Social Innovation Fund

Social Innovation Fund
Name	Social Innovation Fund
Formation	2009
Headquarters	Washington, D.C.
Parent organization	Corporation for National and Community Service
Purpose	Grantmaking for evidence-based nonprofit organizations

Social Innovation Fund

The Social Innovation Fund was a federal competitive grant program created to scale evidence-based nonprofit organizations addressing community needs across the United States. It operated through partnerships with philanthropic intermediaries, blending federal resources with private capital to support interventions in areas such as youth development, health, housing, and workforce programs. The initiative tied funding to rigorous evaluation practices and aimed to replicate models backed by randomized trials and quasi-experimental designs.

Overview

The program sought to amplify proven models by awarding funds to designated intermediaries who then invested in local organizations and evaluation efforts. Modeled to complement initiatives like AmeriCorps, Promise Neighborhoods Program, Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, and Administration for Children and Families, it emphasized measurable outcomes and scaling strategies. Its approach aligned with evidence standards promoted by entities such as the Pew Charitable Trusts, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and Laura and John Arnold Foundation.

History and Establishment

The concept emerged during the administration of Barack Obama and was implemented within the Corporation for National and Community Service following legislation and executive priorities promoting innovation in social policy. Announced alongside other domestic initiatives influenced by advisors with ties to the White House Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation and academics from institutions like Harvard Kennedy School, Brookings Institution, and Center for American Progress, the Fund launched its first competitions in 2009. Early grantees included intermediaries with histories partnering with United Way Worldwide, YMCA of the USA, Local Initiatives Support Corporation, and Conservation International affiliates.

Funding and Grantmaking Model

Awards were made through a competitive process that required grantees to leverage private funds from foundations such as the Ford Foundation, Carnegie Corporation of New York, Open Society Foundations, and corporate philanthropic arms like Google.org and Cisco Foundation. Grant structures included pay-for-success considerations similar to social impact bond pilots led in collaboration with state and municipal governments, including projects in New York City, Chicago, and San Francisco. The Fund prioritized matching arrangements and performance metrics aligned with evaluation standards used by Institute of Education Sciences and What Works Clearinghouse.

Programs and Initiatives

Grantees supported cohorts of organizations implementing models in areas associated with KIPP Foundation-style charter supports, Big Brothers Big Sisters of America mentoring models, and employment programs resembling Year Up. Initiatives also included housing stability pilots connected to National Low Income Housing Coalition partners, early childhood interventions with links to Zero to Three, and reentry programs informed by research from Vera Institute of Justice. Several projects coordinated with state agencies like the California Department of Social Services and local funders such as the Boston Foundation.

Governance and Partnerships

Administered through the Corporation for National and Community Service, program governance involved collaborations with philanthropic intermediaries including Social Finance US, New Profit, and The Aspen Institute. Technical assistance was provided by research organizations such as Mathematica Policy Research, Abt Associates, RAND Corporation, and universities including University of Chicago and New York University. Partnerships frequently connected with municipal governments, state human services departments, and national networks like Independent Sector and National Council of Nonprofits.

Impact and Evaluation

The Fund emphasized randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental evaluations with measurement frameworks comparable to those used by the Institute of Medicine and National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Evaluations conducted by MDRC, Social Policy Research Associates, and Princeton University affiliates reported mixed evidence: some programs achieved statistically significant gains in employment, education, and housing stability, while others produced null results. Findings informed subsequent efforts in evidence-based policymaking promoted by Congressional Budget Office analyses and policy briefs from Urban Institute and Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Criticisms and Controversies

Critiques centered on the emphasis on scaling models with narrow evidence, potential crowding out of smaller providers, and administrative burdens associated with compliance and evaluation reported by advocates including National Council of Nonprofits and scholars at Georgetown University. Some commentators compared the approach to private-sector scaling strategies endorsed by McKinsey & Company and questioned metrics borrowed from impact finance practices championed by Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase. Debates also focused on sustainability after federal awards ended and equity concerns raised by civil rights groups such as NAACP and National Urban League.

Category:United States federal government programs