Grantmakers often pride themselves in finding the most promising nonprofit programs and giving those organizations the support they need to scale up their services and expand impact. Yet some nonprofit leaders argue that the insular focus on individual organizations -- a focus on building infrastructure and capacity and the fundraising work that goes along with that -- gets in the way of the types of nonprofit collaboration and movement building that could have a greater impact. This session will explore the stories and perspectives of two nonprofit leaders -- Bill Strickland, head of the Manchester Bidwell Corporation, a large organization that has significantly scaled and replicated its programs and Angelica Salas, leader of the Coalition for Human Immigration Rights of Los Angeles, working to build a movement at the grassroots level.

In developing strategies and programs, grantmakers and grantees often struggle to ensure broad stakeholder engagement, reduce dependence on experts and avoid time-consuming and costly "pilots" to test strategies. The private sector has long known the value of user-needs research, customer collaboration and rapid prototyping to mitigate cost and risk of failure in the marketplace. But the migration of these practices into social sector innovation has been relatively slow. This session will explore how grantmakers can apply these program design methods to their work and highlight lessons learned from the Stupski Foundation's work to improve education systems.

No foundation has a record of complete success. Indeed, any foundation that takes risks is likely to fund some programs that work out as planned, some that do not, and some -- most -- that fall somewhere in-between. Yet foundations, on the whole, have been reluctant to admit failure, to recognize it publicly, and to learn from it. There have been exceptions, however, and this session will explore the experiences of some foundations that have attempted to learn from programs that did not work out as expected. The session will include case studies of two foundations, analysis of the experiences of other foundations and ample time for audience discussion.

A 2008 Urban Institute study supported by the Meyer Foundation revealed that a majority of nonprofits serving the Greater Washington region had less than three months of operating expenses in reserve and nearly a third had no reserves whatsoever. The attitude and behavior of grantmakers can contribute to this chronic undercapitalization of nonprofits. Nonprofits believe they will be penalized for establishing reserves or submitting budgets that show a surplus and many foundations don't support endowments or other capital campaigns. Join a facilitated discussion about how grantmakers can help organizations understand the importance of reserves and adopt practices that support organizations in building a financial base.

A recently released national study of sabbatical programs for nonprofit leaders -- a pooled research project of five foundations -- shows that sabbaticals are a relatively inexpensive yet highly productive capacity-building tool that yields measurable results. Not only do sabbaticals have revitalizing effects on leaders, their beneficial impact is felt throughout the organization for many years. A planned disruption like a sabbatical can cause secondary staff to build capacity and leaders to experience the benefits of shared leadership. Further, funders that operate sabbatical programs find that the close relationship they develop with their grantees enhances their awareness about nonprofit leadership challenges and increases their effectiveness as grantmakers. Panelists will share specific examples of how sabbaticals have worked for nonprofits and grantmakers, and will offer ideas for implementing successful, creatively disruptive sabbatical programs. Available to download: Creative Disruption Report, Sabbatical Compendium, Sabbatical Replication.