This is expanded content related to the 2013 Webinar: Systematic Civic Stewardship: An Organizing Model for Leading Change in the Social Sector | Monday, June 3, 2013

1. SCS is about
effectively organizing
citizens & institutions to
shape civic practices for
local & global well-being
11DRAFT 05/31/2013© 2012 William M. Snyder / wsnyder@socialcapital.com / worlddesign.org
world design, world design, world design
Civic Shift/Boston will
launch action-learning labs
that apply the SCS approach
to get results, build civic
capacity & scale the work

2. 2
Form a community of practice on
systematic civic stewardship (SCS)¹
• to increase civic stewardship capabilities
in communities city-wide for
breakthrough results on an array of
civic outcomes (health, education,
economy, etc.)
• while building a discipline and civic
commitment for a broader social
movement.
Civic initiatives are crucial to
societal well-being
• but most lack essential stewardship
capabilities, and research shows
disappointing levels of sustained
socio-economic gains.
There is a persistent gap between
institutional & community efforts
• Multi-stakeholder coalitions & leading
institutions often take a hierarchical
approach to community change.
• Community groups generally work in
isolation from each other and lack
sufficient institutional partnerships.
Civic Shift: Organize civil society
more systematically
• Shapinghousehold and community norms
can significantly improve outcomes in
education, health, safety, jobs, etc.
• Organizing more systematically at
community and city-wide levels enables
residents and other stakeholders to shift
norms and improve policies & programs.
¹The SCS communityisalsoknownas a “meta-community”todistinguishit fromtopic-specificcommunitiesofpractice
(on health, education, etc.). These terms and others are provisional and will likely evolve as the work progresses.
Contents
• Overview….…….3-21
• Action Plan…...22-27
• Components of the
SCS model……..29-38
Link to low-ink version
Link to in brief version
• Neighborhood stewardship
teams address targeted issues and
achieve measurable outcomes; led by
residents & other local stakeholders.
• City-wide communities of
practice foster learning, innovation,
and collective action; among
participants and institutions
across localities.
• Meta-community supports
development of SCS capabilities,
including participative methods,
civic measures, social media, and
sustainable funding; for all
participants, city-wide & beyond.
Purpose Case for change Organizing approach

3. Cities & Communities: Cities are principal agents for change at local and global
levels, and communities are strategic contexts for building civic capacity and
achieving breakthrough results.
Participation: We need a more participatory democracy in which citizens take
direct action to improve local civic outcomes, versus relying predominantly on
policies and programs via government and other institutions.¹
Organizing Opportunity: We have a ripe opportunity now to build civic capacity,
given recent innovations in participatory methods, civic data, social media,
monetization instruments, and structures that foster collective action and
distributed learning.
Action-Learning: We can best build our capacity for systematic civic stewardship by
learning from experience; starting with design charettes and action-learning labs in
pilot communities, and expanding from there.
Transformation: Transformative social change requires transformation among
participants: learning that transcends conventional views, collaborating with diverse
others, and aligning to the greater good, even when this entails personal change.
3
¹The term ”citizens“refers here to all residents and stakeholder organizationswho influence and are affectedby shared civic conditions , including
those related to health, education, housing, economy, safety, infrastructure,culture, recreation, the environment, human rights, others.

4. 44
Cities are intricately
interwoven webs of
communities, and our
global civilization is
bound together by a
vital network of cities.
By practicing more
systematic civic
stewardship in
communities at every
level, we can foster
transformative shifts
for well-being worldwide.
“Cities rather than states
are becoming the islands
of governance on which
the future world order will
be built.”¹
“You can't understand
modern life without
understanding cities. They
are the force behind
everything interesting.
They are where everything
new is coming from.”²
¹Parag Khanna, Director Global Governance Initiative,Foreign Policy,2010 ²John Lehrer, Imagine:How CreativityWorks, 2012

5. 5
In recent years, we have increased considerably our understanding, skills, and
intentional efforts for cultivating communities in all areas of our lives
"Whatever happens to the
individual happens to the
whole group, and whatever
happens to the whole group
happens to the individual.
The individual can only say:
'I am, because we are and
since we are, therefore I am.‘¹
¹John S. Mbiti (AfricanReligionsand Philosophy,1990),
regarding the principle of Ubuntu
The power of systematic
civic stewardship derives
ultimatelyfrom community:
• Communities are the
most influential forces for
well-being in personal,
professional, and public
contexts.
• We can systematically
cultivatevital communities,
and constellations of
communities.
• Communities of place
(e.g., neighborhoods and
cities) can be framed as
communities of purpose
that foster both personal
and civic well-being.²
²The term “community of purpose” has been used in many contexts (including organizational);
here it refers to communities whose members organize systematically for collective well-being.

6. Since the 1970’s, despite our best efforts via policy, technology and free-market
forces, societal problems persist and unprecedented ones are emerging
Culture
An exception that
proves the rule?
Communities of artists
and art lovers have
always been strong
Health
U.S. health costs now
~15% of GDP and rising
Transportation
Commuting time up 10%
from 1980-2010
Energy
Cost of carbon-based energy
about $2 trillion/year in 2100
in U.S. alone for effects related
to global warming
Public Safety
Crime rate unchanged
since 1970
(incarceration rate is
400% higher); new
threats of terrorism
and “bio-errors”
Infrastructure
U.S. infrastructure
degraded from “C”
grade in 1988 to
“D” grade in 2009
Education
~20% drop-out rate
in U.S. since 1970’s
Housing
20% in U.S. lack safe,
affordable housing
Economy
Poverty in U.S. stuck at 12+%
since the 1970’s (now 15%);
despite trillions spent on
means-tested programs
Environment
Loss of biodiversity through
mass extinctions (40% of 40,000
species under Red List watch)
Recreation
U.S. kids spend average of
7.5 hours watching screens
(TV, computers, phones)
Civic Engagement
Reduced levels of “social capital”
and public trust; widespread
ideology-driven acrimony
Social Equity
Persistent racial and ethnic
disparities in health, income,
and education outcomes
6

7. • Complexity of problems requires
combined social and technical solutions
provided jointly by diverse players with
complementary capabilities
• Subjectivity of cultural norms and
practices requires interpersonal and
group engagement to shape attitudes
and behaviors that drive results
• Glocality requires collaboration by civic
groups across localities to address
interdependencies, and to influence
broader systems, policies, and
institutional actions
Communities with “collective efficacy” can respond to forces²
• Collaborative action-learning among residents & organizations
• Local commitment to shape socio-behavioral norms (e.g., household
energy practices) as well as broader policies and programs for
greater collective well-being³
• Inter-local learning & collaboration by civic groups with shared interests
²R.J. Sampson documents the power of “collective
efficacy”—acombination of social trust and a shared
sense of capacity to address local problems—in Great
American City: Chicagoand the EnduringNeighborhood
Effect,2012. See also A. Fung on advantages of
community-based“deliberative democracy” (2006)
⁴WhatDoes ObamaReally Believe In?,
New York Times, August 15, 2012, p. 9
Communities are fundamental contexts for solving persistent problems¹
Societal forces demand
commensurate responses
¹Community contexts include ones defined by place, practice,
interest,kinship-friendshipties, workplace, ethnicity, race, and
other affiliations.Factors that make place-basedcommunities
particularlyinfluential include: shared civic identity; proximity;
measurability of outcomes; visibility of interventions & effects;
and nexus for other types of communities.
³Seep.12forexamplesofcommunity-level
opportunitiesto improve civic outcomes
7

8. 8
We can achieve order-of-magnitude advances by better organizing¹
From hierarchy
to community
• Isolated solutions, often at odds
• Defined and applied top-down,
predominantly at state and
federal levels
• Minimal citizen engagement
• Multi-level collaboration and
engagement within and across
neighborhoods and cities
• Collective action-learning by
residents and organizations that
shift practices as well as policies
¹Metcalf’s Law states that the value of a networkfor participantsincreases exponentially with the number of connectionsamong them.
²A phrase first used by feminists organizing in the early 1970’s (Source),and later by social movement theoristssuch as Marshall Ganz.
James Lawson,mentor to Martin Luther King Jr., argues that successfulsocial movements use a “systematic”approach.
Bureaucratic Governance Systematic Civic Stewardship
The civic sector today labors under a “tyranny of structurelessness”²

9. 9
SCS shifts from an primary reliance on
bureaucratic governance, with civil society
in a complementary role…
…to a leadership role for outcome-focused,
diverse civic groups, working within and
across neighborhoods and cities
-- Alexis de Tocqueville, 1840, Democracy in America -- Robert Putnam, 1996, Bowling Alone
“Americans of all ages, all stations in life, and all types
of disposition are forever forming associations. . . [This
is] the most democratic country in the world.”
“High on America’s agenda should be the question of how
to reverse [recent] adverse trends in social connectedness,
thus restoring civic engagement and civic trust.”

10. Meta-Community
•Civic Shift participants build capacity
and civic infrastructure (skills, methods,
measures, etc.) to engage a growing
number of neighborhoods & stakeholders
for greater societal well-being,
in Boston and beyond
Health
Stewardship
Team
Neighborhood Stewardship Team
•Residents and other stakeholders
come together to find ways to shift
community & workplace practices
(e.g., self-care norms, campaigns,
health-care plans, etc.) to increase
screening and early treatment rates
City-wide Community of Practice
•Members of multiple stewardship
teams and other key players (including
communities, institutions, and
stakeholder coalitions) share ideas,
innovate, and collaborate on city-wide
projects and policy efforts
10
Illustrative²
¹Forexample,screeningratesforhighlypreventablecervicalandcoloncancersare~65%&20%(respectively)inlow-incomeneighborhoods,versus
85%and40%in thegeneralpopulation.Overall,screeningratesarefarbelowoptimal:U.S.2020goalsforcervicalandcolectoralare93%and70%.
SCS Solution: Civic stewardship
participants lead shifts in practices,
programs, and policies; beginning
in several neighborhoods and
expanding from there
Civic Problem: Cancer screening
and earlytreatmentrates are far
below targets,incurring significant
human and financial costs, especially
in low-income neighborhoods¹
Results:
• Screening and early-treatment rates in participating
neighborhoods targeted to improve by 10% in 2 years
• Considerable reduction in human and financial costs
• New civic capacity for addressing other health issues
²This case illustration draws on an
NCI-ledeffort in 4 cities across 3 states

11. Communities of place and practice provide a civic stewardship infrastructure that fosters
both participation and expertise; within and across localities
11
Civic communities of practice are groups of citizens
from multiple neighborhoods, plus institutional players, who
build capability in a targeted civic domain (e.g., health):
•Promote learning and innovation about civic practices
•Organize for collective action and advocacy
•Operate within and across cities
This interwoven, multi-level structure supports an enlightened, inclusive,
and truly participatory democracy
Neighborhoods (and cities) are
strategic civic entities:
•Local ownership and initiative
•Able to shape civic practices for results
•Measurable accountability
Capability
Accountability
Communities of Practice
Neighborhoods

12. Neighborhood residents take ownership for local outcomes¹
NeighborhoodsofBoston
x = national average
Neighborhood opportunities forimprovingresults²
•Energy:Shift household & business practices; use energy-saving
appliances &building materials, andsustainable energy devices
•Public Safety: Build social cohesion (e.g., by increasing the
number of residents who know their neighbors)
•Infrastructure: Changes in local design & practices to enhance
functions: water, roads, sewage, transport & Internet
•Environment: Conservation, recycling, planting trees, and
establishing community parks
•Economy: Promote community networks & localbusinesses to
help residents find jobs, build skills & create & fund start-ups
•Education: Encourage and enhance parental involvement
to help kids learn at home and school
•Housing: Inform resident decisions about size, design, and
density, buy/rent and financing options
•Transportation: Increase use of carpooling, public transit,
bikes, and walking
•Recreation: Groups for dance and sports that encourage
participation & enjoyment; turn vacant lots into playing fields
•Culture: Organize events to spotlight local talent and
encourage participation in culture-making for well-being
•Health: Increase cancer screening rates for early detection
and treatment; walking groups; community gardens
Neighborhood outcomes
(illustrative)
•75% H.S. grad. rate
•1.5x Cancer rate
•20% Unemployed
•2x Mortgage defaults
•.8x MW/household
•2x Public transit use
•2x Crime; 3x Incarceration
•40% Voter registration
²A blog post (4/25/2012) at E-Democracy.org lists ways
technology can enhance neighborhood-levelinitiatives.
Greater access to “big data” on civic
outcomes at the neighborhood level
creates new opportunities for local
goal-setting and innovation.
12
¹Neighborhood-basedSCS“coreteams”(anytypeoflocalcoordinatingentity)providelocalstrategic&coordinating
functionstohelpresidents&stakeholdersreviewoutcomes,setpriorities,organizeprojects&stewardshipteams,etc.

13. Frame Challenge
•What is the problemor opportunity?
•What purpose are we striving to achieve?
•How is it seen differentlyby diverse players?
Design Solution
•What are ways to
solve the problem?
•What are best
practices; proven
tools and methods?
•Who to engage?
Adaptive Action
•What adjustments are needed?
•How are conditionschanging?
•What are critical skills, methods, resources?
Evaluate & Diffuse
Did we achieve our
goal?
•Lessons learned?
•Implications for
sustainingand
disseminating?
Interdependent, dynamic processes
Residents work with health-careexperts and
determine that screening & early treatment for
breast, cervical & colon cancers is a ripe area for
improving neighborhood health outcomes.
Residents increase
screening rates and
treatment by 20%;
will heal thousands
and save millions in
next decades; still,
room to improve….
They gather data on
results, analyze key
factors (e.g., self-care
norms); design
outreach initiative;
argue for more clinic
access.
Engage doctors’ offices, schools, and businesses
(such as beauty salons, pharmacies, and fitness
centers) to promote awareness; city agency and
health clinics change policies that increase access
to screening and treatment services.
¹The methods mentioned here are merely representativeof a burgeoning array. A
slide presentation on best practices for community-organizing mentions hundreds of them.
For example, there are over 150 on dialogue and deliberationalone (see NCDD list). 13
Teams lead rigorously participative problem-solving & innovation efforts; they shift culture
through direct engagement, not only via new programs, policies & built environments
Illustrative³
³Healthcare reference case in Medical Care, 2008: pp. S74-S83.
•21st Century Town Meetings
•Study Circles
•Public workshops
•City-design charettes (case)
•Heart and Soul Comm. Planning
•Community PlanIt
•Future Search
•Open Space
•Big Data (e.g., San Francisco)
¹
•New Urban Mechanics
•E-Democracy.org
•Neighbors for Neighbors
•Nextdoor
•ChangebyUs
•City 2.0
•MIT Civic Media lab
2
²More tools are listed on p. 37.

14. 14
Teams help cultivate the neighborhood as a constellation of communities that share a
common purpose for improving collective wellbeing
Place identity is strengthened by various types of community
affiliations (friendship, hobby, kids, faith, vocation, ethnicity, etc.).
Social capital increases via community affiliations, but this does
not necessarily improve civic outcomes (health, safety, etc.).
Stewardship teams leverage local social capital to increase a
community’s collective efficacy for achieving neighborhood goals.¹
¹Social capital refers to the density of social ties and related levels of trust, reciprocity,and shared values. Collective efficacyis defined as “social cohesion combined with
shared expectationsfor social control” (Sampson, 2012: 27) and thus more explicitly refers to a community’s ability to achieve tangible civic outcomes. There is clearly
overlap in the two concepts,and some definitions of social capital emphasize its role in “facilitatingco-ordinatedactions” for improving results (Putnamet al., 1993).
Neighborhood as a Community of Purpose
Stewardship teams can help various types of communities contribute to
neighborhood wellbeing
• Local gardeners and “foodies” organize a community vegetable garden.
• Social media mavens develop a marketing application to help
neighborhood businesses respond to local needs.
• Parents organize a “play and learn” group for young kids.
• Faith-based groups join efforts to promote sustainable energy practices.
Community
Wellbeing
Key
Various community types
(friends,faith, vocation, etc.)
Teams or coalitions focused on
improving a civic outcome
(health, education,safety, etc.)
Health
Energy
Education
Safety
Housing
Economy

15. 15
Healthcare community of practice²
members from 4 neighborhoods share
experiences and ideas to improve cancer
screening rates. They compare current
outcomes and interventions in their
respective neighborhood populations.
Members present both problems and
solutions, draw on external expertise,
and help each other apply a number of
new approaches that show quick results
in targeted areas.
The healthcare community engages
institutions as well as residents, across
public, private, and non-profit sectors.
Community members work on a
collective effort that engages major
hospitals, large employers, health
management organizations, the Cancer
Society, health clinics, as well as city and
state agencies to shift policies and
practices related to treatment and
access for residents city-wide.
In 3 years, more than 20 neighborhoods
are involved and the community is
progressing well towards its goal to
increase screening rates city-wide by 20%
in 5 years, thus substantially reducing
human and economic costs of cancer. The
community has begun working with similar
initiatives in 2 other cities; this inter-city
community includes national health
organizations, non-profits & foundations,
as well as the National Cancer Institute.
²This illustrative mini-case draws on a government-sponsored effort, with teams based in 4 different cities, describedin MedicalCare, 2008: pp. S74-S83.
¹These results (and activities & participants) are illustrative,not actual (see footnote #2). U.S. 2020 goal for and colectoral is 70%; average in 2010 was 40% .
ILLUSTRATIVE

16. 16
Informal interactions support
and are spurred by structured
activities
Workshops and Coaching
on topical issues, best
practices, and
implementation
Collective action for policy
development & advocacy; public
awareness
Teleconferences
bi-weekly on hot topics,
case clinics, project updates
Face-to-face
gatherings
Teleconferences
Webinars
Collective
action
Projects
Experiments
Visits
Immersions
Workshops
Simulations
Coaching
Informal
interactions
Online
resource
space
case studies, references,
Q&A, blog, directory, etc.
Projects for inter-local tools
such as social media apps &
city-wide design efforts
Face-to-face gatherings to review
Visits to see innovative
methods in action, share
skills, build relationships
Online resource space for tools,
Note: For more on community-of-practiceactivities and how they are applied, see Communitiesof Practice,Snyder & Briggs, 2003, pp. 13-16
An ecology of activities—formal and informal, face-to-face and virtual, at various frequencies—
builds capabilities and relationships
projects, demonstrate methods, report
results, devise strategies & build relationships

17. 17
Institutional focus
•Multi-sector, institutional
coalitions target issues and
combine efforts for a shared goal
•Without a crisis, the impetus for
collaboration is often too weak to
gain & sustain active participation
•Deep change requires grassroots
groups that can shift cultural norms
via community influence
•Most conventional institutional
efforts fail to achieve objectives¹
²While many new neighborhood efforts—acrosssocio-economicprofiles--are
gaining momentum (cf. Market Creek), research indicatesthat initiatives have
historically fallen far short of aspirations.A review of two decades’ work
concluded that “there is still no empirical evidence demonstrating that
increases in community capacity lead to improved outcomes at the individual,
family, or community level” (Kubischet al., Voicesfrom the Field III, The Aspen
InstituteRoundtableon Community Change, 2010: vii).
¹Recent initiatives that emphasize shared goals and rigorous measures have
shown promising results (cf. “Collective Impact”),but daunting challenges—
conflictingstrategies,competition for funding, and scarce staff for coordinating
partnership activities—areendemic. Lasker et al. conclude that “community
coalitions “ (including local multi-stakeholderalliances) are “generallyfound by
careful studies to have limited or no effects”(Why It Is So Difficultto Form
EffectiveCommunityCoalitions,City & Community, 2005: 269).
Neighborhood focus
•“Comprehensive community initiatives”
focus in specific neighborhoods,
particularly distressed ones
•It is difficult to maintain sufficient
resources for leadership, training,
funding, and influence required to build
local capacity for sustained success
•Even successful initiatives often fail to
scale due to idiosyncrasy and isolation
•20 years of work shows little long-term
impact on socio-economic results²
Integrative structures for action-
learning: Civic Stewardship
Communities of Practice
•Inter-level: Core participants include
both neighborhood stakeholders and
institutions across all sectors (public,
profit, & non-profit)
•Inter-local: Neighborhood teams
focused on targeted civic outcomes
(health, education, etc.) connect across
localities for learning, innovation, and
collective action & influence
We know collaboration is essential for achieving
breakthrough results, but doing it via institutions
or neighborhoods alone is problematic.
Grassroots grow up
in a stewardship system that
helps them excel at home and
spread the seeds of success
Grasstops get rooted
via communities of practice
that yield local ideas, skills,
commitments, and influence

18. ¹Parag Khanna, Director Global Governance Initiative,Foreign Policy,2010
•More than half the
world now lives in
cities; 70% by 2050
•Top 100 U.S. cities
account for 75% of
its GDP; top 100
cities in the world
generate nearly
40% of global GDP
•70% of global
carbon emissions
are produced by
cities with over
50,000 people
•Cultural product of
the world is created
primarily by artists,
thought-leaders,
and entrepreneurs
who thrive in cities
…get cities right, and you
get the world right.
“The age of nations is over: The
new urban age has begun.”
18
“Cities are the world's
experimentallaboratories
and thus a metaphor for
an uncertain age. They
are both thecancerand
the foundation of our
networked world, both
virus and antibody.
From climate change to
poverty and inequality,
cities are the problem—
and the solution.”¹

19. Scale
Influence
People
Infrastructure
Ideas
Place
Virtual
Blended
Physical
Communities
Institutions Critical Mass
Proximity
All sectors
Faith
Culture
Practice & Interest
Local nexus
Inter-city mesh promotes
global dissemination of
ideas and innovations and
builds collective capacity
for change worldwide¹
National and international
entities play support roles
as cities take the lead to
ensure policies, methods,
and resources are applied
effectively at the local level
Cities foster intensive
interactions among people
and institutions with
diverse perspectives,
associations, and
capabilities. This “creative
abrasion” generates new
ideas, relationships, and
enterprises; and positions
urban citizens to connect
with peers locally& globally.
Global node
City with
stewardship
communities
Nation
National or
transnational
government or
NGO
City Mesh Legend
Friends & Family
Functions
19
Resources
¹Benjamin Barber, in “If Mayors Ruled the World” (2013), argues that inter-city networks—suchas the C40 on climate change
and Cities for Mobility on transportation—arebetter positioned than internationalinstitutionsto disseminatepractical methods
and policies that can solve problems both locally and globally; both because cities are better at putting ideas into action, and
because collectively they have a predominant influence on global outcomes.

20. Neighborhood Stewardship Teams Civic Communities of Practice Inter-City Networks
•How many civic communities of practice
at the city-wide level, on what topics?
•What types of institutions and
constituencies are involved?
•How quickly disseminating successes?
•In which neighborhoods do we have
active teams? On what topics?
•What levels of skills and diversity?
•What types of solutions? How
effective? What results?
•How many cities are involved, on
what topics?
•How involving major institutions?
•What level of inter-city learning
and dissemination?
SCS system-development questions
20
•Identify, launch & support SCS efforts
•Organize peer-to-peer learning activities
•Coach leaders, teams & communities
•Engage institutions
•Support measurement and monetization
•Facilitate collaboration across topics (e.g., health
and education)
•Provide integrated social technologies
•Coordinate research and development
•Promote vision for a local-global social movement
Meta-community functions
Cities Worldwide
Neighborhood
Stewardship teams
focused on a civic
issue, such as health,
education, or energy
Key
Core teams coordinate
neighborhood efforts
Neighborhood Stewardship Teams
Civic Communities of Practice
Meta-Community
City/Metro Area

21. •Critical mass (30%+) of Boston-area
neighborhoods and small towns have
active stewardship teams making visible
progress on 4+ civic issues
•Metro-wide communities of practice on
the full array of civic issues engage 80%+ of
neighborhood stewardship teams as well
as key institutions (all sectors)
•10%+ improvements in targeted results
for 80% of neighborhoods that have been
active for 5+ years
•Collaborating with 40+ peer cities in U.S.
and beyond¹
21
2020: Reaching the tipping point for
transformative civic stewardship in
neighborhoods city-wide…
¹Given that 100 cities in the U.S. account for 75% of its GDP, achieving 30% neighborhood penetrationin 40 cities could have transformative effectsat
a national level—via local community efforts and by broader programs and policies enhanced by widespread,rigorous civic engagement.

22. 22
Slides 23-27 outline preliminary draft of a Civic Shift action-learning plan

23. 23
Participative, recursive processes for designing, launching, and scaling action-learning labs
Hold
Design Charettes³
Launch
Action-Learning Labs⁴
Expand scope, scale
& stakeholders
• Active participants with civic
capabilities and passion to
improveresults;planstohold
informal/structuredcharettes²
• New insights & relationships
• Determine initiatives for
action-learning labs
• Form meta-community core
group to provide leadership
• Breakthrough civic results
• Greater will and skill for
civic stewardship
applications
• Increased rigor and
legitimacy of SCS discipline
CivicShift“meta-community”
supports and sponsors
overall initiative:
• Skilled stewardship teams
and communities of practice,
working within and across
neighborhoods
• Institutions across sectors
that collaborate and
contribute
• Civic stewardship
infrastructure (measures,
methods,media,funding,etc.)
• New issues and priorities
• More neighborhoods & cities
• Engage large-scale institutions
• Local and extra-local civic
stewardship players
(specialists, researchers, etc.)
• Consolidate distributed insights
and proposals to shape major
policies and programs
• Build thriving meta-
communities at neighborhood,
city-wide, and inter-city levels
• Convene 3+ neighborhood-
based core teams and city-
wide Civic Shift participants
• Compare& coordinateproposals
for local SCS initiatives: topics,
goals, strategies, skill-building,
alliances,facilities,funding,etc.
• Form local stewardship teams
on targeted topics (health,etc.)
• Identify topics & coordinators
for civic communitiesof practice
• Identify key institutions and
coalitions to involve and how
• Scale, replicate, and
connect systematic civic
stewardship efforts for
greater impact and
capacity worldwide
Action-Learning Outcomes
Scan and Engage
City-wide
Identify neighborhood-
based groups & city-wide
Civic Shift participants¹ who
want to build and apply
civicstewardshipcapabilities
• Broad scan of metro-area
neighborhood-based
organizations& initiatives
• Engage and assess
neighborhood groups
and stakeholders
• Identify & prepare
groupsfor charettes²
¹CivicShiftparticipants(akameta-community)include communitymembers,institutions(allsectors),consultants/civicspecialists(measures,media,etc.),researchers,funders&policy-makers
²Selection criteria include: results-driven,collaborative,innovative, and oriented to aligning goals across levels (local to global).
³Charettesinclude informal, small-group exploratory conversations as well as structured, large-group events.
⁴Action-LearningLabs include “micro-labs”that meet minimum critical specifications(see p. 25) as well as large-scaleefforts.

24. 24
The charette process begins by
engaging a community-based
team or coalition, which takes
the lead in a public, participative
analysis of a targeted outcome.
Charette participants benefit
directly via skills, relationships,
and professional opportunities,
while they build civic capacity
and create solutions that
improve community wellbeing.¹
Meta-community provides coaching, system-development, institutional access, and scaling
Neighborhood #1 forms design team
to collect and analyze data (re: local
outcomes, priorities, opportunities,
assets, etc.) as prep for charettes
Target priority outcome (e.g., reduce human and financial costs of chronic diseases)
• Collect and analyze population-level results, influencing factors, segment characteristics, etc.
• Talk with outcome-related (e.g., health) experts and relevant organizations to learn about
improvement strategies (e.g., screening, prevention, early treatment, etc.)
• Connect with process experts about ways to engage residents and stakeholders in participative
problem-solving and collective action
Neighborhood #2
forms design team…
Neighborhood #3
Forms design team…
Healthcare stewardship team
continues action-learning
efforts for improved results
Neighborhood
#3 stewardship
team
Engage participants via charettes, conversations, surveys, public dialogues, pilot projects, etc.:
How can we best discover and apply solutions in our community for breakthrough results?
¹See Civic Shift proposal
Action-Learning Lab
Design
Charette
Activities
CommunitiesofPractice
Neighborhoods
Meta-community
Neighborhood
#2 stewardship
team
Community of practice promotes learning, innovation, and collaboration across localities
Participation methods Monetization LeadershipSocial media MeasuresHealth Strategies

25. • Stewardship teams from 3+ neighborhoods
with a shared, measurable goal (e.g.,health)
collaborate as a community of practice
• Baseline skills are stewardship methods,
measurement, and social media; building
capacity for monetization and scaling
• Participants are results-driven, innovative,
collaborative, and multi-level (local+)
• Labs are SCS microcosms; replicable & scalable
• Action-learning labs are mini social
movements
• Innovators and early adopters design
and implement robust solutions
• Early majority (about 30%) achieves
tipping point for culture shift
• Innovators connect across localities
(neighborhoods, towns & cities) to
build a social movement for change
Target people ready for changeMinimum critical elements
Action-learning lab evolution
• Outreach & gatherings for residents,
organizations& other stakeholders
• Orientation to SCS approach
• Design charettes help participants
define a targeted issue & get organized
• Participants begin to establish critical
elements: setting goals, defining
measures, training for participative
problem solving, etc.
• Begin with ready group of residents
(say, 200 households) to participate in a
phase one effort
• Participative problem-solving and civic-
engagementmethodsraiseawarenessand
motivate changes thatimprovescreeningrates
• Measure results and share success stories
• Target next wave of households& increase
involvement of key institutions…
Innovation adoption curve
• “Lean innovation” strategy produces
custom solutions that get
measurable results quickly
• Microcosm approach intensifies
ownership and spurs action
• Seed investments can be catalytic
• Action-learning transforms people as
they transform their communities
Accelerate action-learning
• Frame challenge as a measurable goal
—e.g., cancer-screening rates—and target
key attitudes, behaviors, and policies
• Conduct surveys, pilots, citizen councils,
100-day projects, etc. to test ideas and
improve them quickly and participatively
• Recruit external as wellas local participants
for more ideas and for the resources and
influence required to enact them
25
CommunitiesofPractice
Neighborhoods
Meta-community

26. An SCS meta-communitybuilds skills, relationships,systems & resources for the Civic Shift initiative
CIVIC ACTIVISTS
engage participants at
neighborhood and city-wide
levels to take on priority issues
(such as specific outcomes
related to health or education)
CONSULTANTS
help team members & others
learn skills and methods for
goal-setting, problem-solving,
innovation, engagement,
project management,
leadership, measures, etc.
FUNDERS & INVESTORS
provide start-up funding
(primarily for team and
community leaders); and
help develop sustainable
self-funding strategies
INSTITUTIONAL PLAYERS
(all sectors) offer skilled
stewardship team members,
infrastructure capabilities,
legitimacy, and access to
influential supporters
RESEARCHERS
help assess civic outcomes and
capabilities; identify key success
factors, quantify opportunities,
and promote continuous action-
learning
TECHNOLOGISTS
develop and support
collaborative technologies &
social media for learning,
communication, promotions,
surveys, and connecting people
POLICY-MAKERS
promote legislation and
funding for institutional
public engagement and
increased civic capacity;
support issue-specific projects
EXPERTS & PLANNERS
share expertise on civic issues
(health, education, etc.) and
urban planning and design; help
engage broad participation on
targeted topics
JOURNALISTS, ARTISTS
& DESIGNERS
foster engagement and
awareness; tell stories, spread
ideas across localities, and
inspire civic commitment
26

27. 27
Engage community leaders
and other civic participants,
including specialists, researchers,
institution leaders, designers,
policy-makers, and funders
Hold Civic Shift design
charettes to organize and
prepare action-learning labs¹
Launch action-learning labs
in 2013 and scale from there
¹See Civic Shift proposal

28. 28
Slides 29-38 provide additional detail on components of the SCS model

29. Monetization to
ensure sustained funding
for critical coordination and
development functions
Measures of civic
outcomes—health, housing,
education, etc.—for guiding &
validating stewardship efforts
Methods promote
participative learning,
innovation, and collaboration
among diverse players
29
The multi-dimensional structure integrates and animates a civic stewardship system
Multi-Dimensional
Structure
Media enhance methods for
distributed participation,
coordination, and increasing
visibility and influence
Leadership development
for organizing, strategy-making,
weaving, innovating, etc.
Environment design
to scaffold action-learning,
connecting, and motivation
• Neighborhood Stewardship Teams
• Civic Communities of Practice
• SCS Meta-Community
Principles are action-
learning, inclusive connecting,
and aligning to shared goals
Purpose: Organize
citizens & institutions to
shape civic practices for
local & global well-being
SCS Model components & related capabilities
Note: There are a number of systemic models for guiding civic initiatives,including ones focused on comprehensive community change (e.g., Center for the Study
of Social Policy framework) and multi-stakeholder collaboration(cf. functions associatedwith FSG’s “backbone organization”).The most distinctive element of
the SCS model is its multi-dimensional structure,which integratesboth learning and action, and works across levels (within and across communities and cities).

30. 30
Description: San Diego’s
Diamond district includes
10 neighborhoods and
88,000 people, primarily
low income. The Village at
Market Street aims to
improve social, economic
and environmental
outcomes for residents
and stakeholders.
Other neighborhood/town cases: Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative;
Lawrence Community Works; Harlem Children’s Zone; Promise Neighborhoods;
DamariscottaHeart and Soul; (cf. Aspen Institute ”Voices from the Field,” 2010)
Site and discipline development issues
•M-D Structure: How to structure stewardship teams to align and
achieve goals at both local and city-wide levels? How to promote
city-wide communities of practice for sharing successes and fostering
collaboration across distributed, independent groups & organizations?
•Methods & Media: What are the best methods for promoting
informed, participative problem-solving at the local level? How to
leverage social media technologies to expand access & capability?
•Measurement: How to measure population-based results for
neighborhood and multi-neighborhood initiatives?
•Monetization: How to monetize civic improvements to pay for
staffing, training, facilities & projects for locally-led civic stewardship?
•Meta-Community: How to accelerate and scale development and
applications both within and across cities, in the U.S. and beyond?
¹The Villageat Market Creek 2010 Social and Economic Impact Report (35, 14)
(jacobscenter.org/Stay Informed/ResourceLibrary )
“If it takes a village to raise a child, it takes a network of dedicated
people and organizations to raise a village….Since 1998, Working
Teams have served as the primary platform for residents to lead
change in revitalizing their neighborhood.”¹
Multi-Dimensional Structure: “Working Teams” focus on civic issues
such as built environment, economy, education, health, safety & culture
•Business development team helped create 35 new businesses
and 600+ jobs
•Health team coordinated the elimination of 60 units of
substandard, mold-infested housing
•Safety team implemented program that helped 73% of local ex-
offenders get jobs (vs. 9% state-wide), with 8% recidivism (vs. 75%)
“Learning Partnerships” connect teams across neighborhoods for peer-
to-peer learning and engaging organizations
•Cultural Learning Partnership includes several arts and culture
working teams and other cultural groups and institutions city-wide
Methods for engaging residents in participative problem-solving and
design include: town hall forums, “living room meetings,” joint working
team gatherings, community surveys and focus groups
Measurement at the Diamond district level focuses on indicators
related to strategic goals, for example:
•Civic participation (900 residents on working teams), Economy (new
businesses), and Safety (40% reduction in gang interventions)
Monetization for sustained self-funding: Staff and activities are
funded largely through revenues from building leases and impact-
oriented grants and loans from government agencies and foundations
•Hundreds of residents benefit from job creation; hundreds more
have preferred stock in the Market Street development company
Meta-Community: City-wide, the Connecting Communities Learning
Exchange convenes local community organizers for collective learning
•More broadly, in 2010 nearly 4000 visitors from 31 states and 17
countries participated in conferences, workshops, and site visits
RESULTS
Photo:MarketCreek2010ImpactReport

31. 31
Civic Communities of Practice
• Assess landscape of practices and results across localities on a
targeted issue
• Discover and diffuse ideas, skills, and innovations across localities
• Engage institutions and promote multi-stakeholder collaboration
• Operate within and across cities
• Participants: Members of stewardship teams and city-wide
institutions focused on a targeted civic issue; with coordinator
City/Metro
Meta-Community
• Strategic guidance & support
for stewardship teams and
communities of practice
• Coaching and training on
tools, methods, and values
• Support for measurement,
monetization & social media
• Operates at neighborhood,
city, and inter-city levels
• Expanding scope, scale, and
stakeholder involvement
• Participants: Members
passionate about promoting
general civic stewardship
processes and structures
(versus specific civic issues);
core group provides overall
leadership for the labs and
expansion efforts
Civic Shift/Boston
Core structures
Neighborhood
Stewardship Teams*
• Assess conditions related to a
targeted issue for the local
population (average 5000)
• Engage stakeholders
• Coalesce vision & desired
outcomes
• Lead public problem-solving
and civic-engagement efforts
for improved results
• Measure and report
outcomes
• Participants: Local residents
and other stakeholders
passionate about a targeted
civic issue; with skilled coach
*Local stewardshipteams are launched and coordinated by local SCS “core teams” (or equivalent organizationalentities).They are based in bounded geographic areas with
local identities (institutional& cultural),typically with 3,000-10,000 people. Terms for teams and other structures are provisional and will evolve as the lab progresses.
Neighborhood
(pop. 3,000-10,000)
Stewardship Teams focused
on a civic issue, such as
health, education,or energy
Key
Core Teams coordinate
neighborhood efforts
Neighborhood Stewardship Teams
Civic Communities of Practice
Meta-Community
City/Metro Area
Civic Communities of Practice
promote learning, innovation, and collective
action among residents and stakeholders
across localities
Neighborhood
Stewardship Teams
address targeted issues
and achieve measurable
results; core teams
coordinate local efforts
City/Metro
Meta-Community
provides an open-source
forum for participants to
build & share civic
stewardship capabilities

32. ²Illustrativeestimates cited here are for cities with populations of approximately 100,000. (There are about 300 cities over 100,000 in the U.S.) 32
Motivation: Decades of research
and application show the power
of three basic conditions¹:
•Clear, measurable goals
•Valid information on results
•Skills & tools for making progress
Innovation: Learning and
innovation thrive on iterative
action-learning cycles, in which
ongoing adjustments are guided
by information on outcomes
Monetization: Recognizing and
rewarding the value of civic
stewardship depends on valid
measures of costs & benefits
Measurement helps
monetize results by
validating the value
of civic-stewardship
benefits for residents,
institutions, and
society²
¹Other key factors include group norms and rewards, but rewards depend on valid measures of results, and group norms are mutually shaped by motivation conditions

33. INSTITUTIONAL INVESTMENTS
•Public utility saves $1 million in penalties by contracting with local “green neighborhoods” that commit to 20% reductions
in average energy consumption*
•“Accountable care organization” saves $2 million by contracting with local “healthy community” neighborhoods
that commit to 20% reductions in diabetes rates and 50% increase in cancer screening rates*
•Foundations and venture philanthropists provide “program-related investments” or low-interest loans for projects
that align with their missions
SOCIAL IMPACT BONDS
•National and state government agencies contract with “social impact bond-issuing organizations” for social service
outcomes; investments can go to neighborhood initiatives improving results on array of civic functions (for example,
reduce ex-offender recidivism by 20 people and save $1 million/year; cf. report on U.S., U.K. and city & state applications).
MONETIZING CONSUMER COLLABORATION
•Residents organize coops or other mechanisms to contract for beneficial arrangements with vendors of products and
services, including sale of market information; local cooperation can create value by fostering a “sharing economy”
NEIGHBORHOOD SELF-INVESTMENTS
•Neighborhood councils collect and allocate resident dues—average about $50/resident/year—for funding stewardship-team
coaching and projects
•Crowd-sourced financing for stewardship team coaches and specific projects (for example, Kickstarter, Kiva, Neighbor.ly
and StartSomeGood); public offerings of “community shares” to promote community ventures
VOLUNTARY AND IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS
•Individuals participate for personal & professional growth opportunities, social connectivity & making a difference in the world
•Businesses commit people and resources for employees’ professional development, market reputation, and to achieve
civic-engagement and strategic goals (particularly when these include social and environmental as well as market objectives)
•Faith-based organizations provide “time, talent, and treasure” to local civic initiatives as part of “social justice” mission
*Estimatesfor illustration 33Note: See also 130 Ways to fundyour social venture at Social Earth; and a Clinton Global Initiative working group on “community investing”

34. 34
Community identity and social trust foster the success of local organizations—including
businesses, schools, civic groups, and others—which in turn, further strengthen a
community’s sense of collective efficacy and shared purpose.²
• Share valuable goods, skills, and knowledge via barter and other cooperative methods.
• Create new income opportunities by using local purchasing power, business incubation
centers, microloans, community shares, and other ways (e.g., arts fairs) to promote local
businesses and freelance employment.
• Leverage investments in institutional policies and programs by improving quality and
efficacy—in areas such as education,public safety,and infrastructure—viaparticipation in
planning, budgeting, continuous improvement, and provision (including preferences for
local vendors).³
• Capture a percentageof savingsin governmentexpendituresdue to communityaction (such as
preventative carethatreduces healthcarecosts; or local coalitions thatreduce crime and
recidivism).Communities can monetize gains in civic outcomes via contracts with relevant
institutions (e.g., accountable care organizations and government social impact bonds).
Government costs at neighborhood level (current)
Informal economy opportunity (additional)
Local economy opportunity (additional)
Key
Leverage $90m
Capture $10m
Create $10m
Share $5m
CommunityEconomyOpportunities¹
²For evidence of the link between community and
economy, seeresearchonsocialcapital,e.g.,Putnam
(1994)&Fukuyama(1996)atregional&nationallevels;at
locallevel,seeTheIdeaofa LocalEconomy(Berry,2001)
LocalDollars,LocalSense(Shuman,2006),orblogposton
civicengagement&economicsuccess(Levine,2011);see
alsoresearchontheeffectof“collectiveefficacy”onhealth
andsafetyoutcomes(Sampson,2012).
¹Numbers for “community economy” methods are gross estimates—
meant to illustrate order-of-magnitudeof opportunities,which vary
widely by locality. Average annual U.S.governmentexpenditures(alllevels)
thataremost influenced bylocal conditions are about $10k/resident
nationwide.Roughcalculations:Healthcare $1.2t, Education.8t, Welfare
.7t, Public Safety .3t and related interest .15t for U.S. population of
~315m (Source); thus, for a “standard”neighborhood of 10,000 people,
total expenditures are about $100m/year.
³Eachmonetizationapproachcanfoster
successinothers;forexample,increasing
theefficacyof governmentservicesmay
leadtoinsightsforbusinessstart-ups;
cooperativesmaygrowintobusinesses;
andanadded$15minlocalincome(via
Create&Share)equatesto100’sofliving-
wagejobs,withbenefitsacrosstheboard.

35. SCS promotes the practice of universal principles for shared purposes
Learning about the issues and
innovative solutions…even when
these challenge long-held basic
assumptions
Aligning to shared goals for
the greater good…even as the
vision evolves based on new
experiences and insights
Building civic capacity to
improve results in terms of
strength, scale, scope, and
sustainability
Achieving results in targeted
areas (health, education, etc.)
Becoming more conscious,
loving members of interwoven,
transformational communities, for
current and future generations¹
Connecting with diverse others
to build trust and reciprocity…even
with those who have conflicting
interests and ideologies
Purposes
Principles
¹cf. Martin Luther King’s assertion that “Love is mankind’s most potent weapon for personal and social transformation”
35
Purposes complement principles, both fundamental…and transformational

36. IF we can create civic system conditions that:
1. Define Civic Value (i.e., outcomes related to health, education, safety, etc.) in measurable economic terms
2. Organize capable, accountable civic groups within and across Neighborhoods City-wide, including residents and
institutional stakeholders
3. Skillfully apply participatory Methods, social media, and other tools for learning and collaboration to shape
socio-behavioral norms as well as more informed policies and programs
4. Measure improvements in civic outcomes attributable to stewardship groups (e.g., neighborhood teams and
multi-stakeholder coalitions)
5. Monetize the value of improved civic outcomes to expand available resources for stewardship groups…
THEN communities and cities can generate increasing civic well-being in self-sustaining ways, while
building capacity for continuing advances, and creating transformational options for the future.
36
Civic Value &
Capacity
Monetization
Measures
Civic
Methods
& Media
City-wide
Communities
of practice
Stewardship
teams
Residents & Institutions
Coalitions
Neighborhoods City-wide
Cultural norms
Policies & Programs
Products/Services
Funds Influence
Capabilities
Resources

37. New capacity for
collaborative learning
and action
Technology²
Millennial Mindset
Social-Psychology
Participative
democracy /
Government
gridlock
Increased
focus on
collaboration,
innovation,
and results
Collaboration tools /
Social media
Technical fixes:
innovative programs,
products & services
Civic
entrepreneurs
/ New social
movements
Policyapplications/
Behavioraleconomics
Structural options:
teams, communities,
organizations, and
networks
New methods
for promoting
participative learning
& innovation
High profile
neighborhood-
and city-based
design/develop
initiatives
Worldwide
urbanization &
growing global
influence of
cities
Proliferationof
real/virtual
communitiesof
place,practice,
interest,etc.
Cities & Communities
•SeeClickFix
•E-Democracy.org
•Neighborland
•Neighbors for Neighbors
•Goodneighbors
•Nextdoor
•Blockboard
•ChangebyUs
•City 2.0
•New Urban Mechanics
•Code for America
•MIT Civic Media lab
•Climate Lab
Emerging mindset and socio-
technical methods respond to
growing demands of the new
urban age
•Washington DC data
•San Francisco data
•Chicago crime data
•Charlotte civic results
•Cincinnati educ. data
“Big data” on range
of civic outcomes
available at local level
37
•Open Living Labs
•Societal ”fixes” blog
•Harvard Innovation lab
²Like social-psychology applicationslisted here
(and p. 13), these civic technology applications
represent a small sample in a burgeoning field
We can draw on a deep and diverse
repertoire of methods whose efficacy has
been proven by successful organizations.
Now it is time to apply these for
breakthrough results in the civic sector.¹
¹There is much to learn; after all, in the U.S. alone, tens of billions are spent annually for research, consulting,
and education to support business development. Meanwhile, there are over 1 million non-profits in the U.S.,
most of which struggle to set and achieve measurable goals; or to collaborate on shared missions.
“Cities rather than states are becoming
the islands of governance on which the
future world order will be built.”
-- Parag Khanna, Director Global
Governance Initiative, Foreign Policy, 2010
•Future Search
•Appreciative Inquiry
•Public workshops
•Human-Centered Design
•21st C. Town Meetings
•Collective Impact network
•Communities of practice
•Behavioral green policy
•Behavioral science politics
Promoting civic shifts
for societal well-being Monetizingcivicvalue
•SocialImpactBonds
(Examples)
•Communityfunding
•Sharing economy

38. “By making
communities of our
cities we take a giant
stride toward world
community, and in the
end lasting peace will
come when…world
community has been
achieved.”
-- Lawrence Hayworth,
The Good City
Facebookinteractionsacrosscitiesworldwide(Source)PhotosfromHighLine(NYC)website
38
Practicing civic stewardship transforms us as we transform the world…