Coaching has become an increasingly popular method of intervention and has proven effective in a variety of settings. Economic Mobility Pathways (“EMPath”), for example, has codified a mentorship model that uses holistic goal-setting and individualized coaching to support people’s journeys out of the cycle of poverty. I first encountered the EMPath model during Third Sector’s work with the Department of Transitional Assistance on the Young Parents Program. There, we used EMPath’s Bridge to Self-Sufficiency (the “Bridge”) as a way to define and measure progress in a more nuanced way than
“Hi Siri – what’s the weather today?”
“Okay Google, is there life on Mars?”
“Alexa, add toothpaste to my cart.”
It is hard to argue that data and technology have not fundamentally changed our day-to-day lives, in many ways for the better. Therefore, the growing application of data in the social sector has created general excitement across various stakeholders – government officials, service providers, and philanthropic partners. From assessing policy decisions to determining resource allocations, the use of data and evaluation is slowly becoming the norm rather than the exception.
This post originally appeared on Nonprofit Finance Fund’s Blog and is co-authored by Deirdre Flynn, Associate Director, Pay for Success Program.
The Pay for Success (PFS) field has gone through astonishing changes in the years since the first contracts launched in the US. Those early projects (Rikers Island, Massachusetts Juvenile Justice, New York CEO, Cuyahoga) all only wavered from the original concept in minor ways. In brief, those projects all had payment based on a Randomized Control Trial (RCT) evaluation with the vast majority of success payments linked to the formal population-level