The Dot Connector

by Jana Riess

But ultimately, the success of Strive’s collaborative networks depends on the member organizations and how invested they are in turning things around for kids.

“We want community-owned leadership,” Zimmerman reported. “It can’t just be Strive.”

One of the key steps in GE’s Six Sigma program -- and in Strive’s adaptation -- is “continuous improvement.” In GE and elsewhere in the corporate world, it means that at every stage in the life of any given product -- R&D, production, warehousing, distribution and sales -- checks are in place to fix problems as they arise and before they escalate into crises.

In the nonprofit sector, continuous improvement is different. Here, it cuts more directly to the bottom line: projects that can be measured and shown to be successful get funded. Those that aren’t successful -- or can’t be shown to be -- probably won’t.

‘Spray and pray’

This approach is a big advance over what has been the predominant method of funding nonprofits, which Curl-Nagy called “spray and pray:” “You spray money around and hope that something hits.”

In this older model, organizations might be awarded a large one-time grant and then, at the end of the grant cycle, explain how the money was used and how successful they felt the program was. Such a system, though, is rife with problems. What if the program was a disaster, but the money was already spent before it could be recalled? Are grant recipients really the most impartial judges of whether it was a good use of funding?

In the emerging new world of nonprofits, such tactics no longer fly. Today, more corporations and foundations are doling out smaller grants and promising to renew them only if certain benchmarks are achieved. Because funders are requiring evaluations at every stage of the process, nonprofits have to be able to provide the kind of shared data and number crunching that Strive is helping its affiliates learn how to do.

“This is a change to much more investment in what’s working,” Curl-Nagy said.

For nonprofits, the focus on data and measurement represents a great opportunity, she said. Because continuous improvement is about measuring outcomes all along the way, organizations have to constantly assess what works and what doesn’t.

“You can then make changes before you get to the end and make your money work better for you,” she said.

In the end, everybody wins. The funders are assured their money has been used as they intended. The nonprofit grant recipients get to tweak their approaches constantly, always focusing on what they do best.

Strive goes national

The Strive initiative is clearly at the forefront of collaborative models for education, and other cities are starting to take notice. After little more than three years, the program is already going national in a partnership with Living Cities (a philanthropic collaborative of large foundations) and the Coalition of Urban Serving Universities.

Working with those organizations, Strive has selected several target cities that have the necessary conditions to replicate Strive’s success in cross-sector educational partnerships. All the target cities -- called “implementation sites” -- have an urban university that will serve as an anchor for the community. So far, four additional cities have been selected: Richmond, Va.; Indianapolis, Ind.; Houston, Texas; and Hayward, Calif. Several other cities have been named “development sites” and are just beginning the program. Those cities -- Memphis, Tenn.; Albuquerque, N.M.; Mesa, Ariz.; Fresno, Calif.; and Portland, Ore. -- have qualified for more limited funding and some technical assistance.

Many more cities are interested in joining the program, but Strive plans to proceed at a measured pace.

“We have to be careful to not grow too fast so we can serve the chosen cities,” Curl-Nagy said. “Just because somebody wants to do it doesn’t necessarily mean they’re ready.”

But the cities that are ready should be able to replicate Strive’s success relatively soon, Curl-Nagy said, certainly faster than Strive did the first time around in Cincinnati. After all, they have the benefit of Strive’s experience and can learn what worked and what didn’t.

At the same time, patience is essential, and the new cities have to be careful not to move too fast.

“They know where they want to go and they want to meet a timeline,” Curl-Nagy said. “But you can’t rush the relationships and the foundations. You have to have people really engaged and believing that they can be part of the solution.”

-----

1. Competition is a central tenant of American civil society. How has this affected the way you engage other organizations?

2. What rivals might you humbly learn from and collaborate with to better advance the common good in your industry?

Editor's Note: This article was first published by Faith & Leadership, an offering of leadership education at Duke University. It is printed here by permission. The image above is quoted from here.

Previous 1 2 3

Comments

Comments are now closed

ALSO IN EDUCATION

by Hugh Atkinson

by Sajan George