Monthly Archive for July, 2009

Around the World Part II: Citizens & Communities

Published
by
Andrew
on July 20, 2009
in role of government and social innovation
. Comments
Flickr: _fLeMmA__

Flickr: _fLeMmA__

I am leaving Portugal with great inspiration and practical knowledge about how to further advance a social innovation agenda in the United States.

Friday, I sat on a panel with Christian Bason from MindLab in Denmark, who has been leading a citizen-based agenda for the Danish government for over eight years – and there is much we can learn from him. In his presentation, Christian put forth that 50% of Denmark’s GDP is from the government. The comparable statistic in the United States is approximately 37% (not including the nonprofit sector that often works on behalf of government). Recession or not, he argues, we must strive to make the best use of those resources, and ‘engaging citizens in solutions’ can help maximize those resources. As social problems arise, we cannot rely on raising that government percentage. Instead, we must rely on citizen-based innovation.

The other interesting theme that began to emerge throughout the Portugal convening was to bring forth a greater emphasis on place-based change – where communities engage in their own future. (Certainly there is some of this in the Harlem Children’s Zone model.) Though it remains to be seen how easily a place-based change model can spread, there is something compelling about attempting to develop the “technology” that would allow communities to engage in their own solutions as a matter of our everyday lives. Within each community is a large set of untapped resources in people, space, and money – if it can be unleashed. This begins to crystallize for me as I consider how the White House Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation might create synergy among its focus areas of service, new media, and public-private partnerships. Such an approach advances a broader way of thinking beyond just finding what works and moving toward institutionalizing the ability to innovate as new issues arise within a community.

Social Innovation around the World

Published
by
Andrew
on July 16, 2009
in role of government, social capital markets, social entrepreneurship and social innovation
. Comments

It is early morning in Lisbon, Portugal, on day two of the Social Innovation eXchange (SIX) International Summer School on Social Innovation. The first day was quite inspiring and also eye opening for me. There are about 120 people here from 24 countries around the world, all of whom are advancing social innovation in their own countries. It is the first convening I have been to where I know almost nobody, and I am learning a great deal!

The theme of the event is “Recovery Through Innovation,” and not unlike my first post, there is a strong sense here that we are at an inflection point and that social innovation can play a vital role in moving the world forward on the social issues we struggle with. The critical role of government is quite prevalent here is as well.

Here are a few people I have met so far:

Won Soon Park, from South Korea, is the executive director of Hope Institute. He has been working on engagement of all three sectors for decades. At the Institute, they house the Social Invention Center, which “gathers citizens’ ideas in order to change everyday life and institutions,” and the Center for Alternatives, which “finds new, alternative policy models for our society and the worth in living life for the common good,” among other initiatives. The fascinating thing about their work is the use of technology to find citizen-based ideas, helping to move them forward, combined with very strong connections to both local and national politicians. Won Soon comes from a deep background in advocacy, and brings that experience to driving social innovation in South Korea now.

Louise Savell from the UK is associate director of Social Finance. Social Finance started just a couple of years ago, but they are doing dynamic work to develop financial instruments driven by and for social innovation, a great deal of which involves working directly with the UK’s government. One initiative that particularly intrigues me is the early development of a social impact bond that would be secured by the government based on the savings realized on a particular social issue (e.g., prison recidivism).

Justine Munro from New Zealand is the chief executive officer of the Centre for Social Innovation. The centre just opened this past year, but Justine, along with others from the academic community, are showing me that the momentum being built at universities around the world surrounding social innovation and entrepreneurship is much stronger and more consistent than it was when I first started teaching social entrepreneurship in 1999.

Stay tuned for more from SIX…and follow the conversation on Twitter at #sixlisbon

On “Why the Social Innovation Fund Matters”

Published
by
Andrew
on July 10, 2009
in public innovation, role of government and social innovation
. Comments

Over on the Tactical Philanthropy blog, Sean Stannard-Stockton has provided some great arguments in support of the Social Innovation Fund.  I’d like to add in a few additional thoughts and concerns of my own:

First, we have to be careful not to get too caught up in the dollars − because in reality, $50 million (or even $150 million after the 2-1 match) is not much.  If we only look at this fund as increasing dollars spent, we’re missing a BIG opportunity.  Rather, the money should be seen as a way to influence the actions of all sectors and thus achieve greater systemic change.  And, in my view, this can only be done if recipients of these funds are actually interacting with the public systems (i.e., education, transportation, economic development, etc.) that have a far broader reach than any nonprofit ever will.

Second (and related to the first), accessing these public systems mean interacting with government. While we all know of really great models that have significant impact on their social issue, these organizations’ innovations rarely find their way back into the public system. For example, the innovations in education are not, by and large, changing the way the general public school system is run; the progress made by some programs in stemming recidivism once people get out of prison is not informing a widespread change in the entire judicial system. The Social Innovation Fund should be looking for organizations with proven models who actively engage with government in an attempt to incorporate the best parts of their model into the broader system where change can really be widespread.

Third, states seem to be the natural level of government to promote a social innovation agenda.  The federal government is pretty far removed from most people’s daily lives (and necessarily moves more slowly). Cities, meanwhile, are so numerous that trying to engage with every one would be overly burdensome.  Several states – including Texas, Louisiana, Virginia, and Minnesota − have started offices or passed legislation to find and grow what works. The Social Innovation Fund should encourage more of this − even giving funding priority to collaborations that include a state-based entity committed to ensuring the creation and growth of the most effective and sustainable models.

By supporting organizations that are no longer satisfied with benefiting just one group of clients and work instead to change entire systems, and by encouraging government efforts to work with these organizations to effect such change, the Social Innovation Fund could live up to its name − driving a true paradigm shift in the way the nation attacks social problems.

For more about my perspective on government support for social innovation, visit Public Innovators at www.publicinnovators.com/publications.

A Historic Day – Are you ‘all in’?

Published
by
Andrew
on July 1, 2009
in social innovation
. Comments

President Obama - The White HouseI was sitting in the East Wing of the White House next to Bob Grimm, Director of Research and Policy Development for the Corporation for National and Community Service, waiting for the program to begin. I turned to him with my camera and camcorder in hand and asked, “Have you been here before?” He replied, “Yes, but it never gets old.”

It went all too fast – but yesterday was indeed a historic day in which President Obama set forth a Community Solutions Agenda. I like the way that sounds. It focuses the conversation on two core elements of this work: “community” and “solutions.”

But wait, let me back up. I arrived at the White House about 45 minutes early and waited outside the east entrance gate with one of the early pioneers in social enterprise, Ed Skloot, former President of the Surdna Foundation and now at Duke University. As guests slowly arrived, all waiting for the gates to open, I was impressed by how the White House Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation had invited an excellent cross section of the field. Julius Walls of Greyston Bakery, Gara LaMarche, head of The Atlantic Philanthropies, J.B. Schramm from College Summit, the leadership from the America Forward coalition, David Gergen and his son Chris, Bill Drayton and Diana Wells from Ashoka, Zack Rosenburg from the St. Bernard Project, the author David Bornstein, and Kris Prendergast from the Social Enterprise Alliance. Though at the same time, I didn’t know half the people there. The only noticeable omission was the for-profit social venture field, but that’s a topic for a future blog. The White House press release listed all the attendees.

The gates opened as scheduled at 12:45. We walked our way through various corridors until we arrived in a grand room with portraits of presidents on the walls, including Kennedy, George H.W. Bush, and Clinton. Inside various rooms on each side were more portraits of Adams, Jefferson, Madison, and Jackson. Marble busts of Washington and Lincoln were also on display – you could feel the significance of the activities that had taken place inside these walls. Cameras flashed, camcorders rolled, and people who often don’t get to see each other were getting reacquainted while waiting for the program to begin.

As scheduled, we were ushered in at 1:30 to a long narrow room. At the front was a podium with the Presidential Seal. In the back were photographers, videographers, and reporters. It looked exactly like the press conference room we see on C-SPAN.

The program began with excellent remarks by Stephen Goldsmith, the former Chair and current Vice Chair of the Corporation for National and Community Service and now at the Kennedy School. That was followed by four presentations by different people that have developed solutions to social problems: Geoffrey Canada, Harlem Children’s Zone; Robert Chambers, Bonnie CLAC; Pat Christen, HopeLab; and Vanessa Nunez, Genesys Works. Each presentation was unique and special in its own way. “Kudos” to the White House Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation once again – it was clear Sonal Shah, Michele Jolin, Charlie Anderson and Carlos Monje are working hard to cast a wide net as they selected speakers who represent a broad range of organizations and people, many of whom would not be considered “brand names.”

All of this was a great warm-up to the main attraction, the President’s arrival. His remarks, a little less than 15 minutes, were quite amazing. He set forth an agenda for a new way to work on the social issues we face today, which will indeed propel the dialogue to a whole new level.

I want to share a few quotes from the President’s remarks that I thought were of particular importance:

“So if anyone out there is waiting for government to solve all their problems, they’re going to be disappointed. Because ultimately, the best solutions don’t come from the top-down, not from Washington; they come from the bottom-up in each and every one of our communities.”

“The bottom line is clear: Solutions to America’s challenges are being developed every day at the grass roots – and government shouldn’t be supplanting those efforts, it should be supporting those efforts. Instead of wasting taxpayer money on programs that are obsolete or ineffective, government should be seeking out creative, results-oriented programs like the ones here today and helping them replicate their efforts across America.”

“And it’s absolutely possible if we’re willing to work together to give organizations like these the resources they need to reach their fullest potential and have their fullest impact, and if we’re able to ensure that best practices are shared all across the country, that we’ve set up a strong network of ideas. And that’s precisely the idea behind the $50 million innovation fund included in the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act – an initiative designed to assist community solutions like these that we’re asking Congress to fund this year.”

“And today, I’m announcing that I’ll be asking Melody Barnes, who is our director of the Domestic Policy Council, and our innovation team to lead this process, traveling across the country to discover and evaluate the very best programs in our communities. And we won’t just be looking at the usual suspects in the usual places. We won’t just be seeking the programs that everybody already knows about, but we also want to find those hidden gems that haven’t yet gotten the attention they deserve. And we’ll be looking in all sorts of communities –- rural, urban, and suburban – in every region of this country, because we know that great ideas and outstanding programs are everywhere – and it’s up to us to find them.”

“We’re going to take this new approach, this new way of doing business, government-wide. So we’ve already set up a What Works Fund at the Department of Education – $650 million in the Recovery Act that we’ll be investing in the most successful, highest-impact initiatives in our school districts and communities.”

“Our non-profits can provide the solutions. Our government can rigorously evaluate these solutions and invest limited taxpayer dollars in ones that work. But we need those of you from the private sector to step up, as well.”

“If we work together – if we all go all-in here – think about the difference we can make.”

“In the end, that’s what this effort is about. It’s not about the old partisan lines in the sand. We know there’s nothing Democratic or Republican about just doing what works.”

Are we “ALL IN”?