This document provides insights into impact enterprise acceleration based on research conducted by The Rockefeller Foundation and Monitor Deloitte. It identifies the key needs of impact enterprises as they seek to scale, including business development, financing, distribution, and leadership skills. Common challenges impact enterprises face in scaling are attracting and retaining talent, adapting business plans, accessing financing, and connecting to distribution channels. The report also presents case studies of innovative accelerator models, including those run by Unreasonable Institute, Village Capital, and the Social Franchise Accelerator, that are testing new approaches supported by Rockefeller Foundation grants. The aim of the report is to share best practices and promising innovations in accelerating impact enterprises with other organizations in the field.
Rebuild by Design has established a small global working group on the design and politics of resiliency. This group is looking at—and assisting in shaping—how cities and regions around the world incorporate design into resiliency approaches, initiatives, and policy. Its first collective task is a collection of essays addressing two questions: First, identifying how design thinking is being incorporated and translated into political processes and understanding the obstacles that prevent design insights from informing policy practices. Second, collecting ideas for improving these processes, so that design and politics might be better integrated.
This initial group will form the core of a larger network that we aim to build over the long run. Meanwhile, are engaging directly with existing programs and initiatives. We will not duplicate efforts, but instead use this global working group to ignite broader discussions and further collaborations.
The Rockefeller Foundation was an early investor in culture and innovation to achieve equity and sustainability – in both the environmental and field-wide senses of the term – through its NYC Cultural Innovation Fund (CIF). Created in 2007, CIF has granted $16.3 million to support 99 efforts to leverage culture to achieve social innovation.
As we prepared to launch this evaluation, it became evident that, unlike many other fields, there is not a large body of evaluative literature on the effectiveness and impact of funds for the use of cultural innovation to achieve social change. This was a finding in itself – one that we identified before the evaluation even started. More evaluations have been conducted of programs that seek to support innovation in the arts for the sake of arts, but few have examined the degree to which arts innovation funds have actually brought about the intended societal level changes.
Conservation Finance. From Niche to Mainstream: The Building of an Institutio...The Rockefeller Foundation
Sustainable farmland, healthy forests, clean water, and abundant habitat stand to become more valuable as the global population climbs to nine billion by 2050. Already, pioneering investors have put together financial solutions that combine real assets, such as tropical forests, with cash flows from operations in fields such as sustainable timber, agriculture, and ecotourism. Conservation finance, as this field is known, represents an undeveloped, but emerging private sector investment opportunity of major proportion.
Filling this gap to finance the preservation of the world’s precious ecosystems will require USD 200 - 300 billion in additional capital, and private investment capital may be the only source. Attracting that level of private capital will require attractive risk-adjusted rates of return, in addition to clear and measurable conservation impacts.
In this report, Credit Suisse—together with the McKinsey Center for Business and Environment—there is a toolkit for substantially growing the investment that flows into the conservation sector, illustrated by a few concrete ideas that we deem to be scalable, repeatable, and investable. Implementing these ideas will require strong collaboration between the financial and environmental communities to find new and creative ways of solving the financial structuring and conservation challenges at hand.
In the broader context of impact investing, Program-Related Investments (PRIs) enable foundations to make investments that generate both financial return and social impact. Although PRIs have existed for more than 40 years, they are underutilized as a means of achieving development outcomes at scale. After decades of declining aid resources, there is a growing consensus among funders, philanthropists and the development community that PRIs hold great potential to significantly augment and expand the funding available to achieve more and better development outcomes for the world’s poor and vulnerable populations.
Recognizing that PRIs are a powerful tool to complement grantmaking in reaching program goals, The Rockefeller Foundation formally launched its PRI portfolio in the 1990s. Today the $25 million portfolio contains international and domestic investments in the form of loans, equity investments and guarantees. Through this growing portfolio, the Foundation enables investees to support poor and vulnerable people – by improving asset ownership, expanding access to services and creating or preserving jobs.
Recognizing the need to develop an evidence base of what does and does not work in PRIs, and as part of the Foundation’s commitment to learning and accountability, the Foundation’s Evaluation Office in collaboration with the Foundation’s PRI Team asked Arabella Advisors to evaluate the relevance, effectiveness and impact of the Foundation’s PRI Portfolio. This independent evaluation’s results draw on extensive research, field visits to investees in Asia, Africa and the US, and in-depth interviews
with experts and peer investors that have provided valuable insights, observations and recommendations aimed at strengthening the Foundation’s use of PRIs to achieve social impact.
The Foundation has learned a great deal from this evaluation. While it has been gratifying to see evidence of the benefits of many of the individual PRIs, it is sobering to see the impact limitations of a PRI portfolio that operates without an overarching strategy.
Assessing Market-Based Solutions: Lessons from Evaluating a Youth Employment ...The Rockefeller Foundation
Creating employment opportunities for youth is a priority for many countries. How can these opportunities – increasingly situated within market-based approaches to development – generate and sustain positive employment and social outcomes for individuals, their families and communities? This paper reports on an evaluation of a Rockefeller Foundation initiative that provided instructive lessons on how to assess youth employment and digital jobs programs that embed market-based principles.
Building Capacity for Innovation and Systems Change: Innovation Fellowship Pr...The Rockefeller Foundation
Achieving The Rockefeller Foundation’s goals to build resilience and advance inclusive economies requires moving beyond traditional approaches to problem-solving. New ways
of thinking and working are needed in order to have impact at scale. The Rockefeller
Foundation Global Fellowship Program on Social Innovation was designed to enable
leaders to innovate in order to address the underlying causes of complex social and
environmental challenges. With two successive cohorts of Fellowships now complete and
a third underway, the timing is right to reflect on what the Foundation is learning about
building individual and institutional capacity to innovate and drive systems change.
Ten Cities, Four Countries, Five Years: Lessons on the Process of Building Ur...The Rockefeller Foundation
The Rockefeller Foundation initiated a nine-year Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (ACCCRN)
in ten initial cities and four countries1 in 2008. ACCCRN seeks to strengthen the capabilities of cities to plan,
finance and implement urban climate change resilience (UCCR) strategies for coping with the inevitable impacts
of climate change taking place now, and in the decades to come.
Rebuild by Design has established a small global working group on the design and politics of resiliency. This group is looking at—and assisting in shaping—how cities and regions around the world incorporate design into resiliency approaches, initiatives, and policy. Its first collective task is a collection of essays addressing two questions: First, identifying how design thinking is being incorporated and translated into political processes and understanding the obstacles that prevent design insights from informing policy practices. Second, collecting ideas for improving these processes, so that design and politics might be better integrated.
This initial group will form the core of a larger network that we aim to build over the long run. Meanwhile, are engaging directly with existing programs and initiatives. We will not duplicate efforts, but instead use this global working group to ignite broader discussions and further collaborations.
The Rockefeller Foundation was an early investor in culture and innovation to achieve equity and sustainability – in both the environmental and field-wide senses of the term – through its NYC Cultural Innovation Fund (CIF). Created in 2007, CIF has granted $16.3 million to support 99 efforts to leverage culture to achieve social innovation.
As we prepared to launch this evaluation, it became evident that, unlike many other fields, there is not a large body of evaluative literature on the effectiveness and impact of funds for the use of cultural innovation to achieve social change. This was a finding in itself – one that we identified before the evaluation even started. More evaluations have been conducted of programs that seek to support innovation in the arts for the sake of arts, but few have examined the degree to which arts innovation funds have actually brought about the intended societal level changes.
Conservation Finance. From Niche to Mainstream: The Building of an Institutio...The Rockefeller Foundation
Sustainable farmland, healthy forests, clean water, and abundant habitat stand to become more valuable as the global population climbs to nine billion by 2050. Already, pioneering investors have put together financial solutions that combine real assets, such as tropical forests, with cash flows from operations in fields such as sustainable timber, agriculture, and ecotourism. Conservation finance, as this field is known, represents an undeveloped, but emerging private sector investment opportunity of major proportion.
Filling this gap to finance the preservation of the world’s precious ecosystems will require USD 200 - 300 billion in additional capital, and private investment capital may be the only source. Attracting that level of private capital will require attractive risk-adjusted rates of return, in addition to clear and measurable conservation impacts.
In this report, Credit Suisse—together with the McKinsey Center for Business and Environment—there is a toolkit for substantially growing the investment that flows into the conservation sector, illustrated by a few concrete ideas that we deem to be scalable, repeatable, and investable. Implementing these ideas will require strong collaboration between the financial and environmental communities to find new and creative ways of solving the financial structuring and conservation challenges at hand.
In the broader context of impact investing, Program-Related Investments (PRIs) enable foundations to make investments that generate both financial return and social impact. Although PRIs have existed for more than 40 years, they are underutilized as a means of achieving development outcomes at scale. After decades of declining aid resources, there is a growing consensus among funders, philanthropists and the development community that PRIs hold great potential to significantly augment and expand the funding available to achieve more and better development outcomes for the world’s poor and vulnerable populations.
Recognizing that PRIs are a powerful tool to complement grantmaking in reaching program goals, The Rockefeller Foundation formally launched its PRI portfolio in the 1990s. Today the $25 million portfolio contains international and domestic investments in the form of loans, equity investments and guarantees. Through this growing portfolio, the Foundation enables investees to support poor and vulnerable people – by improving asset ownership, expanding access to services and creating or preserving jobs.
Recognizing the need to develop an evidence base of what does and does not work in PRIs, and as part of the Foundation’s commitment to learning and accountability, the Foundation’s Evaluation Office in collaboration with the Foundation’s PRI Team asked Arabella Advisors to evaluate the relevance, effectiveness and impact of the Foundation’s PRI Portfolio. This independent evaluation’s results draw on extensive research, field visits to investees in Asia, Africa and the US, and in-depth interviews
with experts and peer investors that have provided valuable insights, observations and recommendations aimed at strengthening the Foundation’s use of PRIs to achieve social impact.
The Foundation has learned a great deal from this evaluation. While it has been gratifying to see evidence of the benefits of many of the individual PRIs, it is sobering to see the impact limitations of a PRI portfolio that operates without an overarching strategy.
Assessing Market-Based Solutions: Lessons from Evaluating a Youth Employment ...The Rockefeller Foundation
Creating employment opportunities for youth is a priority for many countries. How can these opportunities – increasingly situated within market-based approaches to development – generate and sustain positive employment and social outcomes for individuals, their families and communities? This paper reports on an evaluation of a Rockefeller Foundation initiative that provided instructive lessons on how to assess youth employment and digital jobs programs that embed market-based principles.
Building Capacity for Innovation and Systems Change: Innovation Fellowship Pr...The Rockefeller Foundation
Achieving The Rockefeller Foundation’s goals to build resilience and advance inclusive economies requires moving beyond traditional approaches to problem-solving. New ways
of thinking and working are needed in order to have impact at scale. The Rockefeller
Foundation Global Fellowship Program on Social Innovation was designed to enable
leaders to innovate in order to address the underlying causes of complex social and
environmental challenges. With two successive cohorts of Fellowships now complete and
a third underway, the timing is right to reflect on what the Foundation is learning about
building individual and institutional capacity to innovate and drive systems change.
Ten Cities, Four Countries, Five Years: Lessons on the Process of Building Ur...The Rockefeller Foundation
The Rockefeller Foundation initiated a nine-year Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (ACCCRN)
in ten initial cities and four countries1 in 2008. ACCCRN seeks to strengthen the capabilities of cities to plan,
finance and implement urban climate change resilience (UCCR) strategies for coping with the inevitable impacts
of climate change taking place now, and in the decades to come.
The purpose of this guide is to introduce a promising approach to surfacing insights and supporting innovative thinking within a field in order to explore new and better paths to impact.
The increasing complexity of development, coupled with the widening range of public, nonprofit, and private sector actors and the demand for more timely feedback, has challenged the utility of conventional approaches to M&E in many development contexts. Though emerging ICTs offer promise, the methodological rigor of tech-enabled M&E has sometimes been questioned and viewed as unreliable in contemporary evaluation debates.
Despite this broad reluctance, M&E innovators are already experimenting in this new space. By reflecting on ways in which these innovators have begun to navigate new territory, and by exploring the great potential for technology to further transform and advance traditional evaluation methods, this paper aims to highlight the current state of tech-enabled M&E while also maintaining a critical perspective which recognizes the limitations and inherent risks which evaluators should remain mindful of when engaging in this new and exciting space.
In addition to providing financial support for the paper, The Rockefeller Foundation supported the M&E Tech Conference and Deep Dive in the fall of 2014 to gather M&E practitioners, technology developers, and leadership from a range of organizations and institutions to discuss opportunities, challenges, and a way forward in strengthening capacity in the area of tech-enabled M&E.
Equity and Inclusive Growth from a Development Perspective is essential reading for development and evaluation practitioners. It provides a concise history and critical examination of the concepts related to growth, poverty, and equity. These three foundational elements of contemporary development theory and practice are at the root of The Rockefeller Foundation’s movement toward advancing inclusive economies and building resilience.
The paper offers many insights about the measurement and evaluation of programs. It illuminates the debate surrounding ways to assess well-being beyond GDP. It covers the many ways to approach the measurement of poverty and the most commonly used indexes. Finally, it examines the important distinction between equity and equality and the policy implications of pursuing equity.
The unprecedented damage Hurricane Sandy caused along the East Coast of the US, especially to the densely populated New York and New Jersey coastlines, was a wake-up call to the threat that weather events pose to our communities. The world has always been plagued by severe and seemingly intractable problems, including storms, but today, we live with an unprecedented level of disruption.
Things go wrong with more frequency and severity, greater complexity, and with more inter-related effects. No longer can we afford to simply rebuild what existed before. We must begin to rethink our recovery efforts, making sure the damaged region is resilient enough to rebound from future storms.
In order to better protect Sandy-area residents from future climate events the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and President Obama’s Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Task Force
initiated Rebuild by Design (RBD) to develop fundable solutions that address structural and environmental vulnerabilities throughout the East Coast region. Recognizing the enormity of this challenge, the RBD process has looked beyond traditional solutions, supporting new approaches in architectural design, regional planning and environmental engineering, all of which are set within an innovative process that combines public, philanthropic and private sector resources and knowledge with community participation in a design competition.
Effective Public Health Communication in an Interconnected World: Enhancing R...The Rockefeller Foundation
The public health communication community has more tools and mechanisms at its disposal than ever before, but we are also facing increasingly complex public health challenges ushered in by globalization, urbanization, conflict, and connective technologies. We are connected in unprecedented ways, but despite this fact there remains a lack of consistent and coherent communication among responders, within health systems and across the public domain.
In light of this persistent problem, KYNE and News Deeply, supported by The Rockefeller Foundation, convened a meeting on Effective Public Health Communication in an Interconnected World: Enhancing Resilience to Health Crises, held at the Bellagio Center in Bellagio, Italy, in October 2015. At the convening, 18 experts in communication, public health, and emergency response came together to detail areas of alignment and gaps.
This report seeks to distill those lessons learned and contribute to the research base on public health communication in times of crisis, by detailing key takeaways from the convening. News Deeply also conducted interviews with participants, as well as external reviews with community organizations and leaders, to inform the body of the report. In addition, we have synthesized case studies from three participants across different regional contexts: the 2013–15 Ebola crisis in West Africa, the SARS epidemic of 2003 in Singapore, and the 2015 Legionnaires’ disease outbreak in New York City.
Scientists and activists concerned about the future of human society and the planet have pointed to the urgent need for what they term sustainability transitions (Clark 2001; Raskin et al. 2002). In other words, due to the complex, systemic, and interrelated nature of the serious social, economic, and environmental problems confronting us, we need entirely new forms of solutions. Clearly, we humans must learn to think differently about our complex world and to work together in unusual and very strategic new ways. We need to more fully see and understand the systems within which we all exist so that we can learn to identify and create conditions for social innovation.
Final Evaluation: The Rockefeller Foundation's Program-Related Investments Po...The Rockefeller Foundation
In 2013, The Rockefeller Foundation funded an independent evaluation of 12 years of PRIs, including 18 transactions totaling $23.9 million deployed both domestically and internationally. The resulting report assesses the portfolio's social and financial performance, as well as opportunities to refine the PRI program strategy and align it with the Foundation's focus areas and grantmaking programs. It also considers the Foundation's contributions to the larger impact investing ecosystem.
In November 2014, Rebuild by Design asked community leaders, design and planning experts, and government officials to discuss their experiences in creating and implementing large-scale infrastructure projects—and to highlight key strategies that can continue to make government-community collaboration effective.
This document distills their responses into specific themes and tactics. The governments of NYS, NJ, NYC, and CT can use these as they continue to develop the Rebuild by Design projects using the collaborative framework upon which the competition was based.
A Guide to Venture Philanthropy for Venture Capital & Private Equity Investors Ashley Metz
Through examining case studies of private equity firms from several European countries, this publication explores three possible models of venture philanthropy engagement and provides examples of best practice. The PE industry is increasingly interested in becoming engaged in venture philanthropy activities. This paper identifies a number of motives for PE firms to become involved in venture philanthropy, including the desire to give back to their communities, to help employees develop skills such as judgement, resilience and social competences, and establishing them as a positive social actor.
Capturing Learning From Tech Innovation Hubs Across AfricaLoren Treisman
This report summarises discussions with staff from technology innovation hubs across seven countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. It explores sustainability, programming, working with the private sector and civil society, impact and advice for funders.
Putting “Impact” at the Center of Impact Investing: A Case Study of How Green...The Rockefeller Foundation
More than ever before, investors are looking to put their money where their values are. As a result, impact investing has burgeoned into an over $100 billion industry in just over ten years. But how do impact investors know whether their money is truly having a positive impact on people and
the planet? How can these investors better manage their results, and use material data – both positive and negative – about social and environmental performance to maximize their impact?
This case study documents the journey of one organization, Green Canopy Homes – and its financing arm, Green Canopy Capital – toward more systematically thinking about, measuring, and managing its impact. While developing the impact thesis for its resource-efficient homes, Green Canopy applied a theory of change tool, an approach common within the social sector, to systematically map the causal pathways between its strategies and intended impact. Its rationale for adopting this approach was simple: use it to maximize impact, and understand and minimize possible harm. The tool also effectively positioned Green Canopy to measure and communicate about its social and environmental performance, and to make client-centric adaptations to its business.
The case study provides an illuminating example of how investors can adapt theory of change to serve their impact management needs. By demonstrating the relevance and transferability of this tool for articulating, measuring, and managing impact, the hope is that this case study can contribute to strengthening other investors’ approaches, in turn contributing to building the evidence base for the “impact” of impact investments.
Craig Applegath of Cohos Evamy presents on the need for resilient cities in the face of increasingly volatile social and environmental changes.
Presented at the 5th annual Green Building Festival in Toronto, Canada, 2009.
A presentation from the Online Deliberation conference in Leeds. Its intended use is jump-starting the idea of developing a "Leeds Declaration" that draws attention to online (and offline) deliberation as an important tool for civic society.
GE NFL Head Health Challenge: People's Insights Volume 2, Issue 11MSL
This week, we distill insights around the GE NFL Head Health Challenge - a $20 million open innovation challenge to mobilize innovators around head health.
100+ thinkers and planners within MSLGROUP share and discuss inspiring projects on social data, crowdsourcing, storytelling and citizenship on the MSLGROUP Insights Network.
Every week, we pick up one project and do a deep dive into conversations around it -- on the MSLGROUP Insights Network itself but also on the broader social web -- to distill insights and foresights. We share these insights and foresights with you on our People’s Insights blog and compile the best insights from the network and the blog in the iPad-friendly People’s Lab Quarterly Magazine, as a showcase of our capabilities.
For more, see: http://peopleslab.mslgroup.com
Impact investment is a strategy to align the power of private markets to the social and environmental development needs of society at-large. From 2012-13, the Rockefeller Foundation, through its Impact Investing initiative, funded research in five Sub-Saharan African countries with the aim of understanding the barriers for impact investing across Africa, as well as recommending national policies to encourage the growth of the industry. This report synthesizes the findings of that work, examining the potential of impact investing as a ‘strategy of choice’ for African policymakers.
Based on the premise that international aid and public spending will never be enough to
adequately fund and scale solutions to the world’s most pressing problems, the Rockefeller
Foundation has, since 2008, supported the development of a global impact investing
industry—an industry whose purpose is to enable the investment of capital with the
intent to generate positive social impact beyond fi nancial return. Over the past fi ve years,
the Foundation’s Impact Investing Initiative has awarded grants and program-related
investments (PRIs) aimed at accelerating the development and growth of the impact
investing industry.
In particular, the Foundation’s support aims to achieve four major outcomes: 1) Catalyze
collective action platforms that help impact investors work together more effectively
on activities such as standard setting, advocacy and marketing; 2) Develop industry
“infrastructure,” such as standards and rating systems; 3) Support scaling of intermediaries
ranging from private equity funds to secondary market facilities; and 4) Contribute to
fundamental research and advocacy necessary to grow the fi eld of impact investing.
In 2011, as part of our Foundation-wide commitment to learning and accountability to
our grantees, partners and stakeholders, we undertook an independent evaluation of the
work of the Impact Investing Initiative to assess our progress in achieving these outcomes
and to inform our actions going forward. Conducted by E.T. Jackson and Associates, this
independent evaluation highlights a number of early successes and remaining challenges,
many of which will shape our activities in the months and years to come.
We are pleased to share the results of this evaluation with our partners and stakeholders,
and to contribute to the broader learning process in this new and rapidly growing fi eld.
It is clear from our evaluation and the related scan report, and from the growing body of
research on impact investing, that there exists great momentum and inspiring leadership in
this dynamic fi eld. More signifi cantly, there are promising signs here that together we can
play an important role in bringing about a more sustainable, resilient and equitable future
for humankind.
The purpose of this guide is to introduce a promising approach to surfacing insights and supporting innovative thinking within a field in order to explore new and better paths to impact.
The increasing complexity of development, coupled with the widening range of public, nonprofit, and private sector actors and the demand for more timely feedback, has challenged the utility of conventional approaches to M&E in many development contexts. Though emerging ICTs offer promise, the methodological rigor of tech-enabled M&E has sometimes been questioned and viewed as unreliable in contemporary evaluation debates.
Despite this broad reluctance, M&E innovators are already experimenting in this new space. By reflecting on ways in which these innovators have begun to navigate new territory, and by exploring the great potential for technology to further transform and advance traditional evaluation methods, this paper aims to highlight the current state of tech-enabled M&E while also maintaining a critical perspective which recognizes the limitations and inherent risks which evaluators should remain mindful of when engaging in this new and exciting space.
In addition to providing financial support for the paper, The Rockefeller Foundation supported the M&E Tech Conference and Deep Dive in the fall of 2014 to gather M&E practitioners, technology developers, and leadership from a range of organizations and institutions to discuss opportunities, challenges, and a way forward in strengthening capacity in the area of tech-enabled M&E.
Equity and Inclusive Growth from a Development Perspective is essential reading for development and evaluation practitioners. It provides a concise history and critical examination of the concepts related to growth, poverty, and equity. These three foundational elements of contemporary development theory and practice are at the root of The Rockefeller Foundation’s movement toward advancing inclusive economies and building resilience.
The paper offers many insights about the measurement and evaluation of programs. It illuminates the debate surrounding ways to assess well-being beyond GDP. It covers the many ways to approach the measurement of poverty and the most commonly used indexes. Finally, it examines the important distinction between equity and equality and the policy implications of pursuing equity.
The unprecedented damage Hurricane Sandy caused along the East Coast of the US, especially to the densely populated New York and New Jersey coastlines, was a wake-up call to the threat that weather events pose to our communities. The world has always been plagued by severe and seemingly intractable problems, including storms, but today, we live with an unprecedented level of disruption.
Things go wrong with more frequency and severity, greater complexity, and with more inter-related effects. No longer can we afford to simply rebuild what existed before. We must begin to rethink our recovery efforts, making sure the damaged region is resilient enough to rebound from future storms.
In order to better protect Sandy-area residents from future climate events the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and President Obama’s Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Task Force
initiated Rebuild by Design (RBD) to develop fundable solutions that address structural and environmental vulnerabilities throughout the East Coast region. Recognizing the enormity of this challenge, the RBD process has looked beyond traditional solutions, supporting new approaches in architectural design, regional planning and environmental engineering, all of which are set within an innovative process that combines public, philanthropic and private sector resources and knowledge with community participation in a design competition.
Effective Public Health Communication in an Interconnected World: Enhancing R...The Rockefeller Foundation
The public health communication community has more tools and mechanisms at its disposal than ever before, but we are also facing increasingly complex public health challenges ushered in by globalization, urbanization, conflict, and connective technologies. We are connected in unprecedented ways, but despite this fact there remains a lack of consistent and coherent communication among responders, within health systems and across the public domain.
In light of this persistent problem, KYNE and News Deeply, supported by The Rockefeller Foundation, convened a meeting on Effective Public Health Communication in an Interconnected World: Enhancing Resilience to Health Crises, held at the Bellagio Center in Bellagio, Italy, in October 2015. At the convening, 18 experts in communication, public health, and emergency response came together to detail areas of alignment and gaps.
This report seeks to distill those lessons learned and contribute to the research base on public health communication in times of crisis, by detailing key takeaways from the convening. News Deeply also conducted interviews with participants, as well as external reviews with community organizations and leaders, to inform the body of the report. In addition, we have synthesized case studies from three participants across different regional contexts: the 2013–15 Ebola crisis in West Africa, the SARS epidemic of 2003 in Singapore, and the 2015 Legionnaires’ disease outbreak in New York City.
Scientists and activists concerned about the future of human society and the planet have pointed to the urgent need for what they term sustainability transitions (Clark 2001; Raskin et al. 2002). In other words, due to the complex, systemic, and interrelated nature of the serious social, economic, and environmental problems confronting us, we need entirely new forms of solutions. Clearly, we humans must learn to think differently about our complex world and to work together in unusual and very strategic new ways. We need to more fully see and understand the systems within which we all exist so that we can learn to identify and create conditions for social innovation.
Final Evaluation: The Rockefeller Foundation's Program-Related Investments Po...The Rockefeller Foundation
In 2013, The Rockefeller Foundation funded an independent evaluation of 12 years of PRIs, including 18 transactions totaling $23.9 million deployed both domestically and internationally. The resulting report assesses the portfolio's social and financial performance, as well as opportunities to refine the PRI program strategy and align it with the Foundation's focus areas and grantmaking programs. It also considers the Foundation's contributions to the larger impact investing ecosystem.
In November 2014, Rebuild by Design asked community leaders, design and planning experts, and government officials to discuss their experiences in creating and implementing large-scale infrastructure projects—and to highlight key strategies that can continue to make government-community collaboration effective.
This document distills their responses into specific themes and tactics. The governments of NYS, NJ, NYC, and CT can use these as they continue to develop the Rebuild by Design projects using the collaborative framework upon which the competition was based.
A Guide to Venture Philanthropy for Venture Capital & Private Equity Investors Ashley Metz
Through examining case studies of private equity firms from several European countries, this publication explores three possible models of venture philanthropy engagement and provides examples of best practice. The PE industry is increasingly interested in becoming engaged in venture philanthropy activities. This paper identifies a number of motives for PE firms to become involved in venture philanthropy, including the desire to give back to their communities, to help employees develop skills such as judgement, resilience and social competences, and establishing them as a positive social actor.
Capturing Learning From Tech Innovation Hubs Across AfricaLoren Treisman
This report summarises discussions with staff from technology innovation hubs across seven countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. It explores sustainability, programming, working with the private sector and civil society, impact and advice for funders.
Putting “Impact” at the Center of Impact Investing: A Case Study of How Green...The Rockefeller Foundation
More than ever before, investors are looking to put their money where their values are. As a result, impact investing has burgeoned into an over $100 billion industry in just over ten years. But how do impact investors know whether their money is truly having a positive impact on people and
the planet? How can these investors better manage their results, and use material data – both positive and negative – about social and environmental performance to maximize their impact?
This case study documents the journey of one organization, Green Canopy Homes – and its financing arm, Green Canopy Capital – toward more systematically thinking about, measuring, and managing its impact. While developing the impact thesis for its resource-efficient homes, Green Canopy applied a theory of change tool, an approach common within the social sector, to systematically map the causal pathways between its strategies and intended impact. Its rationale for adopting this approach was simple: use it to maximize impact, and understand and minimize possible harm. The tool also effectively positioned Green Canopy to measure and communicate about its social and environmental performance, and to make client-centric adaptations to its business.
The case study provides an illuminating example of how investors can adapt theory of change to serve their impact management needs. By demonstrating the relevance and transferability of this tool for articulating, measuring, and managing impact, the hope is that this case study can contribute to strengthening other investors’ approaches, in turn contributing to building the evidence base for the “impact” of impact investments.
Craig Applegath of Cohos Evamy presents on the need for resilient cities in the face of increasingly volatile social and environmental changes.
Presented at the 5th annual Green Building Festival in Toronto, Canada, 2009.
A presentation from the Online Deliberation conference in Leeds. Its intended use is jump-starting the idea of developing a "Leeds Declaration" that draws attention to online (and offline) deliberation as an important tool for civic society.
GE NFL Head Health Challenge: People's Insights Volume 2, Issue 11MSL
This week, we distill insights around the GE NFL Head Health Challenge - a $20 million open innovation challenge to mobilize innovators around head health.
100+ thinkers and planners within MSLGROUP share and discuss inspiring projects on social data, crowdsourcing, storytelling and citizenship on the MSLGROUP Insights Network.
Every week, we pick up one project and do a deep dive into conversations around it -- on the MSLGROUP Insights Network itself but also on the broader social web -- to distill insights and foresights. We share these insights and foresights with you on our People’s Insights blog and compile the best insights from the network and the blog in the iPad-friendly People’s Lab Quarterly Magazine, as a showcase of our capabilities.
For more, see: http://peopleslab.mslgroup.com
Impact investment is a strategy to align the power of private markets to the social and environmental development needs of society at-large. From 2012-13, the Rockefeller Foundation, through its Impact Investing initiative, funded research in five Sub-Saharan African countries with the aim of understanding the barriers for impact investing across Africa, as well as recommending national policies to encourage the growth of the industry. This report synthesizes the findings of that work, examining the potential of impact investing as a ‘strategy of choice’ for African policymakers.
Based on the premise that international aid and public spending will never be enough to
adequately fund and scale solutions to the world’s most pressing problems, the Rockefeller
Foundation has, since 2008, supported the development of a global impact investing
industry—an industry whose purpose is to enable the investment of capital with the
intent to generate positive social impact beyond fi nancial return. Over the past fi ve years,
the Foundation’s Impact Investing Initiative has awarded grants and program-related
investments (PRIs) aimed at accelerating the development and growth of the impact
investing industry.
In particular, the Foundation’s support aims to achieve four major outcomes: 1) Catalyze
collective action platforms that help impact investors work together more effectively
on activities such as standard setting, advocacy and marketing; 2) Develop industry
“infrastructure,” such as standards and rating systems; 3) Support scaling of intermediaries
ranging from private equity funds to secondary market facilities; and 4) Contribute to
fundamental research and advocacy necessary to grow the fi eld of impact investing.
In 2011, as part of our Foundation-wide commitment to learning and accountability to
our grantees, partners and stakeholders, we undertook an independent evaluation of the
work of the Impact Investing Initiative to assess our progress in achieving these outcomes
and to inform our actions going forward. Conducted by E.T. Jackson and Associates, this
independent evaluation highlights a number of early successes and remaining challenges,
many of which will shape our activities in the months and years to come.
We are pleased to share the results of this evaluation with our partners and stakeholders,
and to contribute to the broader learning process in this new and rapidly growing fi eld.
It is clear from our evaluation and the related scan report, and from the growing body of
research on impact investing, that there exists great momentum and inspiring leadership in
this dynamic fi eld. More signifi cantly, there are promising signs here that together we can
play an important role in bringing about a more sustainable, resilient and equitable future
for humankind.
The trajectory of the Anthropocene: The Great Acceleration
International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, Stockholm Resilience Centre
Will Steffen, Wendy Broadgate, Lisa Deutsch ,Owen Gaffney and Cornelia Ludwig
2015 Anthropocene Review
http://anr.sagepub.com/content/early/2015/01/08/2053019614564785.abstract
Based on Steffen et al. (2004) Global Change and the Earth System
More information, videos, data, images:
http://www.igbp.net/news/pressreleases/pressreleases/planetarydashboardshowsgreataccelerationinhumanactivitysince1950.5.950c2fa1495db7081eb42.html
See also:
www.igbp.net
www.stockholmresilience.org
www.futureearth.info
www.globaia.org
www.anthropocene.info
Michelle isn't an instant success story.
However, she has landed a job in her field after several sleepless nights and dedicated hard work. Her time and perseverance has been rewarded, and she’s pretty happy so far with her successes.
"The biggest challenge is just breaking into the industry," says Michelle.
In this presentation we explain the rationale behind the FPGA.
Discoveries associated with a more precise comprehension of the connections inside human brain are foreseen as disruptive in many fields: from improved neurological disorders treatment to strong artificial intelligence, as well as more precise and less invasive diagnostic tools and, finally, improved Big Data systems. For this purpose, Brain Networks (BNs) are used to quickly and accurately model and map neural interconnections inside human brain.
A common statistical tool that helps analysis and definition of BNs is the Pearson Correlation Coefficient (PCC), which is able to identify the correlation between neurons or groups of neighboring neurons.
However, the computational power that commonly available technologies provide allows scientists to analyze only few hundred neural nodes within reasonable time. Increasing the number of analyzed neurons and speeding up the computation are both fundamental steps to achieve more accurate results, and to allow the scientific and medical research to progress.
This work presents an implementation of BNs on Xilinx VIRTEX-7 FPGA. Our goal is to tackle the problems previously described, in order to provide a fast hardware implementation able to support the computation of a remarkable number of neurons.
Colaboração é hoje a palvavra de ordem no mundo dos negócios. Para competir num mercado globalizado, é preciso muita colaboração interna e externa. A produção se dá em rede. O profissional precisa ser multi-disciplinar, multi-tarefa, multi-cultural e multi-outros. Ferramentas para colaboração pipocam, mas a tendência é se tornarem cada vez mais integradas. O espaço virtual é uma realidade e o teletrabalho uma rotina. Áudio gravado na abertura da Especialização em Desenvolvimento Web da UEM.
The Trouble With Tribbles: How LOLcats Ate Our EngagementJeffrey Stevens
How to build better headlines, links, sharing options, and content to compete for the attention of audiences with ever increasing options for entertainment and diversions.
Moving Beyond The Newsletter: Using Technology To Meet Parents Where They AreChris Wejr
Workshop for the 2013 BCCPAC Fall Conference that focused on using technology to enhance school's relationships with their families. Purpose of parent communication is explored as well as examples of tools are shown.
Housing, the 2015 General Election and Beyond: 10 Key ThemesIpsos UK
In his presentation about housing and public opinion at the Chartered Institute of Housing London conference, Ben Marshall outlined 10 key trends and themes.
There are countless resources that define competency-based education. This is not one. This step-by-step guide can help any educator who is considering or currently developing competency-based education programs. Learn directly from an experienced expert who has developed and launched programs all over the country for several institutions, including Western Governor's University.
[HATCH! REVIEW] Studying the demand of Start-ups for Supporting Activities in...HATCH! PROGRAM
[HATCH! REVIEW]
Studying the demand of Start-ups for Supporting Activities in Vietnam.
Recently, the ICT entrepreneurial scene in Vietnam has become more inclusive. This is definitely good for the economy with more dynamic and innovative companies contributing to the economy. However, the survival rates of them are low comparing to other countries in the region such as Singapore and Thailand. There are a lot of reasons causing the differences among survival rate of startup in different countries. One of the decisive reasons is the impact of supporting services to the establishment and long-term development of startups.
Researchers:
Dat Le Viet - Co-founder, HATCH! PROGRAM
Nguyen Quang Huy - Research Analyst Intern, IDG Ventures Vietnam
Situating the Next Generation of Impact Measurement and Evaluation for Impact...The Rockefeller Foundation
Situating the Next Generation of Impact Measurement and Evaluation for Impact Investing contends that measurement practices need to evolve by borrowing from the strengths of both private business and social sector evaluation. Suggesting that an impact thesis is a crucial anchor for impact measurement strategies, the paper offers several measurement approaches in use today. The ‘next generation’ of impact measurement and evaluation must stem from a commitment of impact investors to strengthen evidence for their social returns alongside the evidence for financial returns.
The contemporary era has witnessed an upstart and proliferation in the entrepreneurial endeavours across the globe subsequently challenging many incumbents and established market players with their innovative and transforming business dynamics that redefined many traditional business models. Many factors have stimulated the growth of the numerous entrepreneurial ventures like digital revolution, consumer-centric business operations, changing consumer demands, feasible and accessible technology, social consciousness, and accentuated perception of establishing business ventures as an accountable and responsible corporate entity and so on. In this context of discussions, the present report is contextualised wherein various perspectives of an entrepreneurial organisation has been evaluated with the real-life examples of successful entrepreneurs. The report engages in determining the various entrepreneurial ventures, similarities, and differences between them, the ways in which small entrepreneurial businesses impact the local, regional, national, international economy. In addition to this, the personality trait of the entrepreneurs has been discussed to uphold how personal affiliations and bent of mind instigates towards developing something worthwhile along with understanding how a positive or native external ambiance could shape and influence the entrepreneurial mindsets.
For More Visit https://assignmentwizardsonline.com/
Changing Paradigms of Cluster Development - FMC.pdfTheBambooLink
An overview of the practice of competitiveness through cluster development approach. We begin by looking at some of the roots of the practice and how it has evolved to become a significant force in the way many organizations and many countries now pursue economic development. We then provide an overview of the practice of competitiveness, looking specifically at how cluster-based initiatives have been developed in the context of multilateral and regional organizations.
Inside out finance issue-Indigo Article Page 14-17Loren Treisman
This is the Bertha Centre for Social Innovation's (University of Cape Town, Graduate School of Business) Magazine Inside:Out. This series looks at innovative financing for social enterprises and includes an article by me on pages 14-17 which explores why Indigo Trust is willing to take high risks across a diverse social portfolio.
Especially for distribution purposes ESG Leaders & Chasers make ideal PARTNERS.
And sometimes direct FUNDERS, through their incubators, Venture Capital funds or directly through Mergers&Acquisition.
The Thought Piece presents a checklist for innovators searching standard data on negative impact risk issues and positive impact opportunities.
In Key Performance Indicators KPI's please!
Environment, Social, Governance or ESG score of Operations
Materiality or Relevance per sector, industry, region.
Forces influencing Issues: costs, regulation: limitation & taxation & activists (shareholders!)
Opportunities: Collaboration & Competition and Catalyzing Public Policy: Pilots, Scaling Finance & Preferred Partners.
In the Appendix you'l find dozens of positive & negative themes listed which Partners & Funders weigh in their impact risk & opportunity strategies and due diligence. On which abundant data is also present in sustainability reports, websites etc.
In part 5 of our course on Investible Impact Innovations we present you with a Model Impact Pitch Deck for marketing & funding built on the impact risks & metrics used by (aspiring) impact investors.
Transform Global - A model for a private world banksassbo
Transform Global (TG), previously Transform Capital Management, is a model for a private world bank, also known as a global impact investment bank, investing into funds which have a social, environmental and financial return. TG aims to address critical market failures caused by our current financial system, while tackling the environmental and social symptoms that are a by-product of the system.
The 2012 Roundtable on Institutional Innovation convened leaders to explore how organizations can stay atop today’s constant technological advancement. In the current economic environment, growth and underemployment are two outstanding national, indeed international, problems. While technological advances and globalization are often cited as instigators of the current plight, they are also beacons of hope for the future. Connecting the Edges concludes that by integrating the core of an organization with the edge, where innovation is more likely to happen, we can create dynamic, learning networks.
The Transforming Health Systems (THS) initiative was one of The Rockefeller Foundation’s largest global health initiatives. Aligned with the Foundation’s mission to promote the well-being of humanity, THS aimed to improve the health status and financial resilience of poor and otherwise vulnerable populations through activities promoting improved health systems performance and the expansion of universal health coverage (UHC).
This report synthesizes findings from a five-year, multicomponent evaluation of the THS initiative. The objectives of the evaluation were to assess i) the effectiveness of the three core strategies – global advocacy, regional networks, and country-level investments – employed under THS to advance progress toward UHC in low- and middle-income countries in four focus countries, ii) the overall effectiveness and influence of the initiative, and iii) the Foundation’s legacy in the UHC arena. A key component of the evaluation was to document lessons learned from achievements and challenges to inform the development of future initiatives at the Foundation.
Overall, the evaluation found the THS initiative to be successful in its efforts to activate a global movement to accelerate progress toward UHC. The Foundation catalyzed and shaped the global UHC movement and, ultimately, influenced the inclusion of UHC in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the post-2015 agenda. It also created enduring cross-learning platforms and tools to support country progress toward the SDGs’ UHC targets. Although THS gained less traction in advancing UHC through its focus country investments, its success in making UHC a global development target and creating networks and coalitions to support UHC reform efforts in LMICs will likely have country-level impacts for years to come.
This guide is designed for program officers to use in their work related to networks, coalitions, and other relationship-based structures as part of their initiatives, program strategies, and outcomes. It offers a set of core components that make up the basics of strategizing, implementing, and sustaining inter-organizational relationships and structures. You can work through the guide from beginning to end or jump to specific issues with which you might be struggling. Every component suggests concrete “actions” or questions that a program officer can apply.
Electricity is one of the most important drivers of socio-economic development, yet up to 250 million Indians are not connected to the national grid, and the majority of rural consumers have grossly unreliable power supply. More than solar lanterns and home systems that power a few lights and fans, among the most efficient ways to provide reliable electricity in remote areas is through local mini-grids. India has several run by energy service companies and usually funded by philanthropic capital.
Most of these enterprises have not been able to scale-up their impact meaningfully because the risk of the national grid entering their markets can render their mini-grid unviable. Rather than seeing “grid versus mini-grid” as a policy choice, Beyond Off-Grid: Integrating Mini-Grids with India’s Evolving Electricity System explores ways we can encourage more of both: to have the grid operate in partnership with a network of distributed mini-grids to accelerate electrification.
What does the roadmap for this ‘interconnection’ of our energy system look like? How can we leverage both government and private investment? What are the different interconnection models and their commercial, technical and regulatory implications? Where do mini-grids go from here? This timely report – commissioned by the Asha Impact Trust in collaboration with Shakti Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation – provides a multi-layered perspective to address these questions based on extensive research, wide-ranging policymaker interactions, and our investment experience evaluating mini-grid operators.
We cannot achieve significant poverty reduction without stimulating electricity consumption, which fuels income-generating activities in the modern economy. In India, about 237 million people have little or no access to reliable electricity -- more than 90% of them live in rural areas. This severely constrains economic opportunities. Addressing this chronic problem requires going beyond simply expanding the government grid.
Mini-grids have emerged as a viable solution to complement and integrate with the national grid, and can support the government in achieving its ‘Power for All’ vision. The Rockefeller Foundation’s Smart Power for Rural Development (SPRD) initiative is the first to pursue the creation of a mini-grid sector that is robust enough to fuel commercial enterprises and drive economic development beyond just one village. Smart Power India (SPI), which leads the SPRD initiative in India, has proven that mini-grids can be swiftly deployed to deliver reliable power, and has likewise demonstrated that mini-grids can spur economic activity needed to help people lift themselves out of poverty.
This issue of Smart Power Connect, published after the hundredth village was connected to Smart Power, explores the efforts, success stories, and challenges faced in SPI’s mini-grid journey to date. With insights from government agencies, policy experts, energy service companies, investors and mini-grid customers themselves, this publication provides a glimpse into the potential of the mini-grids to transform the energy sector – and how rural communities are embracing and utilizing clean, reliable and adequate power to improve their lives.
Today, nearly 240 million Indians lack access to reliable electricity, and 90 percent of them live in rural areas. Despite the government’s ambitious plans to accelerate universal electrification by 2018, challenges remain in providing reliable and sufficient energy to the last mile. Distributed renewable energy (DRE) solutions, and in particular mini-grids, have emerged as a reliable complement to the government’s electrification programs by providing rural areas with access to reliable and high-quality electricity at a much faster pace. The growth of the DRE sector will be an important fillip to the last-mile challenge.
Smart Power India (SPI) is an organization that implements The Rockefeller Foundation’s Smart Power for Rural Development (SPRD) to build viable and commercially oriented mini-grid ecosystems in India. This report explains the Smart Power mini-grid model and explores the drivers of success. Analyzing early data from a cohort of the 106 Smart Power mini-grids operational as of 2017, SPI provides data on commercial performance as well as recommendations to further accelerate the rural mini-grid business.
Encouragingly, the report reveals that the 23 top-cohort plants have an average unit-level profit margin of approximately 30% after the first year of operations. It also highlights that villages receiving electricity from SPRD mini-grids show early signs of social and economic impact (also see Understanding the Impact of Rural Electrification.) SPI has observed that site selection, a strong focus on operations, support for demand generation and marketing optimized for rural customers, are critical to the continued improvement of mini-grid operations. Finally, the report provides recommendations to address external challenges such as the need for increased financing, stronger policy support and further technological innovation.
A successful philanthropic initiative depends not just on the strategy pursued – but also on how that strategy is implemented. Implementation considerations can vary significantly based on the shape of an initiative – starting a new organization can look very different than investing in a portfolio of existing organizations. This report looks at four “models” for implementing initiatives. These don’t represent an exhaustive set of potential models to pursue, or even the most high potential models. Rather, these are four examples of models, each of which has significant potential for impact when chosen wisely and executed well. The report outlines the considerations involved in choosing to pursue each of these models and findings on how to implement them, drawn from real-world experience.
Globally, over 1 billion people still live without electricity. Roughly 237 million of these people are in India. Smart Power for Rural Development (SPRD) is a $75 million initiative aimed at accelerating development in India’s least electrified states. Through the deployment of decentralized renewable energy mini-grids, SPRD works to accelerate the growth of rural economies, while at the same time improving the lives and livelihoods of poor and marginalized families and communities. With access to energy, individuals, households, and communities can generate economic opportunities and enhance their quality of life. Understanding the Impact of Rural Electrification has generated significant insights on how SPRD is having an impact on the lives of villagers, and what more is needed to sustain, grow, and scale these gains. We’ve learned that households and businesses are slowly but surely moving up the energy ladder; enterprises are expanding and new ones are being created as a result of energy access, and women are feeling safer and more mobile after dark. In this report, we also introduce the innovative GDP+ approach which, which quantifies and measures the social, economic and environmental gains of access to electricity in GDP terms. The initial findings here show that SPRD villages experienced an $18.50 per capita increase in GDP+.
The information in this brief is drawn from a case study of the JLN conducted by Mathematica Policy Research in consultation with the THS team and the Evaluation Office of The Rockefeller Foundation. The study, completed in 2016, was undertaken to assess the extent to which the JLN had achieved its goal of becoming a country-driven, sustainable network helping to advance progress toward universal health coverage in low- and middle-income countries.
The Joint Learning Network (JLN) is a key innovation and central part of The Rockefeller Foundation’s efforts to promote universal health coverage (UHC) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) under its Transforming Health Systems (THS) initiative (2009-2017). Launched in 2010, the JLN is a country-led, global learning network that connects practitioners around the globe, in order to advance knowledge and learning about approaches to accelerate country progress toward UHC. The JLN currently includes 27 member countries across Africa, Asia, Europe, and Latin America that engage in multilateral workshops, country learning exchanges, and virtual dialogues to share experiences and develop tools to support the design and implementation of UHC-oriented reforms. The core vehicles for shared learning and resource development under the JLN are technical initiatives, which are managed by several technical partners and organized around key levers for reaching UHC objectives.
With 62.5 million tons of food wasted in the United States each year, there is much work to be done to
bring about substantial changes in the food industry that will create a more efficient food system and
help preserve the environment. This guide describes promising opportunities to reduce food waste
in three areas—packaging, food retail, and home kitchens—and discusses a number of solutions that
could be piloted, validated, and scaled to significantly reduce food waste in America.
National Disaster Resilience Competition's Resilience Academies - Emerging In...The Rockefeller Foundation
In 2015 The Rockefeller Foundation partnered with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to launch the National Disaster Resilience Competition (NDRC)
Resilience Academies. Recognizing the salient need to infuse resilience thinking into HUD’s NDRC, these Academies were established to expose state and local governments to new approaches for protecting and promoting the long-term well-being and safety of their communities. A recent independent evaluation of the Academies has provided instructive insights about what works in efforts to build innovative resilience capacity.
Following its successful partnership with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) post–Hurricane Sandy Rebuild by Design competition, The Rockefeller Foundation launched the Resilience Academies and Capacity-Building Initiative. Designed to support HUD’s National Disaster Resilience Competition (NDRC), the Academies and the Initiative provide eligible state, county, and municipal governments with subject-matter expertise and lessons from the Foundation’s years of on-the-ground disaster recovery programming and mitigation planning. Further, the Foundation hoped to assist these key players in moving global knowledge and resources to meet homegrown needs.
In December 2016, The Rockefeller Foundation’s African Regional Office hosted the Rockefeller Foundation Resilience Convening in Nairobi, Kenya. Over 150 delegates and 40 speakers participated, sharing insights, examples, and engaging in debate and discussion on why and how ‘resilience’ can enhance Africa’s ongoing development.
Launched in 2008, the Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (ACCCRN) Initiative aimed to catalyze attention, funding, and action for building the climate change resilience of vulnerable cities and people in Asia. Given that current estimates forecast that about 55 percent of Asia’s population will be living in urban centers by 2030, the ACCCRN Initiative is built on the premise that cities can take actions to build climate resilience – including drainage and flood management, ecosystem strengthening,
increasing awareness, and disease control – which can greatly improve the lives of poor and vulnerable people, not just in times of shock or stress, but every day.
At the time the initiative was launched, the concept of urban resilience and models for implementing it were nascent and emergent. ACCCRN proved to be an important experiment and “learning lab” for the Foundation and its grantees and partners to build capacity in cities to better understand and implement resilience solutions to the often devastating shocks and stresses of climate change. The initiative was effective in the initial 10 ACCCRN cities and, later, in an additional 40 cities.
As part of our Foundation-wide commitment to learning and accountability to our grantees, partners and stakeholders, we undertook an independent evaluation of the work of the initiative in 2014 to assess what worked well and not so well in ACCCRN. Conducted by Verulam Associates and ITAD, who also conducted a mid-term evaluation of the ACCCRN Initiative in 2011, this summative evaluation highlights successes, but also provides an important moment to reflect on the challenges we faced and on what we can do better or differently going forward.
As part of its overall mission of promoting the well-being of humanity throughout the world, The Rockefeller Foundation developed the goal of advancing inclusive economies. The framing of this goal is deliberate: the word inclusive stresses the need to overcome disadvantage while the choice of economies versus growth suggests the need to consider all dimensions of economic life. This executive summary outlines efforts to develop a framework to better understand and measure the characteristics of an inclusive economy. It includes:
• The evolution of the concept of an inclusive economy
• Key lessons learned from an analysis of indicator initiatives
related to measuring an inclusive economy
• A recommended indicator framework composed of 5 broad
characteristics, 15 sub-categories, and 57 indicators
• Implications for future work
For more details, a full report is available at:
inclusiveeconomies.org
The goal of the CEO & Gender Media Audit was to understand the media coverage of CEOs in various situations and determine if there are differences in the way male and female CEOs are covered.
In 2013, in response to the opportunities presented by Africa’s rapidly growing youth population and the ubiquity of information and communications technologies across the continent, The Rockefeller Foundation launched its Digital Jobs Africa initiative. The initiative aims to enable young people to access jobs by providing them with in-demand technology-related and other employability skills. Now just past its two-year mark, the Foundation is taking stock of the rich learning that has emerged from the initiative.
The Rockefeller Foundation has long recognized the importance of meaningful engagement of the private sector in addressing many of the world’s most complex problems. While many social sector leaders understand that engaging the private sector matters, far fewer understand how to do so, or the key questions one should consider before starting down this path of cross-sector collaboration. For instance: Why would a network want to include a company? Or conversely, why would a company want to participate in a network focused on social impact? Can social impact efforts deliver business value? What makes network relationships durable? And ultimately, what are the different needs around accountability, leadership, governance and mindset? To answer questions such as these, The Foundation and our partners at Monitor Institute, a part of Deloitte Consulting LLP, have created “PARTICIPATE: The power of involving business in social impact networks”—a handbook for social change leaders aspiring to effectively engage the private sector as authentic participants in the pursuit of social impact.
In 2015, The Rockefeller Foundation collaborated with several partners to begin developing incentive-based mechanisms to address competition for freshwater, and to bring human water use back in balance with the water needs of freshwater ecosystems in order to build long-term resilience. The early solutions that emerged, and the wider lessons from the group’s work, are captured in this report.
Explore Sarasota Collection's exquisite and long-lasting dining table sets and chairs in Sarasota. Elevate your dining experience with our high-quality collection!
Best Crypto Marketing Ideas to Lead Your Project to SuccessIntelisync
In this comprehensive slideshow presentation, we delve into the intricacies of crypto marketing, offering invaluable insights and strategies to propel your project to success in the dynamic cryptocurrency landscape. From understanding market trends to building a robust brand identity, engaging with influencers, and analyzing performance metrics, we cover all aspects essential for effective marketing in the crypto space.
Also Intelisync, our cutting-edge service designed to streamline and optimize your marketing efforts, leveraging data-driven insights and innovative strategies to drive growth and visibility for your project.
With a data-driven approach, transparent communication, and a commitment to excellence, InteliSync is your trusted partner for driving meaningful impact in the fast-paced world of Web3. Contact us today to learn more and embark on a journey to crypto marketing mastery!
Ready to elevate your Web3 project to new heights? Contact InteliSync now and unleash the full potential of your crypto venture!
What You're Going to Learn
- How These 4 Leaks Force You To Work Longer And Harder in order to grow your income… improve just one of these and the impact could be life changing.
- How to SHUT DOWN the revolving door of Income Stagnation… you know, where new sales come into your magazine while at the same time existing sponsors exit.
- How to transform your magazine business by fixing the 4 “DON’Ts”...
#1 LEADS Don’t Book
#2 PROSPECTS Don’t Show
#3 PROSPECTS Don’t Buy
#4 CLIENTS Don’t Stay
- How to identify which leak to fix first so you get the biggest bang for your income.
- Get actionable strategies you can use right away to improve your bookings, sales and retention.
Accelerating Impact: Exploring Best Practices, Challenges, and Innovations in Impact Enterprise Acceleration
1. Accelerating Impact
Exploring Best Practices, Challenges, and
Innovations in Impact Enterprise Acceleration
February2015
Funded by:
Authored by:
2. Contents
Definitions and Acronyms..............................................................................................................................1
Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................2
The Evolution of Solutions.......................................................................................................................2
Why Focus on Impact Accelerators? ........................................................................................................3
The Rockefeller Foundation Impact Enterprise Project.............................................................................3
Objectives of this Report.........................................................................................................................4
Insights around Impact Enterprise Acceleration...........................................................................................5
Key Needs of Impact Enterprises .............................................................................................................5
Typical Accelerator Support for Impact Enterprises..................................................................................8
Best Practices for Accelerating Impact Enterprises...................................................................................9
Common Impact Accelerator Challenges................................................................................................12
Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models.........................................................................................15
1. Unreasonable Institute......................................................................................................................16
2. Village Capital ...................................................................................................................................25
3. The Social Franchise Accelerator: Bertha/ICSF/Franchising Plus..........................................................34
4. African Management Initiative ..........................................................................................................42
5. Shujog...............................................................................................................................................48
Summary Analysis of Survey Data..........................................................................................................56
Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................................57
Collaboration Holds the Key to Market Evolution...................................................................................57
Closing Remarks....................................................................................................................................58
Appendix 1: List of Additional Shujog Programs.........................................................................................59
Appendix 2: List of Global Impact Accelerators...........................................................................................61
Acknowledgements and Disclaimers...........................................................................................................63
3. 1
Definitions and Acronyms
Social
Enterprise
A form of hybrid organization thatpursues a social mission usingbusinessmethods
Source: Stanford Social Innovation Review
Impact
Enterprise
An organization thatintentionally seeks to grow and sustain financial viability,realizeincreasingsocial impact,
and influence the broader system in which they operate
There are two concepts that set impactenterprises apartfrom standard social enterprises:
Enterprises must be scalable: It is essential to expand the reach and targeted impact of each initiative,as well as
the ability to absorb the capital needed to grow activities.Expandingthe scalealso leads to organizational
complexities that need to be addressed (i.e., what is needed to accommodate a larger organization with a more
expansivereach)
Enterprises intentionally contribute to systemic change: Impact enterprises catalyzechanges in the attitudes
and views of the government, civil society,and privatesector, changingthe way markets respond to the new
way of doing business and changingtheway people respond to these shifts
Source: The Rockefeller Foundation
Impact
Accelerator
Any intermediary organization or platformworkingto scaleimpactenterprises by providing supportfor
multipleimpactenterprise needs
Source: The Rockefeller Foundation and Monitor Deloitte
Impact
Investments
Investments made into companies,organizations,and funds with the intention to generate social and
environmental impactalongsidea financial return
Source: the Global Impact Investing Network (the GIIN)
Impact
Investor
Any organization actingin its capacity as an investor to intentionally generate social and/or environmental
impactalongsidea financial return
Source: the Global Impact Investing Network (the GIIN)
ACTS Assistancefor Capacity-Buildingand Technical Services
ANDE Aspen Network of Development Entrepreneurs
AMI African Management Initiative
GIIN Global ImpactInvestingNetwork
HR Human Resources
ICSF International Centre for Social Franchising
IE Impact Enterprise
IT Information Technology
MOOC MassiveOpen OnlineCourse
TAP Technical AssistanceProvider
SE Social Enterprise
SSA Sub-Saharan Africa
UCT GSB University of Cape Town Graduate School of Business
UK United Kingdom
4. Introduction
2
Introduction
The Evolution of Solutions
The worldfacestremendoussocial andenvironmental problems. Despiteglobal economicgrowth,
1.2 billionpeoplestillliveinextreme poverty.1
More than1.5 millionchildrenunderfivedie from
diseasesthatcouldbe preventedbyexistingvaccines.2
One-fifthof the world’spopulationfaces
waterscarcity.3
More moneywill be neededtoaddressthese issuesthanphilanthropic
organizations andgovernmentshave attheirdisposal. Recognizingthischallenge,theyare seeking
innovative ideasthatleveragetheirresources.Atthe same time,private sectoractorsare bringing
market-basedsolutionstothe space,as theylooktogenerate profitsalongside social impact.
Workingtogether,these differentactorscansuccessfullydeliverinnovative,market-based
solutionsthataddressthe problemsfacingpoorandvulnerable peopleglobally.
An impactenterprise isone suchpromisingsolution.Impactenterprisesare organizationsthat
intentionallyseektogrowandsustainfinancial viability,realizeincreasingsocial impact,and
influencethe broadersysteminwhichtheyoperate.4
Collectively,theyhave the flexibilityneeded
to adapt to the changingdynamicsof problemsandcandeliverinventive andtimelysolutions.
The challenge isthatmanyimpact enterprisesare successful ata small scale,withinalocal
context, butcannotincrease the size of theiroperationsto expand theirimpact.Astheyattempt
to scale,theyoftenstruggle toreachmore customers,attract talentedhumancapital,obtainthe
righttypesof funding,andaccessthe technical expertisethatcanhelpthemadapttheirbusiness
modelsateach stage of development.5
Impactinvestorsare interestedinsupportingthese
enterprises,butoftenhave trouble findinginvestment-readyimpactenterprisesthatdonotneed
significantbusinesssupport.6
The RockefellerFoundationhasbeenone of the foremostchampionsof impactinvestingsince its
inception.In2013, it beganfocusingmore onthe “demandside”of the impact investingfieldand
examinedthe challengesforimpactenterprisesmore closely.The RockefellerFoundation
recognizedthe struggle enterprisesface whentryingtoscale andchose to supportintermediaries
that could helpenterprisesexpandtheirimpactandincrease the positivebenefitsforpoorand
vulnerable populations.These intermediariesare often calledimpactaccelerators.7
1
United Nations Millennium Development Goals
2
UNICEF
3
UNDESA Water Factsheet on Water Scarcity
4
Definition of an impact enterprise as defined by The Rockefeller Foundation. There are two concepts that set impact enterprises apart from standard social
enterprises. One distinction is that impact enterprises must be scalable: it is essential to expand the reach and targeted impact of each initiative, as well as
the ability to absorb the capital needed to grow activities. Expanding the scale also leads to organizational complexities that need to be addressed (i.e. what
is needed to accommodate a larger organization with a more expansive reach.) The second distinction is that impact enterprises intentionally contribute to
systemic change: changing the way markets respond to the new way of doing business, and changing the way people respond to these shifts. Impact
enterprises catalyze changes in the attitudes and views of the government, civil society, and private sector.
5
Grimm, Daniel, Mike Kubzansky, and Kurt Dassel. Enabling Conditions for the Growth of Impact Enterprises: Observations from the Field. Working paper.
Monitor Group, 2012 with support from The Rockefeller Foundation.
6
An impact investor is any organization acting in its capacity as an investor to intentionally generate social and/or environmental impact alongside a
financial return. Definition of an Impact Investor as defined by the Global Impact Investing Network (the GIIN). Source for statement: Koh, Harvey, Ashish
Karamchandani, and Robert Katz. From Blueprint to Scale: The Case for Philanthropy in Impact Investing. Rep. N.p.: Monitor Group, 2012. Print. Produced by
Monitor Group in collaboration with Acumen Fund. Created with funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
7
In this report, the term accelerator refers to any intermediary organization or platform working to scale impact enterprises by providing support for
multiple impact enterprise needs
5. Introduction
3
Why Focus on Impact Accelerators?
Acceleratorsoffer impactenterprisessupportacrosstheirspectrumofneedsasthey seek to scale
There are several differentplatformsthatcansupportenterprisesastheygrow.Many focus on
justone of the myriad of challengesthatface enterprises.Forinstance,impactinvestmentfirms,
challenge funds,grant-makingorganizations,andcrowd-fundingplatformsall addressfinancing
needs butrarelysupportenterprisesinrefiningtheirbusinessmodelsorestablishingrelationships
withpartners.Conversely,social entrepreneurshipschoolsandsocial venture networksprovide
enterpriseswiththissupport,buttheyoftendonothelpwithfundingorwithestablishinga
rigorousmonitoringandevaluationsystem.8
Acceleratorsfocus notjustona single issue but
typicallyaimtosupport a broad spectrumof impactenterprise needsastheyseektoscale. This
supportisprovided throughanarray of resourcesandservices,offeredbothby accelerators
themselves andthrough theirnetworks.
A fewindicativestudieshighlight the potential promise of the acceleratorapproach.A studyby
Syracuse Universityexamined950 businessaccelerators/incubatorsoperatingfrom1990-2008 and
foundorganizationsthatgraduatedfromanaccelerator/incubatorhadslightlyhigheremployment
growthand salesgrowth versus un-incubatedbusinesses.9
Similarly, astudyfromthe Universityof
Cambridge foundthatacceleratorstendtoincrease survivorship ratesof start-uporganizationsby
10-15% by yearfive.10
Overthe past several years,anumberof incubatorsandacceleratorsfocusedspecificallyon
impactenterpriseshave emerged.Ina2013 landscapingexerciseconductedbyThe Rockefeller
FoundationandMonitorDeloitte, more than 160 of these “impactaccelerators”were foundjustin
the UnitedStates,Sub-SaharanAfrica(SSA),andSoutheastAsia. The average age of the
acceleratorssurveyed throughthiswork waslessthan five years.
There is a need for more knowledgesharingand understanding ofbestpracticesamongstimpact
acceleratorsand thebroadercommunity
Giventhe nascentnature of thisfield,many impactaccelerators have focused primarilyoninternal
operationsthusfar.Theyare concernedwith refiningtheirbusinessmodels - developingthe right
configurationof services andidentifyingthe bestwaytodeliverthose servicestoimpact
enterprises.Asaresult,theyoftendonothave time to share lessonslearnedwithpeers,andthus,
manyacceleratorsundergothe processof evaluatingandadopting(ornotadopting) the same
curriculumor servicessimultaneously.Industryexpertsandacceleratorsare increasingly
recognizingthattheyfrequently“re-inventthe wheel.”Asthe industrymatures,there isaneedto
betterunderstandbestpracticesandpromisingnew innovationsinimpactacceleration.Thisisthe
basisof The RockefellerFoundationImpact Enterprise Project.
The Rockefeller Foundation Impact Enterprise Project
Overthe past year,The RockefellerFoundation,inconjunctionwith itsgrantee MonitorDeloitte,
soughtto identifybestpracticesandinnovativenew ideasforscalingimpactenterprises.There
were several phasesof workunderthis project.The firstphase focusedonunderstandingthe
needsof impactenterprisesastheyseektoscale.Inthe secondphase,the teamconducted
primaryand secondaryresearchanddevelopedalandscape of more than 160 impact accelerators
8
More details on the various types of intermediaries that provide people, expertise, and networks can be found in the following report: Shanmugalingam,
Cynthia, Jack Graham, Simon Tucker, and Geoff Mulgan. Growing Social Ventures. Rep. London: NESTA, 2011. Print.
9
Amezcua, Alejandro S., "Boon or Boondoggle? Business Incubation as Entrepreneurship Policy" (2010). Public Administration - Dissertations. Paper 80.
10
Birdsall, Michael, Clare Jones, Craig Lee, Charles Somerset, and Sarah Takaki. Business Accelerators: Th e Evolution of a Rapidly Growing Industry. Rep.
N.p.: U of Cambridge, Judge Business School, 2013. Print.
6. Introduction
4
inthe UnitedStates,Sub-SaharanAfrica,andSoutheastAsiato understandboththe typical
supportacceleratorsprovide forimpactenterprisesaswell aspromisingnew practices. Tohave a
greaterimpacton poor andvulnerable populations,the nextphase encouragedfurtheraccelerator
experimentationbygivinggrants toorganizationstestinginnovative new models.Grantswere
giventofive organizations:AfricanManagementInitiative (AMI),the Social FranchiseAccelerator,
Shujog,Unreasonable Institute,andVillage Capital. Overall,thisworksoughttodeepenand
disseminateknowledge inthe impactacceleratormarket.
Objectives of this Report
Summary ofReport: Thisreportprovidesanoverview of the findingsfromthe project,describing
bestpracticesand challengeslearnedfromacceleratorsthemselves,whilealso summarizing
promising,yetunproven,innovationsthatare currentlybeingtestedbyThe Rockefeller
Foundationgrantees.
Audience& Intended Purpose: The aimistogive accelerators,researchers,andfundersa
qualitative understandingof “whatworks”and “whatis promising”inacceleratingimpact
enterprisesand tohighlightthe keychallengesthatmustbe addressedbyall stakeholdersinorder
for the fieldtocontinue togrow.
Althoughthere iscertainlyaneedformore quantitativevalidation of the findingsinthisreport as
the fieldcontinuestomature,these insightsreflectthe leadingqualitative thinkinginimpact
accelerationtoday.
7. Insights around Impact Enterprise Acceleration
5
Insights around Impact Enterprise
Acceleration
Key Needsof ImpactEnterprises
In orderto understandwhattype of acceleratorsupportisbeneficial toenterprises,itisimportant
to firstunderstandthe needsof enterprisesastheydevelopandgrow theirbusinesses.Thus,The
RockefellerFoundationandMonitorDeloitteteambeganthisresearch projectbyidentifyingthe
eightdiscrete needsorstepsthatimpactenterprisesfollow in ordertogrow theirorganizations.
These are listedbelow.
Exhibit1: Eight Scaling NeedsofImpact Enterprises
1. Market Research: Researchandanalyticson marketdynamics,relevantpolicies,customers,
and potential competitors.Thisresearchinformsandshapes the developmentof business
strategy.
2. Business Development and Strategic Planning: Businessstructuresandstrategiesthatenhance
the performance andimpactof the enterprise.Thiscategoryincludesall the needsof an
impactenterprise astheyestablishanddeveloptheirbusiness,suchasthe procurementof
physical office space,establishmentof back-office functions (suchasinformationtechnology
(IT) supportand humanresources(HR)),recruitmentof humancapital,andanylegal support.
In addition,thiscategoryincludesthe development of abusinessplanandongoingbusiness
strategy.
8. Insights around Impact Enterprise Acceleration
6
3. Financing:Seedfunding;fundsforongoingoperations,suchasequipment,raw materials,
marketing, andinventory;andfundsforexpansion.
4. Supply Sourcing and Production: Sourcingof raw materialsandproductionof goods.
5. Salesand Marketing: Promotionandsalesof goodsorservices.
6. Distribution and Market Access: Accesstoappropriate distributionchannels - bothindividuals
and organizations - toreach targetmarketsand consumers.
7. Monitoring and Evaluation:Performance andimpactmetricsof the enterprise thatprovide
insightsonhowto adjustandoptimize the businessmodel.
8. Leadership Skills and Business Acumen:Leadershipandbusinessskillsof the enterprise team—
thiscomponentisthe core of the enterprise andsupportssuccessinall otherareas. It
addresses the inherentqualitiesthatmake animpactenterprise leadernotjusta social
visionary,butalsosomeone whohasthe skillstocommercialize anidea andperformbasic
managementtasks, suchasconductingmeetings, overseeingemployees,andcoordinating
disparate workstreams.
As an impactenterprise grows,itwillrepeatthe cycle and gothroughthese eightstepsagain,but
withnuancedneedsdependingonthe stage.Forinstance,anearly stage companywill focuson
developingthe rightbusinessplanandgettingseedfundingwhile amore mature companywill
needtorefine itsstrategyonan ongoingbasisandsecure growthcapital.
9. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
7
Common Challenges as Impact Enterprises Seek to Scale
Basedon primaryand secondaryresearch,fouroutof the eightkeyneedsappeartobe
particularlychallengingforenterprisesastheytryto increase theirscale andimpact.
Business Development and Strategic Planning: Enterprisesoftenstruggletoattract and retain
talent,particularlygivencompetitionfromthe private sector.Inaddition,the abilitytocontinually
adapt a businessplanorbusinessstrategiesisadifficultskillforentrepreneurstomaster,butis
absolutelyessential tothe growthof the organization.11
Financing: Availability of financing,
access to financing,highcostof
financing,andonerousfinancing
termsare all commonand difficult
challenges.12
Distribution and Market Access: Despite havingproductsorservicesthatwouldbe highly
beneficial topoorand vulnerable populations,impactenterprisesoftenlackaccesstosufficient
distributionchannelstoconnectwithnew marketsorcustomers,13
includingthe inabilityto
identifynew marketsanddetermine waysinwhichtoenterthem.
Leadership and Business Acumen: Developing
the skillsandbusinessacumennecessarytobe a
strongleaderandsuccessfullymanage abusiness
isa challengingprocessandisa crucial gap in
enablingsocial enterprisestoscale successfully.14
Charismaticfounderswithbrilliantideasare not
necessarilythe bestCEOs.Itisalsooftendifficult
for entrepreneursthatcome fromthe social
sectorto run theirorganizationasa true
“business”or“enterprise”inorderto ensure
successand,ultimately,impactontheirintended
beneficiaries.
11
Koh, Harvey, Ashish Karamchandani, and Robert Katz. From Blueprint to Scale: The Case for Philanthropy in Impact Investing. Rep. N.p.: Monitor Group,
2012. Print. Produced by Monitor Group in collaboration with Acumen Fund. Created with funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
12
Koh, Harvey, Ashish Karamchandani, and Robert Katz. From Blueprint to Scale: The Case for Philanthropy in Impact Investing. Rep. N.p.: Monitor Group,
2012. Print. Produced by Monitor Group in collaboration with Acumen Fund. Created with funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation;
Shanmugalingam, Cynthia, Jack Graham, Simon Tucker, and Geoff Mulgan. Growing Social Ventures. Rep. London: NESTA, 2011. Prin t; Haebig,
Manfred. Enablers for Change: A Market Landscape of the Indian Social Enterprise Ecosystem. Rep. Ed. Katherine Miles, Trina Datta, and Ernst and Young
Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi: Deutsche Gesellschaft Fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, 2012. Print; Grimm, Daniel, Mike Kub zansky, and Kurt
Dassel. Enabling Conditions for the Growth of Impact Enterprises: Observations from the Field. Working paper. N.p.: Monitor Group, 2012. Print. With
support from The Rockefeller Foundation.
13
Koh, Harvey, Ashish Karamchandani, and Robert Katz. From Blueprint to Scale: The Case for Philanthropy in Impact Investing. Rep. N.p.: Monitor Group,
2012. Print. Produced by Monitor Group in collaboration with Acumen Fund. Created with funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation;
Shanmugalingam, Cynthia, Jack Graham, Simon Tucker, and Geoff Mulgan. Growing Social Ventures. Rep. London: NESTA, 2011. Print; Accelerating
Entrepreneurship in Africa. Rep. N.p.: Omidyar Network, 2012. Print. Developed in partnership with Monitor Group; Grimm, Daniel, Mike Kubzansky, and
Kurt Dassel. Enabling Conditions for the Growth of Impact Enterprises: Observations from the Field. Working paper. N.p.: Monitor Group, 2012. Print. With
support from The Rockefeller Foundation.
14
Koh, Harvey, Ashish Karamchandani, and Robert Katz. From Blueprint to Scale: The Case for Philanthropy in Impact Investing. Rep. N.p.: Monitor Group,
2012. Print. Produced by Monitor Group in collaboration with Acumen Fund. Created with funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
“Socialentrepreneursstruggle to access
finance and face capital that is
inappropriately structured for their needs”
— ANDE, “Toward an Ecosystem for Early-Stage Incubation of Social
Enterprises in East Africa”
Most social enterprisesrequire
significantcapacity building and
training to attain the education,
skills, and access to information in
order to execute their business
plan.”
— GIZ, “Enablers for Change — A Market Landscape
of the Indian Social Enterprise Ecosystem”
10. Insights around Impact Enterprise Acceleration
8
TypicalAccelerator Supportfor Impact Enterprises
Acceleratorsupportforthe impactenterprise needshighlightedabove typicallyfallsintofour
categories. The mostcommontype of acceleratorsupportiscapacity buildingfor impact
enterprises.Acceleratorsoftenprovide formaltrainingorworkshopstoteachentrepreneurshow
to refine theirmodelandscale theirbusiness.Thiscaninclude specificcoursesregardingfinancing,
marketing,orbusinessplandevelopment.Many acceleratorsalsoprovideaccesstouseful
networksforenterprises - introducingthemtoinvestorsandotherfunders,potentialpartners,
suppliers,mentors,andcustomersandbeneficiaries.Insome cases,accelerators giveenterprises
resourcesdirectly,suchasfunding,office space,or probono services(suchaslegal services).A
selectnumberof acceleratorsare alsostartingto focuson buildingthe widerimpactinvesting
ecosystem.Thisincludesundertaking market-level interventions,suchasresearch,policy
advocacy,and customereducationto supportthe developmentof the broaderimpact investing
and impactenterprise environment.The graphicbelow providesanoverviewof the typical support
delivered byaccelerators,withthe sizeof eachcomponentrepresentingaqualitative assessment
of itsoverall prevalence amongstimpactaccelerators.
Exhibit2: Standard AcceleratorSupport Areas
Each acceleratortypicallycombinesandadaptsthese traditional supportpracticesintoaunique
configurationfortheirparticularmodel. Fromthe research,itisclearthat factors thatmake an
acceleratorprogramsuccessful are oftenchallengingtodeliver.The keyingredientsof success and
keychallenges inacceleratingimpactenterprises are highlyinterconnected.
In thisnextsection, bestpracticesandchallengesare discussedseparately,pullingfrom all of the
RockefellerFoundationImpactEnterpriseProjectgranteesaswell asthe broader impact
acceleratorlandscape, toprovide useful, high-level insightsforstakeholdersinthe field.Ineachof
the grantee case studies,however,bestpracticesandchallengesare combinedinto criticalsuccess
factors to highlightthe complex realityof implementationforindividual accelerators.
11. Insights around Impact Enterprise Acceleration
9
Best Practices for Accelerating Impact Enterprises
Lookingacross the five granteesandthe broaderimpactacceleratorlandscape,anumberof best
practicesfor successfullyacceleratingimpactenterpriseshave emerged.These insightshave been
furthervalidatedthroughengagementwithfundersandresearchersinthe industryandshouldbe
useful foracceleratorslookingtoenhance theirownmodels,aswell asfundersseekingto
understandwhichpracticestosupport.Foreach bestpractice,some examplesof how the
individualgranteesimplementedthispractice are alsoincluded.More in-depthdiscussionsof best
practices,acceleratoroperatingmodels,keychallenges,andsoforthare providedinthe case
studies(found in thefollowing section).
1. Develop a localized or sector-specificmodel
As the impactacceleratormarketmatures,there isincreasingrecognitionthata one-size-fits-all
approach isnot effective.Marketdynamicsare highlyunique indifferentindustriesor
geographies,andthus itismostuseful togive enterpriseslessonsandresourcesthatare directly
relatedtotheirspecificniche.Acceleratorsare increasinglydevelopingcustomizedmodelsof
supportwithlocal or sector-specificcase studies,mentors,andinstructors.Customizedcase study
examplesenable entrepreneurstounderstandhow toapplygeneral lessonstotheirspecific
business,andcustomizedmentorscanbetterunderstandchallengesfacingentrepreneursand
provide more beneficialguidanceandconnections.
2. Build a strong ecosystemofsupport
No acceleratorcanprovide supportforall enterprise needsonitsown.Theymustbuildastrong
ecosystemof supportaroundthe enterprise — includingmentors,investors,andsector
stakeholders. Throughpartnerships,acceleratorscanprovide bettercurriculum, connections,and
expertiseonspecificgeographicorsectordynamics.Furthermore,these partnerswill remain
critical connectionsandavenuesof supportforentrepreneursastheygraduate fromaccelerator
programsand continue toscale.
3. Carefully screen impactenterprisesforappropriatefit
Dependingonthe type of support providedbyanacceleratorprogram, some impactenterprises
will benefitmore thanothers.Acceleratorsmustscreentheirapplicantstoensure anappropriate
fitwiththe program.A robust, up-frontscreeningprocessensuresimpactacceleratorscanbe
effectiveinprovidingsupportandpreventsimpactenterprisesfromwastingtime inaprogram
that addressesskillstheyalreadyhave orthattheyare not readyfor.
Example: Unreasonable Institute is replicating its North American-based program in emerging
market locations in order to enable impact enterprises in those regions to access more local
connectionsandmentorswithwhomtheycanforge longer-lastingrelationships(see pp. 16-24).
Example:Village Capital buildsasupportiveecosystemforitsproblem-basedprograms.Theseare
supportprogramsspecificallybuilt forenterprisesall tacklingaspecificproblem(suchasthe lack
of financial servicesforlow-income householdsinthe UnitedStates)fromdifferentangles.For
each program,Village Capitalestablishesrelationshipswithproblem-specificexperts,mentors,
and customers,fosteringadedicatedcommunitythathasboth the motivationandexpertiseto
helpenterprisesbecomesuccessful andachievescale (seepp.25-33).
12. Insights around Impact Enterprise Acceleration
10
4. Develop a holistic model, but tailorsupportforindividualenterprises
Acceleratorsdistinguishthemselvesfromotherintermediariesbyofferingholisticsupportacross
multiple scalingneeds.Theyhave arange of resourcesandcurriculumfromwhichtheycandraw.
However,theyare increasinglytailoringthisholisticsupport tothe needsof individual enterprises
- takingthe customizedmodel highlightedabove one level deeper.Manyacceleratorsuse
competencyassessmentstounderstandenterprise strengthsandweaknesses.Withthis
understanding,acceleratorscanidentifythe aspectsof theirprogramthatwill be mostrelevantto
the enterprise andoptimizeresources accordingly — pairingimpactenterpriseswithspecific
mentorsandexpertsorprioritizingcoursesthatfocusonskill gaps.
5. Fostercollaboration amongstimpactenterprises
Impact enterprisesshare amotivationtoaddresscomplex socialandenvironmental issues.
Additionally,startingabusinesstoaddressthese issues involves commongrowthchallenges,
whichall impactenterprises face.This createsaunique opportunityforcollaboration.These
enterprisescanprovide highlyconstructive guidance totheirpeersgiventheiron-the-ground
perspective.Collaborationalsoallowsimpactenterprisestoshare bestpractices,make
connectionsforone another,andevenpartnertogether.
Examples:The Social Franchise Acceleratorhasa multistage applicationandinterviewprocess
to identifyorganizationsthathave the keyingredientstomake themsuitableforsocial
franchising(seepp.34-41). Suitable businessesare those withastrongmanagementteam,a
strongfinancial base thatcouldsupportthe initial costsof franchising,andstrongoperations
systemsthatcouldbe replicatedeffectivelybyfranchisees.Similarly,Shujog’sinnovative new
program hasa clearfocuson preparingenterprisesforcapital raising — aprocessthat should
occur afterthe initial developmentandtestingof abusinessmodel.If anenterpriseistooearly-
stage,the entrepreneurswilloftenbe toobusydealingwithdailyoperationalchallengesand
cannot focuson,or benefitfrom, lessonsaroundhow toraise capital.Therefore,Shujogfocuses
on more mature,investment-readyenterprises(seepp.48-55).
Examples:Each AMI membertakesacompetencyassessmentthatevaluatestheirexisting
businessandimpactknowledge.Uponcompletionof the assessment,membersreceive a
customizedlearningplanof specificcoursesthataddresstheirknowledgegaps(seepp.42-47).
Examples:AMI requiresitsmemberstoidentify“buddies,”whohelpthemstayontrack against
theirlearningplans.AMIalsohasonline discussionforumswhere impactenterprisescan
communicate andseekadvice fromone another(seepp.42-47). Village Capital has impact
enterprise peersinaspecificcohort publicallyreview eachother’sbusinessmodelstoenhance
constructive feedbackandlearning(seepp.25-33).
13. Insights around Impact Enterprise Acceleration
11
6. Maintain long-termenterpriseengagement
The scalingprocessisoftenlongand arduous.Impactenterprisesmusttestnew ideas,fail,and
refine themovertime.Acceleratorsacknowledge thatprovidinglong-termsupportthroughthis
processisdesirable toensure enterprisesremainon trackwiththeirplans. Itisalsobeneficialto
provide newconnectionsforenterprisesastheirneedsevolve overtime.
Example:The Social Franchise Acceleratormentorsremainwithenterprisesthroughoutthe
time ittakesto developandtestaninitial franchise pilotinordertoprovide guidance asneeded
(seepp. 34-41). Similarly,UnreasonableInstitute mentorscommittosix monthsof supportafter
theirmainprogram,and a “lead”mentorperiodicallychecksinwithUnreasonableInstitute to
reporton progressandrequest additional supportandconnectionsasneeded(seepp.16-24).
14. Insights around Impact Enterprise Acceleration
12
Common Impact AcceleratorChallenges
As highlightedabove,implementingsome of the bestpracticescanalso create challengesfor
impactaccelerators.Belowisanoverview of the commonchallengesthatface impactaccelerators
as theyseektosupportimpactenterprisesandscale theirimpact.Some potential mitigation
strategiesthatacceleratorsare currentlytestingare alsolisted,butatthispointintime,itis
unclearwhetherthese will be successful inovercomingchallenges.
1. Lack of awareness
The relative nascence of the impactacceleratormarketmeansmanyinvestors,impactenterprises,
and otherkeystakeholdersare unaware of theirbenefits.Thischallengeisespeciallyacute in
developingeconomies,where knowledge of eventraditional acceleratormodelsisnot
widespread.Thislimitedawarenessconstrainsaccelerators’abilitytoattractboth enterprisesand
relevantpartnerstotheirprogram.
2. Developing a sustainablefundingmodel
The majorityof impact acceleratorscite funding asanacute constrainttotheirprogram.
Acceleratorsreliantonphilanthropiccapital oftenfindthatdonortimelinesandspending
requirementsmisalignwiththeirownneeds.Forexample,donorsoftenneedtofundspecific
initiativesthatgenerate easily identifiable,large-scaleimpact,while acceleratorsoftenneed
fundingtosimplymaintainandscale theiroperationsortotest(potentiallyfailing) innovations
that couldenhance theirmodels.Acceleratorsexploringmore sustainablefundingmodelsare
oftencautiousaboutembracingtraditionallycommercial models(e.g.,equitystakes) astheyfear
thiswill take themawayfromtheirimpactgoals.There isalsoa reluctance toembrace equity
modelsgiventhatmanyimpactenterprisesare nonprofitorgenerate minimal revenues.
3. Balancing business versus socialimpact
For impactaccelerators,“scaling”enterpriseshasmanydifferentfacets.Impactenterprisesneed
to focuson businessgrowth,measuredthroughtraditional metricssuchasrevenue growthor
employeegrowth.Atthe same time,theyalsoneedtoincrease social impact,measuredthrough
impact-specificmetricssuchasnumberof beneficiariesreachedorspecificmeasuressuchas
reducedincidencesof malnutrition.Itischallengingforimpactacceleratorstodetermine the right
Potential MitigationStrategies:Many acceleratorstry to cultivate strategicpartnershipswith
otherecosystemplayerstoraise awareness.These partnershipsallow acceleratorstopresent
theirworkat industrytrainingsandconferencesandmake connectionstoinvestors,
enterprises,and otherkeypartnerssuchas potential mentors.Otheracceleratorshave takento
traditional advertisingmediums,suchasradiointerviews,toreachbroaderaudiences.
Potential MitigationStrategies:Acceleratorsfocusedonphilanthropiccapital are more
consciouslyselectingfunderswhohave long-termgoalsthatalignwiththeirprogram.
Partneringwithmore niche fundersallowsaccelerators todevelopongoingrelationshipswith
fewerspendingrestrictions.Foracceleratorspursingself-sustainingmodels,theyare exploring
revenue-sharingoptions,paybackmodelswhere enterprisesrepaythe costof servicesover
time,orequitystakesthatenterprisescanbuybackovertime underreasonable terms.
15. Insights around Impact Enterprise Acceleration
13
focusbetweenscalingbusinessimpactversus scalingsocial impact.Often,theystruggle tobalance
these twoobjectivesandidentifythe appropriatesupporttoprovide enterprises.
4. Balancing standardizationand customization
Standardizedcurriculum enablesmaterials tobe refinedandperfectedovermanyiterationsand
easesthe processof scalingan acceleratorprogram.On the otherhand,customizedcurriculum,
case studies,andothertoolsallow impactenterprisestounderstandhow toapplygeneral lessons
or theoryto theirownbusinesses.Acceleratorprogramsneedboth,butfindingthe rightbalance is
a challenge.Furthermore,customizedprogrammingishighlyresource intensive.
5. Human capitalresourceconstraints
Impact acceleratorsneedtalentedhumancapital tobothdeliverexistingprogramseffectivelyand
to scale theirmodel.However,limitedphilanthropicfundingforoverheadcosts,lowersalaries
comparedto otherprivate sectorjobs,andoften“unattractive”locationsmeansthatimpact
acceleratorsfrequentlycannotobtainthe necessarytalent.
Potential MitigationStrategies:Some acceleratorsinherentlylinkthesetwogoals,wherebythe
social impactonlyincreasesasthe businessscales.Forinstance,amobilepaymentsystemthat
givesfarmersaccessto formal bankingincreasesitsimpactasitgainsmore customers.Other
acceleratorsfocusondefiningclearimpactgoalsforan individual enterprise andthenhelpthe
enterprise developastrategytomeetthese goals.
Potential MitigationStrategies:Some acceleratorshave identifiedasetof issuesthatnearlyall
impactenterprisesexperience,andhave craftedastandardcurriculumthataddressesthem.
Theythenlayeron tailoredservicesbydrawingonrelevantcase studyexamplesorappropriate
mentorsfromtheirnetwork.
Potential MitigationStrategies:Many impact acceleratorsrelyonmentorsorsector experts
whoare willingtocontribute theirtime free of charge.Some acceleratorsutilize privatesector
secondeesorgraduate studentstoprovide temporary supportona specificinitiative (e.g.,
developinganewcourse).Othersfocusonfindingmembersof the local communitythatare
capable of implementingaprogram andhave the passiontosupportimpactenterprises.
17. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
15
Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator
Models
The followingsectionprovidesadetailedoverview onthe five acceleratorgranteestesting
innovative new practices.The RockefellerFoundationgrantenablestheseorganizationstotest
newmodelsinordertogenerate promisinglessonsforthemselvesaswell asothersinthe field.
For quickreference,thereisan up-frontsnapshotof eachgrantee’sinnovationatthe beginningof
each case study. Each case studythenfollowsasimilarformat:
It beginswithanoverview of the accelerator’sexistingmodel andapproach.Thisoverview
demonstrateswhyeachacceleratoris alreadyaleaderandpromisinginnovatorinthe
field.
Followingthisoverview,the innovationbeingtestedwithThe RockefellerFoundation
fundingisintroduced.Eachcase studyprovidesadetailedsummaryof the innovationand
the specificmarketgapit isaddressing.
Initial insightsof the effectivenessof the innovationare outlined.Eachaccelerator
surveyedtheirimpactenterprises,askingthemtorankthe importance of eachof the eight
scalingneedshighlightedabove andthenevaluate the effectivenessof the accelerator’s
supportfor eachneed.Thisisthencomparedto the importance thatthe acceleratorsaidit
placedoneach of the scalingneeds.
To provide contextonthe sustainabilityof eachmodel andthe resourcesrequiredto
deliverthe program,abrief synopsisof eachaccelerator’sfundingstructure andoperating
model isprovided.
Finally,eachcase studyprovidesasummaryof the keyingredientsof successandkey
challengesforeachaccelerator.Ashighlightedabove,these twoare highly
interconnected.Therefore,eachcase studypresentsthe critical successfactorsforthe
innovationbeingtested,whichcombinebothbestpracticesandchallengestogetherina
waythat highlightsthe evolvingandexperimental nature of eachinnovation.
Exhibit3: The RockefellerFoundationAcceleratorGrantees
18. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
16
Unreasonable Institute
Summary of Organization
Establishedin2009, the Unreasonable Institute isfocusedonfindingcapable entrepreneursand
enablingthemtotackle the world’stoughestenvironmental andsocial challenges.The core of the
Unreasonable Institute modelisprovidingmentorshipsupporttohelpenterprisesbothrefine their
strategyfor creatingimpactas well asenhance theirabilitytodeliverthatimpact.Each year,
Unreasonable Institute matchesadozenventuresfromaroundthe worldwith50mentorsand
100+ potential fundersata five-weekbootcampinBoulder,Coloradointhe UnitedStates.Asof
August2014, 93 Unreasonable Institute enterprisesare operatingin41 countries.
Enterprisesgothrougha rigorous four-monthselectionprocessforUnreasonableInstitute,
includingawrittenapplicationandinterviewswiththe Unreasonable teamandsectorexpertsthat
seektoassessthe viabilityof theirbusinessmodel.Once selected,Unreasonable Institutethen
conducts a seriesof diagnosticassessmentswitheachentrepreneurtounderstandwhere they
wanttheirbusinesstogoand the supportneededtogetthere.
Basedon thisdiagnostic,Unreasonable selectspotentialmentorsfromitsexistingnetwork and
alsorecruitsnewmentorsthatcan provide supportforthe enterprise’sspecificneeds. Itthen
facilitatesintroductoryphone callstotest“chemistry”betweenthe ventureteamandpotential
mentor.The ideaisthat the relationshipshouldbe mutuallybeneficialtoboththe mentorand
mentee.
Once at the Unreasonable Institute bootcamp,so-calledNinja mentorsthathave strongexpertise
ina particularsubjectmatter(andare able to teachthis subjectinaneasy-to-use framework)
deliverworkshopstoall of the entrepreneurs.Theycoverarange of topics,suchas fund-raising,
testingcore assumptionsof a businessusingprototyping,andbeinganeffective CEO.
Entrepreneursthenspendthe majorityof theirtime applyingtheseconceptstotheirown
businessesandengaginginone-on-one meetingswithsome of the mentorswithwhomtheyhad
Model Replication
The Unreasonable Institute isreplicatingitsmodel of intensive mentorshipinnew locationsin
orderto provide localizedsupportforimpactenterprises.Thereare several benefitsto
replication.A local presencecanprovide access forenterprisesthatmaynot have time or
resourcestotravel to the original Unreasonable Institutelocationinthe UnitedStates.In
addition,local mentorsbetterunderstandthe marketdynamicsandchallengesthatenterprises
face and theirphysical proximitycanleadtodeeper,longer-lastingrelationships.Withlocal
institutes,entrepreneurscanquicklytestnew ideaswithcustomersandthenreturntomentors
to share theirdiscoveries.Thistranslatestofasterlearningforenterprises.Finally,there is
greaterlikelihoodof collaborationamongstthe variousenterprisesif theyare all workinginthe
same local context.
1
19. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
17
initial conversations.These are considered Sagementorsastheyprovide individual guidance to
specificenterprises.Ideally,bythe endof the program, each enterprise establishes ateamof two
to fourdedicated Sagementorsthatwill continuetosupportthemlong term.
At the endof the five-weekprogram, entrepreneursattendtwo InvestorDays where theymeet
more than 100 prospective funderswhohave beenspecificallycuratedbasedontheirpotentialfit
withthe enterprises.Afterthe program, alongside the long-termmentorshipsupport,enterprises
alsoreceive apro bono executive coach,whomeetswiththemonce aweektosupportthemin
runningtheirbusinesses.These are professional developmentcoachesthatvolunteertheirtime to
workwithenterprisesandhelpthemturnbusinessplansandtheoretical goalsintoactionable
tasks.
UniquefeaturesofUnreasonableInstitutemodel
The unique value propositionof Unreasonable Instituteisthe cultivationof the long-term
relationshipsbetweenenterprisesandteamsof mentors.Impact enterprisesare notsimply
exposedtoexpertsonaspecifictopic—suchasmarketing,financing,etc.—forthe short-time
periodof the program.Instead,Unreasonable Institute helpsenterprisescurate ahand-selected
teamof mentorsthatprovide supportfortheirspecificbusinessneedsandwillbe there long term.
By ensuringthatmentors’inputisactuallyvaluable andbeneficial tothe enterprises,this
motivatesthe mentorstoremainengaged.The teammentorshipstructure also createsasortof
“coopetition,”asthe mentorsall wanttoadd at leastas much value astheirpeers,if notmore.
Mentorsare askedto committo a minimumof six monthsof supportwithenterprises.Asimpact
enterprisesgrowandtheirneedschange,the mentorteamcanbe refined.Thereisa“lead”
mentorforeach enterprise thatregularlyreportsbacktoUnreasonable Institute sothatitcan
provide additional connectionsasneededasthe enterprisecontinuestoevolve.
Unreasonable Institute ensuresentrepreneursfullyleverage thisopportunitybyteachingthema
frameworkonhowto prepare formentorconversations,how tostructure theirtime andengage
withmentorsduringinteractions,andthenhow tofollow upandcontinue toengage themlong
term.Thisframeworkcan alsobe usedfor buildingrelationshipswithfunders,potential partners,
suppliers,andotherrelevantstakeholders.
Anotherunique featureof UnreasonableInstitute isthe immersiveenvironmentof the bootcamp.
Mentors can come to stay forjusta few daysor for the full five weeks.Thisenablesthe mentor-
mentee pairstoengage bothformallyand informallyand,thus, developlong-termrelationships.
20. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
18
History of theprogram
Since 2009, Unreasonable Institutehasbeenable tosupport93 differentventuresin41countries.
88% of these enterprisesare still active.Collectively,theyhave received more than$53 millionin
fundingandhave positively affectedmore thanfourmillionlives.The graphicbelow providesan
overviewof Unreasonable Institute’shistorical success.
21. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
19
Summary of Unreasonable Institute’s New Innovation: Model Replication
Withsupportfrom The RockefellerFoundation,UnreasonableInstitute isreplicatingitsmodel in
Uganda and Mexico.If successful,the ideaistoscale aggressivelyinsubsequent years— ideally
creatingmore than 100 Unreasonable Institutesaroundthe world.
Unreasonable Institute putsforwardseveral reasonsforwhyreplicationisnecessarytoexpand
theirimpact.The firstrationale forreplicationisbetteraccessformore entrepreneurs.There are
entrepreneurs whoare unable tospeakEnglishorface challengesthatare highlyuniquetotheir
local environment,andthusthe currentUnreasonable Institute programcannotprovide relevant
support.Second,Unreasonable Institute believesphysical proximityleadsto longer-lasting
relationshipswithpotentialmentors(whohave oftenfacedthe same challengesandhave a
strongerunderstandingof the local context) andfasterlearningonhow toimprove business
modelsgiventhe abilitytointeractwithtargetbeneficiariesmore easily.Withlocal institutes,
entrepreneurscanquicklytestnew ideaswithcustomersandthenreturntomentorsto share
theirdiscoveries.Finally,there is agreaterlikelihoodof collaborationamongstenterprisesif they
are all workinginthe same local context.
Detailed description ofmodeland supportprovided forvarious impactenterpriseneeds
For replication,UnreasonableInstitute selectsateamof twocofoundersthatshow high potential
to run successful institutesintheirowncountryandgivesthemaplaybook(whichprovidesa
detailedoverviewof howtorun eachpart of the program) and relevantinfrastructuresystems
(includingthe applicationsystemandanonline videolibraryof workshops).Theseteamsare
invitedtoUnreasonable InstituteinBouldertoreceivein-persontrainingandsee on-the-ground
operations.Theyalsoreceiveongoingsupportfrom the Unreasonable InstituteinBoulderthrough
regularcheck-insandanannual gatheringto share learnings.
The overall structure of the new instituteswill followthe programinBoulder,Colorado,where
enterpriseslive togetherina house forfive weeks,getguidance frommentors,buildtheirbusiness
toolkit,and developconnectionswithothersthatwill leadtogreatersocial impact.The chart
belowhighlights the levelof supportthatthe Unreasonable Institutemodelprovidesfor eachof
the eightscalingneeds forimpactenterprises.
Beyondthe core intensive mentorshipmodel,the exactworkshopsandguidance offeredthrough
the local instituteswill be specifictothe local context,the needsof the enterprises,andthe
mentorsinvolvedinthe program.Overtime,aslocal institutesgetmore established,theywill
likelyfocusmore onproductprototypingandensuringmarketfitgivenproximitytocustomers
22. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
20
while the BoulderInstitute maycontinuetofocusmore oninvestmentreadinessgivenproximity
to investors.
For instance,inBoulder,there are fund-raisingworkshopsand regularcheck-instosee where
enterprisesperformonafunding-readinesschecklist.Inaddition,financial architects— individuals
that have a financial background — dedicate approximately50 hoursof pro bono customized
supportto eachenterprise.This helpsenterprisesclearlydefine theirrevenue streams,cost
structures,andunderstandthe basicsof financial modellingsotheycanmanage theirmoney
effectively.
There are otherinnovationsalsobeingtestedinBoulder.UnreasonableScrimmage isa one-day
eventconnectingentrepreneurstoteamsof otherentrepreneurs,local expertsinspecificfields
(e.g.,engineering,IT),andinvestors.Withinthese teams,entrepreneursthenrapidlyprototypeto
refine andenhance theirproduct.While thereare challengesincreatingthe rightteams,thiscould
be an interestingmethodtohelpcreate strongerbusinessmodels.UnreasonableLaunchpad
providesanopportunityforentrepreneurstopitchto more than 800 potential customers,
investors,andindividualsfrom the communityinordertomake connectionsandgetfeedbackto
refine theirbusinessmodel.While thishasbeenanexcitinginitiative togainvisibilityfor
enterprises,Unreasonable isconsideringsmallereventswithaselectgroupof audience members
to maximize the benefitof the event.
As these ideasare refinedandthe new Unreasonable Institutesbecomemore mature,itislikely
that promisinginitiativeswill thenbe adoptedinthe new institutes(orvice versa).
23. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
21
Feedback on Unreasonable Institute
A brief surveyof the participantsinthe Unreasonable Instituteprogramassessedhow the program
performedacrossthe eightscalingneedsof impactenterprises.15
In general,if Unreasonable Institute placedsignificantemphasisonaspecificfeature of itsmodel,
enterprisesgave itastronglypositiveevaluation.Inparticular,participantsfeltmentorshipwas
highlyvaluableandgave highscoresinareas where mentorsupportwouldlikelybe critical for
success(suchas strategicplanningandbusinessacumen).Inaddition,connectionstofunders
helpedenterpriseswiththeirfinancingneedssignificantly.
EntrepreneurshighlightedthatUnreasonable Institutegave them “exposureto greatpeoplewho
are doing incredible things”and an “amazing community.”The pace of the program wasintensive
and some entrepreneursthoughtadditional time toapplyconceptstotheirbusinesswouldbe
useful versushavingsuchahighvolume of meetingswithmentors.Inaddition,some participants
mentionedthe program “could bemore organized”and“morestructured”in orderto helpthem
bettermanage theirtime andresponsibilitiesandmaximizethe benefitsof the program.
Operating model
As highlightedabove,eachUnreasonableInstitute locationwill have afoundingteamof at least
twocofounders.Eachcofoundingteamisthenresponsible forrecruitinglocal staff toprovide
supporton partnerships,logisticsandotherfactors.There isalsoa Chief Scale Officerthatprovides
expertisetothe local teamsonhow to successfullyreplicate the Unreasonable Institutemodel.
Currently,UnreasonableInstitute isfundedthroughamix of paymentsfromthe participating
enterprises(coveringapproximately18%-25% of programcosts) andphilanthropiccapital
(coveringthe remainderof costs).Enterprisestypically crowdfund theirfees(approximately10-
12,000 USD forthe Unreasonable Institute inColorado) fromtheircontacts,thusminimizingtheir
initial capital outlay.AsUnreasonable Instituteseekstoscale globally,there isarecognitionthat
15
Monitor Deloitte analysis surfaced eight needs of scaling impact enterprises: market research, business development and strategic planning, financing,
supply sourcing and production, sales and marketing, distribution and market access, monitoring and evaluation, and leadership skills and business acumen
* n = 18
*How to interpret the survey results?
In this chart, there are three columns per scaling need. The first column (light grey) represents the relative importance of
the scaling need, as assessed by the impact enterprises. The secondcolumn (blue) represents the importance ofthe scaling
need, as assessed by the accelerator.The third column (dark grey) represents the impact enterprises’ assessment ofhow
well the accelerator addressed the particular scaling need.
All impact enterprise scores are calculated based on an average of responses.
24. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
22
itsreliance onphilanthropicfundingwill impede itsabilitytoreplicate.Thus, itisfocusingon
developingamore sustainable fundingmodel.One option itisexploringisarevenue-sharing
model withenterprises.Initial feedbackfromenterprisesonthisapproachhas beenpositive.
Critical Success Factors
Unreasonable Institute hasidentifiedthe followingfactorsascritical to the successand
sustainabilityof itsmodel as itcontinuestoscale. Manyof these practices are importanttothe
effectivenessof the model,butcanbe challengingtoimplement.
Building strong relationshipswith mentorsand fundersiscrucial, butcan be resourceintensive
Long-term,high-qualitymentor-mentee relationshipsisthe cornerstone of the Unreasonable
Institute model.Inaddition,connectionstothe rightinvestorsisacrucial factorin enabling
enterprisestoraise capital.Unreasonable spendssignificanttime oncultivatingandmaintaining
these relationships,creatingaunique high-touchexperience betweenenterprisesandthese
partnersinorder to facilitate long-termengagement.
Thisdedicationhasbeensuccessful,butalsohighlyresource intensive.Historically,all mentor
relationshipshave beenroutedthroughone staff memberandall funderrelationshipshave been
managedbyanotherindividual.Theyare responsibleforall enterprise pairingsand
communications.Thesestaff membershave struggledtofullyunderstandthe needsof all
enterprises and evaluatethe effectiveness of matches and devote timetorecruitmentand
relationshipmanagementwiththesepartners.Asitscales,Unreasonable Instituteisconsidering
more efficientmodelstomatchenterprisestomentors,suchassurveysandshortinterviewsto
more quicklyandeffectivelyunderstandenterprise needs.Inaddition,itiscontinuingtorefineits
database tools(e.g., ithasa database withthe namesof thousandsof investors)toenable more
efficientselectionof appropriate partnersforspecificenterprises.Achievingthe rightbalance
betweenengagementandefficiencywillbe crucial forsuccess.
Selecting theright teamsand giving themtoolsforsuccessis key to effective replication
The successof newUnreasonable Institutesrestslargelyonthe foundingteams.Theymusthave
dedication, relevantskills, andthe abilitytohire the rightsupporttoimplementthe program
effectively.The twocofoundersforeachnew teammusthave complementaryskillsandproven
successinconveningtogetherstakeholdersinthe field.Aspartof the processto become local
institute founders,theymustrunstart-upweekendsthatprovide mini-accelerationprogramsto
local impactenterprises.Itisalsoimportanttoprovide the foundingteamswiththe rightsupport
to be successful.Ashighlightedabove,UnreasonableInstitute providesfoundersaplaybookthat
outlinesthe detailsof howtosetup and operate aninstitute,accesstorelevantsystems,and
trainings.
Despite the selectionprocessandsupport,itcanstill be a challenge tofindthe rightfounding
team.Duringthisinitial expansionintotwonew locations,one of the founderswasunable tofocus
exclusivelyonUnreasonable Institute,whichslowedprogress,andledtothe founder’seventual
exitfromthe program.Given that the foundersneedtopassdownboththe mindsetandthe
model of the institute,thisfounder’sexithinderedthe abilityof local staff tosuccessfully
implementthe program.
Unreasonable Institute isfocusedonrefiningthe founderselectionprocess andiscurrently
exploringthe ideaof developing"local boards”thatwouldinvestinthe new institute,engage in
the selectionprocessforfoundingteams,andcouldprovide additional supportandconnectionsas
the program grows.Asthese boardswouldhave betternetworksincountry,theywouldbe best
25. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
23
placedto selectthe rightfoundingteamsandknow the rightstakeholdersforsuccessof the
program.To provide additional local support,Unreasonable isplanningaprogramwhere interns
are trainedin institute operationsinBoulderandthendispatchedtonew locationsforshortstints.
Thiswill helpthe internsgetreal experience innew countrieswhileenablinglocal teamstolearn
howto manage the logisticsof the program.
A sustainablebusiness modelisincreasingly importantasUnreasonableInstitutescales
Unreasonable Institute acknowledgesthe currentfundingmodelisnotsustainablelong termasits
program scales. Itbelievesitwill be importanttohave up-frontcapital fornew locationsinorder
to attract and appropriatelycompensate the bestfoundingteam and ensure the teamcanfocus
on operations versusfund-raisingasitstarts the program. The “local boards” mentionedabove
couldprovide this up-frontcapital,utilizingstrongernetworksincountrytotap intovarious
fundingsources.
Anothercomponentof financialsustainabilityismovingawayfromaphilanthropicdependent
model toan independentmodel overtime.The revenue-sharingprogrammentionedpreviously
couldbe a bettermeanstocoverprogram costs.One variationof thisis to take a small equity
stake (e.g.,6%) inan enterprise andthenallow the enterprisetobuythe stake back overtime
basedon currentand projectedrevenues.Applyingone suchmodel toenterprisesthathave
participatedinUnreasonable Instituteoverthe pastfew years,Unreasonable estimatedthatit
couldhave coveredall costsand become profitableafterafive-yearperiod.Thisrevenue-sharing
model will be testedthroughvariousUnreasonable Institute’s programsoverthe nextyear.
Carefulscreening of applicantsensures only enterprisesthatareadequately prepared andcan truly
benefitfrom theprogramareselected
Currently,there isanintensiveselectionprocessforthe UnreasonableInstitute.Entrepreneurs
mustsubmita writtenapplicationtodemonstratetheirunderstandingof theirmarket,theirability
to execute the businessmodel,theirimpactonthe targetpopulation,andtheirabilitytoearn
revenuesthroughtheirbusiness.The nextstepisaninterview totestwhetherthe teampossesses
the followingfourcharacteristics:integrity,coachability,teamwork,andmotivationto“dotheir
homework.”
Unreasonable Institute conductsreferencecheckstobetterunderstandthe entrepreneurs.Sector
expertsalsointerviewenterprisestodetermine the feasibilityof eachenterprise’sbusiness.This
enablesUnreasonable Institute tomake accurate evaluationswithoutneedingtohave deep,
sector-specificknowledge.Through thisprocess,Unreasonable ensuresthatonlyenterprisesthat
are at the right stage intheirlife cycle andwouldtrulybenefitfromthe mentorshipsupportare
selected.Selectingenterprisesthatare nota good fitforthe Institute wouldbe adisservice to
those entrepreneurs.
The challenge isthatthisprocesscan be time consumingandresource intensive.Asaresult,
Unreasonable Institute isfocusedondevelopingnew waystostreamlinethe processandmake it
more efficient,withoutlosingitsability toselectthe rightenterprises.
Ongoing reflection and evaluation ensuresthattheprogramcontinuesto evolveand become
moreeffective
As Unreasonable Institute continuestogrow globally,itwillremainimportanttocontinue to
evolve andlearnfrompastmistakes.The teamisveryopenaboutlearningfromprevious
26. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
24
successesandfailures.Infact,there isa “failures”sectionof the Unreasonable Institutewebsite,
so that otherscan learnas well.As itreplicatesitsmodel, the Boulderteam speakswiththe other
foundingteamsregularlytounderstandwhatworks(andwhat doesnotwork) and consistently
updatesthe playbookasa livingdocument.There are uniquechallengesforeachinstitute and
opportunitiesforeachlocationtolearnfromone anotherthroughmore frequentinteractions.By
consistentlyiteratingandrefining itsmodel,UnreasonableInstitute can helpensure thatthe
programsmore effectivelyscale the impactof differententerprises.
Conclusion
The Unreasonable Institute hasaprovenmodel thatcan effectivelysupportandscale impact
enterprises.Replicationof thismodel will helptailorsupporttolocal contextsandenable the
impactof the program to scale ina more efficientmanner.Initialindicationsdemonstrate that
replicationispromising.Keyfactorstoensuringthe model issuccessful isthe selectionof the right
foundingteamsandthe developmentof amore sustainable businessmodel thatmovesawayfrom
dependence onphilanthropiccapital.
27. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
25
VillageCapital
Summary of Organization
Establishedin2009, Village Capital isanonprofitimpactacceleratorthatservesentrepreneurs
across the globe.Drivenbythe beliefthatnoleaderhasall the answers,VillageCapital delivers
businessassistanceprogramsthat facilitate relationships withstrategicpartnersandinvestors and
provide expertcoachingonbusinessstrategy. From2009-2013, Village Capital conducted27
programsacross the UnitedStates,Asia,andSub-SaharanAfrica.
Impact enterprisesselectedbyVillage Capital committoa 12-weekprogram, whichrevolves
aroundthree in-personsessions thateachlastfourdays.Duringthe sessions,entrepreneurs
attendlecturesandparticipate insmall grouplearningforums. Entrepreneursspend
approximately20%of theirin-personsessions inlectures.Thesefocusonbusinessmodel
refinement,teammanagement,financial management,andoverall businessstrategy.The lectures
provide aconcise frameworkforeachtopic,as well ascase studyexamplesthatfacilitate
understandingof howframeworkshave beenappliedunderdifferentcircumstances.
Entrepreneursspendthe remaining80% of theirsessiontime insmall grouplearningforumsto
applytopicscoveredinlecturestotheirownbusinessesandtoreceive guidance andfeedback
frompeersand mentors.
Program mentors — typicallysectorexpertsandbusiness executives — teachlecturesand
facilitate small grouplearningforums,leveragingtheiruniqueexpertise (e.g.,supplychain,
marketing,productdevelopmentandcustomervalidation).Village Capitalstaff membersalso
provide supportinteachingandcontentgeneration.
The Problem-Based Approach
Village Capital’s“Problem-BasedApproach”isaninnovative twistonacceleratorsupport.Many
acceleratorprogramsfocuson givingindividualenterprisesfunding,connections,andtraining
to enable themtoraise capital andgrow theirownbusiness.These programsacceptthe basic
businessmodelproposedbyentrepreneursandthensimplyworktorefine it.Thiscanleadto
enterprisesthatare just“solutionslookingforproblems.”
Under the problem-basedapproach,Village Capital doesnotsimplyfocuson supporting
individualenterprises,butinsteadaimstosolve abroadersocial andenvironmentalproblem.It
recruitsenterprisesthatall addressone problemfromdifferentangles.VillageCapital then
developsanecosystemof supportaroundthe problem, tailoringthe connections,mentors,and
curriculumto enhance the abilityof enterprisestoeffectivelytackle the issue.Byfocusingmore
on developingsustainable andeffective solutionsversusjustmakingindividual enterprises
investment-ready,Village Capital ensuresthatitsenterprisestrulyaddresssocietal challenges
and make a tangible andbeneficial impact.Thisapproachalsoenablesbetterengagement
amongstenterprisesthemselvesandbetweenenterprisesandpolicymakers,investors,
customers,andmentorsinthe fieldasall stakeholdersare passionate andknowledgeable about
the same problems.
2
28. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
26
Entrepreneursspendtimebetweensessionsback“onthe ground”at theirorganizations,applying
lessonslearned,testingnewhypotheses,andgatheringfeedbackanddataon business
performance.VillageCapital holdsweeklycheck-incallswitheachenterprise teamtodiscusshow
theyare interpretingtheirdataandmodifyingtheirhypothesesaccordingly.Whenentrepreneurs
returnfor the nextin-personsession,theylearnnew skillsandcontinue torefine theirhypotheses
and businessmodelswithpeerandmentorsupport.
UniquefeaturesofVillage Capital’s model
Village Capital’smostwell-knowncharacteristicisthe peerreviewmodel,throughwhich
entrepreneurspubliclyevaluateandrankpeerswithintheircohort.Thisreview processoccurs
duringeach of the program’sthree in-personsessions.Atthe endof the program, the two
entrepreneurswiththe topratingseachreceive $50,000 — fundedbyVillage Capital andlocal co-
investors.
Village Capital isastrongbelieverinthe powerof thispeerengagement.Asentrepreneursare
oftendealingwiththe same customers,marketdynamics,andchallengesastheirpeers,Village
Capital believes theyare bestplacedtoevaluate the viabilityof amodel andprovide inputto
enhance one another’sideas.
By tyingpeerreviewtofunding,the model shiftsthe traditional dynamicsof the early stage
investmentprocessbymakingentrepreneursthe investors.Givingentrepreneursinvestment
decisionrightsencouragesamore critical,honest,andcandidassessmentof businessmodels.
Entrepreneursare motivatedtotrulyenhance theirbusinessmodel anditsabilitytopositively
benefitcustomers,insteadof justdevelopingapitcharoundwhattheythinkinvestorswantto
hear.The peerreviewmodel alsoencouragesgreaterengagementamongstentrepreneurs
because theyare incentivizedtobe regardedhighlybypeersandtoprovide constructive input,
relevantcontacts,andothersupport.
29. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
27
History of theprogram
Since 2009, Village Capital has delivered 27businessassistanceprogramsinthe UnitedStates,East
Africa,India,China,andBrazil.Withapproximately400 graduate enterprisestodate,Village
Capital’salumni have created6,000 jobsand serviced more thansix millioncustomersworldwide,
including2.7millioncustomerslivinginpoverty.The table below showsthe evolutionof
participatingenterprisesandthe programitself.
30. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
28
Overview of Village Capital’s New Innovation: The Problem-Based Approach
ThroughThe RockefellerFoundationgrant,VillageCapital istestinganinnovationonitsmodel
calledthe problem-basedapproach.Inthisapproach,Village Capitalrecruitsimpactenterprises
that are workingtosolve specificsubsetsof alargersocial problemandthenfocusesonensuring
theirmodelstrulyaddressthe problemandhave apositive impactoncustomersandthe
communitiesinwhichtheyoperate.
Many acceleratorsoftenfocusongettingenterprisestobe “investmentready”sotheycanraise
capital and scale.These programscan be too solution-focused.Whenacceleratorsacceptthe
businessmodelproposedbyanentrepreneurandthensimplyworktorefine it— without
questioningthe validityof the problembeingsolved for— theycanobscure blindspots.Village
Capital’sreviewof itsfirst~400 impactenterprisesrevealedthatthe mostconsistentreason
enterprisesfailedisthattheywere “solutionslookingforproblems.”
Under thisnewapproach,Village Capital shiftsitsfocusfrommakingenterprises“investment
ready”to ensuringthatenterpriseshave the righttoolstoeffectivelyaddressreal problems.
Enterprisesare incentivizedtorefine theirbusinessmodel tocreate more efficientandsustainable
solutionsversussimplyrefiningtheirmodel aroundwhatinvestorswill findmore attractive.This
leadstomore pragmaticbusinesseswithrobustcustomervalidation.
Village Capital believesthisapproachalsoenablesmore effectiveengagementwithcustomers,
policymakers,corporations,technology experts,andotherstakeholderswhoare vestedin
addressingthese problemsandcanprovide vital sectorinsightandsupport.Inaddition,as
enterprisesare all workingonthe same problemfromdifferentperspectivesandthusface similar
marketdynamics, theyare betterincentivizedtocollaborate andcanprovide more insightful
feedback,guidance,andrelevantconnections.
Description of modeland supportprovided forvarious impactenterpriseneeds
Througha combinationof the problem-basedapproachanditstraditional supportprogram,
Village Capital istestingapromisingandinnovative model thatmeets the variousscalingneedsof
impactenterprises.The table below showsthe Village Capital program’slevelof supportforeach
of the eightscalingneeds.
Each problem-basedprogrambeginswithanindustryroundtable,where Village Capitalspeaks
withsectorexperts,policymakers,businessexecutives,andexperiencedentrepreneursina
specificlocationtodiscussthe topissuesfacingaparticularsector(e.g., healthcare accessfor low-
31. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
29
income families).16
Throughthe discussion,participantsarrive ataspecificproblem
definition/statementthatentrepreneursmusttryto address.
Applicantstothe programmust have a businessmodel thatalignswiththe selectedproblem
statement.Village Capital thenselectsupto15 of the strongestenterprisesthatare workingto
solve aspectsof the problem.Enterprisesare alsoscreenedtoensure thereare nodirect
competitorsinthe cohort,butrather complementarybusinesses.Throughthe extensive
engagementwithsectorstakeholders,bothinthe developmentof the problemstatementand
throughoutthe program,Village Capital helpsthe entrepreneursgetcontinuousandin-depth
marketresearch.
Once in the program,all of the enterprisesengageinthe same 12-weekprogramhighlighted
above,withcase studiesandmentorsspecificallytailoredtothe cohort’sproblemandsector.The
firstin-personsessionfocusesonrefiningvaluepropositions, demonstratingproducts/services,
understandingriskstogrowth,anddevelopinghypothesestohelpvalidatethe businessmodel and
customerdemand.The secondsessionfocusesondevelopingafinancial model (e.g.,pricing,
revenues,andcosts) anddevelopinga HR strategy.Village Capitalalsoorganizescustomerforums
to provide entrepreneursanopportunitytopitchtheirproductstoreal customersandreceive
actionable feedback.The thirdsessionfocusesoninvestmentreadinessandmonitoring and
evaluation.Throughoutthe program, entrepreneursare pairedwithFinance Associates,who
provide tactical financial guidance andhelpimprovefinancial models.The combinationof lectures,
supportfromFinance Associates,peerguidance,andmentorshipenablesVillageCapital toprovide
supportacross all impactenterprise needs.
16
Roundtables are not necessarily in-person sessions, but rather a series of in-depth discussions with relevant stakeholders.
32. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
30
Interim feedback on newmodel
Overall,initial feedbackonthe problem-basedapproachhasbeenpositive.A brief surveyof
participantsinthe FinTech2014 program assessedhow the programperformedacrossthe eight
scalingneedsof impactenterprises.17
In general,if Village Capital placedsignificantemphasisona specificfeatureof itsmodel,
enterprisesgave itapositive evaluation.Twoareasof feedbacktohighlightare relatedto
financingsupportandmarketaccesssupport.
As mentionedabove,Village Capitaldoesnotbelieve investmentreadinessshouldbe the main
focusof an accelerationprogram.Itthusplacedmoderate emphasisoninvestmentandfinancing
support(throughlectures,mentorship,andthe use of Finance Associates).However,impact
enterprisesfeltfinancingsupportwashighlyimportantforanaccelerationprogramand
subsequentlyratedVillageCapital’ssupportonfinancingneedslowerthaninothercategories.
One entrepreneurhighlightedthatinvestorseither “weren’trealinvestors orwere tapped out,”
while othersindicatedageneral desirefor “moreengagementwith investors”andmore “focuson
pitch development.”
Anotherareato highlightisdistributionandmarketaccesssupport.Despite asignificantemphasis
on thisworkand the recentintroductionof customerforums,participantsdidnotrate the support
providedhighly.VillageCapital acknowledgesthatfindingthe rightcustomersanddistribution
partnersremainsanongoingchallenge,anditisincreasingresourcesdedicated tofindingthe right
partners.
Participantswere particularlyenthusiasticaboutthe peersupportmodel,withmanymentioning
“cohortselection,” “peer review & feedback,”and“collaboration with teams”as strongbenefitsof
the Village Capital program.Mentorshipwasalsoconsideredhighlybeneficial.Several participants
expressedthe desire formore long-termmentorstonotonlyhelpguide themthroughthe
17
The FinTech cohort focusing on delivering financial services to low-income populations. Monitor Deloitte analysis surfaced eight needs of scaling impact
enterprises: market research, business development and strategic planning, financing, supply sourcing and production, sales a nd marketing, distribution and
market access, monitoring and evaluation, and leadership skills and business acumen
* n = 11
How to interpret the survey results?
In this chart, there are three columns per scaling need. The first column (light grey) represents the relative importance of
the scaling need, as assessed by the impact enterprises. The secondcolumn (blue) represents the importance ofthe scaling
need, as assessed by the accelerator.The third column (dark grey) represents the impact enterprises’ assessment ofhow
well the accelerator addressed the particular scaling need.
All impact enterprise scores are calculated based on an average of responses.
33. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
31
program,but alsoto provide supportaftertheyleave the program.Village Capital hasexpressed
effortstoactivelyidentifyandrecruitthese long-termmentors.
Operating model
Both the existingmodel andthe new model are fundedthroughphilanthropiccapital.Village
Capital believesitisimportanttoremainfundedbyphilanthropiccapital inordertostay focused
on theirimpactgoals.Intermsof theirorganizational structure,VillageCapital selectsa
RecruitmentAssociateforeachnew program.The RecruitmentAssociate isresponsiblefor
identifyingpartnerorganizations, mentors,andappropriate impact enterprises.Once mentors,
partners,andentrepreneurshave beenidentified,VillageCapital identifiesaProgramManager,
whoownsthe deliveryof his/herassignedprogram.Frequently,the RecruitmentAssociate
transitionsintothe role of ProgramManager. The Program Managerthenworkswithmentors,
partneringorganizations,entrepreneurs,VillageCapital staff,andotherstakeholderstofacilitate
all aspectsof the program.
To ensure continuousimprovementto itsmodel,Village Capitalevaluatesitsprogramsvia
entrepreneursurveysandusesfeedbacktoimprove future offerings.VillageCapital also
participatesinEmory’sGlobal Impactof EntrepreneurshipDatabase Program, whichallowsitto
track progresson pastcohorts and continue toassessthe effectivenessof itsprograms.
Critical Success Factors
Village Capital identifiedthe followingfactorsascritical tothe successandsustainabilityof the
problem-basedapproach.
Developing an appropriateproblemstatement directly contributesto thesuccessof thisapproach
The first,and arguablymostimportant,successfactorisa well-craftedproblemstatement.A
statementthatistoo narrowmay leadto overlappingbusinessesthatcompete withone another.
A statementthatistoo broad,however,limitssimilaritiesandopportunitiesforenterprisesto
collaborate.Itmayalsoreduce the engagementof communitystakeholdersandhinderthe overall
effectivenessof the approach.Inaddition,understandingaproblemdeeplyisimportanttobe able
to provide the rightsupporttothe enterprises.
To define aproblemstatementappropriately,VillageCapital reliesonaseriesof discussionsor
roundtableswithsectorexpertsandcommunityleaders. Village Capital founditchallengingto
workwithsome sectorexpertsthatwere toosolution-driven.Theseexpertswere focusedon
recommendingsolutionstoproblems,insteadof workingtounderstandanddefinethe problem
itself.Asthe problem-basedapproachcontinuestogrow,VillageCapital islearninghow tobetter
communicate the purpose andvalue of the roundtablestostakeholdersandbetterfacilitate
conversations.Assome stakeholderswill continue toengage insubsequentprogramsandcohorts,
theyare able tolearnfrom the processandprovide strongerinputthe nexttime.Most
importantly,the typesof applicationsreceivedandthe successof the enterprise cohort willalso
give Village Capital directfeedbackonthe effectivenessof the problem statementandenable itto
furtherrefine the process.
Having the rightpartnershelpsbuild an ecosystemofsupportforenterprises
Village Capital emphasizesthe importance of local engagementandpartnershipsforthe successof
the problem-basedapproach.Partnersnotonlyhelptodefinethe problemstatement,butalso
helpcreate an ecosystemof supportaroundthe program.Local partnerseitherserve asoridentify
mentors,investors,customers,instructors,andtechnical assistance providers.Having the right
34. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
32
partnersensuresthatVillage Capitalandthe enterpriseshave credibilityandthe rightconnections
to succeed.
To selectthe rightpartners,Village Capital makesaconcertedefforttoalignproblemswith
passions;ensuringthatpartnersare incentivizedtoprovide supportbecausetheyidentifywiththe
problemandare excitedtoaddressit.Thusfar,communitystakeholders,mentors,andfunders
are all demonstratingincreasedinterestandparticipationinthe problem-basedprograms.
At the same time,maintainingthese relationshipsonanongoingbasisisdifficult forVillage
Capital.Itcan be hard forlocal communitiesandsectorstakeholderstofullyengageandfeel
connectedwithorganizationsthatare onlypresentfora three-monthperiod.Facilitatinglong-
termengagementwithrelevantstakeholdersandproviding ongoingopportunitiesfortheirinput
are keychallenges.
Village Capital hasafewdifferentinitiativestoaddressthese challenges.Village Capital usesin-
house toolstotrack growingrelationshipsandensure itdoesnotlose sightof connectionsasit
scales.Asit expandstonewlocations,Village Capital aimstohave twotothree contentpartners
perprogram. Each contentpartnersharesownershipinthe successof the program, helpingto
make the connectionsneededforsuccessandprovidingrelevantinputintothe curriculumsuchas
sector-specificcase studyexamples.These partnersserveasa crucial long-termconnectionto
othercommunitystakeholders.VillageCapital is alsoworkingtohire more local representatives
withintheirorganization.These full-time employeeswill live inlocal communitiesand engage with
keystakeholdersyearround.
Obtainingsufficientfundingwill be critical to attractingthe righthuman capital resources.Given
Village Capital’sfinancial structure,itisreliantonphilanthropic funding— whichoftenprioritizes
fundingspentdirectlyonenterprisedevelopmentversusonoperational costs.Provingthe value of
these newresourceswillbe importantasthe new model continuestoscale.
The problem-basedapproach naturally fostersbeneficialpeercollaboration
The nature of the problem-basedapproachhasnaturallyincreasedthe levelof collaboration
amongstparticipatingenterprises.Because entrepreneursare selectedbasedontheir
complementarybusiness models — eachsolvesasubsetof a broader problem— theyare joined
by the missiontofix it.Theyunderstandthe needforanecosystemof solutionsandare thusmore
eagerto worktogether.Infact, duringone pilotprogram, 50% of participantsenteredinto
businessrelationshipsorpartnershipswithone anotherfollowingthe program.
An occasional challengewiththisapproachisthatnew fundersorinvestorshave beenhesitant
aboutpeerreviewatfirst;theyoftenvoice aninitial skepticismaboutplacingthe investment
decisionintothe handsof the entrepreneurs.Throughconversationsaboutthe structure and
value of the program,these investorstypicallybecomereceptivetothe concept,butVillage
Capital remainscognizantof thischallengeandhasrecentlyhiredaGlobal Communications
Manager to raise awarenessandmanage communicationwithkeystakeholders.
Achieving therightbalancebetween standardization and customizationofcurriculumis important.
Village Capital acknowledgesthe needtobalance standardizationandcustomizationof curriculum
contentto ensure bothscalabilityandeffectiveness.Standardizationfacilitateseasyreplication
and enablesmaterialstobe testedandrefinedrepeatedly.Customizationandconcrete examples
on howcore frameworksapplytothe specificsectororproblemthe cohortisengagedinamplifies
35. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
33
understandingandretention.The challenge isthatdevelopingcustomizedcontentrequirestime
and resources.
To addressthisconstraint,VillageCapital leveragesitsmentorsandlocal stakeholderstodeliver
the curriculumina mannerthatmakesabstract conceptstangible.VillageCapital hasacore setof
frameworksthatare taught by stakeholderswhohave specificexpertise (e.g.,the Louisville-based
logisticshubof the UnitedParcel Service (UPS) wasinvolvedinsessionsaroundsupplysourcing).
Then,mentorsandotherrelevantstakeholdersprovidecase studyexamplesandguidance tohelp
make the lecturesapplicabletothe individual entrepreneurs.
As the programscales, effective monitoring and evaluationwill enablegreaterbuy-in and
engagementwith thismodel.
As thisproblem-basedapproachcontinuestoscale,akeychallenge will be monitoringand
evaluation.Itisimportanttosystematicallytrackwhetherproblemsare beingframedinthe right
wayand solvedby the rightenterprises thatcanscale overtime.Thiswill enablecontinual
refinementof the model andbuy-infromfuture communitiesandsectorstakeholders.
Conclusion
The problem-basedapproachisaninnovative waytoensure thatacceleratorsscale the impactof
impactenterprises.Byfocusingonthe problemitself,Village Capitalcanbettersupport
enterprisesindevelopingbusinessmodelsthattrulyaddressthe problem.Thisplacesthe
emphasisof accelerationawayfromfocusingonindividual enterprise metricssuchasfunding
raisedandrevenue growthandtowardthe trackingof real social or environmental impacts.
As of now,it isunclearwhetherthisapproachismore effectiveinachievingthose beneficial
impactsand itwill take several yearstoobtainsufficientdata.However,thisapproachcan
certainlybe seenasan effective meansof obtaininggreaterexcitementandengagementamongst
stakeholders.Enterprisesare more likelytocollaborate andthe local communityismore likelyto
be motivatedtosolve abroaderproblemversussolelysupportinganindividual organization.
Overall,the problem-basedapproachisapromisinginnovationonhow tomore effectivelysupport
and scale impactenterprises.
36. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
34
3
The Social Franchise Accelerator:
Bertha/ICSF/Franchising Plus
Summary of Organizations
Launchedin2014, the Social Franchise Acceleratoristhe firstsocial franchisingsupportprogramin
SouthAfrica.It isthe resultof a unique partnershipbetweenanonprofitorganization,anacademic
institution,anda private consultancy - combiningthe bestof social sectorexpertise andprivate
sectorpractices.Each organizationbringsadifferentperspective tothe table,enablingthe
developmentof a programthat can effectivelysupportthe scalingandfranchisingneedsof South
Africa’simpactenterprises.Anoverviewof eachorganizationisprovidedbelow:
InternationalCentreforSocialFranchising (ICSF)
The International Centre forSocial Franchising(ICSF)isaregisteredUKcharity.Establishedin2012,
ICSFleadsthe social franchisingsectorglobally,servingasapioneerinthe developmentof social
franchisingknowledgeandsupport.ICSFchampionsthe use of social franchisingthroughseveral
interrelatedactivities:advisingclientsonreplicationstrategies,guidingclientsthroughthe
replicationprocess,conductingresearchonreplication,andconveningmarketplayersintoan
action-basedsupportnetwork.
ICSFhas providedconsultancyservicesfornumerousprivate companies,social sector
organizations,andimpactenterpriseslocated inAfrica,LatinAmerica,andAsia.These organization
have focusedona range of differentsectors,includinghealth,education,andemployment
generation.ICSFhasalsoconductedresearchforGirl Effect,BigSocietyCapital,GlaxoSmithKline,
and a group of healthcare organizationsthatincludedGatesFoundationandNovartis.Throughits
Social Franchising
Basedon the principlesof traditional franchising,Social Franchisingisaninnovativemethodof
scalingan impactenterprise byofferingitsproductsorservicesthroughindependent
franchisees.The Social FranchiseAcceleratorisacollaborationamongst three organizations –
the International Centre forSocial Franchising,the BerthaCentre forSocial Innovationand
Entrepreneurship,andFranchisingPlus(seebelow fordetails) –to provide supportforimpact
enterprisesseekingtoimplementafranchise model.
Typically,impactenterprisesneedsignificantresourcestoscale,suchasadditional capital,new
employees,andnewassets.Withsocial franchising,these enterprisescaninsteadleanon
independentfranchisees,whothenhire employeesandacquire assetsontheirown.This
reducesthe resource burdenforthe impactenterprise,enablingittoexpandoperationsfar
more quickly.Inaddition,thesefranchiseescanmore effectivelybuildthe businessinnew
locationsastheyoftenhave more local expertisethanthe enterprise.Overall,the positive social
impactof an enterprise canbe scaledmore efficientlyandeffectivelythroughafranchise
model.
37. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
35
social franchise course,ICSFhas alsoprovidedtrainingformanyotherorganizationsinterestedin
thismethodof scaling.18
The Bertha Centrefor SocialInnovation andEntrepreneurship
The Bertha Centre forSocial InnovationandEntrepreneurship(“BerthaCentre”) atthe University
of Cape TownGraduate School of Business(UCTGSB) was establishedin2011 as a centerof
excellence insocial innovationandentrepreneurship.The BerthaCentre conductsresearch,
promotesdialogue,andsupportssocial innovations — particularlythose lookingto scale —
throughrigorousteaching,exposuretoleadingthinkinginthe space,andpractical applicationof
theoryinreal-worldsettings.
To date,the Bertha Centre hashosted more than1,500 impactenterprisesatvariouseducational
eventsandhasprovidedadvisoryservicesandprojectsupportto more than20 organizations.A
brief overviewof the enterprises ithasworkedwith iscapturedbelow:
Franchising Plus
FranchisingPlusisaleading private sectorfranchise consultancyinSouthAfrica.Establishedin
1994, FranchisingPlusdeliversprofessional advisory servicestobusinesseslookingtoexpandtheir
operationsthroughfranchising,licensingandotherbusinessdistributionmechanisms.
FranchisingPlushasworkedwithalarge numberof commercial businessesinSouthAfrica,
includingFirstNational Bank,Goodyear,PicknPay,SABmiller,TimberCity,BatteryClinic,Dis-
ChemPharmacy’s,andNandos.19
FranchisingPlushasalsoworkedona range of social sector
projectsina pro bono capacity and advisedthe SouthAfricangovernmentonfranchisingand
replication.
18
The availability of more quantitative historical data is limited.
19
The availability of more quantitative historical data is limited.
38. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
36
ICSFand the Bertha Centre collaboratedin2012 to run the firstsocial franchisingworkshopin
SouthAfrica.The workshopprovidedanoverview of social franchisingandhighlighteditsbenefits
for impactenterprises. More than100 organizationsattended.Followingthe workshop,many
organizationswantedtopursue social franchisingfurther,butthe lackof a social franchisingsector
inSouth Africamade itdifficultforICSFandBertha Centre to connectthese organizationswith
local resourcesand support.Thismarketgap spawnedthe ideafora social franchise acceleratorin
SouthAfrica.
Overview of the New Innovation: Social Franchising
Basedoff the principlesof traditionalcommercialfranchising,social franchisingisessentially
franchisingforsocial good.Itis an innovativewayforimpactenterprisestoscale theirimpact
efficientlyandeffectively. Many
impactenterprisescanoperate
successfully asasmall business.But
scalinghasprovento be difficultdue
to lack of funding,humancapital,the
rightpartners,and overall lackof
scalingexpertise.Social franchising
helpsovercome thesebarriersand
enablesthe enterprise todeliverits
provenmodel byleasingorlicensingit
to independentfranchisees.
Enterprisesdocumenttheirbusiness
modelsandinternal processesin
detailedoperationsmanualsand
provide trainingandongoingsupport
to enable the franchiseestoreplicate
the businessinnewmarketsor
geographies,usingtheirownresources
to do so.Franchiseestypicallypaya
licensingfeetothe enterpriseforthe abilitytocopytheirbusinessmodel,insteadof developing
theirownbusiness. Whileindividualfranchisesmay staysmall,the overall impactachievedbythe
model canbe quite large.
Social franchisingisbeneficial fornumerousreasons. Impactenterprisescanmultiplyimpactand
reach more beneficiariesfarmore quicklythanwouldbe possible if theywere torely solelyon
theirownresources.Scalingismore likelytobe effective asfranchiseestypicallyhave stronger
local expertiseneededtosuccessfullyrunabusinessinspecificgeographies.Franchisingalso
enablesthe impactenterprise tomake betterimpactandinvestmentdecisionsfrommore data
and become more financiallysustainable throughfranchiseefees.Forthe franchisees,thisisan
opportunitytoreceive trainingandsupportfroman experiencedorganizationaddressingasimilar
social needwhile havinglessfinancialriskandfasterimpactas comparedtostartinga new
organizationfromscratch.
The Social Franchise Acceleratorisanew program that supportsimpactenterprisesindeveloping
and implementingtheirsocial franchise strategy.
Social FranchisingExample
FoodCycle – a UK charity that cooks meals for people at
risk of food poverty and social isolation – sought help
from ICSF to scale nationally. ICSF worked with
FoodCycle to:
Design a franchise system
Codify key processes, procedures and policies
Support creation of operations manuals and training
materials
Support franchisee recruitment and the
implementation of an initial pilot
As a result, FoodCycle launched its franchise program in
summer 2013 and within several months had its first
three franchise FoodCycle kitchens that were ready to
begin operations across the UK.
39. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
37
Description of modeland supportprovided forvarious impactenterpriseneeds
The Social Franchise Acceleratorcombinestraining,consultancysupport,funding,andmentorship
to create a comprehensivepackage of supporttohelpimpactenterprisesdevelopa franchise
model andscale theirsocial impact. Giventhatthis acceleratorisnew,the overview provided
belowisa descriptionof itsfirstplannediterationof the program.Asof October2014, certain
elementsof the programare in progressand will be carriedoutoverthe nextseveral months.
To selectenterprisestosupport,the Social Franchise Acceleratorconductsanin-depthselection
process.Enterprisesmustfirstsubmitanexpressionof interest.The Social Franchise Accelerator
theninvitespromisingorganizationstocomplete amore detailedapplication.Inthisfirstiteration
of itsprogram,the Social Franchise Acceleratorusedthe detailedapplicationtofurtherscreen
participantsandidentified10 enterprisestoparticipate inafive-dayintroductorytraining
workshop.
The workshoptaughtparticipantsthe theoryandstrategiesbehindfranchising.FranchisingPlus
delivereditstraditional “FranchisingbyNumbers”course,whichfocusesontopicssuchas
franchise strategyandfranchisee selection.The course wasmodifiedtofocusonsocial franchising.
ICSFdeliveredsessionsonfranchisinginthe social sectorandhow to conductmonitoringand
evaluationata large scale.Duringthisworkshop,the Social Franchise Acceleratorinterviewed
each enterpriseandselectedthree enterprisesthatwouldreceivefurtherin-depthone-on-one
support.20
To be selectedfortrainingormore in-depthsupport,organizationsmustdemonstratetheyare
suitable forfranchising. Suitable businessesare those that have a productor service thatcan be
‘packagedup’or codifiedintoanoperationsmanual andgiventofranchisees.Inaddition,they
musthave a commitmenttoscale,asustainable businessmodel,astrongmanagementteam,and
a strong financial base that couldsupportthe initial costsof franchising.
As part of the in-depthone-on-one support,the Social Franchise Acceleratorreviewseach
organization’sexistingoperations,currentcapabilities,andcapacityforexpansion.The teamthen
providesguidance toeachorganizationonvariousfranchisingoptions,organizationalstructure,
necessarysystemsandcontrols,marketing,andthe ideal franchisee.There are alsosite visitsto
actual franchise businesses(e.g.,McDonald’s)tounderstandhow the process worksinreality.By
the endof thisconsultationsupport,eachimpactenterprise hasdevelopedbothafranchise model
tailoredtoitsorganizationaswell asany necessaryfranchisingdocumentation(e.g.,anoperations
manual).
Enterprisesthenreceive approximately$25,000 to fundsome of the initial one-time costsof
developingafranchise system.The Social Franchise Acceleratoralsolinksenterpriseswith
mentors,whoare highlyexperiencedprofessionalswithpractical social orcommercial franchise
experience.Thesementorsprovide relevantconnectionstopotentialinvestorsandfranchisees
and guide eachenterprise throughthe implementationof aninitial social franchise pilot.
20
While the Social Franchise Accelerator initially aimed to only support three organizations, a fourth enterprise was also selected to receive more limited
support. The fourth enterprise is already using a franchise model, but the Social Franchise Accelerator is supporting it in developing impact reporting
systems and tools that will be integrated into its franchising plans.
40. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
38
Belowisa breakdownof howmuchsupportthe Social Franchise Acceleratorprovides
organizationsacrosseachof theireightscalingneeds:
Interim feedback on newmodel
As of October2014, the Social Franchise Acceleratorisinthe midstof itsfirstiterationandonly
feedbackonthe initial trainingworkshopisavailable.These resultsare reflectedbelow.21
The Social Franchise Acceleratorperformedbestinprovidingsupportonbusinessdevelopment
and strategicplanningneeds,whichalignswithitsfocusongivingorganizationsthe tools needed
to developasocial franchisingstrategy.
Workshopparticipants indicatedthatsupportonfinancingwasmostimportant,butdidnotrate
the Social Franchise Acceleratorhighlyhere.Thislowerratingislikelydue tothe factthat the
Social Franchise Acceleratoronlydedicatedsignificanttime onfinancingsupportforthe three
organizationsthathadin-depthsupport.Of the 10 enterprises thatparticipatedinthe workshop,
21
Monitor Deloitte analysis surfaced eight needs of scaling impact enterprises: market research, business development and strategic planning, financing,
supply sourcing and production, sales and marketing, distribution and market access, monitoring and evaluation, and leadership skills and business acumen
* n = 10
How to interpret the survey results?
In this chart, there are three columns per scaling need. The first column (light grey) represents the relative importance of
the scaling need, as assessed by the impact enterprises. The secondcolumn (blue) represents the importance ofthe scaling
need, as assessed by the accelerator.The third column (dark grey) represents the impact enterprises’ assessment ofhow
well the accelerator addressed the particular scaling need.
All impact enterprise scores are calculated based on an average of responses.
41. Case Studies on Innovative Accelerator Models
39
the three that thenreceivedfundingandone-on-one supportratedthe financingcomponentof
the program much higher(average score of 5.33 versusoverall score of 3.40).
Overall,enterprisesfeltthe workshopwaseffective inhighlightingthe benefitof social franchising,
withone participantsaying, “Asa whole,the programmewasincredibly interesting…Itallowed us
to gain a clear understanding of theway forward with regardsto scaling.” However,most
workshopparticipantsexpressedthe desire foradditional time andongoingengagementinorder
to explore andtestsocial franchisingconceptswithintheirownbusiness.Whilethisisprovidedto
the three organizationsselectedtoreceive in-depthsupport,the Social FranchiseAccelerator
acknowledgesthatdevelopingalongerworkshopmayalsobe useful infuture iterationsof its
program.
Operating model
The Social Franchise Acceleratorreliesonphilanthropiccapital and probono support. The
RockefellerFoundation grantfundingtothe BerthaCentre covers variouscosts,including ICSF’s
franchisingmaterialsandbothBerthaCentre’sandFranchisingPlus’time andresource
commitments.Mentorsprovidetheirguidanceina pro bono capacity.This currentmodel is
allowingthe partnerstotestwhethersocial franchisingtrainingscanbe successful.Theycanthen
evaluate howfundsare allocatedandservicesare paidforinfuture iterationsof the accelerator
program.
To ensure continuousimprovementintheirmodel,ICSFandthe BerthaCentre are collaboratingto
designamonitoringandevaluationsystemtocapture organizational capacityandsocial impact.
Monitoringwill be done throughoutthe projectandafteritsconclusion,usingsurveysand
interviewstotrackoutcome data. Workshopparticipantswill be trackedforone yearfollowingthe
project’sconclusion.Those whoreceivein-depthsupportwill be trackedforthree years.
Critical Success Factors
The Social Franchise Acceleratorhighlightedthe followingfactorsascritical to the successand
sustainabilityof itsprogram.
Marketing isnecessary to raiseawarenessand acceptanceofsocialfranchising
Franchisingistraditionallyacommercial concept.Throughitswork inthe UnitedKingdom andin
othercountries,ICSFhasfoundthat manyimpactenterprisesare eitherunaware of franchisingor
resistanttousingaspectsof thismodel.Forinstance, some nonprofitimpactenterprisescanbe
hesitanttocharge a licensingfee,particularlywithinexistingnetworkswhere relationships
previouslyexistedwithoutafinancial obligation.22
Otherimpactenterprisesare concernedabout
the lack of control on theirservicesorproductsinthe handsof franchisees.
To raise awarenessspecificallyonthe Social Franchise Accelerator,the three partnersheldtwo
awareness-raisingeventsaroundsocial franchising,publishedanofficial pressrelease,and
conductedradiointerviewsaroundSouthAfrica.Toraise awarenessof social franchisingin
general,the partnersplantoworkwithotherstakeholderstodevelopandpublishinformative
materialsonsocial franchising,increasingbothawarenessandacceptance of franchisingasa
viable model forthe social sector.The partnersalsoplantomodifyfranchisingtrainingmaterials
to be more customizedforthe social sector,reframingtraditionalconceptsinsocial termsand
workingwithenterprisestoidentifywhichcomponentsof the social franchisingmodelworkfor
22
It is also important to note that social franchising works in a number of ways and does not always involve the franchisees paying a licensing fee; although
the fee is a useful way to compensate the impact enterprise for the time and resources used to train franchisees and oversee their work. In addition, a fee is
a way for a franchisee to signal it is serious about implementing the model correctly.