Framework for Collective Impact in Peacebuilding
The development of this Framework would not have been possible without the generous support of Humanity United, with particular thanks to Elise Ford, Peter Rundlet and Stephen Wicken. Their colleague at the Omidyar Group, Rob Ricigliano, provided his usual cogent comments and suggestions. Marin O’Brien Belhoussein, then an independent consultant and now at Search for Common Ground, helped enormously by conducting a literature review and conducting targeted interviews with key individuals.
Many colleagues at CDA have contributed ideas and time to the development of this Framework, including Diana Chigas, Anita Ernstorfer, and Isabella Jean. More recently, Sweta Velpillay has been contributing her considerable experience to the effort. A consultation that focused on an earlier draft of the Framework included those Humanity United and CDA colleagues already noted, as well as Karen Gratten, Graeme Simpson, Lena Slachmuijlder, Leslie Wingender, Susan Allen, Lara Olson, Joe Hewitt, Aaron Chassy, Marin O’Brien Belhoussein, Margarita Tadevosyan, Liz Hume, Rob Ricigliano, and Marc Behrendt.
Finally, we should acknowledge the considerable work over many years by the team at FSG. As you will see, this Framework builds on their model, adapting it to the peacebuilding context. We are grateful for their pioneering work for collective impact.
SUGGESTED CITATION: Woodrow, Peter. “Framework for Collective Impact in Peacebuilding.” Version for field application & testing. Cambridge, MA: CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, 2017.
CDA produced the “Framework for Collective Impact in Peacebuilding” as part of a project supported by Humanity United; “Collective Impact for Peacebuilding: Testing a new model.” The primary aim of this project is to document and learn from the experiences of collective impact efforts by formal and informal networks and consortia in peacebuilding to develop further insights about multi-stakeholder initiatives.
We are now collecting case studies to field test and further refine the framework.
Send us case studies for field testing the framework.
Case studies should include documentation of past or ongoing peacebuilding consortia or network initiatives, and should represent:
1. an intentional effort by a group of stakeholders / multiple actors who have come together*
2. to develop a shared peacebuilding agenda
3. in order to affect the dynamics of conflict and peace with discernable outcomes.
* stakeholders may include international NGOs, local/national NGOs, community groups, business actors, or governments.
Submit a case.
To nominate a case, please submit a one-paragraph summary of the consortium or network, including:
1. the location,
2. types of groups involved in the consortium,
3. peacebuilding programme objectives, and
4. why you think the example is significant.
You may submit case examples that include circumstances you were directly or indirectly involved with, or that you are aware of for other reasons. If you were not involved yourself, please send us contact information for key people involved.
All submissions and information should be sent to Sweta Velpillay [firstname.lastname@example.org] by November 15, 2017.
Receive technical support and accompaniment in applying the collective impact framework.
Similarly, we are also looking to provide technical support and accompaniment in the application of the collective impact Framework to emerging collective endeavors, and to learn from them. If you are interested in applying the collective impact model, please contact us. In addition to providing technical support, CDA will document the process and engage the group in periodic reflection, learning and adaptation.
Each case study will be developed through interviews with network members and support organizations, as well as by critically engaging with other actors, commentators and observers familiar with the context and the work of the network. Cases will also draw from both primary and secondary sources.
CDA will conduct several regional consultations and produce a final report that draws on all of the retrospective and prospective cases, presenting findings, key lessons and, most importantly, a further elaboration of the framework benefiting from the evidence and field experience of its application and adaptation.