Civic Ventures, the first social entrepreneurial organization recognized in the 2010 Skoll Award cycle, announced with MetLife Foundation today its Encore Opportunity awards for 2009. These recognize eight organizations in the non-profit and government arena that are exemplary in tapping the services of older Americans for the public good. These range from an organization employing Native Americans over 50 to teach their native tongue to children to another that teaches environmentally sound farming methods to yet another focused on helping older people with disabilities live independently in their own homes. You can see the list of winners, and read more about them, here.

Vicky was honored under the “Pluralism” theme, with a write up that includes:

Escuela Nueva’s boldly original approach has enormous potential for implementation worldwide, within various educational levels and for addressing rural, urban and migrant populations’ needs. Its collaborative learning approach unlocks entrepreneurial skills and attitudes and strengthens life skills, curriculum and learning materials.

Martin received an award under the “Sustainability” theme for his Self-Sufficiency School model.  From the write up on him:

This year UNESCO selected the Financially Self-Sufficient School model as a “best practice in youth policies and programs.” In addition, over 20 institutions in Latin America and Africa have adopted the model or are preparing to do so. As this replication process proceeds, this “education that pays for itself” will enable very large numbers of young people worldwide to overcome chronic poverty.

Both Vicky and Martin are great examples of social entrepreneurs who have achieved scale not simply by growing their organizations, but by practicing an “open source” approach to their models, encouraging replication by others in Latin America and across the world.  Congratulations to both for the recognition.

1. FSG Social Impact Advisors’ paper “Catalytic Philanthropy” (PDF) by Mark Kramer. Kramer jested, “If you were dropped to Earth from Mars with a pocketful of money looking to invest in a social problem, you wouldn’t find one organization, you’d instead say that the social effect is based on a network of social solutions.” But, Kramer pointed out, the fact is that current evaluation techniques for testing the efficacy of a program seek to isolate that program from the complex system it exists within. How can we get at the performance of a set of nonprofits? Or, how do we get at the social impact created by a network? Kramer’s paper examines three interesting examples that seem like promising hypotheses.

2. Jon Huggett, formerly of Bridgespan and now an independent consultant, shared research on the “coherence” of organizations who have reached global scale. Meaning, do these organizations have a coherent program everywhere? Do they do advocacy with one voice? Do they access funding with the same voice or do they actually compete against themselves for funds? If it is all about scale, then we should know what works at the largest end of scale. Huggett shared his interpretation of the “secret sauce of scale”:

a. Moving beyond leadership to management – beyond one individual at the top, focus on a decision-making process and team of leaders

b. Beyond mission to impact – for example Habitat for Humanity moving beyond “houses built” to “families served,” the real impact of the organization

c. Beyond structure to complementary relationships – a set of informal and formal relationships that exist within a network to foster innovation and ease of decision making, all based on trust.

3. Reflections on the scaling practices of Skoll Award recipients Gram Vikas and mothers2mothers grounded the conversation in the field again. Gram Vikas has historically kept very tight control over replication efforts with partners, but a few partners are now proving to have innovative ways to stay true to the values of the model while implementing the model in new village and cultural contexts. mothers2mothers, at an exciting moment of scale, is in the process of strategizing how to replicate in new sites while keeping fidelity to the core model.

At the end of the presentation, the room was abuzz with many of the academics suggesting ways for mothers2mothers to think about their scaling, research to review, and evaluative techniques to look into. It is clear that the research being done has exciting potential for smart, diligent implementation on the ground. I’m sure that’s what next year’s conference will cover!

]]> http://www.skollonline.com/blog/?feed=rss2&p=296 http://www.skollonline.com/blog/?p=296 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/SkollFoundationNews/~3/X4_CbY3emdU/ http://www.skollonline.com/blog/?p=295#comments Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:14:02 +0000 Kimberly Dasher Tripp http://www.skollonline.com/blog/?p=295

I’m Kimberly Dasher Tripp, a program officer here at the Skoll Foundation and a first-time contributor to the Skoll Foundation blog.  I look forward to the dialogue!

I am at the Fuqua School of Business at Duke this week attending the Scaling Social Impact conference. The event is hosted by the Center for Strategic Philanthropy & Civil Society at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy, the Center for the Advancement of Social Entrepreneurship (CASE) at the Fuqua School, and the Bridgespan Group.

Last night two academics (Marc Epstein, Rice University and Funda Sezgi, IESE Business School) presented research they have conducted regarding scaling. Jeff Bradach of the Bridgespan Group did a remarkable job summarizing crosscutting themes from the two pieces of research. Bradach framed it using four questions about scale:

1. What are we trying to scale? Meaning, what is the essential “it”? We are trying to figure out how we know a model works. So, if we are scaling the wrong thing, we aren’t measuring or creating measures for the right piece of the puzzle. Epstein cited an example in the area of microfinance:  should we simply be scaling access to capital or should we be scaling human capital along with the financial capital in order to support these loans? If every loan officer has an average of 500 clients, do you realistically have the structure to measure impact beyond repayment rates?

2. What are the pathways for scale? Or, what are the processes by which a concept scales? Organizations need to think about the power of running different scale models, identified by Greg Dees at CASE as fitting three broad categories: dissemination, affiliation and branching. The interaction and tension among the three models can be very instructive. Do underlying fee/income structures allow for better scale? Does government or policy support help account for scale?

3. How do you ensure fidelity to the model? Sezgi’s evaluation of the Aravind Eye Hospital noted that the model required a deep discipline of execution with respect to scaling values, not just processes. So, Bradach posed, if you do not exert specific control over the scaling of your values, are some versions of your replicated model not, in fact, your model? In evaluative terms, how can you be sure that the model does or doesn’t work if some branches or versions of your model are not actually your model?

4. What about scaling impact versus scaling organizations? We must take into consideration what scale really means. Bradach used Teach for America as an example. Isn’t some of the most potent impact of Teach for America the work of some of its alumni after their Teach for America experience is over? Is talk about scaling the organization perhaps missing something about impact?

The conference is clearly off to an interesting and thought-provoking start!

From an INSEAD email:

IDSP is dedicated to supporting young people who are excluded from mainstream education and employment opportunities in one of the poorest and most isolated regions of the world. Students come from traditional, feudal communities in which the lives of most young people are constricted by centuries-old tribal and religious customs that inhibit education, development and knowledge of the outside world. IDSP provides high-quality programmes of study that focus on basic skills and community development. They aim to prepare these young people for professional careers and to provide them the tools to create their own enterprises and organizations that further the well being of the community as a whole. They address issues of gender, tribalism and political and religious extremism in a straightforward yet sensitive manner that promotes understanding and development.

Congratulations to Quratal ain and IDSP.

From Gary:

“The health care sector has an obligation to speak now to bring attention to the public health consequences of climate change. It is imperative that we have a strong treaty in Copenhagen to avert the worst impacts of climate change and what could become a global public health crisis of unprecedented proportions that could supersede our ability to provide care.”

This is another example of Health Care Without Harm’s comprehensive approach to promoting better safety and environmental practices in health care worldwide.  From early successes in eliminating mercury from medical devices and improving disposal of medical waste, Health Care Without Harm has expanded to attack unhealthy procurement and food services in hospitals, promote more efficient building and energy use in medical facilities, and, now, align the power of this large industry behind a more aggressive approach to tackling climate change.  With the industry representing something akin to 16 percent of U.S. gross domestic product, what health care does can make a big impact.

You can read the letter to President Obama - and see if your health care system has signed on - here.

Skoll has had multiple touch points - direct and indirect - with Kiva throughout its young life.  Kiva is a great example of an organization that has benefited from both the ecosystem work and the direct support the Foundation undertakes.  Matt Flannery starting blogging on the Skoll Foundation’s community site, Social Edge, in October 2005, right when he launched Kiva.  In October 2006, Kiva, which had been struggling to gain traction, got a huge lift when Frontline World ran a story on the organization’s work in Uganda as part of its series on social entrepreneurs, work funded by Skoll.  (You can read Matt’s blog entry about the impact of the broadcast here.)  Also in 2006, Matt was selected as one of the participants in Santa Clara University’s Global Social Benefit Incubator (GSBI), an annual mentoring-based program to help a handful of promising emerging social entrepreneurs from around the globe scale their programs and connect to resources.  GSBI is supported by the Foundation.  Finally, in 2008, Matt and Premal received the Skoll Award for Social Entrepreneurship.

It’s been great to work so closely with such impressive leaders and such a great organization.  We look forward to the next four years!