2013 Annual Gathering: Workshop #6B: Leading for Social Impact

7/27/2019 2013 Annual Gathering: Workshop #6B: Leading for Social Impact

1/47

2013 Catholic Charities USAAnnual Gathering

Leading for Social Impact

Jeff Bialik, Executive DirectorKaren Erickson, Director of Assessment & Learning

September 16, 20131


2/47

Leading for Social Impact September 16, 2013

Introductions

Jeff Bialik

Executive DirectorCatholic Charities CYOSan Francisco, CA

415.972.1287

[email protected]

Karen Erickson

Dir. Assessment and LearningCatholic Charities CYOSan Francisco, CA

415.972.1346

[email protected]

2
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


3/47



Description:o This workshop will challenge participants to consider a

paradigm shift in traditional program centric thinking infavor of a mission centric approach focused on social impact,outcomes and the metrics that measure success. Focusareas include a survey of emerging trends and tools for

connecting the mission to outcomes and impact.

Learning Objectives:o Identify major trends impacting or likely to impact nonprofit

entitieso Understand why nonprofit leaders should focus on social

impact, outcomes and the indicators that measure successo Gain an understanding of a theory of change and logic

model framework and how it might be applied

3


4/47


What is a paradigm shift and why do we need it?

A paradigm is an accepted pattern of behavior orframework for how we act.

There are disruptive changes or forces at workthat are making it necessary for those of us in non-

profit work to do things differently to make apositive impact

Thus the need for a paradigm shift

4


5/47


Making the case for an era of disruptive changes

Pervasive, disruptive transformation in thenonprofit sector

o Sources of stasis: The trends that providecontinuity in our lives

o Sources of change: The trends that disrupt Minor small, evolutionary changes that occur

over a long period of time Major large scale change within the same macro

structure

Sudden and huge - disruptive, paradigm shifters,black swans

5


6/47


Six Disruptive Forces *

Purposeful Experimentation

Information Liberation

Integrating Sciences

Uncompromising Demand for Impact

Branding Causes, Not Organizations

Attracting Investors, Not Donors

* Disruptive Forces: Driving a Human Services Revolution, The Alliance for Children and Families, Baker Tilly

6


7/47


The growth in number of non-profit organizations is

outpacing the growth in donor contribution

Total Giving in the USAIn $Bn

291285304327

295

Number of Non-profits Registered With IRSIn Mn

There are many non-profits that have not

registered with IRS

Source: GivingUSA

* Average annual growth rate

-.4%*+4.7%*

7


8/47


Significant Environmental Trends

Shifting priorities for governmento Health care/Medicareo Pensions/Social Securityo Debt reduction/revenue aversiono Prison/Military Industrial Complex

o Education (K 16)

The global economyo Europeo Chinao Indiao Middle East

8


9/47


Continuing the significant environmental trends

Changing demographicso Aging populationo Increased diversityo Impact of immigration

Shifting cultural normso Increased acceptance of single parent familieso Changing attitudes re: sexual identityo Explosive ubiquity of social mediao 24x7 connectivity

9


10/47


Still even more significant environmental trends

Hybrid structures Social enterprises

Social innovation For profit service providers Social impact bonds *

o Social Impact Bonds Video Human capital bonds

* For more information, please read McKinsey & Company's report, "From Potential to Action," which assesses theopportunity for social impact bonds in the U.S. and is the result of 12 months of research and analysis.http://mckinseyonsociety.com/social-impact-bonds

10
http://youtu.be/E6GrQtCh83whttp://mckinseyonsociety.com/social-impact-bondshttp://mckinseyonsociety.com/social-impact-bondshttp://mckinseyonsociety.com/social-impact-bondshttp://mckinseyonsociety.com/social-impact-bondshttp://mckinseyonsociety.com/social-impact-bondshttp://mckinseyonsociety.com/social-impact-bondshttp://youtu.be/E6GrQtCh83w


11/47


Five (Not-So-Easy) Fixes in response to theseforces and trends

Move toward social impact mission/vision/(the what and the why)

Diversify revenue streams

Build sustainability (adaptability andresiliency) into the organization

Lead and manage to impacts, outcomes andmetrics/key performance indicators (KPIs)

11


12/47


A Picture of Response to Disruptive Forces*

Multi-service organization ofthe past

Multi-service organization ofthe future

Service-centric Client-centric

Holds itself accountable for short-term, service-specific outcomes

Holds itself accountable for long-term, holistic outcomes

Clients receive the single service

that they were referred to

Clients receive multiple services (if

needed), based on a plan that theycreate with staff

Discharges clients after completingone service

Maintains an extended relationshipwith clients to ensure they achieveand maintain long-term outcomes

Program staff are siloed Roles and processes in place todeliver multiple coordinated services

Reports data for compliance withfunders

Uses data to continually improveservice delivery

* Disruptive Forces: Driving a Human Services Revolution, The Alliance for Children and Families, Baker Tilly

12


13/47


Moving toward a culture of continuous improvement

From To

Data collected for externalreports Data for internal improvement

Data as a burden Data as a useful tool

Only the manager knows that Knowledge sharing across staff

Culture of blame and excuses Culture of shared accountability

Functional or program silos Cross-functional teams

That doesnt have anything to dowith my job!

How can I help us reach ourteam goals?

Fear of breaking rules andpatterns

Support for making mistakes andtrying new strategies

13


14/47


*A New Paradigm for Catholic Charities CYO

Move from a program centric bias where:

Solving a problem requires a program solution

Funding drives program

Programs drive mission

Program funders dictate mission

Programs evolve into perpetual silos

until funders change the rules

Move toward a mission centric bias where:

We provide services not programs

What we do is driven by the outcomes we seek

The evolving needs of the client determine the services weprovide over time

Client needs and efficient use of agency resources requiresexternal collaboration, internal integration and/or hand-offto a third party

Meeting the mission does not require that we perform theservice

Resources gravitate to meet the required outcomes.

14


15/47


Why is measuring outcomes important?

To improve the quality of our services

To focus our limited resources on those activitiesthat actually advance our mission and achieveour desired outcomes

To respond to donors/funders seeking to supportmeasurable impacts

To inform our advocacy

15


16/47


Making the Case for Impacts and Outcomes

Differentiation

Return on investment

The rise of the impact measurement meta-mediary

The voices of philanthropic thought leaders

The growth in the number of nonprofits

The ability to demonstrate impacts is important tofunders

Nonprofit stakeholders

The case for quality

16


17/47


Charity Navigator is introducing its thirddimension in charity evaluation

CN 3.0

This is the most important work being

done in the nonprofit sector

Paul Brest, former president of the Williamand Flora Hewlett Foundation

1. Financial Health

2. Accountability and Transparency3. Results Reporting

17
http://vimeo.com/58384927http://vimeo.com/58384927http://vimeo.com/58384927http://www.charitynavigator.org/


18/47


* Bill Gates 2013 Annual Letter

Bill Gates' 2013 Annual Letter Video

Setting clear goals and findingmeasures that will mark progresstoward them can improve the humancondition *

18
http://youtu.be/6YH6Hve510whttp://youtu.be/6YH6Hve510w


19/47


Where are you going?

How w i l l you get there?

What will show that youve arrived?

If you dont know where

you are going, how areyou gonna know when

you get there?

Yogi Berra

19


20/47


Furthermore, this ability to articulate and measureimpact goes beyond attracting funders, but benefitsall key stakeholders

Source: Interviews; Bridgespan: Strongly Led, Under0managed; Booz & Company analysis

Clients/

Beneficiaries

Funders

Board andManagement

Staff

Benefit to Stakeholders Quotes

Staff are clear about the strategic priorities of theorganization and how their program fits into theoverall missiono Create a tunnel window to channel staffs

creativity and effort on initiatives driving towardsthe mission

Our people are so focused on wh at i t is

that were trying to accomplish from a social

impact perspectiveits about getting to the

goals

- CEO, Teach for America

This becomes a strategic decis ion making

tool, to identify priorities, what to do and what

notto do

- President Emeritus, Great Valley Center

Moving towards real impact means giv ing a

hand up and not just a hand out

- Board Member, Philanthropedia

Government might be satisfied with metric,

for now, butfoundat ions typical ly look for

demonstrat ion of impactbefore funding

- Consultant to Non-profits

Board and management team are aligned andhave clarity in the goals they want to holdthemselves accountable for and how they can goabout to achieve those goals

Beneficiaries receive prevention, intervention andstabilization measures that are tightly linked

towards a sustainable result over the long termo Not just getting temporary piece meal

assistance

Funders need better quality information to decidewhich effective organizations to fundo Foundations (e.g., David and Lucile Packard

Foundation) and sophisticated individual donorstypically want to see impact achieved

20


21/47


Leap of Reason a Basic Premise

Most nonprofits dont know whether or not they are delivering on theirpromises

Managing to outcomes is o Using information to support decision makingo About culture and people not numberso Primarily about helping nonprofits improveo A key to maximizing collective impacto All too rare

We must focus on why and what to measure not just how to measure The nonprofit must be the driver (and the beneficiary) of the outcomes-

assessment process Reasonableness and common sense must guide the outcomes-

assessment processo Hear the constituent voiceo

Assess to learn and doo Apply rigor with reasono Be practicalo Create a learning culture

21


22/47


Now that we know the WHY, lets move on to the HOW

Theories of Change

Logic Models

Data Collection and Reporting

22


23/47


EXERCISE

23


24/47


Theory of Change

I th ink you sh ould

be more expl ic it

here in Step Two.

A common problem is that

activities and strategies oftendo not lead to the desiredoutcomes.

Check your if-then statementsand ensure that they make

sense and lead to the outcomesyou want to achieve.

A logic model makes theconnections EXPLICIT.

24


25/47


Some Definitions

Theory of Change how we effect changeo The empirical basis for believing we can make a differenceo Why we expect we can achieve success

Logic Model what we do and howo The related and interconnected elements of a program, organization or activity that

rationally links objectives, activities and outcomes/impacts

Inputs what resources are committedo Money, time, staff, facilities, methodologies, etc.

Outputs what we measureo Volume of a programs activities, e.g. numbers of clients served, units of service, etc.

Outcomes what we wish to achieveo Meaningful changes that result from the actions that we takeo Changes in knowledge, skills, attitudes, behaviors, condition, or status

Indicators what we use to stay on courseo Specific, observable and measurable demonstration of whether the desired change occurred

Impact what we aim to effecto The long term benefit of our activities beyond the individual services recipient

25


26/47


In the Theory of Change, identifying intended impact andthe belief of why it will happen help crystalize the strategy

Description: Intended Impact

What does success look like?

Description: Theory of Change

Why do we expect we can achieve success?

Explains the underlying beliefs of how theorganizations intended impact will actually happenIdentify the cause-and-effect logic by whichorganizational and financial resources will beconverted into the desired social results

Considers beyond taking account of its ownresources, but also partnership and involvement of

others where necessary Ensures that all stakeholders understand why

strategic decisions are made as they are

Helps to unearth assumptions about programs andservices that can be tested and revised as necessary

Is broad enough to reflect the organizations mission

but focused enough to be actionable

Explains what the organization is trying to achieveand will hold itself accountable for within somemanageable period of time

Identifies both the benefits the organization seeks toprovide and the beneficiaries of those activities

Draws on the following to define the who, what,where, and how

o Organizational values

Target population (e.g., homeless youth, 12-24)

Target outcomes (e.g., self sufficiency)

Geography (e.g., San Francisco)

Approach (e.g., continuum of care)

o Data

Needs of beneficiaries Availability of services by other organizations

o Making tough choices and tradeoffs

Reallocation of resources for greatest impact

Clear on what to do and what not to do

Source: Zeroing in on Impact, Stanford Social Innovation Review, Sept 2004; Delivering on the Promise of Nonprofits, Harvard Business Review; Booz & Companyanalysis

Both discu ssions are iterat ive and there

mig ht be several opt ions to achieve the same

resultsthere is no one right answer

26


27/47


Theory of Change

Theory of change example University of Arizona

University of Arizona Theory of Change Video

27
http://youtu.be/YJSMa7AA3cUhttp://youtu.be/YJSMa7AA3cU


28/47


To get started, a set of key questions need to beasked and answered . . .

Some Questions to Clarify Intended

Impact

Some Questions to Clarify Theory of

Change What is the cause-and-effect logic that gets us

from our resources (people and funds) toimpact?

Where are the gaps or leaps of faith in this logicchain?

What are the most important elements of ourprograms content and structure?

What assumptions led us to choose theseparticular program elements?

Are there other ways in which we could achievethe desired outcomes?

What is the minimum duration our beneficiariesneed to be engaged to achieve theseoutcomes?

What else do our beneficiaries need to achievethese outcomes?

Who are our beneficiaries?

What benefits do our programs create?

Where is our geographic focus?

How do we define success?

What do we hold ourselves accountable for?

What wont we do?

What would make us obsolete?

Source: Zeroing in on Impact, Stanford Social Innovation Review,Sept 2004; Booz & Company analysis

28


29/47


...which will then help the organization develop anactionable intended impact and a coherent theory ofchange

Characteristics of an ActionableIntended Impact

Characteristics of a Coherent Theory ofChange

Identifies the most important needs of yourchosen beneficiaries

Articulates the most important leverage

points to meet those needs

Links your solutions to your beneficiaries

needs through a chain of cause-and-effectrelationships

Is empirically plausible if not proven

Links in a compelling way to your missionand vision for social change

Specifies the outcomes you seek to createfor your beneficiaries

Affords sufficient control over outcomes toenable real accountability

Is realistic and achievable, given yourcapabilities

Is measurable on an accurate, timely basis

Provides an effective platform for makingstrategic tradeoffs, especially those relatedto program focus and resource allocationdecisions Note: Theories of change have been largely used as a tool for evaluation. It is difficult to pinpoint the earliest use of the term "Theory of

Change," but a hint at its origins can be found in the evaluation community among the work of notable methodologists, such as HueyChen, Peter Rossi, Michael Quinn Patton, and Carol WeisSource: ActKnowledge, Theory of Change Community; Zeroing in on Impact, Stanford Social Innovation Review, Sept 2004; Booz &Company analysis

29


30/47


Mission Centric/Outcome Thinking

Figure out exactly what youre trying to

accomplisho Can you define success clearly and succinctly?

Pick the right indicator

o How do you know that you have achieved success?

Get good quality numbers

o Can you confirm that you are actually on track toachieving success?

Show that it was you

o How do you know it was you?

30


31/47


Catholic Charities CYO Canal Family Support Kids Club

Clarifying our Intended Impactso Who, what, where?

o How do we define success?

o What are we accountable for?

o What wont we do?

o What would make us obsolete?

Clarifying our Theory of Changeo What is the cause and effect logic that gets us to impact?

o Where are the gaps or leaps of faith in this logic chain?

o What are the most important elements?

o What assumptions have we made?

o Could we do this some other way?

o What is the minimum duration?

o What else do our clients need?

31


32/47


September 16, 2013

Catholic Charities CYO Canal Family Support Kids Club

Problem Statement:

o Children living in the Canal District of San Rafael, CA, on average

perform at significantly below grade level in reading and writing asmeasured by test scores. This learning gap is caused in part byliving in households where at least one member speaks English as aSecond Language, one or more parents has no more than a highschool education and parents are unaware of and/or unable toaccess school and community resources to benefit the child and

family. As a result of this gap, these children are less likely to makesatisfactory academic progress, more likely to drop out of highschool, and less likely to achieve higher education, leading to ahigher probability of generational poverty.

Program Outcomes and Impacts:

o Our outcomes are to increase satisfactory academic progress;increase access to resources; increase high school graduation; andincrease achievement of higher education leading to our impacts ofa reduction of educational achievement gap in Marin and anempowered and self-sufficient community.

32


33/47


September 16, 2013

The Logic Model

Logic Model Video

33
http://youtu.be/OZ2oBVCDU9Ihttp://youtu.be/OZ2oBVCDU9I


34/47


September 16, 2013

Logic model in evaluation

EVALUATION: check and verify

What do you want to know? How will you know it?

34


35/47


Going through the logic model checklist will helpensure that the causal relationship between theactivities and outcomes is robust

Have you included all the major activities needed to implement yourproject and achieve expected outcomes and impact?

Does your organization have adequate resources to implement theactivities and achieve the desired outcomes and impact?

Have you expressed your outcomes and impact in terms of change?Have you identified who/what will experience that change, and overwhat time period?

Do activities, outputs, outcomes and impact relate to each otherlogically (the if-then relationship)?

Does your logic model clearly identify the scope of your projectsinfluence?

Have you identified the objectives and underlying assumptionsabout why your project exists?

Have you considered external forces that may influence yourprojects success?

Source: FSG Social Impact; Booz & Company analysis

Logic Model Checklist

35


36/47


Logic Model Example: Step Up!

Input/

ResourcesActivities/ Processes Short-term Outputs

Intermediate-term

OutcomesLong-term Impact

Staff

Volunteers Money Equipment Facilities Training

Activities to Nurture Career Awareness and

Exploration Self-assessment of personal interests/ goals Guest speakers from different professions Job shadowing

Activities for Developing Skills for Finding

Employment

Application Writing Resume Writing Job Searching Interviewing

Activities for Developing Job Skills

Service-learning experiences Activities to develop soft skills for work such as

communication, teamwork, time management

Activities for Academic Preparation

Visits to universities, colleges, training centers Research on school programs related to

interests

Learning about scholarships/ bursaries Registering for school and courses

Activities Providing Extended

Support

Safe, respectful and friendly atmosphere One-to-one mentoring

Number of youth

attending program Activities youth took

part in Levels of attendance Goal completion rates Number of volunteers

and their hours Hours of community

service Etc.

Increased:

Awareness ofpersonal interests andskills

Awareness of careers Understanding of the

world or work Skills for finding work Social skills for

working with others Work skills Positive attitudes

towards school Knowledge of

education and trainingprograms

Self-discipline Job experience Goal setting Increased education

experience

Increased likelihood of:

High Schoolgraduation

Employment Post-Secondary

Studies Life-Long Learning Personal Success

Source: Program Outcome Evaluations; United Way of Winnipeg; Booz & Company analysis

36


37/47


The Urban Institute and the Center for What Workshave developed a set of common outcomes andmeasures for non-profits

Objectiveo Provide guidance on what & how to

measure

o Standardize impact/outcomemeasures for benchmarking andperformance comparison

Outcomes and measures have been

defined for 14 categories as areference point

o Adult Education

o Advocacy

o Affordable Housing

o Assisted Living

o Business Assistance

o Community Organizations

o Emergency Shelter

o Employment Training

o Health Risk Reeducation

o Performing Arts

o Prison Re-entry

o Transitional Housing

o Youth Mentoring

o Youth Tutoring

Source: Building a Common Outcome Framework to Measure Nonprofit Performance (2006), The Urban Institute,The Center for What Works; Booz & Company analysis

37


38/47


Common Outcome: Youth TutoringLong-Term ImpactIntermediate OutcomeOutput

Note: Adapted from The Common Outcome Framework; organizations can modify and move the measures along the time continuum (e.g., from intermediate outcometo long-term impact) depending on what they feel is reasonable to achieve within their resources and meansSource: The Urban Institute; The Center for What Works; Booz & Company analysis

38


39/47


Theory of Change: If we provide targeted reading intervention toelementary-aged English Language Learners then they willreach and maintain grade level reading proficiency.

Situation/ProblemStatement

Inputs Outputs Short termOutcomes

IntermediateOutcomes

Long Term Outcomes Benefits/Impact

Elementary school

students from the

Canal District are

reading below

grade level which

causes them to be

significantly less

prepared to

advance in their

education.

Facilities- Location atPickleweed ParkCommunity Centerfacilities

Staff- ProgramAdministrators (2)- After School Group

Leaders (6)

Supplies/OtherResources- Accelerated ReaderSoftware- CommunityPartnerships- Alignment withSan Rafael schools- Safe and positiveculture- Nutritious Snacks

Participants-# of elementary-aged English-Language Learners(grades 1-5)-# of families

Activities- # of hours ofreading practice and

assessment provideddaily- # of meetings withteachers, familyadvocates and otherschool personnel /one-on-one schoolsupport meetingswith families- Physical Activity- Family Support- ExperientialEnrichment

1. 1st and 2nd gradestudents reach andmaintain grade levelreading proficiency

2. 3rd, 4th and 5thgrade students reachand maintain gradelevel readingproficiency

3. 1st, 2nd, and 3rdgrade students reachand maintain gradelevel readingproficiency

4. 4th and 5th gradestudents reach andmaintain grade levelreading proficiency

5. 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4thgrade students reachand maintain gradelevel readingproficiency

6. 5th grade studentsreach and maintaingrade level readingproficiency

All Marin Countystudents are readingat or above gradeleveland are successfullytransitioned tomiddle school.

All Marin Countystudents stay reading

at or above gradelevel and graduatefrom high school.

All Marin Countystudents stay readingat or above gradelevel and graduatefrom college.

Indicators:1. 80% of 1st and2nd graders arereading at orabove Benchmarklevel on the StarEarly Literacy test(at least 40Percentile Rank)

2. 60% of 3rd, 4thand 5th gradersare reading at orabove theBenchmark levelon the StarReading test (atleast 40 PR)

Indicators:3. 80% of 1st, 2nd and3rd graders arereading at or aboveBenchmark level onthe Star Early Literacytest (at least 40Percentile Rank)

4. 60% of 4th and 5thgraders are reading ator above theBenchmark level onthe Star Reading test(at least 40 PR)

Indicators:5. 80% of 1st, 2nd, 3rdand 4th graders arereading at or aboveBenchmark level onthe Star Early Literacytest (at least 40Percentile Rank)

6. 60% of 5th gradersare reading at orabove the Benchmarklevel on the StarReading test (at least40 PR)

Canal Family Sup po rt: 3-13-2013

39


40/47


Data Collection and Reporting

Creating a Data Collection Plan that staff agree on

and own

Working with each program or service to make surethat they have realistic, relevant and practical toolswith which to collect data

Having a database in which to input and store data

Creating a reporting template or dashboard forshowing off the results of the programs efforts

40


41/47


Data Collection Plan

Program Name and Time Period Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 NOTES

Outputs YTD

Outcome Indicators Target Results

Short Term Outcomes:

Intermediate Outcomes:

Long Term Outcomes:

41


42/47


Sample Report

Canal Kids Club Outcomes and Outputs Data for Fiscal Year 2013

July 1, 2012 - June 30, 2013

Outputs

Participants Activities

Number of kids (1-5)

Number of hours of after school

programming

Number of parent / families Number of parent education events

Short Term Outcomes (September) Intermediate Outcomes (Mid-Year)1. Establish baselines on reading tests 2. Kids improve reading level

Average score in first 30 days of school year Average score mid-year

Reading Reading

Long-term Outcomes (April)

3. Kids improve reading levels

Average score in April

Reading

42


43/47


September 16, 2013

Summary of Key Learning

There are both internal and external factors thatmotivate us to measure impacts

o Improve quality

o Focus resources

o Attract/retain funding

To measure impact we must translate our missioninto an end goal, explain why and how and thenmeasure performance

Theory of Change/Logic Model are good tools to

use

Delivering real impact takes time

43


44/47


September 16, 2013

Summary of Key Learning (continued)

Transition to outcome-centric requires a

paradigm shifto Requires changes in culture, org structure,

systems

o Changes must be both top-down and bottom-up

Measuring outputs is different from measuringoutcomes

May require narrowing the focus of services andindividual staff performance expectations

Important to socialize the concept and the language

44


45/47


Challenges & Achievements

Major Challenges

o Gaining support from board, agency leaders and program staff

o Getting comfortable with the tools and language

o Battling against the inertia and moving the culture (internaland external) inch by inch

o Anticipating change in a changing environment

o Finding good indicators for each outcome

Select Achievements

o Engaging the discussion with agency leadership, program staffand the board

o Applying the Theory of Change/Logic Model tools to eachunique program in a multi-program agency

o Identifying significant resources that are available to supportthis journey (see links to resources)

o Having good data to give to funders and community partners

45


46/47


September 16, 2013

Links to resources best practices

http://www.performwell.org/ http://dekhconsulting.com/

http://www.vppartners.org/leapofreason/overview http://www.fsg.org/ http://www.trueimpact.com/ http://www.whatworks.org/ http://www.urban.org/center/cnp/projects/outcomeindicators.cfm http://www.mckinsey.com/client_service/social_sector

http://www.jimcollins.com/ http://www.missionbased.com/ http://www.bridgespan.org/Home.aspx http://www.ssireview.org/ http://www.socialimpactexchange.org/exchange/knowledge-

center/overview

http://www.aecf.org/KnowledgeCenter.aspx http://www.uwex.edy/ces/pdande www.innonet.org http://www.performwell.org/ http://outcomestoolbox.com/

46
http://www.performwell.org/http://dekhconsulting.com/http://www.vppartners.org/leapofreason/overviewhttp://www.fsg.org/http://www.trueimpact.com/http://www.whatworks.org/http://www.urban.org/center/cnp/projects/outcomeindicators.cfmhttp://www.mckinsey.com/client_service/social_sectorhttp://www.jimcollins.com/http://www.missionbased.com/http://www.bridgespan.org/Home.aspxhttp://www.ssireview.org/http://www.socialimpactexchange.org/exchange/knowledge-center/overviewhttp://www.socialimpactexchange.org/exchange/knowledge-center/overviewhttp://www.aecf.org/KnowledgeCenter.aspxhttp://www.uwex.edy/ces/pdandehttp://www.innonet.org/http://www.performwell.org/http://outcomestoolbox.com/http://outcomestoolbox.com/http://outcomestoolbox.com/http://www.performwell.org/http://www.innonet.org/http://www.uwex.edy/ces/pdandehttp://www.uwex.edy/ces/pdandehttp://www.aecf.org/KnowledgeCenter.aspxhttp://www.aecf.org/KnowledgeCenter.aspxhttp://www.socialimpactexchange.org/exchange/knowledge-center/overviewhttp://www.socialimpactexchange.org/exchange/knowledge-center/overviewhttp://www.socialimpactexchange.org/exchange/knowledge-center/overviewhttp://www.socialimpactexchange.org/exchange/knowledge-center/overviewhttp://www.ssireview.org/http://www.ssireview.org/http://www.bridgespan.org/Home.aspxhttp://www.bridgespan.org/Home.aspxhttp://www.missionbased.com/http://www.missionbased.com/http://www.jimcollins.com/http://www.jimcollins.com/http://www.mckinsey.com/client_service/social_sectorhttp://www.mckinsey.com/client_service/social_sectorhttp://www.urban.org/center/cnp/projects/outcomeindicators.cfmhttp://www.urban.org/center/cnp/projects/outcomeindicators.cfmhttp://www.whatworks.org/http://www.whatworks.org/http://www.trueimpact.com/http://www.trueimpact.com/http://www.fsg.org/http://www.fsg.org/http://www.vppartners.org/leapofreason/overviewhttp://www.vppartners.org/leapofreason/overviewhttp://dekhconsulting.com/http://dekhconsulting.com/http://www.performwell.org/http://www.performwell.org/


47/47


September 16, 2013

Contact info:

Jeff [email protected]

415.972.1287

Karen [email protected]

415.972.1346
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

Documents

2013 Annual Gathering: Workshop #6B: Leading for Social Impact