Federal Agency Issues Preliminary Plans for Social Innovation Fund

The Corporation for National and Community Service today released a long-awaited draft notice spelling out how it will award grants under the $50-million Social Innovation Fund.

The “Notice of Funds Available” — which was delayed by slow Congressional action to approve the agency’s budget — says the corporation plans to award approximately five to seven grants of $5-million to $10-million during the 2010 fiscal year, which ends September 30.

The money, which will be awarded for periods of up to five years, will go to “intermediary grant-making organizations” that will in turn award grants of at least $100,000 annually to promising nonprofit groups. Both the intermediary organizations and the nonprofit groups must provide matching funds.

The draft notice, which will be finalized after a comment period that ends January 15, also offers a definition of “social innovation” and explains what kind of evidence the grant makers and nonprofit groups will be required to provide to show their projects have impact.

Corporation officials said on a telephone conference call they expect to receive between 150 to 200 applications for the money, which they expect to award next summer.

Among the notice’s provisions:

Definition of Social Innovation: “Development of a potentially transformative practice or approach to meeting critical social needs.”

Priority Grant-making Areas: Projects to improve “measurable outcomes” in increasing economic opportunity; preparing young people for success in school, citizenship, and work; and promoting healthy lifestyles. The grant makers must support programs that serve low-income neighborhoods.

Emphasis on Evidence: The corporation will give priority to intermediary groups that use “rigorous evidence” to select their grant recipients, will encourage the use of evaluation tools by all participants, and will assess the efforts of the grant makers and nonprofit groups to achieve measurable outcomes. The notice provides definitions of “strong impact,” “strong evidence,” “moderate evidence,” and “preliminary evidence.”

Examples of Potentially Successful Applicants: 1) “A rural, nonprofit grant-making organization with deep roots in the local community and a strong focus on community needs, including education, health, and poverty.” 2) “A high-engagement philanthropy organization working with a handful of innovative community organizations in two areas: workforce development and poverty alleviation.” 3) “A local government office with a commitment to spurring, investing,in, and supporting new solutions to local problems.”

Nicola Goren, the corporation’s acting chief executive, said the Social Innovation Fund is a novel approach to government grant making since the money will not go directly to nonprofit groups and does not hang its hat on a single promising approach.

Instead, the money will go to intermediary groups with an expertise in “finding, supporting, and monitoring the progress and growth of promising nonprofit organizations.” She said it will also help build a network of organizations across the country that are skilled at targeting promising approaches to key social problems.

Asked whether the economic downturn could make it difficult to find matching funds, Stephen Goldsmith, interim chairman of the corporation’s board, said he already had received signals that some national grant makers had an “appetite” to provide the money. He said grant makers should be especially interested in stepping forward during hard times since they could help nonprofit groups tackle social problems more effectively.