Pay for Success: To Invest or Not to Invest? Assessing Collaboration

Pay for Success: To Invest or Not to Invest? Assessing Collaboration

When things go wrong in a PFS project—and they most likely will—it’s the quality of the partners’ collaboration that determines whether the project stays on track toward better outcomes for low-income people.


We’ve launched our Pay for Success: To Invest or Not to Invest? series to walk others through how we decide which Pay for Success (PFS) projects to consider investing in. We started by sharing our initial screening criteria, and have written about the importance of impact and innovation. Over the next few weeks, we’ll discuss each of our initial screening categories in more depth.

When things go wrong in a PFS project—and they most likely will—it’s the quality of the partners’ collaboration that determines whether the project can course-correct to stay on track toward getting better outcomes for low-income people. So it’s no surprise that collaboration is one of the qualities we look for when screening. In fact, the level of collaboration we look for closely aligns with our “partnership” criteria in the 4 Ps framework that we use to assess the credit worthiness of a PFS transaction.

In PFS, strong collaboration looks a lot like collective impact. As our colleague Eileen Neely has previously written, we’ve long considered PFS to be collective impact. PFS transactions with strong collaboration have the power to realign existing partners, funds and organizations, ultimately leading to large-scale, enduring change that addresses the most pressing problems facing low-income people.

Three key elements that demonstrate that a project is set up to facilitate strong collaboration:

Cross-sector Partnership of Decision-Makers and Doers

PFS transactions are a team effort and the people at the table matter. When we’re deciding whether or not to invest in a PFS project, we want to see that everyone who has skin in the game is engaged in the partnership. If a project is focused on workforce development, for example, we want to know whether early-stage conversations included someone from the government departments of budget/finance, labor, education and workforce, in addition to the service provider, evaluator and intermediary putting together the project. As the project moves through transaction structuring, are funders from both philanthropy and the private sector being included in conversations? Are funders viewed as partners? When we look at the list of project partners, we want to see a representative from every organization and/or system that influences the problem.

Aligned Incentives

When investing in PFS, we look for evidence that a project will align all partners’ interests to achieve outcomes. This involves two primary questions.

First, is there a shared goal, and are partners clearly aligned in how they articulate the shared goal? In the Massachusetts Juvenile Justice PFS Project, for example, all parties involved agreed that the goal was to reduce recidivism and increase employment for high-risk young men coming out of the juvenile justice system or on adult probation. This ensured, from the start, that all partners were working toward the same endgame.

Secondly, is there a way to hold people accountable to the shared goal? As we addressed last week, we ideally like to see a financial incentive for all the project parties–including the service provider—to keep everyone involved in problem-solving throughout the duration of the project. Together, a unified goal and financial incentives keep everyone at the table and engaged throughout the life of the PFS project.

Local Support

The benefit of collaboration is that everyone brings their strengths to the table, and we believe that a local/community foundation represents an important voice in the partnership. These groups know their communities’ needs best because they are connected to the fabric of the place they serve. In addition, strong local support of a project indicates to us, as a national funder, that the problem the PFS project is targeting is a priority for the local community. We also look to local and community foundations to provide context for us—is this project truly serving the hardest-to-reach populations?

No one person, organization or sector can solve our seemingly intractable urban problems. Cross-sector collaboration is critical to finding and implementing solutions. And because effective, sustainable solutions are the ultimate goal of PFS transactions, collaboration is critical for success.

Next up: we explain what we look for in a government champion. Check back next week to learn more!

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Email

Latest Articles

1863 Ventures Seeks to Close the ‘Friends and Family’ Financing Gap for New Majority Entrepreneurs

Melissa Bradley understands how barriers to capital for entrepreneurs of color hurt our economy and our communities. “There is clearly a cost if we do not invest in diversity,” said Bradley, founder of 1863 Ventures. “We miss out on great returns when we are not inclusive in our investment theses. There are opportunity costs for all of us.” She cites …

A Vision for Systemic Change in the Twin Cities: An Interview with Marcus Pope

JK:We’re celebrating your new role as President of Youthprise! Can you tell us a bit about Youthprise? MP: I’ll start by sharing Youthprise’s mission, which is to increase equity with and for Minnesota’s Indigenous, low income, and racially diverse youth. We take the “with and for” very seriously; half of our board members are young people between the ages of …

The Legacy of Wealth Inequities in the Brown and Flynn Families: A Hypothetical Exploration

The first post in a two-part series explores the potential of capital to undo the historical legacy of inequities. Race is a complex issue that continues to drive many of the socioeconomic outcomes in the US. For example, if you are a person of color born in the United States, your zip code is more of a predictor of your …

Living Cities Selected to the ImpactAssets 50 for 11th Year in a Row

Living Cities’ Capital for the New Majority team is thrilled to announce that Living Cities and the Catalyst Family of Funds have been selected to the ImpactAssets 50 (IA 50) for the eleventh consecutive year and named as an Emeritus Impact Manager for the second time. “Now in its eleventh year, the ImpactAssets 50™ is the most recognized free database of …

Get Updates

We want to stay in touch with you! Sign up for our email list to receive updates on the progress we’re making with our network of partners, as well as helpful resources and blog posts.

Name