Fall 2013

Volume 1 • Issue 2

IN THIS ISSUE: 3 9 10 14

Charter schools face some of the same struggles as other nonprofit organizations. How? Lewis Lavine interviews DHS Commissioner Raquel Hatter.

What Race to the Top taught Nashville nonprofits about government partnerships.

Book Review: “How Change Happens – or Doesn’t: The Politics of US Public Policy”

Volume 1 | Issue 2

Welcome to this issue of NNR PUBLISHER Susan King

Center for Nonprofit Management

ADVISORY TEAM

Lewis Lavine

Center for Nonprofit Management

Brad Gray

Center for Nonprofit Management

Keel Hunt

When discussing partnerships between the public and private sectors, Department of Human Services Commissioner Raquel Hatter summed up the primary reason why it should happen perfectly when she said in an interview: “we share a mission: we’re looking to partner with the people ofTennessee and the families that we have the honor to serve.”

We do share a mission and in this issue of Nashville Nonprofit Review, we look at both sectors and how they work together to create charter schools that benefit our community and implement multi-million dollar grants for Tennessee's education system; we learn how nonprofits can partner with government agencies in an effective way to best benefit our community.

Rich Rhoda

This is rounded out with a book review exploring how public policy is changed at the federal level and the lessons that can be learned by local nonprofits.

Linda Schact

Thank you to all our contributors for putting in the time and effort to share your expertise about each sector.

The Strategy Group Tennessee Higher Education Commission Nelson and Sue Andrews Institue on Civic Leadership at Lipscomb University

CONTRIBUTORS Richard Haglund

Tennessee Department ofEducation

Bob Obrohta

Tennessee College Access Network

Richard Rhoda

Tennessee Higher Education Commission

Dr. Raquel Hatter

Department ofHuman Services

Center for Nonprofit Management

37 Peabody St. Nashville, TN 37210 (615) 259-0100 cnm.org For content suggestions, contact Susan King at susan@cnm.org or (615) 259-0100 ext. 304

About the Center for Nonprofit Management Our mission: To

create and sustain nonprofit excellence Our vision: Better

communities through extraordinary nonprofit services For 27 years, the Center for Nonprofit Management has been a home to Middle Tennessee’s nonprofit leaders. Located in the historic Trolley Barns near downtown, we offer a place to relax, share triumphs and find solutions to problems. At CNM, nonprofit board members, executives and staff have the opportunity to learn how to enhance their services through our comprehensive calendar of skillbuilding workshops, our consulting services and our annual Bridge to Excellence conference. We also celebrate and recognize the enormous positive impact made by our nonprofit members through our annual Salute to Excellence awards dinner.

2

Fall 201 3

by Rich Haglund General Counsel and Chief Operating Officer Achievement School District

W

hat do charter schools have to do with high quality nonprofit organizations benefitting Middle Tennessee? In other words, why should you read this article?

Charter schools are public schools operated by independent, nonprofit governing bodies.

In 2002, Tennessee’s legislature made public charter schools one means “within the public school system for ensuring accomplishment of the necessary outcomes of education by allowing the establishment and maintenance of public charter schools that operate within a school district structure but are allowed maximum

flexibility to achieve their goals.”

T.C.A. § 49-13-102(b).

Charter schools, by law, have a different governance structure, but that legal structure alone does not distinguish them. Differences and similarities vary based on the individual charter school and the public schools located within the same community.

The main difference between chartered and non-chartered schools is that, by law, the school leadership—the independent governing body which includes at least one parent—decides how to spend all of the per pupil allocations represented by the attending students.

This practice of school-based decision making is required by law

for charter schools, but available for any school pursuant to local board policy and practice. By holding school leaders responsible for specified student outcomes while allowing those leaders the freedom to determine the means of achieving those outcomes, chartering authorities demonstrate commitment to student success and confidence in the leaders and teachers working with those students.

School-based autonomy offers unusual opportunities for nonprofit board service and organizational impact in Tennessee communities.

Reading this article will help you understand what a public charter school is, decide whether to get involved with public education through a charter school, and know 3

Nashville Nonprofit Review

what a charter school board must do to prepare students for postsecondary success.

How does application work?

Charter school applications are submitted to a "chartering authority"--a local board of education or the Achievement School District (ASD). Charter school applications may be submitted by “any individual, group, or other organization . . .; provided, however, that a sponsor cannot be a for-profit entity, a private elementary or secondary school, a post-secondary institution not accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, a religious or church school or promote the agenda of any religious denomination or religiously affiliated entity.” T.C.A. § 49-13-104(10).

Authorizing decisions are to be made “in the best interests of the pupils, school district or community.” T.C.A. § 49-13-108.

Public charter school students are

measured against the same academic standards as students in other public schools. To have a charter school approved, the sponsor who submits an application must demonstrate to the chartering authority the capacity to design and implement an academic program, operate a business, and be a good steward of public trust and funds, in order to prepare students for successful post-secondary education, work and citizenship. To remain open, the charter school must meet the academic, organizational and financial performance standards established in the application and the charter agreement entered into with the chartering authority.

evaluate amended applications.

Some local boards of education include an interview of applicants, and a dedicated public comment period at a board meeting or workshop before the board votes on an application. If a local board of education denies an amended

State law defines the authorization timeline and required elements of charter school applications.

Applications are submitted April 1 of the year “preceding the year in which the proposed charter school plans to begin operation.” T.C.A. § 49-13-107(b). Local boards of education have 90 days to evaluate initial applications, and 30 days to

application, the sponsor may appeal to the State Board of Education.

«

Sponsoring and/or operating a public charter school is one way nonprofit organizations can help strengthen the public schools in our communities

The Achievement School District (ASD) may authorize charter schools to serve students “zoned to attend or enrolled in a school” in the bottom five percent of the schools in the State (a “priority school”). T.C.A § 49-13-106(a)(2).

Charter schools authorized by local boards of education, on the other hand, may serve any student in the district. The ASD has its own authorization process that lasts 60 days and does not include an amended application or an appeal to the State Board. The ASD uses teams of local, State and national education experts and community members to vet applications, conduct extensive interviews, and make recommendations to the ASD. 4

Fall 201 3

Upon approval, the charter application becomes part of a charter agreement that is binding on the governing body of the school. T.C.A § 49-13-110.

What types of nonprofit entities operate public charter schools?

Tennessee charter schools must be operated by “a not-for-profit organization with exemption from federal taxation under § 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.”

T.C.A. § 49-13-106(b)(1)(B).

Though the application may be filed by an individual or entity without § 501(c)(3) exemption, once approved, the school must be operated by a governing body with such exemption.

Many charter schools are operated by single purpose entities created specifically to operate a charter school or schools. Most public charter schools in Nashville—such as STEM Preparatory Academy, New Vision Academy, and KIPP Nashville—were created specifically to operate charter schools. Some, however, are sponsored by and/or operated by nonprofit entities with broader missions. For example, the Martha O’Bryan Center, which has operated programs serving Nashville’s youth for decades, recently sponsored two charter school applications: East End Prep, an elementary school now in its third year of operation, and Explore! Charter School, authorized to open in 2014. Power Center Academy Middle and High

Schools in Memphis were sponsored by a community development corporation. And The Influence 1 Foundation in Memphis, which works in community engagement and economic development, sponsored and operates three charter schools in Memphis under the City University name, with a fourth scheduled to open in 2014.

Nashville Public Schools, said that as an authorizer, "We look for organizational and operational expertise. At a minimum, the board needs somebody with a legal background, one or two people with institutional education experience, and somebody with a strong background in finance."

Rebecca Lieberman, ChiefTalent

Who comprises the board of a charter school?

State law does not proscribe the membership of the board for a public charter school.

However, chartering East End Prepatory School is operated by the authorities are Martha O'Bryan Center, a Nashville 501 (c)3 required to review organization. the capacity of the sponsoring organization and Officer at the Tennessee Charter proposed governing body to School Center, noted that some comply with applicable laws; hire, new charter school board members supervise and train staff; are surprised by how "hands on" implement an academic program; they need to be to help the school and manage millions of dollars in succeed. "These board members order to help students meet the have to roll up their sleeves and go goals established in the charter to work. Because the board—to an application. T.C.A. § 49-13-107. extent—provides many of the Chartering authorities generally supports that district leaders might look to see if the board has provide for a district managed experience in, or can oversee school: legal, facilities and school leaders with experience in development work.” the following areas: successful school design and startup, real Is a charter school a estate, law, nonprofit organization nonprofit or a government management and leadership, and entity? When does that fiscal management. distinction matter?

Carol Swann, Coordinator of Charter Schools for Metro A charter school is a public school.

5

Nashville Nonprofit Review

T.C.A. 49-13-104(9). However, it is operated by “a not-for-profit organization.” T.C.A. 49-13106(b)(1)(B). So, for accounting and other purposes, is the public charter school treated like a government entity or a non-profit organization? The organizational nature of public charter schools affects their interaction with local, state and federal government programs. Legal liability and compliance requirements are also affected by determinations of a charter school’s organizational status.

Tennessee law requires charter school employees to “participate in the same retirement program as the teachers and employees of the local board of education to which the charter school is associated. “ T.C.A. 8-35-242. If non-teaching employees of the local board of education participate in TCRS, then non-teaching employees of LEA-authorized charter schools must participate in TCRS. The Achievement School District is “an organizational unit of the department of education,” T.C.A. 49-1-614(a), teachers and employees of charter schools authorized by the ASD are not “associated . . . to [any] local board of education,” 8-35-242. The law does carve an exception for teachers at ASD authorized charter schools, however, because 8-34101 defines teachers as “any person employed in a public school as a teacher [including ROTC teacher], librarian, principal, supervisor of teachers or any other

Liberty Collegiate is one of the charter schools in East Nashville.

position whereby the state requires the employee to be certificated as a teacher or licensed as a nurse or physical therapist.” T.C.A. 8-34101.

Because of these statutes, charter school governing bodies (operators) that have schools authorized by local boards of education and the ASD may have some non-teaching employees who are required to participate in the Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System (TCRS) through a local board of education, and some non-teaching employees who are not allowed to participate because they work solely in schools authorized by the ASD. For auditing purposes, the law requires each charter school to have an audit prepared that uses “generally accepted auditing standards” and meets “minimum audit standards and regulations, which shall be prescribed by the

comptroller of the treasury.”

T.C.A. 49-13-127.

Public charter schools are subject to the same public records and open meetings laws as other local government entities. Thus, the governing body’s records relative to the school are generally public records, and access must be provided when requested by Tennessee citizens. Tennessee’s public records and open meetings laws are among the broadest in the country. Other than certain personal information (social security numbers, private cell phone numbers, home addresses, e.g.), even employment records are public. The law also requires that charter schools post agendas and contact information for faculty and board members with the same level of detail as that provided by the local board of education on its website.

The meetings of the governing 6

«

The charter school is responsible for raising any funds beyond those needed to successfully operate the school body of a public charter school are public, and citizens must be given adequate notice to be able to attend and, if allowed by the board, participate in meetings. If the board is meeting at a great distance from the school, the governing should facilitate attendance via electronic means.

Public charter schools are required to submit an annual audit to the chartering authority, the Comptroller of the Treasury, and the Department of Education.

These audits are posted on the Comptroller’s website.

What is the relationship between the nonprofit school operator and the local board of education?

Prior to authorization, chartering authorities research (and may interview) the proposed board members to determine if the board members are serving in name only, or are committed to the proposed school. As with any startup corporation, the board of a new charter school may need areas of expertise during the planning and initial implementation years, and then a different set of skills in board members once the school is well-established. As explained

Fall 201 3

above, the sponsor or applicant need not be the same as the governing body that operates the charter school.

Ms. Swann offered a word of caution regarding board transition from the application stage to the operational stage. "We ask questions to see if this is a founding board or an operating board. If we get a sense the board is only there to impress us, and will be gone once the school is authorized, we probably won't authorize that school."

During the application process, the board should be able to provide guidance to the founding team and those preparing the application.

The chartering authority may interview the board members to determine whether the board members are committed to the project or serving only to try to impress the chartering authority and get the application approved.

approved, most communication between the chartering authority and the charter school will flow through the school leader or the CEO of the charter management organization.

Which aspects of charter school leadership are critical for all board members to understand?

"A lot of the expertise necessary for charter schools is in either the financial or operational areas of running a school," Lieberman said.

"The board doesn't need to run those areas of the school, but to serve as consultants in the development and supervision of those areas." School based autonomy facilitates analyzing the return on investment in schools.

Charter schools can demonstrate to a local board of education how its investments can yield specific outcomes for specific students at a specific cost.

Ben Cundiff, a board member at Nashville’s East End Preparatory School, noted that because charter schools are created by statute, board members must “familiarize [them]selves with the requirements of the charter school law.”

Charter school boards are, for the schools they govern, like the local board of education. That board’s policies, rather than policies created by the local board of education, apply to students and staff at the charter school. Once

Serious fundraising is currently required during the startup of a charter school. State, local and federal funds flow on a per pupil basis to the charter school (the money follows the student). The charter school is responsible for raising any funds beyond those needed to successfully operate the school.

7

Nashville Nonprofit Review

Cundiff explained: because the school does not have capital funding for a facility, “we need more fundraising than we anticipated. We have to raise about a third of our budget.” And, even though East End spends “so much time reporting and have so many people looking over our shoulder, there is still a significant lack of information and a significant amount of misinformation about charter schools” in the community.

So, East End added a board member “with expertise and interest in fundraising and getting the word out.”

Board members need to understand school accountability requirements. "They need to understand," Lieberman said, "that the school needs to perform at a certain level. They need to know what metrics are used to measure the school's success and to what extent the school is on target to achieve those results." Swann added, "They need to know enough that if something's not working, they can help turn things around."

Metro Nashville Public Schools uses performance frameworks to judge the academic, organizational and financial performance of its public charter schools. These frameworks were recently presented to the local board of education. The academic performance of all Nashville public schools—chartered or not—was measured using the same framework. In addition, the organizational and financial

performance of Nashville's public charter schools is measured using frameworks.

What challenges may come as a surprise for nonprofit charter school operators?

Perhaps the biggest surprise to some charter school operators has been discovering that operating a fully autonomous public school is

«

At a minimum, the board needs somebody with a legal background, one or two people with institutional education experience, and somebody with a strong background in finance.

very different from any school leadership experience they may have had previously in a traditional public school. During the appeal of one chartering authority’s decision to deny an application, a charter school founder noted that the group starting the school had “over 400 years” of combined experience in education. That experience does not usually include developing and executing multi-million dollar budgets, hiring and firing employees, managing payroll, or leasing and maintaining a large building that satisfies codes.

In a traditional public school, all of that work has typically been done by someone outside the school.

Managing cash flow—a basic,

critical skill for successful business operations—is not something taught to most public school leaders. “One of the people on our board,” Cundiff said, “is a very able accountant. We place a lot of reliance on him keeping a close eye on the numbers.” Fiscal challenges led to the closure of one of Nashville’s charter schools in 2010.

The challenges of expansion are also keenly felt by charter schools.

Chartering authorities have a duty to assess whether approving another charter school with similar leadership, operational plans or instructional methods would be “in the best interests of the pupils, the school district, or community.”

T.C.A. § 49-13-108. One Nashville school applying to add another grade tier was denied in part because the chartering authority felt that adding another school when the operator’s existing school was close to closure because of academic performance.

Chartering authorities have tools in place, such as a replication application developed by the Tennessee Department of Education, to determine whether allowing an organization to open additional schools is in the best interests of the students and the community. Many charter school operators have their own internal metrics for determining whether they can grow as planned and still provide students with the same quality educational experience.

"Board members have to understand that the board holds the 8

Fall 201 3

charter," explained Lieberman. "They are ultimately responsible for the success and failure of the school."

As in other organizations, the governing body of a charter school must distinguish between supervision and management. “Every board leans toward making the mistake of getting involved in management as opposed to supervision,” Cundiff stated.

“We’ve had this board for about three years now, and our school leader has done a magnificent job. That’s made it easier for us to stay out of the day to day management.”

Sponsoring and/or operating a public charter school is one way nonprofit organizations can help strengthen the public schools in our communities.

Preparing students for successful post-secondary education, work, and citizenship demands organizational, financial and academic expertise.

"An authorizer needs to hold an applicant accountable for having all the elements of a school developed at the front end of the process," Swann noted. "Strength in one area does not make up for weakness in another.

You have to be ready to run a school—the business side and the academic side—from the start."

A Conversation with Dr. Raquel Hatter CNM President Lewis Lavine sat down with the Tennessee Department ofHuman Services Commissioner Raquel Hatter recently to talk about partnerships between nonprofits and government agencies. With experience in both the private and public sector, Dr. Hatter talked about building an effective partnership with a government agency and how both sectors can begin to understand each other's work.

Read some oftheir conversation here and watch the video below to see the whole discussion.

You've worked on both sides of the public arena, on the nonprofit side and the government side. How are they different? And how do you handle each one?

A: I think that one of the first things that I realized when I came into this role as commissioner was that there was a definite need to increase the understanding of the sector from the private perspective and the public sector perspective. I remember being in a meeting with some of my staff at the department and listening to how we were making decisions relative to partners and it was at that moment that it was clear to me that we needed to increase our understanding of that sector.

And then having been with the department, it was clear from my experience in the private sector that it worked both ways. And so I do think there are a number of similarities. One, we share a mission: we’re looking to partner with the people ofTennessee and

Rich Haglund is General Counsel and ChiefOperating Officer for the Achievement School District. Rich previously served as the director of

charter schools for the Tennessee Department ofEducation, general counsel to the Tennessee Board of Education, and as an assistant attorney general.

Watch the full video of Lewis Lavine's conversation with Commissioner Raquel Hatter.

9

Nashville Nonprofit Review

the families that we have the honor to serve to move them forward. We also share some of the challenges with limited funds, competing priorities and trying to figure out what’s going to happen next. So I think we definitely have a lot in common but I think the landscape is different and there’s still room for improvement in understanding each other’s sectors.

them challenges. One is that fundamental understanding of the landscape. One of the things I would suggest is to suspend judgment. Seek to understand, for both of us to do that. And I think that sometimes what I see is that it will be legitimate feedback based on what appears to be really illogical that we’re doing in the public sector, but no matter how illogical it may appear, there’s a How have you created reason for it. I’m certainly not partnerships? Sometimes we justifying it in every instance, but I think that partnerships are think understanding that helps put not possible between the two things in perspective … One of the sectors, but you’ve done that differences, being a public sector very well. leader, is that we’re accountable to virtually everyone and there are so A: Well, I’m trying… we’re many people and stakeholders who, working on it at all rightfully so, can Sometimes, times. I think it’s weigh in on how moving past the idea nonprofits can we operate and that we are a funder be more nimble than what we do and and the partner is a the government. how we steward vendor. That may be over taxpayers how we initially come dollars. together. So one of the things we’re trying to do is enlist feedback from Sometimes nonprofits don’t partners… we invite them to panels understand that you are to tell us what they’re doing, try to beholden to the federal learn from them. And we also government for much of what invite them to submit innovative you do. I assume sometimes ideas so that they know we value it’s difficult being innovative them beyond the funder/vendor given of restrictions you have perspective. We also have an open from Washington. door policy. We meet with people whenever they ask us to, whether It is and I will tell you this, I do they have really cool things to say think that it would serve nonprofits to us or not. well to study the funding streams and federal requirements and they What barriers have you seen? can weigh that against what we require to see if we’re being more restrictive. What we found I wouldn’t categorize them as sometimes in the department that barriers as much as I would call we have been more restrictive than

«

what the [federal government] require in some instances and that’s usually not the case but we should also look for those opportunities where we could be more innovative. I will say that we are beholden to the feds when it comes to certain funding streams, therefore nonprofits are, too.

Frequently nonprofits fear that the state agencies are using the fact that the feds are there as an excuse to not let the nonprofits do something and if it’s a true partnership, that shouldn’t happen.

Absolutely not. And again, it should be about the mission that we’re trying to fulfill, that should be the driver. For us, at the department, and I think under the leadership of Governor Haslam in the charge of transformational change, the expectation is if there are instances where the regulation is one that is prohibitive and is interfering with our ability to be effective, the expectation is to figure out how we can affect that… so, we’re not really in the business of accepting status quo, so we’re trying to be disruptive in a healthy way in this new normal.

Dr. RaquelHatteris the Commissionerofthe Tennessee DepartmentofHuman Services.

She was previously CEO ofthe Nashville nonprofitFamily andChildren Services. Dr. Hatterhas dedicatedmore than 20 years of herlife to servingadults, children, andfamilies.

10

Fall 201 3

Interdependent Effectiveness: State-Nonprofit Partnerships

by Bob Obrohta Tennessee College Access and Success

A

Network

t times, words are poor tools to reflect the work created by human collaboration and interdependency. Case in point, buried on pages 128-129 of Tennessee’s winning 2010 Race to the Top application is a paragraph that appeared to be no more than an afterthought. It reads: “Finally, communities with persistently failing schools tend to lack a college-going culture. To support those communities in their turnaround work, Tennessee will establish a statewide college access network. To make quick and significant progress in the areas of education attainment, participation, and affordability, this will be a systemic effort in college access and success. ”

the state’s leading philanthropic and nonprofit organizations already providing college access and success programming. The budget request for the project was a mere one-half of one percent, $3 million spread out over four years, ofthe overall $501 million Race to the Top budget.

«

As it closes the door on its first chapter, TCASN will continue to rely on the interdependent relationships it has established in order to create a college-going culture across the state

What made Tennessee different was the broad philosophical and strategic agreement among key stakeholders on the Tennessee College Access and Success Network’s mission, goals, and implementation strategy in order to be highly effective. Before the Network was even a thought, THEC, community-based college access programs and private foundations were partnering together to establish local programs targeted to “move the needle” by enrolling more people in postsecondary education.

The relationships between these local college access programs and the state were mutually beneficial.

THEC had built an army of expert college access organizations that could advocate, be implemented quickly, and effectively run college The idea was simple and by no access initiatives. The means was Tennessee the first state organizations had found not only a However, this tiny paragraph think ofdeveloping a network of source of funding, but more strategically placed in the middle of to stakeholders targeting college importantly, a champion in the the 268-page federal application and success. Prior to the state’s leading higher education was not an afterthought; it was the access ofTennessee’s network, organization to provide voice and culmination ofyears ofrelationship founding states had previously developed advocacy for their cause. A high building across stakeholders in the 16 college networks with level of trust continued to grow as Tennessee Governor’s Office, the varying access budgets and impact. new initiatives and ideas were Tennessee Higher Education discussed and successfully Commission (THEC), and some of 11

Nashville Nonprofit Review

relationship would become apparent.

TCASN leadership represented not only expertise in college access and success, but also some of the most skilled professionals at navigating the complex Tennessee is leading the nation in college readiness systems of bureaucracy, through TCASN membership implemented. The organizations organizations, and nonprofit quickly realized their mutual success sustainability. relied on a positive interdependent relationship with one another.

In other words, due to a stable source of funding, there was a window of The local college access opportunity to build a Network that organizations provided a balanced could be fostered and sustained representation of the state from west beyond the four-year life of the Race to east, reflecting urban and rural to the Top grant. By the end ofthe first communities. Together, along with year of funding, TCASN received THEC, these organizations would 501(c)3 status. make up the Tennessee College Access and Success Network’s To build a membership base, the Partnership Council and led the Partnership Council decided on three Network through an incubation goals: grant funding, professional period and its first year of existence. development, and The organizations included: The communication/advocacy. TCASN Ayers Foundation (Parsons), Oasis would use half of its funding to Center (Nashville), The Niswonger expand and/or create new college Foundation (Greeneville), access and success programs across tnAchieves (Knoxville), Public the state. To date, TCASN has Education Foundation provided $1.7 million in funding to (Chattanooga), the Southwest support 50 access and success Tennessee Development District projects that provide college access (Jackson), and Educate and Grow and success services to over 64,000 (Kingsport). students and families.

It wasn’t until Tennessee won the These projects vary widely, as Race to the Top competition that the TCASN believes in allowing true value of the interdependent communities to build projects around

a college-going framework that will work best for their community. This assures a deeper “buy-in” from the member base as they do not view the Network as imposing a program on the community but, rather, see the member as a partner in the larger mission.

Having gone through two previous cycles ofgrant funding, TCASN used its most recent grants competition to encourage the creation and expansion of promising practices across the state, including expanding dual enrollment programs, highlighting exemplary student retention programs happening at Tennessee community colleges, and linking college access to creative arts.

Numerous professional development opportunities are provided to TCASN’s membership through workshops, webinars and conferences. A minimal registration fee for the TCASN Statewide Annual Conference also acts as the organization’s membership fee.

Given that the membership is made up of schools and organizations that tend to serve low-income/firstgeneration students, membership fees are reasonable in order to be inclusive of all groups ($25-35).

TCASN staff contract with expert member organizations to provide a portion of the professional development and also provides access to national experts in an effort to share innovative work happening across the country.

Through communication and advocacy, TCASN has published white papers on college-going 12

Fall 201 3

cultures, non-academic indicators of success, and is currently developing a paper on common measures for college-going.

Additionally, TCASN has sponsored work on low-cost/no-cost statewide policy recommendations as well as policy research around dual enrollment policy recommendations. All ofthis work is shared on the Network’s website and once it is released, it is promoted through TCASN’s social media outlets.

The Network is active on Facebook and Twitter and is constantly sharing best practices as well as writing articles to highlight projects it believes are having a dramatic impact and should be expanded.

In its brief existence the Tennessee College Access and Success Network (TCASN) has grown to be a national leaderin the college access community.

What began as a six-member organization is now a 501(c)3 boasting a membership ofmore than 150 organizations made up of schools, school districts, community-based organizations, higher education institutions, businesses and philanthropy. In a recent independent study about TCASN, conducted by the University ofTennessee’s Institute for Assessment and Evaluation, the National College Access Network identifiedTCASN as one oftwo state leaders incollege access andsuccess: “Michigan and Tennessee are really

the two that we holdup as an example ofwhat can be done when we are working with other states, but interestingly MI and TN also had a strategic and serendipitous alignment offunds and leadership. ”

Race to the Top funding ends June 27, 2014. Through membership dues, sponsorships, and additional contracts leveraged to provide services, the Network now has reserves providing for sustainability through Fiscal Year 2015.

As it closes the door on its first chapter, TCASN will continue to rely on the interdependent relationships it has established in order to create a college-going culture across the state. We will rely on the actions, deeds, and the common goal of our communities to continue moving forward.

Bob Obrohta is the executive director ofthe Tennessee College Access and Success Network. He has a bachelor’s degree in political science from the University ofSt. Francis and a master’s degree in higher education administration from Teachers College, Columbia University.

Race to the Top

In 2010, Tennessee was awared a $501 million grant in the Race to the Top competition.

Race to the Top is a $4.35 billion United States Department of Education contest created to spur innovation and reforms in state and local district K-12 education. It is funded by the ED Recovery Act as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

Forty states and the District of Columbia submitted applications for the first phase of grants.

Delaware and Tennessee were selected from among 16 finalists who presented their proposals to panels of peer reviewers earlier this month.

The peer reviewers awarded the highest scores to Delaware and Tennessee. According to the U.S. Department of Education, they awarded Delaware and Tennessee high marks for the commitment to reform from key stakeholders, including elected officials, teacher's union leaders, and business leaders.

In both states, all school districts committed to implementing Race to the Top reforms.

Tennessee also has aggressive plans to improve teacher and principal evaluation, use data to inform instructional decisions, and turn around their lowest-performing schools.

You can access the application and the report submitted to the United States Department of Education for the first two years of implementation.

13

Nashville Nonprofit Review

Book Review

How Change Happens – or Doesn’t: The Politics of US Public Policy Review by Rich Rhoda

F

Tennessee Higher Education Commission

resh offthe press is Elaine C. Kamarck's book "How Change Happens — or Doesn't: The Politics ofUS Public Policy. " Richard Rhoda reviewed this book about policy change through the lens ofa nonprofit leader.

It is clear from the outset: the purpose of this book is to inform the reader about the realities of public policy in modern America.

In doing so, author Elaine Kamarck asserts that policy and politics are not separate worlds, in fact they overlap. She offers, “US-style democracy is a complex system; understanding why change happens is not at all a straightforward, linear proposition with clear lines of causality.”

The book provides a framework, a systematic way of analyzing the politics surrounding a wide variety of policy initiatives at the national level. Although written as a textbook for students of policy and change, it speaks directly to the interests of policy practitioners.

And many of the imparted lessons are relevant and helpful to the nonprofit community.

The book consists of nine succinct chapters that build from a solid base of policy analysis fundamentals for evaluating policy problems and determining viable solutions.

Successive chapters broaden the reach of analysis by drawing in profound, yet often nuanced, dynamics such as the interplay of presidential and congressional politics, the influence of public opinion and the frailties of polls, the complex intersection of bipartisanship and factions, and the varying significance of elections.

Distinctions between successful and failed attempts at transformative changes are explained by these factors.

The landscape covered by the book is colorful and captured in the titles of its chapters: Change in the Messy World of Partisan Politics, Assessing the Policy Battlefield, Evaluating Policy Problems, Not All Policy is Created Equal, The

Overrated Value of Bipartisanship, When Insiders Get it Wrong, Politics as a Fight, Elections: Do They Matter?, and Coping with the Unexpected.

Karmarck presents balanced, to-thepoint accounts of events to demonstrate her principles of how change happens – or doesn’t. For example, Harry Truman, a weak president was able to pass the landmark Marshall Plan in 1947 largely due to the plan’s ability to draw a diverse coalition around it.

Passage of the plan also is cast as a rare example of how some issues can transcend partisanship even in the middle of a highly polarized time.

LBJ’s successful passage of the Social Security Amendments of 1965, which created Medicare, is cited as an example of a determined president capitalizing on a window of opportunity that made change possible due to an alignment of time and political circumstance.

Karmarck’s account of the anatomy of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 is fascinating, and as she states: “To this day the act stands as a triumph of the public interest over powerful business and special interest groups.” Applying her analysis framework, she also traces the 14

Fall 201 3

origins and evolution of today’s most crucial policy/political issues such as universal healthcare, immigration reform, and climate change. Her depiction of the dynamics that led to the 1995 shutdown of the federal government well characterizes those of the recent 2013 shutdown.

Understanding how change happens — or doesn’t — is essential for nonprofit organizations as they are assessing the social needs they seek to address, the unjust issues they seek to resolve, or the environmental causes they seek to improve. Of particular value for these purposes are the early chapters: Assessing the Policy Battlefield, Evaluating Policy Problem, and Not All Policy is Created Equal. Without question the work of nonprofit organizations will benefit from their leadership and advocates understanding the solid fundamentals of public policy analysis established by Kamarck.

And central to the analysis is the ability to successfully assess the prospects for change.

Kamarck identifies six critical sectors in which to assess the ‘policy battlefield.’ They are: the problem, the solution, the inside players, the outside players, the strategy, tactics, and scope of conflict, and the election. Note: This framework is useful to a nonprofit organization in a generic sense, rather than a literal context.

Two of the sectors of particular relevance are the problem and the solution. Having an appreciation of the significance of these two sectors will assist an organization that is undertaking a self-study or developing a strategic plan. It also will guide a study to determine the feasibility of a new organization.

With respect to analyzing the problem which the organization exists to resolve, the organization is advised to determine: Is it a long-standing or persistent problem? Is it a brand new

Nonprofits can learn from this.

problem? Is it a problem that has made the transition from private to public issue?

Understanding the nature of the problem itself is critical to crafting an effective solution. For example, making change happen to correct long-standing problems may be possible through a ‘policy window’, which opens itself to change as a result of shifts in dynamics among competing interests. Policy windows may be limited opportunities that require immediate recognition and action based upon well-considered solutions. Healthcare reform is a case in point.

Conversely, as Kamarck notes, other problems “burst upon the public’s consciousness with such intensity that they create an inevitable demand for change.”

Such brand new policy problems may be so powerful they require urgent institutional response.

Homeland security is a prime example.

There also are policy problems waiting for transformative change that originate as personal or private issues but emerge over time as problems that have public conse

quences. Making change happen in this type of problem introduces issues of individual rights versus governmental or institutional intervention, and is assured of protracted debate. Smoking is perhaps the best example; obesity is migrating in this direction.

In terms of solutions, Kamarck states that characteristics of successful policy solutions tend to have one or more of the following: They tend to be rooted in basic, fundamental values; They tend to be simple and understandable; They tend to be devoid of extensive uncertainly about unintended consequences; and they tend to solve multiple policy problems, thus enabling the engagement of allies and supporters.

Kamarck writes with the insights and authority that come from wellgrounded policy scholarship coupled with tested in-the-line-offire political experience. She writes to inform, not impress the reader with her abundant knowledge. She brings life to the events she describes by capturing key personality traits of the major actors and providing critical analysis of the political environment. How Change Happens – or Doesn’t is an excellent text for the student of policy and political science.

Moreover, it resonates with practitioners in the public policy and political arenas. Kamarck’s principles of policy analysis and transformative change translate well to the work of nonprofit communities.

Richard Rhoda is the executive director ofthe Tennessee Higher Education Commission and board chairman ofthe Center for Nonprofit Management.

15