Who gets included in Collective Impact: A mixed methods study of 10 CI initiatives

Abresch, Chad; Grimm, Brandon; Lyons, Kiara; Maloney, Shannon; Tibbits, Melissa

doi:10.1080/15575330.2021.1941161

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We engaged in action research as a translation method. By studying our translation process, we join other scholars in reflectively and empirically investigating the efficacy of the collective impact approach to organizational change in the engineering graduate education context (e.g., [65][66][67][68][69][70][71]).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Catalyzing Organizational Change for Equity in Graduate Education: A Case Study of Adopting Collective Impact in a College of Engineering

Lee,

Holloman,

Knight

et al. 2024

Education Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Graduate education in engineering is an extremely challenging, complex entity that is difficult to change. The purpose of this exploratory research paper was to investigate the applicability of the Collective Impact framework, which has been used within community organizing contexts, to organize the change efforts of a center focused on advancing equitable graduate education within engineering. We sought to understand how the conditions of Collective Impact (i.e., common agenda, backbone organization, mutually reinforcing activities, shared measurement system, and continuous communication) could facilitate the organization of equity-focused change efforts across a college of engineering at a single institution. To achieve this, we took an action research approach. We found the Collective Impact framework to be a useful tool for organizing cross-sectional partnerships to facilitate equity-focused change in graduate education; we also found the five conditions of Collective Impact to be applicable to the higher education context, with some intentional considerations and modifications. Through coordinated efforts, the Collective Impact framework can support the goal of reorienting existing decentralized structures, resource flows, and decision processes to foster bottom-up and top-down change processes to advance equitable support for graduate students.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Catalyzing Organizational Change for Equity in Graduate Education: A Case Study of Adopting Collective Impact in a College of Engineering

Lee,

Holloman,

Knight

et al. 2024

Education Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Second, its focus on collaboration locally has been thought to contribute to shifting responsibility for deep, systematic change away from government systems while at the same time under-resourcing fragmented sectors to implement the approach [12]. In 2022, the model is continuing to evolve, with its most robust attention to addressing equity, justice, and inclusion [13,11]. To this end, communities implementing CI in the U.S. and internationally have led the effort to understand and resolve limitations of CI related to equity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing positive social determinants of health through collective impact

McCrae

Spain

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Communities across the U.S. and globally confront the challenge of transforming negative social determinants of health (SDOH) into positive ones. To address this complex social problem, collective impact (CI) has promise but has been critiqued for insufficiently challenging structural inequities. Research applying CI to SDOH is limited. This mixed-methods study examined early adoption of CI in the 100% New Mexico initiative that aims to address SDOH population-wide in a state with strong cultural identity and assets but also persistent socio-economic inequality. | Methods. A web-based survey, interviews and focus groups were conducted with initiative participants in June and July 2021. Survey participants rated agreement with six items assessing CI foundation from the Collective Impact Community Assessment Scale. Interviews and focus groups centered on motivation to engage, progress in model components, CI core conditions, and contextual factors influencing experiences. Surveys were analyzed using descriptive means. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis, an inductive approach, stratified analyses, and co-interpretation. Results. Fifty-eight participants completed the survey, and 21 participated in interviews (n = 12) and focus groups (n = 9). Survey means were highest related to initiative commitment, and lower regarding shared ownership, having multiple perspectives and voices, and adequate resources. Qualitative results indicated the framework’s cross-sector emphasis helped motivate participation. Participants embraced the focus on leveraging community assets that characterizes CI and the current framework. Counties used unique engagement and visibility strategies including mural projects and book clubs. Participants reported communication challenges across sector teams which influenced feelings of accountability and ownership. Participants did not report challenges lacking relevant, available, and timely data or tension between funder-driven and community-driven desired outcomes, contrasting previous CI research. Conclusion. Multiple foundational conditions of CI were supported in 100% New Mexico, including evidence for support of the common agenda addressing SDOH, shared measurement framework, and mutually reinforcing activities. Results suggest that efforts to launch CI to address SDOH, which are by nature multi-sector, should include robust communication support for local teams. The use of community-administered surveys to identify gaps in SDOH resource access contributed to ownership and collective efficacy that may portend sustainability; however, relying on volunteers threatens sustainability.

show abstract

Reducing loneliness in the community. More Together (‘Flere i Fællesskaber’)—a complex intervention in Denmark

Lasgaard,

Bo,

Nielsen

et al. 2023

Health Promotion International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mounting evidence that loneliness is a determinant of poor health and well-being underpins the need for effective interventions and community action. ‘More Together’ (MoTo) is a large-scale, complex, multi-component and multi-level intervention for community change that addresses loneliness among young people and older adults in Silkeborg Municipality, Denmark. The intervention is inspired by the Collective Impact framework, and it is practice driven and rooted in an extensive cross-sector partnership. This article outlines (i) the organization of the cross-sector partnership, (ii) the structure of the intervention programme, (iii) the key components and activities of the programme and, finally, (iv) the intervention setting and target population. MoTo aims to create new ways to develop, implement and evaluate loneliness interventions. Experiences gained from MoTo hold the potential to transform our understanding of loneliness interventions and may inform and guide future interventions.

show abstract

Who gets included in Collective Impact: A mixed methods study of 10 CI initiatives

Cited by 4 publications

References 20 publications

Catalyzing Organizational Change for Equity in Graduate Education: A Case Study of Adopting Collective Impact in a College of Engineering

Catalyzing Organizational Change for Equity in Graduate Education: A Case Study of Adopting Collective Impact in a College of Engineering

Advancing positive social determinants of health through collective impact

Reducing loneliness in the community. More Together (‘Flere i Fællesskaber’)—a complex intervention in Denmark

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About