Inclusive Dubuque Funding Support RequestMasterpiece on the Mississippi
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager
SUBJECT: Inclusive Dubuque Funding Request
DATE: December 12, 2013
Dubuque
band
AI- America City
1
2007 • 2012 • 2013
Inclusive Dubuque is requesting $75,000 per year as an ongoing commitment to
implement the Inclusive Dubuque Initiative. This investment is intended to leverage
investment from community partners.
Inclusive Dubuque is a partnership of more than two dozen organizations from the
business, education, nonprofit and social sectors to support Inclusive Dubuque.
Inclusive Dubuque will require long term support to ensure a welcoming and inclusive
Dubuque that is a more vibrant place to live; home to highly engaged citizens; has
residents that are engaged to make their neighborhoods better; and has a workforce
that supports a growing economy. The Community Foundation of Greater Dubuque will
serve as the fiscal agent for the initiative and facilitate a community effort to support a
more welcoming, inclusive community.
The Inclusive Dubuque vision includes:
• A Welcoming Community — by creating an environment where all people feel
respected, valued and engaged.
• Quality of Life — to ensure that everyone has access to resources and can enjoy
a sense of wellbeing and belonging.
• Economic Development — to attract and retain global talent to position the
community for continual economic growth.
• Culturally Competent Education System — by partnering to encourage the use
of an intercultural approach to educate; by honoring one's own culture and
valuing other cultures, through civility, compassion and respect.
• Open Communication — that builds a culture to focus on respecting and
understanding all perspectives, while seeking common ground.
• Community Engagement — through the open exchange of ideas and
opportunities that contribute to an inclusive community.
Inclusive Dubuque is built on the Collective Impact Model. This is similar to
DubuqueWorks and the Third Grade Reading Community Initiative. The Collective
Impact Model is described as follows:
Common Agenda
All participants have a shared vision for change including a common
understanding of the problem and joint approach to solving it through agreed -
upon actions.
Shared Measurements
Collecting data and measuring results consistently across all participants ensures
efforts remain aligned and participants hold each other accountable.
Mutually Reinforcing Activities
Participant activities must be differentiated while still being coordinated through a
mutually reinforcing plan of action.
Continuous Communication
Consistent and open communication is needed across the many players to build
trust, assure mutual objectives, and create common motivation.
Backbone Organization
Creating and managing collective impact requires a separate organization(s) with
staff and a specific set of skills to serve as the backbone for the entire initiative
and coordinate participating organizations and agencies.
The City Council has designated "Dubuque Welcoming, Inclusive Community: Action
Plan" as a priority. The City has a $222,352 uncommitted balance in the Urban
Development Action Grant (UDAG) fund that is available to support this initiative.
I know that we all appreciate that Inclusive Dubuque is asking for more than money.
The City will be a contributing member to create the collective impact desired by the
Inclusive Dubuque Collaborative. The City will participate in many ways in this initiative
and, in fact, participates in the planning and hard work of implementation through the
time and talent of several City employees.
I respectfully recommend Mayor and City Council approval of the request to support
Inclusive Dubuque.
Michael C. Van Milligan
MCVM:jh
Attachment
cc: Barry Lindahl, City Attorney
Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager
Teri Goodmann, Assistant City Manager
2
Jennifer Larson, Budget Director
Kelly Larson, Human Rights Director
Eric Dregne, Vice President of Programs Community Foundation of
Greater Dubuque
Jessica Rose, Director of Strategic Initiatives, Community Foundation of
Greater Dubuque
3
Jennifer Larson, Budget Director
City of Dubuque
50 West 13th Street
Dubuque, Iowa 52001 -4864
December 6, 2013
Re: Request — Inclusive Dubuque
Dear Jennifer:
The purpose of this letter is to request funding support for Inclusive Dubuque from the
City of Dubuque. The work of Inclusive Dubuque supports making Dubuque a
Sustainable City; ensuring economic prosperity and social /cultural vibrancy. Inclusive
Dubuque coordinates the efforts of providers to encourage planned /managed growth
and partnering for a better Dubuque, each of these are 5 year goals of the City of
Dubuque. The creation of a Dubuque welcoming, inclusive community action plan is a
Top Priority in the 2012 -14 City Council Policy Agenda and Inclusive Dubuque will help
to meet this priority.
Inclusive Dubuque is a partnership of more than two dozen organizations from the
business, education, nonprofit and social sectors to support Inclusive Dubuque.
Inclusive Dubuque will require long term support to ensure a welcoming and inclusive
Dubuque that is a more vibrant place to live; home to highly engaged citizens; has
residents that are engaged to make their neighborhoods better; and has a workforce that
supports a growing economy. The Community Foundation will serve as the fiscal agent
for the initiative and facilitate a community effort to support a more welcoming, inclusive
community.
Description of program objectives
Inclusive Dubuque is a community -wide initiative focused on creating a vibrant and
welcoming community to ensure the regions success today and into the future, with a
vision that supports;
• A Welcoming Community — by creating an environment where
all people feel respected, valued and engaged.
• Quality of Life — to ensure that everyone has access to
resources and can enjoy a sense of wellbeing and belonging.
• Economic Development — to attract and retain global talent to
position the community for continual economic growth.
• Culturally Competent Education System — by partnering to
encourage the use of an intercultural approach to educate; by
honoring one's own culture and valuing other cultures, through
civility, compassion and respect.
• Open Communication — that builds a culture to focus on
respecting and understanding all perspectives, while seeking
common ground.
• Community Engagement— through the open exchange of ideas
and opportunities that contribute to an inclusive community.
■
c1ril UVT!''Y FOUNDATION
of Crasser a ■1 ■4■r
The Reebok Bulldh g Phonic 563.588.2100
700 1 cult 9trnat. Sege 195 Fae: 363.5834619
Dubuque, IA 52001 crflueltdbqfoundadon.erg
www,ebgfoundation.arg
To support this work, we request ongoing support of $75,000.00 per year
beginning in the FY2014 Budget. This amount will leverage investment
from community partners and support the implementation of the Inclusive
Dubuque Initiative. Inclusive Dubuque will receive in -kind support from
the Community Foundation for office space, equipment and
organizational support. Please find the overview of the Inclusive
Dubuque mission and partners and planned budget attached.
Thank you for your consideration of our request on behalf of the Inclusive Dubuque
Mission Partners.
Sincerely,
e('
Eric Dregne
Vice President of Programs
Community Foundation of Greater Dubuque
Inclusive Dubuque Budget
$50,000 Staff (Coordinator and assistant)
$10,000 Administrative costs
$ 5,000 Training / Development
$ 4,000 Travel
$50,000 Community Outreach and Engagement
$50,000 Marketing
$30,000 Consulting
$26,000 Printing and Publications
$225,000 Total
INCLUSIVE
INCLUSIVE
INCLUSIVE
dubuque
MISSION STATEMENT
A local initiative focused on creating a vibrant and
welcoming community to ensure the region's success
today and into the future.
WHY
What makes a community a desirable place to live?
What draws people to stake their future in it? Why do you call Dubuque home?
The Knight Foundation's 2008 Soul of the Community project found that three main qualities
attach people to place:
1) SOCIAL OFFERINGS 2) THE AREA'S AESTHETICS 3) OPENNESS & WELCOMING
As Dubuque has continually changing demographics, the differences in race, religion, gender
and education, among many others, allow us share, learn and grow from our individual
experiences, connect with people, and strengthen our community.
Connecting with others based on similarities, as well as differences, is the why... to make
Dubuque a better place to live, work, and to call home.
WHAT
• A Welcoming Community
Create an environment where all people feel respected, valued, and engaged
• Quality of Life
Where everyone has access to resources and can enjoy a sense of wellbeing and belonging
• Economic Development
Attract and retain global talent to position the community for continual economic growth
• Culturally Competent Education System
Partnering to encourage the use of an intercultural approach to educate by honoring one's
own culture and valuing other cultures, through civility, compassion, and respect
• Open Communication
Build a culture to focus on respecting and understanding all perspectives, while seeking
common ground
• Community Engagement
Openly exchange ideas and opportunities to contribute to, strengthen, and support an
inclusive community
1
how we work )
INCLUSIVE dubuque
Collaborative
I Hy of nub: a pro
Uarkc Uuivcmity
Community Foundation of Greater Duhuquo
Dubuque Ar on Chmubw 1)1 Coltman(
nubuepte Ar on C ongrveal ken Iluile•d
Dubuque New Labul Mnnagenlela Cournil
Didi1no1nd Jv LJSIIIU
Dubuque Community School District
Greater Dubuque Development Corporation
I Iouucl
IBM
John Deere
Loras College
Multicultural Family Center
Myctiquo
NAACP
Northeast Iowa CommunityCollege
Prudential
Tri State Independent Phycicianc
linker city of Dubuque
llniversily of \Vise ouciu IIiI Ioville
Ii SE
ONE
DI ItSI IIP
NMEI.T urlino:
monde
COLLECTIVE IMPACT
Common Agenda
Rl pxtklpamshave a shared vision for change Indudinga
rnmmin urrortandtp nt thrpmhlom anti AJM We
appmich to vdvbp It thrnlph agrc rid opnn artlnn%
Shared Measurements
t nllrctlnp, entaaM m Aaainp- roculr. mnshtamYy across
all participants oneircceffartc nnnalnallsncd And
pet lkiFanblwld naLlIothel auuwttable.
Mutually Reinforcing Activities
PedicipantecUtilsan ut bedil le; enUaLed wide ail being
coordinated through a mutually reinfordng plan of re lino.
Continuous Communication
Consistent and opencomminication b neeucleuuaaU:e
ninny IAnye Iolxiild Iuni,Apmre awl al alit.' lives au::
create commonmottatbn
Backbone Organization
Oenlingeull nuu:gi:p!rnlly: l iv: iutan 1 :alni:v.e
at parole u gel riedita(a) witilLaff dole weaklelof
akIb L x:va as Llic backbone for the entire initiative and
coordinate parcldpadng orgaNzadons and agencies.
( the process 1
PHASE TWO
DATA C011 FCTION
COMPltI 111 NSIVI
SI UDY
l inleline:
6-1 ) months
PHASE THREE
COMM UNIT(
LNUAULMLNI
IMPLEMENTATION
PHASE FOUR
LONG -TERM VISION
Comm uniration
I duc :onion
PAelricx and
Tangihln Rncuhe
DUBUQUE CITY COUNCIL
MAYOR
Roy D. Buol
2640 Becker Ct.
Dubuque, Iowa 52001
Phone: (563) 564 -5455
rd b uo l @c ityofd u b u q u e.org
Term Expires: Dec. 31, 2017
AT -LARGE
Ric W. Jones
1270 Dunleith Ct.
Dubuque, Iowa 52003
Phone: (563) 556 -3490
rjones @cityofdubuque.org
Term Expires: Dec. 31, 2017
AT -LARGE
David T. Resnick
375 Alpine St.
Dubuque, Iowa 52001
Phone: (563) 582 -9217
dresn ick @cityofd ubuq ue.org
Term Expires: Dec. 31, 2015
FIRST WARD
Kevin 1. Lynch
749 Brookview Sq.
Dubuque, Iowa 52002
Phone: (563) 582 -2655
klyn c h @c ityofd u b u q u e.org
Term Expires: Dec. 31, 2017
SECOND WARD
Karla A. Braig
1795 Loras Blvd.
Dubuque, Iowa 52001
Phone: (563) 582 -0595
kb ra i g @c ityofd u b u q u e.org
Term Expires: Dec. 31, 2015
THIRD WARD
Joyce E. Connors
660 Edith St.
Dubuque, Iowa 52001
Phone: (563) 582 -3843
jco n n ors @c ityofd u b u q u e.o rg
Term Expires: Dec. 31, 2017
FOURTH WARD
Lynn V. Sutton
876 Yale Ct., #1
Dubuque, Iowa 52001
Phone: (563) 585 -0129
Is utto n @cityofd u bu q ue.org
Term Expires: Dec. 31, 2015
1".1r/ PI1IINCII MFFTwec
The Dubuque City Council meets on the first and
third Monday of each month in the City Council
Chambers on the second floor of the Historic
Federal Building at 350 West Sixth Street.
Meetings begin at 6:30 p.m. and are broadcast
live on CityChannel, Dubuque's local government
access channel (85.2 digital, 8 analog) on the
Mediacom cable system. Meetings are also
streamed live and archived on the City website,
www.cityofdubuque.org /media. For agenda and
minutes information, visit www.cityofdubuque.
org /citycouncil or contact the City Clerk's Office at
(563)589 -4120 or cityclerk @cityofdubuque.org.
CITY co "cil ;3
GOALS & PRIORITILS
Each year, the Dubuque City Council completes its annual goal- setting sessions. Over
the course of two days in August, City Council members reaffirmed the 15 -year vision
statement, mission statement, and developed priorities for a 2013 -2015 policy agenda.
2028 VISION STATEMENT
The city of Dubuque is a progressive, sustainable city with a strong diversified economy and
expanding global connections. The Dubuque community is an inclusive community celebrating
culture and heritage and has actively preserved our Masterpiece on the Mississippi. Dubuque
citizens experience healthy living and retirement through quality, livable neighborhoods with
an abundance of fun things to do; and are engaged in the community, achieving goals through
partnerships. Dubuque City government is financially sound and is providing services with
citizens getting value for their tax dollar.
CITY MISSION STATEMENT
The City's mission is to deliver excellent municipal services that support urban living and a
sustainable city plan for the community's future and facilitate access to critical human services
which result in financially sound government and citizens getting services and value for their tax
dollar.
tivt -YEAR COMMUNITY GOAL
FOR A SUSTAINABLE DUBUQUE
• Economic Prosperity
• Social /Cultural Vibrancy
• Environmental lntegrity
• Planned and Managed Growth
• Partnering for a Better Dubuque
• Improved Connectivity —
Transportation and Telecommunications
• Financially Responsible City Government and High Performance Organization
POLICY AGENDA 2013 -2015
Tor r). n iti /in ^"
• Annexation: Direction on specific actions a) study implementation, b) corridor to Airport
• Arts and Culture organizations city support: Evaluation, potential projects review and priority,
overall direction, funding level
• Dubuque welcoming, inclusive community: Action plan
• Four Mounds Foundation /HEART program city support
• Management and Employee Succession Planning and Funding
• Master Plan for Chaplain Schmitt Island: Development
• Safe Community Initiative: Monitoring, future direction, specific actions
• Washington Neighborhood Strategy: Business attraction, HEART program, update housing stock,
homeownership, promotion, police substation
Llicrh Prinrities (in alphabetical order)
• Bee Branch Project: Specific projects, direction, funding
• Clean Air Attainment Strategy
• Greater Dubuque Development Corporation support
• Historic Millwork District: Development, project monitoring
• Indoor Aquatic Center: Direction
• Riverfront Leases: Agreement
• Smarter City: Smarter health and wellness, smarter travel, smarter discards
• Southwest Arterial Project: Design, land acquisition, intersecting roads
MANAGEMENT AGENDA 2013 -2015
Economic Prosperity Goal
• Dubuque Initiatives: Next Step
• Workforce Market -Rate Housing
• Marina Store: Operational
• Project HOPE
Environmental /Ecological Integrity Goal
• Sustainability Purchasing Policy and Procedures
• Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) for Transit
• Grand River Center Electric Meters Project
• City Operations: Sustainability Performance Measures
• Sustainable Dubuque Community Grant
• America's River III Task Force
• Plastic Bag Reduction Strategy: Implementation
• Fats /Oils /Grease: Policy, Program and Enforcement
• Dubuque Metropolitan Area Solid Waste Agency (DMASWA)
28E Agreement: Evaluation
• Community Climate Action & Resiliency Plan -
50% Greenhouse Gas Reduction by 2030: Implementation
Social /Cultural Vibrancy Goal
• City Workforce Diversity: Recruitment and Selection
• Territory Accountability Design: Targeted Actions
• Multicultural Family Center Building Expansion
• Intercultural Competency Program within City Government:
Self Assessment, Training
• Intercultural Competency Program for the Community:
Marketing to School District, Nonprofit and Community
Organizations, Businesses
• Police /Race Dialog
• City Life: Implementation
• Local ADA Compliance Program
• Leadership Enrichment After School Program (LEAP)
• Firefighter Internship for Recruitment of Diverse Workforce
• Racial Profiling: Problem Analysis, Action Plan
• Community Engagement Strategy: City Actions
Planned & Managed Growth Goal
• Inflow and Infiltration Program /Home Inspections: EPA
Consent Decree Implementation
• City Comprehensive Plan: Update
• Flood Wall: Funding, Evaluation, Cell Protection
• Statewide Urban Design and Specification City Engineering
Standards (SUDAS) City Engineering Standards: Update
• Washington Street Row House Units: Sale
• Historic Preservation Program: Evaluation, Update
• Downtown Loan Program: Implementation
• West Third Street Reservoir Study
• Housing Choice Voucher Program
• Water and Sewer Service Extension to City Residents and
Businesses
Dubuque
*. ***
Masterpiece on the Mississippi
For more information, call 563.589.4120
or visit www.cityofdubuque.org /councilgoals
Partnering for a Better Dubuque Goal
• Parks /Schools Joint Projects and Services: City Actions
• City Volunteer Program: Development
• Sister City Program: Delegation to Potential City
• Veterans Memorials: Direction
• Handicap Accessibility for Parks: Direction
• Bridges Out of Poverty Program: City Support
Improved Connectivity:
Tra nsportation and Telecommunications
• Smart Transportation Program
• Traffic Signal Synchronization: Citywide
• Amtrak Train Platform (Port of Dubuque): Funding
• Roundabout: ROW Acquisition a) University /Asbury
b) Radford /Pennsylvania
• Intermodal Transportation Facility in Historic Millwork District
• Air Traffic Control Tower: Funding
Financially Responsible City Government and High
Performance Organization
• Website Content Management (CivicPlus)
• 900 MHz Data System: Expansion
• Employee Wellness Program: Five -Year Goals, City Internet Posting
• Employee Involvement Teams: Expansion
• Healthcare Cost Containment
• Police Officer Recruitment and Retention
• Records Management and Retention
• City Hall Protocol and Safety
• New Computer -Aided Drafting (CAD) Software
• Emergency Police Dispatch and Emergency Fire Dispatch
• New Fire Pumper
• Disaster Preparedness and Recovery Plan: Discussion
• Environmental Sustainability Management System (ESMS): ISO
14001 Model Program
• Affordable Care Act: Analysis of Impacts
Major Projects
• State Revolving Fund (SRF) Green Alley Projects
• Port of Dubuque Park: Development
• City Greenhouse Project
• Water & Resource Recovery Center Project
• Locust and Iowa Ramps: Renovation Project
• North Softening Basin Renovation Project
• Comiskey Park Improvements
• Northwest Arterial Trail — Bergfeld Recreation Trail Connection
• Bunker Hill Golf Course Irrigation Improvements
• Airport Terminal Project
• Elm Street Reconstruction Project
• One Way — Two Way Conversion Project
• Cedar Cross Road: Design
• Wacker and JFKTraffic Signalization Project
• North Cascade Road: Design
• White Street Traffic Signal and Improvements Reconstruction (at
14th and 20th)
• US 20 /Fremont Avenue Traffic Signal: Upgrades
• NWArterial /Chavenelle Intersection Improvement Project
StanfordSOCIAL
TNNOVATIONPIWEW
Collective Impact
By John Kania & Mark Kramer
Stanford Social Innovation Review
Winter 2011
Copyright 0 2011 by Leland Stanford Jr. University
All Rights Reserved
Stanford Social Innovation Review
Email. info @ssire>iew.ug, www.ssireview.org
Collective
Impact
LARGE -SCALE SOCIAL CHANGE REQUIRES
BROAD CROSS - SECTOR COORDINATION,
YET THE SOCIAL SECTOR REMAINS
FOCUSED ON THE ISOLATED INTERVENTION
OF INDIVIDUAL ORGANIZATIONS.
BY JOHN KANIA & MARK KRAMER
Illustration by Martin Jarrie
T
300 leaders of local organizations agreed to participate, includ-
ing the heads of influential private and corporate foundations,
city government officials, school district representatives, the
presidents of eight universities and community colleges, and
the executive directors of hundreds of education - related non-
profit and advocacy groups.
These leaders realized that fixing one point on the educational
continuum —such as better after - school programs — wouldn't
make much difference unless all parts of the continuum im-
proved at the same time. No
single organization, however
innovative or powerful, could
accomplishthis alone. Instead,
their ambitious missionbecame
to coordinate improvements at
every stage of a young person's
life, from "cradle to career."
Strive didn't try to create
a new educational program or
attempt to convince donors to
spend more money. Instead,
through a carefully structured process, Strive focusedthe en-
tire educational community on a single set of goals, measured
in the same way. Participating organizations are grouped
into 15 different Student Success Networks (SSNs) by type of
activity, such as early childhood education or tutoring. Each
SSN has been meeting with coaches and facilitators for two
hours every two weeks for the past three years, developing
shared performance indicators, discussing their progress,
and most important, learning from each other and aligning
their efforts to support each other.
Strive, both the organization and the process it helps fa-
cilitate, is an example of collective impact, the commitment of a
group of important actors from different sectors to a common
agenda for solving a specific social problem. Collaboration is
nothing new. The social sector is filled with examples of part-
nerships, networks, and other types of joint efforts. But col-
lective impact initiatives are distinctly different. Unlike most
he scale and complexity of the U.S. public education system has
thwarted attempted reforms for decades. Major funders, such as
the Annenberg Foundation, Ford Foundation, and Pew Charitable
Trusts have abandoned many of their efforts in frustration after ac-
knowledging their lack of progress. Once the global leader —after
World War II the United States had the highest high school gradu-
ation rate in the world —the country now ranks 18th among the top
24 industrialized nations, with more than 1 million secondary school
students dropping out every year. The heroic efforts of countless teachers, administrators,
and nonprofits, together with billions of dollars in charitable contributions, may have led to
important improvements in individual schools and classrooms,
yet system -wide progress has seemed virtually unobtainable.
Against these daunting odds, a remarkable exception seems
to be emerging in Cincinnati. Strive, a nonprofit subsidiary
of KnowledgeWorks, has brought together local leaders to
tackle the student achievement crisis and improve education
throughout greater Cincinnati and northern Kentucky. In
the four years since the group was launched, Strive partners
have improved student success in dozens of key areas across
three large public school districts. Despite the recession and
budget cuts, 34 of the 53 success indicators that Strive tracks
have shown positive trends, including high school graduation
rates, fourth -grade reading and math scores, and the number
of preschool children prepared for kindergarten.
Whyhas Strive made progress when so many other efforts
have failed? It is because a core group of community leaders
decided to abandon their individual agendas in favor of a col-
lective approach to improving student achievement. More than
36 STANFORD SOCIAL INNOVATION REVIEW • Winter 2011
collaborations, collective impact initiatives involve a centralized
infrastructure, a dedicated staff, and a structuredprocess that leads
to a common agenda, shared measurement, continuous communi-
cation, and mutually reinforcing activities among all participants.
(See "Types of Collaborations" on page 39 )
Although rare, other successful examples of collective impact are
addressing social issues that, like education, require many different
players to change their behavior in order to solve a complex problem.
In 1993, Marjorie Mayfield Jackson helped found the Elizabeth River
Project with a mission of cleaning up the Elizabeth River in southeast-
ern Virginia, which for decades had been a dumpinggroundforindus-
trial waste. They engaged more than 100 stakeholders, including the
citygovernments of Chesapeake, Norfolk, Portsmouth, and Virginia
Beach, Va.,the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Navy, and dozens
oflocal businesses, schools, community groups, environmental orga-
nizations, and universities, in developing an 18 -point plan to restore
the watershed. Fifteen years later, more than 1,000 acres of watershed
land have been conserved or restored, pollution has been reduced
by more than zis million pounds, concentrations of the most severe
carcinogen have been cut sixfold, and water quality has significantly
improved. Much remains to be done before the river is fully restored,
but already 27 species of fish and oysters are thriving in the restored
wetlands, and bald eagles have returned to nest on the shores.
Or consider Shape up Somerville, a citywide effort to reduce and
prevent childhood obesity in elementary school children in Somer-
ville, Mass. Led by Christina Economos, an associate professor at
Tufts University's Gerald J. and Dorothy R. Friedman School of Nutri-
tion Science and Policy, and funded by the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Blue Cross
Blue Shield of Mass achusetts, and United Way of Mass achusetts Bay
and Merrimack Valley, the program engaged government officials,
educators, businesses, nonprofits, and citizens in collectively defin-
ing wellness and weight gain prevention practices. Schools agreed to
offer healthier foods, teach nutrition, and promote physical activity.
Local restaurants received a certification if they served low -fat, high
nutritional food. The city organized a farmers' market and provided
healthy lifestyle incentives such as reduced -price gym memberships
for city employees. Even sidewalks were modified and crosswalks
repainted to encourage more children to walk to school. The result
was a statistically significant decrease in body mass index among
the community's young children between 2oo2 and zoos.
Even companies are beginning to explore collective impact to
tackle social problems. Mars, a manufacturer of chocolate brands
such as M &M's, Snickers, and Dove, is working with NGOs, local
governments, and even direct competitors to improve the lives of
more than 500,000 impoverished cocoa farmers in Cote d'Ivoire,
where Mars sources alarge portion of its cocoa. Research suggests
JOHN KANIA is a managing director at FSG, where he oversees the firm's
consulting practice. Before joining FSG, he was a consultant at Mercer Manage-
ment Consulting and Corporate Decisions Inc. This is Kania's third article for
the Stanford Social Innovation Review.
MARK K R AM E R is the co- founder and a managing director of FSG. He is also the
co- founder and the initial board chair of the Center for Effective Philanthropy, and
a senior fellow at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government.
This is Kramer's fifth article for the Stanford Social Innovation Review.
38 STANFORD SOCIAL INNOVATION REVIEW • Winter 2011
that better farming practices and improved plant stocks could triple
the yield per hectare, dramatically increasing farmer incomes and
improving the sustainability of Mars's supply chain. To accomplish
this, Mars must enlist the coordinated efforts of multiple organiza-
tions: the Cote d'Ivoire government needs to provide more agricul-
tural extension workers, the World Bank needs to finance new roads,
and bilateral donors need to support NGOs in improving health care,
nutrition, and education in cocoa growing communities. And Mars
must find ways to work with its direct competitors on pre- competi-
tive issues to reach farmers outside its supply chain.
These varied examples all have a common theme: that large -scale
social change comes from better cross - sector coordination rather
than from the isolated intervention of individual organizations. Evi-
dence of the effectiveness of this approach is still limited, but these
examples suggest that substantiallygreaterprogress could be made
in alleviating many of our most serious and complex social problems
if nonprofits, governments, businesses, and the public were brought
together around a common agenda to create collective impact. It
doesn't happen often, not because it is impossible, but because it
is so rarely attempted. Funders and nonprofits alike overlook the
potential for collective impact because they are used to focusing on
independent action as the primary vehicle for social change.
ISOLATED IMPACT
Most funders, faced with the task of choosing a fewgrant-
ees from many applicants, try to ascertain which orga-
nizations make the greatest contribution toward solv-
ing a social problem. Grantees, in turn, compete to be chosen by
emphasizing how their individual activities produce the greatest
effect. Each organization is judged on its own potential to achieve
impact, independent of the numerous other organizations that may
also influence the issue. And when agrantee is asked to evaluate the
impact of its work, every attempt is made to isolate that grantee's
individual influence from all other variables.
In short, the nonprofit sector most frequently operates using an
approach that we call isolated impact. It is an approach oriented toward
finding and funding a solution embodied within a single organiza-
tion, combined with the hope that the most effective organizations
will grow or replicate to extend their impact more widely. Funders
searchfor more effective interventions as if there were a cure forfail-
ing schools that only needs to be discovered, in the way that medi-
cal cures are discovered in laboratories. As a result of this process,
nearly 1.4 million nonprofits try to invent independent solutions to
major social problems, often working at odds with each other and
exponentially increasing the perceived resources required to make
meaningful progress. Recent trends have only reinforced this per-
spective. The growing interest in venture philanthropy and social
entrepreneurship, for example, has greatly benefited the social sector
by identifying and accelerating the growth of many high-performing
nonprofits, yet it has also accentuated an emphasis on scaling up a
few select organizations as the key to social progress.
Despite the dominance of this approach, there is scant evidence
that isolated initiatives are the best wayto solve many social problems
in today's complex and interdependent world. No single organiza-
tion is responsible for any major social problem, nor can any single
TYPES OF COLLABORATIONS
Organizations have attempted to solve social problems by collaboration for decades without
producing many results. The vast majority of these efforts lack the elements of success that
enable collective impact initiatives to achieve a sustained alignment of efforts.
Funder Collaboratives are groups of funders interested in supporting the same issue who
pool their resources. Generally, participants do not adopt an overarching evidence -based
plan of action or a shared measurement system, nor do they engage in differentiated
activities beyond check writing or engage stakeholders from other sectors.
Public- Private Partnerships ire partnerships formed between government and private
sector organizations to deliver specific services or benefits. They are often targeted narrowly,
such as developing a particular drug to fight a single disease, and usually don't engage the full
set of stakeholders that affect the issue, such as the potential drug's distribution system.
Multi- Stakeholder Initiatives are voluntary activities by stakeholders from different sec-
tors around a common theme. Typically, these initiatives lack any shared measurement of
impact and the supporting infrastructure to forge any true alignment of efforts or
accountability for results.
Social Sector Networks are groups of individuals or organizations fluidly connected
through purposeful relationships, whether formal or informal. Collaboration is generally
ad hoc, and most often the emphasis is placed on information sharing and targeted short -
term actions, rather than a sustained and structured initiative.
Collective Impact Initiatives are long -term commitments by a group of important actors
from different sectors to a common agenda for solving a specific social problem. Their
actions are supported by a shared measurement system, mutually reinforcing activities,
and ongoing communication, and are staffed by an independent backbone organization.
organization cure it. In the field of education, even the most highly
respected nonprofits —such as the Harlem Children's Zone, Teach for
America, and the Knowledge Is Power Program (KIPP) —have taken
decades to reach tens of thousands of children, a remarkable achieve -
ment that deserves praise, but one that is three orders of magnitude
short of the tens of millions of U.S. children that need help.
The problem with relying on the isolated impact of individual
organizations is further compounded by the isolation of the non-
profit sector. Social problems arise from the interplay of govern-
mental and commercial activities, not only from the behavior of
social sector organizations. As a result, complex problems can be
solved only by cross - sector coalitions that engage those outside
the nonprofit sector.
We don't want to imply that all social problems require collec-
tive impact. In fact, some problems are best solved by individual
organizations. In "Leading Boldly," an article we wrote with Ron
Heifetz for the winter 2004 issue of the Stanford Social Innovation
Review, we described the difference between technical problems and
adaptive problems. Some social problems are technical in that the
problem is well defined, the answer is known in advance, and one or
a few organizations have the ability to implement the solution. Ex-
amples include funding college scholarships, building a hospital, or
installing inventory controls in a food bank. Adaptive problems, by
contrast, are complex, the answer is not known, and even if it were,
no single entity has the resources or authority to bring about the
necessary change. Reforming public education, restoring wetland
environments, and improving community health are all adaptive
problems. In these cases, reaching an effective solution requires
learning by the stakeholders involved in the problem, who must then
change their own behavior in order to create a solution.
Shifting from isolated impact to col-
lective impact is not merely a matter of
encouraging more collaboration or public -
private partnerships. It requires a systemic
approach to social impact that focuses on
the relationships between organizations
and the progress toward shared objectives.
And it requires the creation of a new set of
nonprofit management organizations that
have the skills and resources to assemble
and coordinate the specific elements neces-
sary for collective action to succeed.
THE FIVE CONDITIONS OF
COLLECTIVE SUCCESS
ur research shows that successful
collective impact initiatives typi-
cally have five conditions that to-
gether produce true alignment and lead to
powerful results: a common agenda, shared
measurement systems, mutually reinforc-
ing activities, continuous communication,
and backbone support organizations.
Common Agenda 1 Collective impact
requires all participants to have a shared
vision for change, one that includes a common understanding of the
problem and a joint approach to solving it through agreed upon ac-
tions. Take a close look at any group of funders and nonprofits that
believe they are working on the same social issue, and you quickly
find that it is often not the same issue at all. Each organization often
has a slightly different definition of the problem and the ultimate
goal. These differences are easily ignored when organizations work
independently on isolated initiatives, yet these differences splinter
the efforts and undermine the impact of the field as awhole. Collec-
tive impact requires that these differences be discussed and resolved.
Every participant need not agree with every other participant on
all dimensions of the problem. In fact, disagreements continue to
divide participants in all of our examples of collective impact. All
participants must agree, however, on the primary goals for the col-
lective impact initiative as a whole. The Elizabeth River Project, for
example, hadto find common ground among the different objectives
of corporations, governments, community groups, and local citizens
in order to establish workable cross - sector initiatives.
Funders can play an important role in getting organizations to
act in concert. In the case of Strive, rather than fueling hundreds
of strategies and nonprofits, many funders have aligned to support
Strive's central goals. The Greater Cincinnati Foundation realigned
its education goals to be more compatible with Strive, adopting
Strive's annual report card as the foundation's own measures for
progress in education. Every time an organization applied to Duke
Energy for agrant, Duke asked, "Are you part of the [Strive] network ?"
And when a new funder, the Carol Ann and Ralph V. Haile Jr./U.S.
Bank Foundation, expressed interest in education, they were encour-
aged by virtually every major education leader in Cincinnati to join
Strive if they wanted to have an impact in local education.'
Winter2011 • STANFORD SOCIAL INNOVATION REVIEW 39
Shared Measurement Systems Developing a shared measure-
ment system is essential to collective impact. Agreement on a com-
mon agenda is illusory without agreement on the ways success will
be measured and reported. Collecting data and measuring results
consistently on a short list of indicators at the community level and
across all participating organizations not only ensures that all efforts
remain aligned, it also enables the participants to hold each other
accountable and learn from each other's successes and failures.
It may seem impossible to evaluate hundreds of different or-
ganizations on the same set of measures. Yet recent advances in
Web -based technologies have enabled common systems for report-
ing performance and measuring outcomes. These systems increase
efficiency and reduce cost. They can also improve the quality and
credibility of the data collected, increase effectiveness by enabling
grantees to learn from each other's performance, and document the
progress of the field as a whole.2
All ofthe preschool programs in Strive, for example, have agreed to
measure their results on the same criteria and use only evidence -based
decision making. Each type of activity requires a different set of mea-
sures, but all organizations engaged in the same type of activity report
on the same measures. Looking at results across multiple organizations
enables the participants to spot patterns, find solutions, and implement
them rapidly. The preschool programs discoveredthat children regress
during the summerbreakbefore kindergarten. Bylaunching an innova-
tive "summer bridge" session, a technique more often used in middle
school, and implementing it simultaneouslyin all preschool programs,
they increased the average kindergarten readiness scores throughout
the region by an average of 10 percent in a single year.3
Mutually Reinforcing Activities Collective impact initiatives
depend on a diverse group of stakeholders working together, not
by requiring that all participants do the same thing, but by encour-
aging each participant to undertake the specific set of activities at
which it excels in a way that supports and is coordinated with the
actions of others.
The power of collective action comes not from the sheer num-
ber of participants or the uniformity of their efforts, but from the
coordination of their differentiated activities through a mutually
reinforcing plan of action. Each stakeholder's efforts must fit into
an overarching plan if their combined efforts are to succeed. The
multiple causes of social problems, and the components of their
solutions, are interdependent. They cannot be addressed byunco-
ordinated actions among isolated organizations.
All participants in the Elizabeth River Project, for example, agreed
on the 18 -point watershed restoration plan, but each is playing a
different role based on its particular capabilities. One group of or-
ganizations works on creating grassroots support and engagement
among citizens, a second provides peer review and recruitment for
industrial participants who voluntarily reduce pollution, and athird
coordinates and reviews scientific research.
The 15 SSNs in Strive each undertake different types of activities
at different stages of the educational continuum. Strive does not
prescribe what practices each of the 30o participating organizations
should pursue. Each organization and network is free to chart its
own course consistent with the common agenda, and informed by
the shared measurement of results.
40 STANFORD SOCIAL INNOVATION REVIEW • Winter 2011
Continuous Communication Developing trust among nonprof-
its, corporations, and government agencies is a monumental chal-
lenge. Participants need several years of regular meetings to build
up enough experience with each other to recognize and appreciate
the common motivation behind their different efforts. They need
time to see that their own interests will be treated fairly, and that
decisions will be made on the basis of objective evidence and the
best possible solution to the problem, not to favor the priorities of
one organization over another.
Even the process of creating a common vocabulary takes time,
and it is an essential prerequisite to developing shared measurement
systems. All the collective impact initiatives we have studied held
monthly or even biweekly in-person meetings among the organiza-
tions' CEO -level leaders. Skipping meetings or sending lower -level
delegates was not acceptable. Most of the meetings were supported
by external facilitators and followed a structured agenda.
The Strive networks, for example, have been meeting regularly for
more than three years. Communication happens between meetings
too: Strive uses Web -based tools, such as Google Groups, to keep
communication flowing among and within the networks. At first,
many of the leaders showed up because they hoped that their par-
ticipation would bring their organizations additional funding, but
they soon learned that was not the meetings' purpose. What they
discovered instead were the rewards of learning and solving prob-
lems together with others who shared their same deep knowledge
and passion about the issue.
Backbone Support Organizations Creating and managing
collective impact requires a separate organization and staff with
a very specific set of skills to serve as the backbone for the entire
initiative. Coordination takes time, and none of the participating
organizations has any to spare. The expectation that collaboration
can occur without a supporting infrastructure is one of the most
frequent reasons why it fails.
The backbone organization requires a dedicated staff separate
from the participating organizations who can plan, manage, and
support the initiative through ongoing facilitation, technology and
communications support, data collection and reporting, and han-
dling the myriad logistical and administrative details needed for
the initiative to function smoothly. Strive has simplified the initial
staffing requirements for a backbone organization to three roles:
project manager, data manager, and facilitator.
Collective impact also requires a highly structured process
that leads to effective decision making. In the case of Strive, staff
worked with General Electric (GE) to adapt for the social sector
the Six Sigma process that GE uses for its own continuous quality
improvement. The Strive Six Sigmaprocess includes training, tools,
and resources that each SSN uses to define its common agenda,
shared measures, and plan of action, supported by Strive facilita-
tors to guide the process.
In the best of circumstances, these backbone organizations em-
body the principles of adaptive leadership: the ability to focus people's
attention and create a sense of urgency, the skill to applypres sure to
stakeholders without overwhelming them, the competence to frame
issues in away that presents opportunities as well as difficulties, and
the strength to mediate conflict among stakeholders.
FUNDING COLLECTIVE IMPACT
Creating a successful collective impact initiative requires
a significant financial investment: the time participating
organizations must dedicate to the work, the development
and monitoring of shared measurement systems, and the staff of
the backbone organization needed to lead and support the initia-
tive's ongoing work.
As successful as Strive has been, it has struggled to raise money,
confronting funders' reluctance to pay for infrastructure and pref-
erence for short-term solutions. Collective impact requires instead
that funders support a long -term process of social change without
identifying any particular solution in advance. They must be willing
to let grantees steer the work and have the patience to stay with an
initiative foryears, recognizing that social change can come from the
gradual improvement of an entire system over time, not just from a
single breakthrough by an individual organization.
This requires afundamental change inhowfunders see their role,
from funding organizations to leading along -term process of social
change. It is no longer enough to fund an innovative solution created
by a single nonprofit orto build that organization's capacity. Instead,
funders must help create and sustain the collective processes, mea-
surement reporting systems, and community leadership that enable
cross - sector coalitions to arise and thrive.
This is a shift that we foreshadowed in both "Leading Boldly" and
our more recent article, "Catalytic Philanthropy," in the fall 2009
issue of the Stanford Social Innovation Review. In the former, we sug-
gested that the most powerful role for funders to play in address-
ing adaptive problems is to focus attention on the issue and help to
create a process that mobilizes the organizations involved to find a
solution themselves. In "Catalytic Philanthropy," we wrote: "Mobi-
lizing and coordinating stakeholders is far messier and slower work
than funding a compelling grant request from a single organization.
Systemic change, however, ultimately depends on a sustained cam-
paign to increase the capacity and coordination of an entire field." We
recommended that funders who want to create large -scale change
follow four practices: take responsibility for assembling the elements
of a solution; create a movement for change; include solutions from
outside the nonprofit sector; and use actionable knowledge to influ-
ence behavior and improve performance.
These same four principles are embodied in collective impact
initiatives. The organizers of Strive abandoned the conventional ap-
proach of funding specific programs at education nonprofits and took
responsibility for advancing education reform themselves. They built
a movement, engaging hundreds of organizations in a drive toward
shared goals. Theyusedtools outside the nonprofit sector, adapting
GE's Six Sigma planning process for the social sector. And through
the community report card and the biweekly meetings of the SSNs
they created actionable knowledge that motivated the community
and improved performance among the participants.
Funding collective impact initiatives costs money, but it can
be a highly leveraged investment. A backbone organization with a
modest annual budget can support a collective impact initiative of
several hundred organizations, magnifying the impact of millions
or even billions of dollars in existing funding. Strive, for example,
has a $1.5 million annual budget but is coordinating the efforts and
increasing the effectiveness of organizations with combined bud-
gets of $7 billion. The social sector, however, has not yet changed
its funding practices to enable the shift to collective impact. Until
funders are willing to embrace this new approach and invest suffi-
cient resources in the necessaryfacilitation, coordination, and mea-
surement that enable organizations to work in concert, the requisite
infrastructure will not evolve.
FUTURE SHOCK
What might social change look like if funders, nonprofits,
government officials, civic leaders, and business ex-
ecutives embraced collective impact? Recent events at
Strive provide an exciting indication of what might be possible.
Strive has begun to codify what it has learned so that other com-
munities can achieve collective impact more rapidly. The organization
is working with nine other communities to establish similar cradle
to career initiatives .4 Importantly, although Strive is broadening its
impact to a national level, the organization is not scaling up its own
operations by opening branches in other cities. Instead, Strive is pro-
mulgating a flexible process for change, offering each community a
set of tools for collective impact, drawn from Strive's experience but
adaptable to the community's own needs and resources. As a result,
the new communities take true ownership of their own collective
impact initiatives, but they don't need to start the process from
scratch. Activities such as developing a collective educational reform
mission and vision or creating specific community -level educational
indicators are expedited through the use of Strive materials and as-
sistance from Strive staff. Processes that took Strive several years
to develop are being adapted and modified by other communities
in significantly less time.
These nine communities plus Cincinnati have formed a commu-
nity of practice in which representatives from each effort connect
regularly to share what they are learning. Because of the number
and diversity of the communities, Strive and its partners can quickly
determine what processes are universal and which require adapta-
tion to a local context. As learning accumulates, Strive staff will
incorporate new findings into an Internet -based knowledge portal
that will be available to any community wishing to create a collec-
tive impact initiative based on Strive's model.
This exciting evolution of the Strive collective impact initiative
is far removed from the isolated impact approach that now domi-
nates the social sector and that inhibits any major effort at com-
prehensive, large -scale change. If successful, it presages the spread
of a new approach that will enable us to solve today's most serious
social problems with the resources we alreadyhave at our disposal.
It would be a shock to the system. But it's a form of shock therapy
that's badly needed. •
Notes
1 Interview with Kathy Merchant, CEO of the Greater Cincinnati Foundation, April to, zoio.
2 See Mark Kramer, Marcie Parkhurst, and Lalitha Vaidyanathan, Breakthroughs in
Shared Measurement andSocialImpact, FSG Social Impact Advisors, 2.009.
3 "Successful Starts;' United Way of Greater Cincinnati, second edition, fall 2.009.
4 Indianapolis, Houston, Richmond, Va., and Hayward, Calif., are the first four com-
munities to implement Strive's process for educational reform. Portland, Ore., Fresno,
Calif, Mesa, Ariz., Albuquerque, and Memphis are just beginning their efforts.
Winter2011 • STANFORD SOCIAL INNOVATION REVIEW 41
INCLUSIVE
INCLUSIVE
INCLUSIVE
dubuque
Contact: Jessica Rose
jessicarose@dbqfoundation.org
Community Foundation of Greater Dubuque
563- 588 -2700
For Immediate Release
INCLUSIVE DUBUQUE, A NEW COLLOBORATIVE INITATIVE, ANNOUNCED
FOR GREATER DUBUQUE AREA
The Inclusive Dubuque Steering Committee announces the official launch of the
Inclusive Dubuque Initiative on Wednesday, October 2 at 9:30 a.m. to be held in the Port of
Dubuque at the Grand River Center, River Room.
Inclusive Dubuque is a community -wide initiative with the goal of bringing together
people and organizations to participate and contribute in their own ways toward achieving the
following broad goals:
• A Welcoming Community: Create an environment where all people feel
respected, valued, and engaged
• Quality of Life: Where everyone has access to resources and can enjoy a sense of
wellbeing and belonging
• Economic Development: Attract and retain global talent to position the
community for continual economic growth
• Culturally Competent Education System: Partnering to encourage the use of an
intercultural approach to educate by honoring one's own culture and valuing
other cultures, through civility, compassion, and respect
• Open Communication: Build a culture to focus on respecting and understanding
all perspectives, while seeking common ground
• Community Engagement: Openly exchange ideas and opportunities to
contribute to, strengthen and support an inclusive community.
"As community leaders, we are compelled to acknowledge the concerns, set a broad
vision, and invite people to work that vision into their own homes, neighborhoods,
organizations and workplaces," says Mayor Roy Buol. "Being inclusive will contribute to the
strength of our community —but, it can only be achieved by pooling our efforts, with each
person and organization defining what changes they can best contribute. Being an `Inclusive
Dubuque' will involve action...it will involve inviting candid community input from a diversity of
groups and being prepared for what, at times, will be sensitive and emotional. We will learn
about ourselves and our community on a deeper level, and we will realize a responsibility to
represent those whose voices have not been heard. This effort will allow us to reach all areas
of our community, from private business, to local government, to education, to faith
communities, to non- profits, and to neighborhoods /'
Inclusive Dubuque is a partnership between the public and private sectors, including the
City of Dubuque, Clarke University, Community Foundation of Greater Dubuque, Dubuque Area
Labor Management Council, Dubuque Area Congregations United, Diamond Jo Casino, Dubuque
Area Chamber of Commerce, Dubuque Community School District, Greater Dubuque
Development Corporation, Hormel, IBM, John Deere, Loras College, Multicultural Family
Center, Mystique Casino, NAACP, Northeast Iowa Community College, Prudential, Tri -State
Independent Physicians, University of Dubuque and University of Wisconsin – Platteville.
# ##
INCLUSIVE
INCLUSIVE
INCLUSIVE
dubuque
inclusive Dubuque's mission is to establish a community -wide initiative focused on creating a
vibrant and welcoming community to ensure the region's success today and into the future.
www. inclusi vedba. orq