Blog

Last November, Matt Forti and Kim Siegal penned an article titled Actionable Measurement: Getting from “Prove” to “Improve” in the Stanford Social Innovation Review. The article calls upon the social sector to unite around “common questions” that “nonprofits ought to answer about their impact so that they can maximize learning and action around their program models.”

Almost every collective impact effort I have visited has struggled with community engagement at some level. During the past few years, I have learned a great deal from projects I’ve visited, while also drawing on my experience doing community building for more than two decades through Public Allies and The Asset-Based Community Development Institute.

As we reflect on 2016, we want to share four key areas that stood out for the Collective Impact Forum community. Read to see the Forum’s most-read resources for the year.

As part of Tamarack’s 2016 Community Change Series, Tamarack thought leader, Mark Cabaj, and myself decided to review the collective impact framework with a new perspective.

The principles and practices of collective impact apply especially well to issues facing community development practitioners because they help set up an implementation system, something that is needed in addressing local concerns. I’m happy to share about a new special issue of the journal Community Development that explores in greater detail how collective impact has been used in community development applications.

Backbone organizations are unusual entities and that means they need unusual boards too. Board members of organizations responsible for performing backbone functions need to assume roles and responsibilities beyond those of a board member of a traditional nonprofit.

Over the past two months, we published seven interviews with experienced backbone leaders. Although we approached these interviews with a loose agenda (“How have their initiatives evolved and been sustained?” “What can experienced backbone leaders teach newer initiatives”, etc.), the interviewees provided a treasure trove of nuanced advice, stories of success, and (yes) stories of failure. Instead of sticking to talking points, each interviewee gave us the real story.

Cheryl Moder is the Vice President of Collective Impact at San Diego’s Community Health Improvement Partners (CHIP), a 20-year old nonprofit whose mission is to advance long-term solutions to priority health needs through collaboration. Among other responsibilities, CHIP has served as the backbone for the San Diego County Childhood Obesity Initiative for the past 10 years.

The notion of “neutrality” is sometimes used to describe one of the defining features of backbone leaders in collective impact, with phrases such as “perceived neutrality” or “neutral conveners” often coming up when describing the role. However, as the collective impact approach continues to reach a broader audience, some have astutely pointed out shortcomings of the word “neutrality” in describing the ideal role of backbone leaders.

Hello CI enthusiasts! This is our sixth in a series of interviews with experienced backbone leaders. In this chat, we’ll hear from Lynda Petersen, Associate Director at the Community Center for Education Results (CCER).