ERIC ED537178: Focus for Impact: The PacifiCorp Foundation for Learning's Early Childhood Literacy Initiative. Principles for Effective Education Grantmaking. Case in Brief Number 5

2012·0.17 MB·English

by  ERIC

Case in Brief No.5
PRINCIPLESFOREFFECTIVEEDUCATIONGRANTMAKING
Focus for Impact:
The PacifiCorp Foundation for Learning’s
Early Childhood Literacy Initiative
PRINCIPLESFOR EFFECTIVE EDUCATION GRANTMAKING
Discipline Knowledge Resources Effective Engaged Leverage, Persistence Innovation
&Focus Linkedto Grantees Partners Influence& &Constant
Results Collaboration Learning
To better advance its mission of
As partof its flagship Early Childhood
promoting lifelong learning, the Literacy Initiative,the PacifiCorp Foundation
for Learning awarded $1.3 million to support
PacifiCorp Foundation committed
five grantees—one from each of the five
in 2001 to begin devoting 20 percent
western states where PacifiCorp concentrated
of its grantmaking budget to a its business—between 2003-2006.
long-term, multi-year initiative to
Because of the foundation’s narrow area
supportasmall number ofgrantees; of focus,proactive selection of programs
trustees chose the area of early and ongoing support for grantees,the Early
Childhood Literacy Initiative was consid-
literacyfor itsfirst initiative.
ered unique for a small corporate philan-
“Focus for Impact” is intended thropy.However,emerging evaluation data
suggested that the initiative’s programs were
to help funders see ways of
contributing to increased early childhood
applying discipline and focus——
literacy rates and all five grantees were on
one ofGrantmakersfor Education’s the road to becoming self-sustaining.
Principles for Effective Education
Established in 1998 by PacifiCorp,a
Grantmaking——to their work. regional power company based in Portland,
The casestudy explorestrade-offs, Ore.,the PacifiCorp Foundation’s total
annual grantmaking budget is about $2.5
benefits and tensions stemming
million.For its first 10 years,the founda-
from choosing a discrete area
tion’s mission was to “support the vitality,
of focus to guide grantmaking. general welfare,and quality of life”in
communities where PacifiCorp had >
operations.The company’s regional amount of its giving (about 20 percent)
managers,who oversaw operations in their to high-impact,long-term “learning
respective service territories,recommended initiatives.”The board agreed to identify a
grant proposals to the foundation board particular problem to address through the
for approval.Average grants ranged from learning initiatives and invite organizations
$2,000-$5,000 and typically went to to apply for the funding.(The foundations’
capital campaigns or capital expenses at remaining grantmaking budget was set
well-known community organizations. aside for smaller grants that met specific
guidelines related to learning.)
We knew we were responding to real needs,
F
but our dollars were spread so thin that
or its first set of “learning initiative”
it was hard to see if we were really making
grants,the foundation board allocated
an impact. $1 million over three years—beginning
in 2003—to help develop literacy skills
PacifiCorp Senior Vice President Michael among zero- to nine-year-olds.The budget
Pittman,a long-time foundation board included $300,000 to a program partner
member and former chair,observed,“Like in each of PacifiCorp’s three largest service
many corporate foundations,we wanted territories:Utah,Oregon and Wyoming;
to foster goodwill in the communities in the remaining $100,000 was set aside to
which our customers and employees lived, convene grantees annually and to provide
manyof whicharerural and isolated from them with technical assistance.The
other donors.Weknewwe wereresponding foundationlater allocated an additional
to real needs,but our dollars were spread $300,000 over three years to add Idaho
so thin that it was hardto see if we were and Washingtonto the initiative.
reallymaking an impact.”
Atfirst,the foundationthought it could
I identify onehighlyeffectiveearlychildhood
nMarch 2001,after a great deal of discus- literacy program that could be replicated
sionabout the foundation’s goals and how across allfivestates.Isaac Regenstreif,the
it could be moreeffective,trustees agreed foundation’sexecutivedirector,explained,
on a new strategic direction.They changed “PacifiCorp’s corporate culture values
the foundation’s name to the PacifiCorp scaling up effective models over launching
Foundation for Learning and adopted a new start-ups.The board felt more comfortable
mission statement that prized learning as investing in piloted programs that had
“the cornerstone of our brightest future.”To demonstrated track records of success.”
implement this new model of philanthropy,
The foundationboardtasked Regenstreif
board members also decided to transition
with conducting due diligence on potential
away from responsive,general purpose grant-
programs.He visited schools of education,
making within three years in order to engage
nonprofit organizations,policymakers,com-
in three new major categories of giving.
munity leaders and company executives—
For one of these new categories,the concluding,he said,that “without local buy-
foundationplanned to allocate a significant in and investment,aprogram could not
Lessons learned
achieve the high-impact and long-term sus-
tainability that we were looking for because
This case study——the full text of which is
each community has unique needs and ideas
available at www.edfunders.org——suggests four
about how to address those needs.”In the
important lessons for grantmakers seeking to
end,the foundation decided that it would
increase their impact:
hand-select one program partner from each
•Choosing a discreet area to focus your
state to submit a proposal for funding from
grantmaking can help clarify intended impact
the Early Childhood Literacy Initiative.
and necessary resources——and the resulting
The five grantees in the Early Childhood trade-offs.Adesire to support significant
Literacy Initiative represent various change rather than address needs led the
approaches to improving early childhood PacifiCorp Foundation to adopt a radically
literacy,ranging from a school-based inter- different grantmaking strategy. The result was
vention in Oregon to collaboration with greater clarity about how exactly it would be
health care providers in Wyoming to efforts helping to boost early childhood literacy in five
states and what its grantees needed to succeed.
with parents to increase time reading to their
Still, “the foundation faces a constant tension
children in Utah,Idaho and Washington.
over how to strike the right balance between
F having a clear focus and retaining the flexibility
ocusing 20 percent of its annual giving torespond to important local needs,” according
on the Early Childhood Literacy Initiative to Isaac Regenstreif, the executive director.
was sometimes difficult for the foundation.
•Maintaining focus is hard work.“Committing
Foundation leaders and grantees saw trade-
toafocused partnership over multiple
offs,benefits and challenges stemming from years forced us to ‘hold the line’,” observed
the initiative’sdiscrete area of focus.“The Regenstreif. The foundation’s successes
foundation faces a constant tension over came notonly from a limited focus on early
howto strike the right balance between childhood literacy (which it shares with other
having a clear focus and retaining the flexi- funders), but alsofrom itsconcentration of
bility to respond to important local needs,” foundation resources, persistence and commit-
Regenstreif observed. ment to building the capacity of its grantees.
Some company managers were initially •Balance focus with a willingness to respond
tounforeseen developments.Even as it made
skeptical of the new grantmaking strategy,
abig beton a fewearly childhood literacy
according to Pittman.“They lived and
grantees, the foundation was equally clear
worked in communities where PacifiCorp’s
about its intention not to allocate 100 percent
support for community projects was highly
of its resources to the new focus area.
valued because there were not other large
corporations or organizations for people to •Focus doesnotmean “one size fits all;”
turn to.”In 2004,the foundation made a with a clear end in mind, different program
models can be effectively supported.The
mid-course correction by creating an annual
PacifiCorp Foundation supported a range of
$100,000 smallcommunity capital grants
approaches to improving early childhood
budget for rural areas.
literacy in order to engender local buy-in
Similarly,the foundation’s requirement that and commitment,which became essential
grantees measure program effectiveness and to the success of these programs.
B
submit biannual reports on outcomes also y2006,over 10,000 children had been
proved challenging.“The board was clear served by the five programs’combined
that if we were going to allocate significant efforts—and evaluation results suggested
resources to this initiative,we had to be the programs were achieving their goals.
able to prove that we were making a dra- For example,76 percent of the children in
matic impact,”Regenstreif said.“However, Oregon’s project had improved their read-
we underestimated how hard it is for non- ing ability during their kindergarten year;
profits to design and effectively conduct in addition,participating schools had
evaluations,particularly in the field of early helped more kindergartners achieve reading
childhood literacy when so many of the at grade level than many demographically
benefits are long-term.”In response,the similar schools.And the Idaho effort—
foundation contracted with an external which used regular home visits as its inter-
evaluator to provide technical assistance vention model—saw the average amount
to the grantees onevaluation. of time participating families read to their
children jump 50 percent and helped every
I
participating child score at or above
n2005,the foundation made another
grade level onthe state’s reading indicator
notable mid-course correction by offering
assessment for kindergarten entry.
the initial EarlyChildhood Literacy
grantees in Oregon,Utah and Wyoming, The foundation felt confident that all five
who were nearing the end of their three-year programs would achieve long-term
grants,afourth year of funding—“to give sustainability,Regenstreif noted.“Defining
the programs additional time and incentives aclear focus has helped us make more
to attract new sources of funding to sustain thoughtful decisions about where to
their work,”Regenstreif explained. allocate our resources.”
Drawn from the experience and wisdom of our members, GFE’s Principles for Effective
Education Grantmaking are designed to help strengthen philanthropy’s capacity to improve
educational outcomesfor all students. Our series of accompanying case studies is designed
tohelp donors,leaders and program staff reflect more deeply on what the principles mean
for their own grantmaking, how to integrate them into their efforts and how to improve
the results of their grants in education.
This Case in Brief provides a synopsis of an in-depth case study and the lessons it suggests
for education funders. We encourage you to review and consider the full text of the case
study; free copies of it and others are available online at www.edfunders.orgor by calling
503.595.2100. In addition, the case studies in this series are being taught at many of GFE’s
programs, and also can be taught in individualized settings by special arrangement.
720SWWashington,Suite 605, Portland, OR 97205 503.595.2100 www.edfunders.org