Towards a collective impact initiative for children?

Ced SimpsonChair

Action for Children & Youth AotearoaFebruary 2012

Some problems are simply too complex to solve with any single approach

‘Nothing will work, but everything might’

Clay Shirky

The social sector has 1.4 million nonprofit organizations, most of which work independently, and tens of thousands of government agencies which are notoriously inward-looking. When it comes to solving social problems, society often behaves like a drowning man whose arms and legs thrash about wildly in the water. We expend a great deal of energy, but because we don’t work together efficiently, we don’t necessarily move forward.

David Bornstein (2011)

Is this also true of New Zealand,albeit on a smaller scale?

‘Large-scale social change requires broad cross-sector coordination, yet the social sector remains focused on the isolated intervention of individual organizations.’

John Kania & Mark Kramer (2011)

Most funders, faced with the task of choosing a few grantees from many applicants, try to ascertain which organizations make the greatest contribution toward solving 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 a grantee 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.

John Kania & Mark Kramer (2011)

Problem

Single-provider/single-programme solutions are often insufficient for complex problems

Even a range of good programmes, when not aligned, will not be as effective as a coherent collective effort

Social capital can be lost when ‘willing workers’ are discarded because their ‘underperforming’ programmes are ditched

‘collective impact’ initiativesA disciplined effort to bring together dozens or even hundreds of organizations in a city (or field) to establish a common vision, adopt a shared set of measurable goals and pursue evidence-based actions that reinforce one another’s work and further those goals.

David Bornstein (2011)

Needed?A collective impact

initiative to deliver results

US examples

A US example

Communication of the challenge

Communication of the challenge

Communication of the challenge

Communication of the challenge

Communication of the challenge

The insulated pipeline

Communication of the challenge

approach

Broad partnershipsA common agenda & shared measurement

systems – A common framework: goals, language, measures

Mutually reinforcing actionsContinuous communication

– Website & updates, workshops, webinars Backbone support organizations

5 conditions for success• a common agenda• shared measurement systems• mutually reinforcing activities• continuous communication• backbone support organizations

John Kania & Mark Kramer (2011)

Broad partnerships

Broad partnerships

Ready by 21 National Partnership Mobilization Partners Technical Partners

•Founder & Managing Partner

•Signature Partner

Broad partnerships

A clear strategy

•The Pipeline

•The Building Blocks

•The Readiness Target

The Big Picture

•Ready Communities •Ready Leaders

•Ready Youth

A clear strategy

Ready by 21 Building Blocks •BROADER PARTNERSHIPS •BIGGER GOALS •BETTER DATA •BOLDER STRATEGIES

A clear strategy

A common framework

is used to

A common framework

Describe overall outcomes

Map contribution and align effort

Encourage results-oriented activities by using common measures

Some core activities

Communicating the challenge in simple, compelling, repetitive ways

Communicating the strategy in simple, compelling, repetitive ways

Mapping contributions to agreed outcomes & assessing degree of success using standard tools

The national backbone support organisations for Ready By 21 are

(the ‘managing partner’)a key ‘signature partner’ (United Way),

‘mobilization partners’ and

‘technical partners’

Reasons for success?

• Fit all the success criteria for ‘collective impact initiatives’

• Instigated in civil society, not by a particular government

Proposal:

A collective impact initiative based on

Ready By 21-like methodology +

the human rights framework

Why use the human rights framework?

1. It gives emphasis to the moral/legal imperative

Action for children is not just another priority; we have moral and legal obligations to respect, protect and fulfil the human rights of children

Why use the human rights framework?

2. Provides a broadly-agreed accountability framework for human and societal development, applying to all actors

New Zealand has voluntarily entered into legally-binding commitments to our children.

All agencies, groups and individuals have responsibilities, and the state (and its agents) are accountable through treaty-reporting and other systems

Why use the human rights framework?

3. A common framework for cross-disciplinary/ sector collaboration, anchored in something deeper that professional ethics & policy of the day

Different frameworks used by different professionals, sectors and agencies can be a stumbling block to shared understanding, aligned effort and collaboration, and effectiveness.

Why use the human rights framework?

4. Includes functional principles such as non-discrimination, participation & empowerment, responsibility

Established human rights principles reflect effective working principles

For more information...David Bornstein (2011) ‘The Power of Partnerships’ The New York Times, 10 March 2011. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/10/the-power-of-partnerships/

John Kania, & Mark Kramer. (2011). Collective impact. Stanford Social Innovation Review, (Winter 2011). http://www.ssireview.org/images/articles/2011_WI_Feature_Kania.pdf

http://www.readyby21.org

ced.simpson@article28.org.nz