Supporting Collective Impact
Well before the 2011 publication of Kania and Kramer’s “Collective Impact” article in Stanford Social Innovation Review, the philanthropic field recognized that multiple organizations working collaboratively have the potential to develop collective strategies that produce a substantive impact on entrenched social issues – an impact larger than what would occur if those same organizations operated independently. Despite the potential of collaborative problem solving, many of the efforts that foundations have supported over the years have failed to achieve meaningful results. In fact, some efforts have left communities worse off because of fractured relationships. Having designed and evaluated collaborative initiatives since 1993, one of the most important lessons is that naturally emerging networks have much greater potential for collective strategizing than do groups that foundations convene around their own interests. While it might be ill-advised for foundations to try to orchestrate a coalition, there are multiple ways for foundations to add value to existing networks. Because of their connections to groups with content expertise, foundations can provide networks with research and models that speak directly to what network members are trying to accomplish. Foundations can also fund staffing, meetings and technology that allows networks to remain vital and connected. And if members of the network express an authentic desire to move beyond sharing knowledge and coordinating activities, foundations can offer consultants skilled in facilitation and strategic planning, which allows the group to determine the next stage in their work together. If a group gets to the point of deciding it wants to work toward collective impact, it will face the difficult challenge of developing a shared strategy that actually achieves the group’s goals. Two of the initiatives I’ve evaluated offer insights on how collaborative groups can find and/or develop effective strategies. •Reclaiming Futures brought a 6-stage model of what it takes for young people involved in the justice system to receive the attention and support they need to resolve their substance and mental health issues. This “system map” pointed to gaps where the people who needed services were being lost, which allowed the group to focus its efforts on the highest value fixes in screening, assessment, treatment and follow-up. •The Health Foundation of Central Massachusetts has used the Synergy Initiative since 2001 to support inter-agency groups that form to address issues of shared concern. The foundation provides a structured, evidence-based approach to designing and testing promising innovations, and then sustaining those that show positive results. A key feature in this process is the active participation of the foundation’s CEO in each collaborative process, not to direct the group toward a particular solution, but to ask probing questions and to maintain pressure on the group to continue moving forward. The foundation also takes advantage of its 501(c)(4) status to advocate with state lawmakers and agencies for public funding for effective program models emerging from the Synergy Initiative. Collaborative strategizing is a complex exercise that depends on trusting relationships, solid ideas, critical thinking and a sustained commitment. Foundations need to be aware of these lessons and challenges when they support networks and coalitions – as well as when they collaborate with other funders. A literature review conducted for the Kansas Health Foundation points to 14 recommendations on how foundations should prepare for and participate in funding collaboratives in order to achieve outcomes that improve on what the foundations could achieve on their own.
Contributions to the Field > Supporting Collective Impact > Relevant Publications
Getting to collective impact: How funders can contribute over the life course of the work.
This article provides an extensive case study of the Central Appalachian Network, a long-term collaborative process involving 6 rural development organizations that were funded by a succession of foundations. The network passed through 5 stages of development, culminating in the implementation of a collective-impact strategy. The article points to the different ways that foundations can add value at each stage.
Building the capacity of networks to achieve systems change.
Networks are increasingly recognized as powerful platforms and vehicles for advancing social change. Foundations have taken advantage of their potential by (a) providing funding to networks aligned with their interests, or (b) convening new networks. In contrast, the Mary Reynolds Babcock Foundation deploys its staff as "network officers" who actively engage with networks in ways that build their capacity.
How can foundations promote impactful collaboration?
The Health Foundation of Central Massachusetts devotes most of its resources to supporting collaborative groups in developing, testing and sustaining innovative approaches to address the key health and SDOH issues facing the region. Their model emphasizes reviewing available evidence, rigorous program design, experimentation, and using data for learning and advocacy. In addition, the foundation's CEO played a critical role as an active participant in each collaborative group, asking probing questions and continually pushing the group to next-level work.
Achieving synergy with collaborative problem-solving: The value of a system-level framework.
One of the fundamental challenges that arise within collaborative problem-solving efforts is to develop a "breakthrough" solution that yields a larger, more synergistic impact that would occur if the members had acted independently. This article argues that a "system analysis" is essential to identifying where there is strategic leverage and to developing a breakthrough solution. The Reclaiming Futures initiative in North Carolina provides context for illustrating a system analysis.