120 likes | 206 Views
Public-Private Partnerships for Innovation and Evaluation James A. Riccio MDRC OAS IASPN Technical Consolidation Meeting Mexico City August 10-11, 2011. What is MDRC?. Social policy research firm: non-profit Headquartered in New York City
E N D
Public-Private Partnerships for Innovation and Evaluation James A. Riccio MDRC OAS IASPN Technical Consolidation Meeting Mexico City August 10-11, 2011
What is MDRC? • Social policy research firm: non-profit • Headquartered in New York City • Mission: Increase knowledge of “what works” to improve well-being of low-income people • Leader in use of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to test new social policies • Involved in many public-private initiatives 2
3 examples of public-private collaboration • Opportunity NYC—Family Rewards (CCT pilot) • Federal Social Innovation Fund (SIF) • UK Employment Retention and Advancement demonstration (UK ERA) 3
Example #1: CCT Program Opportunity NYC—Family Rewards Planning partners: • Local government: NYC Center for Economic Opportunity (CEO) (part of Mayor’s Office) • Evaluation firm: MDRC • Program operator:Seedco(private, non-profit)
Rockefeller Foundation funded the design phase, which included… • Planning grant for MDRC and Seedco to work with NYC government (CEO) • Learning exchange with Mexico (Oportunidades) • Design document prepared by MDRC • Extensive consultations with other government agencies, experts, academics
Full pilot launched in 2007 • Private donors paid all program and evaluation costs (many funders) • Funds channeled through non-profit called: The Mayor’s Fund to Advance NYC • MDRC and Seedco: Contract with Mayor’s Fund • City agency (CEO) managed the contract • Collaborative decision-making • 3-year program completed; 5-year evaluation ongoing 6
Example #2: Federal Social Innovation Fund Core collaborators: • NYC Center for Economic Opportunity (CEO) • Mayor’s Fund to Advance NYC • MDRC 7
What is the “Social Innovation Fund”? • Federal initiative to scale up of evidence-based programs operated by non-profits • Each federal $1 must be matched by $3 in non-federal funds (usually private funds) • Where evidence is “promising” but not “strong,” initiative must be evaluated to build stronger evidence • MDRC, CEO, and Mayor‘s Fund won 1 of 11 federal grants in national competition
MDRC-CEO SIF Projects: 5 in 8 cities 1. CCT program (begins fall 2011) Family Rewards (revised version):NYC and Memphis 2. Career advancement program WorkAdvance:NYC, Cleveland, Youngstown, and Tulsa 3. Public housing employment program Jobs-Plus: NYC and San Antonio 4. Tax-time savings incentives program SaveUSA: NYC, Newark, San Antonio, Tulsa 5. Education & work internship for disconnected young adults Project Rise: NYC, Kansas City (KS), Newark
Structure of the collaboration • Federal and private dollars go to Mayor’s Fund • CEO(government) oversees the project • CEO and MDRC collaborated on design of models and selection of cities • CEO, MDRC, and local funding partners selected local non-profit providers • MDRC is providing technical assistance to local non-profits and is conducting the evaluations • CEO and MDRC arecollaborating on fundraising
Example #3: UK ERA (2003-2011)Employment Retention and Advancement project: • Goals: (1) Test innovation to improve job stability and earnings (2) build UK capacity to do RCTs • Initially conceived by MDRC and UK Treasury • Rockefeller funded MDRC to engage in early exploratory conceptual work with Treasury • Treasury subsequently funded full-scale design effort and evaluation (MDRC with UK partners) • Close collaboration with government (Dept. for Work and Pensions) throughout project
Conclusions: Some possible benefits of public-private collaboration • Broader range of ideas and expertise • Spreading the risk, so can try bolder and potentially more controversial projects • Broader range of stakeholders and potential supporters of an initiative (if it works) • Possible expansion of resource base to conduct more pilots (leveraging funding)