Social Innovation Fund Information Session

November 12, 2012

Introductions

• Meghan Barp, GTCUW

• Michael Goar, Twin Cities Strive

• Elise Wiener, GTCUW

• Michael Michlin, University of MN

• Dr. Dan Mueller, Wilder Research

• Lorinda Chagnon, GTCUW

• Michael Graif, GTCUW

Twin Cities Strive Overview

Michael Goar

Vision & MissionVISION

Children of all socio-economic backgrounds are well prepared for success in the 21st century.

MISSIONDramatically accelerate educational achievement of all children from

early childhood through early career through an aligned partnership of community stakeholders.

GEOGRAPHIC SCOPEPhase I: The partnership will focus on the cities of

Saint Paul and Minneapolis

Phase II: After demonstrating success in Phase I communities, expansion to additional communities will be considered.

A Holistic, Systemic Approach

3rd Grade Kindergarten 8th Grade 12th Grade College - Career

Academic

Student & Family Support

Preliminary Network Recommendations & Timing

Family Engagement

Teacher Excellence

Early Literacy (Age 3 to Grade 3)

College and Career ReadinessPHASE I

Feb/March 2013

PHASE II

May/June 2013

Early Learning*(Birth – Age 3)

PHASE III

TBD

STEM* College Success*

* Additional Development Required

PRE-LAUNCH

Nov.2012- January 2013

Community EngagementNetwork Launch Planning

6

Alignment of Networks to Community Level Goals

* Additional Development Required

LaunchPhase

Network Kindergarten Readiness

3rd Grade Reading

Proficiency

8th Grade Math

Proficiency

H. S. Graduation

Post Secondary

Completion

I Early Literacy (Age 3 to Grade 3)

I College and Career Readiness

II Family Engagement

II Teacher Excellence

III Early Learning*(Birth – Age 3)

III STEM*

III College Success*

7

Social Innovation Fund Overview

Meghan Barp

“Social innovation” is a powerful strategy rooted in our unparalleled tradition of citizen engagement that believes –

• The best solutions to many major problems come out of communities – not Washington DC

• Significant social impact can be generated by pro-actively growing the most promising solutions to critical problems with evidence of results.

• The federal government can be a catalyst to foster public-private collaborations and other leveraged strategies to make it happen.

The Strategy

Producing desired outcomes•Better economic, education and health outcomes for low-income communities•More people served by most effective solutions•Stronger intermediaries and nonprofit organizations•More, stronger evidence about what works

Generating important knowledge and learning•How nonprofits can best increase scale, build evidence base•How intermediaries can best support nonprofit organizations

Influencing others to adopt aspects of the SIF model•Governments: policies•Intermediaries and nonprofit organizations: practices

SIF Goals

11

Improve

lives

of

people

in

need

Grant Program

• Selection of intermediaries/

nonprofits• Growth of capacity & impact• Rigorous evaluation

Grow

impact of

innovative

solutions

that work

Leverage Strategy

• Influence federal agencies &

nonprofit sector• Share knowledge • Support targeted initiatives

Social Innovation

Fund

Theory of Change

Strive & Social Innovation FundKindergarten

ReadinessKindergarten

Readiness 3rd Grade Reading

3rd Grade Reading

8th Grade Math

8th Grade Math

High school GraduationHigh school Graduation

Postsecondary Credential

Postsecondary Credential

Improve Program QUALITY & Increase Child/Youth ACCESS

Strive & Social Innovation Fund

•$5M federal •2012 – 2016•Twin Cities•Grant Awards

The SIF model is distinguished by four key features:

Innovative Model

Evidence

CommittedFunders

ScalingKnowledge

SupportInfrastructure

1. Reliance on experienced, knowledgeable grantmaking intermediaries to select and grow high-impact nonprofits

2. Emphasis on evidence-based decision-making and rigorous evaluations of program results

3. Requirement that each federal dollar be matched 1:1 from private and nonfederal sources by grantees and subgrantees

4. Commitment to capture, apply and share knowledge gained from the SIF experience

Evaluation Overview

Dr. Michael Michlin

Role of Evidence in the SIFValid evidence of results is essential to the SIF program:

1. All programs must demonstrate a minimum level of effectiveness to receive funding

2. All intermediaries must commit to evaluating their portfolio in ways that advance existing evidence of program effectiveness

3. Long term success of the SIF will mean proving it has contributed to increasing:

– the number of nonprofits implementing evidence-based programs– the strength of evidence among funded programs

Continuum of Evidence Building

16

Increasing strength of evaluation data

17

SIF aims to invest in programs

showing strong impact

• Output: direct product of program activities

• Outcome: change that is observed as a result of program implementation

• Impact: change that can be directly attributed to a specific program model or intervention

18

Preliminary Levels of Evidence

Preliminary•Must be based on a reasonable hypothesis; based on research findings•Your program or a similar program•Pre- and post-test that shows change in your outcome of interest•No comparison or control group is used

19

Preliminary Levels of Evidence

Example: Your school has used volunteers to support your reading program for a number of years. Those students behind grade level in reading receive additional time with volunteer tutors. Tracking student progress through periodic testing has shown that those kids who spend time with volunteer tutors are making large gains in reading proficiency. The curriculum used by the tutors utilizes best practices based on research findings addressing literacy development. You want to expand this effort so more kids have access to tutors and tutors are well trained.

20

Moderate Levels of Evidence

Moderate•Support causal conclusions•Studies conducted in limited settings or with limited variation in program participation•Methods used limit the ability to attribute resulting changes in outcomes to the intervention•Example approaches: regression/discontinuity analysis, propensity score matching, time-series analysis, non-equivalent comparison groups

21

Moderate Levels of Evidence

Example: Your program provides tutoring to students not at grade level in an after school setting. The program is full to capacity, yet additional students qualify. Students in the program and a comparison group of program eligible students not in the program receive pre- and post-testing to determine change in proficiency level before and after the time students were (or would have been) in the program. Differences in pre- and post-testing are compared.

22

Strong Levels of Evidence

Strong•Support causal conclusions•Randomized control group used•Studies conducted in a range of setting with a range of participants (supporting assumptions that scaling the program to a greater level will be successful)

23

Strong Levels of Evidence

Example: A multi-site randomized control trial is conducted with center-based early childhood centers implementing a parent-child engagement intervention. Eligible families are randomly placed into receiving the intervention or receiving early childhood care in the existing care setting. Parents in the intervention group attend additional parent-focused skill development classes. Consistency of delivery of the intervention is tightly monitored and children in both groups are assessed throughout the intervention for changes in developmental precursors to literacy development.

precursors of literacy development

24

Levels of Evidence

• Upload documents describing all research studies undertaken

• RFP review process will include evaluation experts

• Reviewers will use a rubric which takes into account methodology used and quality of the studies completed

Compliance

Elise Wiener

26

Key Characteristics of Organizations with Highly Effective Financial Management• Written and followed policies and procedures• Qualified and trained financial staff• Effective communications• Succession planning and cross-training• Self-assessment and continuous

improvement• Active, knowledgeable and informed Board

and finance committee

27

Efficient Accounting System

• Accounting System must be capable of:• Distinguishing between grant vs. non-grant related

expenditures• Identifying costs by program year• Identifying costs by budget category• Differentiating between direct and indirect costs

(administrative costs)• Accounting for each award/grant separately

28

Basics of OMB Circulars

• Cost Principles• CFR 220 (formerly A-21)• CFR 230 (formerly A-122)• Allowable & Unallowable Costs

• Administrative Requirements• CFR 215 (formerly A-110)• Accounting System • Documentation requirements

• A-133 requirements • An organization is subject to an A-133 audit it if expends more

than $500,000 of Federal funds in its fiscal year.

29

• Minimum award: $100,000• Budget categories

• All amounts must be explained• No subgranting allowed• All costs must be allowable under Federal rules and regulations

• Evaluation component• Criminal background checks

• FBI finger-print based check• State criminal history registry check• National Sex Offender Public Registry check

http://www.nationalserviceresources.org/national-service-criminal-history-check-resources

Budget Considerations

30

• Match requirement: 1:1

• Cash match only

• Must be new funding or reserves

• No previously obligated/committed funds

• No in-kind match allowed

Match Requirements

31

• Monthly invoicing and financial reporting• Reimbursement basis• Appropriate supporting documentation required• All costs must be allowable under federal rules and

regulations (allocable, reasonable, consistently applied and necessary)

• Time and effort reporting required• Separate reporting of expenses against the subgrant share

vs the subgrant match share

Grants Management

Application Instructions

Michael Graif

Online Grant Application Overview

Training:

December 3, 2012: 9AM-12 PM

December 4, 2012: 1-4 PM

Applications due January 11, 2013 12 NOON

www.unitedwaytwincities.org/sif

Resources PowerPoint Overview of the New Grant System

Online Instructions for Grant Applicants

Service Level Agreement (for technical assistance)

SIF materials: www.unitedwaytwincities.org/sif

Help Desk email: support@unitedwaytwincities.org

Help Desk phone: 612-340-7534

Service Level Agreement: The Basics

• Hours of support: 8:00 am - 4:30 pm CST Monday-Friday

• Priority Level 1: Emergencies and Maintenance

• Priority Level 2: Urgent Items

• Priority Level 3: Non-Urgent Items & Requests for New Features

• Email: support@unitedwaytwincities.org• Phone: 612-340-7534

RFP and Application ReviewAction Item Date/Deadline

Release RFP to national audience through multiple channels

December 3, 2012

Subgrantee Orientation November/December 2012

Applications due January 11, 2013

Proposal review and scoring January/February 2013

Site visits with potential subgrantees February 2013

Final scoring and recommendations by review committee

February/March 2013

Final approval by Executive Committee March 2013

Funding begins April 1, 2013

Questions?Questions about SIF:

sif@unitedwaytwincities.org

Technical/application questions:

support@unitedwaytwincities.org

SIF Information:

www.unitedwaytwincities.org/sif