Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Collective Impact 1

No description

Sarah Milnar

on 5 December 2012

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Collective Impact 1

Challenges Success for Every Child, In Every School, Cradle to Career? Collective Impact A Framework for Cross-Sector Collaboration Reasons to Collaborate With hopes, a framework and best practices guide for other cities' collective impact initiatives Nonprofits Businesses Government Collective Action Teachers Parents Students Social Sector Networks Funder Collaboratives Shared Value Private-Public Partnerships Social Partnerships - Initial turbulence
- HUGE social problem
- Sector failure: Isolated impact
does not work!
- Limited resources
- Pressure from funders - Different types of partnerships have
different connotations
- No shared purpose or goals
- No clear definition of roles
- Power imbalance
- Partners only tackle one aspect of a
very large problem
- Sense of competition instead of
- Logistical, bureaucratic, process
- Mismatched missions, cultures,
- Funders think in scale and
replication Collective Impact - Common Agenda
- Shared Measurement Systems
- Mutually Reinforcing Activities
- Continuous Communication
- Backbone Support
Organizations Case Study:
The Strive Partnership - Partnership of more than 300 organizations committed to student achievement from cradle to career in Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky
GOAL 1: Every child will be prepared for school
GOAL 2: Every child will be supported in and out of school
GOAL 3: Every child will succeed academically
GOAL 4: Every student will enroll in college
GOAL 5: Every student graduates and enters a career Outcomes SHARED OBJECTIVE
Use data to inform decision-making to improve kindergarten readiness in Covington

Children, Inc.; Covington Housing Authority; Covington Independent Schools; Every Child Succeeds; 4C for Children; Head Start; Northern Kentucky University; Success by 6

1) By September 2011, 70% of children will enter kindergarten prepared,
as measured by the DIAL-3
2) By December 2011, each center's total average score will increase by 3%,
as measured by the DIAL-3

Percent of children assessed ready for school

Kindergarten entry scores increased from 63% to 67%, exceeding the collaborative's goal (Strive Partnership Report, 2011, p. 13) - Of 34 measures of student
achievement, 81% were trending
in the right direction in 2011

- Increased from 74% in 2010 and
68% in 2009 (Strive Partnership
Report, 2011, p. 2) Collective Impact in Action References But what about Milwaukee? Research Questions - What is collective impact?
- How can practices from the Strive Partnership inform a collective
impact, cradle to career, education initiative in Milwaukee?
- How can this initiative be successfully implemented in Milwaukee?
- How can the creation and implementation of Milwaukee Succeeds
serve as a case study for collective impact education initiatives in other
cities? - Semi-structured interviews
Interview power players from Strive Partnership on best practices for community collaboration
- Content and secondary analyses
Strive Partnership annual reports
State Department of Education reports
Census data on poverty Project Design:
Initial Investigation Project Design: General - Longitudinal, exploratory study
- Expected duration: 10 years
- Field research, direct observation, semi-structured
interviews, content and secondary analyses
- Subjects: Milwaukee Succeeds network listing, news
monitoring for community players, snowball
- End goal: A BOOK! Anderson-Butcher, D., Bean, J., Iachini, A., Lawson, H.A., Plaspohler, P., & Wade-Mdivanian, R. (2010).
Emergent evidence in support of a community collaboration model for school improvement. Children & Schools, 32(3), 160-171.
Babiak, K. & Thibault, L. (2009). Challenges in multiple cross-sector partnerships. Nonprofit and Voluntary
Sector Quarterly, 38(1), 117-143.
Boccacin, L., Bramanti, D., & Rossi, G. (2011). Partnership, social capital and good practices among public, private
and the third sector. Journal of US-China Public Administration, 8(3), 241-260.
Bornstein, D. (2011, March 10). The power of partnerships. The New York Times. Retrieved from
Brisson, D. & Usher, C. L. (2007). The effects of informal neighborhood bonding social capital and neighborhood
context on homeownership for families in poverty. Journal of Urban Affairs, 29(1), 65-75.
Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Middleton Stone, M. (2006, December). The design and implementation of cross-
sector collaborations: Propositions from the literature. Public Administration Review, Special Issue, 44-55.
Hunt, V. H. (2007). Community development corporations and public participation: Lessons from a case study in
the Arkansas Delta. Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 34(3), 9-35.
Kania, J. & Kramer, M. (2011, Winter). Collective impact. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 36-41.
Strive partnership report: Every child, every step of the way, cradle to career. (2011). Strive Partnership. Retrieved
from http://www.strivetogether.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/StrivePartnershipReport_2011.pdf
Striving together report card: Student progress on the roadmap to success. (2010). Strive Partnership. Retrieved
from http://www.strivetogether.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/2010StriveReportCard.pdf Sarah Milnar - PUBS 6025 - December, 2012 Continuum Crowd Funding Themes of Success - Forge initial agreements
- Build leadership, legitimacy, trust
- Manage conflict
- Plan for the future
- Establish structure and governance
- Rely on outcomes and accountability Semi-structured interviews
Milwaukee Succeeds network members (quarterly)
Milwaukee Succeeds executive director (bi-weekly)
Power players from private, public and third sectors (as appropriate)
Three Phases:
1) Identify gaps in education system and role of interviewee
2) Discuss formation/progress of Milwaukee Succeeds
3) Evaluate actual impact of collective impact
PI to explain purpose of study and obtain verbal consent at first interview
Risks/conflicts of interest explained
"Off the record" policy Project Design: Milwaukee Content and secondary analyses (ongoing)
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction reports
Milwaukee Public Schools reports, charter/choice reports
Census data on poverty
Annual reports from partner organizations
Newspaper articles on education and collaboration
Milwaukee Succeeds annual reports Project Design: Milwaukee Direct observation
Conducted in public spaces and events, such as school board meetings
Conducted at regular Milwaukee Succeeds meetings among consenting participants, to which PI has been invited
Study conclusion
Upon saturation of information regarding creation and implementation of Milwaukee Succeeds, or 10 years (whichever comes first)
Records shred three years upon completion of study Project Design: Milwaukee Collective
Impact! Justice System Hospitals
Full transcript