Page 1
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
The Leadership ChallengeMoving towards a governance model for the
Washtenaw County Literacy Coalition
Background image source: "Book" by Steve Mishos<http://flickr.com/photos/flyzipper/342012313/>
This presentation is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution‐Share Alike 3.0 license. Please visit http://www.creativecommons.org for more information.
April 14, 2008Haley Gallagher & Virginia Knechtel
Erika Malinoski & Buzzy Nielsen
Page 2
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
1 class: Public Policy 578 ‐ Applied Policy Seminar
2 instructors: Elisabeth Gerber & Bob Guenzel
3 groups: Emergency dispatch, government consolidation, & literacy governance
4 students: Haley, Virginia, Erika, & Buzzy
Page 3
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
& General Findings
& Critical Qualities for Success
&Model I: Educational Outreach
&Model II: County Leadership
&Model III: Nonprofit Expansion& Variation: Suborganization
&Model IV: New Nonprofit
& Conclusions
Page 4
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy Graph source: Chapin Hall Center for Children (2000), p. 17
General findings about nonprofit
coalitions
Page 5
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Questionnaire respondents 15
Clients 200 to millions
Staff 0 to 1,400
Use volunteers? Yes, 75%
Budgets $60,000 to $190 million
Budget sources Taxes, fees, donations, grants, memberships, endowments, . . .
Efforts in other coalitions Significant
Page 6
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Priority ofliteracy coalition
72.7% ranked it as a medium priority
Are there barriersto involvement
72.7% said yes, citing time, money, and staffing
Hours/monthdevoted to coalition
Average: 2‐5
Page 7
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
0
1
2
3
4
Resource is critical
Resource is helpful
We have enough
We could contribute
This is a strength
Respon
ses
Volunteers
Program evaluation
Literacy resources
Resources the task force needs and has the capacity to fill
Page 8
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Resources in which the task force has strong capacity
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Literacy strategies
Administrative Support
Referrals
Strategic planning
Personnel management
Technology
Fiscal services
Page 9
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Resources that the task force needs
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Fundraising
Service expansion
Publicity
Marketing
Page 10
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
The Good:& Strong support for a coalition effort on literacy
& Breadth of strengths among members
& New partnerships/opportunities already arising
& Agreement on an overall goalfor expanding referrals networks
&Willingness to invest time in a successful coalition
Page 11
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
The Bad:& Different conceptions of mission
& Distrust from previous coalition attempts
& Need for leadership
& Concern for specific populations
& Overextended capacity & funding issues
& Different conceptions of organizational form
Page 12
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
& Public awareness
& Political capital
& Sustainable funding
& A central hub for literacy services/information& Including satellite
services in neediest areas
& Education & Training& For network members
& For staff/volunteers
& Data collection
& Asset inventory
Page 13
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
& Strong leadership
& Board of Directors
& Common and realistic mission
& Patience and willingness to reevaluate
&Willingness for members to contribute
& Ideally, a nonprofit structure
Page 14
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
A strong LEADER must emerge.
Page 15
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy Graph source: Chapin Hall Center for Children (2000), p. 18
Problems identified in previous coalitions
Page 16
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
This literacy champion should:& Build relationships among organizations
& Connect varied goals to a common mission
& Lead strategic planning and the push for progress
& Hold organizations accountable for commitments
& Facilitate collaboration and referrals
& Emerge from the community
& Be a new full‐time, funded position
Page 17
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
The task force must agree on a COMMON MISSION.
Page 18
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy Graph source: Chapin Hall Center for Children (2000), p. 18
Problems identified in previous coalitions
Page 19
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Organizations should be willing to CONTRIBUTE individual resources and time for communal progress.
Page 20
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Priority ofliteracy coalition
72.7% ranked it as a medium priority
Are there barriersto involvement
72.7% said yes, citing time, money, and staffing
Hours/monthdevoted to coalition
Average: 2‐5
Priority ofliteracy coalition
72.7% ranked it as a medium priority
Are there barriersto involvement
72.7% said yes, citing time, money, and staffing
Hours/monthdevoted to coalition
Average: 2‐5
Page 21
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy Graph source: Chapin Hall Center for Children (2000), p. 18
Problems identified in previous coalitions
Page 22
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Such contributions may include:& Funding for a coordinator position
&Willingness to funnel grant monies through a central organization
& Time investments for more meetings, joint services, etc.
Page 23
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Build on relationships formed in the task force
Typified by:& On‐the‐fly partnerships
structures(meetings, listserv, etc.)
Page 24
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Strengths:& Low‐risk
& Easy
& Slight improvement from status quo
Weaknesses:& Low impact
& Lost funding opportunities
& Large populations of needy people remain unserved
Page 25
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Center literacy coordination efforts through a higher education institution
Typified by:& Creating a new position (possibly faculty‐level)
within a college or university
& Significant student volunteer involvement
& Partnerships with local nonprofits and agencies
Page 26
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
& Executive Director is MSU professor
& 12‐15 member Board of Directors
& Incentives for students & faculty participating in coalition‐sponsored activities
&Multiple partnerships with public and private entities, including with a national literacy effort
& Diversified funding sources
Capitol Area Literacy Coalition
Page 27
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Strengths:& Credibility &
brand of colleges and universities
& Stable funding and administration
& Access to student volunteers
Weaknesses:& Could be
perceived as overly academic
& University guidelines may generate conflicts
& Poor mission fit
Page 28
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Create a leadership position within the County
Typified by:& Placement within a County department
& County acting as a central point of access, funding, and referrals for clients, funders, and nonprofits
& A 501(c)(3) continuing to act as fiduciary agent
Page 29
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
& Established as a "Local Management Board," with board members from the County, nonprofits, and businesses
& Created a position within the department of Health & Human Services
& Key component: ChildLink, a referral & triage services provided by the County & multiple nonprofit partners
Page 30
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Strengths:& Stable funding
& Strong administrative capacity
&Multiple service locations throughout county
Weaknesses:& Poor mission fit
& Financial difficulties
& County may be ineligible for certain types of external funding
Page 31
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
An existing nonprofit leads the coalition
Typified by:& Nonprofit acting as spokesperson for the
coalition
& Shared fundraising efforts, with the nonprofit acting as fiduciary agent
& Nonprofit leader coordinating meetings and the provision of services to prevent duplication
Page 32
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
& A pre‐existing nonprofit, Washtenaw Housing Alliance, leads the coalition
& Includes Operations Committee with representatives from member organizations
& Different work groups tasked with addressing different areas of need for the coalition
& Central website, organization, and location foster dissemination of information and funding
Page 33
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Strengths:& Strong mission
identification
& Uses existing capacity (with new funding infusions)
& Strong “branding”
Weaknesses:& Heavy burden on
one organization
& Few nonprofits have the capacity
&Mission drift
& Organizational authority/trust
Page 34
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Create a suborganizationwithin an existing nonprofit
Typified by:& Ensure a set of services receives attention
without drawing resources from core activities
& Varying degrees of autonomy possible
&May or may not use existing non‐profit's brand
Page 35
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Strengths:& Separates
coalition functions
& Close coordination between new and existing nonprofit
& Capitalizes on existing brand
Weaknesses:& Complicates
decision‐making
& Difficulty finding leadership
& Time‐consuming creation process
Page 36
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Create a new umbrella nonprofit, which serve the same functions as an expanded organization would do
Page 37
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
&Membership‐based organization
& Includes Board of Directors, Advisory Roundtable (represents larger literacy community), and Adult Learners Network
& Opts for strong Board decision‐making, rather than a strong executive director
Page 38
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Strengths:& Executive director
fulfills needed administrative functions
& Does not unduly burden current nonprofit
Weaknesses:& Difficult to find
leadership
& Less credibility
& Time‐consuming creation process
& Creates additional bureaucracy
Page 39
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
MODEL III: Variation
Create a suborganizationwithin an existing nonprofit
Page 40
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Existing nonprofit
Existing nonprofit's programs & services
Coalitionsuborganization
Executive committee
Coalition director
Workgroups
Data, research, & evaluation
Fundraising etc.
Page 41
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Strengths:& Community/coalition support
& Can capitalize on strengths of other models
& Strong mission fit
&Washtenaw County's particularly strong nonprofit sector
& Provides the smoothest transition
Page 42
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
Key considerations:& Nonprofits will need to broaden mission
& The County should continue its strong support of the coalition
& Further capacity for centralized space, volunteers, etc. will be needed
& Coalition members will need to demonstrate sustained commitment by contributing time and other resources
Page 43
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
We see strong commitmentto the success of this coalition
We believe the coalition has or canacquire the resources it needs for success
With the leadership, strong mission commitment,and willingness to contribute to the commongood, we believe this coalition WILL succeed.
Page 44
Gerald R. FordSchool of Public Policy
This presentation is available online athttp://www.slideshare.net/remnil/literacy‐governance