Exploring the Field of Social Innovation in NYC

Exploring the Field of Social Innovation in NYC A joint-interest project for The New School and the Centre for Social Innovation (CSI)

Emerging Trends in Social Innovation and Investment, Spring 2014 Milano School of International Affairs, Management, and Urban Policy The New School 1

Team Christianna Ambo-Jones, MS Candidate Urban Policy Analysis & Management Danielle Palmer, MS Nonprofit Management Dorit Avganim, MS Nonprofit Management Gertrud Høgh Rasmussen, MFA Transdisciplinary Design Hannah Denitz, MA International Affairs Leah Cabrera Fischer, MFA Transdisciplinary Design Melissa Bautista, MS Nonprofit Management Michael Ryan, MS International Affairs Reid Henkel, MFA Transdisciplinary Design

Contents 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Executive Summary Introduction

5 11

2.1 2.2

12 14

Research Problem Problem Context

Research Methods General Findings

14 16

4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4

16 17 19 20

Social Innovation Theoretical Framework Conditions Necessary for Supporting Social Innovation in Cities Resources and Key Players Trends in NYC

Sector Analysis

22

5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4

22 30 34 38

Impact Investment, Social Entrepreneurship and Private Enterprise Education Public Sector Non Profit

Conclusions and Recommendation Appendices

42 46

A. B. C. D.

46 47 48 56

Glossary of Terms Interviewees Profiles Workshop Student Consultant Team Profiles and Key Insights

Bibliography

62

3

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The New School in partnership with The Centre for Social Innovation (CSI) has appointed a group of graduate student consultants through the Emerging Trends in Social Innovation and Investment course to research and contextualize social innovation in New York City (NYC). The aim of the report is to identify what structures and resources are necessary for supporting social innovation in NYC; determine opportunities, trends and challenges in the field.

1.1 Problem Context and Research Scope: The client, CSI, outlined the research scope to be covered under the following questions: 1. What factors allow cities to support Social Innovation?

2. How is NYC unique in facilitating Social Innovation?

3. What would make NYC more Socially Innovative?

Our team adopted the broad definition put forward in the workscope by Michele Kahane, the course professor - social innovation includes all sectors and diverse approaches to solving social and environmental challenges. Our research considered the adversities and opportunities of each sector, allowing us to add a variety of perspectives, voice and interrelated context to tell the story of social innovation in NYC. In gathering data around the three questions above, we will give insight on: • The critical factors that make cities hubs for Social Innovation and creativity and the existence of these in NYC • Trends/ new models, policies and initiatives for supporting social innovation in NYC • The current state of Social Innovation in NYC • Opportunities for Social Innovation which will be addressed through a sector analysis We will make recommendations that speak towards what should happen in the field to make NYC an even stronger hub for social innovation, envisioning a vibrant socially innovative city in the coming years.

4

1.2 Research Methods Our findings were informed through both primary and secondary research methods. A detailed literature review set the framework for discussing the current state of social innovation in each sector. Interviews with field practitioners, other industry agents and stakeholders gave perspective on current trends, challenges and visions for the field. A human-centered design workshop, engaging several stakeholders - students, social entrepreneurs, non profit agents, academic personnel and other social innovation enthusiasts made tangible our general findings, conclusion and recommendations.

1.3 General Findings Social Innovation Theoretical Framework The dialogue that exists around social innovation is highly nuanced and it is a vexing task to pin down a single definition. Broadly speaking, cities add to the complexities of innovation as they are hubs for interaction, collaboration and ideas. Research has suggested several perspectives and frameworks from which Social Innovation can take shape. While the language of and around social innovation is greatly varied, it is becoming a more common part of everyday conversation.

Conditions Necessary for Supporting Social Innovation in Cities An array of conditions are necessary in order to successfully support social innovation in cities. For any city, the conditions need to be tailored to fit the cultures and challenges unique to it. Before social innovation can be stimulated, enhanced and supported in a city, “it is vital to understand its power structures (public, private, civil society) and the dynamics between groups and key individuals…”

(Breakthrough Cities, The Young Foundation). Once those dynamics are understood, then systemic barriers have to be tackled and overcome. If the current systems are dysfunctional, social innovators will find it difficult to affect change and social innovation will be

impeded. Once social, environmental and governance challenges are tackled at the source and the appropriate conditions for social innovation are in place, social innovation actors can more effectively achieve social change in cities. According to Breakthrough Cities, the most useful conditions for social innovation include diversity and tolerance, the recognition of crisis and challenge, dispersal of power, strong leadership, cultures orientated towards ‘openness’, and networking and collaboration. We have found these essential conditions to be consistent with our primary and secondary research.

Resources and Key Players in NYC There is an existing ecosystem which supports and enables social innovation in NYC. This includes key players and resources. Key sectors were identified in order to map out the current state of social innovation in the city. The diagram in page 19 is a product of the workshop and secondary research to support it. It provides a general overview of the landscape of social innovation in NYC. Trends Creative new ideas have emerged in several different sectors in NYC. What we consider to be trends are those that are showing up not just here in NYC but in other areas around the globe and are part of the social innovation conversation. A big one is the move towards transparency and accountability. These are key drivers of measurable social impact and change. Creative and unique collaborations and partnerships are becoming more common among public sector agencies, private firms and nonprofits. Other trends include creative means of funding social impact projects, like New York’s social impact bonds initiative, crowd funding models and competitions.

5

1.3 SECTOR ANALYSIS Our research found in each sector a set of strengths, weaknesses and opportunities around social innovation.

Impact Investment, Social Entrepreneurship and Private Enterprise While much remains unknown regarding the immediate effects and enduring value of impact investment and social entrepreneurship, research shows the sectors holds great promise for the field of innovation and change-making in NYC. Creating opportunities for partnerships, and thereby the faster resolution of complex social issues, impact investment is a new way of envisioning the expansion of finance and scalability, but also of the innovation sector as a whole. While infusions of new capital, and new methods of tracking fiscal impact are part of its value, its ultimate value and definition are still being written by practitioners at the forefront of driving change.

6

Education Education has the potential to transform social innovation from being a current business trend and movement into a validated field of work. The role of education should be to transform social innovation into something easily understood and actionable in order to legitimize this field of work.

Universities are key players in preparing students with the necessary knowledge and skills to work in the social innovation/ entrepreneurial space.

There are many schools and programs in NYC focusing on social change. This can provide great opportunities for students to engage in social ventures, form partnerships and collaborations to setting the policies, which can have direct impact on the perception of social innovation within the city.

Public sector

Nonprofits

Local government has the potential to set the rules, direct funding to areas of most need as well as to solutions with greatest impact, and facilitate adoption and scale of what works. NYC’s public sector has begun to open up to participating in social innovation but there is no general consensus in adopting creative problem solving methods. Bureaucratic systems continue to snail the process and fear of government displacement leave some people resistant. While there is a lack of the social innovator human resource in the public sector, a few visionary thinkers, including former Mayor, Michael Bloomberg, have been instrumental in shaping the direction of social innovation in the public sector.

Social innovation is still not clearly defined in the nonprofit sector, yet it is present and growing.

Innovation in this sector can take many forms in programming models but the ultimate goal should be impact. Research has presented good examples of the practices of high-impact nonprofits that as case studies can be a great resource for other nonprofits. The growing trend of strategic collaboration across all sectors can prove to be a move in the right direction for this sector. In NYC, the push towards working more collaboration on a shared issue in the nonprofit sector is growing but there is still more work to be done.

7

1.4 Conclusions & Recommendations While the research of this project has brought nationwide and in some cases global perspective to the work, the ultimate goal has been to envision of a stronger NYC social innovation sector. One in which barriers and opportunities are known and innovators, practitioners, foundations and entrepreneurs can access, act and make changes to the sector themselves, making real the vision for a sustainable innovation ecosystem within the city.

1.5 Our vision for NYC • NYC as a hub and example of the groundbreaking and invaluable work that comes out of the innovation sector.

• A NYC database dedicated to publishing useful resources for entrepreneurs and innovators promoting collaboration and integrating key players into the social innovation space and community of NYC. • Ongoing meetups dedicated to exploring new funding models and new concepts for scaling and expanding innovative principles focused on complete issue eradication rather than single firm success.

• Education initiatives building a formal curriculum inspired by innovation principles and practices that focus on tackling real world and city centered problems.

• A nonprofit sector that works under a ‘network-mindset” working to bring nonprofit leadership in line with donors educating them on the benefits of the work they do as participants in the innovation ecosystem.

• A NYC in which local governance is more receptive to the value of social innovation and human-centered design; reorganizing itself to operate as a hub for ‘smart’ citizens who, with the proper support of their city, stand to advance the city of New York as a model for innovative cities worldwide.

8

9

10

2. INTRODUCTION

We are graduate student consultants tasked to research the state of social innovation in New York City (NYC) on behalf of our client, the Centre for Social Innovation (CSI), in a joint-interest project through the New School. (See appendix D - Student Consultant Team Profiles and Key Insights for background on each team member) The diversity in our team make-up enables an interdisciplinary approach to our research.

The client, CSI, is a regional organization with offices in NYC and Toronto. “The Centre for Social Innovation provides its members with the spaces, relationships and knowledge they need to translate ideas to impact. We’re part coworking space, part community center and part incubator for people and organizations that are changing the world. More importantly, the Centre for Social Innovation is a place of possibility.” (CSI Website)

11

2.1 Research Problem

Our research will focus on current Social Innovation trends, opportunities, infrastructure and agents in NYC market sectors.

Under the guidance of our client, we have generalized our scope of work to be as follows: 1. What factors allow cities to support Social Innovation?

2. How is NYC unique in facilitating Social Innovation?

3. What would make NYC more Socially Innovative?

These questions are relevant and important as people around the world people are finding new ways to work and to create social impact. Cities are essential hubs for social innovation (like they have been for business innovation in places like Silicon Valley and elsewhere). Our findings are developed along a more detailed discourse that provides a conceptual framework for social innovation thriving in cities and urban settings; a taxonomy and profiles of innovative trends, models, policies and initiatives that are supporting social innovation in NYC; an ecosystem map of key players and resources, and a sector analysis that describes the state of social innovation in NYC. We will conclude with opportunities and barriers for social innovation in NYC and recommendations on what can be done to enhance and scale social innovation, giving insight into the visions that field practitioners, other agents and stakeholders have for the field.

12

2.2 Problem Context

NYC and other places is that instead of six degrees of

The field of Social Innovation is burgeoning, dynamic and filled with separation, things are only one or two degrees apart. When you nuances, particularly vexing when trying to pin a single definition. want to accomplish something, it is easier to map out the landscape.

Innovation is not a new phenomenon, however the capacity for As far as the designation of the world’s capital for social innovation, social responses and engagement in connection with innovation this could equate to more fragmentation or more organization”. is a more recent idea. For this project we will broadly define social

innovation to include all sectors and diverse approaches to solving This all leads to the question of how to social and environmental challenges. create a healthy ecosystem in which (Kahane, Michele - Professor, Emerging social innovation can thrive. With political “It’s hard to say and I certainly Trends in Social Innovation and and economic fragmentation; the lack Investment, The New School for Public don’t have a reliable answer but the of a shared concept as well as the Engagement) difference between NYC and other need to empower citizens to make the places is that instead of six degrees world a better place, social innovation Assessing social innovation is particularly remains a complex idea. Through of separation, things are only one challenging when using cities as a hub research, it is clear that the field is about of action. Many urban challenges are or two degrees apart. When you social connectivity within and between ripe for entrepreneurial and innovative want to accomplish something, it is sectors. To support the growth of social responses but contain very deepeasier to map out the landscape.

As innovation as a field one must create the seated ethnic, cultural, economic and conditions necessary for its growth—one far as the designation of the world’s sometimes religious issues. Getting cannot create social innovation itself to a common place for collaboration capital for social innovation, this could without enabling the process by which it and creativity to spark is thus at times equate to more fragmentation or more can be arrived at. difficult. NYC is a particularly dynamic

organization”. and complex place to observe the In an interview with Fred Dust, a partner trends and successes in this field as Kippy Joseph, of IDEO, an organization that works well as the major gaps in social justice Associate Director of Innovation at the with cross-sectoral leaders and change Rockefeller Foundation efforts. One of the preliminary questions agents to unravel their power for social then is how do you create new ways of change and impact, he noted “we are producing social value? One overarching moving into the next generation of leadership”. He alluded to characteristic within this nebulous structure that is social innovation how there is no shortage of ideas and new models but there is implies the capacity to repurpose pre-existing patterns to serve a a need for incubation spaces and organizational capacity. The greater good. In an interview with Kippy Joseph, the Associate Centre for Social Innovation can play an integral role in this regard Director of Innovation at the Rockefeller Foundation, she spoke as it provides a collaborative space for more comprehensive and to her understanding of the term social innovation, specifically in ambitious missions and curriculums to incubate. relation to New York City. She explained, “It’s hard to say and I certainly don’t have a reliable answer but the difference between 13

3. RESEARCH METHODS 3.1 Primary Methods: Interviews With the guidance of Michele Kahane, Professor of Professional Practice, Social Entrepreneurship at The New School and Eli Malinsky, Executive Director at Centre for Social Innovation, our team contacted and interviewed 20 specialists and leaders in diverse fields of innovation. While no two interviewees came from a single background, all their work is focused in areas concerning the expansion of social business, the reach of social impact and the enhancement of innovation.

Interviews were primarily carried out by phone, lasting no more than 30 minutes and focusing on the following 3 questions: 1. What makes a city support/ inhibit social innovation?

2. What about NYC facilitates or inhibits social innovation 3. What would it take to make NYC a more socially innovative city?

While some interviews remained true to these questions, many diverted revealing incredible insights from sectors and perspectives relating to each of our six focus areas. Most participants either manage or work for organizations based in NYC with work that seeks to help people throughout the city, state, country and world.

Human-Centered Design Workshop A human-centered design thinking workshop was conducted on Tuesday, April 15, 2014, where we brought together, students, social entrepreneurs, non-profit agents and experts on social innovation from different sectors, including public, private, investment and education. We engaged the participants in a set of designed activities in order for us to gain an understanding of the landscape 14

of social innovation in NYC. We first asked the participants to identify key players, resources and emerging trends in social innovation, specific to NYC, and then had them organize these into meaningful clusters. The objective of this activity was to map out the ecosystem that supports social innovation and identify overall areas of support.

Participants then picked the area they found most promising in regards to strengthening NYC as a hub for social innovation and defined the strengths and weaknesses of it. This activity allowed the participants to then identify five opportunities for supporting the ecosystem as a whole. The final activity gave the participants a dream space in which they came up with their ideal future scenario for NYC as a social innovation hub based on the opportunities they defined.

Bringing a diverse group of people together allowed us to open up a broad and reflective dialogue around social innovation in NYC. By allowing participants the space to bounce thoughts and ideas off each other we were able to gain insights into the City’s current social innovation landscape and develop future scenarios for making New York a social innovation hub.

3.2 Secondary Methods: Literature Review Each of the team’s 9 members conducted secondary research, reading through dozens of articles, studies, papers and online texts for outlining the current state of innovation in NYC, the country and throughout the world. This independent research yielded a wealth of valuable insight, which was then shared and organized among members for responding to the research questions in valuable and inspirational context.

Human Centered Design Workshop 15

4. GENERAL FINDINGS 4.1 Social Innovation Theoretical Framework A theoretical approach is also valuable to a greater understanding of One of the core components of social innovation is the appeal to social innovation. The neo-institutional theory explores the socially an integrated approach of problem-solving through collaboration constructed worlds of innovation rather than focusing on “technical and shared ideas. In the article “Social Innovation: Moving the Field models and strategic choice”. This model relishes in cultural context Forward: A Conceptual Framework”, Giovany Cajaiba-Santana and institutional frameworks that guide theoretical insights about presents diverse perspectives that help to weave through the social innovation. The “Structuration theory provides a theoretical numerous literatures and narratives around Social Innovation. One framework that highlights how social systems and social structures lens is the “Individualistic Perspective” that aligns an innovation are iteratively and reciprocally created sector with small-scale or individual by agents who are both constrained and entrepreneurship. This view denotes the “...communities are the core empowered by institutions”(Santana,46/47). presence of “visionary” and goal-oriented entrepreneurs. Within the discourse of Social platform for diverse “human While the definition of social entrepreneurship Innovation, the “Structural Perspective” interventions”. “Success may lack consensus, one unifying and core resonates and arouses the most attention. requires a personal touch and analysis describes social entrepreneurs as It “implies that structure and context will be deep understanding of local “those who identify and then challengethe causative factor for innovation”(Santana, with inspiration, creativity, direct action, and 45). This perspective considers the capacity problems and resources. It courage-an unjust “stable state’s equilibrium” of societies to adapt and adjust to new also requires a familiarity with (Goldsmith, Stephen, The Power of Social innovative practices. In this case, social or a guide through the local Innovation: How Civic Entrepreneurs Ignite innovation is tied to organizational analysis political waters” Community Networks for Good). Social and how certain “structural determinants” entrepreneurs are crucial to instilling elicit or deter societies adaption to new social (Goldsmith, 14) momentum around innovative ideas and norms. A third and more holistic perspective is creating a preliminary movement, however, the “Structuration Perspective”; this narrative without civil entrepreneurship, the entire field of social innovation gives equal mind to both the “dualistic and interdependent” nature could flop. Hence, civic entrepreneurship can often times overlap of social innovation. This perspective aligns the relationship social innovation. Community based support can leverage and between agency and structure to explore the complexities of the offer the “necessary fodder for innovation and change” (Goldsmith, phenomena. Two major social innovation processes make up this 6). Goldsmith notes how communities are the core platform for perspective; “one is based on collective actions that take place diverse “human interventions”. “Success requires a personal touch inside a given social system, which are determined by underlying and deep understanding of local problems and resources. It also institutions”. The second element of this perspective deep-seated requires a familiarity with or a guide through the local political the significance of the historical and cultural context in which social waters”(Goldsmith, 14). Community and the idea of “civitas” are innovation is embedded(Santana, 46). pivotal components to the field of social innovation.

16

4.2 Conditions Necessary for Supporting Social Innovation in Cities V.J.J.M Bekkers, L.G. Tummers and W.H. Voorberg in From Public Innovation to Social Innovation in the Public Sector: a literature review of relevant drivers and barriers discuss the factors that affect the ability for creativity and innovation to thrive. The social and political complexity of the environment, the legal culture in the market sector, the allocation of resources and relationship networks that exist among stakeholders and the structure of governance are all drivers or barriers; determinants of social innovation in the city. (Bekkers, Tummers and Voorberg, 2013) Lauren Kahn et al. in Breakthrough Cities consider the most useful conditions for social innovation to include diversity and tolerance, existence of a challenge, dispersal of power, strong leadership and transparency and openness. .

1. Diversity and tolerance

2. The recognition of crisis and challenge

Research says that diversity and tolerance are part of the foundation for a creative and socially innovative city. In any city, non-natives, outsiders and immigrants can contribute a great deal to social innovation. If the city is receptive to and tolerant of input from outsiders (as New York - the melting pot- has demonstrated that it is), then a rich “social and cultural diversity [will] foster understanding and learning‌.fuelling the economic, cultural and intellectual rejuvenation of cities.â€?

Many times change only occurs when a crisis or new challenge arises. Cities have always posed social challenge. The density, intricacy of systems, intimacy of space, attractiveness to a myriad of people and businesses who compete for services to support various lifestyles have amplified public service issues of health, education, sanitation, housing, crime and transportation. Cities have also been vital in creative problem-solving.

Hosting the most daring of problems, as well as being an environment ideal for finding the solutions. Sometimes, without the crisis, the need for change can go unnoticed or ignored. Crisis can create a powerful pressure to respond to social need through innovation due to the failure of old routines and practices.

17

18

3. Dispersal of power:

4. Networking and collaboration:

The balance of power in a city can be very skewed towards the top (with the wealthy and the political residing at the top of the pyramid). Much of the power in cities, like in NYC remains with the elite while the majorities are cut off from access to power and information. Social innovation can be limited by the lack of or inequality in access to power and information by all stakeholders to an issue. In NYC, outer boroughs, immigrant and other underserved communities are prime examples of groups of stakeholders who often have difficulty accessing all the information needed to contribute creatively to solving their social challenges.

It is crucial that collaboration exists within and outside of activity in order to effectively drive social innovation. To create a demand for networking and collaboration within a city can be difficult but can be achieved if the networking relationships is seen as mutually beneficial. The relationship (whether between different cities or different organizations) should be a good fit and one where different ideas are brought together to develop social innovation. “It is crucial that community-building...transforms localized social relations in such a way that local people are empowered to voice and organize around their own needs” (The International Handbook on Social Innovation: Collective Action, Social Learning and Transdisciplinary Research, pg. 232).

5. Open and transparent organizational culture:

6. Strong leadership:

To address diversity in the context of social challenges there must be a tendency towards sharing information and having open and transparent processes. To solve problems that affect all people, all people must be aware of the processes, results and expectations of solutions. Collecting data and sharing information is becoming ever more important in driving the direction of social innovation. For an organization to be successful in social innovation, the organizations culture must be one that encourages taking risks and one that places the “end result” as a priority over bureaucratic procedures.

The creative leader plays a big part in driving social innovation in cities. Leaders from a variety of backgrounds and expertise can make the process of social innovation more rich and rewarding.

4.3 Resources and Key Players There is an existing ecosystem which supports and enables social innovation in NYC. This includes key players and resources. Key sectors were identified in order to map out the current state of social innovation in the city.

This diagram is a product of the workshop and secondary research to support it. It provides a general overview of the landscape of social innovation in NYC.

EVENTS

CMX Summit MakeImpactNYC Social Good Summit Social Innovation Summit Startup Weekend The Feast Ultra Light Startups

NETWORKS

Be Social Change Blue Ridge Foundation CMXHub Freelancers Union GarysGuide General Assembly NYC Idealist.org Job First NYC Meetup New York City Venture Connection NYC Seed Social Innovation Exchange Social Venture Network Start Up One Stop

COMMUNITY

BronxWorks Brooklyn Grange Center for Economic Opportunity Center for Urban Pedagogy Civic Service Green Map HHS Connect Hester Street Collaborative Friends of the High Line LES - No Longer Empty Partnership for Parks Rebot Red Hook Initiative The Open Society Foundations The Public Policy Lab Young Mens Initiative

EDUCATION

4.0 Schools Center for Educational Innovation Defy Ventures EarlyLearn NYC Fortune Society Girls Who Code iMentor Innovate NYC Schools iZone NYC Charter Schools Center Kinvolve Kipp Schools New Classrooms Practice Makes Perfect She’s the First Teach for America The Future Project

HIGHER EDUCATION

Columbia Business School Desis Lab The New School NYU Stern and NYU Wagner School of Visual Arts

FUNDING

Acumen Fund Blue Ridge Foundation Curry Stone Foundation Donors choose.org Echoing Green Ford Goldaman Sachs Gramlen America IO BY IndieGoGO Kickstarter Mayor´s Fund for Advancing the City PRI Rockefeller Foundation Robin Hood Foundation SeedInvest SORDNA Foundation Techstars

SPACES

42West24 500 Startups Alley NYC Bat Haus Beespace Blueprint Health Brooklyn Creative League Brooklyn Navy Yard BrooklynWorks159 Centre for Social Innovation Collab Coworkrs Dumbo Startup Lab Ensemble Entrepreneur Space FABWORKS The Farm Fueled Collective Green Desk Green Spaces Green Worker Cooperatives Grind The Hive Hive at 55 Impact Hub In Good Company Micro Office Solutions Mission50 Neue House New Work City No Space OfficeLinks Hub The Productive Projective Space Regus Secret Clubhouse SoTechie Space-4-Work Spark Labs Studio Guild Sunshine Suites TechSpace WeCreate NYC We Work Wix Lounge WorkHouse NYC The Yard

19

4.4 Trends in NYC Social Impact Bonds

20

In NYC, the introduction of social impact bonds in early 2012, have been designed to support social innovations that have proven social impact. These bonds allow flexibility in government spending to support programs that generate desired results and separate the administration of these programs from traditional government services by having these independently run through NGO organizations and private/ public partnerships. The flexibility of this financing tool is to the advantage of social innovation itself as it can be adopted locally in other cities. (Costa, Kristina and Kohli, Jitinder, Social Impact Bonds: New York City and Massachusetts to Launch the First Social Impact Bond Programs in the United States, 2012) According to Alvaro Rodriguez Arregui in his article The Role of Governments in Social Innovation, the ability for government to mitigate financial risk through such creative solutions like these social impact bonds is also an incentive to invite private corporations and philanthropies to participate in this joint social impact venture. NYC’s social impact bonds are currently directed at reducing recidivism in a program managed by an independent NGO - MDRC, an organization committed to finding solutions to the nation’s critical social challenges.

of Youth and Community Development and Education have been largely supported in similar means through programs like Ladders for Leaders, Out-of-School-Time and the Summer Youth Employment Program. (These are all programs managed through non profits and supported by the city in collaborative problem solving). In 2007, The MillionTreesNYC initiative was launched as a part of PlaNYC, former Mayor Bloomberg’s sustainability agenda for the city. This initiative calls for collaboration among the Department of Parks and Recreation, where the MillionTreesNYC is housed, nonprofit New York Restoration Project (NYRP), private corporations, citizen volunteers and philanthropists to support healthy environments by planting and caring for 1 million trees in the city by 2017. The Center for Economic Opportunity (CEO) has also been supported through the Mayor’s Fund and has gone on to address the reduction of poverty through economic opportunity throughout the nation.

Thus far, The Mayor’s fund has been able to have some impact in mostly all public sector areas but not all programs have been scalable or sustainable. The Annual Report goes on to highlight a decade of the fund’s accomplishments. The Mayor’s fund has also been a successful recipient of the Social Innovation Fund[2], allowing the city to support even more sustainable solutions for urban challenges.

Partnerships and Collaborations

Incubators and Co-Working Spaces

The 2012-2013 Mayor’s Fund to Advance New York City’s annual report: Over a Decade of Strengthening Public Programs through Private Partnerships, details several other areas of public sector involvement in social innovation in the city. In education, in 2006, the Mayor’s fund partnered with the Department of Education (DOE) in support of the NYC Leadership Academy; providing comprehensive leadership training for early-career NYC school principals. NYC Leadership Academy has since become an independent NGO continuing impact in that area. The Department

There is a focus on creating spaces to foster creativity and incubate socially innovative ideas. The emergence of co-working spaces, like CSI has been increasing. (name a few) While this is an efficient business model - diluting start-up costs for entrepreneurs and economizing space, it more importantly creates opportunities for working together across industries, sectors and other social and cultural divisions.

21

5. SECTOR ANALYSIS 5.1 Impact Investment, Social Entrepreneurship and Private Enterprise Since the term was popularized in 2007, impact investment has acted as a hopeful outlier for traditional funding and is considered to some as the Holy Grail of funding for social entrepreneurs and innovators.

However, the best reasons for advancing the impact investment platform revolves around the potential to bring successful market based approaches to the social economy and replacing stopgap solutions for individual firms with the possibility of eradicating complex social issues entirely. As a means of accelerating social progress, a key attraction of impact investment in NYC compared to other impact platforms of change is the potential of scalability, establishing defined intentions and using market based approaches to bring about positive social and environmental change while also creating financial incentives. A consensus is emerging around the importance of impact investment and according to the World Economic Forum, the definition of impact investment is: “An investment approach that intentionally seeks to create both financial return and positive social or environmental impact that is actively measured”. (World Economic Forum, 2013) NYC’s social entrepreneurs stress the importance for additional capital and more sustainable methods of support, lacking the resources to expand the amorphous yet invaluable impact of their social objectives. The investment and business approach has developed in line with the current trends of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and philanthropic activities but differs in terms of its investment strategy, dual functionality and overall business structure and objectives. This is where social enterprises, entrepreneurs and impact investors in NYC can act as accelerators contributing to the “organized process” of innovation. Injecting specific resources such as capital, creating unique human investments and skillsets, and utilizing the marketplace can all help solve complex social issues.

22

Many leading proponents of impact “An investment approach investments have estimated the potential that intentionally seeks to size of the sector. In create both financial return 2009 the Monitor and positive social or Institute estimated environmental impact that that the sector could potentially reach is actively measured” USD$ 500 billion by (World Economic Forum, 2013) 2020 (Freireich et al, 2009). Despite the fact that this is a positive prediction, very few sectors have sustained growth rates above 50% per year, and in order to reach this predicted $500 billion dollar mark, growth rates would have to grow approximately by 53% annually - a daunting task for a sector still in its infancy stage (World Economic Forum, 2013). The very definition of the term, still causing controversy among practitioners, may be holding the sector back from its greatest potential. What is being found, as eloquently explored in posts by Matt Bannick & Paula Goldman, in Priming the Pump’s: Sectors, Not Just Firms, is that most impact investors see their primary goal as investing in social enterprises and entrepreneurs that yield strong financial and social returns—a goal this report endorses. The article acknowledges that “a singular focus [on objectives of impact investment] may miss the forest through the trees… Creating and scaling entire sectors can make the difference, for example, between supporting one solar lantern company that can provide safe lights to thousands of children who otherwise can’t study for school at night—or accelerating an entire solar lighting industry that could provide these lanterns to millions, if not hundreds of millions of students” (Bannick et al, 2012).

The next emerging generation of investors and entrepreneurs in NYC will be more likely to seek profitable business ventures or investment models with social objectives in addition to financial returns. Though incredible work is being done within NYC, a shift in the conscientious drive of the sector to entice mainstream asset owners and assistant managers to allocate a portion of their portfolios to the impact investment sector will enhance capital within the social innovation and entrepreneurial sphere. The research conducted in Priming the Pump at the disposal of new emerging innovators and entrepreneurs, highlights that it is possible for sector wide change which can be accelerated more readily through impact investment (Bannick et al, 2012). The main drive to invest in innovative projects is because successful initiatives and innovations offer enhanced benefits and solutions to the status quo. Perhaps the greatest achievement for impact investment won’t be the tangible funding it provides, but like the success stories of Grameen Bank and BRAC - which not only succeeded as firms, but created the Microfinance market - may be credited with the shifting focus from individual firm objectives to sector wide success for social issue alleviation.

models and rely on creative partnerships. Solving social and environmental problems are no longer confined to the exclusive platform of traditional, grant-funded non-profit organizations or governments alone. Instead, social entrepreneurs and enterprises are using the best business practices and market based approaches in the pursuit of a blended value creation that is a combination of both social and financial returns. Impact investors, social entrepreneurs and innovators have gained new opportunities in NYC from the convergence of both social entrepreneurship movements with the evolving industry of impact investment. Some important actors located both inside NYC and in other US cities include our client, CSI, the Center for Urban Pedagogy (CUP), John Kassalow and Scott Berrie, who formed VisionSpring, which provides ready-made reading glasses to people in the developing world and Bill Drayton who is the founder and Chief Executive of Ashoka. Successful impact investors and enterprises such as Acumen Fund located in NYC and ImpactAssets founded by Jed Emerson must also navigate complex partnerships and capital structures that bring together grants, subsidies, and commercial investment capital (Bugg-Levine et al, 2011).

Aaron Hurst, CEO & Co-Founder of Imperative notes that “Both financial resources and human capital help support social innovation. On the financial side, having the financial stability to maintain large and diverse investment pools. On the talent side, it is about having the best and the brightest people. Folks in their 20’s and 30’s. The key pieces for innovation in a city is that a lot of these social innovations requires partnerships from government, corporate and other major sectors. The culture has to be one where people are not afraid to try things.”

Social enterprises and entrepreneurs are vital for the development of social innovation within NYC as they are capable of focusing on a particular social issue through diverse market based business 23

As advocated by practitioners and stakeholders in the impact investment arena, in order for the sector to reach its full potential, the current ecosystem needs to be brought into the mainstream. The major factors in the current impact investment ecosystem that were identified involve the following six major areas: Capital Providers:

Intermediaries

The two highest capital providers within the impact investment ecosystem in NYC are high net worth individuals/ families and development finance institutions. Foundations are also a natural fit for impact investment as they have similar social objectives given their concentrated focus on addressing specific social-sector challenges.

Financial intermediaries, ranging from brokers, dealers, commercial banks, and advisors to exchanges can all be effective in playing an important role in the developing the sector in NYC. Intermediaries can create liquidity, reduce overall risk, and lower transaction costs facilitating payment mechanisms (Brest et al, 2014).

Investment Funds: Wealth Advisors and Depository Institutions Existing investment funds are ripe for use in the impact investment sector. Such funds also provide seed capital and pioneer funding that are in line with their social and financial objectives.

Investments Targets Impact enterprises in NYC follow several different business structures including: for profit, nonprofit, and hybrid models. Serving a variety of different social causes and socio-economic groups ranging from the base of the pyramid (BOP), the emerging middle class, to mainstream society.

24

Providing information to individuals involved in the impact investment sector, wealth advisors in NYC are an important platform advising on investment strategies, products available and portfolio structures on offer. Depository institutions differentiate themselves compared to other banks and institutions as they typically administer loans to impact enterprises allowing smaller loan sizes, which in turn can provide vital capital to start-up enterprises and social entrepreneurs in their infancy stage.

Strengths Impact Investing

Weaknesses Impact Investing

• Impact investment creates new sources of capital for social entrepreneurs and enterprises in NYC

• Impact Investment is in its infancy stage and is still experiencing growing pains

• Allows the inherent benefits of market equilibrium ensuring both financial and social returns

• While small firms and entrepreneurs in NYC may succeed with additional funds made available through impact investment, sector wide misuses of such funds are left unresolved and lack of collaboration can be an issue

• Provides the capital necessary for firms to continue research and development processes, and generates new funding to cover overhead associated with scaling • Encourages a revisioning of success, driving focus away from individual firm accomplishments and scaling, towards the eradication of entire issue sectors • By focusing on a social or environmental issue through investments in feasible and profitable enterprises and innovations, more resources can be attracted and provided addressing particular social challenges.

• Because innovation is inherently risky and the social problems being addressed are usually complex, solutions can only be tested through a trial and error process and are more likely to fail.

• Since both social innovation and impact investment involve new, untested approaches, neither have successful enough or lengthy enough track records to make projections necessary for future-minded decisions • For some investors, suitable impact investments may only be available in one asset class and may be limited to a particular geographic region or specific economic sector (Johnson et al, 2013).

• Because this field is fairly new, government policies and regulations are lacking but need to keep pace through system developments to ensure that policies do not unintentionally inhibit or restrict potential growth or positive change. Anne Evans from Ashoka and Edwin Torres from the Rockefeller Foundation (Appendix A) both raised the issue and expressed a need for government policies and regulation to evolve in line with the changing landscape that is emerging over the last decade.

25

Impact Investing Opportunities

A key attraction of impact investment is the potential for scalability, establishing defined intentions for social change and using market based approaches to bring about positive social and environmental change

26

NYC can establish a supportive ecosystem, take an active role in refining investee business models and measure the social and financial impact and returns for this growing industry. The development of such skills and traits will create successful investors in other areas of the impact investment and social innovation platform within NYC.

As the size of investments increase over time, government policies and regulations are updated and implemented, the sector will be invaluable as an effective, positive platform for social and environmental change

Strengths Social Entrepreneurs and Private Enterprise

Weaknesses Social Entrepreneurs and Private Enterprise

• Social enterprises and entrepreneurs are vital for the progress of social innovation within NYC as they usually develop new business models or strategies, which creates the ability to see beyond the restrictions of a particular field and offer fresh cross disciplinary insight.

• Lack of finance and scalability are big issues that are commonly raised by social entrepreneurs and enterprises which can restrict their potential for large-scale sectoral change

• Develops profitable business models which focus on revenue raising while creating long-term and sustainable organizations and solutions to social issues.

• Social entrepreneurs and enterprises are pragmatic and efficient in getting “the job” done by focussing on specific goals and not just approaches.

• Social Entrepreneurs are able and willing to break free of established structures and systems which in turn challenge the status quo and provide a variety of innovative solutions.

• Social entrepreneurs can sometimes be vague about their financial and social objectives and what their mission statement is • The most challenging process for social enterprises and entrepreneurs is to be able to identify which area or stage of the business or product lifecycle need to be improved and what are the best methods to do so in order to create economies of scale.

• Ignoring current efforts is also a problem as there are already several players involved in different sectors which could benefit more from collaboration approach as opposed to more “individuals” entering the marketplace

• Social entrepreneurs and enterprises promote an ecosystem supportive of change and create the ability and freedom for the individual or organization to become positive change makers in society.

27

Social Entrepreneur and Private Enterprise Opportunities

Impact enterprises and social entrepreneurs within the current ecosystem are diverse in terms of geographic and sector dispersion and are able to target a variety of different social or environmental issues

28

Impact enterprises can follow several different business structures from for profit, nonprofit to hybrid and serve a variety of different social causes, and socio-economic groups

Rather than leaving social solutions and innovative ideas to the public sector or governments, social enterprises and entrepreneurs are able to identify what is not working in society, provide innovative solutions, and have the potential to persuade entire social sectors to move in different directions for longterm structural change

Our vision: Investing in Social Change New York City is one of the financial capitals of the world and is seeing an increase of socially minded individuals going into business. We see a New York in which private investors use efficient market based approaches to work alongside philanthropic and public sector funding in a complementary manner to address complex social and environmental issues. There will be a network that connects financial capital with the intellectual, human, and social capital necessary to tackle the stickiest problems that cannot be solved by the current siloed approach. By connecting investors with causes that they care about and the people doing impactful work in those areas, this collaborative funding model will scale sustainable solutions to complex social issues.

Funding Models Meaning

Investing in Social Change

Ideas

Talks and Meetings

Partnerships 29

5.2 Education

“Education is fundamental and plays a necessary role if social entrepreneurship is going to be a field. It is in the university setting where movements become validated, movements become fields and fields become disciplines. Universities play a key role in transforming movements into established roles.�

(Gabriel Brodbar, Executive Director, NYU Reynolds Program in Social Entrepreneurship)

30

Universities worldwide are facing an identity crisis in which they are questioning their role as educators to equip students with the necessary skills and networks to address the needs of communities, both locally and globally. Higher education is expected to contribute to the society by providing highly skilled graduates who become change makers and drive social change. The knowledge economy has a high demand for talented students who seek to actively participate and contribute to the challenges and uncertainties faced worldwide. Therefore, universities are increasingly becoming global drivers for social change by inspiring, connecting and supporting students to broaden their reach of social impact in their communities and around the world.

A major challenge in NYC is the high level of competition. To a certain extent the city is a Microcosm of the world, making it very challenging to find and work on something new. According to Leaman if NYC would be known and recognized as a city of Social Innovation, the meaning of social innovation would be different. It could not always be about what is new but rather on how to work together and collaborate in new ways which are meaningful in generating social change. Spaces to incubate early stage social innovators could be another potential way for this type of activity to thrive in NYC. As stated by Marina Kim, some of this could be done in partnering with existing incubators and peer-to-peer mentorship from other recent graduates (2-5 years) There are many opportunities for higher education models within the city to reframe the special characteristics that NYC has to offer. A major challenge and opportunity for schools is connecting students with other academic programs that are dealing with the same kind of questions. By generating stronger networks of students the academic space serves as a test bed to reframe the importance of cross-disciplinary collaboration between professionals from different schools. NYC provides large opportunities to form creative partnerships amongst universities and government agencies to enable the city to become a social innovation incubator. In order to generate more changes in the city, schools have to make a stronger

effort to encourage students to work on projects that are directly connected to the city. There are many ways of getting involved with local communities, in the city and the surrounding areas. In many ways, in a city like New York social innovation is moving towards students.

NYC is house to universities which are considered drivers of social change. They are vital players in connecting students with real life partners to enable a more vibrant social innovation atmosphere in the city. Thus, education plays an essential role to enable social innovators and projects, which stimulate social inclusion, networking and partnering with local partnerships and citizenry. The academic space is an interesting laboratory to prototype projects within the city. Enabling students with networks, spaces and services to prototype academic projects in real-world scenarios can generate stronger bonds to make the city a hub for social innovation.

The stronger programs and schools leading social innovation programs in NYC are The New School, NYU Stern, Columbia Business School, School of Visual Arts (MFA Design for Social Innovation). Each of these programs helps build a stronger social innovation scene in NYC, however they remain disconnected from one another in leading social ventures within the city. In order to generate more changes in the city, schools have to make a stronger effort to encourage students to work on projects that are directly connected to the city. According to Marina Kim, CoFounder and Executive director of Ashoka U, a big opportunity for higher education is for campuses to work together.

Universities are key players in preparing more citizens to be successful in the social innovation space. According to Gabriel Brodbar, by enabling more professionals with the skills and knowledge to navigate this space, the practice of social innovation moves beyond a movement and a trend to a recognized field of work. Therefore, higher education programs play an important role in making NYC renowned as a social innovation hub.

31

Strengths • The city is a learning laboratory, students can learn in a variety of environments which provide diverse learning experiences. The context of the city is unique for students to prototype projects outside the classroom.

• Schools serve as testbeds for Social Innovation projects, and provide funding and mentorships.

• Academic space is very powerful to show that this is a comprehensible landscape, and help students understand their place in the ecosystem within the city.

• Many schools which are focusing around the same questions provide great opportunities for partnerships.

Weaknesses • Disconnectedness - Campuses are focusing on Social Innovation and not working together, there is a lack of collaboration and partnership across schools • • Schools are framed around an artificial time period, however social problems do not get solved in semester chunks . This is a challenge for students transitioning from the academic to Social Innovation space.

• Many academic projects are have a global focus instead of contextualizing them within NYC.

32

Opportunities Generate stronger networks of students the academic space serves as a test bed to re frame the importance of cross-disciplinary collaboration between professionals from different schools. A starting point could be promoting city wide SI competitions.

Opportunity for education models to explore the special characteristics that New York has to offer, and schools to connect students with other academic programs that are dealing with the same kind of questions.

Our vision: Schools for Social Change With over 2,500 educational institutions and over 100 colleges and universities, NYC has an incredible opportunity to create a culture of collaboration within the educational field. We envision a New York in which schools work together on real world projects, sharing resources and knowledge through a transparent network. These projects will be formalized into a Social Innovation Curriculum that encourages creative problem solving to local social issues. This formal curriculum will give legitimacy to the social innovation field and help create new job opportunities such as Dream Creator or Change Catalyst.

Large networks/ interconnectedness

Real world projects

Schools for Social Change

Curriculum

Creative problem solving 33

5.3 Public Sector One of the major roles of government is to provide general social In a global comparison of the reception of social innovation, more services to the public in areas that have been considered inefficient, leaders are recognizing the importance of failing as part of the unsafe or inappropriate for the private sector to do so. All levels of learning process in public service delivery. However, Chelsea government are faced with the dilemma of maximizing social benefit Mauldin, Executive Director at the Public Policy Lab NYC, sees this with limited resources. In the three levels of US government, local as a slow process in the public sector. She describes the resistance government has the scarcest of resources and yet the most direct in the public sector as a “fear of being wrong and incompetent” - as opportunity for impact as they operate the closest to the beneficiaries a possible displacement of government. Other challenges include and other stakeholders. The public getting buy-in from superiors to sector’s participation in social have permission to experiment.

“When I came to government, everything I innovation can thus unlock potential Social innovation needs flexibility for for having real impact that address testing to find “what works”. (Costa, had heard about bureaucracy prepared me large scale social challenges as they Kristina and Kohli, Jitinder, Social for the worst; instead, I found a community exist at their root in the complexities Impact Bonds: New York City and of dedicated civil servants trying to solve and diversities of communities.

Massachusetts to Launch the First our city’s greatest challenges. NYC has Social Impact Bond Programs in the Social innovation as a means and an United States, 2012) Governments over 300,000 employees, about the size end to problem-solving for complex (not yet collectively) are beginning of the entire population of Belize. Imagine social challenges has been trickling to work with people from design what happens when those civil servants are into governments around the and entrepreneurial fields who empowered to reshape how the City serves globe. The Danish government has have know-how in effectively using established MindLab to revolutionize prototyping and experimentation as its residents, whether through service design, public policy; in Singapore, the Prime tools in designing for the consumer. civic innovation, or something else entirely.”

Minister’s Public Service Division There is an attempt to approach Dave Seliger, Special Projects Manager at NYC Mayor’s Office established a Design Thinking Unit, service delivery from the citizen and in the United Kingdom several perspective - to design with as public organizations are leading opposed to for constituents. Tim service design for addressing social challenges. (Bason, Christian, Smedley expresses this in his article, The New Smart City – From Design-Led Innovation in Government, 2013) NYC’s public sector Hi-tech sensors to Social Innovation that the goal then is to create is not alone in its efforts to apply socially innovative techniques the “smart citizen” and the most influential player in that role is to service delivery and public policy and it has made some the government. (Smedley, 2013) Social Innovation is a step up commendable efforts which I will highlight in the SWOT at the end from technological innovation, it is how we share the value of new of this section. products and services; it is how we close the loop on products and services that are created for people to improve their lives.

34

Findings in NYC Public sector participation in social innovation is happening more through the initiative of NGOs who reach out in attempts to engage various service departments and agencies in problemsolving using design-thinking methods. Public Policy Lab is a great example of such an organization who requires participation of agency staff in their process of problem-solving, in hopes that staff will continue to share the experience and benefits. The design-thinking leader within the NYC public sector is rare and the reception of socially innovative practices and efforts is mixed.

Some people are open to new ways of doing things and some people are entrenched in the traditions and practices of old.

However there is optimism for the field in this sector. Dave Seliger, Special Projects Manager at NYC Mayor’s Office said, “When I came to government, everything I had heard about bureaucracy prepared me for the worst; instead, I found a community of dedicated civil servants trying to solve our city’s greatest challenges. NYC has over 300,000 employees, about the size of the entire population of Belize. Imagine what happens when those civil servants are empowered to reshape how the City serves its residents, whether through service design, civic innovation, or something else entirely.” (Civic service workshop 2014) As design-thinking, social innovation, social entrepreneurship and social impact are becoming a bigger part of NYC dialogue, even trickling into policy making, there is expressed a desire for a physical space that acts as an environment to house outsidethe-box thinking that would increase the chances of system-wide adoption of design thinking within government. However, NYC has a long way to go in its adoption of social innovation and its implications. NYC government still operates as a rigid, bureaucratic institution that will faster address the urgency of public needs in an inadequate short-term solution than taking a more holistic approach.

35

Strengths •

Home to major key players: NYC is home to quite a few forefront personnel in the field of social innovation. Some notable public sector leadership has grown out of NYC. Former Mayor, Michael Bloomberg was able to establish an arguably aggressive social impact agenda for NYC under PlaNYC.

•

Ideal for collaboration and partnerships: Former Mayor Bloomberg’s plan largely involved engaging with the private sector and NGOs to champion the work of social innovation where possible. What he has done is embrace the nature of a city to leverage talents and resources across sectors for achieving shared value for all stakeholders. Organizations like the Center for Urban Pedagogy (CUP) and Public Policy Lab help to bridge relationships and exchange resources with the public sector in collaborating on problemsolving.

•

Establishing the Model: Out of other initiatives have grown leading non profits like CEO (Center for Economic Opportunity) which now operates on a national level. NYC’s government can play an important role in helping solutions to scale. NYC was also a pioneer in establishing social impact bonds as an alternative way to fund social impact. This financing tool is flexible and can be adopted in other cities and towns.

problem-solving is very new even in NYC where the population is diverse and groups of these people readily work together in private sector settings.

There is a general assumption that a lack of competition in the public sector, stifles creativity. However, there is competition. The competition for service and the competition in demand for limited resources, these pressures should ignite the creative individual.

•

Responsiveness to urgency avoids proper planning: The nature of public sector services is the urgency in the need of the public - fire services, policing, education, hunger, poverty, homeless. Social Innovation is largely driven by citizen engagement, something that can be difficult to accomplish when so many are in need. The time and resources that favor a holistic approach to problem-solving can be costly to agencies constrained budgets.

•

A mixed reception of social innovation and design-thinking: There is no public policy culture/ system or norm for embracing socially innovative ideas.

Each agency (and its employees) are open or not to exploring the field.

•

Fear of admitting that the traditional way of providing services may be WWflawed: This is a critical barrier to a more open culture of social innovation in the public sector. There is a need for getting beyond the idea of a “displacement” of government and towards embracing partnership and collaboration Budget constraints - funding social innovations is a challenge even in the private sector, even more so for the government; especially with the ‘rules of procurement’ for public funds.

•

Weaknesses •

•

•

36

Operational structure of government: The nature of public sector operations is very bureaucratic, hierarchical and inflexible. Red-tape policymaking that is reactive rather than proactive, rules of procurement of public funds, vertical rather than horizontal decision making and the bias of seeking elective office in policy making are often barriers that inhibit the possibility for social innovation to flourish in the city’s public sector.

Lack of flexibility: Social Innovation needs flexibility. While social innovation procedures are collaborative and engage stakeholders across sectors and for the entire decision making process, it is also very risky. There is no guarantee that a solution will work or is ideal. Government is designed to protect the public from major risks thus the public sector does not facilitate experimentation and is very behind in modernization of systems and technologies.

Lack of innovative skill or motivation in public sector human resource: The social innovator/ design thinker is not typically employed in the public sector.

Engaging engineers, designers, architects and other industry experts in

Opportunities Ability to scale: The public sector can continue to serve citizens and protect the interests of society by adapting to socially innovative problem-solving and being a facilitator for allowing scaling through adoption. Policing the rules of this is as important as participating in it.

The right kind of challenges: Very large social impact opportunity in the public services sector. This is where the biggest of codependent, co-existing social, environmental and economic challenges exist for the most dependent and vulnerable of populations.

There is a lack of access to capital that supports social impact.

Local government can attempt to play a role in bridging access, either by redirecting funds to opportunities for social impact or subsidizing non profits in their social impact work.

Our vision: Open Government As the body that designs and enacts local policy, the New York City government has the potential to drastically change the dialogue surrounding the social innovation field in the City. We envision a local government that opens its doors to those in the social innovation field and includes them in the policy making and resource allocation discussions. This will allow the New York City government to adopt a human-centered process to policy design while simultaneously empowering its citizens to effect change in their neighborhoods and shifting their perceptions of government from a riskaverse institution to one that encourages creative experimentation.

Empower Citizens

Resource reallocation

Open Government

Dialogue and language Human Centered Design 37

5.4 Non Profits The nonprofit sector is one of the fastest growing sectors in evaluate the work they are doing and the impact they are having at the country and for this sector social innovation is of the utmost a systems level. Evaluation should determine if the work is having importance. The purpose of a nonprofit is to address societal lasting impact or short-term solutions. The need for organizations issues that the government is unable to or is too under resourced to look at problems at a systems level has gained even more to address. The government cannot do everything and provide importance because of the study of systems failure: “ a widespread everything for its citizens, so nonprofits work to address gaps perception that many of the systems supporting daily life need and inequities in service. In NYC alone there are around 27,500 radical overhaul” (Systems Innovation). organizations registered with the IRS and many more who are not required to register due to the size of their operating budget (http:// Environments surrounding social issues are not static and because www.nycnonprofits.org). The organizations range from directof this nonprofits are required to be able to adapt strategies in service providers to advocacy groups innovative ways for addressing the to museums. The most innovative of complexity of issues (Weerawardena, “There is a key collaborative and emotional these organizations are startups who 2012, p. 95). In 2004, the Center piece to [social innovation].

There needs to be are being funded via competitions for the Advancement of Social like Ashoka and the New Challenge.

Entrepreneurship (CASE) at Duke a community of innovators who can support Recently, the concept of social University partnered with Leslie each other. To be able to hearing someone innovation has galvanized nonprofit Crutchfield and Heather McLeod talk and being emotionally supportive to organizations to come up with Grant to study twelve high impact them.

In New York, we are spoiled.

We new and improved strategies/ nonprofit organizations. Among the models within their sectors. These twelve organizations, two of them don’t realize that in smaller places getting strategies/ models address crucial were founded in and operate in emotional support is hard. In those smaller social problems in effective, efficient NYC, Teach for America and Youth places, people don’t feel like they have a and sustainable ways. These social Build USA. The study highlighted community they belong to.” innovations look to benefit society six practices of these high impact as a whole instead of just a fraction nonprofits: advocate and serve, make D Aaron Hurst, CEO and Co-founder of Imperative of the population. Marcos Salazar, markets work, inspire evangelists; a social entrepreneur and the nurture nonprofit networks; master co-founder of the nonprofit Be Social Change remarks, “Social the art of adaptation; and share leadership (Crutchfield, 2012, pp. innovation is a combination of not only doing something new to 41-42). Innovation falls under the practice of “Mastering the art of solve social and environmental problems, but also improving on Adaptation” and that is accomplished by: methods that already exist. The combination of those two things coming together to solve social and environmental problems.”

• Listening to the environment around them and the ideas proposed internally; Systems change is one of the key ways to differentiate social • Developing and innovating by creating new ideas for innovation from entrepreneurship. Nonprofits must take the time to programs and revising and updating existing programs; 38

• Evaluating and learning by assessing what works and what doesn’t work and sharing within their network; • Modifying the future plans and ideas based on the results of the assessments (Crutchfield, 2012, pp. 158).

Another practice learned from these twelve organizations is that like-minded nonprofits need to work as a network instead of as competitors or in a vacuum. Crutchfield and Grant refer to this as a “network mind-set”: “The real difference between these nonprofits and many others lies in the way they work with and through other organizations to achieve greater good” (Crutchfield, 2012, pp. 120).

Aaron Hurst, CEO and Co-founder of Imperative observes “There is a key collaborative and emotional piece to [social innovation].

There needs to be a community of innovators who can support each other. To be able to hearing someone talk and being emotionally supportive to them. In New York, we are spoiled. We don’t realize that in smaller places getting emotional support is hard. In those smaller places, people don’t feel like they have a community they belong to.”

Funding for nonprofits is available, but the rules of funding can restrict the socially innovative process for many organizations. They have to follow certain guidelines and do specific programming in order to get the funding they need to be operational. “Nearly half of organizations reported that they experienced limitations on the percentage of government funds that could be used for program and organization administration costs. Approximately one-quarter of organizations with a contract indicated that they had to share in the cost of the contract and one-half of grantees said they had a matching requirement associate with a grant.”(urban.org). These restrictions can make it hard to impact system change or be socially innovative. If the goal of having more socially innovative nonprofits is going to succeed, the issue of funding needs to be addressed by other sectors.

There are a variety of nonprofits in NYC working on solutions for numerous social challenges. Although different perspectives are

invaluable to the creation of comprehensive solutions, the concern is that many of these nonprofits are not working together. Being only a fragment of the solution will limit the effectiveness of longterm impact. By creating the space, relationships, and knowledge that people and organizations need, sustainable social impact can be more often realized for nonprofits. A lack of social innovation in New York nonprofits is not the problem. The problem lies in educating nonprofits on evaluating their missions on a systems level so that their social innovations can have the most sustainable impact and supplying nonprofits with the funding they need so that innovation is not limited. Below is a discussion on three similarcause organization who could benefit from collaborating.

Health for America is a fellowship program that cultivates the fresh approach of young people in the health field. “Health for America has three clearly defined goals: to provide young people with training and practical experience—a “long-term investment”; to build institutional capacity for innovation by integrating technology into healthcare; and, in the process, to create sustainable solutions that impact patient outcomes.” Dowser.com. The Brooklyn Food Coalition was formed in order to help to identify food disparities (food deserts), gather information on available food facilities in each area, and helps neighborhoods become self reliant by creating localized food systems instead of relying on the food industry. Leave It Better, has incorporated healthy eating into the food sustainability movement by creating a socially innovative strategy where kids grow their own produce. By building gardens in NYC schools, students are learning about healthy eating and sustainable food practices. With the help of organizations like the Brooklyn Food Coalition and Leave It Better, fresh produce, which is expensive, becomes virtually free. In this way, the combination of a less expensive way of eating and a food sustainability method that addresses environmental issues comes together to create a socially innovative strategy for American health. If every nonprofit made a point to collaborate with their peers, gather the right information that measures their success and results, the combined efforts could have a much stronger impact.

39

Strengths •

There are countless nonprofits in NYC due to the variety and depth of social problems we face in our society. The nonprofits in NYC are passionate about their missions and are often started by grassroots efforts that involve people from the community.

•

There is a large and vibrant nonprofit sector in NYC and organizations like Teach for America and YouthBuild USA has shown that it can be a great platform for socially innovative ideas to grow to scale.

•

There are monetary and other incentives in NYC that call for nonprofits to be socially innovative, such as funding from foundations like The Robin Hood Foundation, the New York Foundation, and the Partnership Fund for New York City.

Weaknesses •

Nonprofits do not always evaluate the work they are doing at a systems level to ensure they are creating sustainable impact.

•

The nonprofit sector tends to be fragmented. Nonprofits do not combine their efforts, resources or ideas well enough to create the kind of change that is needed.

•

Funding for nonprofits is viewed as competitive and the rules of funding can restrict the socially innovative process for many organizations.

•

40

There is social innovation happening in NYC but the access to information and opportunities for unlocking the benefits of creative thinking is restricted for some players

Opportunities Due to the influence of NYC, social innovation can begin to have its own framework in the nonprofit sector. That framework can be built upon and become a driving force behind the kinds of innovation that takes place in the city.

Many of the problems facing the cities of today requires a need for creating more sustainable environments addressing how people connect and how capacity is developed. There must be established a sense of place and mutual responsibility in communities and neighborhoods, to ‘own’ where they live and change their lifestyle appropriately. (Buonfino, Leadbeater, Ali, Mulgan, & Kahn, pg. 19).

Collective impact can and should be used to tackle social problems. There is an opportunity to unite nonprofits that are socially innovative in order to achieve a greater social impact.

There is an opportunity to break down the silos that exist in NYC and make the whole of NYC a socially innovative platform.

There is an opportunity to create the sort of funding that does not limit the social innovation of nonprofits by educating individual donors on the value of innovation.

There is an opportunity to educate immigrants, underserved communities and those in outer boroughs about social innovation and its possible impact. Tapping into these communities and working with them will spawn even better socially innovative ideas because it will be coming from the people. There is an opportunity for organizations like CSI to educate foundations about social innovation and the importance of investing in startups that have socially innovative ideas

Our vision: Networked Nonprofits With a nonprofit sector of over 27,000 organizations, the possibilities are endless. We see the future of the nonprofit sector in New York as one that doesn’t divide itself by organizations, but rather by goal. This will allow multiple organizations to attack similar issues by sharing ideas, resources, and strategies for implementation. Working with a “network mindset,” organizations will partner with one another and the local community. The focus on citizens will allow for nonprofits to scale out and reach other communities while maintaining a visible local impact. This collective effort will allow organizations to accomplish what all nonprofits should aim to do: work themselves out of a job through issue eradication

Collective effort

Network mindset

Networked Nonprofits

Flow of strategies

Neighborhood as lab of ideas 41

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Innovation, as it’s own “entity” can be seen in culture, organization and product, often defined as “Process Innovation”. Penetrating the larger system is the ingredient to creating a healthy ecosystem and environment that supports the growth of social innovation. In order to change the system, one must change the perspective. Additionally, it is important to make the question bigger and define the terms of the conversation to make it relevant and appeal to a broader set of players. There is an incredibly creative and progressive population in NYC with unlimited ideas about how to create sustainable futures and achieve social impact.

Yet actors are disconnected from each other and from the resources necessary to weave the web of social innovation in NYC.

42

43

NYC?

What is our dream for

44

Many people working in the social innovation field do not even consider themselves social innovators. We envision a NYC based database that records all entrepreneurs and innovations happening in the city which will be used as a tool for collaboration across sectors. In doing so, a branding space for NYC will be created and known by it’s graphic logo (I LOVE NY-SI) whereby social innovation has a name and space for itself in the cityscape. Key players will see themselves as part of a larger cause when they get their stamp of approval “Innovated and Tested in NYC�

45

7. APPENDICES

A. GLOSSARY OF TERMS Social Innovation - social innovation includes all sectors and diverse approaches to solving social and environmental challenges. It is a discontinuous process that is comprised of “parts”.

Social Innovation hub - Infrastructure - city, policy, educational, or otherwise - which supports the continued exploration of innovation across all sectors and include all approaches including strategies, concepts, and organizations that meet social needs of all kinds that extend and strengthen civil society.

Civil entrepreneurship - Businesses or individuals focused on extending and strengthening civic society through socio-economic business models that directly engage society in making change.

Impact Investment - “An investment approach that intentionally seeks to create both financial return and positive social or environmental impact that is actively measured”.

(World Economic Forum, 2013)

46

B. Interviewee Profiles Ami Dar Executive Director & Founder Idealist.

Fred Dust Partner IDEO

Rick Surpin President & Founder Cooperative Home Care Associates.

Shana Dressler Founder Social Innovation Collective

Maria Gotsch President & CEO NY City Investment Fund

Kippy Joseph Associate Director Rockefeller Foundation

Ronna Brown President Philanthropy New York

Gabriel Brodbar Executive Director of the NYU Reynolds. Program in Social Entrepreneurship at New York University.

Eddie Torres.

Associate Director for the NYC Opportunities Fund.

Rockefeller Foundation

Rick Surpin President Independent Care System

Christine Gaspar Executive Director Center for Urban Pedagogy

Ami Dar Executive Director Idealist

Chelsea Mauldin Executive Director Public Policy Lab

Marcos Salazar Co-Founder Be Social Change

Marina Kim Co-Founder and Executive Director Ashoka U

Aaron Hurst CEO Imperative (Ashoka Fellow)

Michèle Leaman Changemaker Campus Director Ashoka U

47

C. Workshop Eduardo Staszowski Assistant Professor of Design Strategies, Parsons; Director of Parsons DESIS Lab

Jacqueline Cooksey Service Design Consultant

Dave Seliger Special Projects Manager at NYC Office of the Mayor; Co-founder of Civic Service

Benjamin Winter Part time faculty, Parsons; Participatory Design Researcher, DESIS Lab

Joel Stein Current Parsons Students (Design and Urban Ecologies)

Jane Pirone Assistant Professor of Communication Design, Parsons; Founder of Not for Tourists and Happy Mazza Media

Kevin McQueen Instructor for the Community Development Finance Lab, The New School for Public Engagement; Partner, BWB Solutions LLC Jinghang Huang Current Parsons Students (Transdisciplinary Design); Make Your Mark Rashid Owoyele Former Parsons Students (Transdisciplinary Design); Make Your Mark Lauren Wong Current Parsons Students (Transdisciplinary Design); Make Your Mark Nabil Laoudji Freelance Coach, Fullbridge Alessandro d’Ansembourg Director of Social Impact, Zago Lauren Coakley Vincent Program Manager, NYC Business Solutions, NYC Department of Small Business Services 48

Molly Day Chief of Staff, LIFT

Lara Penin Assistant Professor of Transdisciplinary Design, Parsons; Cofounder of DESIS Lab Franchesca Cifuentes Career Development Specialist, The Young Adult Internship Program, Department of Youth and Community Development Hannah Denitz Current Milano Student (International Affairs) Melissa Bautista Current Milano Student (Nonprofit Management) Christianna Ambo Current Milano Student (Urban Policy Analysis and Management) Danielle Palmer Current Milano Student (Nonprofit Management) Facilitators (Current Transdiciplinary Design Students) Reid Henkel Gertrud Høgh Rasmussen Leah Cabrera

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

D. Student Consultant Team Profiles and Key Insights Student Research Team was made up of MS Candidates from various programs within New York’s THE NEW SCHOOL: Christianna Ambo-Jones: Christianna is a current candidate for an MS degree in Urban Policy Analysis & Management at the Milano School of International Affairs, Management and Urban Policy at The New School. She obtained her undergraduate degree in Business Administration at CUNY Bernard Baruch College, where she majored in Economics and minored in Sociology. She works as a Data Manager and Assistant Program Manager for a major utility rebate program at the Association for Energy Affordability, Inc. She is passionate about the possibilities for addressing social challenges through social innovation and has invested in building a strong skillset through courses and experiences in monitoring & evaluation, policy analysis, sustainability, data management & visualization, human-centered and creative design thinking, and process improvement.

Key Insights: Christianna’s research focus was social innovation in the public sector. She found that: • There is mixed reception of creative design thinking/ human-centered design approach methods within local government and public agencies. Addressing public service issues through creative problem-solving in NYC requires the practitioner finding the right individual who shares interest in and sees value in social innovation efforts. That individual does not always exist and even when found, it is quite a task to convince peers and colleagues even to participate in research and ideation workshops or to be willing to pilot problem-solutions. There is notable resistance and notable acceptance - no general consensus on how social innovation as a field is received in the public sector.

56

• The role of the public sector is critical in solving social challenges. With all the independent efforts in the field to bring about social change and realize meaningful, sustainable social impact, getting the government on board is very important. The reasons - addressing large scale social and environmental challenges has traditionally been the responsibility of the government. Issues of safety and rights, widespread poverty, health, education, unemployment are public goods. Local governments may have financial limitations but they are critical actors in setting the policy and adopting working solutions that they can scale.

• There needs to be discussion on the roles of various players in social innovation efforts. Some of the resistance is due to confusion created by actors stepping over traditional lines - for the public sector, there is fear of displacement. Solving problems together can be quite a task - as we know from several team project experiences. How people connect, where they connect and what perspective they bring must be carefully navigated to bring them first to a comfortable space where they can begin to let down the walls and start discovering new ways to solve old challenges.

Danielle Palmer: Danielle is a candidate for a Masters in Nonprofit Management from the Milano School of International Affairs, Management and Urban Policy at The New School. She obtained her undergraduate degree at the University of Hartford where she focused on Communications with a minor in Politics. She currently works with Human Resources Information Systems at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, a hospital committed to the care of cancer patients. She is interested in health and wellness in minority communities across New York and the ways in which to address preventable but endemic health issues.

Key Insights:

Dorit Avganim

Danielle’s research focus was social innovation in the nonprofit sector. She found that: • The nonprofit sector suffers from a “hero complex.” Although the impact of the sector is invaluable, too many nonprofit organizations in New York work alone on the same social issues instead of working together. This division in the sector may come from the reluctance in most nonprofits to admit that that the old way of doing things is not sufficient enough to thoroughly address our social issues (starting with systemic barriers).

Dorit is a candidate for an M.S. in Nonprofit Management, with a focus on Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship, from the Milano School of International Affairs, Management and Urban Policy at The New School. An active participant in discussions around fiscal sustainability and the cultural ecosystem of New York City, Dorit has worked for the last decade as a producer and administrator bringing the work of hundreds of artists to audiences worldwide.

• Aaron Hurst remarked “There is also a key collaborative and emotional piece to it (social innovation). There needs to be a community of innovators who can support each other.

To be able to hearing someone talk and being emotionally supportive to them. In New York, we are spoiled. We don’t realize that in smaller places getting emotional support is hard. In those smaller places, people don’t feel like they have a community they belong to.” What makes New York so special is that we are on the cusp of being a premiere social innovation hub that other cities can learn from. To have the ability to collaborate with such a diverse group social innovators (whether they know they are social innovators or not) is something that can’t be found just anywhere. We need to tap more into the social innovation potential in New York, and we need to make sure that every social innovator has access to be a part of the community.

• Collaboration between sectors has to be paramount if the social innovation is going to be a true success in New York.

For instance, funding for nonprofits from the public sector should encourage social innovation instead of stifling it.

There should be encouragement among leaders across all sectors to be socially innovative so that ideas can be fostered and grow.

Key Insights: • Priming funders as guides rather than gatekeepers may help in bringing new methods of group funding and the expansion of impact investment into play. While foundations/funders often act as gatekeepers on the look out for exemplary projects that might bring notable accolades, offering them opportunities to meet other organizations with similar areas of interest, and facilitating their work together as guides may help them to gain even more notable recognition and may accelerate scalability by supporting issue sectors rather than individual projects.

• Impact investment continues to grow in importance, more so as an outline for how new means of funding may happen to bring ideas to scale than solely as a resource for new capital. Introducing the tangible ideas behind impact investment and clarifying it for funders seems key to its expansion. The Centre for Social Innovations offers invaluable office/work space and camaraderie to innovators and entrepreneurs, and such spaces for interaction for funders and foundations (such as the work of Philanthropy New York) may aide in the understanding and expansion of impact investment throughout the innovation sector.

57

• While entrepreneurs and innovators need additional support for overhead and development, they are equally in need of networking opportunities. Operating in a silo (along with needing more time before measurements are taken) seems to be what keeps the innovation sector from achieving trackable impact.

Hannah Denitz: Hannah is a candidate for an M.A in International Affairs with a concentration on Urban Policy and Society Justice within the Milano School of International Affairs, Management and Urban Policy at The New School. She is interested in the concept of “for purpose” organizations and the shift away from purely non-profit and forprofit ventures, specifically for organizations with an international charitable arm. She received her Bachelor’s Degree from University of Vermont in Global Studies and Spanish and is passionate about Latin American Cities and creating spaces for social innovation to thrive.

Key Insights: • One key insight that I found through both my primary and secondary research, specifically in an interview with Fred Dust, a partner of IDEO is how key the education sector is to instilling social change. Not only do those in academia have the power to create innovative ways of thinking; specifically, the ability to appeal to greater audiences but they have the power and capacity to create a movement and discipline for social innovation. As Dust noted, “school’s are interesting crossovers and big incubators for social innovation businesses and practices”(Interview 4/22).

• As far as addressing the question of whether cities are viable hubs for social innovation, specifically with respect to New York City, my interviews and secondary research answered 58

yes. Cities are places where you cannot avoid people and hence they are a great breeding ground for social innovation. Equally, cities are places where stark contrasts are very visible (Rich/Poor, Educated/Not) as well as other conditions. In conjunction with my findings from an interview with Kippy Joseph, Associate Director of Innovation at the Rockefeller Foundation, it can be concluded then that cities call for the kinds of innovations that allow those gaps to be minimized by building connections that enable progress and avoid conflict.

• In my conversation and interview with Kippy Joseph, she alluded to the fact that there is “an inability of people in different sectors and parts of the system to see the system as a whole”. These words struck a chord with me and resonated throughout my other research. There are ample innovators who hold the “promise and drive to command funding” yet no matter how large they attempt to scale, the overarching issue will not be addressed until multiple disciplines are involved. A systems map would be incredibly useful to aligning these different disciplines as well as addressing the barrier of how authority is shared. As Joseph noted, “if every academic had a systems map and developed relationships to ensure the research agenda on a particular issues knew all of the social innovators working on the same thing, there would be more fluidity to addressing social issues”. This bit of information made it ever so clear that the question now is how to look for people doing similar things across disciplines.

Melissa Bautista: Melissa Bautista is a candidate for a Masters of Science in Nonprofit Management from the Milano School of International Affairs, Management and Urban Policy at The New School. She has a B.S. in Rehabilitation Services from The Pennsylvania State University.

She has experience working in several different fields, but since

graduating from her undergraduate degree she has focused mainly on working in the nonprofit sector. She is passionate about working with organizations who help young people from low income communities succeed. Her focus in Milano is on Social Entrepreneurship because she is interested in learning how to affect real systems change.

Key Insights: • One of the common threads among the Social Entrepreneurs we interviewed was that the diversity of New York City is conducive to innovation. Ami Dar stated that cities high in innovation had high numbers of immigrants from countries that are innovative. Our textbook for Emerging Trends highlighted the role government officials can play in hindering or supporting innovation. Ami emphasized the importance of a supportive government as well. The workshop group I was a part of also touched upon these two insights as well.

• My secondary research into foundations that provide funding for nonprofits via grants highlighted the lack of funding for risky ventures. Foundations are mostly willing to fund innovative programs that have already established that they work. They are interested in seeing the potential for impact before investing their funds. This works out well for for the organizations already established, but does not help new organizations trying to get started.

• My secondary research into the nonprofit sector led me to the textbook Forces for Good by Leslie R. Crutchfield and Heather McLeod Grant. It struck me that one of the six practices of high impact nonprofits is operating with a “network-mindset”. It is not common to find that approach in the nonprofit sector mostly because funding is viewed as a commodity to be competed over. Real and quantifiable systems change will not be possible in the nonprofit

sector until their is more collaboration. The start-up of organizations in collaborative workspaces should help to alleviate the “stand alone” mentality of nonprofit leaders.

Michael Ryan: Michael Ryan is a candidate for a Masters of Science in International Affairs from the Milano School of International Affairs, Management and Urban Policy at The New School. Michael has a Bachelor of Business Degree in International Trade and a Bachelor of Arts Degree in International Studies from Victoria University in Melbourne, Australia. He has also obtained a Degree in Chinese Mandarin from Beijing Language and Culture University in Beijing, China. Michael has extensive international business experience and has lived and worked in five different countries in both the private and public sector. Michael is currently consulting for the United Nations, has his own international trade firm and works on different collaborative projects that invest in feasible businesses that have a social impact element under his company name The Social Press.

Michael is very interested in social entrepreneurship and impact investment and hopes to be more involved in the emerging field in the future.

Key Insights: • The potential for social innovation, impact investment and social entrepreneurs to focus on complex social or environmental issues is huge. However, the academic focus and broad scope of aiming to place so many different stakeholders and actors under the definition could restrict the prospects of the private, public and the market itself to provide much needed innovative solutions and capital.

• It is important to acknowledge the huge impact that strong leadership and clear objectives of an organization have in order to be successful in providing smart innovative solutions for society. Regardless whether the organization 59

is a for-profit or non-profit, it is vital to create a revenue stream that covers basic overhead costs in order to create sustainable business models within the field of social impact.

• There is a strong need for an increased cross disciplinary and collaborative approach within the social economy and proven track records of success need to be established. For example, it would be more feasible for social entrepreneurs to pool their resources together as opposed to working independently within saturated markets and competing for limited resources and funding.

Leah Cabrera Fischer: Leah Cabrera is a candidate for a Master in Fine Arts in Transdisciplinary Design from the School of Design Strategies at Parsons, The New School for Design. Before starting her Masters program she worked as an architect and designer in Spain, India and Guatemala, bringing work experience to address urban and spatial challenges. She is interested in applying design thinking to navigate open ended problems, and propose valuable strategies to address them. Leah graduated from Universidad Francisco Marroquín in Guatemala with a Bachelor of Architecture in 2011.

• Michele Leaman from Ashoka University on what would be expected If NYC were to be deemed the City of Social Innovation in the next 5 years: Given that the competition in NYC is really though, the barrier very high as well.. If NYC would be know for a city of Social Innovation, orientation of what Social Innovation means would be different. It couldn’t always be about what is new but how to work together in new ways.This could leverage NYC in new ways. Since New York is a microcosm of the whole world - It´s not easy to find something new - Therefore, collaborating in news ways would be more fruitful for making NYC the hub for social innovation.

• The notion of social entrepreneurship as a meta profession under where many professions sit on, as Gabriel Brodbar mentioned in an interview. Social entrepreneurship is really the opportunity to bridge the opportunity between the helping professions and the non helping profession. The role of the university is to show that this is a comprehensible landscape, and help students understand their place in this landscape. Universities are going to become more effective a fundamental part of the eduaction is with interacting with students across sectors Gertrud Høgh Rasmussen

Key Insights: • Gabriel Brodbar mentioned talked about community networks on an interview and remarked: It is crucial to recognize that this type of work is a series of lifelong be, - part of this means lifelong community. Sense of community is critical - part of the things you need is build a real community when people face difficult times in this path, since the trajectory of the entrepreneur is that of a lone wolf. The need for community, is no joke. It is a real important part of this space.

60

Gertrud is a candidate for a Master in Fine Arts in Transdisciplinary Design from the School of Design Strategies at Parsons, The New School for Design. She graduated from the Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts - School of Design with a BFA in Service Design in 2013.

She is interested in how design can create changes in complex systems, in particular related to services within the public sector.

Key Insights: • I was very surprised of how little knowledge the workshop participants had of key players and available resources.

when we were going through the material produced, there were large gaps within every sector. In example, no one had mentioned The Blue Ridge Foundation, the Public Policy Lab or NYU Stern as a key player though they are highly influential and visible in the social innovation landscape.

• It seems as there is no infrastructure for social innovation within the city. While the interviewees and workshop participants agreed on that a lot of things were happening within the city, the workshop participants in particular seemed isolated in terms of network. The social entrepreneurs don’t know where to turn for resources, support or network possibilities, or even on what platforms the knowledge is facilitated and communicated. It seems as it is hard for the social entrepreneurs to perceive themselves as part of a larger system or community.

• If NYC wants to become a hub for social innovation, it needs to focus on the quality of the experience and not number of enterprises. One interviewee pointed out that some pivotal things that aren’t openly talked about. These are the emotional processes and experiences that comes with entrepreneurship such as loneliness, solitude and how it affects personal life and relationships.

Reid Henkel:

Key Insights: • One of the most interesting things that I found in doing this research project was how innovation is perceived within the government. The New York City government is seen as an institution that is very much averse to change, and while it still has a long way to go to adopt a culture of experimentation there are many civil servants that are looking for ways to change the way it is run. This, for me, points towards a huge opportunity to begin public sector partnerships with outside organizations.

• People working in the nonprofit sector working towards social change are not necessarily thinking about the entire system. While their intentions are good, the idea that they can effect real change without working together is pervasive in the nonprofit world. Social change is more than an individual or organizational effort, it should be a collective effort that requires a collaborative mindset.

• The term social innovation is problematic in and of itself.

Many people are working for social good but they do not see themselves as doing anything greater than their own mission statement. There are bridges to be made but the organizations first have to see themselves as working in the same space.

Reid Henkel is from New York City and is currently a first year graduate student in the MFA Transdisciplinary Design program at Parsons, The New School for Design. He completed his B.A. in Psychology and Cognitive Science from Rice University in Houston, Texas. Prior to enrolling at Parsons he worked in the education field as a preschool teacher in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Reid is interested in using strategic design to alter the ways in which entire systems operate.

61

8. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Arlington, VA: Ashoka U, 2011. PDF.

Arregui, Alvaro Rodriguez (2013) “The Role of Governments in Social Innovation”.

Huffington Post: Impact <<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alvaro-rodriguezarregui/the-role-of-governments-i_b_3185062.html>> extracted March 31, 2014

Bugg-Levine, A. &. Emerson, J. 2011. Impact Investing: Transforming How We Make Money While Making a Difference.

Ashoka U. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Apr. 2014. “Ashoka U Influencer: How Might Social Innovation Change the Course of Higher Education?” <<https://www.ashoka.org/ story/ashoka-u-influencer-how-might-social-innovation-change-course-highereducation>> Ashoka U. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 March 2014. “Why Higher Education.” <<http:// ashokau.org/about/why/>> Bannick, Matt, and Paula Goldman. “Priming the Pump: The Case for a Sector Based Approach to Impact Investing.” Http://www.ignia.com.mx/bop/uploads/media/ Priming_the_Pump.pdf. Omydiar Network, n.d. Web. <http://youngfoundation. org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Breakthrough-Cities-June-2009.pdf>.

Bason, Christian (2013). “Design-Led Innovation in Government”. Stanford Social Innovation Review Bekkers, V.J.J.M., Tummers, L.G., Voorberg, W.H. (2013). “From public innovation to social innovation in the public sector: A literature review of relevant drivers and barriers”. Rotterdam: Erasmus University Rotterdam Bloomberg, Michael R., Sheekey, Megan (2013). Over a Decade of Strengthening Public Programs through Private Partnerships. Mayor’s Fund to Advance New York City: Annual Report 2012-2013 Kahn, Lauren, Rushanara Ali, Alessandra Buofino, Charlie Leadbeater, and Geoff Mulgan.

Clark, C.H &. Allen, M.H. 2013. Accelerating Impact Enterprises: How to Lock, Stock, and Anchor Impact Enterprises for Maximum Impact. Rockefeller Foundation, New York.

Columbia Business School. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Apr. 2014. <<https://www8.gsb. columbia.edu/socialenterprise/about/message>> Costa, Kristina, Kohli, Jitinder (2012). “Social Impact Bonds: New York City and Massachusetts to Launch the First Social Impact Bond Programs in the United States”. Center for American Progress << http://www.americanprogress.org/>> extracted March 31, 2014 Crutchfield, L. R., & Grant, H. M. (2012). Forces for Good. Forces for Good: The Six Practices of High-Impact Nonprofits(Revised & Updated ed., pp. 41-42). San Francisco: Wiley, John & Sons, Incorporated.

Deloitte. 2013. <<http://globalblogs.deloitte.com/deloitteperspectives/2013/10/ reflections-from-the-world-economic-forums-impact-investing-initiative.html>> Freireich, J. &. Fulton, K. 2009. Investing in Social and Environmental Impact.

Monitor Institute.

“Breakthrough Cities: How Cities Can Mobilise Creativity and Knowledge to Tackle Compelling Social Challenges.” The Young Foundation, n.d. Web. <http://youngfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Breakthrough-CitiesJune-2009.pdf>.

Geoffrey, Elliot. Character and Impact of Social Innovation in Higher Education.

Worcester, UK: n.p., n.d. PDF.

Brest, P. &. Born, K. Unpacking the Impact Investing, in Stanford Social Innovation Review. September, 2013.

Johnson, K. &. Lee, H. 2013. Impact Investing: A Framework for Decision Making.

Cambridge Associates, Boston.

Bridge Impact. 2010. Shifting the Lens: A De-risking Toolkit for Impact Investment.

August, 2013.

Krampetz, Erin, and Jacqueline Smith. “Disruptive (Social) Innovation in Higher Education.” Skoll World Forum. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Apr. 2014. <http://skollworldforum. org/2011/08/19/disruptive-social-innovation-in-higher-education/>.

Brock, Debbi D. Social Entrepreneurship Education Resource Handbook.

62

Cajaiba-Santana, Giovany. “Social Innovation: Moving the Field Forward, A Conceptual Framework.” Technological Forecast and Social Change, (2014): 4251

John Elkington and Pamela Hartigan, The Power of Unreasonable People, Chapter 6, Harvard Business Press, 2008, pp 157 – 178

Krampetz, Erin, and Jacqueline Smith. “Disruptive (Social) Innovation in Higher Education.” Skoll World Forum. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Apr. 2014. <http://skollworldforum. org/2011/08/19/disruptive-social-innovation-in-higher-education/>.

World Economic Forum. From the Margins to the Mainstream: Assessment of the Impact Investment Sector and Opportunities to Engage Mainstream Investors.

September 2013

Michelini, L. 2012. Social Innovation and New Business Models: Creating Shared Value in Low-Income Markets. Springer, London.

World Economic Forum. From Ideas to Practice, Pilots to Strategy: practical Solutions and Actionable Insight on How to DO Impact Investment. December 2013.

Monitor Institute. 2014 <<http://www.monitorinstitute.com/what-we-think/impactinvesting/#impact-investing>> N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Apr. 2014 “Design for Social Innovation”<<http://dsi.sva.edu/ program/chair_letter/>> NYC Nonprofits : News. (n.d.). NYC Nonprofits : News. Retrieved April 30, 2014, from <<http://www.nycnonprofits.org/exec_summary/index.html#exec1>> NYU Stern. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Apr. 2014. “An Education in Possible.” <<http://www. stern.nyu.edu/experience-stern/about/values/index.htm>> Sahni, Nikhil R., Wessel Maxwell, Christensen, Clayton M. (2013). “Unleashing Breakthrough Innovation in Government”. Stanford Social Innovation Review Smedley, Tim (2013). “The New Smart City – From Hi-tech Sensors to Social Innovation”. The Guardian: Guardian Sustainable Business << http://www. theguardian.com/sustainable-business/smart-cities-sensors-social-innovation>> extracted April 1, 2014 Stephen Goldsmith with Gigi Georges and Tim Glynn Burke, Power of Social Innovation: How Civic Entrepreneurs Ignite Community Networks for Good, John Wiley & Sons, 2010, Chapters 1, 2, 3 and 7 The New School, N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Apr. 2014. “About.” <<http://www.newschool. edu/about/>> UK Sustainable Investment and finance Association. The Future of investment: Impact Investment, August 2013.

Voorhes, M &. Hoque, F. 2013. Unleashing the Potential of US Foundation Endowment: Using Responsible Investment to Strengthen Endowment Oversight and Enhance Impact. USSIF Foundation, New York.

Weerawardena, J., & Mort, G. S. (2012). Competitive Strategy in Socially Entrepreneurial Nonprofit Organizations: Innovation and Differentiation. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 31(1), 95.

63