Community Indicators and the Collective Goods Criterion for Impact

  • Frank RidziEmail author
Part of the Community Quality-of-Life and Well-Being book series (CQLWB)


Common wisdom holds that communities can accomplish more when people find ways to work together. However, such nuanced sensibilities can be difficult to measure. This is true in the field of community indicators as well as its allied fields of social movements, collective impact, catalytic philanthropy and community coalitions. Due to the elusiveness of evaluation techniques some in the social movements field have argued for a definition of success based on the collective goods criterion (CGC). In this chapter we explore the case of Syracuse, New York on the occasion of its achievement of seven years of positive change in its key community indicator of the four year graduation rate. Though it would be difficult to claim that Syracuse’s community indicators project, CNY.vitals, caused this change, we explore how a CGC approach can be used to examine how the measurement mentality that accompanied the community indicators project is associated with collective benefits that have accrued to members of the community in terms of cultural capital, philanthropic investment and governmental policy change.


Syracuse CNY vitals Collective goods Literacy rate Catalytic philanthropy Collective impact Philanthropy 


  1. Aldrich, L., Silva, D., Marable, D., Sandman, E., & Abraham, M. (2009). Using community-based participatory evaluation methods as a tool to sustain a community health coalition. Foundation Review, 1(1), 146–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amenta, E., & Young, M. P. (1999). Making an impact: Conceptual and methodological implications of the collective goods criterion. In M. Giugni, D. McAdam, & C. Tilly (Eds.), How social movements matter. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  3. Baker, C. (2016). Refugees in Syracuse: Benefit or burden? Here’s what the numbers say. The Post Standard. Updated March 14, 2016 at 10:42 AM
  4. Butterfoss, Frances Dunn. (2007). Coalitions and Partnerships in Community Health. San Francisco:  Jossey−Bass.Google Scholar
  5. Carlson, N. E., Hernández, E., Edmond-Verley, C., Rotondaro, G., Feliz-Santana, E., & Heynig, S. (2011). Developing a master data sharing agreement: Seeking student-level evidence to support a collaborative community effort in education. The Foundation Review, 3(4), Article 3. doi:
  6. Catlin, B. (2014). The county health rankings: “A Treasure Trove of Data” transforming data into policy-relevant information. In Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco and Urban Institute (Ed.), What counts: Harnessing data for america’s communities (pp. 59–73). Available online
  7. CNYcentral. (2016). Mahoney announces $20 million for Syracuse Say Yes, preserving free tuition program. Tuesday, March 1, 2016. Accessed online Marh 23, 2016.
  8. FOCUS. (2016a). About F.O.C.U.S. Accessed online March 17, 2016.
  9. FOCUS. (2016b). The 87 GOALS-from the people as presented at the FOCUS Greater Syracuse Vision Fair. Accessed online March 18, 2016.
  10. Gamson, W. (1975 and reprinted 1990). Strategy of social protest. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  11. Hatry, H., & Morley, E. (2008). Guide to performance management for community literacy coalitions. Urban Institute and National Institute for Literacy. Accessed online March 23, 2016.
  12. Henig, J. R., Riehl, C. J., Houston, D. M., Rebell, M. A., & Wolff, J. R. (2016). Collective impact and the new generation of cross-sector collaborations for education: A nationwide scan. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University, Department of Education Policy and Social Analysis.
  13. Holden, M., & Phillips, R. (2010). Best research from the Community Indicators Consortium 2009: Introduction to the special issue. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 5(4), 261–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jargowsky, P. (2015). Architecture of segregation: Civil unrest, the concentration of poverty, and public policy. The century foundation issue brief August 7, 2015.
  15. Kania, J., & Kramer, M. (2011, Winter). Collective impact. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 36–41.Google Scholar
  16. Kania, J., Hanleybrown, F., & Splansky Juster, J. (2014). Essential mindset shifts for collective impact. Collective Impact Forum Blog. Posted Tuesday, September 2, 2014 At 3:14 PM. Accessed online March 23, 2016.
  17. Kramer, M. R. (2009, Fall). Catalytic philanthropy. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 29–35.Google Scholar
  18. Levitt, S., & Dubner, S. J. (2005). Freakonomics: A rogue economist explores the hidden side of everything. New York: William Morrow/HarperCollins. ISBN 0-06-073132-X.Google Scholar
  19. Reese, E. (2011). They say cutback, we say fight back!: Welfare activism in an era of retrenchment. Russell Sage Foundation, p. 17.Google Scholar
  20. Results Scorecard. (2016). “Case Studies.” Accessed online March 23, 2016.
  21. Ridzi, F. (2012). Managing expectations when measuring philanthropic impact: A framework based on experience. The Foundation Review, 4(4), Article 8. doi:
  22. Ridzi, F., Carmody, V., & Byrnes, K. (2011, Spring). From rRead ahead to literacy coalition: The leadership role of the Central New York Community Foundation in the creation of a local institution. Community Literacy Journal, 5(2), 101–134.Google Scholar
  23. Semuels, A. (2015). The resurrection of America’s slums. The Atlantic. Accessed August 9, 2015.
  24. Sirgy, J., Phillips, R., & Rahtz, D. (Eds.). (2013). Community quality-of-life indicators: Best cases VI. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  25. Smith, D. E. (1999). Writing the social: Critique, theory and investigations. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  26. Syracuse 20/20. (2016). Toward A Competitive City Agenda, Mayoral Election 2005. Accessed online March 18, 2016.
  27. Wood, D. M. (2012). Facilitating change with community indicator programs. Unpublished dissertation, Accessed online March 17, 2016.
  28. Wood, D. M. (2016). Community indicators and collective impact: Facilitating change. Community Development. Published Online 01 Feb 2016. doi: 10.1080/15575330.2015.1133685
  29. Zimmerman, G. (2012). Using Community-Level Data To Drive Efforts For Collective Impact. Online Accessed March 17, 2016.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Central New York Community Foundation and Le Moyne CollegeSyracuseUSA

Personalised recommendations