Chesapeake Bay Funders Network

1
Chesapeake Bay Funders Network

• Capacity Building Initiative

2
Development of Capacity Building Initiative (CBI)

• Rauch Foundation
• Chairs CBFN Capacity Building Workgroup
• River Network
• Conducted research, prepared white paper
• CBFN Workgroup
• Developed key goals and objectives
• TCC Group Trust
• Finalizing Initiative details

3
Capacity Building Models

• Charles Stewart Mott Foundation
• Mary Reynolds Babcock Foundation
• Pfizer Foundation Southern HIV/AIDS Prevention
  Initiative
• Peninsula Community Foundation Organizational
  Capacity Grants Initiative

4
Capacity Building Initiative Process

• Targeted General Operating Grants
• Large Capacity Building Grants
• Customized Assistance

Tier 1 Organizations
Organizational Assessment Process

• Smaller gen. ops Grants
• Smaller Capacity Building Grants
• Customized Assistance

Eligible Watershed Organizations Applications
Tier 2 Organizations
Selection Process
Tier 3 Organizations

• Networking /training Opportunities for Capacity
  Building
• Networking Opportunities for Watershed Issues

5
Capacity Building InitiativeEnhancing the
Effectiveness of Watershed Groups
Region
Region
Y1 - Y3 Goal To strengthen/ build core
organizational capacities of watershed
organizations
Communities
Watershed Organizations
Programs
Network Collective Impact
6
Capacity Building InitiativeStrengthening the
Ecological Health of Communities
Region
Y3 Goal To improve the quality of
education/outreach, restoration/ protection
projects and advocacy activities to impact
communities
Communities
Watershed Organizations
Programs
Network Collective Impact
7
Capacity Building InitiativeEstablishing and
Sustaining a Regional Network and Greater
Collective Impact
Y3 Goal To have a functioning Chesapeake Bay
regional network of watershed organizations and
supporters and to continue to enhance the
networks effectiveness and their collective
impact
Region
Communities
Watershed Organizations
Programs
Network Collective Impact
8
Nonprofit Capacity Building Needs

• 4 Core Capacities
• Adaptive (6)
• Leadership (5)
• Management (11)
• Technical (11)
• Organizational Culture
• Adaptive and Leadership Capacity
• Crucial for nonprofits and vital at every life
  cycle stage, but often overlooked

9
TCCs Four Core Capacities Model
10
Core Capacity Assessment Tool (CCAT)

• Self-Assessment Survey
• 4 Core Capacities Organizational Culture
• 36 Sub-Capacities
• 146 Total Questions, averaging 4 questions for
  each sub-capacity
• CCAT Participation
• Minimum of 3 organizational leaders must take the
  survey
• Anonymous survey with answers reported in
  aggregate no weighting
• CCAT Results
• On-line system with instant access, analysis and
  reporting
• PDF files (summary and details) for download to
  share with stakeholders
• Highlights strengths and provides recommendations
  on areas of challenge

11
Core Capacity Assessment Tool (CCAT)

• Core Capacity Example
• 6 Sub-Capacities for Adaptive Capacity
• Decision Making Tools
• Environmental Learning
• Organizational Learning
• Organizational Resource Sustainability
• Program Resource Sustainability
• Programmatic Learning
• 30 Total Questions, averaging 5 questions each
• Adaptive Sub-Capacity Example
• Decision Making Tools
• Our organizations constituents/clients are
  actively recruited to provide input and feedback
  on how programs/services should be provided
• Our organization has a written strategic plan
  that includes a clear, specific, and measurable
  set of goals and objectives that will ensure
  success
• Our organization informally evaluates our
  programs by engaging staff to document and/or
  share stories and anecdotes

12
CBI Assessment Process

• Review of CBI Proposals
• CCAT Participation
• On-line self-assessment tool, minimum of 3
  participants per org
• T1 Range 6 to 16 survey respondents
• T2 Range 3 to 13 survey respondents
• Strong board participation
• Interviews
• T1 100 in-person interviews
• Grantee feedback on process/approach
• Aggregate review and discussion with CBT

13
Assessment Results

• Tier 1 and 2 were comparable in strengths and
  challenges
• High in Leadership and Management
• High in Organizational Culture
• Low in Technical capacities across the board
• Opportunity for peer learning/mentoring
• CBI participants noted the assessment as a rare
  opportunity

14
From Needs to Recommendationsart and science

• Review of CBI proposal
• CCAT results
• Org Interview
• Context/Life Cycle
• Other CB efforts completed or under way
• CBFN Capacity Building Workgroup
• Budget

15
Summary of Recommendations

• Areas of Need (In order of need- omni-need)
• Adaptive Management
• Program Evaluation Training and coaching
• Strategic Assessment/Planning
• Leadership
• Board Development through Consulting, Group
  Training Follow-up
• Management
• Assessing/managing Staff Performance? Consulting,
  Group Training Follow-up
• Technical
• Marketing ? Group Training Follow-up
• Fundraising ? Group Training Follow-up
• Technology Skills ? Assessments, Hard/Software
  Training

16
Grant Awards Group Assistance by Tiers and
Type

• Grant Assistance
• Tier 1 (8 groups)
• Targeted General Operating 227,500
• Targeted Capacity Building 104,500
• Tier 2 (11 groups)
• Targeted General Operating 77,500
• Targeted Capacity Building 73,000
• Group Assistance
• Tier 1, 2, 3 (36 groups)
• Group Assistance 74,500
• (Prog eval training, IT assist)
• TOTAL 557,000

17
Grants by Region/State

• Capitol Area MD 83,763
• Central MD 175,447
• Eastern Shore MD 77,342
• Southern MD 35,842
• MD TOTAL 372,394
• VA TOTAL 199,605
• MD avg T1 50,400 T2 25,333
• VA avg T1 50,000 T2 15,000
• includes ex. capacity building grants

18
Preferred Service Providers

• 54 RFQs submitted
• 21 preferred
• Assessed using 3 Criteria
• Knowledge and Track Record
• Exp. With Env./watershed non-profit groups
• Capacity/flexibility to deliver services needed

19
CBI Evaluation

• Developed CBI Logic Model for planning and
  evaluation purposes
• Developing core evaluation questions
• Prioritizing evaluation components and indicators
• Working individually with grantees to identify
  measures of success
• Developing evaluation plan within context of
  evaluation goals and budget which will include
  multi-layered approach
• Organizational
• Programmatic
• Regional/Network

20
Capacity Building InitiativeEnhancing the
Effectiveness of Watershed Groups
Region
Region
Indicators ? capacities in leadership,
strategic planning, board, fundraising,
partnerships, technology, evaluation, etc. Data
Sources Organizational assessment, grantee
interviews, grantee reports, etc.
Communities
Watershed Organizations
Programs
Network Collective Impact
21
Capacity Building InitiativeStrengthening the
Ecological Health of Communities
Region
Indicators ?ecological conditions, ? numbers of
volunteers, ? diversity of funding,
?competitiveness for existing grant funding (i.e.
Trust, NFWF, KCF) Data Sources Grantee
interviews, grantee reports, etc.
Communities
Watershed Organizations
Programs
Network Collective Impact
22
Capacity Building InitiativeEstablishing and
Sustaining a Regional Network and Greater
Collective Impact
Indicators ? membership, quality meetings, of
collaborations, greater involvement in Bay-wide
issues, greater use of existing/new technical
tools (i.e., NEMO) Data Sources Evaluations
of network meetings, membership roster,
interviews, etc.
Region
Communities
Watershed Organizations
Programs
Network Collective Impact
23
Next Steps

• Develop CBI action plan with Tier 1 and 2 groups
  (grant agreement)
• Watershed Network Activities
• Listening sessions with Jeff Lape, 5/30, 6/7
• CBI kickoff and network meeting, June 27,28
• 2nd Annual Watershed Forum, Oct. 12-14
• Develop evaluation and tools
• Next CBFN meeting evaluation, CBI progress
  report