by Neel Hajra
Why aren’t there Harlem Children’s Zones all over the country? Why is it that superb local efforts aren’t immediately replicated in other communities? After all, isn’t replication a common goal of foundations AND the government? Don’t we all tell our funders that yes, our program will become a regional or national model?
In fact, the old model was for foundations to provide startup capital to promising initiatives, with the hope that there would be a “hand-off” to government for replication and scaling. Head Start is a classic example. It’s also an extremely rare occurrence. The Wall Street Journal posted an article about the challenge of replicating the success of the Cleveland Clinic. While hospitals are among the giants of the nonprofit sector, that makes the issue even more intriguing. When the largest part of our sector can’t engage in effective replication, even when backed by the government, clearly the “cloning” of good ideas is MUCH harder than people think.
The reasons are wide and varied, but often include:
- Cost: Everyone always underestimates the cost of replication – nonprofits always promise this to foundations, but it’s perpetually under-funded
- Independence: At the end of the day, many communities believe that their situations are unique, and therefore not prone to emulating solutions from other parts of the country.
- Culture: Strong organizations or programs are often driven by a certain culture that can’t be easily duplicated
- Expertise: Replication, whether through expansion, franchising, or otherwise, is an art and science. Nonprofit organizations often lack the requisite know-how to do it right.
- Control: Sometimes the founding organization isn’t willing to give up enough control to other communities to allow for robust replication.
NEW itself has replicated its BoardConnect program in Kalamazoo, Battle Creek, and the Upper Peninsula in Michigan. It’s a wonderful way to share our best practices, but the fees paid by our partners don’t come close to covering the startup and maintenance costs associated with the effort. We are willing to take a loss because we feel strongly that our successes should be shared with others.
Organizations are slowly starting to contemplate how to leverage information technologies to encourage replication. “Open sourcing” a program (i.e., packaging it up and distributing it for free) is a growing movement. Kaboom’s online toolkit is a great example.
My hope is that the increasing interconnectedness of society will allow for more frequent replication of great services. But until funders and communities accept (and embrace) the true costs and challenges of replication, it will remain a very tough road.
« StrategyLab and Sector Blur StrategyLab Day 1 Impressions »

Great commentary, Neel. I think the question of why/why not on the replication front is complicated even beyond the excellent points you’ve laid out. It often comes down to a decision of organizational strategy. You can be a fantastic organization serving a specific mission in a specific geographic locale. Becoming a regional or national replication model inherently changes the composition and focus of your organization…which is why KaBoom! went to the technology platform instead of making mini-affiliates in each city. They felt they could make more impact (with a program that fits that opportunity) in an online space instead of incurring the costs of affiliate infrastructure, etc. Getting big changes organizations, period.
Another interesting piece is the unwillingness of the founding organization to share and seed the idea/structure of a program and let it be operationalized according to community need elsewhere. Funders reward replication from a single entity…our culture loves “scale” even though scale and exact replication may not be the answer. Branding, control, quantifiable impact and evaluation…all reasons why orgs want to do apples-to-apples replication which may not imbed in the community in the same way. Program diffusion in a more relaxed, innovative way may be better for communities, but it’s not as easy to put into a quarterly report for your funders.