Case in Brief No.2 PRINCIPLESFOREFFECTIVEEDUCATIONGRANTMAKING Persistence, Partnership and Public Will: The Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Investments in Kentucky School Reform PRINCIPLESFOR EFFECTIVE EDUCATION GRANTMAKING Discipline Knowledge Resources Effective Engaged Leverage, Persistence Innovation &Focus Linkedto Grantees Partners Influence& &Constant Results Collaboration Learning “Persistence, Partnership and Public In 1999,Kentucky became the first state to Will” explores the sustained role the combine school funding equity with a clearer focus on student outcomes.Legislators Annie E. CaseyFoundation played enacted a comprehensive reform plan—the in Kentucky for more than a decade Kentucky Education Reform Act (KERA)— to help create an environment in that included a new accountability system which the state’s ambitious and focused on ensuring that all students learned key skills and knowledge,new programs to comprehensiveefforttoimprove support student learning,and significantly education for all of its students increased funding. would havethe time,resources and Despite strong support from the state’s attention needed toprove its worth. governor and business community,Kentucky’s sweeping school reform effort faced potential- The case study illustrates the ly powerful resistance.The whole structure of importance——and challenges——of local education—steeped for decades in twoofGrantmakers for Education’s patronage,misspending,nepotism and anti- eight Principles for Effective authority politics and accustomed to a class- room regime of “time on task”as opposed to Education Grantmaking: persistence “outcomes”—was bound to resist change. and engaged partners. The goals and design of Kentucky’s efforts wererevolutionary for the country in 1990, and they caught the attention of the Annie E.Casey Foundation.The foundation works to build better futures for disadvantaged> children and believes that changing public widely and aggressively,what it was systems is essential to improving public already doing:provide outside pressure welfare.Interested in expanding its grant- to maintain momentum for reform. making in education,the foundation con- These grants helped the Committee cluded it could learn a great deal from build its capacity and support the working in Kentucky. law’s implementation. The Casey Foundation recognized it was • The CEOs created a business-led commu- nications effort to raise awareness and going to take a long time to get changes support for the law’s implementation,and in every community and every school. Its Oz Nelson persuaded the foundation to approach set the tone for other foundations financially contribute to that effort supporting the work. as well.This campaign was led by the Partnership for Kentucky School Reform, The foundation’s involvement in Kentucky which was organized initially by the school reform came about in an unusual way: Prichard Committee,led by the CEOs Kent C.“Oz”Nelson,who was both CEO and financed primarily by their companies. of United Parcel Service (UPS) and chair • The foundation,with the Prichard of the Casey Foundation’s board in 1990— Committee,created an independent together with David Jones,CEO of Humana research entity,the Kentucky Institute Inc.,and John Hall,CEO of Ashland Inc.— for Educational Research,to assess the had made a substantial commitment to implementation of KERA over time and supportKentucky’seducationreformefforts. document lessons learned.The founda- Nelson invited the foundation and key tionprovided funding for the Institute, reformadvocates to workwith them. and a high-level UPS executive served The group soonagreed that private onits board. dollars could best supportKentucky school T reform by buying time for the new educa- he three parts of the strategy were tionlaw to workand mobilizing public intentionallyintertwined:“The Institute,the supportfor change in schools.Theydevel- Partnership and the Prichard Committee oped a three-pronged strategy to leverage wereparts of the same piece,”observed the assets of both the corporate donors Robert Sexton,the Prichard Committee’s and the foundation: executive director.Also essential to the • The foundation provided financial strategy,noted the Partnership’s executive support to the Prichard Committee, director,Carolyn Witt Jones,was the foun- a10-year-old nonprofit with a historyof dation’swillingness to provide consistent advocating for Kentucky school reform, funding for all three efforts over a sustained good relationships with key decision- time period.“The Casey Foundation recog- makers,and an understanding of both nized it was going to take a long time to the content and need for school reform. get changes in every community and every Essentially,the foundation funded school,”she said.“Its approach set the tone the Committee to continue to do,more for other foundations supporting our work.” T Lessons learned he foundation’s choice to invest heavily in nonprofit partners—rather than in the This case study——the full text of which is school system itself—produced one of the available at www.edfunders.org——suggests four most important lessons from the Kentucky important lessons for grantmakers seeking to school reform experience. increase their impact: Bruno Manno,who took over management •Make a long-term commitment. “It’s of the foundation’s education grants portfo- necessary to keep at it in order to see results,” lio in 1999,said that the Kentucky experi- observed the Casey Foundation’s Ralph Smith. ence reaffirmed the foundation’s long-term In Kentucky, persistence meant 11 years of approach to reform of public systems and active engagement and 14 years of funding. to creating nonprofit advocates for change: The foundation staff also paid careful “It’s a distinct foundation strategy not to attention to keeping the board of directors invest exclusively in public agencies because, informed about progress. for example,department of education •Build a broad constituency for support leaders come and go.Rather,we try to build of your solution or project.The foundation nonprofits that will endure…and keep focused itsinvestments on public awareness, everybody’s feet to the fire.” advocacy and data collection efforts—— realizing, said one foundation leader, that Although the foundation had never set “you can’t think that you can ignoreeither an end date for its investment in Kentucky politicsor policy.” Ensuring deep public school reform,the decade anniversary support is also a strategy for maintaining celebration of KERA in 2000 stimulated aproject after a granthas ended. thinking about the status and trajectory of •Engage partners and grantees in designing reformin Kentucky,whether the foundation the solution.The foundation was always was still uniquely essential to the work and clear about its mission of supporting at-risk what an appropriate exit should be.The key familiesand children and itsinterest in using questionfor foundationleaders was,“What research and data to inform policy debates. do we need to do to sustain the work?” Still, it coordinated closely with the key leadersin Kentucky who were steering the I n2001,the foundationproposed a school reform effort, and its grants evolved in response to their input about what was closing three-year commitment grant to needed. The foundation came to be seen by the Prichard Committee to help it develop its partners as part of the “inner circle” for aplan to become more self-sufficient, debating strategy and policy proposals. beginning with a business plan;the Ford Foundation joined in financing this strategy. •Remain flexible.Even while it stayed true to With respect to the Partnership for itsinitial grantmaking strategy, the foundation Kentucky Schools,the foundation worked provided additional grants in Kentucky for emerging projects on an as-needed basis. with Jones to develop a strategy for apply- This approach allowed it to meet unanticipat- ing the researchand practice lessons from ed needs as grantees’ work evolved and Kentucky—particularly the need to engage to quickly address unanticipated issues. communities in education improvement— to schools in other states.The foundation’s investments in the Kentucky Institute for quate—we weren’t going to have that kind Education Research were less successful,as of influence.But we could be influential the institute struggled to find its niche and with maintenance of attention at the eventually merged into the university sys- political,legislative and community levels.” tem,and so no “close-out”grant was made. Student achievement in Kentucky has In deciding how to get involved in a signifi- improved significantly since the early 1990s, cant and sustained way to support Kentucky and student test scores have increased faster than in many other states.The foundation’s It’s a distinct foundation strategy not to grantees are widely credited with nurturing invest exclusively in public agencies... and sustaining Kentucky’s school improve- ment strategy,despite sometimes fierce wetry to build nonprofits that will endure… opposition and shifts in the state’s political and keep everybody’sfeet to the fire. leadership—and most observers agree that the Annie E.Casey Foundation’s early school reform,Tony Cipollone—the foun- and persistent investments in Kentucky dation’s lead staff person for this work helped build the capacity of the system through the 1990s—envisioned a role for and public institutions to have a shot at the Annie E.CaseyFoundation that was success.“By engaging and supporting both limited and essential:“We believed strategic partners,the foundation’s funding that given the magnitude of funds that full and influence have had a long-standing implementationof KERA would require, impact,”said Carolyn Jones. the foundation’sresources werenot ade- Drawn from the experience and wisdom of our members, GFE’s Principles for Effective Education Grantmaking are designed to help strengthen philanthropy’s capacity to improve educational outcomes for all students. Our series of accompanying case studies is designed to help donors, leaders and program staff reflect more deeply on what the principles mean for their own grantmaking, how to integrate them into their efforts and how to improve the results of their grants in education. This Casein Briefprovides a synopsis of an in-depth case study and the lessons it suggests for education funders. We encourage you to review and consider the full text of the case study; free copies of it and others are available online at www.edfunders.orgor by calling 503.595.2100. In addition, the case studies in this series are being taught at many of GFE’s programs, and also can be taught in individualized settings by special arrangement. 720SWWashington,Suite 605, Portland, OR 97205 503.595.2100 www.edfunders.org