5. Associate donationsPartnersVendors
[client name]
The Program Funding
Non-brandedBranded
EXPAND SUSTAIN
Grants
Corp./private donations
Associate
donations
[client name]
Citizen Effect
While the branding element is always
important, it shouldn’t be overstated.
Strength of an initiative, nature of how
the program is structured and oftentimes
timing are all essential factors.
EILEEN SWEENEY, Senior Director
Motorola Mobility Foundation and Community
Relations at Motorola
While the branding element is always
important, it shouldn’t be overstated.
Strength of an initiative, nature of how
the program is structured and oftentimes
timing are all essential factors.
EILEEN SWEENEY, Senior Director
Motorola Mobility Foundation and Community
Relations at Motorola
No major institution today will put only
one donor’s name on a program because it
limits additional funding.
ELLEN FRASER, Sr. Director Corporate and Foundation
Relations,
Brookings Institution
No major institution today will put only
one donor’s name on a program because it
limits additional funding.
ELLEN FRASER, Sr. Director Corporate and Foundation
Relations,
Brookings Institution
6. Associate donationsPartnersVendors
[client name]
The Program Funding
Non-brandedBranded
EXPAND SUSTAIN
Grants
Corp./private donations
Associate
donations
[client name]
Citizen Effect
While the branding element is always
important, it shouldn’t be overstated.
Strength of an initiative, nature of how
the program is structured and oftentimes
timing are all essential factors.
EILEEN SWEENEY, Senior Director
Motorola Mobility Foundation and Community
Relations at Motorola
While the branding element is always
important, it shouldn’t be overstated.
Strength of an initiative, nature of how
the program is structured and oftentimes
timing are all essential factors.
EILEEN SWEENEY, Senior Director
Motorola Mobility Foundation and Community
Relations at Motorola
No major institution today will put only
one donor’s name on a program because it
limits additional funding.
ELLEN FRASER, Sr. Director Corporate and Foundation
Relations,
Brookings Institution
No major institution today will put only
one donor’s name on a program because it
limits additional funding.
ELLEN FRASER, Sr. Director Corporate and Foundation
Relations,
Brookings Institution
Hinweis der Redaktion
Regional Expansion pros: Many local relationships already established (i.e. with district level officials & local community organizations) Big opportunity to develop human capacity in area with great need Program is already known, has positive reputation Opportunity to engage Bell County staff in training neighboring counties, so the transfer of knowledge is local, very empowering for local staff Easier to monitor sustainability of Bell County program if expansion is geographically close cons: Current human capacity is quite limited in SE KY, great need for training, capacity building, and technical assistance Severe structural barriers to health and wellness Random Selection : pros: Ability to chose a community with more efficient expansion opportunity (i.e. less severe barriers to health, more human capacity) cons: Program must be re-designed for new local context Relationship-building and developing local buy-in starts from zero No opportunity to capitalize from economies of scale
Bottom -Up PROS Humana would have more ownership of the program Strongest local buy-in Local relationships established (District officials/local community orgs) Program reputation established Low cost to operationalize and no need for clinical study Opp to develop human capacity in area with great need utilizing Bell County staff – transfer of knowledge is local, empowering Easier to monitor sustainability of Bell County if expansion is geographically close CONS Expensive (need for staff salaries, operational cost) Slower path to scale (could take 10 years to effect policy change at state level No built-in state funding Limited human capacity in southeastern Kentucky – more intense training needed/tech assistance Need to be nimble and flexible Top-Down* PROS Efficient path to scale Policy change mandated at a high level means shorter path to scale (2 years) Built-in funding if state mandates program/staff salaries covered and cost savings from economies of scale More access to top resources Many local relationships established and program already has positive reputation Some local buy-in CONS Humana would have less control over program Requires strong strategy to implement on the ground *MCI’s top recommendation – in another part of Kentucky or a neighboring state or top-down strategic selection (buy-in from US Dept. HHS, go to new community in another part of country) Top down refers to high-level policymakers mandating the program and then the state, district, and local health depts implement the program. (MCI did this in Jordan; after the pilot they went to the Ministry of Health & the Royal Health Awareness Society and now it's a national program). So it's a policy change coming from the top and trickling down locally. This is the type of economic/social development the UN, World Bank, USAID etc promotes because you essentially change the system and then work to implement the changes on the ground. Bottom-up is the more grass-roots approach where we start in Bell, then go up the Cumberland Valley district health dept, then go the state of KY, then the US Dept HHS. This is more of a advocacy path, i.e. trying to change the system by showing each level, one step at a time, that the MC method is effective. You get more people who "believe" in the program sooner but it can take 10 yrs to get to the same level of scale that top down could bring you in 2 yrs. This is the method most small non-profits use because they work one community at a time, trying to help enough individuals until the system changes.
Bottom -Up PROS Highest control option - strategic market selection Could build more national awareness at faster pace (via publicity efforts) CONS Expensive option – program must be redesigned for local context and no opp to capitalize from economies of scale No local buy-in or established relationships in community May require new clinical study Top-Down PROS Allows Humana some selection control with all the benefits of growth approach Opportunity to build awareness of the program at a faster pace CONS Program must be re-designed for new local context No local buy-in established No opp. to capitalize from economies of scale May require new clinical study
