collective impact implementation: getting started · collective approaches to solving large-scale...
TRANSCRIPT
Boston | Geneva | Mumbai | San Francisco | Seattle | Washington FSG.ORG
Session for:
Oregon Early Learning
Council
Collective Impact
Implementation:
Getting Started
August 12, 2013
FSG.ORG
2
© 2012 FSG
Goals for Today’s Workshop
Goals for the Day
Review Key Elements of CI
Discuss Components of Implementation
Q&A
FSG.ORG
3
© 2012 FSG
About FSG
FSG Overview
• Nonprofit consulting firm specializing in strategy, evaluation
and research, founded in 2000 as Foundation Strategy Group and
celebrating more than a decade of global social impact
• Partner with foundations, corporations, nonprofits, and
governments to develop more effective solutions to the world’s most
challenging issues
– Advised over 400 clients in every region of the world
– Issue areas include education & youth, global development,
global health, US health, community, and environment
• Recognized thought leader in philanthropy and corporate social
responsibility with multiple articles published in HBR, SSIR,
Chronicle of Philanthropy, and the American Journal of Evaluation
• Staff of 110 full-time professionals with offices in Boston, Seattle,
San Francisco, Washington, DC, and Geneva
– Passion and knowledge to solve social problems
– Combination of on-the-ground experience and world-class
consulting skills
FSG.ORG
4
© 2012 FSG
FSG Is Playing a Leadership Role in Accelerating Disciplined
Collective Approaches to Solving Large-Scale Social Problems
FSG and Collective Impact
• Client work in Collective Impact: FSG understands how to
enable and sustain cross-sector partnerships through our work
with clients in the following sectors:
• FSG articles paved the way for Collective Impact:
‒ Leading Boldly (2004)
‒ Breakthroughs in Shared Measurement (2008)
‒ Catalytic Philanthropy (2009)
‒ Collective Impact (2011)
‒ Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work (2012)
• Webinars
‒ Overview of Collective Impact
‒ Shared Measurement in Collective Impact
‒ Funders and Collective Impact (September 2012)
‒ Juvenile justice
‒ Teen substance abuse
‒ Economic development
‒ Education reform
‒ Environmental sustainability
FSG.ORG
5
© 2012 FSG
There Are Several Types of Problems
Source: Adapted from “Getting to Maybe”
Simple Complicated
Baking a Cake
Sending a Rocket
to the Moon
Social sector treats problems as simple or
complicated
Complex
Raising a Child
Collective Impact: Overview
FSG.ORG
6
© 2012 FSG
Traditional Approaches Are Not Solving Our Toughest –
Often Complex – Challenges
• Funders select individual grantees
• Organizations work separately and
compete
• Evaluation attempts to isolate a
particular organization’s impact
• Large scale change is assumed to
depend on scaling organizations
• Corporate and government sectors
are often disconnected from
foundations and nonprofits
Isolated
Impact
Collective Impact: Overview
FSG.ORG
7
© 2012 FSG
Imagine a Different Approach – Multiple Players
Working Together to Solve Complex Issues
• All working toward the same goal and measuring the
same things
• Cross-sector alignment with government, nonprofit,
philanthropic and corporate sectors as partners
• Organizations actively coordinating their action and
sharing lessons learned
Isolated Impact Collective Impact
Collective Impact: Overview
FSG.ORG
8
© 2012 FSG
Collective Impact Is a Unique and Differentiated Approach to Bringing
Actors Across Sectors Together to Work Toward a Common Agenda
Collective Impact: Overview
It is distinct from other forms of collaboration
Type of Collaboration Definition
Collective Impact
Initiatives
Long-term commitments by a group of important actors from
different sectors to a common agenda for solving a specific
social problem
Funder Collaboratives Groups of funders interested in supporting the same issue who
pool their resources
Public-Private
Partnerships Partnerships formed between government and private sector
organizations to deliver specific services or benefits
Multi-Stakeholder
Initiatives Voluntary activities by stakeholders from different sectors
around a common theme
Social Sector Networks Groups of individuals or organizations fluidly connected
through purposeful relationships, whether formal or informal
Mo
re E
lem
en
ts o
f C
oll
ec
tive
Im
pa
ct
FSG.ORG
9
© 2012 FSG
Achieving Large-Scale Change through Collective
Impact Involves Five Key Elements
Common Agenda • Common understanding of the problem
• Shared vision for change
Shared Measurement
• Collecting data and measuring results
• Focus on performance management
• Shared accountability
Mutually Reinforcing
Activities
• Differentiated approaches
• Willingness to adapt individual activities
• Coordination through joint plan of action
Continuous
Communication
• Consistent and open communication
• Focus on building trust
Backbone Support
• Separate organization(s) with staff
• Resources and skills to convene and
coordinate participating organizations
Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews
Collective Impact: Overview
FSG.ORG
10
© 2012 FSG
A Champion, Funding, and Urgency for Change Are Key to Launching a
Collective Impact Initiative
Influential Champion
Financial Resources
Urgency for Change
$
• Commands respect and engages cross-sector
leaders
• Focused on solving problem but allows
participants to figure out answers for themselves
• Committed funding partners
• Sustained funding for at least 2-3 years
• Pays for needed infrastructure and planning
• Critical problem in the community
• Frustration with existing approaches
• Multiple actors calling for change
• Engaged funders and policy makers
Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews
Collective Impact: Enabling Conditions
FSG.ORG
11
© 2012 FSG
Thought Exercise: Is Your Network Ready for Collective Impact?
Is the Right Infrastructure in Place:
Credible Champions / Catalysts exist to drive CI discussions
Neutral Convener exists and is looked to by the community
Backbone Support Structure exists or key staff positions can be filled
Are the Conditions Accommodating:
Significant resources and attention are focused on addressing the problem
Existing collaborative efforts are present that can be taken to the “next level,” and with tools and
processes in place
Funder Alignment of local funders (public and private) willing to financially support / partner on an effort
Potential to Engage a Board, Cross-sector set of community players
Internal and external circumstances point to Issue “Ripeness” to the urgency of the issue at hand
Within the community, there is a shared understanding of why there is an Urgency for Change, often
driven by data
Interest exists or effort is underway to Understand the Problem, key players, and / or evidence-based
strategies
Collective Impact: Enabling Conditions
FSG.ORG
12
© 2012 FSG
Determining Readiness Requires Assessment Across Many
Dimensions
Collective Impact Readiness Factors
Weaker Supporting Environment
for CI Assessment
Stronger Supporting
Environment for CI
Credible champions
/ catalysts
Few credible champions / catalysts exist
to drive CI discussions
Credible champions / catalysts exist to
drive CI discussions
Neutral convener No existence of or potential for neutral
convener
Neutral convener exists and is looked
to by the community
Backbone support
structure
Backbone support structure does not exist
and no logical organization could take on
Backbone support structure exists or
key staff positions can be filled
Resources /
attention
Limited resources / attention are focused
on addressing the problem
Significant resources / attention are
focused on addressing the problem
Existing
collaborative efforts
Limited collaboration exists, with tools and
processes to be developed “from scratch”
Deep collaboration exists, which can
be taken to the “next level,” and with
tools and processes in place
Funder alignment Local funders (public and private) are
unwilling to commit to financially
supporting or partnering on an effort
Local funders (public and private) are
willing to financially support / partner
on an effort
Potential to engage
cross-sector work
Limited potential to engage multiple
sectors
Potential to engage a broad, cross-
sector set of community players
Issue “ripeness” Different issues within one community may be at different stages of ripeness
Urgency for change Community players lack data and / or
sense of urgency for change is not shared
among community players
Community players have a shared
understanding of urgency for change,
often driven by data
Understanding of
the problem
Limited interest exists in understanding
the problem, key players, and / or
evidence based strategies
Interest exists or effort is underway to
understand the problem, key players,
and / or evidence-based strategies
Readiness Assessment
FSG.ORG
13
© 2012 FSG
Phase II
Organize for Impact
Phase III
Sustain Action and Impact
Develop group;
structure
communication and
decision making
Map the landscape
and use data to
make case
Facilitate
community
outreach
Create infrastructure/
backbone and
processes
Facilitate and refine
Analyze baseline
data to ID key
issues and gaps
Components
for Success
Create common
agenda (common
goals, strategy)
Engage community,
build public will
Establish shared
metrics, indicators,
measurement
approach
Support
implementation;
alignment to
goal/strategies
Continue engagement,
conduct advocacy
Collect/track/report
progress; process to
learn and improve
Phase I
Initiate Action
Governance &
Infrastructure
Strategic
Planning
Community
Involvement
Evaluation &
Improvement
Collective Impact Efforts Tend to Develop Over Three Key Phases
Evolution of a Collective Impact Initiative
FSG.ORG
14
© 2012 FSG
Timing for Each Phase Varies by Collective Impact Initiative
Phase II
Organize for Impact
Phase III
Sustain Action and Impact
May 2010 – Dec 2010
(7 months)
Sept 2010 – Feb 2011
(5 months)
Jan 2011 – Dec 2011
(12 months) 2012
May 2011-Oct 2011
(5 months)
Initiative
Feb 2011 – Nov 2011
(9 months)
Nov 2011 – May 2012
(7 months)
Nov 2011
June 2012
Phase I
Initiate Action
The implementation of any collective impact effort is determined by the
specific local context of the initiative
Evolution of a Collective Impact Initiative
FSG.ORG
15
© 2012 FSG
Developing a Common Agenda Requires Creating Boundaries for
the Initiative
• “What’s in” and “What’s out”: Establishing boundaries for what
issues, players, and systems to engage in the project is essential to its
successful execution
• No Set Playbook: Determining boundaries is a situation-specific
judgment call
• Loosely-Defined and Malleable: Boundaries change over time and
subsequent analysis or activity may draw in other issues, players, or
systems
• Apply to Geography: Discerning geographic boundaries requires
same type of judgment (e.g., city, state, national or global
engagement)
Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012
Common Agenda
FSG.ORG
16
© 2012 FSG
While the Common Agenda Tells Us Where We are Going, the
Strategic Action Framework is the Roadmap for Getting There
Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews
Clear Goal for
Change
A Description of
the Problem
(Informed by
Research)
A Portfolio of Key
Strategies to
Drive Large Scale
Change
A Set of
Principles that
Guide the
Group’s Behavior
An Approach to
Evaluation that
Frames Strategy
for Receiving
and Integrating
Feedback
1
2
3
4 5
Common Agenda
FSG.ORG
17
© 2012 FSG
Shared Measurement Is a Critical Piece of Pursuing a Collective
Impact Approach
Shared Measurement
Identifying common metrics for tracking progress toward a common agenda across
organizations, and providing scalable platforms to share data, discuss learnings,
and improve strategy and action
Improved Data Quality
Tracking Progress Toward a Shared Goal
Enabling Coordination and Collaboration
Learning and Course Correction
Catalyzing Action
Definition
Benefits of Using Shared Measurement
Source: Breakthroughs in Shared Measurement and Social Impact, FSG, 2009
FSG.ORG
18
© 2012 FSG
There are Three Phases to Developing a
Shared Measurement System for Collective Impact
Design Develop Deploy
1 2 3
• Shared vision for the
system and its relation to
broader goals, theory of
change or roadmap
• View of current state of
knowledge and data
• Governance and
organization for
structured participation
• Identification of metrics,
data collection approach,
including confidentiality/
transparency
• Development of web-
based platform and
data collection tools
• Refinement and
testing of platform
and tools
• Staffing for data
management and
synthesis
• Learning forums and
continuous
improvement
• Ongoing infrastructure
support
• Improve system based
on a pilot, review,
refinement, and
ongoing evaluation of
usability and impact
Creating a Shared Measurement System
Source: FSG Analysis
Shared Measurement
FSG.ORG
19
© 2012 FSG
Shared Measurement Provides a Common Language for Organizations
to Use to Drive Continuous Learning and Improvement across the Field
Shared Measurement
Share Results Against
Common Metrics:
• Through continuous learning
and improvement,
organizations are able to gauge
their performance against a
Shared Measurement strategy’s
common benchmarks and
evaluate their impact at the
system level
Refine Individual and
Collective Work:
• Organizations refine their strategies
based upon key insights from the field
• Collective Impact is sustained through
the harmonized impact of individual
organizations
Learn from Each Other:
• Organizations are able to share
best practices through a
common language of results
and learn from each other’s
experiences
Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews
Shared Measurement
Fuels Collective
Impact through the
Continuous Learning
& Improvement
Process
FSG.ORG
20
© 2012 FSG
Key Success Factors in the Development of Shared
Measurement Systems
Shared Measurement for Collective Impact
Source: Breakthroughs in Shared Measurement and Social Impact, FSG, 2009
Effective
Relationship
with Funders
Strong leadership and substantial funding (multi-year)
Independence from funders in devising indicators, managing system
Broad engagement during design by organizations, with clear
expectations about confidentiality/transparency
Voluntary participation open to all organizations
Broad and
Open
Engagement
Effective use of web-based technology
Ongoing staffing for training, facilitation, reviewing data accuracy
Testing and continually improving through feedback
Facilitated process for participants to share data and results, learn,
and better coordinate efforts
Infrastructure
for
Deployment
Pathways for
Learning and
Improvement
FSG.ORG
21
© 2012 FSG
Several Challenges Can Occur When Developing and Implementing
Shared Measurement Systems
Difficulty in coming to agreement on common outcomes and indicators
Concerns about relative performance / comparative measurement across
providers working in the same space
Limited capacity (time and skill) for measurement and data analysis within
participating organizations
Alignment among funders to ask for the common measures as part of their
reporting requirements
Time and cost of developing and maintaining a system, both for human capital
and technology
Challenges
Overview of Shared Measurement
FSG.ORG
22
© 2012 FSG
There Are a Number of “Tips and Tricks” to Bear in Mind When
Developing Shared Measures
Overview of Shared Measurement
Collecting and
Presenting Data
• Set specific and time-bound goals and report progress relative to
targets
• Include data on whole populations (vs. a sample) where possible
• Use numbers as well as percentages to make goals more tangible
Identifying
Indicators
• Limit “top-level” indicators to a manageable number (~15), with
additional contributing indicators if needed
• Establish a set of criteria to guide the identification and prioritization
of potential indicators
Leveraging
Existing Efforts
and Expertise
• Form a voluntary team of data experts to advise on the design,
development, and deployment of a shared measurement system
• Develop a crosswalk of what partners are already measuring
• Consider leveraging existing indicators adopted by relevant efforts
at the local, provincial, or federal level
FSG.ORG
23
© 2012 FSG
Collective Impact Is Best Structured with Cascading Levels of
Collaboration
Shared Measures
Backbone
Governance,
Vision and Strategy
Action Planning
Implementation
Public Will
Common Agenda
Steering
Committee
Community Members
Partners
Working Groups
Structuring a Collective Impact Initiative
24
© 2012 FSG
FSG.ORG
• Build a common understanding of the problem
• Provide strategic guidance to develop a common agenda
• Ensure mutually reinforcing activities take place:
– Coordinate and facilitate communication and collaboration
– Convene partners and key external stakeholders
– Catalyze or incubate new initiatives or collaborations
– Provide technical assistance
– Create paths for, and recruit, new partners
– Seek opportunities for alignment with other efforts
• Collect, analyze, interpret, and report data
• Catalyze or develop shared measurement systems
• Provide technical assistance for building partners’ data capacity
• Build public will, consensus and commitment:
– Create a sense of urgency and articulate a call to action
– Support community member engagement activities
– Produce and manage external communications
• Advocate for an aligned policy agenda
• Mobilize and align public and private funding to support goals
Backbone Organizations Provide Six Key Functions
Backbone Activities
Guide Vision and Strategy
Support Aligned Activities
Establish Shared
Measurement Practices
Build Public Will
Advance Policy
Mobilize Funding
25
© 2012 FSG
FSG.ORG
Many Types of Organizations Can Serve as Backbones
Types of Backbones Examples
Funders
New Nonprofit
Existing Nonprofit
Government Agency or School District
Shared Across Multiple Organizations
Steering Committee Driven
Backbone Organizations
FSG.ORG
26
© 2012 FSG
Working in Collective Impact Requires a Mindset Shift
Adaptive vs. Technical
Problem Solving
No Silver Bullets.… But we
do have Silver Buckshot
Credibility vs. Credit
• Allowing answers to come from within
• Supporting common agenda building,
information sharing and coordination/
alignment
• Many small changes implemented in
alignment can add up to large scale
progress
• Creating new incentives to work
collaboratively vs. competitively
Collective Impact: Mindset Shifts
FSG.ORG
27
© 2012 FSG
In Catalyzing Social Change, Collective Impact also
Depends on Essential Intangible Elements for its Success
• Fostering Connections between
People
• The Power of Hope
• Relationship and Trust building
• Leadership Identification and
Development
• Creating a Culture of Learning
Collective Impact’s Intangible Elements
Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews
Collective Impact: Intangibles
FSG.ORG
28
© 2012 FSG
Collective Impact: Key Takeaways
1. Common Agenda
2. Shared Measurement
3. Mutually Reinforcing Activities
4. Continuous Communication
5. Backbone Support
1. Guide Vision and Strategy
2. Support Aligned Activities
3. Establish Shared Measurement
Practices
4. Build Public Will
5. Advance Policy
6. Mobilize Funding
• Relationship and Trust Building
• Fostering Connections between People
• Leadership Identification and Development
• Creating a culture of Learning
• The Power of Hope!
FSG.ORG
29
© 2012 FSG
Thank You!
To talk more with FSG about Collective Impact:
• Jeff Cohen, Director
Collective Impact resources available on FSG’s website: http://fsg.org/KnowledgeExchange/FSGApproach/CollectiveImpact.aspx