CHAPTER 4.

Roderick Jones’ case: Developing learning-based organizations to serve high-need communities

Frederick Jefferson & Joyce Duckles

(with contributions from Linda Francis)

4.1. Rod’s story

  4.1.1. Introduction to Rod’s case

Roderick Jones joined The Community Place of Greater Rochester (abbreviated as Community Place hereafter) in 2001, right after this organization had been created from a merger of three Settlement Houses, and then became its CEO from 2003 to 2008. As such, he was instrumental in shaping the new organization’s vision, mission, culture and organizational structure. This was not a new experience for Rod, who a decade earlier had started with a few friends a new not-for-profit organization — the Rochester Step-Off Education Foundation. As starting new organizations is considered by many to be the hallmark of social entrepreneurship (e.g., Bornstein, 2004; Dees, 2001), Rod can be considered a good example of a social entrepreneur. Furthermore, he explicitly viewed himself as an entrepreneur in his work toward sustainable social change and his commitment to continuing innovation:

“Those of us in the helping profession … we have a responsibility to be innovative at every turn, to be creative, to be what we call best in class… [but] we’re no longer the entrepreneurs … we’re not innovating, we’re so trapped into feeding machines and keeping people employed.” (Rod)

Rod’s entrepreneurial spirit and his strong vision for the members of his community led to the creation and implementation of several initiatives—as documented in his story.

A strong vision and philosophy guided Rod as a leader within the Community Place and his community.  The Settlement mission informed this vision, as stated by one of Rod’s close collaborators:

“the Settlement House philosophy…is that every member of society deserves the best of society…[Rod’s] belief was that people shouldn’t keep coming back for help, that we should help them get to a better place in their life.” (Rod’s collaborator)

Central to Rod’s vision was a rejection of the deficit views that permeate many models of “serving” the community.  Rather than trying to “fix people,” Rod focused on “offering opportunities for the community to invest in their success.”  Rod viewed the community members as experts he needed to listen to and learn from.  By understanding the “lived experience” of those we serve, Rod believed that we can work on their challenges from within rather than from outside.

These two aspects of his vision—the need to understand the lived experience of those we serve and the settlement vision of engaging people in their own movement toward change—are central to Rod’s story.

In order to empower people to change their own lives, Rod also believed that we need to change the learning culture of helping organizations as well as the learning culture of the community and society at large.  By creating new participation structures for youth and families in his community, Rod provided the means for them to see new possible futures while providing access to the resources for making these new futures possible and sustainable.  Rod viewed education as a key resource because it leads to people being able to sustain themselves as human beings in a viable way. This is why we consider Rod not only a social entrepreneur, but also an “educator,” consistent with our broad decision of education as supporting development and learning across the lifespan and in a variety of settings.

The Community Place, the organization Rod was leading at the time of our study, was formed in 2001 with the merger of Genesee Settlement House and Eastside Community Center, with the later addition of Lewis Street Center in 2002.  The purpose of the merger was to keep the strong settlement house movement in Rochester alive as community centers adapt to the “changing needs and environment of the city.”  The settlement house movement originally formed nearly a century ago to help immigrants of many nationalities and ethnicities integrate into American society. Since then, it has adapted to deal with the changing needs and environments to continue to work with struggling community members to achieve economic and social prosperity for themselves and their community.

Rod and several of his collaborators spoke often of the settlement house history in Rochester and the settlement mission’s central role in the Community Place.  In Rod’s words, “We continue the mission of helping people help themselves to move to another place.”

The Community Place serves young children, teenagers, adults, families, the aging and individuals with disabilities primarily living in the Northeast sector of the city of Rochester, (the poorer sector of this urban area), though many programs branch out into the greater Rochester area.  At the time of our study, in its 2005-2006 Annual Report, the Community Place reported that a total of 7,606 individuals were served that year in a variety of programs, most offered in partnership with local organizations (see Figure 3.1 for more information).

Figure 3.1. The Community Place Profile at the time of our study (2006)

Growing up in New York City

Rod was raised by a single mother in a tough neighborhood in New York City.  He felt that those around him believed there was “no possibility.”

“I grew up in a really tough neighborhood in New York City and it was hard because there were tough things going on.  You know, most of it the social ills associated with being poor. … [For] the people I grew up with, frequently there was no possibility. You know, I could remember some of the older guys who would make comments like ‘you think you are going to be better than us, well, you are just a   N— like us.’” (Rod)

In contrast, his mother ensured that he was “raised in possibility.” He recalled the lessons his mother taught him through her words and her actions.  Through “affirmations and aphorisms” Rod’s mother taught him and his siblings that, with hard work, everything is possible.  She had him travel to a high school in a more affluent community, which Rod described as both a challenge and an essential learning experience for him, which went well beyond the classroom.  One challenge stemmed from being a poor African American teenager among kids with different lives and from different backgrounds, kids who spoke of parents who were surgeons and other professionals.  Rod came to realize that he did not need to compete with their stories and that he could embrace his reality:

“It was at that point that I realized…that I had to be okay with my own life’s accomplishments because we’re all individual contributors and that while the kids I went to school with could brag about their parents’ accomplishments, what then could you say for yourself?”  (Rod)

Rod also faced the challenge of being academically underestimated and generally misunderstood by teachers and counselors in his school, a mindset that was contrary to the lessons he was learning from his mother.  He felt that his guidance counselor especially had no understanding of the transitions and struggles he went through each day just to get to and from school and the ways that Rod was being raised to see his own potential and his own possibilities.

“I can remember early in the 11th grade my guidance counselor called me in and I remember the words that he used, he said, “ it’s come to my attention that you’re slated to graduate at the end of your 11th year” …and he started to say “I don’t think that you’re mature enough or academically prepared enough to proceed to college” … in my mind at that moment I’m thinking to myself, “man you don’t know me”.  You know, you don’t know the life I live just to get here every day, what a struggle that is to get through the projects to the train station to get here every day, and you’ll be going back to your home on Long Island.  I remember concluding that conversation by saying to him, “you really don’t want my mother to come here, because it won’t be nice.” (Rod)

The lessons Rod learned from this time period were central to Rod’s emerging philosophy about the need to understand the lived experiences of others and about creating the possibilities as a first step to empowering others.

From his mother, Rod also learned lessons about how social and economic networks can be uniquely structured, as families in his neighborhood supported one another. Women often babysat for each other, and they held “rent parties” where the women played pitty-pat and gambled and sold chicken fried dinners.  Through these secondary economies, the women ensured that everyone could pay the rent and that children had childcare.

As we present Rod’s unfolding story, it will become evident how Rod built on many of these early lessons and experiences in his role as a leader and a social entrepreneur.

From business to the non-profit world

As Rod attended college and began a career in the business sector, his learning experiences continued to shape his vision and his path.  He spoke briefly about his years in college.  One of the primary influences during these years was his connection with fraternities which led to a strong social network in the Rochester area.  Fraternity life also introduced Rod to the world of stepping, an African American dance and cultural art form, which also created social ties and served at the base for one of his first initiatives, as described later in this section.

After graduating from college, Rod worked briefly for General Electric (GE) in the field of corporate computing.  While working under Jack Welch when GE was expanding with the purchases of NBC and Ryder Truck, he found the business aspect of corporate life fascinating.  However, Rod soon became discouraged and dissatisfied with several aspects of the corporate culture.

“Often times I went to work like there was this place that people were running to get to and nobody told me, and they would step over each other, run over each other to get there and I was the last one to know.  But even at that I realized that … it wasn’t about being best in class, it wasn’t even about merit or innovation, it was about getting by or getting over and I always would say to myself, those things are going to come home to roost in this society in a way that we never could believe.” (Rod)

In the summer of 1992 Rod left GE to work in the not-for-profit sector.  In his new role as case manager for young people at Genesee Settlement House, Rod said that he felt “right at home”. Soon after, he moved into a position as a line manager running a youth development program at Action for a Better Community (ABC).  This was his introduction to “youth development as a philosophy.” He also worked his way up to running a model of youth programs locally as part of a national demonstration model and then moved to the Perinatal Network. At this stage of his career Rod moved quickly into different roles, acquiring a variety of skills and building his vision. As one of his collaborators noted, “Rod looks at a job situation as being trained for a skillset acquisition.”

Joining the Community Place

Rod joined the Community Place as Vice-President in 2001, just after this new organization had been created as a result of the merger of two separate district settlement houses. A few months later, a third Settlement House also joined in. This merger brought about some significant challenges as well as opportunities, which Rod described as follows:

“… there were several years of talks between the two former CEOs and the Board of Genesee Settlement House and East Side Community Center …  In May of 2001 there were three of us brought on as vice presidents to lead the merger into completeness…  If you can imagine there were several duplicate programs…  there were employees who would be laid off …  they were about $1.5M in debt and their operating budget was $1.2M, so we needed to find the money to close the gap.  They had a couple of outstanding construction projects that were way over budget…  So it was all of those kinds of things that were part of the merger.”  (Rod)

In 2003, Rod took over as Interim CEO following the resignation of the previous CEO.  In the meantime, the board conducted an extensive local search with the goal of finding a CEO with specific values and experience, including leadership, strategic thinking, financial acumen, business acumen, and understanding of the Settlement House movement.  A board member involved in the search committee told us about their selection of Rod as CEO:

“We picked Rod on his vision, passion and his commitment to Settlement—[these] were really the three driving forces for his selection …There were other candidates that had more leadership experience, people that had been in the non-profit leadership roles for many years, while Rod hadn’t yet been in a leadership role… we knew Rod, but he had not acted in the CEO position.  So, there were risks associated with our decision, but we really felt his passion, felt we could embrace his vision without really knowing what it was yet, and that his leadership would grow over time and that’s literally what we got with Rod.” (Rod’s collaborator)

  4.1.3. Rod’s Innovation #1:  Starting Rochester Step-Off Inc.    

In 1994, while still working at Action for a Better Community (ABC), Rod was one of the founders of the Rochester Step-Off Education Foundation (“Step-Off” hereafter), an independent and self-sustaining non-profit organization that later officially partnered with the Community Place when Rod was its CEO.

Stepping is a cultural art form which uses a percussion movement and chanting, combining African boot dance and military drill moves.  It uses the form of step which began in Black fraternities and sororities over 100 years ago. The underlying philosophy of Stepping encourages academic achievement and community building.

Rod envisioned the Step-Off program as a way to leverage Black youth’s interest in stepping to provide them “academic exposure to higher education, support for completing school, physical development, character development, cultural competence and awareness.”  Kids participating in Step-Off would be expected and supported to perform academically as well as perform the step moves, while also learning to work together.

How the idea came about and was evaluated/refined

Rod’s motivation for starting Step-Off stemmed from a “political will” he was sensing in the community.  He felt that the United Way and other local funding agencies were saying, “oh no, don’t waste any money on teenagers, they’re just too far gone at that point, if you don’t get them by six, nothing can be done”. In contrast, Rod wanted to create participation structures for teenagers to take the path toward higher education and to demonstrate to the community what teenagers can do, and he saw stepping as the perfect means to reaching the teenagers.

One of his colleagues and friend had been running an informal program that involved high-school students in stepping as a way of keeping them in school.  Rod saw both the potential and limitations of this program, as he recognized youth’s interest in stepping, but also thought that it could be used to develop aspirations to go to college, not just to finish high school.

“Rod would bring the connectedness [to higher education] that I could never do.  I knew I’d reach a plateau as far as where stepping could go and it would be, that being his criteria.  His criteria was it’s got to be a vehicle to get students in college; my vehicle, my vision at that point was to keep these kids in school, keep them in class.” (Rod’s collaborator)

Rod envisioned Step-Off’s primary goals as providing a path to academic success with a goal of encouraging kids to aspire toward higher education.  Rod remembered how he was not encouraged to go to college, no one was “creating the expectation” for him.  Rod felt strongly that understanding the opportunity was an essential first step toward future success. He wanted Step-Off to provide a structure to create expectations for youth to go to college as well as provide the supports and resources kids need to succeed. The heritage and the messages behind stepping were important for Rod to pass on to young people.  The emphasis on academic achievement was part of Step-Off – if you wanted to participate, you had to “invest” in the process as well.

“The other part that we say to young people as well is, ‘if you choose this path, it’s an earned way’ … and these are words we use with kids, it’s an earned way.  You’re entitled to nothing…sometimes kids aren’t willing to grapple with that …and we say to them sometimes, you can show up and sit at the bench and watch the model until you’re ready to invest in it.” (Rod)

“We quite frankly have kids who will go to school because they know that in order to go into practice you got to go to school.”  (Rod)

Rod told us how the decision to make Step-Off an independent not-for-profit organization came about:

“…we got together a couple of us and concluded that we’re going to … create a showcase that’s county-wide for people to understand what teenagers can do and are doing and …to effect the development of young people to progressively move them towards participation in higher education and increase in graduation and be able to do it in a business fashion that would be a model to demonstrate, where the resources are diverse, that you hold to some principles, that you take only enough to do what you need and that you diversify the burden so that you know there’s no one person footing the bill but everybody is contributing to the wellness of young people.” (Rod)

He saw great need for an initiative of this kind, and he was confident that youth would respond positively to it, based on his own experience as an African American teenager who had not received this kind of support.

With respect to the needed resources, Rod was confident that he could call on volunteers for much of the services, based on the connections he had made when in college.  He expected the revenues generated by the end of the year performance to eventually enable the organization to be self-supporting.  He did also realize, though, that some start-up funds should also be secured from other community organizations and individual donors.

Rod’s decision-making process suggests that ultimately his decision to start Step-Off was informed by his overall vision for empowering African American youth, and that he did not pay much attention to the risks involved given his belief in the value of this initiative.

Planning and gathering the needed resources

In order to get Step-Off started, Rod needed to get financial support.  He was able to pull together funds from different sources – including the Rochester Community Foundation, United Way and ABC (the organization he was working for at the time) – to cover the costs for the first year-end performance at the Blue Cross Arena. However, a collaborator shared that Rod was hesitant to take outside money for Step-Off, due to his concern that otherwise the funders’ agendas would corrupt the true values and goals of the program.  Rather, he hoped that the program could became self-sustaining through ticket sales for the year-end performances – a goal that was quickly achieved.

The Step-Off program also relied on a large force of volunteers. To secure these volunteers, Rod used his connections to the fraternity and sorority members within Rochester, who became essential leaders in Step-Off. Rod’s connections to higher education were critical to the success of the program.

At the beginning of Step-Off, Rod also assisted in bringing some structure to the new organization:

“Yeah, one of the toughest things was to make that bridge from being an amorphous organization to being a 501-C-3 … Rod’s background with Action for a Better Community … was helpful for us to go through that process.” (Rod’s collaborator)

Implementing and monitoring the initiative

Rod talked to us about the quick growth of Step-Off in Rochester.  From 1994 to 2008, Rod estimated that 6,400 kids had been involved in the Step-Off program and 16,000 people had attended the year-end performance at the arena.  Over 200 volunteers had been involved as well. These were clearly metrics he had decided it was important to monitor from the start to evaluate progress and success.

More importantly, though, Rod considered Step-Off a success because of its outcomes and “incremental achievements”—as monitored through the grades of the participants and how many of them graduate and go on to college. Rod believed that Step-Off played an all-important role in creating the expectation that the participating youth will go to college.  The financial incentives provided by Step-Off were another means of encouraging youth to continue in higher education, as some of the kids got savings bonds each year for academic performance and there were college scholarships available for seniors.  Rod believed these incentives were important for many of the youth as they decided whether to go on to college. Past steppers often came back as mentors within the program, becoming role models and creating the “culture of expectation.”

“After 14 years we have some lawyers, we have some doctors and they come back year over year and they go on to pledge at other colleges so it creates the culture of expectation so that they can participate in higher ed.  You know, we believe that there’s a pass into middle class, there’s a pass into higher ed and then once you have your pass you have to know the rules of engagement so that when our kids get there they can participate.”  (Rod)

Ensuring long-term sustainability and/or bigger impact

The revenues generated by the end-of-year performance, combined with the on-going commitment of many volunteers, ensured the financial stability to maintain this program over many years.

As a way to ensure long-term sustainability for Step-Off, especially as some of the original founders started to leave, in 2004 Rod was able to secure a formal partnership with the Community Place (where he was the CEO at the time).  This formal partnership was intended to provide valuable administrative support while maintaining the original spirit of Step-Off, as articulated in a 2007 Newsletter of the Community Place:

“By serving as a managing agent [of Step-Off], The Community Place provides administrative support to help the organizations operate efficiently and obtain funding from outside sources.  The organizations remain volunteer-driven and in tune with the local community from which, and for which, they were formed” (from The Community Place Pulse, Newsletter, Spring 2007)

  4.1.4. Rod’s innovation #2: Developing the vision and culture of the new Community Place organization

How the idea came about and was evaluated/refined

As he took on the position of CEO at the Community Place just a few years after this organization was started, Rod had a clear vision for the organization as well as his role.  He believed that the board and the previous CEO had laid the groundwork in creating stability.  His job now was to take the Community Place to the “next level of delivery,” which included a more aggressive, deliberate and pronounced approach to meeting their mission.

“How we meet our mission, how we advance the organization, how we move the community to a different place, how we engage the community and the type of organization, the type of institution we create … those were all my jobs.” (Rod)

Planning and gathering the needed resources

Rod identified several steps as needed to move his organization forward on its mission. His first goal was to create a new institutional culture at the Community Place, based on the vision he had formed through his previous experiences and his commitment to the settlement mission.

A basic premise for Rod was that the Community Place should not be a place of hand-outs.  Instead, the goal shifted to helping people by empowering them to help themselves.

“People do not look to us for handouts; rather, they look to us for the tools and support they need to break through barriers and stand up on their own.  Many times all it takes is one opportunity, one resource, or one piece of good advice for people to begin to build a better life for themselves and their community.” (from the Community Place 2005-6 Annual Report)

Rod also referred to this philosophy as “challenging the entitlement notion.”  This was accomplished by creating clear goals which the community would understand—although this transition was not always easy:

“If the goal is to stabilize families and to move them forward … when you come, let’s identify what caused the crisis that leaves your house unstable and let’s figure out how we work from there – and if we have to give you food for now until you get a higher paying job, then as long as you’re moving in that direction we will help to supplement it.  I can remember those times when, you know, we probably served 4,000 people in the area and the numbers were down to maybe we had 5 people come in a day…and the staff was saying, you know, we’re going to lose our contract ‘cause people aren’t coming in.’  I said no, the people are beginning to understand … this is not what we do, our goal is to help your family, you and your family get to a higher ground.  Here’s our set of responsibilities, and here’s your set of responsibilities and we’ll keep our end for as long as you keep your end. …It’s a hard transition at times but I think as we’re careful about being clear with people where we’re trying to get to and people start to see, you know, begin hoping and that your goal is not to put stumbling blocks in front of them but that there’s an expectation.”  (Rod)

Rod also recognized that along with a change in culture there also needed to be a change in “doing business” – which in turn led to some changes in operations and services offered.

Implementing and monitoring the initiative

Rod stopped providing daycare and some family services because he found that they were both financially draining on the organization and not helping to fulfill the mission of building sustainability for families and neighborhoods.  He adopted the guiding principle of the “three B’s – balancing business and benevolence.”

“…we’ve gone quite frankly away strategically from things like babysitting and recreation and isolation of development.  If it’s not leading to a development that helps people progress to a higher quality of life, we strategically got away from it, which has been fairly difficult.  You have people who have served in the organization for 30 or 40 years who believe that you have to offer daycare because it feels good in here [the heart], not that it helps in here, the pocket, you know, it feels good to the heart but the pocket suffers and a part of what we say to our community is that we have some operating principles of which one we call the three B’s … it’s balancing business and benevolence and those scales must always be balanced.”  (Rod)

At the same time, Rod was asking employees to “practice what they preached” and live their own lives according to the same mission and values that they were trying to teach and nurture.  He felt that part of this included ensuring the organization’s own financial security, by both becoming less dependent on external sources and by building an endowment.

“So when you talk about cultural changes, that was a lot to ask of people…  You cannot “hypocrite”, you have to first live it.  … That was one of the first things I said to my boss, I don’t want to inherit an organization that’s broke.  After 100 years, we’re hand to mouth, and we’re telling people in our family services unit here’s how you avert crisis.” (Rod)

As CEO, Rod implemented several key initiatives which helped to ensure financial solvency for the Community Place, while also forward his goals and the mission of the organization within the “new culture” he was creating.  While Rod did cancel some programs and services, he also formed several partnerships and began new programs which he felt forwarded their goal of empowering families and building communities.  In 2004, Rod began a partnership with The Rochester Step-Off Education Foundation, as mentioned earlier.  He also partnered with Families and Friends of Murdered Children and Victims of Violence (FFMCVV), an organization that provides support and resources to victims of violence and their families. The Community Place entered into an agreement with Beacon Centers Youth Development Program to offer more comprehensive services and better prepare youth for college and the world of work.

Rod also worked at developing an endowment for his organization.  To revive the public confidence of funders, he made explicit efforts to clearly communicate the new vision and expectations for the Community Place, as well as their implications:

“I think we also have to revive the public confidence of those who we count on for largess, you know, the donor, the contributor …they have to understand the work that we do so that in their mind it’s not wasted money, particularly as resources grow limited” (Rod)

Though this culture shift was difficult for some people within the organization, Rod believed that it moved them closer to the settlement mission that he and the board embraced.  This shift in vision also formed the foundation for many of the programs and initiatives which Rod formed and implemented at the Community Place over his five-year tenure as CEO.

  4.1.5. Rod’s innovation #3: Starting the HOST program

One of Rod’s first and most significant initiatives as CEO of the Community Place was starting the HOST program (Housing Opportunities for Sustainability and Transition).  Here is how this program was described in one of the Community Place’s newsletters:

“Many of our most recent initiatives have centered on helping our community harness the collective power of its members to revitalize neighborhoods socially and economically.  Our Housing Opportunities for Sustainability and Transition (HOST) Program sets forth a two-pronged approach to community building.  First, the HOST program works to purchase and renovate dilapidated houses and apartment buildings in the Parsells Avenue area.  After the buildings are renovated they are rented to responsible individuals and families at below-average rates…The second main goal of the HOST program is to improve the economic viability of our community…By helping businesses grow in our community we can keep dollars circulating here longer, thereby improving the overall economic health of the community.” (From The Community Place Newsletter, 2008)

How the idea came about and was evaluated/refined

The groundwork for the HOST program began while Rod was still vice-president.  Rod and the previous CEO had witnessed the drug dealing and other activities at an apartment building within sight of the Community Place; they watched the kids walk by the building as they came to the Community Place.  Rod talked about the risk they took as they purchased this building and began to renovate it.

“Early on my boss took a huge risk on this project that I wanted to do … it was an apartment building across the street that had 14 units and it would what you would call a gate, you could just go up to the window and buy drugs.  It was just falling apart inside and my boss, she was able to persuade the board to let us buy this building.  God only knows, you talk about money pit.  I can remember the days going over in my overalls … they had these efficiency units in there, so all the stoves, the oven was above it, the stove and sink were all together with the refrigerator … we had to pull all of those steel bays out by hand.  We didn’t have the money to do it, so I was over there, we’d go over there and knock the walls out and there was a group of us and it took a while to develop it over time.” (Rod)

Rod’s vision and goals for HOST were closely aligned with the settlement mission, leading specifically toward community building through creating opportunities for sustainable and affordable housing while building secondary economies within the neighborhood.

Planning and gathering the needed resources

On his first day as CEO of the Community Place in 2005, Rod presented a position paper which he titled “FABRIC” (Facilitating And Bridging Resources Into Communities) to propose the HOST program to the board.  Building on the ideas generated from the purchase of the apartment building, and from the settlement philosophy, Rod laid out his plans to create a program with the goal of building a sustainable community. There are several parts to Rod’s vision as presented in FABRIC.  Each part guides the shape of the HOST program.

First is getting people reconnected to a sense of community and neighborhood.  With all of the transiency in the neighborhood, people were not connecting, not creating a “common social value.”  One of the central goals of HOST was to create some stability within the community through affordable housing.

The second part of Rod’s vision was the building of secondary economies.  He believed that this was an essential step in moving toward sustainability.  In order to accomplish this, dollars needed to stay within the community through an internal system of supply and demand.  Rod planned to create secondary economies by starting to have the Community Place become the landlord for some of the homes and buildings, and then also bringing businesses owned by community residents into the neighborhood.

“When you look at communities that succeed … there was a perpetual supply and demand.  The dollar turns over ten times, twelve times, thirteen times.  You have to have that if a community is going to prosper … and I know we talk a lot about jobs, jobs is only a portion of it.  If fifteen of us can work but every dollar we get goes out of the community to a landlord, what do you have?  So that means that one of us has to be the grocer, one of us has to be the seamstress, one of us has to be the tutor, one of us has to be the piano instructor, and we have to create enough of the base supply and demand amongst commodities that allows us to have a perpetual supply and demand so the dollar cycles.  The way we’ve found best to do that was to be the landlord, so the HOST has two parts, one is the housing piece and the other is the economic development piece.” (Rod)

Many partnerships and supports needed to be to realize the HOST program.  Support for the program was secured from the REALTORS Charitable Foundation and the Independent Insurance Agents of Monroe County.

The board’s support was critical to provide support as well as the human, social and economic capital needed to build the HOST Program.

“[Rod] did bring it to the board and we accepted the vision as a concept that we wanted to move forward with, then subsequently the opportunity came along where houses became available, so Rod literally looked at inventory in the neighborhood… what can we purchase, who’s out there selling.  We did have a realtor on the board and a lawyer on the board so we were able to work those transactions, realtor, lawyer and banker, so between the three entities we could work those transactions all within the board gave us confidence and a sense that we’re doing the right thing and that someone actually insured that we’re going to be a profitable entity.” (Rod’s collaborator)

Implementing and monitoring the initiative + ensuring long-term sustainability and/or bigger impact

 Overtime, as part of the HOST program, the Community Place has continued to buy up property to encourage rentals as well as home ownership.  They have an operations crew to identify how to bring the homes up to their code for living.  They then identify candidates from within the community or workers at the Community Place who would be interested in renting or possibly, potentially buying.

  4.1.6. Updates to Rod’s story

In 2008, only five years after having taken on the Community Place’s CEO position with a transformative agenda, Rod surprised many by deciding to leave this position and take on the leadership of a larger Settlement House in another city.

Given that Rod had been such a strong force in bringing change to the Community Place, when he decided to leave Rochester the board was initially concerned that the growth they had experienced at the Community Place might not continue.  However, they found that Rod had built a solid foundation and an entrepreneurial culture that would continue without him as leader.

“Upon his leaving I am now aware as a board member that it’s not just him…These ideas are not Rod, these are Community Place’s ideas. Now they could have been Rod’s ideas, but they are no longer Rod’s ideas, we are absolutely positioned to continue that mission…I was so personally affected that he was leaving and taking the mission with him, but he didn’t take the mission with him. We have it, we have the mission, we are moving forward with everything he put in place, and operating exactly as he did or a little differently.” (Rod’s collaborator)

Interestingly, Rod identified as a major leadership challenge that people in the organization tended to focus more on serving him and his vision, than on developing the capacity to serve themselves and their own vision. He observed:

“I came to realize along this pathway is that control is not yours to have and control of people is even less of yours to have and that change is about choice in time, so the best you can do is equip people for choice. I came to the realization that I’m in service, that’s all.  That no matter what I do it’s a grace to arrive at a certain place at a certain time prepared to do what I have to do in that moment, and that the best that I can do is to do what I was supposed to do in that appointed time.  People being different is about God’s business and not about me controlling people, and to do anything else would be manipulation.” (Rod)

Maybe Rod knew that his service in a community was done when the weight of dependence became palpable. At that time he chose to leave, thereby creating an opportunity for choice and self-determination for the community he “abandoned”.

Since leaving the Community Place, Rod first served as President and CEO of a large Settlement House in St. Louis.  As of 2021, he was the Executive Director of Goddard Riverside, a non-profit organization serving over 20,000 people throughout New York City through a variety of programs for families at every stage of life.

Regardless of his position or organization, we know he continue to be “in service” furiously and courageously creating new opportunities for sustainable freedom of choice and self-determination.

4.2. Analysis of Rod’s entrepreneurial activity

  4.2.1. Rod’s practices about vision

Rod’s vision was the guiding force behind all of the work he did at the Community Place.  Based on his personal experiences growing up in NYC, through college, and through working in a variety of businesses and non-profits, Rod developed a philosophy closely aligned with the settlement mission.

With the board, the community, and potential funders, Rod communicated his vision to gain “buy-in” to his programs and initiatives.  For example, he distributed a vision paper (FABRIC) the day he became CEO of the Community Place, outlining his goals for the neighborhood and the organization.

In each of the initiatives we discussed with Rod and his collaborators, Rod’s vision was a primary influence shaping the organization, the partnerships, and the programs he developed.  Under Rod’s leadership, a new culture evolved at the Community Place with a focus on helping people to help themselves by creating participation structures for member of the community in a variety of capacities – as potential home-owners, business leaders, and/or community members.  The partnership with the Step-Off program focused on creating participation structures for youth which included a path to college.  The HOST program evolved to strengthen community through empowerment of residents to invest in their own neighborhood and become active members in creating safe, sustainable communities.  As we analyzed these initiatives, we found that Rod’s vision of understanding the “lived experiences” of those we serve, of moving away from deficit views and creating possibilities, of empowering community members to move themselves toward sustainability, truly guided everything he did as CEO of the Community Place as well as throughout his professional life.

One of Rod’s strengths was getting people to “buy in” to his ideas.  He was able to present his clear vision and goals for an initiative to board members, businesses, and community members.  When talking about Rod, his collaborators described how they were drawn to him and his passionate clarity-mission-driven-commitment to creating a new order, a new service-movement for freedom and sustainability:

“Clear vision and initiative definitely, and sharing and getting people to buy in, that clearly is one of his strengths.  I mean he can sell it and because of his passion and commitment you get caught up in Rod, you just get caught up in him, and you don’t want him to be anything less than successful and so you do whatever you need to do to make it happen.” (Rod’s collaborator)

   4.2.2. Rod’s practices about opportunities

Rod always found many opportunities he would like to pursue.  One way he uncovered these opportunities was from keeping a pulse on the community.

“It’s interesting, he would say that he wouldn’t watch the news much, but he knew what was going on and I think he would create opportunities where there weren’t any.  … He’d go down the street, and he comes back and tells me that the guy in the carpet store [is leaving]; I didn’t know that was an opportunity, until Rod told me we had the opportunity to buy the carpet store.” (Rod’s collaborator)

Similarly, Rod also kept up with the literature on his field and what other settlement houses around the country were doing, as a way to get new ideas and uncover possible opportunities for his organization. A collaborator also said that Rod kept an eye towards the future:

“He was able to see or read the winds of change as they came along and adapt some of his visions towards that … I would say the opportunity to have Step Off incorporated in was one of the examples.” (Rod’s collaborator)

All opportunities Rod uncovered were also evaluated based on his vision, especially his belief in the settlement mission.  In each of the initiatives mentioned in his story, it was evident that this was one of the primary measures Rod used when evaluating whether an idea was worth pursuing.  For example, the Step-Off program was aligned with Rod’s goal of “creating the expectations” for youth to go to college, and the HOST program built on the settlement house goals of improving community by creating opportunities for success of individuals.

Another tool Rod used to evaluate whether an opportunity was worth pursuing was “balancing business with benevolence.”  Rod recognized that it was necessary to take into consideration the cost of an initiative or program in relation to the value it would provide to the community.  He or his staff also had to prepare some financial analyses to the board whenever he proposed a new major initiative.

However, the board felt that Rod still came up with too many opportunities, all which were consistent with their mission.  The board often had to be the “bad guy,” turning down potentially worthy ideas based on their understanding of their limited resources.

“So yeah, Rod had energy, he had the intellect, he had the commitment to the people in the community to make all those things happen and then … the sky was the limit … well the board was the limit.”  (Rod’s collaborator)

There were a few instances when Rod and his board chose to turn down opportunities which seemed valuable for the community but did not fully fit with the organization’s mission.  One notable example is the Rochester Surround Care Community (RSCC).  In 2006, the RSCC was created as a non-profit organization modeled after the Harlem Children’s Zone to improve the north-east quadrant of Rochester (the poorest neighborhood in the city). Taking a holistic approach, RSCC sought the collaboration of many social agencies with the community itself to design and implement comprehensive initiatives to transform this neighborhood. The Community Place, along with all the social and education organization working in the north-east section of the City of Rochester, was offered the opportunity to participate in this major initiative.  However, Rod concluded that the program, as it was evolving, did not align with the settlement mission.  He considered the possibility of changing the program, by taking a leadership role in it and molding it to fit with his philosophy. However, he and the board saw how difficult that would be and turned down the opportunity to be involved. Interestingly, this evaluation was right on, as RSCC did not survive beyond a few years due to financial and organizational challenges.

  4.2.3. Rod’s practices about risk

Rod never spoke explicitly about risk-taking in his interviews.  He never seemed to approach his innovations and initiatives as risks.  Instead, he saw them as evolving opportunities.  When asked directly about risk, Rod responded that he had been “blessed with great opportunities to do different things.”  In contrast, collaborators did see Rod as a “major risk taker.” However, they viewed this as a positive quality which served the Community Place well.

“I think that Rod can’t…[be] restrained [from taking risks]. … I don’t know how calculated some of his risk taking was, but he was a major risk taker and you can’t hold people like that down.” (Rod’s collaborator)

As Rod’s decision to jump into a project was essentially based on whether his vision and philosophy was being addressed through the program, risk did not seem a major factor influencing Rod’s actions.

One of Rod’s collaborators noted that there was a good balance to Rod’s risk taking within the Community Place.  Rod often used the board as a check on his risk taking.  Both he and the board recognized the value of having an energetic and passionate leader, along with a board who required business plans and was willing to insist on slowing down.

“I think his threshold of risk is higher than the board’s – and it’s supposed to be.” (Rod’s collaborator)

  4.2.4. Rod’s practices about resources

Just as Rod had a strong philosophy guiding his vision, he also had a philosophy guiding his dealing with finances, which he called the “three B’s – balancing business and benevolence.”  As mentioned earlier, he believed that a delicate balance needed to be maintained between spending too much on programs and ensuring that your clients and community members have the opportunities they need to succeed.

“We’re very clear about that … we say to families, you know, this is your financial obligation, and this is our financial obligation, and we always have to keep those things balanced.  You go too far over into benevolence, then the business falls off, you may never find yourself having the opportunity to provide benevolence again.  If you fall too much on the business side … you may never be able to have such a relationship that that person can move.” (Rod)

Though Rod sought this balance, collaborators noted that Rod often entered into a new venture without having all of the financial resources in place.  Somehow, he would figure out how to get the money to fund his programs.  This was true with both Step-Off and the HOST program.

Collaborators also stated that in addition to being good with numbers, Rod also surrounded himself with the right people with the right skillsets to attend to the financial side of the Community Place.  He found a strong COO and finance manager, and he tapped into the expertise of the board when needed.

The underlying vision which Rod used to guide his programs was also applied to the ways he dealt with finances.  As CEO of a not-for-profit, Rod was not dealing with financial gains.  However, he worked to balance his mission and his need to raise money for programs. He is a good fundraiser; as one of his collaborators stated, “Rod can do the ask, I mean he can ask anybody for anything, and he would get it.”

As CEO of the Community Place, Rod worked along with donors and others who had supported the Community Place in the past to build relationships and trust.  He believed that mistrust had grown between funders and non-profits and he saw his role as rebuilding mutual respect.

“The only way to collaborate is by mutual respect, but we have to get to that place.  I think we also have to revive the public confidence of those who we count on for largess, you know, the donor, the contributor …they have to understand the work that we do so that in their mind it’s not wasted money, particularly as resources grow limited” (Rod)

However, he refused to take money if he felt it would compromise the goals of his programs.  For example, in some occasions he turned down donations for Step-Off because he felt that there was a “hook” attached to the money which might influence the integrity of the program. Just as he encouraged financial self-sufficiency and security for those he served, Rod also wanted to make his programs as self-supporting as possible. He sought grants if available.

He also looked at creating partnerships as a means to secure the resources needed for a specific initiative. For example, as he believed that the Community Place could benefit by having more services within their community, Rod would take organizations that were floundering under the wing of the Community Place if they were aligned with the overall mission.  These organizations did not require any funding but could benefit from the infrastructure that the Community Place could provide, and in turn this partnership would enable the Community Place to offer needed services to its clients without having to secure additional resources.  One board member referred to this as a “marriage of opportunity.”

“Rod could find opportunity with the scarce resources we had.  In addition to HOST we also had management agreement with Friends and Family of Murdered Children, Victims of Violence and Step-Off, where he was able to see the opportunity without any investment. … We’ve got an infrastructure, a pretty solid infrastructure; they’re floundering because they don’t have infrastructure.  Is there a marriage of opportunity and can we assist someone and be successful and make ourselves successful?  So an entrepreneurial vision that was executed through boot-strapping and that it didn’t cost us a dime to invest in that opportunity.” (Rod’s collaborator)

In several of the programs, Rod used several bootstrapping strategies.  He paid attention to cost-saving, keeping a lean staff, and being ready to do things by himself if needed (as illustrated at the beginning of the story of the HOST program).

Rod was very successful in securing the necessary resources for each of his initiatives.  Often, these resources involved human capital, though Rod was also able to find the financial capital when necessary.

For several of the programs and partnerships at the Community Place, volunteers were the key to their success.  For example, Rod estimated that Step-Off relied on approximately 200-300 volunteers to keep them going.  Volunteers helped in many aspects of the HOST program as well.  Rod viewed this workforce as evidence that the Community Place was involved in the “movement of social change.” He used his social network to recruit the necessary volunteers.

Creating partnerships was another tool Rod used to secure resources his organization did not have internally.  For example, he partnered with several organizations to offer specific services, such as Step-Off, Family and Emergency Support Service, and Senior Centers.  A basic premise underlying all of these collaborations was mutual respect of one another’s expertise.

“I think that if we’re to change or if we’re to be successful in any discipline we have to learn to collaborate. And collaboration is not in the memorandum of agreement, but it’s in the way we engage one another, and I think at the root of that is mutual respect.” (Rod)

With the personnel and team within his organization, Rod built on his vision of understanding the “lived experience” of the people of the community they served.  He insisted that his team “be willing to embrace the difference” and suspend judgment and recognize that the change that they are a part of is owned by the community members.

“To open yourself up to the multitude of lived experience of other people is a huge thing.  It means to suspend judgment … and to be willing to embrace difference, not agree or disagree, but to embrace the difference and I think that’s a huge cornerstone … and one of the things we say to people who come to work here is that you have to love people, because if you don’t, you’re going to have a hard time getting over the hump.” (Rod)

Rod also spoke about how his staff inspired him.  He believed that their creative energy kept him and his organization moving toward innovation and success.

“…and you talk about innovation, the uninhibited enterprise that exists in each of them challenges me every day to rethink what I think I know… my marketing director is 20 maybe 25 … he creates all of this kind of stuff, he’s the brain behind the whole thing… other guys in our youth area who have such a vision for our young people and they can walk you know, both of the worlds between profession and kids.  I’ll tell you, every day is an adventure … sometimes I have to reserve a certain amount of my mind to keep up with it, but I think it’s them that really keeps it moving.” (Rod)

Rod proactively worked at attracting and retaining individuals on his staff who shared his vision and drive towards innovation, and he also worked to get the right people in the right positions within his organization. He developed ownership of the agenda among his staff by including them in the decision-making process. And, perhaps most importantly, he himself modeled the practices he wanted everyone in the organization to adopt.

He developed leadership within the organization. Indeed, one of the hallmarks of Rod as an entrepreneurial leader of his organization was his explicit goal of developing a diverse leadership team that could be empowered to be entrepreneurial – with or without him at the helm.

  4.2.5. Rod’s practices about growth

The Community Place grew and changed significantly under Rod’s leadership as CEO. He brought in many other organizations under the umbrella of the Community Place, as he recognized the mutual benefit of creating these partnerships for both the organizations he brought in and for the community which he served.

Rod was also always expanding and building on innovations.  He expanded the Community Place by adding more programs, though he also discontinued the programs he felt were either not successful or not in line with the mission and vision of the organization.

The primary challenge Rod faced regarding the growth of the Community Place and his programs was to slow down.  The Board of Directors served as the check to Rod’s pace of growth.

“I think he’s very successful in handling rapid growth.  I think from a board perspective we have to slow that down a little to make sure we’re really good at what we do before we take on more growth.”  (Rod’s collaborator)

Rod recognized that such rapid growth would lead to changes in the organization and even his role, and addressed this proactively—as stated by the same collaborator:

“Accepting and dealing with change … I think that’s what makes an entrepreneur successful, and it made Rod successful … times are changing, and folks will need to merge over time and reaching out across the table to say ‘you could merge with us and we could make this a successful investment’.”  (Rod’s collaborator)

Personally, Rod also continuously sought to impact as many people as possible through his practice—something that led him to frequent job changes, including after he left the Community Place.

  4.2.6. Other interesting elements of Rod’s case

Starting a new non-for-profit organization

Many of the challenges and opportunities of starting a new organization apply to both for-profit and not-for-profit entities.  These include most notably the lack of “safety nets” and the need to carefully manage the cash flow to avoid untimely closure, on the one hand, and the opportunity to develop brand new systems and culture, on the other.  What is significantly different, though, are the revenue and funding sources the two types of organization can rely on.

Pursuing institutional entrepreneurship

As CEO of the Community Place, Rod worked proactively at developing a new organizational culture consistent with his vision—where bringing about innovation was at the core. Rod viewed entrepreneurship as central to any educational mission and to the not-for-profit sector, even though entrepreneurship is most often associated with business.  He felt that those in the “helping profession” were not focusing enough on being innovative and being trend setters.

“I think one of the things that make any institution strong is their ability to engage in free enterprise and I think innovation is absolutely the life blood of any organization.  Without it, forget it.” (Rod)

In doing so, Rod worked at breaking with existing norms and beliefs, as well as establishing and legitimizing new expectations and norms – what is considered the core of institutional entrepreneurship (e.g., Dimaggio, 1983).  Rod was successful in this endeavor, as he created an entrepreneurial culture at the Community Place that lived on even after he left.  One of his collaborators specifically commented on how the leadership and all of the people at the Community Place embraced and lived this culture.

The key role of the board in a not-for-profit organization

A factor that was very important to Rod’s success was having the complete confidence of his board and staff in his vision and leadership ability. This level of support was essential, given that the new leader came with the intent to fundamentally overhaul the traditional programs and practices of the Community Place.  Rod often used the board as a sounding board and a “check”, as he conceived visionary and ambitious plans but also realized that he needed a “reality check” about what was or not feasible at a given time.

  4.2.7. Concluding thoughts about Rod’s case

Rod is a great example of a social entrepreneur whose work is solidly grounded in a philosophical perspective and vision.  His story illustrates how his vision developed and emerged from his life experiences, his work experiences, and from the community which he served.  The tenets central to Rod’s vision can serve as models for any social entrepreneur and entrepreneurial educator.  They build on the notions of understanding the “lived experiences” of those we serve and of “offering opportunities for the community to invest in their success.”

While informed by his strong vision, Rod’s contributions came as a result of a great number of initiatives and innovations he promoted and successfully carried out. While some of these initiatives involved starting a brand-new organization to do something he felt needed to be done (as in the case of Step-Off), most of them involved new ventures within an existing organization – whether they involved a new program like HOST, new partnerships leading to offering new services, or introducing the unfamiliar sport of golf in an after-school program.  Interestingly, some of the most important innovations Rod undertook had to do not with a specific “initiative” but rather with the more encompassing goal of transforming the culture and structure of an organization – as he did when he became the CEO of the Community Place.

Each of these initiatives added value to the community, youth and families that Rod and his organization were committed to serve – whether this was by providing neighborhood residents with the opportunity to become home owners or assisting a local entrepreneur open a store front barbershop. Indeed, in this story value-added was never measured as value to the organization, but rather Rod’s focus was always on the value-added for the people he served. At the same time, we can see that Rod’s tenure as CEO did add considerably value to the Community Place. The HOST program by the end of 2006 had acquired and renovated 6 homes and 2 apartment buildings, and had also established Beacon Centers for Youth Development, a college preparatory program and a new pilot business incubator program.

We conclude with a few of the lessons we learned from our time spent with Rod and his collaborators and from our analysis of his words and his story.

First of all, the settlement house mission of “offering opportunities for the community to invest in their own success” is often not the model adopted within service-based not-for-profits, nor education initiatives aimed at supporting underprivileged students.  Both Rod and his collaborators raise the point that many organizations work from the deficit model of “fixing people.”  Rather than understanding the “lived experience” of those we serve, many organizations position themselves as the experts.  Rod and the Community Place assumed a different approach and have faced challenges within the Rochester community in their attempts to break away from this top-down model.

Rod also believed strongly that, as the leader of the Community Place, he needed to model the values and goals which he was trying to encourage within the community.  He insisted that his staff become models as well.  This included listening to and respecting one another as well as moving toward financial solvency and security.  As he said often, we cannot “hypocrite” those we serve.

Rod’s story shows us that sustainability can be built into programs in unique ways.  Rod’s use of secondary economies in the HOST program and the revenue-generating year-end performances in the Step-Off program are wonderful examples of innovative means of ensuring fiscal sustainability.  This model can move entrepreneurial educators away from the need to constantly seek outside funders to sustain programs – a model that often fails over time.  Rod also worked toward the sustainability of individual community members by providing them the supports and tools to be self-sustaining.

Finally, Rod often worked on multiple levels with complementary goals.  As he worked toward creating an entrepreneurial culture within the Community Place, he also worked toward “reviving the public faith” in the not-for-profit sector to re-establish respect for the expertise of those in non-profit and helping professions.

4.3. Commentaries on Rod’s case

We are collecting readers’ insights and lessons learned from reading Rod’s case on the companion website, and we invite you to add yours by following the specific guidelines provided in the “Guidelines for Contributions” document.

Posted commentaries about Rod’s case – None available yet