  |
The structure and style of the TPPI benefited from close collaboration with other program staff members of the Foundation, who were generous in sharing what they had learned and in providing ongoing informal peer consultation. That kind of internal culture of learning and mutual support is an invaluable asset in any kind of grantmaking, but it is particularly critical for a complex initiative like the TPPI.
Primary responsibility for design, management and monitoring of the Initiative was delegated to a four-person team consisting of a senior program officer, program officer and their two program assistants. However, from the beginning, they reached out to other funders who had been working in the area of teen pregnancy prevention, as well as those involved in the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, in order to connect the work and learning of the TPPI with larger developments in the field. They also consulted regularly with a variety of national and local experts.
That openness to learning from the experience of peers and from others outside the Foundation set the tone for a relatively “ego-free zone” that facilitated the kinds of productive cross-institutional conversations and collaborations that characterized the TPPI throughout its lifespan. That elusive synergy is always an intention of large-scale initiatives, but seems to be more a matter of good chemistry than precise engineering. The Foundation staff has an important role to play in modeling effective collaborative practice and providing access to resources, including expert advisors. A significant, but often unappreciated part of that role is to create the space and allow the time for relationships to develop. It’s a process that can’t be rushed, no matter how much we might like it to conform to a carefully constructed project timeline.
The evaluation team also played an essential role in building a culture of learning within the Initiative. First of all, three different evaluation groups partnered together on this project: Philliber Research Associates; University of California, San Francisco; and SRI International. Each contributed complementary skills and experience, and all were considered valued learning partners by the Foundation staff and the other participants in the Initiative. From the beginning, their approach was to help build the capacity of all those who were part of the TPPI to participate directly in the assessment of their own work. While there were some inevitable bumps in the road, the ongoing, informal input and regular formal reports of the evaluation team were seen by all as helpful assets in helping the TPPI realize its potential. |
|