Collective Impact Element Dashboard

Collective Impact Element Dashboard

In our effort to apply a more transparent and disciplined process to supporting our Integration Initiative site partners in cities, we developed this dashboard as a tool to capture progress and prioritize resources based on where those partners are in their work.

This dashboard incorporates the three elements of what Living Cities thinks it takes to create dramatically better results for low-income people: Collective impactpublic sector innovation, and capital innovation.

We update these dashboards as a team every quarter and reflect on what is working, what isn’t and why. We then rate the status of each element using a simple red, yellow, green code for where the site partner is at in the work, and trending up or down areas to indicate trajectory of progress. The overall element rating is an average of each of the component parts (Red= 1; Yellow= 2; Green = 3), with red signifying “low performance”, yellow “medium” and green means “achieved performance.” The arrow ratings you’ll see in the document are assessments of the performance trend. For example, a site partner can be red on performance, but improving, and receive an upward green arrow. Finally, if we don’t feel like we know enough about the working being done, we’ll gray a box out and note the need for more information.

A full description of each component included on this page. Download the document to access a template you can customize to your own collective impact elements!

Collective Impact Components

1. Shared Result

Sites agree to well-articulated ambitious population-level shared result and strategy areas. These shared results have a 10-year timeline.

2. Outcomes

Partner sites prioritized 3-6 and 6-10 year outcomes and hypotheses with plausible theories.

3. Cross-Sector Table

Partner sites create customized/strategic cross-sector tables aligned around prioritized three year outcomes including key public sector institutions/actors needed to achieve results. The cross-sector tables adopt a learning orientation for continuous improvement while maintaining a neutral convener stance.

4. Key Drivers

Sites select key drivers around shared result and prioritized outcomes based on strategies. These key drivers measure whether or not a population is better off as a result of the cross-sector table’s work.

5. Baseline Data

Sites establish necessary baseline data based on prioritized outcomes and key drivers. Once this data is identified, it is acquired, and continuously used to improve the performance of the cross-sector table.

6. Strategies

Sites identify specific strategies, resources, actions, and plans they’re going to take; which are informed by prioritization of outcomes and progress towards shared result.

Public Sector Innovation Components

These components are derived from the Equipt to Innovate Field Guide.

1. Broad Leadership Buy-In & Alignment with City Goals

  • Council, Mayor, City Manager, County Executive and department leadership priority.
  • Alignment with local government’s strategic plan. The initiative’s shared result aligns closely with specifics of the city/county government’s strategic plan or drives in a new way the plans of the involved government entity.
  • Public players weave initiative ideas into daily work of city government. The Initiative’s goals are woven into or change the practices of government agencies; departmental business plans are revised or rewritten.
  • Consideration is given to incorporating initiative goals into various other city plans; examples might include plans related to sustainability, workforce development, transportation and infrastructure improvement, public works, resiliency, youth issues.
  • Power of the government’s convening authority is activated and utilized.
  • Public participants engage other members of city government and external partners broadly, and are vocal about the initiative, advocating regularly for the achievement of the shared result.
  • Cross-sector partnering is matched by cross-departmental silo-busting within government.

2. Continuous & Meaningful Involvement of the Right Public Sector Players & Partners

  • Based on the shared result, the right city government departmental leaders are either at the collective impact table or otherwise meaningfully involved in the effort.
  • Involvement continues to broaden within local government over time; departments that have control over key systems are educated on the goals and engaged to help make systems changes.
  • An inventory of all public sector partners is in place and utilized to make the broadest possible impacts for low-income communities: including but not limited to – county, state and federal officials; universities, community colleges and other public education systems; regional economic development entities; workforce boards and councils; public authorities (e.g., housing, port & other transportation); judicial system; and so on.
  • When possible, government uses community engagement resources to co-create project goals with community members and participants.

3. Public Resource Allocation, Reallocation & Unallocation, As Warranted

  • City/county government funds or other resources are devoted to the Initiative.
  • Budget changes are made to reallocate finances from lower priorities to higher impact efforts.
  • Financial system improvements are codified to apply to other programs serving low-income populations. Strategic analysis of funding options by public financial professionals is, at a minimum, annually reviewed.
  • City sets aside funding for reasonable risk-taking and experimentation toward the end goals of the initiative.
  • Local government uses integration initiative as opportunity to explore innovative funding methods and mechanisms (e.g., pay-for-success approaches, public-private partnerships, use of public funds as “top-loss” to leverage philanthropic and private investment).

4. Policy, Practice, Process & Personnel Development and Reform

  • Ineffective government processes or practices are actively re-engineered or discarded; better, more effective ones are adopted.
  • City ordinances are drafted or changed to advance and take to scale successful results.
  • The government is urged to have the right people in the right positions to make good progress.

5. Sustainability of Improvement and Embedding Change and Innovation

  • Successful programs are embraced and built into city structures, including the annual budget.
  • New policies are developed and ordinances passed to serve the long-term needs of future generations.
  • Useful positions are integrated into the public bureaucracy as appropriate.
  • Productive changes survive mayoral and other elected leader transitions.

6. Capitalizing on Government Data and Public Transparency

  • City/county exercises best practices around open data, puts good data policies in place to govern and broadly share valuable public information, and encourages private use of data toward beneficial public or other economic opportunity purposes.
  • Public partner drives results-based accountability both at collective table and inside government.
  • Public entities regularly disaggregate data for helpful understanding of racial, gender and socioeconomic disparities.
  • City/county leads by example in use of data for performance management and achieving transparent progress to key strategic outcomes, not just for compliance purposes.

Capital Innovation Components

1. Understand Concept

Sites understand the concept of using all types of capital, particularly private capital, to advance their shared result.

2. Identify Strategies

Sites identify at least one strategy in their framework that can be accelerated, scaled up, or replicated by using private capital.

3. Know the Ecosystem

Sites know the “capital ecosystem” related to the identified strategy, or other money that might be used to advance a site’s shared result:

  • They are aware of existing funding that supports or could support the issue area(s) of focus in their ecosystem;
  • They understand reasons why the existing funding is insufficient to move the shared result or leading indicator and ways to realign the existing funding to advance a site’s the shared result; and
  • Relationships between existing funders in the ecosystem are developed or strengthened to improve coordination of resources.

4. Identify Players

Sites identify a player or players to lead or coordinate deploying capital to accelerate the shared result.

5. Develop Solutions

Sites develop possible solutions to address capital insufficiency.

6. Develop Transactions

Sites develop investable transaction(s), or a way to accelerate, scale or replicate a strategy in a site’s framework using larger amounts of funding through use of repayable capital.

7. Transactions Closed

The investable transaction is closed and money flows to advance the related strategy.

8. Use Data

Sites are using data to evaluate efficacy of capital work as applied to the related strategy.


More Resources

Internal Scan: Racial Equity and Inclusion Competency Survey Results 2021

On June 15, 2021 Living Cities administered our fifth annual Racial Equity and Inclusion (REI) competency survey to all staff to reflect on their individual competency related to understanding and advancing racial equity. The survey was originally designed by Hafizah Omar, with feedback and input from Nadia Owusu and Ratna Gill. The questions from this survey were adapted from GARE’s …

Systemic Racism 101: A Visual History of the Impact of Racism in America

Systemic Racism 101: A Visual History of the Impact of Racism in America Book by: Living Cities and Aminah Pilgrim Purchase today:  In collaboration with historian Aminah Pilgram, PhD, we break down concepts of systemic racism, starting with Columbus’ arrival in 1492 to the Black Lives Matter movement. This book offers historical overviews, infographics, and more to help you …

Living Cities Blended Catalyst Fund 2021 Annual Report

This report summarizes Living Cities Blended Catalyst Fund’s (BCF) activities during its sixth year of operations, from July 1, 2020, through June 30, 2021 (FY21). During this fiscal year, the BCF Team fully committed the Fund as of March 31, 2021 reaching 26 investments totaling $33.5MM. The latter half of the BCF investments have been aligned with the iterated investment …

Answering the Call: Implementing the Promise of Equity in Procurement

The second City Accelerator cohort on Inclusive Procurement invited ten cities–Boston, Cleveland, El Paso, Houston, Kansas City, Minneapolis, Nashville, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and South Bend–to leverage their spending power and procurement systems to create greater and more equitable economic opportunity for Black and Brown-owned businesses. Throughout a year that included a global pandemic and racial justice uprisings in response to the …

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.