Community Leadership Webinar #1 Values, Culture and Will March 13, 2009.

Community Leadership Webinar #1

Values, Culture and WillMarch 13, 2009

Welcome

• First Community Leadership Webinar

• Hosted by CFLeads & the Council on Foundations

• More than 90 participants

Agenda

• Welcome – Winsome Hawkins• The Making of the Community Leadership

Framework – Mike Howe• Aligning for Community Impact – Steve

Joul• Becoming A Catalyst for Community

Change – Jennifer Leonard• Q & A

Presenters

Mike Howe Chair, National Task Force on Community Leadership

Steve JoulPresident, Central Minnesota Community Foundation

Jennifer Leonard President & Executive Director, Rochester Area Community

Foundation

THE MAKING OF THE COMMUNITY LEADERSHIP FRAMEWORK

Mike HoweChairNational Task Force on Community Leadership

National Task Force on Community Leadership

• 30 philanthropic leaders

• 12 months

• 2 frameworks – individual community foundation and field-level

CL Framework Value

• Many pathways to community leadership – not prescriptive

• A way to unpack complex concepts and processes

• A tool for planning that starts from analysis rather than intuition

• A tool for taking stock and evaluating progress

• A means to target the right actions to achieve desired results

• Finally…a definition of community leadership

Community Leadership Definition

The community foundation is a catalyzing force that creates a better future

for all by addressing the community’s most critical or persistent challenges,

inclusively uniting people, institutions and resources, and producing significant,

widely shared and lasting results.  

Unpacking the definition

The community foundation

is a catalyzing force

that creates a better future for all

by addressing the community’s most critical or persistent challenges

inclusively uniting people, institutions, and resources

and producing significant, widely shared and lasting results.

Framework for Community Leadership, First Level Building Blocks

D.

Understanding and skills

A.

Values, culture and will

C.

Resources

B.

Relationships

Building blocks are inter-related

• Not mutually exclusive

• Strengthening one building block strengthens others

• Best strategies address multiple building blocks

First-Level Building Blocks

1. Common good

2. Diverse & inclusive

3. Results-driven learning organization

4. Respectful & transparent

A. Values, Culture & Will

First-Level Building Blocks

1. Grassroots & grasstops

2. Encourage & engage new leaders

B. Relationships

First-Level Building Blocks

C. Resources

1. Internal systems

2. Human resources

3. Donors and investors

4. Business model

First-Level Building Blocks

D. Understanding & Skills

1. Possess and gather information

2. Community change processes

3. Facilitation & communication

4. Knowing when & on what to act

5. Public policy

6. Outcomes & metrics

A. Values, Culture and WillFirst-Level Building Block

The community foundation manifests the values, culture & will to exercise community leadership.

Building Block A: Second-Level Building Blocks

A.1 The community foundation is committed to the common good.

A.2 The community foundation is fundamentally committed and organized to increase opportunity, diverse participation and fairness.

A.3 The community foundation is a results-driven learning organization.

A.4 The community foundation is humble, respectful and transparent.

ALIGNING FOR COMMUNITY IMPACT

Steve JoulPresident Central Minnesota Community Foundation

History of Central Minnesota Community Foundation

• Created in 1985

• Primarily focused on Donor Services

• Limited unrestricted grant dollars

• Focused grant dollars in key areas– Strengthening youth and families– Supporting infrastructure of non profits– Recognizing and appreciating diversity

What Was Missing?

• Community/leadership initiatives had no basis

• No metrics to measure impact in the community

• Not leveraging impact of other funds held at the Foundation

Donor Service vs. Community Service

Donor ServicesOrganization

DiscretionaryGrantmaker

Source: Development Deliberations by Stuart Applebaum

The X/Y Factor

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Increasing Social Capital

Incr

easi

ng

Fin

anci

al C

apit

al

"Discretionary Grantmaker"focus on community building

"Donor Services"focus on donor services

Measuring Community Service – Social Capital• Robert Putnam’s work at Harvard – “Bowling Alone”

– Connections are important– Greater connections mean:

• Better schools• Safer streets• Greater economic growth• More effective government• Healthier lives

• Social Capital increases the productive potential of a community

• Social Capital defines “Community”

• Benchmark Survey– Quantifiable– Comparable– Repeatable

“Without adequate supplies of “social capital” – that is, without civic engagement, healthy community institutions, norms of mutual reciprocity, and trust – social institutions falter and lose efficacy.” – Robert Putnam

Goals of the Social Capital Survey

• Establish a Benchmark Metric for the Region

• Create Community Discussion

• Create a Measure of Health of Our Community

The Social Capital Survey

• “Social Capital” is a method of measuring the value of connections that individuals have to other individuals and to their communities.

• This survey looks at a variety of indicators found, in national research, to be good measures of social capital.

See also: www.communityview.org

A strategy map illustrates CMCF’s ultimate goal of building a prosperous community.

Social Capital

Financial Capital

Example metrics:Social capital surveyNumber of CVIEW users

Example metrics:Social capital surveyNumber of CVIEW users

Example metrics:% dollars staying localTotal endowment

Example metrics:% dollars staying localTotal endowment

Prosperous Community

Engaged People

Connected Resources

Poor Community

High Financial Capital Growth, High Social Capital

Growth

The strategic plan supports growth in both social and financialcapital. The Vision is:

• Engaging People,

• Connecting Resources,

• Building Community.

The redesign work was to align the work of the Foundation to the two-pronged strategy

• Strong donor services• Relatively small,

“scattered” grant making

• A desire to be more “strategic” and understand impact

• Criteria with common philosophy

• Benchmark of social capital metric

• Clearly defined role for CMCF (as catalyst, observer, or participant)

• Start, Stop, Continue… • Venture Philanthropy

Community Programs Committee – Original Purpose

ORIGINAL PURPOSE: “to study and propose the role the Central Minnesota Community Foundation should play in bringing individuals and community resources to bear on significant community issues that lead to building a better community.”

CURRENT FUNCTIONS: 1. Provides the vehicle by which the

Foundation exercises leadership on the key important issues facing the community.

2. Assess and monitor community needs and assets as well maintain inventory of who is doing what in the community.

3. Recommend community foundation involvement on key community issues and determine approach of being observer, participant or catalyst.

4. Recommend priority focus areas for the unrestricted grants of the Foundation

5. Recommend grants from the Community Foundation

Community Programs Committee -- Resources and Tools

• Influential and engaged volunteers• Unrestricted grants ($100,000 per year)• Neutrality of the Foundation • Access to Donor Advisors with Funds at

CMCF• CommunityVIEW – Interactive web-based

tool to connect people and issues in the community

In determining CMCF involvement, we will use the following criteria:

Address Community Needs: 6. How does it address community needs?

7. How does it build the capacity of the community to be responsive?

Impact, Results & Sustainability: 8. To what extent is the plan clear, sound,

measurable, and well developed?

9. To what extent is the impact on the community broad-based and long term?

10. To what extent are the results measurable?

11. What is the potential for sustainability?

Resources & Philanthropy:12. How does it stimulate philanthropy?

13. How does it engage other resources?

CMCF’s Role:1. How does CMCF’s participation

add value?

2. To what extent does CMCF have the resources to support the level of involvement chosen?

Build Community:3. Does it build Social Capital?

4. How does it create opportunities for individuals and families to successfully engage with the St. Cloud area economic, political, and social life?

5. How does it expand knowledge and understanding in the community?

Restructure of Unrestricted Grant Making Process

• Committee used criteria to evaluate our leadership initiatives in community

• Solicited grant applications that created “Bridging ” Social Capital

• Committee used “Building a Healthy Community” criteria to rank grant applications using on-line tool, CommunityVIEW

• Committee especially looked at “how” funded applicants measured the building of Social Capital

• Committee now looking at moving to a more focused and intentional approach to grant making by exploring the Venture Philanthropy model.

Timeline

2005-06

Dec 2006

2006-07

2006-07

2009

July 2003 Grants Committee become the Leadership Committee with revised purpose.

Mar 2004 Social Capital Survey completed as a metric.

Nov 2004Leadership Committee becomes Community Programs Committee (CPC), and considers roles of catalyst, participant, and observer for the Foundation.

Fall 2005 CPC formulates and adopts set of criteria for “Building a Healthy Community”

Criteria used for in-depth evaluation of CMCF initiatives, grant rounds on hold, process is redesigned. CPC grapples with what to invest in, what to let go of…

CMCF holds training for non-profits on what Social Capital is and the new grantmaking process.

CPC utilizes CommunityVIEW for letters of intent (>60) and final selection of proposals.

Continuation of Social Capital as the metric and monitoring of Initiatives. Two grant rounds held, with new criteria, larger amounts, investment and venture philanthropy focus.

A resurveying planned with the Social Capital survey.

What Difference Has it Made?

• Some initiatives discontinued– Agro forestry Fund– Applied Technology Initiative

• Other initiatives enhanced– Women’s Fund– Create CommUNITY

• Future decision making made easier– Community Cultural Arts Plan

Tough Love Advice and Thinking

• Should have done it sooner

• Question of additional metrics in Community Service – Challenging discussion

• Crucial 2nd Level A Building Blocks– A.1 – Committed to effecting change that

advances the common good

– A.3 – The CF is a results –driven learning organization

Tough Love Advice and Thinking Continued• 2 Building Blocks we wished had been stronger

– C. 2. – The CF has human resources to exercise community leadership.

– C.4. – The CF’s business model provides flexible financial resources to support community leadership efforts.

• What would we do differently?– Move process along quicker– Provide more education to volunteers

Conclusion

The Mission of the CMCF is to:

Engage People, Connect Resources and Build Community

This is done by building both Financial Capital and Social Capital.

BECOMING A CATALYST FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE

Jennifer LeonardPresident and Executive DirectorRochester Area Community Foundation

Becoming a Catalyst

• The Importance of Values, Culture and Will

• Internal Preparation Is Key

• Evolutionary, Not Revolutionary

• Critical Role of Strategic Planning

• Changing the Customer

• Changing the Conversation

• The Virtuous Cycle

Hedgehog

Our People are Passionate

We Can Be Best in the World

Economically Sustainable

?

Hedgehog

Our People are Passionate

We Can Be Best in the World

Economically Sustainable

Community Change Agent

Revised Mission

2000 Version:RACF builds a better community

for everyone through philanthropy…

• By stimulating growth and providing careful stewardship of the community’s endowment

• By engaging donors, recipients, and other partners

• By building upon and mobilizing community assets and resources

2005 Version:

We engage passionate philanthropists in improving our community.

Revised Vision

2000 Version:

We engage passionate philanthropists in improving our community.

2005 Version:

To be greater Rochester’s catalyst for community change.

Our Values (Revised)

2000 Version:• World Class Stewardship• Inclusiveness• Opportunity for All• Foster Personal Responsibility• Personalized Donor Support• Creative Problem Solving• Collaboration/Partnership• Impact/Making a Difference• Independent

2005 Version:• Principled Leadership• Permanent Stewardship• Personalized Philanthropy• Collaboration and Partnership• Systemic Change• Broadly Inclusive • Independent and Nonpartisan

Key Customers (Revised)

• Greater Rochester Community• Philanthropists Committed to Greater Rochester

Community

• Key Partners– Community Leaders– Nonprofits and Community Initiatives– Legal and Financial Advisors– Government and Private Funders– Board, Staff and Volunteers

Key Result Areas (Revised)

• Learning to Make Change

• Focusing for Impact and Engagement

• Telling Our Story

• Broadening Our Circle

• “Did we prepare to be community change agents?”

• “Did we engage philanthropists and community partners?”

• “Does the community perceive us as facilitators of change?”

• “Have we reached and engaged more diverse populations?”

Learning to Make Change

•Outcomes– Frequent, effective community leadership in multiple

areas

– Demonstrable community improvements

– Public policy improvements

•Process measures– Board and staff ready for roles as change agents

– Foundation operation is more sustainable

– Policies and procedures support core mission

– Community partnerships developed

Focusing for Impact & Engagement

•Outcomes– Measurable impact in interest areas

– Our expertise recognized and solicited

– More philanthropists more actively engaged

– Increased resources in interest areas

•Process measures– Strategies for impact and change identified

– Recruitment and deployment of staff

– Knowledge and accountability systems in place

– New ways to engage philanthropists in place

Telling Our Story

•Outcomes– Increased public awareness of Foundation– Foundation seen as change agent, expert and leader– Attraction of philanthropists who want what we do

•Process measures– Foundation “branded” as community change agent – Increased investment in marketing – Culture of storytelling about impact– Internal and external messages clear on mission– Systematized reporting of results to all partners

Broadening Our Circle

•Outcomes– Increased variety of philanthropists– Retention of diverse staff, board, philanthropists – Foundation as place for community philanthropy – Foundation broadly representative of community

•Process measures– New ways to engage philanthropists– Sustainable products allow everyone to be a

philanthropist (without encouraging small funds)– Outreach to specific target markets (geography, ethnicity,

lifestyle, etc.)– Foundation’s inclusive practices enhanced

Timeline (as of 2006)

2006• Refine interest areas• Re-price products• Debate leadership role(s),

oversight• Choose new priority area• Hire program, communications

officers • Restructure Program Dept• Plan marketing campaign• Investigate “next gen”

philanthropist engagement • Investigate technology

(accountability and customer relationship management) tools

• Professional development

2007• Finish repositioning marketing

messages, materials• Launch marketing campaign• Implement at least one giving

circle • Invest in technology tools• Upgrade website to strengthen

community issues, philanthropist interface

• 35th anniversary rollout, including Evening Out

• Consider different event for 2008

Timeline (cont’d)

2008• Hire development officer• Major community leadership

initiative• Add one more giving circle• Focus on grant accountability• Continue telling the story…

“Changing the Conversation”

A vehicle for changeNot a vehicle for donors

Support our community Not support anything you wantMake a difference

Not make a grantJoin our family of philanthropists Not get our services for a low fee

“Changing the Conversation”

Larger funds get more services Not all funds get everything

The work we do Not the business we’re inCommunity philanthropist

Not fundholderCommunity Philanthropy Awards Not Philanthropy Awards

Always Ask:

Is This the Best Thing We Can Do to Strengthen Greater Rochester?

Three Years Later

• Board Development and Makeup

• Board Comfort with Sharing Credit

• Board-initiated Community Indicators Project (Joint with UW)

• Board Focus on Economic Downturn

• We Are “At the Table” Making Change

• Example: Preventing After-School Cuts

Q & A

• Press *1 to enter the question queue

• To remove yourself from queue, press *2

• Please state your name & community foundation before asking your question

• Direct your question to one of the presenters

Thanks!

• For more info about the Community Leadership Framework, visit www.cfleads.org

• Archived Webinar available at www.cfleads.org

• Watch for Webinar announcements

Community Leadership Webinar Series