Fluent Essays

ASSIGNMENT DETAILS INCLUDED ON TIME ... QUALITY WORK Aent Instructions STRATEGIC PLAN ANALYSIS For this assignment, you will choose a strategic plan and evaluate its components against the best practices you have studied in this course. You may choose to analyze your own organizations strategic plan or one of the following plans: · Gates Family Foundation. (2016).  Strategic plan 2017–2021 [PDF]. https://gatesfamilyfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/2016GatesFamilyFoundationStrategicPlan.pdf · THIS IS INCLUDED ON A SEPARATE DOCUMENT Instructions Write a 10–12-page analysis of a strategic plan and develop recommendations for conducting future strategic planning. Determine which strategic plan you will evaluate and use that as the title of your analysis paper. You may use either: · The Gates Family Foundation 2016 Strategic Plan. In your plan: 1. Study the chosen strategic plan carefully and identify the following components: . Any prerequisites. . The organizational mission, vision, and values. . Indications of a distinction between the roles of leadership and administration or management. . Current and anticipated staffing levels, types of skills and experience level, employees hired, et cetera. . Evidence and elements of a SWOT analysis. . Identified goals. . Identified strategies for achieving those goals. . Identified strategies for implementing organizational change. · Complete the following once youve identified the above components: . Analyze how each component is used in the strategic plan.  . Explain how the plan resemble the content of the strategic planning materials in the Week 9 What You Need to Know activity. . Explain how the plan differ from the content of the strategic planning materials in the Week 9 What You Need to Know activity. · Recommend how the plan could be strengthened through the inclusion of any missing elements and/or additional explanation. Example assignment: You may use the Week 10 Assignment Example [PDF] to give you an idea of what a Proficient or higher rating on the scoring guide would look like AS A GUIDE AND EXAMPLE Additional Requirements Your assignment should also meet the following requirements: · Length: 10–12 double-spaced pages. · Font and Font Size: Times New Roman, 12 point. · References: 5-7 ASneeded to support your analysis and recommendations. · APA format: Use current APA formatting for citations and references. ADDITIONAL THINGS TO ANSWER IN THIS ASSIGNMENT · Why Have Nonprofit Organizations02:13 · Charitable Organizations02:08 · Private Foundations00:42 · Civic Leagues and Social Welfare00:51 · Trade & Professional Association00:50 · Social & Recreational Clubs · Mission and Vision Statements02:02 · Strategic Direction · Strategic Planning Process03:20 · Strategic Thinking Strategic Planning for Nonprofits,  · Key Roles in Strategic Planning03:07 · Importance of Diversity00:46 · Conclusion RUBRIC Strategic Plan Analysis Scoring Guide Due Date: End of Week 10 Percentage of Course Grade: 30\%. CRITERIA NON-PERFORMANCE BASIC PROFICIENT DISTINGUISHED Evaluate how leadership and management roles are distinguished in a strategic plan.  13\% Does not address the difference between leadership and management roles. Describes how leadership and management roles are distinguished in a strategic plan. Evaluates how leadership and management roles are distinguished in a strategic plan. Evaluates the similarities of and differences between the distinct roles of leadership and management in an adult education environment, providing examples related to operational and strategic planning, and using graphics to support text as appropriate. Analyze the baseline identifying characteristics of a strategic plan, including prerequisites; organizational mission, values, and vision; and SWOT analysis. 14\% Does not address the baseline identifying characteristics of a strategic plan, including prerequisites; organizational mission, values, and vision; and SWOT analysis. Describes some but not all of the baseline identifying characteristics of a strategic plan, including prerequisites; organizational mission, values, and vision; and SWOT analysis. Analyzes the baseline identifying characteristics of a strategic plan, including prerequisites; organizational mission, values, and vision; and SWOT analysis. Analyzes the baseline identifying characteristics of a strategic plan, including prerequisites; organizational mission, values, and vision; and SWOT analysis, and ensures the analysis is supported by references to the literature or employs supporting graphics. Analyze the prospective capacities of a strategic plan, focusing on goals and strategies. 14\% Does not address the prospective capacities of a strategic plan, focusing on goals and strategies. Describes the prospective capacities of a strategic plan, focusing on goals and strategies. Analyzes the goals and strategies for achieving goals in a strategic plan. Analyzes the prospective capacities of a strategic plan, focusing on goals and strategies, and ensures the analysis is supported by references to the literature or employs supporting graphics. Analyze the prospective capacities of a strategic plan, focusing on human resources management. 13\% Does not address the prospective capacities of a strategic plan focused on human resources management. Describes the prospective capacities of a strategic plan, focused on human resources management. Analyzes the prospective capacities of a strategic plan, focusing on human resources management. Analyzes the prospective capacities of a strategic plan, focusing on human resources management, and ensures the analysis is supported by references to the literature or employs supporting graphics. Analyze the prospective capacities of a strategic plan, focusing on best practices for managing implementing change in organizations. 13\% Does not address the prospective capacities of a strategic plan focused on best practices for managing implementing change in organizations. Describes the prospective capacities of a strategic plan focused on best practices for managing implementing change in organizations. Analyzes the prospective capacities of a strategic plan, focusing on best practices for managing implementing change in organizations. Analyzes the prospective capacities of a strategic plan, focusing on best practices for managing implementing change in organizations, and ensures the analysis is supported by references to the literature or employs supporting graphics. Make recommendations for strengthening the plan based on best practices. 13\% Does not make recommendations for strengthening the plan based on best practices. Makes recommendations for strengthening the plan that are not clearly based on best practices. Makes recommendations for strengthening the plan based on best practices. Makes recommendations for strengthening the plan based on best practices. Assesses how the plan will be strengthened through inclusion of missing characteristics or additional explanation. Organize content so ideas flow logically with smooth transitions. 7\% Does not organize content for ideas to flow logically with smooth transitions. Organizes content with some logical flow and smooth transitions. Organizes content so ideas flow logically with smooth transitions. Organizes content so clarity is enhanced and all ideas flow logically with smooth transitions. Support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence. 7\% Does not support main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence. Sources lack relevance or credibility, or the evidence is not persuasive or explicitly supportive of main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations. Supports main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant and credible evidence. Supports main points, assertions, arguments, conclusions, or recommendations with relevant, credible, and convincing evidence. Skillfully combines virtually error-free source citations with a perceptive and coherent synthesis of the evidence. Adhere to the rules of grammar, usage, and mechanics. 6\% Does not adhere to the rules of grammar, usage, and mechanics. Errors in grammar, usage, and mechanics inhibit readability and comprehension and detract from good scholarship. Adheres to the rules of grammar, usage, and mechanics. Exhibits strict and nearly flawless adherence to the rules of grammar, usage, and mechanics. 1 Copyright ©2021 Capella University. Copy and distribution of this document are prohibited. Strategic Plan Analysis Learner’s Name Capella University EDD8506: Adult Education Administration Instructor Name January 1, 2021 2 Copyright ©2021 Capella University. Copy and distribution of this document are prohibited. Strategic Plan Analysis A brief overview of strategic planning leadership and management is presented in the paper. This is followed by an overview of the Tracy Family Foundation (TFF) and an analysis of the TFF’s Long Range Strategic Plan Final Report 2020 – 2024 (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d.). The characteristics of the strategic plan are outlined. The concept of strategic planning and its components are introduced. The prospective capacities of the plan are explored, resulting in recommendations to improve the plan. Strategic Planning Leadership and Management Strategic planning is simply a set of concepts, procedures, and tools designed to help executives, managers, and others to think, act, and learn strategically on behalf of their organizations and the stakeholders of their organizations (Bryson, 2018). In other words, strategic planning in higher education institutions is perceived as a tool to articulate the institutional mission and vision, help prioritize resources, and promote organizational focus. Strong, competent leadership is essential to the success of a strategic plan in higher education. In such an environment, it is preferable that the president of the institution chair the strategic planning committee (SPC). The presence of the president is critical because it provides integrated leadership and support as the group goes through the strategic planning process. A president with good strategic sense can bring together not only all aspects of the institution’s operations but also any concerns of the governing board (Hinton, 2012). Senior administrative staff are included as permanent members in the SPC. In higher education institutions, academic staff and students are included in the SPC. Students are given limited terms to account for those who would graduate before the end of the strategic plan’s term. SPC members can be drawn from leadership positions, such as president of the faculty or president of the student association. Members from such positions provide additional benefits of 3 Copyright ©2021 Capella University. Copy and distribution of this document are prohibited. distribution of information and access to readily identified groups of stakeholders. Finally, while the governing board is responsible for approving the strategic plan and monitoring it at the policy level, the president reports to the governing board and therefore will be required to explain, advocate, and interpret the plan to the satisfaction of the board (Hinton, 2012). In higher education institutions, leadership is a behavior used to enhance member motivation by bringing individual and institutional interests together and to continuously communicate and clarify the vision, which becomes the focus of the institution’s culture. It should be clear from the outset that leadership can occur at any level of the institution. The key to leadership is that the leader facilitates social processes for the rest of the institution on a continuous basis, using the institution’s vision as the focus. This element is critical to the implementation of a strategic plan, based as it is on a shared vision (Hinton, 2012). Although some scholars would argue that manager and leadership roles are mutually exclusive, others believe the opposite. Managers can possess leadership characteristics, and leaders can display traits of managers (Cox, 2016). Table 1 illustrates some similarities and differences between the roles of leadership and management. The success of an institution-wide strategic plan depends on the involvement of staff members from across various levels of hierarchy in the institution in every step of the process from information gathering to execution. In fact, mid-level managers are the ones chiefly responsible for the ultimate contours of any strategic plan as it unfolds through the actual experience of the organization (King & Alperstein, 2018). 4 Copyright ©2021 Capella University. Copy and distribution of this document are prohibited. Table 1 Similarities and Differences Between Leadership and Management Roles Leadership Role Similarities Management Role • Deals with promoting change and adaptability • Problem-solving skills • Deals with complexity and establishes control and predictability • Involved in setting the direction for success • Motivational skills • Involved in creating budgets and implementing plans • Involved in strengthening commitment to the organizational vision • Analytical skills • Involved in organizing and staffing • Relies on persuasion and influence • Listening skills • Relies on control and devises effective action The Tracy Family Foundation The TFF was founded in December 1997 by 24 members of the second generation of the Tracy family as a tribute to their parents, Robert and Dorothy Tracy. At present, the third and fourth generations of the Tracy family continue to engage in the TFF. The TFF is supported by Dot Foods, the largest food redistributor in the United States, owned and operated by the Tracy family. The TFF has awarded nearly 5,000 grants of more than $30 million to organizations serving their communities (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d.). 5 Copyright ©2021 Capella University. Copy and distribution of this document are prohibited. Characteristics of Tracy Family Foundation’s Strategic Plan The TFF sent surveys out to their grantees in 2019 with the intention of gathering the data needed to perform a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis. This approach enables the TFF to analyze its internal and external environments. The strengths and weaknesses of the institution are derived from analyzing the internal environment of the institution. The obstacles and threats of the institution are derived from analyzing the external environment of the institution. The insights gleaned from the SWOT analysis are used to determine the areas of focus for the strategic plan. The TFF’s mission is to “advance innovative, collaborative, and sustainable change in communities and cultivate a philanthropic spirit in all generations of the Robert and Dorothy Tracy family” (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d., p. 2). The vision for the TFF is a “world where communities thrive, and families flourish with all generations of the Robert and Dorothy Tracy family giving and serving together” (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d., p.2). At the core of the TFF’s values are family, faith, education, leadership, and community. These values are elaborated below. • Family: The Tracy family believes that strong values shape healthy families, and healthy families create thriving communities. • Faith: The Christian faith of the Tracy family influences the work of the TFF. • Education: The Tracy family believes that quality education opens doors to new worlds and new possibilities. • Leadership: The Tracy family believes that better leaders help make better communities. • Community: The Tracy family believes in fostering strong communities. The TFF’s Long Range Strategic Plan Final Report 2020 – 2024 (LRSP) began with the establishment of goal statements for each of the TFF’s funding focus areas. The goal statements 6 Copyright ©2021 Capella University. Copy and distribution of this document are prohibited. clarify what the TFF aims to accomplish by investing in the focus areas. After the goal statements are formulated, the TFF staff work to arrive at the most suitable change theories for each focus area. These theories of change include measurable outcomes that signal when a goal has been reached (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d.). Finally, the TFF staff develop the strategic actions that the TFF will take over the duration of the LRSP to achieve the desired outcomes and move the selected indicators (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d.). The TFF identified the following five focus areas in the LRSP. • Brown County: The goal of this focus area is to establish Brown County as an attractive community to live in. Key indicators of success include academic measures of performance of Brown County students through K–12 as well as postsecondary education enrollment rates (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d.). • Education: The goal of this focus area is to nurture learning communities capable of inspiring learners, leaders, and problem-solvers. The key indicators of success include the readiness of students to perform at the grade-level requirements. They also include indicators on improving the designation of education institutions funded by the TFF, teacher retention rates, and indicators of student test score levels for SAT, ELA, and Math (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d.). • Families: The goal of this focus area is to foster strong, healthy, and resilient families. The key indicators of success for this focus area include measures that monitor the increase in the number of married couples, divorce rates, and family community engagement (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d.). • Youth: The goal of this focus area is to foster strong, healthy, and resilient youth. Key indicators of success include measures of emotional health, spirituality, goal setting, leadership skills, and health (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d.). 7 Copyright ©2021 Capella University. Copy and distribution of this document are prohibited. • Mental health: This is a new focus area for the TFF. At the time of publication of the LRSP, the goals and key indicators of success were yet to be determined (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d.). Strategic Planning A strategic plan is a comprehensive road map for implementing a company’s statement of mission so that it can reach the position defined by its vision. The strategies are first defined for each individual growth or performance area and then aligned functionally. A strategic plan may have a duration of 3 to 5 years, depending on the organization’s needs and projection of future events (Jakhotiya, 2017). The initial SWOT analysis and the conclusions based on strategic inquiry should be reviewed for vital information. A strategic plan should be prepared by the top management of an organization under the leadership of its CEO. The group constitutes a strategic planning team (SPT). The SPT teams and subteams are responsible for implementation of strategies along with monitoring and measurement of performances in their respective functional areas. A proper structure for reviewing a strategic plan on a quarterly basis is critical. The review process should lead to recommendations for improvements in executing the plan strategies. (Jakhotiya, 2017). Strategic Planning Prerequisites Strategic planning should be based on the thorough knowledge of the present and potential strengths and weaknesses of an organization. Planners should consider possible opportunities and future threats. The present performance of various business verticals and functional departments should be thoroughly understood by those who are responsible for conducting strategic planning exercises (Jakhotiya, 2017). Among the various approaches and techniques adopted in the strategic planning process is SWOT analysis (illustrated in Figure 1). This approach is used to carefully analyze and evaluate 8 Copyright ©2021 Capella University. Copy and distribution of this document are prohibited. two critical environments: the internal and external environments (Ololube et al., 2016). Strengths denote favorable internal features that the institution can utilize to accomplish its strategic aims. Weaknesses are internal factors that limit goal accomplishment. Opportunities are features of the external environment that will help the institution realize its goals. Threats are features of the external environment that might hinder the institution from accomplishing its goals (Ololube et al., 2016). As a prerequisite for the LRSP, the feedback from the surveys sent to TFF grantees was used to compile a list of strengths and opportunities only (illustrated in Figure 2). This could be indicative of family foundations that often give to a narrow and sometimes idiosyncratic range of causes or institutions that are dear to the family (Feliu & Botero, 2015) and are therefore unconcerned with threats from competition. Figure 1 SWOT Analysis Note. This figure illustrates the elements of a typical SWOT analysis. They are strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. All elements are necessary to understand an organization’s internal and external environments. Internal Environment External Environment Institution’s Current Situation Strengths Opportunities Threats Weaknesses 9 Copyright ©2021 Capella University. Copy and distribution of this document are prohibited. Figure 2 TFF’s SWOT Analysis Note. This figure illustrates a variation of the SWOT analysis used in the LRSP. It uses only two of the four elements of a typical SWOT analysis, namely strengths and opportunities. Components of a Strategic Plan Strategic plans have various components, with each component filling a particular need. These components serve as planning tools that can be utilized either independently or in groups. The development of these components is usually a linear progression. The planning process ensures these individual components are aligned with each other and are mutually supportive (Hinton, 2012). Internal Environment External Environment TFF’s Current Situation Strengths Opportunities 10 Copyright ©2021 Capella University. Copy and distribution of this document are prohibited. Figure 3 Components of a Strategic Plan The mission statement, while not a technical part of the strategic plan, is the foundation because the strategic plan must align with the mission. The first half of the TFF’s mission centers on advancing innovative, collaborative, and sustainable change in communities, more specifically, the communities within Brown County. The mission manifests in the focus areas or goals determined by the TFF, such as a focus on education, family, youth, and mental health within Brown County (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d.). A vision statement, institutional goals, and an optional values statement form the supporting documents that establish the context for the strategic plan. These supporting documents provide specific points of guidance in the planning process. The vision statement is the expression of the institution’s aspiration based on an analysis of the institution’s environment. The TFF’s vision is to promote the development of thriving communities and families, which the Tracy family believes can be achieved through values such as faith, education, and leadership (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d.). Institutional goals provide the means for evaluating progress toward the vision, and values statements describe the manner in which the institution will work to achieve its goals (Hinton, 2012). •Mission StatementFoundation •Values •Institutional Goals •Vision Supporting Components •Goals and Objectives •Implementation PlanStrategic Plan 11 Copyright ©2021 Capella University. Copy and distribution of this document are prohibited. Goals and Strategies of a Strategic Plan In the LRSP, the TFF established goal statements for each of its funding focus areas to clarify what it aims to accomplish by investing in the focus areas (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d.). Goals provide overarching guidance for the major themes of a strategic plan (Hinton, 2012). For example, a major theme in the LRSP is to improve academic programs. The TFF has its own perspective on what is important about academic programs, such as ensuring the programs fit the educational needs of the student population in Brown County (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d.). The specific actions taken to improve academic programs could range from ensuring college preparation programs are expanded to lower school grades to funding programs that work toward improving county-wide grade-level reading by the third grade (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d.). These types of actions align closely with the TFF’s goals. (Hinton, 2012). Turning goals and objectives into a working plan is the function of the implementation plan. More than any other part of the strategic plan, the implementation plan is revised, amended, and changed frequently to respond to environmental factors. Organizations can use strategic planning to clarify and address major organizational issues, respond wisely to them, and deal effectively with rapidly changing circumstances (Bryson, 2018). While the strategic plan’s goals and objectives remain a source of guidance and focus, the implementation plan delves into the strategies that deal with getting the job done. One aspect of these strategies critical to the planning process is identifying the resources each goal and step will require. Broadly, the resources for implementing a strategic plan include people, time, space, technology, and funding (Hinton, 2012). The exact amount of a critical resource is not always known at the time of the plan’s inception; however, the type of resource can be identified. It is important to know the specific 12 Copyright ©2021 Capella University. Copy and distribution of this document are prohibited. resources needed and to continue to refine the size of the need as the plan develops. The implementation plan needs to be directive, clear, and well documented. The implementation of a strategic plan depends on the institution’s ability to turn strategic thoughts into operational action. For this reason, it is necessary to document who is responsible for implementing an action, a date by which the action is expected to be completed, and what measures will be used to assess the completion of the action (Hinton, 2012). Human Resources in Strategic Planning Many institutions select representatives from major stakeholder groups to serve on the SPC with the intention of disbanding once the plan has been created. People appointed to the SPC usually have a working knowledge of strategic planning, or the broad institutional perspective to do it well in the beginning. It takes time and hard work to develop a functioning SPC that can operate effectively. The intention behind forming the committee must not be restricted to creating the plan. The role of the committee should be extended to allow it to participate in the implementation and assessment of the plan (Hinton, 2012). To ensure the plan is being implemented, a monitoring process must be established to assist with decisions and keep the planning process on track and responsive. While this can be done by a single individual, it is recommended that stakeholders from various functional areas be involved in the process and bring together their working knowledge of the different aspects of the complex organization. It is also important for committee members to understand the working aspects of the plan, such as why a certain goal or step must come before another or why a particular goal is no longer as relevant in a certain year of the plan as it was in previous years (Hinton, 2012). The LRSP contains an outline of the recommended strategies the TFF intends to use to accomplish its goals for various aspects concerning Brown County. The LRSP, however, lacks 13 Copyright ©2021 Capella University. Copy and distribution of this document are prohibited. detail on staffing requirements for the completion of each of its goals. The TFF’s approach to strategic planning began with the TFF board’s decision for Vario Consulting to lead the strategic planning work. The company was selected based on their past working relationship with the Tracy family (The Tracy Family Foundation, n.d.). Institutions rarely have staff with enough comprehensive experience to lead and support an institutional strategic plan without some external guidance. Additionally, the strategic planning process could get more complex and difficult with time. It is therefore not unusual for organizations to seek out consultants to advise them at any point in the planning process. A good consultant can provide guidance and options for the process based on the content the organization’s staff develops and the way the organizational culture shapes the issues. An outstanding consultant can even analyze the institution and challenge it with new ways of thinking or doing (Hinton, 2012). Change Management in Strategic Planning Poor communication, inadequate training, or insufficient workforce planning can lead to a lack of acceptance of business changes and poor performance. In many cases, failure to provide for adequate change management planning has resulted in the loss of millions of dollars in failed or delayed implementation (Voehl, 2017). The TFF’s LRSP is lacking in detail on the change management theories it intends to use during the strategic planning process. Including change management strategies in a plan is crucial for stakeholders to understand the potential hurdles in implementation. Including these details could also stimulate discussion about which change management theory would best suit the needs of the strategic plan. The lack of focus on change management strategies in the LRSP could be because of the vast scope of the plan (which encompasses various aspects of Brown County like education, health, and family) or because of the foundation’s decision to use a consultant to lead the strategic planning process. Each aspect 14 Copyright ©2021 Capella University. Copy and distribution of this document are prohibited. of Brown County may require additional analysis before determining which change management theory would best suit that aspect. Recommendations for Improving the Strategic Plan The LRSP contains a partial SWOT analysis. Ideally, this phase of the strategic plan could benefit from a full SWOT analysis that covers not only the strengths and opportunities but also the weaknesses of and threats to the organization’s ability to implement a successful strategic plan. The LRSP contains broad outlines of its goals and strategies to achieve those goals. There is also minimal information on staffing and budgeting. However, the plan does indicate that the foundation will rely on resources from the food redistribution company owned by the Tracy family for those purposes. The TFF opted to hire a consultant to lead the entire strategic planning process. The danger is that the TFF may not have enough of its staff involved in the strategic planning process and the foundation may become overreliant on direction from the consultant. It is vital to have as many stakeholders as possible understand how the planning process works. Nonpermanent members of the planning committee can be replaced with new members in staggered terms. Such a rotation allows new people to learn from the committee while the replaced members take their knowledge back with them to their departments. This type of participatory learning increases the ability of the entire organization to understand how the planning process works and supports strategic thinking across the organization. These benefits accrue over time (Hinton, 2012). Conclusion Leadership and management in strategic planning were briefly explored. The characteristics of the TFF’s LRSP were analyzed. The concept of strategic planning was introduced, and its components expanded upon. The prospective capacities of the LRSP were 15 Copyright ©2021 Capella University. Copy and distribution of this document are prohibited. examined regarding goals and strategies, human resources, and change management. Finally, suggestions to improve the LRSP were explored. 16 Copyright ©2021 Capella University. Copy and distribution of this document are prohibited. References King, E., & Alperstein, N. M. (2018). Best practices in planning strategically for online educational programs. Routledge. Bryson, J. M. (2018). Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organizations: For public and nonprofit organizations, a guide to strengthening and sustaining organizational achievement (5th ed.). Wiley. Cox, J. A. (2016). Leadership and management roles: Challenges and success strategies. AORN Journal, 104(2), 154–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aorn.2016.06.008 Feliu, N., & Botero, I. C. (2015). Philanthropy in family enterprises. Family Business Review, 29(1), 121–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486515610962 Hinton, K. E. (2012). A practical guide to strategic planning in higher education. Society for College and University Planning. Jakhotiya, G. P. (2017). Strategic planning, execution, and measurement (SPEM): A powerful tool for CEOs. CRC Press. Ololube, N. P., Aiya, F., Uriah, O. A., & Ololube, D. O. (2016). Strategic planning: A universal remedy for the successful management of 21st century university education (UE). Management, 6(3), 76–88. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.mm.20160603.03 The Tracy Family Foundation (n.d.). Strategic plan. https://tracyfoundation.org/strategic-plan Voehl, F., & Harrington, J. H. (2017). Change management: Manage the change or it will manage you. CRC Press. Gates Family Foundation Strategic Plan 2017-2021 December 14, 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Introduction 1 II. 2016 Update Process 3 III. 2011-2016 Grant Making Summary 5 IV. Foundation Mission, Approach, Values 9 Mission Approach Values Governance V. Philanthropic Model 13 Initiated Grant Making Responsive Capital Grant Making Program Related Investments (PRIs) Mission Related Investing Use of Staff Resources Family Funds VI. Context 15 VII. 2016 Strategic Plan Highlights 19 VIII. Priority Area – P-12 Education 21 Introduction A. Autonomous Public Schools 23 B. Innovation and Incubation 25 C. Human Capital 27 D. Advocacy 29 E. Systems Reform 30 IX. Priority Area – Natural Resources 33 Introduction A. Land Protection in Focus Landscapes 35 B. Land Trust Capacity Building 38 C. Water Resources 39 D. Stewardship at Scale 42 E. Payment for Ecosystem Services 46 X. Priority Area – Community Development 49 Introduction A. Access to Economic Opportunity 50 B. Community Planning 52 C. Multi-Modal Access and Infrastructure 53 D. Placemaking 54 E. Food Systems and Agriculture 56 XI. Capital Grants Program 59 XII. Program Related Investments (PRIs) and Mission Investing 61 XIII. Strategic Communications and Convening 63 XIV. Appendix 65 A. Third Party Feedback – K-12 Education B. Third Party Feedback – Natural Resources and Community Development 1 I. Introduction The Gates Family Foundation celebrated its 70th anniversary in 2016. Since its creation, the Foundation has committed more than $350 million to philanthropic activities. The vast majority of these investments have been focused on the people, communities and natural resources of Colorado. The Foundation’s activities are guided by a strategic plan. The strategic plan identifies the Foundation’s core interests, key strategies and tactics, and approach to evaluating the effectiveness of its work. The Foundation generally undertakes a review and update of its strategic plan every five to six years. The last strategic plan was completed in 2011. That plan resulted in fairly substantial changes to the Foundation’s approach and philanthropic model. Among the more significant changes:  The scale of the capital grants program was reduced, and the program made even more competitive.  A commitment was made to devote 60\% of the Foundation’s resources to grant making initiated by the Foundation in four priority areas: K-12 Education, Natural Resources, Rural Communities, and Urbanism. The biggest commitment of resources would be to the Education and Natural Resources work.  The Foundation launched a Program Related Investment (PRI) program, providing new tools for advancing philanthropic objectives.  The Foundation made its first true market return, mission-aligned investment through its portfolio.  The Foundation staff has grown in size and in the range of skills and experience available to tackle some of the most important community economic, environmental, and social challenges facing Colorado.  The Foundation has become more outcome-oriented, and seeks to track both quantitative and qualitative metrics of success more effectively.  Foundation staff often play more active roles as conveners, leaders, thought partners, and change agents. The Foundation also generally works more collaboratively with a wide range of partners in multiple areas.  The Foundation has sought to enhance the role of its trustees, engaging them more directly in the development of underlying strategies in addition to the approval of individual grant commitments.  The Foundation has created internship opportunities for the next generation of family members, both on its board and as part of its investment advisory committee.  The Foundation purchased the landmark Hover Building in downtown Denver and relocated its offices there. The Foundation has used the Hover Building to provide office and meeting space to support the work of a large number of community partners and grantees. Probably the single most significant change was the commitment to initiate grant activity in four priority areas. The commitment to this approach grew out of analysis and discussions undertaken as part of the development of the 2011 strategic plan. In that plan, the trustees and staff committed to sustaining a focus on four significant, long-term challenges facing the state: 2 1) The challenge of educating all of Colorado’s children – A significant proportion of Colorado children are not achieving the minimum level of academic proficiency necessary for success later in life. Colorado’s public education system has struggled to serve children of color and from low-income families effectively. As a result, a growing population of children faces limited prospects and dramatically reduced opportunities to participate in the economic and social life of Colorado communities, let alone function as global citizens. 2) The challenge of providing responsible stewardship of the state’s natural resources – Colorado’s natural resources face challenges due to climate change, significant declines in forest health, increased potential for catastrophic wildfires, and significant impacts due to energy development and growth of the recreational economy. Population growth increases pressures on natural systems and drives the conversion of more land and water to urban use. 3) The challenge of accommodating more people – Colorado’s population is anticipated to double within the next 40 years. The kinds of communities we create to accommodate the needs of this much larger population will have profound implications for a variety of aspects of life in urban and rural communities throughout the state. 4) The uncertain future of rural communities – Rural communities and rural culture are an essential part of the identity and character of Colorado. But the future facing rural communities is full of challenges. Many face unprecedented growth pressures, while others are struggling to survive. The Foundation remains committed to focusing a substantial portion of its efforts on these four long-term challenges. The 2016 strategic plan update has provided a chance to confirm the commitment to the philanthropic approach embraced in the 2011 plan (a strong commitment to initiated grant making in four priority areas; a more focused and more competitive capital grants program; increasing use of other tools such as PRI commitments and investments through the Foundation portfolio; development of the capacity of Foundation staff; and a more active role in leading, convening, and collaborating with partners in key areas). 3 II. 2016 Update Process The 2016 strategic plan has provided an opportunity to assess what has been learned from the Foundation’s experience from 2011 to 2016 operating in this different type of model. The process used to develop the 2016 plan was similar in many respects to development of the 2011 plan. The primary difference was the ability to look back at the experience of the last five years with the current model. Elements of the 2016 process included:  A review of Foundation grant making prior to adoption of the 2011 strategic plan  Internal analysis of grant making between 2011-2016, including internal assessments of the impact of Foundation grant making and convening/leadership efforts in priority areas  Third party feedback from education, natural resources and community development partners and grantees (collected through consultants to ensure as much candor as possible in responses)  Analysis of changes in the Colorado context over the last five years  Analysis of population and demographic, economic, public policy/political, and nonprofit/ philanthropic trends and projections in Colorado  Analysis of changes in financial markets and associated challenges of portfolio management and ensuring the long-term sustainability of the Foundation  Analysis of changes occurring or projected in the Foundation’s core areas of interest – public education, natural resources and urban and rural community development  Framing of key issues for board consideration  Review of staff recommendations at the annual board retreat in June of 2016  Drafting of an updated strategic plan in late summer for board review and refinement in September and final approval in December  Communication of the content of the new plan and updating of the Foundation website in the fourth quarter of the year 4 5 III. 2011-2016 Grant Making Summary Following adoption of the strategic plan in 2011, the Foundation’s grant program began a process of transition. Between 2011 and 2015, the Foundation shifted from a model where nearly all of the its grant resources were committed through a responsive capital grant making process to a program with an emphasis on initiated grant making in priority areas and a smaller and more competitive capital grants program. This transition can be seen in the table below: Category 2011-15 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Education 8,349,891 150,000 820,000 1,958,500 2,229,247 3,192,144 Natural Resources 4,737,087 110,000 726,049 937,232 1,283,806 1,600,000 Rural Communities 1,597,000 0 165,500 621,500 468,000 422,000 Urbanism 1,457,250 5,000 95,000 105,000 340,750 911,500 Total Initiated 16,141,228 265,000 1,806,549 3,622,232 4,321,803 6,125,644 Total Capital 27,697,154 8,358,740 6,417,614 4,982,300 4,639,700 3,298,800 Total Grants 43,838,382 8,623,740 8,224,163 8,604,532 8,961,503 9,424,444 \% Capital Grants 63.2\% 97\% 78\% 58\% 52\% 36\% \% Initiated Grants 36.8\% 3\% 22\% 42\% 48\% 64\% Note: In the table above and the charts and tables that follow in this section, grants labeled Rural Communities reflect only those grants made through the Foundation’s initiated grant making program focused on community planning, alternative economic futures and urban-rural food linkages. Overall, more than one-third of all of the Foundation’s grant making in Colorado is focused on rural communities. Grants benefitting rural communities and projects exist in every category of Foundation activity, not just those grants specifically labeled Rural Communities. Capital and Initiated Grant Spending (2011-2015) 6 The general mix of capital spending across categories has remained fairly constant over many years. In the capital grants program, Education tends to be the largest category of spending. The Well-being of Children, Youth and Families is usually second. Either Arts and Culture or Parks and Recreation is typically the third largest category. As noted above, the direction defined in the 2011 strategic plan required the scale of the capital grants program to decrease by roughly half in order to free up resources to be used in the initiated grant making areas. Capital grant spending and commitments for the years 2011-2015 are shown below: Capital Grant Commitments by Category 2011- 2015 Education 5,917,800 (29\%) Well-being of Children, Youth and Families 4,837,000 (24\%) Arts and Culture 4,751,000 (23\%) Parks and Recreation 2,062,000 (10\%) Natural Resources 974,000 ( 5\%) Community Development and Revitalization 926,214 ( 5\%) Urbanism 570,000 ( 3\%) Rural Communities 255,000 ( 1\%) Total 20,293,014 Capital Grant Commitments by Category (2011-2015) Education (29\%) Well-being of Children, Youth and Families (24\%) Arts and Culture (23\%) Parks and Recreation (10\%) Natural Resources (5\%) Community Development and Revitalization (5\%) Urbanism (3\%) Rural Communities (1\%) 7 Capital Grants Spending by Category 2011-2015 Education 10,036,500 (36\%) Well-being of Children, Youth and Families 6,447,000 (23\%) Arts and Culture 5,243,000 (19\%) Parks and Recreation 2,986,000 (11\%) Natural Resources 1,014,940 ( 4\%) Community Development and Revitalization 979,714 ( 4\%) Urbanism 600,000 ( 2\%) Rural Communities 330,000 ( 1\%) Total 27,637,154 Other observations regarding the capital grants program during the period 2011-2015:  Total commitments during this period were just over $20 million, indicating success in scaling new commitments to fit the current Foundation model where capital grant making is approximately 40\% of total grant making. Actual capital grant spending during this period was higher at $27.6 million. The higher spending number reflects the reality of paying off larger grants and larger overall commitments of capital made prior to 2011.  When the top five largest capital grants awarded in each year are reviewed, it is evident that much has changed in the capital grants program. Other than a $1 million commitment made early in 2011, the largest capital grant commitments have been in the $250,000 to $400,000 range. There is no longer as much capacity to make capital grant commitments of $1 million or more.  In most of the years since 2011, the top five largest grants by year included grants as small as $125,000 to $175,000. In comparison, for the years 2006-2010 the largest capital grant commitments ranged from $600,000 to $1.5 million.  A slightly different trend is noticeable in the average and median size of capital grants. In the period prior to 2011, the average grant size was $100,000, and the median grant size was $50,000. At present, the average grant size is closer to $62,000 (reflecting fewer very Capital Grants Spending by Category (2011-2015) Education (36\%) Well-being of Children, Youth and Families (23\%) Arts and Culture (19\%) Parks and Recreation (11\%) Natural Resources (4\%) Community Development and Revitalization (4\%) Urbanism (2\%) Rural Communities (1\%) 8 large grants skewing the average) and the median grant size is approximately $40,000. So the median (typical) grant has not declined much in size.  The mix of capital grants by category of spending is fairly diverse. No single category dominates, but the three categories of Education, the Well-being of Children, Youth and Families (largely social services organizations), and Arts and Culture collectively represent just over three quarters of all the capital grant commitments in the last five years.  In terms of capital grant spending (as opposed to capital grant commitments) over the last five years, Education spending is the dominant category. Education grants paid out were the highest amount of any category in four of the five years, and only $75,000 short of being the highest in the fifth year. This pattern reflects the reality of paying off large capital commitments made prior to 2011 to two higher education institutions. 9 IV. Foundation Mission, Approach, Values and Governance Mission The mission of the Foundation is to make philanthropic investments statewide that contribute to the quality of life in Colorado, create opportunities for youth, and support stewardship of this extraordinary place. In carrying out its mission, the Foundation strives to maintain a long-term perspective and to focus on the challenges and opportunities that will have the greatest impact over time on the people, communities, and resources of the state. Approach The Foundation’s mission is broad, its scope is statewide, and its primary areas of activity include many complex challenges. The Foundation’s asset base is significant, but any one of the Foundation’s areas of interest could easily absorb all of the resources available for distribution in any given year. As a family foundation, the goal is also to balance current expenditures and impact with the ability to sustain the asset base so that future generations can also engage in philanthropic activity, give back to the state, and address the needs and opportunities they perceive to be most important in their time. The Foundation remains committed to focusing in areas that are consistent with the interests of the institution’s founders, where it believes the state will face long-term challenges, and where the Foundation’s participation can add value and make a difference. The trustees also continue to recognize the role the Foundation has played for 70 years as one of the few statewide philanthropic resources available to assist communities and nonprofit organizations in undertaking significant capital projects. The commitment to both initiated activity and responsive capital grant making is an attempt to balance these two roles. Ultimately, the trustees and staff are most concerned with impact. Both want the Foundation to have an impact on the state well beyond what the scale of the Foundation’s own assets might suggest is possible. The Foundation uses many approaches to achieve this goal. The current vision and aspirations for the Foundation include the following:  A high impact organization, with a collaborative and creative culture, skilled at leveraging other resources and advancing complex concepts and projects, and always focused on outcomes  Increasingly good at using all of the Foundation’s assets (dollars, people, relationships, credibility, access, convening capability, physical space) to maximize impact 10  Directly contributing to reductions in the achievement gap between low-income students and their more affluent peers  Playing a leadership role in driving important long-term outcomes in land and water resource management  Contributing in meaningful ways to the long-term viability and quality of life in rural communities  Playing a leadership role in managing the challenges of population growth and urbanization of the state, while continuing to improve the quality of life and promote innovation in urban areas  Committing scarce capital dollars in a manner that is thoughtful and creative  Becoming increasingly effective in evaluating the impact of Foundation commitments through the use of metrics, data, and other tools  Using an increasing percentage of the Foundation’s financial assets in mission-aligned ways  Influencing the priorities, activities and investment of resources by others, leveraging additional resources and impact in priority areas  Providing broader civic leadership when appropriate, serving as a valued convener and thought partner  Providing an attractive, flexible platform for expanded family philanthropy  Managing the organization and acting in a manner that is consistent with the values and interests of the founders and the Gates family, and ensuring the long-term sustainability of the institution Values The legacy of the Gates family in Colorado has been shaped by a set of core values, including a strong belief in the importance of innovation, citizenship, free enterprise, self-reliance, striving for excellence, and an entrepreneurial spirit. The Foundation’s founders and their descendants have also displayed a strong commitment to providing access to opportunity, particularly for young people, and a deep respect for nature. The work of the Foundation aspires to be in alignment with these values. The Foundation’s own culture also continues to place a heavy emphasis on the following attributes:  Being strategic – staying focused on impact, value added and leverage  Being forward looking – taking a long-term view  Staying grounded and humble, not ego driven  Being good partners – approachable, supportive, and respectful of partners and collaborators  Being data and information driven  Remaining intellectually curious and eager to learn  Being flexible, adaptable and open to new perspectives and new ideas  Being rigorous 11  Operating with integrity  Being fair, pragmatic and non-partisan  Striving to be an agent for constructive change  Willing to lead, where appropriate  Willing to take risk intelligently, and fail and learn when necessary  Valuing and respecting the diversity of the communities within which the Foundation works  Remaining a place that can continue to attract, retain, and empower talented people Governance The Foundation’s governance structure is atypical for a family foundation, in that it involves a hybrid of family and community control. Ultimate authority rests with six family members, each representing a branch of the Gates family. These members approve the selection of the seven trustees that serve as the Foundation’s board. Many years ago, the decision was made to give majority control of the board of trustees to non-family members from the community. The current Gates Family Foundation board reflects this configuration, with four non-family members and three family members. The Foundation’s Investment Advisory Committee also includes community members that are neither family members nor trustees. This configuration makes available a diverse set of skills and experience to assist with the management of the Foundation’s portfolio of assets. Together, these practices ensure access to a talented and experienced pool of leaders, and keep the Foundation more closely grounded in Colorado. In addition to majority community control of the board of trustees, the Foundation has instituted term limits (12-year maximum term). The Foundation has also created both a board intern role (two-year term, non-voting status) for family members as well as an emeritus trustee role (three- year term, non-voting status). These latter roles were created in part to facilitate the transition of the next generation of family members onto the board, providing opportunities for learning prior to board service as well as mentoring and coaching support for next generation board members once on the board. The Foundation also made the decision a number of years ago to restrict its philanthropic activity to the state of Colorado. The Foundation’s asset base, while large, would be insufficient to have meaningful impact in multiple states. One other innovation in the Foundation’s structure is the opportunity for Gates family members to create family funds to be housed and administered at the Foundation. The family fund structure allows family members to place assets at the Foundation to support their personal philanthropy. Given the geographic diversity of the places of residence of family members, this opportunity provides a counter balance to the main Foundation’s restriction of its activities to Colorado. The geographic focus and missions of these family funds are, in most cases, very different than those of the main foundation. Family funds essentially make the infrastructure of the Foundation available at little cost to encourage philanthropy beyond the direct work of the main Foundation. As of the end of 2016, there are seven family funds housed at the Foundation. 12 13 V. Philanthropic Model The current philanthropic model employed by the Foundation has its roots in the 2011 strategic plan. The Foundation pursues its mission through a combination of initiated grant making, responsive capital grant making, Program Related Investments (PRIs), mission related investing, and the selective commitment of staff resources to play convening, leadership or other roles where critical to the success of a particular strategy or initiative. Each of these elements is described below. Initiated Grant Making The heart of the Foundation’s current activity is initiated grant making focused on the four long- term challenges described previously: closing the achievement gap for low-income students while raising the academic bar for all children; being effective stewards of Colorado’s natural resources; supporting the long-term health of rural communities; and, continuing to improve the quality of urban life even as the state accommodates an anticipated doubling of population in the next 40 years. Currently 60\% of the Foundation’s grant making annually is committed to initiated grant making in these areas. Initiated grant making can take many forms. The goal is to provide the most effective form and scale of support to ensure the success of key partners. The Foundation has also invested in an expanded staff with more skills and capacity to drive activity in these areas. Responsive Capital Grant Making The Foundation continues to operate a responsive capital grants program. The range of projects eligible for consideration has changed little over time, but the program has become much more competitive. Roughly 40\% of the Foundation’s grant making is allocated to the capital grants program. The Foundation uses the capital grants program to support multiple objectives. Among these objectives are:  Reinforcing the Foundation’s objectives and strategies in K-12 education, natural resources and community development  Supporting investments in rural communities that face greater challenges in accessing capital for capital projects  Maintaining a presence in the worlds of basic human needs/social services, arts and culture, parks and recreation, and civic capacity that would otherwise not be targets for the Foundation’s initiated grant making Program Related Investments (PRIs) In recent years the Foundation has committed to the operation of a PRI program. These PRI commitments are generally below market, recyclable commitments of capital to support activity in priority program areas. The Foundation has targeted having up to $10-11 million in capital in active PRI commitments at any given point in time. To date, these commitments have taken the form of low-interest loans and loan guaranties. Since the adoption of the 2011 strategic plan, the Foundation has used PRI commitments to address land banking for affordable housing and community facilities in proximity to transit station sites, energy retrofit and renewable energy investments in nonprofit facilities, and the development and 14 expansion of charter school facilities. At present, the Foundation is choosing not to count PRI commitments as distributions. As a result, the Foundation’s PRI commitments are above and beyond the minimum 5\% distribution requirement being met through the Foundation’s initiated and capital grant programs. Mission Related Investing The Foundation has started to look for opportunities to include investments within its portfolio that are aligned with its mission. The first of these, the Colorado Impact Fund, is a private equity fund providing growth capital to Colorado companies that have potential to generate market returns and also provide some form of social or environmental benefit. The Foundation continues to explore investment opportunities that can meet its target for returns as well as advance some aspect of the Foundation’s mission. Use of Staff Resources The Foundation has intentionally grown the size of its program staff and increased the depth of skills and experience available in priority subject areas. Increasingly, the commitment of staff time is as important as the commitment of grant funds. Selectively, Foundation staff are playing key roles in initiating projects, convening partners, and providing leadership on significant issues. Use of staff in this fashion is now an important component of the Foundation’s philanthropic model. Family Funds As noted previously, the Foundation provides the opportunity for Gates family members to utilize the Foundation’s staff and infrastructure to pursue their own philanthropic interests. The assets of these family funds are managed and invested as part of the Foundation’s total portfolio. As of 2016, there are seven family funds distributing approximately $10 million per year. 15 VI. Context During the course of this strategic plan update process, Foundation staff and trustees reviewed a great deal of information regarding what Colorado’s future might look like. Demographic, cultural, and political trends, along with trends in the nonprofit and philanthropic sectors will all impact the landscape within which the Foundation pursues its mission. Staff and trustees also reviewed the landscape ahead in the Foundation’s core areas of interest. Highlights of the big picture context are summarized below: Population and Demographic  Colorado’s future, like much of its recent past, will be heavily influenced by accelerated population growth. Few states in the country have seen a pattern of sustained in-migration comparable to that of …