Anchor Mission Playbook | Rush University Medical Center

Anchor Mission

Playbook

prepared by

Rush University Medical Center

with support from

Chicago Anchors for a Strong Economy (CASE),

the Civic Consulting Alliance,

and The Democracy Collaborative

Healthcare Anchor Network

Health systems collaborating to improve community well-being

by building inclusive and sustainable local economies.

Anchor Mission

Playbook

prepared by

Rush University Medical Center

with support from

Chicago Anchors for a Strong Economy (CASE),

the Civic Consulting Alliance,

and The Democracy Collaborative

Anchor institutions can play a key role in helping the low-income commu-

nities they serve by better aligning their institutional resources—like hir-

ing, purchasing, investment, and volunteer base—with the needs of those

of communities. The recommendations in this “playbook,” drawn from re-

search carried out to help Rush University Medical Center (RUMC) align

around its Anchor Mission, are being published to help other hospitals and

health systems accelerate their own efforts to drive institutional alignment

with community needs.

We hope this playbook contributes to the anchor institution literature as

this important ﬁeld develops and deepens. We encourage other institutions

to also document and tell their stories in a transparent manner—both oppor-

tunities and barriers, success and failures—because that is the only way we

will succeed in closing the economic, racial, and health disparity gaps that

prevent us from achieving healthy communities physically, mentally, and

spiritually. Together, we can all learn and accelerate the implementation of

these critical and needed strategies in our communities.

Suggested Citation:

Ubhayakar S, Capeless M, Owens R, Snorrason K, Zuckerman D. Anchor Mission Playbook [Report]. Chicago, IL and

Washington, DC: Rush University Medical Center and The Democracy Collaborative; August 2017.

Table of contents

Executive Summary: 1

Preface: Ted Howard, The Democracy Collaborative 4

I: Overview 6

Anchor Institutions 6

Anchor Mission Vision 8

Anchor Mission Partners 10

II: Readiness Review 12

Resource Capacity 12

Organizational Structure 12

Accountability Structure 16

Compliance Review 17

III: Developing an Anchor Mission 18

Anchor Mission Framework 18

Anchor Mission Initiatives 20

IV: Human Resource Initiatives 23

Understand Hiring and Career Development Initiatives 23

Dene Target Community 25

Dene and Track Metrics 27

V: Procurement and Supply Chain Initiatives 28

Understand Current Initiatives 29

Identify Addressable Spend 30

Plans for RFP Process 30

Dene and Track Metrics 32

VI: Capital Projects 33

Understand Current Local Construction Initiatives 33

Plans for RFP Process 35

Dene and Track Metrics 36

VII: Treasury/Finance Initiatives 38

Understand Current Impact Investing Initiatives 38

Investment Criteria 39

Target Beneciaries 40

Dene and Track Metrics 40

VIII: Volunteerism 42

Understand Current Community Engagement Initiative 43

Dene and Track Metrics 45

Conclusion 46

Contacts 47

Appendices 48

1. Sample RACI Matrix for Anchor Mission 48

2. Case Study: Rush Medical University Center’s Anchor Mission 49

2a. RUMC’s Anchor Mission Framework 49

2b. RUMC’s Anchor Mission High-Priority Initiatives 50

2c. RUMC’s Anchor Mission Human Resource Initiatives 51

2d. RUMC’s Anchor Mission Supply Chain Initiatives 52

2e. RUMC’s Anchor Mission Capital Projects Initiatives 52

2f. RUMC’s Anchor Mission Treasury/Finance Initiatives 53

2g. RUMC’s Anchor Mission Community Engagement

Initiatives 54

3. The Democracy Collaborative’s Hospitals Aligned for Healthy

Communities toolkit series 54

Endnotes 55

About The Democracy Collaborative 56

About The Healthcare Anchor Network 56

Preface

Ted Howard, President and CEO, The Democracy

Collaborative

For an institution like Rush University Medical Center, the economic deter-

minants of health are not an abstract matter—the deeply entrenched pov-

erty in the communities of color on Chicago’s West Side shows up in their

emergency room on a constant, daily basis, as the health of their neighbor-

ing communities pays the price for decades of disinvestment and chronic

unemployment. In this, Rush is not unique—many of our world-class med-

ical institutions ﬁnd themselves confronted with similar economic dispari-

ties in the urban communities they are a part of, sometimes even just blocks

away from their front doors.

But, along with a growing number of forward-thinking healthcare anchor

institutions, Rush University Medical Center is unique in that it has recast

its mission as an institution to tackle these challenges head on. Taking up

this “Anchor Mission” means moving

beyond simply treating the symptom-

atic results of place-based racial and

economic inequity and towards a re-

alignment of all institutional resourc-

es to ﬁght these inequities at the root

by building community wealth. For

institutions like Rush, the persistence

of drastic gaps in life expectancy be-

tween richer and poorer neighborhoods isn’t just a moral crisis—it’s a cri-

sis for the institution itself as it delivers on its mission. Creating a culture

of health across all of its operations is not just the right thing to do, it’s a

smart way to get ahead of the cost curve of providing effective care, by

helping create and sustain healthier communities.

Even among the core group of institutions that have started to lead on these

issues, convening in spaces like our own Healthcare Anchor Network, Rush

stands out as exemplary. In our Hospitals Aligned For Healthy Communities

toolkit series, we identiﬁed three core operational areas in which a shift to-

wards community wealth building could make a signiﬁcant difference for

Creating a culture of health

across all of its operations is not

just the right thing to do, it’s a

smart way to get ahead of the

cost curve of providing effective

care, by helping create and

sustain healthier communities.

community health outcomes—hiring, purchasing, and investment. Rush is,

to our knowledge, the ﬁrst institution to incorporate work across all three

areas as core parts of an institutional strategy around the Anchor Mission.

Moreover, Rush has taken the additional and extremely valuable step of doc-

umenting how and why they are making these shifts operational within their

institution, as a resource for other hospitals

and health systems looking to do the same.

When hospitals and health systems nation-

wide collectively spend more than $782 bil-

lion annually, employ more than 5.6 million

people, and hold investment portfolios of

$400 billion, the potential gamechanging

impact on the health and wellbeing of Amer-

ica’s communities should even a fraction of

these institutional resources be redirected

towards building more inclusive local econ-

omies cannot be overstated. Such a shift will

only be truly possible if more institutions are, like Rush, willing to help their

peers by sharing what works, in detail, and with an eye towards collaborative

learning for greater impact.

The account that Rush has provided here to this important end—drawing on

their work and the help provided by Chicago Anchors for a Strong Econo-

my (CASE), the Civic Consulting Alliance, and The Democracy Collaborative

(TDC)—demonstrates how, with a commitment from institutional leader-

ship and the appropriate resources for staff time in key positions across the

organization, signiﬁcant progress towards the Anchor Mission can be made

in a relatively short period of time. We are excited here at TDC to have been

able to help Rush take such auspicious ﬁrst steps towards fully adopting

their Anchor Mission, and honored that lead author Shweta Ubhayakar and

the rest of the Anchor Mission team at Rush have made it possible to share

their invaluable “playbook” with a national audience of healthcare anchors

as part of our Community Wealth Innovators Series.

When hospitals and health

systems nationwide together

spend more than $782 billion

annually, employ more than

5.6 million people, and hold

investment portfolios of

$400 billion, the potential

gamechanging impact on

the health and wellbeing of

America’s communities cannot

be overstated.

I. Overview

Anchor Institutions

Anchor institutions are nonproﬁt or public place-based entities such as

universities and hospitals that are rooted in their local community by mis-

sion, invested capital, or relationships to customers, employees, residents,

and vendors.

Anchor institutions therefore have an ability to engage in

long-term planning in a manner that aligns their institutional interests

with those of their local communities. Thus they have both ability and

motivation to improve the long-term well-being of their communities by

leveraging their institutional resources.

In recent years, many anchor institutions have shifted their strategies to

both advance their nonproﬁt missions and to reduce health and wealth

disparities in their surrounding communities. These institutions have

developed an “Anchor Mission” approach: a

commitment to apply their economic power

in partnership with community to mutually

beneﬁt the long-term well-being of both.

For

instance, anchor institutions can use their posi-

tion as major employers and purchasers to im-

prove economic opportunity and well-being in

low-income and underserved communities.

Hospitals and universities have adopted Anchor Mission strategies that ad-

dress a wide range of community needs and interests, as shown on the chart

on the next page.

Many of these strategies for local hiring, procurement, investing, and land

use can advance the goals of racial and economic equity. By shifting these

powerful economic drivers to more directly serve the needs of low-income

communities, anchor institutions can help to increase wealth building op-

portunities for families in the communities they serve. Given the connec-

tions between economic and physical health, this is a powerful way for

healthcare anchors in particular to realize their missions. Investing in local

businesses owned by local people will increase a neighborhood’s multiplier

In recent years, many anchor

institutions have shifted their

strategies to both advance

their nonproﬁt missions

and to reduce health and

wealth disparities in their

surrounding communities.

effect, which will spur more secondary investments into communities, pro-

viding revitalization without displacement.

This Playbook, adapted from research and analysis by Bain & Company and

The Democracy Collaborative, provides guidance for institutions that wish

to develop their Anchor Mission strategy. Bain developed its research and

analysis on behalf of RUMC on Chicago’s West Side, drawing heavily from

a body research by The Democracy Collaborative on the leading promis-

ing practices in the ﬁeld. We offer our lessons learned to help other health

system institutions in and around Chicago, and across the country, as they

develop their own Anchor Missions.

Inclusive, local

hiring

Inclusive, local

sourcing

Inclusive, local

construction

Place-based

community

and impact

investing

Support for

aordable

housing

Create pipelines

from outside the

institution into it

and then upward

internally for

local and diverse

residents

Meet procurement

needs via inclusive,

local businesses.

Partner with

inclusive, local

vendors and hire

diverse, local

residents on capital

projects.

Leverage cash-on-

hand and long-term

investments to

invest in inclusive

and sustainable

community projects.

Utilize grants or

impact investments

to support the

development of

aordable housing.

University

Hospitals

√ √ √

Johns

Hopkins

√ √ √

Henry Ford

√ √ √

Bon Secours √ √ √

Dignity

Health

√ √

UChicago √ √

Drexel

University

√ √

√

RUMC √ √

√

Hospitals and universities adopting Anchor Mission strategies

Anchor Mission Vision

Critical to the success of an institution’s Anchor Mission (AM) strategies and

initiatives is grounding the work in—and keeping it connected to—a core vi-

sion. This vision statement should encompass both an imperative for action

and a statement of goals.

The imperative for action that helps inform the vision often stems from a

legacy of disinvestment within the highest need communities the institu-

tion serves. The vision statement therefore helps demonstrate an institu-

tion’s commitment to be a partner in helping address community needs, and

to also leverage and grow community assets. In developing its vision state-

ment, an institution should invest time in understanding the surrounding

community, including both the challenges residents face and the commu-

nity’s assets. The problem statement may be related to inequalities in areas

such as employment, health, housing occupancy, income and wealth, asset

ownership, or education levels across racial, ethnic, and social groups. Pri-

vate nonproﬁt healthcare institutions have a unique opportunity to lever-

age their legally mandated Community Health Needs Assessments (CHNAs)

for their community diagnostics to align with this approach.

In the summer of 2016, RUMC changed its corporate mission from “be the

best in patient care” to “improve health.” Rush’s board adopted this broader

mission in recognition of the ongoing health crises in the neighborhoods

around the health system’s main campus on the West Side of Chicago. Many

of these neighborhoods suffer from high unemployment, job scarcity, pover-

ty, poor public education, environmental despoliation, and disproportionate

levels of crime and violence—factors collectively known as negative social de-

terminants of health. The overall effect of this neighborhood disadvantage is

evident in the most basic metric of public health, life expectancy.

For instance, while the average resident of the Loop will live to 85, a resident

in neighboring West Garﬁeld Park has a life expectancy of only 69 years.

Many other measures of community well-being, from housing to crime to

education attainment, show a similar disparity, even when the communities

are just ﬁve miles apart.

Life Expectancy (Years) at Birth by Neighborhood on

Chicago’s West Side

Rogers

Park

LOOP:

East

Garﬁeld

Park:

West

Garﬁeld

Park:

Oak Park

(outside

Chicago)

North

Lawndale:

South

Lawndale:

Data: 2010 Life Expectancy Estimates By Community Area, Illinois Department of Public Health

Median Household Income on Chicago’s West Side

[$5,000 to $28,359)

[$28,359 to $38,510)

[$38,510 to $47,135)

[$47,135 to $56,507)

[$56,507 to $68,483)

[$68,483 to $86,906)

[$86,906 to $227,708]

Data from 2015 ACS 5-Year estimates

As an institution, Rush made being a catalyst and anchor for communi-

ty health and economic wellness a strategic priority. Its Anchor Mission

strategies help address four critical health needs identiﬁed in the West

Side community:

• Improve social, economic, and structural determinants of

health

• Improve access to care and community resources

• Improve mental and behavioral health

• Prevent and reduce chronic disease

In creating strategies to achieve its “improve health” mission, Rush ﬁrst looked

internally to re-orient portions of its existing business operations to beneﬁt

communities on the West Side. Rush created an Anchor Mission Work Group

and created a framework and strategy based on four “Theory of Change” le-

vers: hire and develop more West Side talent, purchase more goods and ser-

vices from West Side vendors, invest portions of its endowment into West

Side projects, and engage its employees in volunteering in West Side neigh-

borhoods. With the help of Bain & Company, Rush identiﬁed leaders inside of

all relevant business units, set goals and metrics, and developed a clear path

forward to continue to make progress on those initiatives.

A central part of the visioning process is setting expectations for the ﬁ-

nancial impact of the Anchor Mission work. The institution may aim for

a revenue neutral approach with all initiatives or frame Anchor Mission

activity in terms of acceptable loss. The scale of “acceptable loss” can be fur-

ther qualiﬁed by calculating a “social return on investment (ROI)” in each

initiative area. Social ROI calculations will be most objective in investing and

purchasing initiatives, where impact into the target community can be mea-

sured directly in ﬁnancial terms. The social ROI in hiring and volunteering

initiatives can be estimated by considering the impact on employment and

community vitality.

Anchor Mission Partners

The institution can leverage existing community-based organizations, col-

laboratives, and thought leaders to develop their anchor mission.

Anchor partners help provide guidance, resources, and expertise to support

the Anchor Mission. Partnerships also allow for collaboration and greater

collective impact. Anchor Missions across multiple health systems can mag-

nify the impact of Anchor Missions and help improve health and wellness

in speciﬁed communities and neighborhoods. For example, collaborating

anchors can leverage their combined purchasing power to help local ven-

dors through joint commitments to long-term contracts, which provides

the incentive and security necessary for these local businesses to expand.

Cleveland’s Greater University Circle Initiative and the planned West Side

Anchor Committee in Chicago are two examples of efforts to scale up impact

of Anchor Mission work.

Community based

organizations

Collaboratives National thought leaders

Who

Organizations, typically not-

for-prots, that are focused on

one or two main community

impact areas in a given

geography

Groups of institutions and/or

organizations united around a

common goal

Collaboratives are typically

created to leverage scale and

share resources

Institutions or organizations

focused on the community

wealth and/or anchor institution

concept

Typically will conduct and

publish research, convene

organizations via on-going

national networks and

convenings, and provide one-

on-one advisory services

Role

Partner with anchor

institution on a given initiative

or set of initiatives

CBO helps anchor source

supplies, labor, etc. and anchor

helps CBO further their impact

and mission

When rst starting, institution

can leverage best practices

coming out of other

collaboratives

This can serve as a model to

develop own collaboratives later

Prime resource when getting

an anchor institution o the

ground to learn about example

initiatives, how other

institutions have created

success, contacts to talk to about

the mission, etc.

Examples

√

Anchor Mission Partners

II. Readiness Review

Before an institution can begin implementing its Anchor Mission strat-

egy, it should build an infrastructure to ensure long-term success of the

Anchor Mission. This section outlines logistical pre-work an institution

should take on before implementing its Anchor Mission. This work may

be done concurrently with the visioning pre-work outlined in Section III:

Internal Anchor Mission. During the Readiness Review, an institution

will evaluate if it has the 1) resource capacity, 2) organizational structure,

and 3) accountability structure to develop and execute an Anchor Mission

strategy effectively.

Resource Capacity

Catalyzing and institutionalizing an Anchor Mission approach will re-

quire an institution to dedicate people, time, and resources. While not

every institution may be able to commit these resources from the onset,

the following should be seen as goals for systematizing and sustaining

this approach:

• At least 0.75 – 1.0 FTE of project manager’s time and at least 0.5

FTE data analyst dedicated to anchor mission efforts

• Staff in the relevant departments or business units dedicated to

Anchor Mission Initiatives as part of their existing job

• 1.0 FTE Career Development Manager and 1.0 FTE Recruiter/

Community Liaison Talent Acquisition Consultant dedicated to

HR anchor initiatives

• Financial readiness assessment and preliminary budget

• Institutional databases from HR, Supply Chain/Procurement

and other business units

• A dashboard for tracking and reporting progress

• Buy-in from leadership team to build and execute plans

Organizational Structure

To launch an Anchor Mission program, it is recommended that an insti-

tution incorporate ongoing Anchor Mission support into its organizational

structure. Based on our experience, the team of individuals involved in the

Anchor Mission, referred to in this playbook as the Anchor Mission Work-

ing Group, and should include an Executive Leadership Team, a Core Team

responsible for project management and strategic direction, and business

unit/department leads.

Anchor Mission Senior Leadership Team:

Executive leaders in the organization with authority to direct high-level

operations, budgetary, and HR decisions should have strategic oversight of

Human Resources

Career

Development

Manager

Recruiter

AVP, Employee and

Organizational

Development

SVP, HR

Oce of Community

Engagement

Manager, Community

Health Equity

AVP, Community

Health Equity

Volunteer Program

Manager

Business Diversity

Strategic Sourcing

Manager

Director, Supply Chain

Treasury

AVP, Treasury

VP, Treasury

Anchor Mission Core Team

Data Analyst

Anchor Mission

Manager

Capital Projects

VP, Capital Projects

Anchor Mission Specifc Roles

Executive Leaders responsible for strategic direction

CEO COO

SVP, Community

Health Equity

SVP, HR

VP, Strategic

Planning and

Communications

CFO

Sample Structure for an Anchor Mission Working Group

Anchor Mission activities. This group might address Anchor Mission work

in the context of previously scheduled meetings or in separately constituted

Anchor Mission meetings.

The role of senior leadership includes:

• Serving as overall leaders of the Anchor Mission

• Supporting vision development and communicating to key

stakeholders

• Developing strategy and approving measures and initiatives

• Acting as ambassadors of the mission with CBOs, business

partners, etc.

• Holding the organization accountable for execution

Senior leadership should designate a key leader to drive the engagement

and act as the spokesperson for Anchor Mission strategy. The ideal key lead-

er will have the following characteristics:

• Ability to dedicate 5–10% of his/her time to the cause

to mobilize mission, attend and lead meetings, update

organization leadership, etc.

• Established relationships with senior leadership and credibility

as a decision maker for the organization

• Relevant background experience in community health,

community engagement, community economic development,

and/or with other community-based organizations working to

solve similar issues

Core Team:

The Core Team should include individuals directly involved in the Anchor

Mission who oversee components of the initiative in its planning and imple-

mentation stages. Not all members of this team would need to be new hires.

In fact, it would be valuable to have more of them be existing employees

already familiar with the organization. The Core Team would work directly

with business units to track progress on Anchor Mission initiatives.

The role of the Core Team includes:

• Implementing strategies and corresponding programs

• Tracking results and providing reports to the Anchor Mission

Board

The Core Team should have a project manager to oversee the different busi-

ness unit leads and to report to the leadership team regarding progress and

milestones for the Anchor Mission strategy. The project manager will be in

charge of coordinating existing efforts, driving new initiatives, and keeping

the wheels turning. The ideal project manager will have the following char-

acteristics:

• Ability to dedicate 75-100% of his/her time to the Anchor

Mission

• Ability and opportunity to develop relationships with

leadership and business unit leads

• Relevant background experience in community health,

community engagement, community economic development,

and/or with other community-based organization working to

solve similar issues

Business Unit Leads:

Business unit leads would be responsible for overseeing and executing an-

chor mission initiatives within the business units identiﬁed as key to the

AM strategy. See Section III: Anchor Mission – AM Initiatives for how to

identify Anchor Mission business units. The role of business unit leads in-

cludes:

• Ability to dedicate 10–15% of his/her time to the AM activities

• Driving design and mobilization of AM initiatives

• Engaging relevant stakeholders to support and approve

initiatives

• Designing metrics, setting timelines, and conducting resource

planning

• Monitoring and reporting progress of initiatives

Accountability Structure

Anchor Mission leaders should clearly deﬁne decision-making processes

and accountability for key roles. To help speed decision-making and estab-

lish clear points of accountability, the institution should create a process for

deﬁning roles and expectations. Institutions may also consider linking per-

formance evaluations to Anchor Mission activities. This practice strength-

ens incentives for employees and would clarify the commitment level of the

institution’s senior leadership.

Institutions can create a RACI (Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and In-

formed) matrix to specify what, by whom, and how to accomplish essential

tasks. RACI matrices help clarify ownership of initiatives, decision rights,

and the role of key leaders and stakeholders. See Appendix 1 for a template

for an Anchor Mission RACI matrix.

Denition Principles for Allocating

Responsible

• Responsible for executing – “doing the

work”

• Participates in the decision-making

• Is also consulted and contributes to the

decision - “R” implies “C”

• Only the smallest eective number of

people should be responsible

• Others may be kept informed but do not

have a formal right to provide input

• “R”s always are “I”s and implied “C”s

Accountable

• Accountable for outcomes of the decision

– “the buck stops here”

• Ensures the decision is made using the

appropriate decision-making process

with the participation by the designated

stakeholders (“R”s)

• Gains alignment during the decision-

making process

• Only one role is accountable for decision-

making; however, the decision-making

process should be collaborative

• The individual who is accountable for a

nal outcome should nalize the decision

only after collaboration with the right

stakeholders, and make decisions in the

best interest of the system

• “A”s can also be “R”

Consulted

• Consulted by the “Responsible”

stakeholders to provide input to the

process

• Being consulted indicates that the

individuals are not directly involved in

the decision-making activity

Informed

• Informed about the decision after the

decision has been made

• Not involved in decision-making

• People should be informed if they

are required to participate in the

implementation of the decision or require

the information to do their work

The institution should also develop a reporting structure for program staff

to ensure the effectiveness and sustainability of the Anchor Mission. The

institution should create a tracking and reporting cadence, which would

describe the process for communicating progress for the Anchor Mission

on an ongoing basis.

The institution should meet often to discuss Anchor Mission updates. Below

is a proposed meeting cadence for the Anchor Mission Workgroup:

Meeting Type Cadence Objectives

Initiative check-in Weekly

• Business Unit leaders provide project manager

with detailed update on actions and progress

made over past month

• Ensure initiative is on track to achieving Y1

targets

Communications

– Anchor Mission

update

Monthly

• Communications leads and other Business Unit

leads discuss latest Anchor Mission progress

to develop content for internal and external

communications

• Flag any changes in initiative roll-outs to

ensure proper communication timeline

Full Anchor Mission

working team update

Monthly

• All initiative leads provide read outs of

progress on their respective initiatives

Update to Executive

Leaders

As needed

• Key leader engages Executive Leadership as

needed to make decisions around Anchor

Mission execution

Anchor Mission Core

Team meeting

Biweekly

• The Core Team ensures alignment across

ongoing initiatives and makes operational

decisions

Compliance Review

Public institutions will need to seek input from their legal departments at

the outset of Anchor Mission planning to ensure compliance with all rel-

evant legal restrictions and consent decrees. Public institutions may face

signiﬁcant legal restrictions in the areas of both hiring and purchasing. Le-

gal restrictions are likely to affect both the feasibility of speciﬁc initiatives

and their timeline to implementation. Public institutions may ﬁnd that close

consultation with their legal departments is a necessity throughout the

planning and implementation of Anchor Mission work.

III: Developing an Anchor Mission

In addition to the Readiness Review, the institution should align on prin-

ciples and methods of the Anchor Mission. The timing of the processes

outlined in this section may overlap with the Readiness Review outlined

in Section II. The Anchor Mission should be clearly deﬁned so that all stake-

holders can understand its purpose and importance. To maximize impact

on the overall institution and surrounding neighborhoods, there should

be an institution-wide understanding of the Anchor Mission. If everyone

in the institution clearly understands the Anchor Mission, the mission be-

comes part of the institution’s culture and can then be supported and upheld

throughout all levels of the institution. The framework serves as a commu-

nication tool to help all employees and stakeholders understand the Anchor

Mission and how it relates to their roles. To develop its Anchor Mission, an

institution should 1) align on its Anchor Mission Framework and 2) develop

Anchor Mission Initiatives.

Anchor Mission Framework

The institution should develop a framework that communicates its Anchor

Mission strategies. An Anchor Mission framework should be a comprehen-

sive description of the institutions’ overall vision that maps out how differ-

ent initiatives that will allow the institution to meet their Anchor Mission

goals. The framework should include the institution’s vision, intended im-

pact, theory of change, and geographic area of focus. (See Appendix 2a for a

case study of the Anchor Mission framework for RUMC.)

Vision:

The vision for the Anchor Mission is the purpose and goal of the Anchor

Mission. The vision should be clearly communicated, and the Anchor Mis-

sion strategies will build off the vision. See Section I for how to develop a

vision for the Anchor Mission.

Intended Impact:

The intended impact represents the social beneﬁt that the Anchor Mission

seeks to create, and is a response to the problem statement and communi-

ty needs. The intended impact should be measurable and achievable. Some

possible intended impacts include:

• Measurable impact with internal community, e.g. decreased

employment turnover for target positions

• Measurable impact with external community, e.g. decreased

unemployment within a target area

• Employee engagement in local communities through

volunteering or patronizing neighborhood businesses

• Involvement of local community members in organizational

governance

• Increased numbers of local, community-owned and controlled

institutions (such as employee-owned businesses or community

land trusts)

Theory of Change:

The theory of change describes the pathway for getting to your intended

impact. The theory of change includes assumptions of current and proposed

services. The theory of change should provide channels and methods for

addressing the stated issues. It should also reﬂect the institution’s core com-

petencies and capabilities. Rush University Medical Center identiﬁed ﬁve

overarching theory of change levers when it initiated its Anchor Mission:

• Hire locally and create sustainable career pathways for entry

level employees

• Utilize local labor for capital projects

• Buy and source locally

• Invest locally

• Volunteer and support community building

An institution should decide on theory of change levers that are suitable for

the institution. This playbook will focus on the ﬁve theory of change levers

listed above; however, the process for executing Anchor Mission strategies

can be adapted to other levers, such as community banking or aligning real

estate and land-use to support permanently affordable housing.

Geographic area of focus:

A well-deﬁned geographic focus will help articulate the Anchor Mission.

The organization should identify the target community it wants to serve,

and the identiﬁcation of the target community should be responsive to the

challenges faced by the community. Imposing geographic limits will also

clarify the tasks of data collection and tracking progress. The scope of an

initiative could be a single neighborhood (e.g., Cleveland’s University Circle),

or a collection of neighborhoods or community areas (e.g., Chicago’s West

Side).

Several considerations may drive the selection of a geographic area of focus,

including the availability of data and disparities in public health outcomes

within and between spatial units. For example, the RUMC Anchor Mission

focuses on the West Side deﬁned by nine target neighborhoods and relies

on zip codes for data collection and measurement purposes. Rush’s Anchor

Mission target neighborhoods are North Lawndale, South Lawndale, East

Garﬁeld Park, West Garﬁeld Park, Near West Side, Lower West Side, West

Town, Humboldt Park, and Austin.

Anchor Mission Initiatives

Once the institution has developed a framework for the Anchor Mission, it

should align on programs and services that support the Anchor Mission. It

should design, prioritize, build, and socialize speciﬁc organizational initia-

tives that move Anchor Mission goals forward. The Anchor Mission Senior

Leadership Team should meet to discuss priorities and identify areas of op-

portunity. Key steps in this process are:

• Identifying business units/departments essential to Anchor

Mission implementation

• Prioritizing initiatives and allocating resources

• Securing commitment to resources from leadership

• Developing an internal communication plan

Identifying Anchor Mission business units

The organization should identify key business units that will drive the An-

chor Mission. For the theory of change levers outlined above, the relevant

business units and initiatives are likely to include:

• Human Resources – Hire and develop talent

• Supply Chain/Procurement – Buy and source locally

• Treasury/Finance – Invest locally

• Capital Projects – Utilize local labor

• Community Health Equity – Volunteer and support community

building

Prioritizing initiatives and allocating resources

The Anchor Mission Senior Leadership Team should work with department

leads to identify high-priority initiatives for each business unit.

The following questions can help guide the discussion:

• What would an Anchor Mission strategy look like in your

business area?

• What internal or external forces could be barriers to moving

the strategy forward?

• What internal or external forces could facilitate moving the

strategy forward?

• What is the best practice for leveraging the anchor strategy

within your business area (if one exists?)

• How will you measure progress over the next year and over the

next ﬁve years?

• What support do you need to develop the strategy and who else

should be involved?

• What support do you need to implement the strategy and who

else should be involved?

The Anchor Mission Core Team should work with business unit leads to cre-

ate a list of possible initiatives that support the Anchor Mission Framework.

From this list, the organization should focus limited organizational resources

on high-impact and relatively easy-to-implement initiatives. Below is a sam-

ple framework for prioritizing initiatives based on analysis at RUMC.

Each business unit, in collaboration with the Anchor Mission Working

Group, should select and build out components of the initiatives. The fol-

lowing sections (IV-VIII) will discuss how each business area can build and

implement Anchor Mission initiatives. See Appendix 2b for a case study of

Rush’s key initiatives.

Internal communication plan:

Anchor institutions should set up an internal communication strategy to

keep employees engaged and to sustain momentum.

It should focus on: 1) explaining the vision and framework for Anchor Mis-

sion, celebrating small successes, recognizing employee efforts, and sharing

Low High

High

Low

Volunteer

locally

Invest

locally

Buy &

source

locally

Hire

locally &

develop

talent

Feasibility of scaling initiatives

Impact of scaling initiatives

progress in a proactive, multi-channel manner and 2) intentionally articu-

lating the core connection of Anchor Mission initiatives to the institution’s

overall mission.

The plan can rely on the following channels of communication:

• Developing internal talking points for key leaders and middle

managers

• Email updates and newsletters

• Websites (the organization’s main page as well as social media

sites)

• Workshops and panels

IV: Human Resource Initiatives

The human resources business unit can oversee and manage Anchor Mis-

sion strategies related to hiring locally and developing internal talent pipe-

lines, with a particular focus on residents and employees facing barriers to

employment or career pathways. When developing and launching these

AM initiatives, the institution should take stock of its current HR initiatives,

deﬁne its target community, and deﬁne metrics along with clear methods

for tracking them.

Understand Hiring and Career Development Initiatives

In developing Anchor Mission Initiatives, the institution should deﬁne its

Human Resources objectives related to the Anchor Mission. As a starting

point, the institution should identify any current community development

initiatives to understand what already exists that might relate to HR issues.

HR-related community development initiatives may include programs fo-

cused on access to jobs, career development, child education, ﬁnancial edu-

cation for employees, and more.

After mapping out its current initiatives, the institution can identify areas

of opportunity and gaps where new initiatives may need to be developed.

Some possible HR initiatives include:

• Create employment preferences for entry-level jobs for those

facing barriers to employment

• Build and facilitate career paths for entry-level employees to

move up in the organization

• Provide tuition support for certiﬁcations of skills training for

frontline employees

• Build a program to boost volunteer participation among

employees

• Provide ﬁnancial literacy training to employees

• Assist employees’ children with applying to and paying for

college

• Offer STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics)

courses to employees’ children

• Partner with local community-based organizations and

workforce development programs in underserved areas to host

recruitment events

• Partner internally with key stakeholder groups to increase

employee voice and participation in workplace decision-making

at various levels, and overall employee engagement

• Assess opportunities for wealth building for lower-wage

employees through additional employer’s savings match or

housing assistance

Because Human Resources work is particularly time intensive and relies

heavily on organizational culture, it is especially important that Anchor

Mission HR activities be carefully planned at well executed at the outset.

Poor implementation of a program to give employment preference to those

facing barriers to employment, for example, would only increase resistance

for hiring and recruiting managers to support such a program in the future.

The pace at which an institution hires from underemployed populations

should be aligned closely with the institution’s ability to guarantee success.

RUMC has committed to hiring to two new individuals to focus on recruit-

ing hard-to-employee residents from the anchor communities and to create

pipeline career pathways for entry-level employees. RUMC has set the local

hiring goal for FY18 to 16% of new hires from anchor mission communities/

zip codes with the current baseline of 14%. The Democracy Collaborative’ s

Inclusive, Local Hiring toolkit provides a list of success factors from leading

efforts in this area to consider when designing such a strategy.

For each initiative, the organization should prioritize those that meet the in-

stitutions’ targeted objectives. Two to three initiatives should be designated

as highest priority. Appendix 2c outlines Rush’s two high priority human

resource initiatives: an employment preference initiative and a career de-

velopment program. For each high priority initiative, the institution should

identify the following: the goal of the initiative, key steps or programs, and

an initiative lead.

Dene Target Community

After deﬁning its HR objectives, the institution should understand its cur-

rent role in the Anchor Mission neighborhoods in order to determine how

it can best meet its Anchor Mission goals. The institution can leverage inter-

nal HR data to answer the following questions:

Why do we need to dene a

“target community”?

What will we do dierently for

the “target community”?

• The impact we want to make on

the community can start with

employees that experience the same

challenges and hardships

• Existing resources (funds, programs,

etc.) are likely under-utilized by this

group

• It is easier to pilot and fund new

programs for a smaller group

• Prove success on smaller scale

to build buy-in for expanding

programs

• Provide dierential support and

services

• Job coaching and fund skills

training to create career

development path

• Hiring programs for high turnover

roles

• Determine ‘risk factors’ and other

useful insights to better address

their needs

• Barriers to long-term employment

• Roles with signicantly high

turnover

• Sub-groups with unique needs

• Track this group to ensure we are

making an impact

• Career mobility

• Retention

• Utilization of education and

support programs

Which employees live in Anchor Mission neighborhoods?

• What percent of the institution’s workforce lives in AM

neighborhoods?

• What is the position and salary breakdown per neighborhood?

Where do these employees work within the hospital?

• Are these employees concentrated in a few departments?

• What type of roles do they have? Clinical? Non-clinical?

Apprentice?

From this analysis, the HR business unit lead can draw key insights to un-

derstand the AM neighborhood workforce. The institution can also estab-

lish a baseline by understanding how many employees it hires locally in

different departments and positions, which may reveal opportunity areas

for HR initiatives.

After gaining an understanding of its AM neighborhood workforce, the

institution should clearly deﬁne a “target community” for the Anchor

Mission to help focus and maximize impact and meet its Anchor Mission

objective. This target does not need to be deﬁned exclusively in terms of

geography—it may also take into account wage gaps, entry-level positions

with high employee turnover, concentrated disadvantage among racial or

ethnic groups, etc.

Target community deﬁnitions should be framed and communicated as

guidelines for the Anchor Mission that helps identify employees who may

need assistance, but the deﬁnitions should not single out any employees.

After deﬁning the target community, the institution can use internal data

and surveys to develop a ﬁrst-hand understanding of the target population.

This will help the institution base their programs on evidence-based infor-

mation from the people who will be impacted. Information from HR data

and feedback from target community employees and their managers can

provide focused insights and priorities for the institution.

Some insights that might be gained from this analysis include:

Target population career needs such as:

• Formal guidance

• Mentoring

• Skills training or certiﬁcation

• Internal communication about potential career pathways

Barriers to career mobility and stability for the target population, such as:

• Transportation

• Child care

• Irregular shift scheduling

Dene and Track Metrics

To measure the progress and success of each HR initiative, the institution

should align on key metrics to track. Likely sources for these metrics include

HR internal data, employee and community member feedback, supervisor

feedback, and information from the recruiting team.

To ensure the HR Anchor Mission initiatives have a measurable impact

on external communities, as outlined in the framework, the institution

must choose externally facing outcome metrics by which to measure the

success of its HR initiatives. Some potential HR metrics for the Anchor

Mission include:

• Number of new hires through Employment Preference

Initiative

• Percent of new hires from Anchor Mission zip codes

• Percent of Employment Preference hires retained after one year

• Percent of new hires from AM zip codes retained after one year

• Employee satisfaction with career mobility opportunities

• Annual turnover rate in target roles

• Percent of target community utilizing tuition funds

• Number of internal candidates making <$25/hr hired into new

positions at the insititution

After deﬁning the key metrics to track HR initiatives, the institution should

identify the baseline for each initiative as well as goals several years out (ﬁve

years is often a good scope for a strategic plan like this). This information can

be recorded in a dashboard, maintenance of which is the responsibility of

the Anchor Mission project manager.

The Anchor Mission project manager should work with department leads

to establish a reporting cadence for these metrics, with department leads

updating the dashboard monthly or quarterly or annually depending on the

metric.

Below is a sample dashboard with sample targets for HR initiatives:

Additionally, the institution can create a reporting dashboard spreadsheet

that can track the progress of Anchor Mission strategies. The tracker should

be updated quarterly by the Anchor Mission project manager with informa-

tion from supporting business units.

V: Procurement and Supply Chain

Initiatives

The procurement, supply chain, or business diversity unit can oversee and

manage Anchor Mission strategies related to buying locally from inclusive

and sustainable businesses like minority- and women-owned enterprises

and employee-owned companies. Institutions can ﬁnd support for the “buy

local” anchor initiatives from prime vendor partners and local business as-

Metric Baseline

Targets

Data

source

Y1 Y3 Y5

# of new hires through

Employment Preference

Initiative

Recruiting

team

% of new hires from AM zip

codes

HR data

% Employment Preference

hires retained after one

year

HR data

% of new hires from AM zip

codes retained after one

year

HR data

sistance agencies, such as, in our region, Chicago Anchors for a Strong Econ-

omy or Five Forward in Chicago. See Appendix 2d for a case study on Rush

University Medical Center’s local purchasing initiative.

If the institution decides that inclusive, local purchasing is a high AM prior-

ity, the institution should understand current initiatives, identify address-

able spend, develop plans for integrating these goals into the RFP process,

and deﬁne and track metrics.

Understand Current Initiatives

If an institution seeks to scale up local purchasing, it should ﬁrst identi-

fy its current initiatives and capabilities as the institution may need ad-

ditional resources or infrastructure. The supply chain and procurement

department leads should meet with the Anchor Mission Core Team to un-

derstand what resources might be required to achieve goals to spend more

locally with inclusive and sustainable businesses. The institution should

ensure it is willing to dedicate the resources needed to support a local pur-

chasing initiative. Some discussion questions include:

• Cost proﬁle: Are we willing to pay more than market rate to

purchase more supplies locally? If so, how much more? Is it

possible to shift evaluation of contracts from lowest price to

best value?

• New processes: Will we institute any new events or steps to the

RFP processes to ensure proposals from local businesses that

might require additional resources? (E.g. local-only vendor fair,

online research to identify vendors available, etc.)

• Tracking initiative’s success: Does the current procurement

reporting system allow us to categorize spend data in the way

we’ll need to for tracking purposes? Do any expense recording

procedures need to be modiﬁed?

• Current initiatives: What do we currently buy locally? Who

helps us ﬁnd our vendors?

• Capacity building: How can we build capacity of local

businesses and/or offer technical assistance around contracting

opportunities?

• Improving equity: Can we set up any preferred purchasing and

living wage considerations for primary vendors?

• Collaboration opportunities: How can we build capacity of local

businesses and/or work with other regional anchor institutions

to support businesses that can serve multiple anchors?

Identify Addressable Spend

To effectively support the Anchor Mission Initiative of increasing inclusive,

local purchasing, the institution should work with purchasing managers to

identify spend areas with high potential for inclusive, local sourcing and

prioritize opportunities. Some points to consider are:

• Do we currently purchase any goods or services locally?

• What are the best goods and services (e.g. maintenance, food/

dining, medical equipment) to purchase locally?

• Who are our prime vendor partners?

• How have we partnered with local retail businesses in the past?

• Have we partnered with any other regional anchor institutions

in the past around joint purchasing?

The institution can also work with vendor partners and local business as-

sistance agencies, such as Chicago Anchors for a Strong Economy (CASE), to

identify addressable spend.

Plans for RFP Process

To provide purchasing managers with resources that will facilitate shifting

more spend to AM vendors, the institution can develop a list of local ven-

dors (based on your institution’s deﬁnition of local). The vendor list may be

included in the RFP processes for expiring contracts.

Department leads should identify which of their contractors and subcon-

tractors are local. For national vendors, department leads should determine

if they have local partners. Institutions can develop local procurement plans

with spend goals at the division or departmental level that feed into the

larger organizational plan.

Institutions may also add clauses with their national and re-

gional vendors that incentivize or require vendors to purchase

and hire locally. When an institutional Anchor Mission focuses

on local purchasing, the institution may choose to tie perfor-

mance reviews or compensation to progress on this initiative.

The table below compares the actions taken by other health

system institutions to support their local purchasing initiatives:

Setting Goals,

Tracking

Performance

Added supplier diversity to

dashboard with operational

goals for health system

Integrated supplier diversity

indicators into supply chain

associates’ performance

evaluations

Allowed supplier diversity

director to set goals for

department vice presidents

Annually reported

departmental supplier

statistics for CEO’s review

Established a dashboard

for tracking and reporting

supplier performance on a

monthly basis

Linking

Performance to

Compensation

Tied supply chain associates’

compensation to supplier

diversity progress

Tied executive

compensation to

achievement of dashboard’s

supplier diversity goals

• Regional CEOs are held

accountable for hitting

targets on operational

dashboard, including

supplier diversity goals

Tied executive

compensation to progress

on assigned supplier

diversity goals

• A department vice

president’s success

with supplier diversity

could lead to increased

compensation

Tied executive

compensation to progress

on supplier diversity

initiative

• CEO reviews supplier

diversity statistics for

each region before

approving compensation

for regional executives

Notes

Case studies, above, for linking compensation and supplier diversity progress focus on

executive pay. These health systems may leverage executive pay more so than sourcing

managers’ pay, for the following reasons:

• Executives have broader decision-making power over budget priorities than supply

chain associates

• Large health networks like those above may use executive pay as a tool for aligning

regional leaders on system-wide priorities

Incentives at all levels Leadership incentives

Dene and Track Metrics

To measure the progress and success of an inclusive, local purchasing ini-

tiative, the institution should align on key metrics to track. The sources for

these metrics include procurement spend data and procurement bid data.

Some potential supply chain/procurement metrics to track include:

• Number of direct Anchor Mission community vendors doing

business with the institution

• Dollar amount of direct Anchor Mission spend doing business

with the institution

• Percent of direct spend with Anchor Mission vendors against

total addressable spend

• Percent of direct spend with Anchor Mission vendors against

total spend

• Percent of vendor employees at living wage

• Percent of vendor employees from the target neighborhoods

• Percent of spend with minority- and women-owned

enterprises (MWBEs), including primary vendor subcontracting

After deﬁning the key metrics to track initiatives, the institution should

identify the baseline for each initiative as well as goals several years out (ﬁve

years is often a good scope for a strategic plan like this). This information

should be recorded in a dashboard, maintenance of which is the responsi-

bility of the Anchor Mission project manager.

The Anchor Mission project manager should work with department leads

to establish a reporting cadence for these metrics, with department leads

updating the dashboard weekly, biweekly, monthly, or annually depending

on the metric. A sample dashboard with sample targets for supply chain/

procurement initiatives can be found on the next page.

Additionally, the institution can create a reporting dashboard spreadsheet

that can track the progress of Anchor Missions strategies. The tracker

should be updated quarterly by the Anchor Mission project manager with

information from supporting business units.

Metric Baseline

Targets

Data

source

Y1 Y3 Y5

# of direct AM community

vendors doing business

with RUMC

Procurement

spend data

$ of direct AM spend doing

business w/ RUMC

Procurement

spend data

% of direct spend with

AM vendors against

addressable spend

Procurement

bid data

% of direct spend with

AM vendors against total

spend

Procurement

bid data

VI: Capital Projects

The capital projects business unit can help support the Anchor Mission ini-

tiatives to buy and hire locally when construction projects are in the pipe-

line. Initiatives in this domain would focus on working with inclusive, local

construction ﬁrms or developing local hiring provisions for to increase the

number of residents employed from the anchor neighborhoods.

See Ap-

pendix 2e for a case study of Rush’s local construction initiative.

To accomplish this, institutions can work with local business assistance

agencies. If the institution decides that local purchases and hiring for capital

projects is a high AM priority, the institution should understand its current

initiatives, develop plans for RFP processes, and deﬁne and track metrics.

Understand Current Local Construction Initiatives

To support a local construction labor initiative, the organization should ﬁrst

establish a baseline from prior projects to help set realistic goals for local

construction. Some key questions include:

• What has been the capital projects proﬁle at your hospital over

the past 20 years?

• What capital projects are in the pipeline for your hospital over

the next 10 years?

• What prior experience do you have working with AM

community construction in the past? What percentage of spend

on capital projects goes to these ﬁrms?

• Would you look to work with local construction companies or

companies that hire AM community workers? Why or why not?

• What channels do you currently use to request proposals from

this group?

• How has the sub-contract relationship worked best in the past

to encourage local buying and hiring?

• Do your upcoming capital projects have any required hiring or

contracting targets for local companies, minority- and women-

owned enterprises (M/WBEs), or employee/community-owned

businesses set internally or through agreements with local

governments? Are there any contracting requirements around

providing a living wage?

For previous capital projects, the following data should be collected by proj-

ect for the past three major capital projects:

• Description of project

• Year(s) of project

• Budget/cost of project

• Contractor(s)/vendor(s) used

• Location of contractor(s)/vendor(s)

• Diversity proﬁle of contractor/vendor employees working on

project

For future projects, the following data should be collected by project:

• Planned project start date and duration

• Planned project budget

• Planned number of contractors/vendors

Payroll data from past tax increment ﬁnancing (TIF) projects can be used

to identify what percentage of construction hours and spend went to AM

community residents, which serves as a baseline for setting local hiring

goals. By understanding its current state, the institution can build its local

construction hiring goals from the baseline.

Plans for RFP Process

After establishing local construction hiring goals, the capital projects busi-

ness unit should align on strategies to meet those goals. The process to se-

lect vendors should prioritize these Anchor Mission goals. In particular, the

vendor selection process should be tailored to meet the type of goals set. The

table below outlines the steps in two different approaches to a local hiring

initiative for capital projects:

Local Resident Hiring Model Local Vendor Hiring Model

Vet companies

submitting RFPs

Evaluate each

submission using

standardized

Anchor Mission

evaluation criteria

Vet companies

submitting RFPs

Evaluate each

submission using

standardized

Anchor Mission

evaluation criteria

Obtain commitment

from company to

meet local hiring

requirements

Explain local

hiring initiative to

vendor, including

expectation that

X% of individual

vendor’s workforce

on project be

from the AM

neighborhoods

Aggregate

recommended

contracts across

project

Compile each

construction area’s

“short list” of

vendors to create

the project-wide

view

Institute a

verication

mechanism

Hold vendors

accountable

for local hiring

commitments via

weekly audits of

new hires, payroll

reports

Review contracts

via a central

committee or

project manager

Make holistic

contracting

decisions from

a project-wide

perspective to

ensure AM goals

are on track to be

achieved

1 1

2 2

3 3

If the institution decides that local hiring for capital projects is a high AM

priority, it can take the following steps to ensure successful implementa-

tion:

• Draft communications explaining local construction hiring

initiatives to be shared externally with vendors and internally

with rest of capital projects team

• Create a proﬁle of ideal vendors to communicate both

internally and externally

• Outline reﬁnements made to RFP process – such as

requirement of vendors to report local hiring, plans to track

data, and communication strategy to vendors – to ensure new

anchor mission initiatives are built into all components of the

process

On the next page is a sample Anchor Mission vendor vetting framework

that can be incorporated into the RFP process to evaluate capital projects.

Dene and Track Metrics

To measure the progress and success of the institution’s capital projects ini-

tiative, institutional and business unit leaders should align on key metrics

to track. The sources for these metrics include vendor data, capital projects

data, and vendor payroll data.

Some potential capital projects metrics include:

• Number of inclusive and/or local construction companies

subcontracted with

• Percent of construction spend with inclusive and/or local

businesses

• Percent of construction hours worked by Anchor Mission

communities zip code residents

• Percent of wages paid to Anchor Mission communities zip code

residents

After deﬁning the key metrics to track initiatives, the institution should

identify the baseline for each initiative as well as goals projected out several

years (we would recommend ﬁve years as a good duration for a strategic

plan like this). This information should be recorded in a dashboard, mainte-

nance of which is the responsibility of the Anchor Mission project manager.

The Anchor Mission project manager should work with department leads

to establish a reporting cadence for these metrics, with department leads

updating the dashboard weekly, biweekly, monthly, or annually depending

on the metric.

On the next page is a sample dashboard with sample targets for capital proj-

ect initiatives.

Anchor Mission

vendor vetting

framework

One criterion must be met “Bonus points”

Anchor Mission

Community

employment

Commercial

Address

AM Community

involvement

Overall

reliability

Description

Company can

prove that X% of

construction hours

worked on projects

will be by residents of

AM neighborhoods

Company with a

commercial address

in one of the AM

neighborhoods

Company with track

record of community

involvement

(e.g. donations,

volunteering)

Company is

nancially sound and

can demonstrate

success on similar

engagements

Benets

to target

community

• Decreased

unemployment

rates

• Increased per

capita income

• Additional local

revenue to be

spent in AM

communities

• Increased sales tax

• Can work with

them to hire more

AM community

residents

• Demonstrates

RUMC’s

commitment to

partnering with

community-

focused

businesses

• Lowers risk of any

issues with quality

and timeliness

of work to be

performed

Counts toward

goal(s) of:

• % of total

construction

hours worked by

residents in AM

neighborhoods

• % of total wages

paid to AM

residents

• # of local

construction

companies

contracted with

• % of total

construction

spend spent with

local construction

businesses

n/a n/a

Additionally, the institution can create a reporting dashboard spreadsheet

that can track the progress of Anchor Missions strategies. The tracker

should be updated quarterly by the Anchor Mission project manager with

information from supporting business units.

VII: Treasury/Finance Initiatives

The treasury and ﬁnance business units can oversee and manage the An-

chor Mission strategies related to local impact investing. Hospitals hold large

amounts of unrestricted cash and investments on their balance sheet.A por-

tion of these investments, measured in either dollars or Days Cash on Hand,

can be deployed in impact investing. If the institution chooses to support the

Anchor Mission through impact investing, the initiative leaders should ﬁrst

understand current initiatives, then outline criteria for investments, deﬁne

target beneﬁciaries, and deﬁne and track metrics.

Understand Current Impact Investing Initiatives

Impact investing involves reallocating a portion of operating reserve funds

to Anchor Mission community-focused impact investments. There are a

number of ways to get involved with impact investing and the institution

should determine which is most suitable for its Anchor Mission. The trea-

sury and ﬁnance business units should start by mapping out current invest-

ment strategies and determine which impact investing method is most suit-

able for the institution to support the Anchor Mission and the talent of the

local community.

Metric Baseline

Targets

Data

source

Y1 Y3 Y5

# local construction

companies sub-contracted

with

Vendor data

% construction spend with

local businesses

Capital

projects spend

data

% of construction hours

worked by AM zip code

residents

Vendor payroll

data

% of wages paid to AM zip

code residents

Vendor payroll

data

Investment Criteria

After the institution has determined the type of impact investing it wants

to pursue, it should deﬁne criteria for investments to focus its search. The

institution should align on the acceptable parameters for ﬁnancial risk and

return, impact area, geographic focus, and the investment management ser-

vices to be used. The next page contains a list of discussion questions to help

develop criteria for impact investing.

By aligning on investment criteria, the institution has a way to narrow down

its investment options and to select those that will best support its anchor

mission. The institution should continue to research investment opportuni-

ties with reﬁned investment criteria.

Direct:

Donations/

Grants

Direct:

Equity

(invest)

Direct:

Debt

nancing

Indirect:

Fund-invested

capital

Description

Direct infusion of

capital to a non-

prot focused

on desired social

impact area

Investor takes

ownership

stake in a social

enterprise or

mission driven

for-prot

Investor provides

loan direct to

beneciary,

expecting a

return

Investor provides

capital; fund

invests capital

according to

mission and

distributes

return

Benets

• Guarantee that

capital provided

goes directly to

desired cause

• Can use non-

prot’s reporting

to report out on

social impact

success of capital

deployed

• Tax-deductible

• Guarantee that

capital provided

goes directly to

desired cause/

organization

• Investee answers

directly to investor

allowing for

greater input on

exact use of funds

• Guarantee that

capital provided

goes directly to

desired cause/

organization

• Investee answers

directly to investor

allowing for

greater input on

exact use of funds

• Little-to-no

work required

by investor

to manage

investment

• Can test fund for

credibility

• Risk is diversied

due to number

investors pooling

funds

Considerations

• No return of

capital

• Can require or

have expectation

of more active

involvement to

ensure enterprise’s

success

• Requires

investor to be

the investment

manager

• Riskier to “be the

bank”

• Often dicult

to specify exact

impact area of

capital invested

Greatest ability for direct impact Greatest likelihood of capital return

Target Beneciaries

Once the organization has developed its investment criteria to support

its Anchor Mission, it should create an investment “wish list” to measure

opportunities. It should select target beneﬁciaries based on their ability to

check off items on the investment list. See Appendix 2f for an example of

an investment check list based on RUMC’s criteria for investment. Each

investment opportunity should be evaluated based on the investment cri-

teria. A scorecard for each opportunity can be created and compiled from

interviews from the organization’s staff, the organization’s website, or other

external research. The scorecards create a standardized method to compare

different opportunities. A sample scorecard can be found on the next page.

Dene and Track Metrics

To measure the progress and success of the institution’s impact investing

initiative, it should align on key metrics to track. The sources for these met-

rics may include return on operating reserves, treasury, and HR data.

Criteria Discussion Questions

Finance

Financial return

(targeted)

• Are below-market rate returns acceptable? If so, what range is comfortable?

• Which is our top priority: best nancial return or greatest social impact in

target areas?

Social

impact

Impact area

• Are there any topics in particular the institution is hoping these funds will

support? E.g. education, public safety, health/nutrition?

• Are there any topics that would not consider (non-core to Anchor Mission)?

Geographic

focus

• How important is it that an organization be able to guarantee funds will go

to AM communities vs. Chicago as a whole?

• Should we consider any outside-of-Chicago investment opportunities?

Risk

prole

Investment

management

services

• What is absolutely required from a management perspective in order to

consider an opportunity? E.g. nancial-only reporting, reporting of the

overall fund’s impact vs. intuition’s dollars’ impact specically, frequency of

performance updates, etc.?

Track record/

ability to report

on ‘social return’

• What historical data would make the institution comfortable with

choosing an investment? E.g. list of current investors, ability to deliver

on communicated returns, targeted social impact metrics showing

improvement over time, etc.?

Investment Criteria to Consider

Some potential impact investing metrics include:

• Amount invested in Anchor Mission community business

• Financial return on investment

• Impact area-speciﬁc metrics (e.g., number of affordable houses

built, number of jobs created, foot trafﬁc increase to retail

or restaurant locations that are targets for local investment

initiatives, etc.)

After deﬁning the key metrics to track initiatives, the institution should

identify the baseline for each initiative as well as goals several years out (ﬁve

years is often a good scope for a strategic plan like this). This information

should be recorded in a dashboard, maintenance of which is the responsi-

bility of the Anchor Mission project manager.

The Anchor Mission project manager should work with department leads

to establish a reporting cadence for these metrics, with department leads

updating the dashboard weekly, biweekly, monthly, or annually depending

on the metric.

Below is a sample dashboard to track local investments:

Metric Baseline

Targets

Data

source

Y1 Y3 Y5

Amount invested in AM

community businesses

n/a

Return on investments

Return on

operating

reserves

Impact area-specic

metric(s): TBD

n/a

Additionally, the institution can create a reporting dashboard spreadsheet

that can track the progress of Anchor Missions strategies. The tracker should

be updated quarterly by the Anchor Mission project manager with informa-

tion from supporting business units.

VIII: Volunteerism

The Department of Community Health Equity (or similar department) can

oversee and manage the Anchor Mission strategy related to local volunteer-

ing or community participation in institution planning and decision making

(especially when it comes to issues that are of importance to the community,

for instance land use). RUMC has initially focused on designing a volunteer

program that will increase the value of employees’ time volunteered. Objec-

tives of community engagement initiatives may include:

• Improve engagement of institution with internal and external

anchor mission communities

• Increase the resource pool to support community and social

impact goals

• Strengthen connections and demonstrate commitment to

cultural value

See Appendix 2g for a case study of RUMC’s volunteer program initiative.

If an institution decides that community engagement is a high AM priori-

ty, the institution should understand its community engagement initiatives

and deﬁne and track metrics.

Understand Current Community Engagement Initiative

To develop a community engagement plan to support its Anchor Mission,

the institution should start by understanding the current status of volun-

teerism—an important indicator of community relationships. Below are

some guiding questions that can help institutional leaders to understand the

current volunteer program structure and prospects for developing a volun-

teer program in line with an Anchor Mission:

• What types of programs exist currently to encourage

employees to volunteer their time?

• Are employees incentivized to participate?

• How much time is currently allotted for employees to spend

volunteering?

• How many employees currently volunteer and where?

• How do you track participation and hours volunteered? Do you

have an estimate of these ﬁgures currently?

• What are some of the more popular projects/causes?

• Do programs/policies vary by department or seniority?

• Do the volunteer programs we currently have align with our

strategic engagement priorities or mission as an institution?

• Are there speciﬁc social impact priorities set centrally?

• Who receives reports of community engagement at your institution?

• Are any community engagement reports shared publicly?

• How do you ensure buy in to the volunteer program at all levels

of management within the organization?

• What are the estimated costs associated with implementing a

volunteer program organization-wide?

• What community partnerships currently exist to encourage

employees to volunteer their time?

After the institution has an understanding of its current initiatives, it should

determine whether or not to expand its current initiatives or develop a new

volunteer program. Volunteer programs can operate in a number of differ-

ent ways. Some examples of volunteer programs that other hospitals enact-

ing Anchor Missions have deployed include:

• Service days

• Community engagement teams

• Focused campaigns

• Volunteer-time-off policy

• Funding and promotion of employees’ volunteer projects

• Project menu of local opportunities

The institution should shape its volunteer program or community engage-

ment initiatives based on its resource capabilities and community engage-

ment goals. When developing a volunteer program, the institution should

leverage best practices from other corporations’ community engagement

programs. The table below outlines seven best practices based on external

research into volunteer programs:

Best Practice External Examples How to Leverage

Have a plan

Toyota Financial Services has an

annual 3-day retreat for its team to

design an updated plan that includes

a vision, goals, & priority programs

• Select eligible projects based on relevance to

community goals and informed by community

needs assessment

Measure

progress

Hewlett Packard estimates and

reports the monetary benets of its

employees’ volunteer work

• Employees should be incentivized to log volunteer

hours

• Participation and impact on community goals

should be measured and reported

Play to

strengths

Timberland initiatives are tied to

“community greening” (aligned with

its brand)

• Source projects and under-served community needs

requiring healthcare expertise

Involve

leadership

At Janus Capital Group, a small group

of SVP-level leaders meet regularly to

help form the employee engagement

strategy (to maintain/bolster

attendance at volunteer programs)

• Show public commitment and participation of senior

leadership

• Communicate program vision and embed in Rush

culture

Leverage

partnerships

Caesars Entertainment provided a

long-term non-prot partner a grant

to help build a recycling facility

• Find community partners running eective projects

• Solicit feedback from partners during and after

projects

Engage

employees

Janus Capital appoints “Community

Champions” – department

representatives responsible to stir

interest and recruit for volunteer events

• Select departmental champions to create closer

personal connection to employees and higher

awareness

• Oer variety of project types to cater to personal causes

Celebrate

successful

outcomes

Aetna hosts its volunteer program on

an internal portal where employees

can post volunteer event stories

• Follow-up projects with photos, impact stories and

awards for exceptional volunteers

Source: Points of Light institute (Points of Light is the largest organization in the world dedicated to volunteer service)

Dene and Track Metrics

To measure the progress and success of the institution’s community engage-

ment initiative, it should align on key metrics to track. The sources for these

metrics may include interviews with community volunteer leaders and vol-

unteer teams, HR data, and additional surveys.

Some potential impact investing metrics include:

• Dollar value of volunteer hours, which may be included in

community beneﬁt report

• Number of volunteer hours

• Percent of employees participating in volunteer program

• Satisfaction with program

After deﬁning the key metrics to track initiatives, the institution should

identify the baseline for each initiative as well as goals several years out (ﬁve

years is often a good scope for a strategic plan like this). This information

should be recorded in a dashboard, maintenance of which is the responsi-

bility of the Anchor Mission project manager.

The Anchor Mission project manager should work with department leads

to establish a reporting cadence for these metrics, with department leads

updating the dashboard weekly, biweekly, monthly, or annually depending

on the metric. Below is a sample dashboard to track community engagement

initiatives:

Metric Baseline

Targets

Data

source

Y1 Y3 Y5

Dollar value of volunteer

hours

Dollar value

of volunteer

hours

# volunteer hours

# volunteer

hours

% of employees

participating

% of

employees

participating

Satisfaction with program

(score: 1-10 )

Satisfaction

with program

(score: 1-10 )

Additionally, the institution can create a reporting dashboard spreadsheet

that can track the progress of Anchor Missions strategies. The tracker

should be updated quarterly by the Anchor Mission project manager with

information from supporting business units.

Conclusion

Rush University Medical Center began its Anchor Mission journey in the

summer of 2016. By elevating it to an organizational priority, we have

been able to effectively and efﬁciently 1) build the infrastructure for our

Anchor Mission approach 2) establish baseline and goals for the next ﬁve

years and 3) have expanded our internal strategy to include a West Side

Anchor Committee and a broader community strategy, which is co-owned

by the committee members.

Anchor institutions can play a key role in helping the low-income commu-

nities they serve by better aligning their institutional resources—like hir-

ing, purchasing, investment, and volunteer base—with the needs of those

of communities. The recommendations in this “playbook,” drawn from re-

search carried out to help Rush University Medical Center align around

its Anchor Mission, are being published to help other hospitals and health

systems accelerate their own efforts to drive institutional alignment with

community needs.

We hope this playbook contributes to the anchor institution literature as

this important ﬁeld develops and deepens. We encourage other institutions

to also document and tell their stories in a transparent manner—both oppor-

tunities and barriers, success and failures—because that is the only way we

will succeed in closing the economic, racial, and health disparity gaps that

prevent us from achieving healthy communities physically, mentally, and

spiritually. Together, we can all learn and accelerate the implementation of

these critical and needed strategies in our communities.

Contacts

For further information about Rush’s Anchor

Mission, contact:

Shweta, Ubhayakar, MS-HSM, MBBS

Anchor Mission Manager,

Rush University Medical Center

shweta_a_u[email protected]du

For general inquiries, contact:

Veenu Verma

Associate Principal,

Civic Consulting Alliance

[email protected]g

Kathryn Yaros

Anchor Relationship Manager,

Chicago Anchors for a Strong Economy (CASE)

kyaros@worldbusinesschicago.org

David Zuckerman

Manager, Healthcare Engagement,

The Democracy Collaborative

dave@democracycollaborative.org

Appendices

1. Sample RACI Matrix for Anchor Mission

A RACI matrix is a tool for deﬁning decision rights. The matrix allows orga-

nizations to specify “what,” “’by whom,” and “how” to accomplish a task.

CEO COO

AM Program

Leader

AVP, HR

AM Project

Manager

Business Unit

Leaders (HR;

Cap. Projects;

Biz. Diversity;

etc.)

Responsible

Set high level

priorities for

AM (CEO)

Allocate

funding

necessary for

executing AM

priorities

Designate

Business Unit

leaders and AM

Project Manager

Coordinate

anchor mission

activities with

partners outside

RUMC

Set targets for

Employment

Preference

Initiative

Sign o on

workforce

development

manager hire

and other AM

new hires

Track progress

across all

initiatives

Report bi-

weekly on

progress to Core

Team

Report data

monthly to

Project Manager

Accountable

Problem solve

missed targets

and other

diculties in AM

implementation

Communicate

AM funding

needs to COO

Communicate

AM personnel

needs to CEO

and COO

Maintain

consistent

methodology in

data collection

and reporting

Consulted

Review and

prioritize

major new

opportunities

for

investment,

purchasing

contracts

Help senior

leadership set

priorities across

AM initiatives

Help senior

leadership

set priorities

across AM

initiatives

Help Core Team

set priorities

with reports

from “on

the ground”

implementation

issues

Help project

manager

understand “on

the ground”

implementation

issues

Informed

Kept abreast

of AM

progress

within each

Business Unit

Learn AM

priorities

from senior

leadership

Learn AM

priorities from

project manager

and senior

leadership

2. Case Study:

Rush Medical University Center’s Anchor Mission

2a. RUMC’s Anchor Mission Framework

Below is the framework developed by RUMC to communicate its Anchor

Mission.

Ambition

Increase life

expectancy

Reduce hardship

Improve quality of

life

Intended Impact

Measurable

internal

community

impact

Measurable

external

community

impact

Employee

engagement

in our local

communities

Strengthened

values and sense

of purpose

Theory of Change

Collaborate with community partners

Hire

locally

and

develop

talent

Utilize

local labor

for capital

projects

Buy and

source

locally

Invest

locally

Volunteer

and support

community

building

2b. RUMC’s Anchor Mission High-Priority Initiatives

Below are RUMC’s four high-priority initiatives for its Anchor Mission.

Change

levers

Hire locally

and develop

talent

Utilize

local labor

for capital

projects

Buy and

source locally

Invest locally

Volunteer

and support

community

building

• Employment

preference

initiative

• Career ladder

development

• Skills training

• Mentoring and

coaching

• Local labor for

capital projects

• Apprenticeship

• Diversity hiring

and contracts

• Local

purchasing

program

• Gift shop

procurement

• Prime vendor

engagement

• Impact

investing

in local

communities

• Local business

incubation to

fulll sourcing

needs

• Employee

engagement

in local

communities

• Leveraging

employee

expertise (e.g.,

teaching skills

class)

2c. RUMC’s Anchor Mission Human Resource Initiatives

Below are RUMC’s priority initiatives for its Human Resources business

unit. The priorities include an employment preference initiative and a ca-

reer development program.

2d. RUMC’s Anchor Mission Supply Chain Initiatives

Below are RUMC’s local purchasing initiatives for its Supply Chain business

unit.

2e. RUMC’s Anchor Mission Capital Projects Initiatives

Below are RUMC’s local construction initiatives for its Capital Projects busi-

ness unit.

2f. RUMC’s Anchor Mission Treasury/Finance Initiatives

Below are RUMC’s impact investing initiatives for its Trea-

sury/Finance business unit.

Below is an investment checklist for RUMC to incorporate

Anchor Mission priorities.

2g. RUMC’s Anchor Mission Community Engagement

Initiatives

Below are RUMC’s community initiatives for its Community

Engagement business unit.

3. The Democracy Collaborative’s Hospitals

Aligned for Healthy Communities toolkit

series

As more healthcare institutions join the effort to reorient the

business of healthcare in communities and integrate econom-

ic inclusion strategies in their central mission, hospitals and

health system administrators need actionable approaches to

shifting workforce, purchasing, and investment practices.

Such approaches are detailed at length in Hospitals Aligned for

Healthy Communities, a series of toolkits designed by The De-

mocracy Collaborative with the support of The Robert Wood

Johnson Foundation.

These toolkits provide tools for health systems to integrate

community health principles into business functions often

thought of as distinct from improving health: 1) workforce

development and hiring, 2) procurement, and 3) investment.

The series presents best practices of leading healthcare insti-

tutions across these functions and includes tools, templates,

and other interactive resources to help healthcare institutions

shift internal practices to improve health outcomes in the

communities they serve. The full toolkits are available for free

at: hospitaltoolkits.org.

Endnotes

1 Nancy Martin et al., Advancing the Anchor Mission of Healthcare, (Washington, DC: The

Democracy Collaborative, April 2017), 10.

2 Tyler Norris and Ted Howard, Can Hospitals Heal America’s Communities? “All in for Mission”

is the Emerging Model for Impact (Takoma Park, MD: The Democracy Collaborative, 2015), 7,

http://democracycollaborative.org/content/can-hospitals-heal-americas-communities-0.

3 The multiplier eect refers to the increased impact of local spending. Dollars spent at

locally owned businesses recirculate in the community at a greater rate than money spent

at national chains and absentee-owned businesses. For more information on the multiplier

eect, see: “The Multiplier Eect of Local Independent Businesses,” American Independent

Business Alliance, accessed June 11, 2017, https://www.amiba.net/resources/multiplier-

eect/.

4 “What are hospital community benets?” (Baltimore, MD: The Hilltop Institute,

2013), accessed August 2016, http://www.hilltopinstitute.org/publications/

WhatAreHCBsTwoPager-February2013.pdf.

5 For more information about the Greater University Circle Initiative see: Walter Wright,

Kathryn W. Hexter, and Nick Downer, Cleveland’s Greater University Circle Initiative: An

Anchor-Based Strategy for Change (Washington, DC: The Democracy Collaborative, May,

2016, http://democracycollaborative.org/greater-university-circle-initiative; and Justin

Glanville, Cleveland’s Greater University Circle Initiative (Cleveland, OH: The Cleveland

Foundation, 2013), https://www.clevelandfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/

Cleveland-Foundation-Greater-University-Circle-Initiative-Case-Study-2014.pdf.

6 David Zuckerman and Katie Parker, “Inclusive, Local Hiring: Building the Pipeline to a

Healthy Community,” Hospitals Aligned for Healthy Communities (Washington, DC: The

Democracy Collaborative, September 2016), http://hospitaltoolkits.org/workforce/.

7 Farzana Serang, J. Phillip Thompson, and Ted Howard, The Anchor Mission: Leveraging the

Power of Anchor Institutions to Build Community Wealth (College Park, MD: The Democracy

Collaborative, February 2013), http://community-wealth.org/content/anchor-mission-

leveraging-power-anchor-institutions-build-community-wealth.

Design by John Duda, The Democracy Collaborative

CC map imagery from Stamen & Open Street Map

CC Icons used: person, store by ngamlerdlek.design;

money grow by Royyan Wijaya; celebrate by sasha willins

from the Noun Project

The Democracy Collaborative

The Democracy Collaborative, a nonproﬁt founded in 2000,

is a national leader in equitable, inclusive, and sustainable de-

velopment. Our work in community wealth building encom-

passes a range of advisory, research, policy development, and

ﬁeld-building activities aiding on-the-ground practitioners.

Our mission is to help shift the prevailing paradigm of eco-

nomic development, and of the economy as a whole, toward

a new system that is place-based, inclusive, collaborative, and

ecologically sustainable.A particular focus of our program is

assisting universities, hospitals, and other community-root-

ed institutions to design and implement an anchor mission

in which all of the institution’s diverse assets are harmonized

and leveraged for community impact.

Learn more:

http://democracycollaborative.org

Healthcare Anchor Network

The Healthcare Anchor Network is a growing national collab-

oration of more than 30 leading healthcare systems building

more inclusive and sustainable local economies, bringing to-

gether anchor institutions that together employ more than 1

million people, purchase over $50 billion annually, and have

over $150 billion in investment assets.

Learn more:

http://healthcareanchor.network

Community Wealth Innovators Series

Best practices and lessons learned from key leaders in the eld