The Harlem Children's Zone (HCZ) is one of America's most well-known and impactful non-profits. Their innovative model, which focuses on a 'cradle to college' approach to supporting children, has been replicated throughout the United States. What's more, HCZ's dedication to data-driven programming has forced many in the education and broader non-profit fields to re-think how they do business. For me, HCZ has been a source of inspiration because of the extent to which the organization takes a holistic approach to tackling poverty--recognizing that no one intervention will suffice to break the numerous and often impenetrable barriers to success faced by America's poor--and I congratulate Geoffrey Canada for pioneering the use of data, and for growing HCZ into what it is today. At the same time, however, I have focused on one potential flaw to their model: it's cost and time-intensity.
In a recent article of mine, The Math of Social Change, I talked about how hard it is to accept that only a certain percentage of those we serve will truly benefit from the service. I went on to explain that two logical responses to this realization are to a) determine the characteristics of those that are likely to benefit and target the intervention to them, and/or b) increase the percentage of people that benefit from the intervention. The necessity for both of these responses is born of the fact that social change work is all too often a zero sum game: with limited resources, the dollar spent on the person that does not benefit could have been spent on someone that would have benefited. Therefore, it's imperative that we do a better job targeting the right people, or ensuring that more people benefit from the intervention.
In a recent article of mine, The Math of Social Change, I talked about how hard it is to accept that only a certain percentage of those we serve will truly benefit from the service. I went on to explain that two logical responses to this realization are to a) determine the characteristics of those that are likely to benefit and target the intervention to them, and/or b) increase the percentage of people that benefit from the intervention. The necessity for both of these responses is born of the fact that social change work is all too often a zero sum game: with limited resources, the dollar spent on the person that does not benefit could have been spent on someone that would have benefited. Therefore, it's imperative that we do a better job targeting the right people, or ensuring that more people benefit from the intervention.