The Nuts & Bolts of
Collective Impact
Jennifer Splansky Juster
Director, Collective Impact Forum, FSG
Merita Irby
Chief Operating Office, the Forum for Youth Investment
Kelli Parmley
Executive Director, Bridging RVA
April 22, 2014
#Rb21NM
Starting with the end in mind . . .
Getting specific about community context
The small gear makes a big difference
#Rb21NM
FSG.ORG
Partners
Co-Catalysts
#Rb21NM
FSG.ORG
Goals of the Collective Impact Forum: To create the knowledge, networks and
tools that accelerate the adoption and increase the rigor of collective impact
Activities
•
Develop a field-wide digital forum to create and disseminate effective knowledge, tools and practices
that support collective impact
•
Support communities of practice, convenings and other events across the country that enable
practitioners and funders of collective impact to increase their effectiveness
Co-Catalysts
#Rb21NM
Agenda
Collective Impact Overview
Collective Impact Structures
Collective Impact Timing and Sequence
#Rb21NM
FSG.ORG
There Are Several Types of Problems
Simple
Complicated
Complex
Baking a Cake
Sending a Rocket to the
Moon
Raising a Child
Right “recipe” essential
Gives same results every time
“Formulas” needed
Experience built over time and can
be repeated with success
No “right” recipes or protocols
Outside factors influence
Experience helps, but doesn’t
guarantees success
The social sector traditionally treats problems as
simple or complicated
#Rb21NM
Source: Adapted from “Getting to Maybe”
Traditional Approaches Are Not Solving
Our Most Complex Social Problems
FSG.ORG
• Funders select individual grantees
• Organizations work separately
compete
and
• Corporate and government sectors are often
disconnected from foundations and
nonprofits
• Evaluation attempts to isolate a particular
organization’s impact
• Large scale change is assumed to depend
on scaling organizations
#Rb21NM
Isolated Impact
Imagine a Different Approach –
Multiple Players Working Together to
Solve Complex Issues
Collective Impact
FSG.ORG
• Understand that social problems – and
their solutions – arise from interaction
of many organizations within larger
system
• Cross-sector alignment with
government, nonprofit, philanthropic
and corporate sectors as partners
• Organizations actively coordinating
their action and sharing lessons
learned
• All working toward the same goal and
measuring the same things
#Rb21NM
FSG.ORG
Collective Impact is the commitment of a
group of important actors from different
sectors to a common agenda for solving a
specific social problem.
#Rb21NM
Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012
Five Conditions for Collective Impact
Common Agenda
Shared
Measurement
Mutually Reinforcing
Activities
Continuous
Communication
Backbone Support
#Rb21NM
FSG.ORG
Differences between
Collective Impact and Collaboration
Collaboration
Collective Impact
Convene around specific
programs / initiatives
Work together over the long
term to move outcomes
Addition to what you do
Is what you do
Prove
Advocate for ideas
Learn and improve
Advocate for what works
Collective impact initiatives also are nearly always cross-sector, whereas
collaborations often occur within a single sector
#Rb21NM Source: Jeff Edmondson, Strive
FSG.ORG
PAIR & SHARE:
Think about initiatives in your community
Can you think of one thing that fizzled and
one thing that sailed?
What made the difference . . .
#Rb21NM
Agenda
Collective Impact Overview
Collective Impact Structures
Collective Impact Timelines & Key Steps
#Rb21NM
A Collective Impact Approach can be taken by
groups operating at different levels in a
community
Where is your work?
Overarching Leadership
Ready by 21 Leadership Council * P-20 Council Strive
Network * Children’s Cabinet * WIB
Population Focused
Success By 6 * Thriving Seniors
Provider Network
Out-of-school Time (OST) Network
Issue Coalition
Substance Abuse Coalition * Teen Pregnancy
Intimate Partner Violence * Child Abuse & Neglect
Neighborhood
Promise Neighborhoods * Neighborhood Association
#Rb21NM
Task
Force on
Violence
Perinatal
Community
Consortium
Counselor’s
Consortium
Rochester
Children’s
Collab.
Early
Childhood
Develop I.
Domestic
Violence
Consortium
Transitions
Collab.
Service
Delivery
Community
Profile
SDFSCA
Planning
Committees
Best
Practice
Mentoring
Round
Table
Interagency
Council
Cross Systems
Change
Reclaiming
Youth
Rochester‘s
Child
Student
Asst. Prof.
Greater Roch.
Area
Youth
2000
Continuous
Improvement
Monroe
Cty. Sch
& Comm.
Health Ed.
Network
OASAS
Prevention
Initiative
Homeless
Services
Network
HW &
Tutoring
Round
Table
Student
Assistance
Prof.
COLLABORATIONS
PCIC
CHANGE
Runaway &
Homeless
Youth Ser
Provider
Diversion
Collaborative
#Rb21NM
MCTP
Juvenile
Justice
Council
RAEYC
YRBS
Group
RECAP
Health
Action
Homeless
Continuum
of care
Impl. Team
Evaluation
Rochester
Effectiveness
Partnership
CCSI
TIER II
Community
Mobilization
Positive
Outcomes for
Youth &
Families
SACSI
Domestic
Violence
Partnership
Not Me
Not Now
City
Violence
Initiative
Roch.
Enterprise
Community
Zone P.
Do Right by
Kids campaign
Comm.
Asset
Network
NBN
N.E.T.
Advocacy
America’s
Promise
Preventive
Services
Coalition
Youth
Services
Quality C.
Children &
Family Serv.
Subcomm.
CASAS
Providers
Reg. 2
Preventive
Provid.N
Community
Service
Board
School
Health
Leadership
Team
United
Neighborhood
Centers Of
Greater Roch.
Perinatal
Substance
Abuse
Coalition
Adult
Services
Subcomm.
Board
of
Health
Cascading Levels of Collaboration
Cascading Levels of Collaboration
& A Range of Possible Roles
FSG.ORG
Common Agenda
ACCOUNTABILITY
Governance,
PARTNER
Vision
and Strategy
Steering
Committee
Shared Measures
DATA PARTNER
BACKBONE
Working Groups
Backbone
core team
Partners
WORKING GROUP LEAD OR
Action Planning
MEMBER
Execution
COLLABORATIVE PARTNERS
Community Members
COMMUNICATIONS
Public Will&
ENGAGEMENT
PARTNER
#Rb21NM
Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews
Building Civic Infrastructure:
The Role and Function of a
Backbone Entity
Context
• 28 Member Board (K-12, Higher
Education, Business, Government,
Philanthropic/Civic)
• Rotating Education and Business
Chairs
• 9 jurisdictions (subset of Richmond
MSA)
– 8 School Districts
• 5 College and University Partners
• 2 critical backbone positions funded
positions supported by Virginia
Commonwealth University
WHY A
BACKBONE?
We believe that education is
the most important engine of
individual opportunity and
economic growth in our region.
Is this Our Civic Infrastructure?
Is our engine supporting
individual opportunity for
everyone?
Regional Educational Attainment
Charles City County Chesterfield County
Population 4,153
20%
Population 173,965
Goochland County
Population 12,660
9%
19%
Population 53,799
5%
13%
22%
46%
44%
26%
46%
26%
19%
42%
23%
Henrico County
New Kent County
Population 169,936
Population 10,897
9%
49%
Hanover County
Powhatan County
Population 16,589
11%
21%
34%
Population 108,098
17%
35%
24%
City of Richmond
16%
41%
31%
21%
23%
17%
22%
28%
22%
19%
Source: U.S. Census, American Community Survey 2012, 5-Year Estimates . Populations given are for Working Age adults, ages 25-64
Hispanic Educational Attainment by Locality
100%
2%
8%
13%
16%
90%
27%
29%
80%
42%
43%
45%
28%
70%
31%
6%
62%
60%
33%
50%
93%
21%
21%
40%
21%
29%
30%
42%
56%
17%
18%
18%
20%
17%
37%
10%
9%
24%
18%
19%
17%
11%
11%
Powhatan
County
Richmond City
17%
0%
Charles City
County
Chesterfield
County
Goochland
County
Hanover County Henrico County
Bachelor's degree or higher
High school graduate, GED, or alternative
Source: U.S. Census, American Community Survey 2012, 5-Year Estimates.
New Kent
County
Some college or associate's degree
Less than high school diploma
Bridging
Richmond
Region
Black or African American
Educational Attainment by Locality
100%
10%
17%
90%
80%
12%
13%
18%
26%
33%
42%
44%
25%
30%
70%
33%
30%
41%
60%
50%
33%
39%
36%
32%
40%
25%
35%
35%
32%
22%
30%
29%
20%
19%
15%
29%
25%
10%
23%
19%
23%
20%
12%
9%
9%
5%
0%
Charles City
County
Chesterfield
County
Goochland
County
Hanover County Henrico County
Bachelor's degree or higher
High school graduate, GED, or alternative
New Kent
County
Powhatan
County
Some college or associate's degree
Less than high school diploma
Richmond City
Bridging
Richmond
Region
Is our engine positioned to
support economic
competitiveness and growth?
Projected Degree Gap (2030) Based on Industry Mix :
27,106 Degrees
350,000
Current (45% attainment)
326,724
Projected Industry Demand (49%)
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
Sources: Weldon Cooper Center; U.S. Census, American Community Survey, 2012; Chmura’ JobsEQ®; BLS Employment Projections. Projections
assume that future degree requirements for occupations remain close to current requirements-- higher education requirements for occupations, to
replace experience, for example, would create a larger gap.
27,106
Degrees
By 2030
450,000
NEED: 55% of Population
with at least an Associate’s Degree by 2030
55% Attainment
400,000
Current Rate (45%)
65,405 Degrees
Needed
350,000
65,405
Degrees
Needed
300,000
250,000
200,000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
(46%)
(48%)
(52%)
Source: Weldon Cooper Center; U.S. Census, American Community Survey, 2012, Chmura Economics & Analytics
(55%)
How: Six Functions of a
Backbone
FSG.ORG
1. Facilitate a shared agenda
2. Support the alignment and coordination of
activities
3. Establish shared measurement practices
4. Build public will to take action
5. Advance policy solutions and changes
6. Mobilize resources both human and financial
across public and private sectors in support of the
agenda
Build Civic Infrastructure
Local Data
(Community and
focused local trends)
The formal and informal
processes and networks
through which
communities make
decisions and attempt to
solve problems.
National
Research
Community
Voice
(Summarize
and translate)
(Lived expertise)
Alignment
Focusing – agree upon a common result and
action based on shared metrics and evidence
Mobilizing – Coordinate the efforts and capitalize
on the unique strengths of diverse organizations to
help people along the path to college- and careerreadiness
Improving – Collect and analyze data and
evidence to improve outcomes
1. Common
Agenda;
6. Mobilize
Resources
Focusing
Mobilizing
Improving
2. Align and
Coordinate
3. Shared Measurement
4.. Build
Public Will;
Community
Voice
Local Data
Research
--Develop
Community and
Intermediate
Indicators
--Research to
support indicator
selection
--Regional Data
Advisory
Committee
--Identify Priorities
--Deeper
analysis of local
data to support
strategy
development
--Identify
effective,
scalable
strategies and
performance
measures
--Focus groups of
practitioners and
community
members
--Develop
capacity to share
data
--Improve
human capacity
to do analysis
--Best practice in
continuous
improvement and
evaluation
--Leadership
engagement for
advocacy
--Focus groups
and quality
surveys
5.. Policy
Solutions/
Changes
Results
Regional Goals
and Indicators
Two Regional
Action Networks
Identify Human
Capital Gaps
for Analysis
and Results
Facilitation
Action Networks
a group of diverse and
committed individuals all
focused on one specific
community indicator to
promote and scale what is
working
Local Data
(Community and
focused local trends)
National
Research
(Summarize
and
translate)
Community
Voice
Two Components:
I.
Broad Regional
Strategies
I.
Focused Pilot
(Lived expertise)
Cascading Levels of Collaboration
Cascading Levels of Collaboration
& A Range of Possible Roles
Common Agenda
Steering
Committee
Shared Measures
Governance,
Vision and Strategy
Working Groups
Action Planning
Backbone
Partners
Execution
Community Members
Public Will
#Rb21NM
Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews
Collective Impact Infrastructure:
Structuring for Intentionality and Uncertainty
FSG.ORG
Common Agenda and Shared Metrics
strategic guidance
and support
partner-driven
action
Ecosystem of
Community Partners
Steering
Committee
Work
Group
Chair
Backbone
Support
(organizations
that collectively
play backbone
function)
= community
partner (e.g.,
nonprofit, funder,
business, public
agency, resident)
Chair
Chair
Work
Group
Chair
Chair
Chair
Work
Group
Chair
Chair
Work
Group
#Rb21NM
* Adapted from Listening to the Stars: The Constellation Model of Collaborative Social Change, by Tonya Surman and Mark Surman, 2008.
Many Types of Organizations Can
Serve as Backbones
Types of Backbones
Funders
New Nonprofit
Existing Nonprofit
Government Agency or School District
Shared Across Multiple Organizations
“Backbone for backbones”
#Rb21NM
Examples
FSG.ORG
Backbone Organizations Engage in Six
Important Activities
6 Activities of Backbone Organizations
1. Guide vision and strategy
2. Support aligned activities
3. Establish shared measurement
4. Build public will
5. Advance policy
6. Mobilize funding
#Rb21NM
FSG.ORG
Backbone Organization
Backbone Support Organizations:
Diagnostic
Do you have the Skills?
6 Activities of Backbone Organizations
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Guide vision and strategy
Support aligned activities
Establish shared measurement
Build public will
Advance policy
Mobilize funding
Do you have the bandwidth?
1.
2.
3.
4.
Dedicated Staff (with skills)
Organizational buy-in
Sustainability potential
Start-up flexibility – willingness to serve in
interim or time limited role
Is it a Fit?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
#Rb21NM
Partnership’s vision matches your vision
Geographic Scope – similar to Partnership
Geographic Levels – neighborhood, city/county state
Leadership Levels – respected by grasstops and
grassroots
Credibility – are you seen as the natural leader in this
space?
Backbone Diagnostic
Are there key partners
in your community
playing backbone
functions? Who is
doing what? How do
you relate?
Individually:
Who would you list?
Pair:
How could you use a
backbone diagnostic?
#Rb21NM
Agenda
Collective Impact Overview
Collective Impact Structures
Collective Impact Timing & Sequence
#Rb21NM
CI Efforts Tend to Transpire Over
Four Phases
Phase I
Assess Readiness,
Facilitate Dialogue
FSG.ORG
Phase II
Initiate Action
Phase III
Organize for
Impact
Phase IV
Sustain Action
and Impact
Identify champions
and form crosssector group
Create infrastructure
(backbone and
processes)
Facilitate and refine
Strategic
Planning
Hold dialogue about
issue, community
context, and available
resources
Map the landscape
and use data to
make case
Create common
agenda (common
goals and strategy)
Support
implementation
(alignment to goal
and strategies)
Community
Involvement
Facilitate community
outreach specific to
goal
Facilitate community
outreach
Engage community
and build public will
Continue
engagement and
conduct advocacy
Determine if there is
Analyze baseline
Evaluation
consensus/urgency to data to ID key issues
And
move forward
and gaps
Improvement
Establish shared
metrics (indicators,
measurement, and
approach)
Collect, track, and
report progress
(process to learn and
improve)
Components for
Success
Governance Convene community
and
stakeholders
Infrastructure
#Rb21NM
FSG.ORG
Timing for Each Phase Varies by Initiative
Initiative
Phase II
Initiate Action
Phase III
Organize for Impact
Phase IV
III
Sustain Action & Impact
May 2010 – Dec 2010
(7 months)
Jan 2011 – Dec 2011
(12 months)
Jan 2012 
Sept 2010 – Feb 2011
(5 months)
Feb 2011 – Nov 2011
(9 months)
Nov 2011 
May 2011-Oct 2011
(5 months)
Nov 2011 – May 2012
(7 months)
June 2012 
The implementation time taken for collective impact efforts is
determined by the local context of each initiative
#Rb21NM
Source: FSG Interviews and Analysis
One Framework:
“Start Up” to “Systems Change”
Systems Change
Sustaining (July 2014)
Emerging (January 2014)
Exploring (July 2009 – August 2013)
Launching a Collective Impact Initiative Has Three
Prerequisites
Influential Champion
• Commands respect and engages cross-sector leaders
• Focused on solving problem but allows participants to figure
out answers for themselves
!
•
•
•
•
Urgency for Change
Critical problem in the community
Frustration with existing approaches
Multiple actors calling for change
Engaged funders and policy makers
Financial Resources
• Committed funding partners
• Sustained funding for at least 2-3 years
• Pays for needed infrastructure and planning
#Rb21NM
Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews and Analysis
FSG.ORG
A Big Picture Approach
to Action Planning & Community Change
Take
Shape
Structural
Alignment
Track
Progress
Shared
Measurement
#Rb21NM
Take
Aim
The recurring steps of
Community Change
Management
Goal
Alignment
Target
Action
Take
Stock
Mutually
Reinforcing
Activities
Shared
Diagnosis
A Big Picture Approach
to Action Planning & Community Change
includes
FSG’s
Five Conditions
Backbone Support
Take
Shape
Structural
Alignment
Shared
Measurement
Take
Aim
Track
Progress
Shared
Measurement
The recurring steps of
Community Change
Management
Goal
Alignment
for a
Common Agenda
Continuous
Communication
Mutually
Reinforcing
Activities
#Rb21NM
Target
Action
Take
Stock
Mutually
Reinforcing
Activities
Shared
Diagnosis
Shared
Measurement
A Big Picture Approach
to Action Planning & Community Change
Process & Standards
the “nuts & bolts”
of collective impact
Take
Shape
Structural
Alignment
Track
Progress
Shared
Measurement
Take
Aim
The recurring steps of
Community Change
Management
Target
Action
Mutually
Reinforcing
Activities
#Rb21NM
Goal
Alignment
Take
Stock
Shared
Diagnosis
Standards for . . .
Take
Shape
Reflection &
Improvement
Partnership
Structures
Backbone Support
Organizations
Linking to
Existing Efforts
• Form
• Connect
Partnership
Evaluation
Track
Progress
• Track
• Improve
Shared Action &
Accountability
Intervention Design
& Selection
Issue Integrated
Logic Models
#Rb21NM
Take
Aim
The recurring steps of
Community Change
Management
• Engage
• Frame
Engagement
Strategy
“Big Picture”
Frameworks
Communicating
Big Goals
Target
Action
Take
Stock
• Visualize
• Align
• Assess
• Analyze
Identifying Needs &
Resources
Analysis
Techniques
Selecting Targeted
Goals & Indicators
Take
Shape
Take
Stock
Take
Aim
Benefits of the
• Adaptable Roadmap
meeting leaders where they are
what’s “good enough” to go forward?
• Tackle more than one issue at a time
by looking at “whole person”
taking aligned action at different levels of work
• Builds on evidence of what works
#Rb21NM
Track
Progress
Big Picture Approach
• Connections between steps
• Helps to clarify roles
Target
Action
it can be done!
Take
Shape
Take
Aim
Take
Stock
Target
Action
Track
Progress
Structural
Alignment
Goal
Alignment
Shared
Diagnosis
Mutually
Reinforcing
Activities
Shared
Measurement
Overarching Leadership
Ready by 21 Leadership Council * P-20 Council
Strive Network * Children’s Cabinet
Population Focused
Success By 6 * Thriving Seniors
Provider Network
Out-of-school Time (OST) Network
Issue Coalition
Substance Abuse Coalition * Teen Pregnancy
Intimate Partner Violence * Child Abuse & Neglect
Neighborhood
Promise Neighborhoods * Neighborhood Association
#Rb21NM
FSG.ORG
In Catalyzing Social Change, Collective Impact also
Depends on Essential Intangible Elements for its Success
Collective Impact’s Intangible Elements
• Relationship and Trust building
• Fostering Connections between
People
• Leadership Identification and
Development
• Creating a Culture of Learning
#Rb21NM
Source: Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work, 2012; FSG Interviews
FSG.ORG
Stay Connected
• Presentation materials will be posted at
www.readyby21.org/nationalmeetingonline
• Tweet about your session! #Rb21NM
#Rb21NM
FSG.ORG
HANDOUTS
#Rb21NM
FSG.ORG
There Are Five Conditions to Collective Impact Success
Common Agenda
All participants have a shared vision for change including a common
understanding of the problem and a joint approach to solving it through
agreed upon actions
Shared
Measurement
Collecting data and measuring results consistently across all
participants ensures efforts remain aligned and participants hold each
other accountable
Mutually
Reinforcing
Activities
Continuous
Communication
Backbone Support
#Rb21NM
Participant activities must be differentiated while still being
coordinated through a mutually reinforcing plan of action
Consistent and open communication is needed across the many
players to build trust, assure mutual objectives, and appreciate common
motivation
Creating and managing collective impact requires dedicated staff and a
specific set of skills to serve as the backbone for the entire initiative and
coordinate participating organizations and agencies
Source: FSG SSIR Collective Impact Article, Winter 2011; FSG Interviews
FSG.ORG
Backbones Differ Depending on Local or
Issue-Specific Context
Types of
Backbones
Description
Examples
Pros
Cons
• One funder initiates
CI strategy as
planner, financier,
and convener
• Ability to secure start-up funding
and recurring resources
• Ability to bring others to the table
and leverage other funders
• Lack of broad buy-in if CI effort
seen as driven by one funder
• Lack of perceived neutrality
• New entity is
created, often by
private funding, to
serve as backbone
• Perceived neutrality as facilitator
and convener
• Potential lack of baggage
• Clarity of focus
• Lack of sustainable funding stream
and potential questions about
funding priorities
• Potential competition with local
nonprofits
Existing
Nonprofit
• Established nonprofit
takes the lead in
coordinating CI
strategy
• Credibility, clear ownership, and
strong understanding of issue
• Existing infrastructure in place if
properly resourced
• Potential “baggage” and lack of
perceived neutrality
• Lack of attention if poorly funded
Government
• Government entity,
either at local or
state level, drives CI
effort
• Public sector “seal of approval”
• Existing infrastructure in place if
properly resourced
• Bureaucracy may slow progress
• Public funding may not be
dependable
• Numerous
organizations take
ownership of CI wins
• Lower resource requirements if
shared across multiple
organizations
• Broad buy-in, expertise
• Lack of clear accountability with
multiple voices at the table
• Coordination challenges, leading to
potential inefficiencies
• Senior-level
committee with
ultimate decisionmaking power
• Broad buy-in from senior leaders
across public, private, and
nonprofit sectors
• Lack of clear accountability with
multiple voices
Funder-Based
New Nonprofit
Shared Across
Multiple
Organizations
Backbone across
backbones
#Rb21NM
FSG.ORG
CI Efforts Tend to Transpire Over Four Phases
Phase I
Assess Readiness,
Facilitate Dialogue
Phase II
Initiate Action
Phase III
Organize for
Impact
Phase IV
Sustain Action
and Impact
Identify champions
and form crosssector group
Create infrastructure
(backbone and
processes)
Facilitate and refine
Strategic
Planning
Hold dialogue about
issue, community
context, and available
resources
Map the landscape
and use data to
make case
Create common
agenda (common
goals and strategy)
Support
implementation
(alignment to goal
and strategies)
Community
Involvement
Facilitate community
outreach specific to
goal
Facilitate community
outreach
Engage community
and build public will
Continue
engagement and
conduct advocacy
Determine if there is
Analyze baseline
Evaluation
consensus/urgency to data to ID key issues
And
move forward
and gaps
Improvement
Establish shared
metrics (indicators,
measurement, and
approach)
Collect, track, and
report progress
(process to learn and
improve)
Components for
Success
Governance Convene community
and
stakeholders
Infrastructure
#Rb21NM
FSG.ORG
Timing for Each Phase Varies by Initiative
Initiative
Phase II
Initiate Action
Phase III
Organize for Impact
Phase IV
III
Sustain Action & Impact
May 2010 – Dec 2010
(7 months)
Jan 2011 – Dec 2011
(12 months)
Jan 2012 
Sept 2010 – Feb 2011
(5 months)
Feb 2011 – Nov 2011
(9 months)
Nov 2011 
May 2011-Oct 2011
(5 months)
Nov 2011 – May 2012
(7 months)
June 2012 
The implementation time taken for collective impact efforts is
determined by the local context of each initiative
#Rb21NM
Source: FSG Interviews and Analysis
FSG.ORG
Appendix
• Each Stakeholder and group Plays a Specific Role
• A Backbone’s Scope and Budget May Grow Over Time, Primarily
Reflecting Staff Additions And Available Resources
• Every Backbone Needs Funding; Backbone Budgets Can Range
From Around $400K to Upwards of $800K
• Selecting a Backbone Is an Important Process that Should Build the
Credibility of the Backbone and the Initiative
• A Strong Steering Committee Is Important for Building the
Initiative’s Credibility and for Bringing Other Stakeholders to the
Table
• Steering Committee Members Should Be Carefully Recruited
• Representative Collective Impact Timeline: The First 18 Months
#Rb21NM
FSG.ORG
Each Stakeholder and Group Plays a Specific Role
Stakeholder / Group
Community
partner
Description and Role
•
•
Work Group
(a.k.a. network,
action team)
•
•
•
•
Steering
•
Committee
(Strategy Group) •
•
Backbone
Organization
#Rb21NM
•
•
Individual organizations and members of the community (e.g, nonprofit,
funder, business, public agency, student, parent, resident)
Partners should have access to a variety of opportunities to learn about and
engage in the initiative
Comprised of cross-sector community partners targeting particular element of
common agenda (e.g., early childhood, K12, postsecondary, OST, data, policy,
funding)
Designs and implements a targeted action plan, involving non-work group members
as needed
Led by two co-chairs willing to invest time and (ideally) staff capacity
Some groups or networks serve slightly different functions, e.g., funders group (to
identify opportunities for alignment), or inclusive community network to raise
awareness about project and provide mechanism for vetting actions
Comprised of cross-sector community partners (representative of the large
ecosystem)
Provides strategic direction for the initiative and champions the work
In some cases, committee members are chairs for action teams
Provides dedicated staff
Supports the work of partners by assisting with strategic guidance, supporting
aligned activity, establishing shared measurement, building public will,
advancing policy, and mobilizing funding
A Backbone’s Scope and Budget May Grow Over Time,
Primarily Reflecting Staff Additions And Available
Resources
Year 2*
Year 1
Potential
Staff:
Typical
Responsibilities:
Estimated
Budget:
Executive Director
Data Manager
Facilitator
Project Coordinator
Year 3 On*
1. Executive Director
2. Data Manager
3. Facilitator
1.
2.
3.
4.
• Guide vision and strategy
• Liaise with Working Group and
Strategy Groups
• Build public will / awareness
• Begin implementation of
strategies and shared
measures
• Guide vision and strategy
• Support and coordinate
aligned activities
• Deepen shared measurement
practices
• Build public will / awareness
• Expand priority strategies and
partners based on data
• Build public will / awareness
• Communicate progress
• Advance policy
• Mobilize funding
$3-400K
$5-600K
$7-900K
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Executive Director
Data Manager
Facilitator
Project Coordinator
Communications Manager
Office Manager / Assistant
* The resources required by the Backbone vary with the needs of the initiatives. In some instances budgets have remained flat or declined; in others, FTEs and budgets have
grown with the changing requirements of the role
#Rb21NM
Source: FSG case work and analysis
FSG.ORG
Every Backbone Needs Funding; Backbone
Budgets Can Range From Around $400K to
Upwards of $800K
Illustration of a Backbone’s Budget:
Expense Category
Budget ($)
Description
Low
High
80,000
155,000
1 FTE Executive Director
55,000
100,000
1 FTE Facilitator/Coordinator
65,000
100,000
1 FTE Data/Operations Manager
25,000
65,000
.5-1 FTE Admin. Support
Benefits
45,000
84,000
At 20% of salaries
Professional Fees
90,000
105,000
Travel and Meetings
7,000
30,000
Workshops, events, retreat
Community Engagement
0
35,000
Space rental, youth stipends
Communications
36,500
90,000
Reports, materials design, paid media
Technology
0
4,900
In kind hardware, software, IT
Office
0
74,000
In kind/paid rent, utilities, supplies
Other
0
6,500
849,400
Salaries
Total Expenses
403,500
#Rb21NM Source: Adapted from Strive Network, TYSA, & CCER
Consultants, R&E, Recruiting, Data Collection
Staff training, miscellaneous
Covered by grants and fees
FSG.ORG
Selecting a Backbone Is an Important Process that Should
Build the Credibility of the Backbone and the Initiative
Open
Process
Semi-Open
Process
FSG.ORG
Predetermined
 Conduct landscape scan of key
players, including the “usual suspects”
and beyond
 Build understanding of the role of a
backbone among early initiative
leaders
 Approach high-potential backbone
organizations to assess their interest
in serving as a backbone
 Issue an RFP
 Interview applicants
 An “early backbone” helps guide the
initiative from the beginning,
including helping to select the
Steering Committee
 Based on existing knowledge of key
players, backbone is “named,” usually
by the initiative’s funders
 6-12 months after the first SC
meeting, a determination is made to
either make the early backbone into a
permanent backbone, or open the
process to other backbones
 The backbone helps recruit a Steering
Committee, potentially with the help
of an early “advisory group” or
funders
Pros: Allows for a backbone “try out,”
backbone staff available from beginning
of initiative
Cons: May be politically difficult, and
inefficient to switch backbones
Pros: Quick, avoids difficult conversations
in the short-term (though may arise in the
long-term)
Cons: May not have high credibility, may
not find the org. with the best skill set,
assumes funders know best
 Steering Committee and/or funder(s)
selects backbone
Pros: Transparent, builds credibility, open
to many organizations with different skill
sets
Cons: Takes time, must work through
potentially difficult decisions
#Rb21NM
FSG.ORG
A Strong Steering Committee Is Important for Building the
Initiative’s Credibility and for Bringing Other Stakeholders
to the Table
#Rb21NM
FSG.ORG
Steering Committee Members Should Be Carefully Recruited
Sample Traits
1. Decision Maker. CEO/President Level - Able to drive systems change relevant
to effort
2. Representative. Geographic coverage of effort (counties and subregional
steering committees) as well as sector
3. Influential Champion. Commands respect of broader set of stakeholders (and
perceived so). Can bring stakeholders to the table and keep them there. Can
champion the strategy with the broader community
4. Content Expertise/Practitioner. Familiar with subject matter to contribute
substantively
5. Passion and Urgency. Passionate about issue and feels real urgency for the
need to change
6. Focused on the Greater Interest. Represents need of their own organization
but able to think and act in the greater interest of the community
7. Commitment. Willing and able to commit time and energy to attend meetings
and get work done
#Rb21NM
FSG.ORG
Representative Collective Impact Timeline:
The First 18 Months
Initiate Action
3
0
6
Conduct “landscape and readiness
assessment”
Analyze baseline data, understand the problem,
“make the case”
ID and recruit Steering Committee
Develop common agenda
Conduct outreach to key stakeholders (gather input, build understanding, build support)
Organize for Impact
6
12
18
Identify and build capacity of backbone organization
Develop common agenda
Develop initiative-level
shared measures
Create work groups; build their capacity
Develop strategy-level shared
measures
Develop shared measurement system
Conduct outreach to key stakeholders, as needed
#Rb21NM