Back to top

Sustainable Resourcing

Sustainable resourcing includes consistent and reliable staff and funding that is necessary for long-term planning, stability, and continuity of the anchor collaborative’s efforts. Sustainable resourcing allows collaboratives to invest in capacity-building activities and pursue multi-year initiatives that are core to the anchor mission, which require long-term commitments and engagement by anchor institutions and the backbone.

By securing and effectively managing resources, the collaborative can create a stable foundation for its work, build its capacity, and contribute to the vitality of the local community. A well-resourced, well-managed collaborative can build trust and credibility among stakeholders, innovate, adapt to changing community needs, and measure its impact, while also leveraging outside resources and partnerships to advance its mission. Without reliable and ongoing resources, the collaborative may struggle to achieve its goals, engage stakeholders, and sustain its efforts.

What you need to know

To successfully resource the collaborative:

  1. Examine common funding sources for anchor collaboratives and identify the sector (anchor institutions, public entities, or philanthropy) that can best provide initial resourcing.
  2. Leverage initial resources to demonstrate proof of concept while laying the foundation for conversations about longer-term funding models (e.g., recurring membership dues, public support, and/or multi-year philanthropic commitments).
  3. Document financial needs for operational support, projects and programs, and in-kind contributions or sponsorships.
  4. Leverage the networks and relationships of your champions and the development teams within anchor institutions to expand fundraising capacity.
  5. Develop a fundraising plan that outlines goals for diverse funding streams across local and national philanthropy, public sector, and anchor contributions, including the business and mission imperatives for why funders should support the anchor collaborative.

In this section, we discuss common staffing approaches, organizations that fund collaboratives, and different ways in which anchor collaboratives utilize their resources to support their goals.

Resourcing needs

Where the anchor collaborative “lives” (i.e., which organization(s) serve as the backbone, whether there’s a fiscal sponsor) can determine the resources that a collaborative needs and can access. Collaboratives operating as an initiative of an existing nonprofit usually have their general operating expenses supported by the nonprofit, which helps fundraise for new initiatives. Other collaboratives may be fiscally sponsored or under contract with a university or health system for back-office functions, while collecting membership dues or donations from anchor institution members to support the collaborative’s programs and general operations.

Among the anchor collaboratives who informed this playbook, the annual reported budgets specific to the collaborative’s work ranged from $75,000 to $5 million. As with any new initiative or nonprofit, backbone organizations and the anchor collaboratives should think strategically about a funding model that includes a mix of revenue sources.

Staffing the collaborative

Many collaboratives will start with a part-time consultant or facilitator who is responsible for many of the coordinating and engagement functions of the backbone including organizing the group, socializing the anchor collaborative concept, building relationships and buy-in, establishing foundational structures, facilitating meetings, and helping set initial goals. A collaborative may then decide to hire a full-time executive director as the scope of activity expands and resourcing permits. The initial staff (consultants, facilitators) are typically either contracted or employed by the trusted convener or backbone organization, an anchor institution, or other allied organization, as most collaboratives do not start off as independent organizations. Additional capacity can come from partner organizations, other anchor institution members, or by hiring support staff specifically for the collaborative.

Some collaboratives have grown to teams of 5-10 employees, with project managers, program analysts, development directors, or administrative staff who support one or several of the collaborative’s initiatives. Especially in the early stages, anchor institution members of the collaborative may provide in-kind staff, such as grant writers or development officers who support the collaborative by identifying and pursuing funding opportunities and building relationships with funders.

For more on staffing the collaborative, see section 1.4 Forming the Collaborative and the Backbone, and section 3.1 A Shared Imperative, which discusses the role of a trusted convener.

Who funds anchor collaboratives?

Below we outline four main funders of anchor collaboratives:

With the addition of anchor institutions as a unique revenue source, these sources of funding are consistent with the Nonprofit Finance Fund’s research on Funding Streams for Place-based Partnerships. Following an overview of funding sources, we discuss how funding is used by anchor collaboratives to support general operations and programmatic work.

Table 5. Funding Sources and Use for 17 Anchor Collaboratives
 

 

Funding source

Funding use

Hover to learn more
Philanthropy, Local
Philanthropy, National
Public
Anchor Contributions
Operating (member dues)
Operating (public, grants)
Project-specific/
Restricted
In-kind
Sponsorships

Albuquerque

x

 

     

x

     

Baton Rouge

 

x

x

x

 

x

x

x

 

Brooklyn

x

x

x

   

x

x

   

Chicago

x

x

x

x

x

 

x

x

 

Denver

x

 

x

x

   

x

 

x

Hartford

x

 

x

x

x

 

x

   

Milwaukee

 

 

 

x

         

Newark

 

x

x

x

 

x

x

   

North Central Mass

x

 

 

x

 

x

 

x

 

Ogden

x

 

 

x

x

 

x

   

Philly

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

 

x

San Diego

 

 

x

x

 

x

x

 

x

South FL

x

x

     

x

x

 

x

Southwest

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

 

St. Louis

x

 

 

x

 

x

 

x

 

Tacoma

x

x

x

x

 

x

x

x

 

Western Mass

x

 

x

   

x

     

Funding source

Philanthropy, local: restricted or unrestricted grants from private, community, or corporate foundations operating locally or at the state level; or individual donors.

Philanthropy, national: restricted or unrestricted grants from private, community, corporate foundations operating nationally.

Public: federal, state, local, or another publicly funded agency that provides grants or contracts to anchor collaboratives.

Anchor contributions: Financial contributions from anchor institutions include sponsorships, membership dues, donations, and grants to support the collaborative’s general operations and programmatic initiatives. Anchor institutions may also support the collaborative in-kind through staff time or space for events and meetings.

Funding use

Operating (member dues): Unrestricted membership fees or dues paid by members of the anchor collaborative to support the mission and general operations of the collaborative.

Operating (public, grants): Unrestricted grants or funding from public sources to support the mission and general operations of the collaborative.

Project-specific/Restricted: Grants, public funding, or member contributions earmarked for a specific use by the Anchor Collaborative.

In-kind: Non-cash contributions such as staff time, office or event space, catering, or supplies to support the Anchor Collaborative’s activities.

Sponsorships: Funding from a public or private source for a one-time event or short-term project, typically from the donor’s marketing budget.

Funding Streams, Philadelphia Anchors for Growth & Equity (PAGE)

PAGE is largely funded through philanthropy from sponsorships and grants from the Lenfest Foundation, the Barra Foundation, JPMorgan Chase, TD Bank, and AmerisourceBergen. In parallel, PAGE anchor institutions each pay $20,000-$25,000 in dues annually. The collaborative also receives funding from the City of Philadelphia and the Economic Development Administration. The diversity of funding streams allows PAGE to sustainably operate, without an overreliance on a single stream of funds. PAGE believes the quest to diversify funding should be sequential, with support from anchor institutions and government coming first. For PAGE, once that support was secured, it was easier to get philanthropic dollars and public grants. Even if an anchor collaborative has a philanthropic sector willing to provide catalytic support, PAGE recommends securing commitment letters from their anchor institutions before taking philanthropic dollars so those institutions fully understand that funding is part of their commitment to the collaborative and their community.

[56] “Funding Streams for Place-based Partnerships, and Their Benefits and Challenges,” Nonprofit Finance Fund, last modified 2021, https://nff.org/file/1526/download?token=M5BBsFgX.

[57] Douglas Easterling and Laura McDuffee, “Social Determinants Of Health: How Are Health Conversion Foundations Using Their Resources To Create Change?,” Health Affairs Forefront, (2018), accessed February 1, 2024, https://doi.org/10.1377/forefront.20180313.6738.

Philanthropy

Local and national philanthropy—including private, community, and corporate foundations—commonly provide funding for anchor collaboratives. A small number of collaboratives have also received large gifts from individual donors. Private sector philanthropy has typically come from large national or multinational corporations with headquarters or deep history in the location where the anchor collaborative is located.

1. Local philanthropy

Defined as restricted or unrestricted grants from private, community, or corporate foundations operating locally or at the state level; or individual donors. Health funders including anchor institutions themselves (e.g., through their foundations), community foundations, and health conversion foundations are increasingly common funders for equitable economic development initiatives. Health conversion foundations are created with the proceeds from a sale, merger, acquisition, or other transaction by nonprofit healthcare systems or hospitals, and do not have the same type of donor restrictions that often limit where community foundations can focus their resources. These place-based foundations have historically focused on healthcare access, but many have shifted their focus to address root causes of health and wealth disparities (e.g., social determinants of health, community conditions, and systems change). Grants from local funders tend to be smaller compared to those of national funders, however, the collaborative may find stronger alignment and long-term commitment with local philanthropy due to their mutual focus on place.

Table 6. SDOH outcomes sought by health conversion foundations

SDOH Domain Targets for Change
Community building Increased civic engagement; Improved sense of connectedness and trust; Collective efficacy and ability to set community-wide goals
Educational Success Increased educational attainment and graduation rates; More educational opportunities; Increased access to high-quality education
Parenting and Early Childhood Parenting skills; Healthy family environment; Increased access to high-quality child care
Economic Well-being Increased job opportunities and workforce development; A growing, thriving economy that attracts business and entrepreneurs; Increased home ownership and financial literacy
Built Environment Development of walkways, parks, trails, and exercise routes; Conversion of former rail lines to exercise paths; Creation of public spaces to encourage community engagement and healthy activity
Housing More affordable housing; Independent living for seniors; Reduced homelessness; More transitional housing for the homeless
Community Safety Violence prevention; Criminal justice reform; Better opportunities for ex-offenders when re-entering communities
Transportation Transit-oriented urban development; Expansion of transportation options to promote healthy activities and reduce traffic; Increased availability of public transportation in underserved communities
Source: Health Affairs analysis of interviews with foundation leaders and foundations’ program-related materials, 2016

Grantmakers in Health developed a primer on Health Conversion Foundations, including a list of such foundations by state as of 2021: Update From the Field: Health Conversion Foundations.

2. National philanthropy

Includes restricted or unrestricted grants from private, community, or corporate foundations operating nationally. Based on what we have learned at the Healthcare Anchor Network, national funders are more likely to support anchor collaboratives that have a clear shared imperative and framework for action—for example, the collaborative may have developed a charter, secured commitments from anchor institutions, and/or piloted an initial program together with the community.

Below is a list of national funders that have supported anchor collaboratives around the country to date (and is not indicative of their future funding priorities). Collaboratives have found it important to identify national funders that value place-based efforts and are willing to fund hyperlocal work. Healthcare Anchor Network encourages national funders to look more deeply at anchor collaboratives as a place-based strategy for impacting economic and racial inequities, and explore how to partner with local philanthropy or other national intermediaries to support these efforts. While the following funders have supported collaborative work in the past, there are many other national funders who focus at state or regional levels. It is important to conduct thorough research and explore various options to find the best fit for your anchor collaborative, and check with the development teams within anchor institutions to see where they already have relationships.

Examples of national funders supporting anchor collaboratives:

  • Ballmer Group
    • West Side United
  • Bank of America Foundation
    • Philadelphia Anchors for Growth and Equity
  • Citi Foundation
    • South Florida Anchor Alliance
  • JPMorgan Chase Foundation
    • West Side United and Philadelphia Anchors for Growth and Equity
  • Lowes Foundation
    • Southwest Partnership
  • Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
    • Brooklyn Communities Collaborative and Tacoma Anchor Network
  • TD Ameritrade Foundation
    • Philadelphia Anchors for Growth and Equity

3. Public entities

Includes federal, state, local, other publicly funded agencies that provides grants or contracts to anchor collaboratives. For most of the collaboratives who helped inform this playbook, public funding is a small portion of their total revenue. However, a handful of collaboratives were initiated with public funding sources and later received philanthropic grants. Others have contracted with municipalities for specific projects or services such as school- or community-based programs. During the COVID-19 pandemic, several collaboratives received funding from the American Rescue Plan Act. Other collaboratives have administered Community Development Block Grants, or received grants through other programs administered by state or federal authorities, typically through housing and workforce agencies.

Leveraging Public Funding, Tacoma Anchor Network (TAN)

The City of Tacoma is the fiscal sponsor and primary funder of the Tacoma Anchor Network (TAN), which was established in 2018 in alignment with the Tacoma 2025 Strategic Plan. From 2022-2024 TAN was allocated $77,500 annually, which primarily covers one part-time contractor to facilitate the network. City staff in the Office of Strategy provide additional backbone support. TAN has benefitted from champions on the city council who advocate for and help approve its funding based on recommendations from the Office of Strategy within the city manager’s office. The public funding has enabled the anchor institutions to work together and build trust as a network without requisitioning dues from institutions—making it more accessible since some anchor institutions have spending restrictions. However, TAN recognizes that city budgets have competing priorities that can change over time, so it is working to diversify its funding stream through potential anchor institution membership fees, grants, and other philanthropic funding.

Anchor Collaboratives as Partners in Federal Funding Opportunities, Western Massachusetts Anchor Collaborative (WMAC)

Western Massachusetts Anchor Collaborative is part of a broad coalition of partners that received a strategy development grant as part of the Economic Development Administration’s Recompetes Program. The Springfield-Holyoke Recompete Plan, led by the MassHire Hampden County Workforce Board and Baystate Health, represents a coalition of community partners and anchor institutions that have come together to tackle structural barriers to employment, and create a human-centered design process that starts with understanding challenges that unemployed people experience, and then works with employers, service providers, government, workforce development board, and others to systemically start to mitigate them. The plan focuses on connecting residents in neighborhoods that have faced persistent inequity, structural racism, and disinvestment to supportive services and good jobs at anchor institutions. Funding will support four holistic investments that address employment barriers through a shared services hub, workforce development and training, and the expansion of employer commitments to worker-friendly jobs. The coalition is one of twenty-two finalists who are eligible to apply for implementation funding, with awards ranging from $20-$50 million to be announced in 2024.

4. Anchor institutions

Financial contributions from anchor institutions include sponsorships, membership dues, donations, and grants to support the collaborative’s general operations and programmatic initiatives. Anchor institutions may also support the collaborative in-kind through staff time or space for events and meetings. Financial contributions signal an institutional commitment to the collaborative and demonstrate members’ vested interest in its success. Grants or annual membership donations from anchor institutions help cover the day-to-day operating expenses of the collaborative and can be leveraged for additional funding from outside sources.

Determination of Need and Community Benefit AgreementsWhen setting up a funding structure, anchor collaboratives will need to determine whether any payment issued by anchor institutions to support the collaborative is contractual, or if it is a grant or donation with no stipulations tied to the payment. The latter affords more flexibility, especially in early years, and is recommended. The next section called How Anchor Collaboratives Use Funding, emphasizes annual dues from members and programmatic grants as the most sustainable funding sources for this work.

Some collaboratives have instituted a “pay what you can'' model, or do not request funding at all from community partners, neighborhood associations, or those members of the collaborative who are important community partners and may fall outside the traditional definition of an anchor institution. It is highly recommended to set up a financial contribution structure that considers the unique financial position of each member of the anchor collaborative.

In-kind contributions In-kind contributions and sponsorships from anchor institutions typically account for a smaller portion of total revenue for the collaborative. While in-kind contributions and sponsorships do signal early support of the collaborative and can help resource the collaborative in the short-term, these contributions are best understood as supplementary funding in addition to the other sources discussed here.

A successful anchor collaborative will require at least some financial contributions from anchor institutions in addition to their operational commitments associated with the anchor mission. Both commitments are necessary and funding for the collaborative should not come in lieu of the organizational commitments associated with the anchor mission. Funding is necessary to support the backbone function and coordination of the collaborative’s activities. The success of those activities ultimately hinges upon the anchor institution’s own commitments to leverage their economic assets (hiring, purchasing, investing, advocacy, community giving, etc.) in partnership with the community.

How anchor collaboratives use funding

This section describes the ways in which anchor collaboratives use different funding sources to cover costs associated with launching, building, and sustaining the collaborative through events and short-term projects, general operations, and programmatic work.

Events, convenings, and short-term projects are often funded by sponsorships from a public or private source. Sponsorships—which typically come from an anchor institution’s marketing budget—might support research products or events that help socialize the anchor collaborative concept and goals in the community, build support, and gain buy-in from anchor institution members. In Philadelphia, for example, the construction community has provided generous support of supplier diversity events and has been instrumental in pushing for change in the procurement space.

Sponsorships and in-kind contributions add important resources to projects that help get the collaborative off the ground. However, this funding cannot sustain the work long-term, and should be pursued in addition to longer-term grants and membership dues that fund the collaborative’s core functions and activities.

Anchor collaboratives cover general operating expenses through membership dues, grants, and public funding.

Membership dues: Membership donations, fees, or dues are paid by members of the anchor collaborative to support the mission and general operations of the collaborative. “Donations” or
“Dues”? Operating expenses include salaries, insurance, utilities, an annual audit, supplies, and equipment. Anchor collaboratives rarely establish a dues structure from the outset. Rather, an annual dues structure has come with the process of “formalizing” the collaborative, with decisions about expectations in terms of membership dues made by a governance committee or executive committee.

Among the anchor collaboratives that informed this playbook, annual dues from anchor institution members ranged from $10,000 - $250,000 per institution. Not all collaboratives had a dues structure at the time of this writing. Annual dues can demonstrate funding stability and position the collaborative to attract additional philanthropic support for specific initiatives. When establishing a financial contribution structure, collaboratives can consider member's operating revenue, budget, assets such as real estate, employee count, or an equation that takes all factors into account. Some collaboratives allow anchor institutions to contribute on a sliding scale, or to allocate support to general operations or a specific project.

Membership dues have also helped cover programmatic costs that individual members may be less likely to fund through a grant. For example, one collaborative’s community building work is funded through membership dues. While perhaps atypical to classify community building initiatives as general operations, this work requires significant staff time, relationship building, and financial resources. Community building is core to the collaborative’s success and can be long-term, amorphous, and not easily funded by grants.

It is possible that the anchor collaborative is housed within an organization that already collects annual dues from its members. Often unrestricted, membership dues collected by the “host” or backbone organization can fund the anchor collaborative in its incubation stages. For some collaboratives under this structure, anchor institutions have contributed funds above and beyond their annual dues to the host organization to specifically fund the anchor collaborative. Still, the recommended model for long-term sustainability is a separate sliding scale dues structure for all anchor institution members.

Making the case for annual dues

Conversations with anchor institution members about annual dues can be tricky. Backbone staff in particular may be interested in a more diversified funding structure, but feel they are not ready to have the conversation with their members about paying dues or may not know how to initiate it. In discussions about financial contributions for the collaborative, backbone staff should be educated about, and prepared to acknowledge, the financial circumstances and restrictions facing each member. The governance committee can be helpful in setting up a fair dues structure that makes sense for the collaborative.

Grants and public funding: Many collaboratives receive funding for general operating expenses from public or philanthropic sources. General operating grants from community foundations have been leveraged as “seed funding” for getting the collaborative off the ground and providing the initial staffing and resources necessary to recruit other anchor institutions as members. In many cases, these grants—especially in early stages—cover the cost of a part-time consultant or external facilitator who is responsible for moving the work forward, writing grants, setting goals, etc.

Public grants or cooperative agreements have also helped cover operating costs of anchor collaboratives who provide services aligned with a city’s community or workforce development goals, for example. Collaboratives might also establish a policy for setting aside a certain percent of grant funding for operational expenses. In Baton Rouge, after debating whether they should introduce annual membership dues, the collaborative instead established a policy to set aside 10 percent of any grant funds to support other programs or general operations. Others have set aside as much as 30 percent of grant funding to support operations.

Almost every collaborative we identified has received program- or project-specific funding from philanthropy, public sources, or anchor institution member contributions (beyond their annual dues). After a thorough goal-setting process and adoption of an anchor mission framework in partnership with community organizations, anchor collaboratives will have a better understanding of their initial direction and funding requirements for programmatic work. With this in mind, collaboratives can identify funding opportunities that align with their intended goals and activities. A collaborative might start by seeking funding to conduct a research project, launch a pilot, or build out critical infrastructure including technology. Below are some examples of grant-funded projects, programs, and longer-term initiatives that have helped collaboratives advance anchor strategies in their communities:

  • a Participatory Action Research study focused on engaging Black business owners in an Impact Purchasing strategy in Brooklyn

  • a web-based regional marketplace that streamlines vendor registration and uses AI to connect local vendors with bid opportunities at anchor institutions

  • workforce and procurement analyses to understand anchor institutions’ needs and opportunities in hiring, career development, and contracting

  • a paid internship program that trains residents in priority neighborhoods to become civic leaders in their community

  • a training and mentorship program for entrepreneurs of color to expand capacity and build contracting relationships with anchor institutions

  • workforce training programs to prepare residents living in priority geographies for jobs at anchor institutions

More examples of these initiatives can be found in section 2: Understanding Anchor Strategies.

Steps for getting started: Develop a fundraising plan for the collaborative

The backbone, with members of the anchor collaborative, can take a strategic approach to identifying and securing resources by developing a fundraising plan. 

Here are some action-oriented steps to develop a fundraising plan alongside members of the anchor collaborative:

  • Conduct a thorough assessment of the financial needs of the collaborative. Consider questions such as:
    • What are our programmatic goals for the collaborative (e.g., launch a shared business accelerator program, create a shared workforce pipeline program)?
    • What are our operational goals for the collaborative (e.g., how many full-time employees [FTEs] would be required to sustain this work? Which roles are top priority to support first?)?
    • What existing funding do we have (e.g., dues, philanthropy)? For what amount and for how long? Is this funding tied to specific projects or goals, or is it general operations funding?

    Note: This is a great opportunity to engage with other anchor collaboratives to gather their input and guidance. This can help ensure an accurate estimate of funding needs.

  • Research funders that are aligned with the collaborative’s goals around equitable economic development, local community impact, specific anchor mission strategies, etc., and note key talking points from each organization to weave into future proposals. Consider diversifying funding streams to reduce reliance on any single source. Fundraising teams within anchor institutions can help with this.

    To find additional funders, anchor collaboratives and backbones can consult online resources such as GrantStation, Foundation Center, Grants.gov, or Guidestar, as well as consult with local community foundations, nonprofit organizations, government grants and programs (local, state, and federal), or other experts in your area.

  • Craft a written fundraising plan including key deadlines, time-bound financial goals, and lists of prospective donors and grant opportunities, and update the plan regularly to reflect changes in the collaborative's needs and funding landscape. Establish a fundraising working group that includes development professionals from anchor institutions and community partners.

  • Create a compelling case for support that reflects the priorities of your collaborative in alignment with the funding opportunity. Articulate collaborative's mission, vision, progress to date (including anchor institution commitments and partnerships with community organizations), and unique value proposition of the model. Collaborate with community partners and anchor institution fundraising staff in the development of such proposals, and tailor proposals for each prospective funder.

  • Call on your champions for support in building and nurturing relationships with new and prospective funders. Engage funders in the collaborative's work, share updates and progress, and invite them to events and meetings to see the impact of their contributions. Stay on top of documenting key outcomes and progress toward stated goals to ensure accurate, timely, and thorough reporting to funders. 

  • Explore and consider a dues model for all collaborative members. Connect with other anchor collaboratives that are focused on similar strategies and are funded in this way. Start conversations with the collaborative about what a dues structure could look like. Pose questions such as: What value does the anchor collaborative provide to your institution? What progress would the institution need to see to consider a recurring donation?

Backbones are highly encouraged to activate their champions and the fundraising teams at anchor institutions, both of whom can be immensely effective in helping to secure resources for the collaborative. The networks of executive-level champions in particular are one of the most important resources for unlocking public, philanthropic, and anchor institution funding. And, tapping the development teams within anchor institutions is one of the most effective ways for the collaborative to add fundraising capacity and compete for national funding. 

Continuum of Progress: Sustainable Resourcing

In an ideal state, sustainable resourcing will involve multi-year grants that support both larger-scale projects and general operating costs to support the anchor collaborative. There would be robust staffing to provide the backbone function of the collaborative, with members supporting the work as deemed appropriate (e.g., membership dues, project-specific funds, in-kind donations). Sustainable resourcing will enable the collaborative to balance capacity-building and project-based efforts.
Building
Evolving
Sustaining
The collaborative has received grants from one or a handful of funders and is actively seeking out additional funding opportunities, including prospecting potential funders.
The collaborative has secured larger-scale, perhaps multi-year, grants and has begun building relationships with mission-aligned funders at the local or national level.
Funding supports larger-scale programs and general operating costs to sustain anchor strategy implementation.
Funding supports small scale pilot projects or discovery processes that get the collaborative off the ground.

Funding supports larger-scale programs, initiatives, and services in support of anchor strategy implementation.

Funding supports larger-scale programs and general operating costs to sustain anchor strategy implementation.
The collaborative is staffed by a part-time employee or consultant, with support from the host or partner organizations, who together fulfill the backbone functions.
The collaborative is staffed by at least one full-time employee and perhaps one or numerous support staff.
The collaborative is staffed by numerous full-time employees, who together provide the backbone functions for the collaborative.
Members contribute one-time resources to the collaborative through in-kind donations, sponsorships, or small grants for specific projects.
Members contribute ongoing resources to the collaborative through grants, dues, or some other mechanism.
Members support general operations and/or project-specific work of the collaborative through membership dues and/or project-specific funding.
The backbone is exploring sustainable sources of funding and seeking commitments from members.
The backbone has created a strategy and catalog of funding opportunities for the collaborative to pursue that consider different types of sources (dues, in-kind donations, grants, etc.).
The backbone proactively pursues fundraising opportunities in alignment with the predetermined fundraising strategy.
Member Mindset
I am willing to allocate in-kind contributions to the collaborative and can demonstrate my commitment to this work in non-financial ways, such as through my organizational commitments to the anchor mission.
I derive value from the collaborative and recognize the importance of a diversified funding stream. I contribute financially and non-financially (e.g. though my relationships with funders) to help ensure the collaborative is sufficiently resourced.
I recognize my responsibility as a member of this collaborative to provide and/or help secure funding to sustain general operations and project-specific work of this collaborative.
Backbone Mindset
I am laying the foundation for the collaborative and seeking early commitments from anchor institutions that will position us well to secure additional funding.
After demonstrating proof of concept in pilot phases, I am well positioned to develop a fundraising strategy that includes a more diversified funding stream.
I have the resources I need to execute the multi-year commitments of the anchor collaborative.
Back to top