1Pleaserefertothefullreportforthequalitativeresponses. Page1

THELINCYINSTITUTERESEARCHBRIEF SPECIALREPORTNO.1

November2013

IdentifyingandDescribingtheNetworkofHealth,Education,andSocialServiceNon‐ProfitOrganizationsinSouthernNevadaBYSHANNONM.MONNAT,PhDANNASMEDLEY,MAFATMANASOZ,PhD

Abstract

Thisbriefpresentstheresultsofapartneringsurveydesignedtomeasurethepartneringpowerofeachhealth,education,andsocialservicenon‐profitinsouthernNevadaindicatedbytheconnectionsbetweentheseorganizations.Thesurveydocumentswhichorganizationsengagedinthemostpartnering,increasingthepotentialthattheycouldbetterleverageinvestmentsandphilanthropythroughtheirsocialnetwork.UniversityofNevadaLasVegas(UNLV),UnitedWayofSouthernNevada(UWSN),HELPofSouthernNevada,CatholicCharities,ThreeSquare,theClarkCountySchoolDistrict,GoodwillofSouthernNevada,andOpportunityVillageconsistentlyrankedhighlyintermsofoverallparticipationandactivity,influence,accesstoinformationandresources,andabilitytomobilizethenon‐profitcommunity.Therewerealsoanumberofsmallerorganizationsthatwefoundtobeimportantbrokersandconnectors,andtheseorganizationscanbeusedasmodelsforimprovingthecapacityoflower‐budgetandlesser‐resourcedorganizationsinthecommunity.1

IntroductionandSummaryofFindingsManyoftheeconomic,social,anddemographicissuesfacingsouthernNevadaaredynamicandinterrelated,requiringacoordinatedapproachonthepartofsouthernNevada’snon‐profitcommunity.Thecoordinationofservices,skills,andtalentsenablescommunityneedstobeaddressedinwaysthatexceedthescopeandcapacityofanysingleorganization.Withtheincreasingdesireoffundingorganizationstosupportcollaborativeefforts,maintainingsustainable

connectionsbetweensouthernNevada’snon‐profitorganizationsisneedednowmorethanever.

ThisisthefirstcomprehensivestudyofsouthernNevada’shealth,education,andsocialservicenon‐profitnetwork.Viaaweb‐basedsurveyofnearly300executivedirectorsandotherleadersofhealth,education,andsocialservicerelatednon‐profitorganizationsinClarkCounty,wewereabletoconductasocialnetworkanalysistoidentifythestructureofthenon‐profitnetworkaswellasthepositionsofindividualorganizationswithinthatnetwork.

 

Page2

WefoundthatsouthernNevada’snon‐profitnetworkisnotdense,dueinparttothevastsizeofthenetwork(460organizationswereidentified).Thelargestorganizationsarewellconnected,butthereareopportunitiesfordevelopingmoreconnectionsacrossorganizationsofallsizesandsectors.Ourfindingsshowthattheaverageorganizationisconnectedwithtenothernon‐profitorganizationsinsouthernNevada,buttherearealsoanumberofisolates(i.e.,completelydisconnectedorganizations).

Intermsofoverallparticipationandactivity,influence,accesstoinformationandresources,andabilitytomobilizethenon‐profitcommunity,UniversityofNevadaLasVegas,UnitedWayofSouthernNevada,HELPofSouthernNevada,CatholicCharities,ThreeSquare,theClarkCountySchoolDistrict,GoodwillofSouthernNevada,andOpportunityVillageconsistentlyrankedhighly.However,therewerealsoanumberofsmallerorganizationsthatwefoundtobeimportantbrokersandconnectors,andtheseorganizationscanbeusedasmodelsforhelpingtobuildthecapacityoflower‐budgetandlesser‐resourcedorganizationsinthecommunity.

Whenaskedaboutbarrierstocollaboration,surveyrespondentsindicatedlackoffundingandresources,perceptionsofterritorialityandcompetition,theneedfortraining,concernaboutlackofdataavailabilityandusage,thedesireformorenetworkingopportunities,andcritiquesofleadership.MotivationandPurposeThereisaneedwithinsouthernNevadatomanagenon‐profitorganizationsefficientlyandeffectivelyandtoaugmentnon‐profitorganizations’abilitiestobuildadaptiveprograms,successfullycompeteforfederalandfoundationalgrantfunding,andeffectivelyservetheresidentsofsouthernNevada.Todate,nosystematicstudyexploredcollaborationsamongsouthernNevada’snon‐profitorganizations.Evidencegeneratedthroughthisprojectcanhelpguidethedevelopmentofoptimalstrategiestoimprovenon‐profitorganizationalcooperation,collaboration,andperformance

relatedtosocial,health,andeducationaloutcomes.

Thisprojectidentifiesthestructureofnonprofithealth,education,andsocialservicenetworkswithaspecialemphasisonidentifyingthenonprofit“leaders”insouthernNevada.Nonprofitleadersarethosewhoinfluencetheopinions,motivations,and/orbehaviorsofotherorganizationsandstakeholders.Thesearetheagenciesthat“makethingshappen.”Leadership,mostoftendiscussedinthecontextofindividualopinionleadershipandthediffusionofinnovationsmodelcanbeappliedtothenonprofitsectortoidentifywhichorganizationsarethemostactivewithinsouthernNevada’snonprofitnetwork,whichorganizationshavethegreatestaccesstoinformationandresources,andwhichorganizationscanserveasbrokers,intermediaries,andinnovatorsofdevelopmentandchange.ResearchMethodsSampleandResearchTools:Theprimaryresearchtoolusedinthisstudywasaweb‐basedsurveyadministeredtoExecutiveDirectorsandotherleadersofhealth,education,andsocialservicenon‐profitorganizationslocatedinClarkCounty,Nevada.Thesurveyandresearchplanweredevelopedviaacollaborativeeffortbetweenthestudy’sprincipalinvestigator,TheLincyInstituteScholars,andtheExecutiveDirectorofTheLincyInstitute.TheresearchprotocolwasapprovedbytheUniversityofNevada,LasVegasInstitutionalReviewBoard(IRB).

Analysis:Socialnetworkanalysis(SNA)isadistinctivemethoddesignedtomap,measure,andanalyzethecomplexrelationshipsthatoccurbetweenpeople,groups,andorganizations.Usingmathematicalalgorithmsandappropriatesoftwaredesignedspecificallyfornetworkanalysis,wecanexamineinformationandresourceflows,levelsofcooperationandcollaboration,andoverallpatternsofrelationshipsbetweennon‐profitorganizationsandhowthosepatternsfacilitateorconstraintheoverallfunctioningofsouthernNevada’snon‐profitnetwork.Accordingly,inadditiontobasicstatisticsdescribingthesample,wehave

Page3

providedtheresultsofournetworkanalyses,includingsociograms(Moreno&Jennings,1934)andsociometricstatisticsthatdescribethenetworkpositionsofselectedindividualorganizations(e.g.,organizationalcentrality)aswellascharacteristicsoftheentirenon‐profitnetwork(e.g.,networkdensity).OrganizationalCharacteristicsWeaskedrespondentstoidentifysomecharacteristicsabouttheirorganizations,includingyearsofoperation,numberofemployees,annualoperatingbudget,andtypesofservicesprovided.Whenarespondentdidnotidentifythestartyearoftheorganization,weattemptedtolocatethatinformationviatheorganization’swebpageorGuideStar.Thesamplesizesvaryacrosseachofthefiguresbelowduetoavaryingnon‐responserateoneachoftheitems.

AsshowninFigure1,thenon‐profitcommunityinsouthernNevadaisyoung;47.5%oforganizationswerestartedin2000orlater.Over78%ofhealth,education,andsocialservicenon‐profitorganizationsinsouthernNevadaareunder35yearsold.

Figure1YearOrganizationBegan,N=387

Mostorganizationsoperatewithsmallbudgets(under$1,000,000),asshowninFigure2below.34%ofrespondentsindicatedthattheirannualoperatingbudgetislessthan$250,000withanother13.7%reportinganoperatingbudgetof$250,000‐500,000.However,nearly20%ofrespondentsreportedannualoperatingbudgetsof$5,000,000ormore.Theseareoftengovernmentorganizations,funders,andthelargestprivatenon‐profitorganizations.

Figure2AnnualOperatingBudget,N=291

Mostorganizationsarealsoquitesmall;morethanhalfofrespondents(53.8%)reportedhaving10orfeweremployees.About12%oforganizationsemployed11‐30people,9.3%employ31‐50,andjustunderaquarteroforganizationsemploy51peopleormore(seeFigure3below).

Figure3NumberofEmployees,N=290

SocialNetworkAnalysisSocialnetworkanalysisprovidesinformationaboutboththestructureofthenon‐profitnetworkasawholeaswellasthepositionsofindividualorganizationswithinthenetwork.

Networkanalysisenablesustodeterminethemostwell‐connectedandinfluentialorganizationswithinanetworkaswellastheoverallcohesivenessofthenetwork.Toassessthehealth,education,andsocialservicenon‐profitnetworkstructure,weaskedrespondentstolistupto20southernNevadanon‐profitorganizationswithwhichtheyweremostconnected.Weindicatedthattheorganizationslistedcouldbeprivateorlocal/stategovernmentorganizationsbutspecifiedthattheymustbelocatedin

 

Page4

southernNevadaandmustbeinthehealth,socialservices,oreducationalfields.Someexamplesofconnectionswere:havingaformalMemorandumofUnderstanding(MOU),sharingpersonnel,volunteers,spaceordata,referringclients,receivingclientreferrals,receivingfunding,providingfunding,havingboardmembersincommon,participatingincommonprojectsorinitiatives,collaboratingongrantproposals,andco‐sponsoringevents.Respondentscouldalsotypeinotherwaysinwhichtheywereconnectedthatwerenotlistedonthesurvey.

Figure4representsasociogram(graphicalpresentationofconnections)(Moreno&Jennings,1934)oftheentirehealth,education,andsocialservicenon‐profitnetworkinsouthernNevada,withlargercirclesrepresentingagreaternumberofconnections.Circlesarealsocolorcodedbaseduponsector(private,government,faith‐based,andphilanthropic).

Figure4SociogramofConnectionsbetweenHealth,Education,andSocialServiceNon‐profitOrganizationsinSouthernNV

Thesecondapplicationofsocialnetworkanalysisinthisprojectwastohelpusunderstandtherolesandpositionsofindividualorganizationswithintheoverallnetwork.Thepositionofanorganizationwithinthenetworkdeterminesitscapacitytoaccessknowledgeandresources,spreadthatknowledgeefficiently,andcontroltheflowofinformationandresources.Ultimately,theorganizationsthatscorethehighestonseveralkeynetworkmeasuresareconsideredtobethemostactiveandinfluentialwithintheoverallsystem.

Thereareanumberofwaystodescribeanorganization’sparticipationwithin,importanceto,orinfluenceovertheoverallnetwork.Themostcommonmeasuresofcentralityaredegree,eigenvector,betweenness,andcloseness.Networkswithmorecentralstructureshavegreatercapacitytocoordinateotherorganizationsandproviderapidresponsetonewopportunities.Theyalsohavegreatercapacitytoanticipateandcopewithuncertaintiesandchallenges(Blanchet&James,2011).

Page5

DegreeCentrality–Howpopularisyourorganization?

Oneofthemostcommonwaystomeasurenetworkcentralityisviadegreecentrality.Degreecentralityissimplythenumberofimmediatecontactsanorganizationhasintheoverallnetwork.Degreecentralityisviewedastheorganization’slevelofinvolvementoractivityinthenetworkandcharacterizestheextenttowhichanorganizationcanbeconsideredtobeamajorchannelforinformation.Organizationswithhighdegreecentralityareinvolvedwithmanyother

organizationsandthushavethepotentialtoobtainanddisseminateinformationandresourcesquickly.Alistofthe20organizationswiththehighestdegreecentralityispresentedinTable1withtheoverallnumberofties(connectionswithotherorganizations)andthestandardizedmeasurethatrepresentstheproportionofconnectionstheorganizationhasoutofallpossibleconnections.Figure5belowpresentsasociogramofthese20organizationswiththehighestdegreecentralityscores.

Table1DegreeCentrality‐Top20Organizations

Wecanseethattheprivatenon‐profitorganizationsarethemostrepresentedwith11organizationswhilethefaith‐basedorganizationsaretheleastrepresentedwithonlyoneorganization(CatholicCharities).Overall,thetop20mostconnectedorganizationsarealsowellconnectedwitheachother.

UNLV,forexample,isdirectlyconnectedto11oftheseorganizations,andThreeSquareandCatholicCharitiesaredirectlyconnectedto14organizationseach.Everyorganizationwithinthetop20caneitherdirectlyreacheachotherorreacheachotherindirectlythroughapaththroughoneortwootherorganizations.

Organization DegreeCentrality(NumberofTies)

StandardizedDegreeCentrality

UNLV 97 0.213

UnitedWayofSouthernNevada 82 0.180

HELPofSouthernNevada 73 0.160

CatholicCharities 72 0.158

ThreeSquare 70 0.154

ClarkCountySchoolDistrict 66 0.145

OpportunityVillage 55 0.121

GoodwillofSouthernNevada 50 0.110

ClarkCountyFamilyServices 41 0.090

ClarkCountySocialServices 41 0.090

BoysandGirlsClubsofLasVegas 40 0.088

TheShadeTree 39 0.086

LasVegasUrbanLeague 38 0.083

NevadaPartners 38 0.083

NevadaPEP 38 0.083

SouthernNevadaHealthDistrict 37 0.081

MGMResortsFoundation 37 0.081

CityofLasVegas 36 0.079

LegalAidCenterofSouthernNevada 36 0.079

SafeNest 35 0.077

 

Page6

Figure5SociogramofConnectionsbetweenthe20MostConnectedOrganizations

red=private;blue=government;green=funders;pink=faith‐based

EigenvectorCentrality–Howpopularareyourfriends?

Inadditiontohowmanyconnectionsanorganizationhas,itisalsoimportanttobeconnectedtothe“right”organizations.Thatis,anorganizationincreasesitscentralityinthenetworkanditsabilitytoobtaininformationandresourcesifitisconnectedtootherorganizationsthathavenumerousconnections.Inachildhoodfriendshipcircle,thiswouldbeafriendshipwiththemostpopularkids.Thismeasureisreferredtoaseigenvectorcentrality.

Organizationswithahighnumberoftiessometimesalsohavehigheigenvectorcentralityscores,butnotalways.Forexample,althoughTheSalvationArmyandCommunitiesinSchoolsNevadawerenotinthetop20fordegreecentrality,theredidratehighlyoneigenvectorcentrality.Thus,whilethoseorganizationsthemselvesdonothavethesamehighnumberofconnectionsasUNLVorUnitedWay,forexample,theyareconnectedtowell‐connectedorganizations,affordingthemaccesstoinformationandresources.

Table2liststhe20organizationswiththehighesteigenvectorcentrality.

Table2EigenvectorCentrality‐Top20Organizations

Organization EigenvectorCentrality

United WayofSN 0.239UNLV 0.222ThreeSquare 0.218HELPofSouthernNV 0.216CatholicCharities 0.214ClarkCountySchoolDistrict 0.186GoodwillofSouthernNV 0.161OpportunityVillage 0.151LasVegasUrbanLeague 0.144BoysandGirlsClubsofLV 0.142CityofLasVegas 0.141ClarkCountySocialServices 0.127TheSalvationArmySouthernNV 0.122NevadaPartners 0.121VegasPBS 0.120CommunitiesinSchoolNV 0.118TheShadeTree 0.115MGMResortsFoundation 0.114ClarkCountyFamilyServices 0.105CityofNorthLasVegas 0.101

Page7

BetweennessCentrality–Whereistheorganizationlocatedinthenetwork?

Whereanorganizationislocatedinthenon‐profitnetworkisalsoimportant.Anorganizationthatissituatedbetweendisconnectedorganizationscanserveasanintermediaryoraninformationandresourcebroker.Thisplacementaffordstheorganizationcertainadvantagesandpowerbecauseitcancontroltheflowofinformationandresources.Ifanorganizationrestsbetweenmanyotherorganizationsinthenetwork,thatorganizationcangreatlyinfluencethenetworkbybeinganeffectivemessengerofinformation.Thistypeofnetworkcentralityisreferredtoasbetweennesscentrality.Researchindicatesthatbetweennesscentralitybestcapturesthemostimportantactorsinanetwork–thenon‐profitleadersormostinfluentialorganizations(Freeman,1979;Wasserman&Faust,1994)

Table3Freeman’sBetweennessCentrality‐Top20OrganizationsOrganization Betweenness

Centrality

UNLV 12.254UnitedWayofSN 8.007HELPofSouthernNevada 6.911OpportunityVillage 5.449CatholicCharities 5.329ThreeSquare 5.197ClarkCountySchoolDistrict 5.119TheShadeTree 2.682GoodwillofSouthernNevada 2.596NevadaPEP 2.371ClarkCountyFamilyServices 2.232MGMResortsFoundation 2.216SNHealthDistrict 2.159WestcareFoundation 2.134LegalAidCenterofSN 2.083NevadaStateCollege 1.990

NVHealthDivision&DivisionofMentalHealthServ.

1.977

ClarkCountySocialServices 1.961USOLasVegas 1.900NevadaGIVES 1.881Note:NormalizedValues

Anorganizationwithahighbetweennesscentralityscorecanbeconsideredabridgingorganization.

Ifthatorganizationwasremovedfromthenetwork,thenetworkwouldbecomedisconnectedorinthemostextremecaseitcouldcollapse.Table3liststhe20organizationswiththehighestbetweennesscentralityscores.

ClosenessCentrality–Howindependentistheorganization?

Closenesscentralityemphasizesanorganization’sindependence.Anorganizationthatisclosetomanyotherorganizationsisveryindependentbecauseitcanquicklyreachouttomanyotherswithoutneedingtorelymuchonintermediariesorbrokers.Theseorganizationscanalsoquicklymobilizeothersinthenetworkbecausetheycanmoreeasilyreachouttomanyorganizationsthancanmoredisconnectedorganizations.Researchershavelinkedclosenesscentralitywiththeabilitytoeasilyaccessinformationinanetwork(Leavitt,1951)andwithhavingpowerandinfluenceoverthenetwork(Coleman1973;Friedkin,1991).Table4liststhe20organizationswiththehighestclosenesscentralityscores.

PredictingCentrality

Aftercalculatingthemostcommoncentralityscoresforeachorganization,wemergedthosescoreswithdatacollectedfromtheorganizationsorinformationwecouldfindonlineabouttheirsize,budget,age,andtypesofservicesprovided.Withthatinformation,weareabletopredictthetypesoforganizationsthatshouldhavehighcentralityscores.Inotherwords,whatorganizationalcharacteristicsareassociatedwithdegree,eigenvector,betweenness,andclosenesscentrality?

 

Page8

Table4ClosenessCentrality‐Top20Organizations

Organization ClosenessCentrality

UnitedWayofSN 8.318UNLV 8.308HELPofSouthernNevada 8.292ThreeSquare 8.276CatholicCharities 8.270ClarkCountySchoolDistrict 8.240OpportunityVillage 8.221GoodwillofSN 8.187MGMResortsFoundation 8.152SalvationArmySN 8.143LasVegasUrbanLeague 8.141CityofLasVegas 8.134ClarkCountyFamilyServices 8.133ClarkCountySocialServices 8.133LegalAidCenterofSN 8.133BoyandGirlsClubsofLV 8.131VegasPBS 8.123TheShadeTree 8.121NevadaGIVES 8.117CommunitiesinSchoolsofNV 8.115Note:NormalizedValues

Theresultsofbivariatecorrelationanalysesshowthattherearesignificantpositiverelationshipsbetweenorganizationage,numberofemployees,annualbudgetandcentralityscores.

Onaverage,olderandlargerorganizations,intermsofbothnumberofemployeesandbudget,havegreatercentralityinthenetwork,includinggreateractivity,influence,power,andaccesstoknowledgeandresources.Overall,thereisanegativerelationshipbetweenbeingaprivatenon‐profitorganizationandeachofthecentralityscores,butthisislargelybecausetherearesomanyprivatenon‐profitorganizationswith

onlyoneortwoconnections,andthoseoutnumberthehandfulofprivatenon‐profitorganizationswithalargenumberofconnections.Finally,beingagovernmentnon‐profitorganizationhasapositiverelationshipwithdegree,eigenvector,andbetweennesscentrality,whilethereisnorelationshipbetweenbeingafunderorfaith‐basedorganizationandcentralityscores.

Accordingly,wecalculatedthepredicted(i.e.expected)centralitymeasuresforalltheorganizationswithcompleteage,budget,andemployeenumberinformation.Therewere276suchorganizations.Aftercalculatingtheexpectedvalues,wecomparedthosetothemeasuredcentralitymeasuresvalues.Someorganizationsperformedbetterthanexpectedandsomeperformedworsethanexpectedineachcentralitymeasure.

Werankedtheover‐performingorganizationsusingtherelativedifferenceformula(i.e.,thedifferencebetweenthemeasuredandtheexpectedscorerelativetotheexpectedscore,whichtakesthesizeoftheexpectedscoreintoaccount).Tables5through8displaythetop10over‐performingorganizationsineachcentralitymeasure.

Amongtheunder‐performingorganizations,somedefaultedtothiscategorybecausetheirmainareasofoperationarenothealth,education,orsocialservices.However,someorganizationsareunder‐performingdespitethefactthattheyoperateinoneormoreofthoseareasandthattheirbudget,age,andnumberofemployeespredictthemtohavehighcentralityscores.TwoofthoseorganizationsareUniversityofNevadaCooperativeExtension(DegreeCentrality–Expected:25.550,Measured:4)andCure4theKidsFoundation(DegreeCentrality–Expected:24.627,Measured:5)

 

 

 

 

 

Page9

Table5DegreeCentrality‐Top10Over‐PerformingOrganizations

 

Table6EigenvectorCentrality‐Top10Over‐PerformingOrganizations

Table7Freeman’sBetweennessCentrality‐Top10Over‐PerformingOrganizations

Organization Expected Measured RelativeDiff.UNLV 23.318 97 3.160UnitedWayofSouthernNevada 20.046 82 3.091NevadaGIVES 7.449 30 3.027MGMResortsFoundation 10.291 37 2.595NevadaPartners 11.671 38 2.256HELPofSouthernNevada 23.701 73 2.080CatholicCharities 23.426 72 2.074ThreeSquare 23.021 70 2.041FamilyTiesofNevada 7.548 22 1.915NevadaHomelessAlliance 7.565 22 1.908

Organization Expected Measured RelativeDiff.NevadaGIVES 0.019 0.093 3.905UnitedWayofSouthernNevada 0.058 0.239 3.135MGMResortsFoundation 0.028 0.114 3.123NevadaHomelessAlliance 0.019 0.077 2.988NevadaPartners 0.032 0.121 2.795NevadaPublicEducationFoundation 0.019 0.071 2.658ThreeSquare 0.066 0.218 2.285UNLV 0.069 0.222 2.229CatholicCharities 0.068 0.214 2.138HELPofSouthernNevada 0.069 0.216 2.136

Organization Expected Measured RelativeDiff.UNLV 1.134 12.254 9.801USOLasVegas 0.229 1.900 7.296UnitedWayofSouthernNevada 0.988 8.007 7.107NevadaGIVES 0.236 1.881 6.955SHARE 0.267 1.625 5.087MGMResortsFoundation 0.375 2.216 4.912ActionRed 0.232 1.353 4.843R&RPartnersFoundation 0.241 1.405 4.841FamilyTiesofNevada 0.253 1.479 4.835HELPofSouthernNevada 1.193 6.911 4.791

 

Page10

Table8ClosenessCentrality‐Top10Over‐PerformingOrganizations

Organization Expected Measured RelativeDiff.HeartheCry 6.676 7.831 0.173EmergencyAidofBoulderCity 6.766 7.917 0.170HopeofNevada 6.679 7.787 0.166NevadaPartners 7.125 8.111 0.138NevadaGIVES 7.221 8.117 0.124JuniorLeague 7.058 7.922 0.122NevadaPublicEducationFoundation 7.184 8.028 0.117TheAdoptionExchange 7.165 7.971 0.113NevadaHomelessAlliance 7.197 8.003 0.112ProgressiveChoices 6.964 7.724 0.109

IdentifyingOpinionLeaders

Inadditiontoaskingsurveyrespondentstoidentifytheorganizationswithwhichtheirorganizationswereconnected,wealsoaskedthemtoidentifyupto10peoplewhomtheyperceivetobetheleadersand/orconnectorsofthenon‐profitcommunityofsouthernNevada.Wespecifiedthatthesearethepeopletowhomanexecutivedirector,programcoordinator,etc.,mightturnforadvice,expertise,assistance,orcollaborationwhenopportunitiesforfundingor

programmaticimprovementarose.Atotalof569peoplewereidentified.Mostofthosepeople(73%,N=414)wereidentifiedonlyonce.CassPalmerandStaceyWeddingwereidentifiedthemostfrequentlyat26timeseach.Thewordcloudbelow(Figure6)identifiesthepeoplewhoweremostcommonlylistedasopinionleaderswithlargerfontsizesindicatingmoretimesidentified.

Figure6WordMapofOpinionLeaders

Page11

BarrierstoCollaborationWeaskedrespondentstorankthemostimportantbarrierstheyseetocollaboratingwithothernon‐profitorganizationsonafive‐itemscalefromgreatestbarriertolowestbarrier.TheresultsoftherankingarepresentedinFigure7.

Figure7PerceivedBarrierstoCollaboration(%),

N=217

Inadditiontoaskingaboutbarriers,weaskedrespondentstoindicatetheirperspectivesaboutthecapacityofthehealth,education,andsocialservicenon‐profitcommunitytoeffectivelysecuregrantfunding.Abargraphshowingthepercentageofrespondentswhoreportedthattheoverallcapacitywasexcellent,good,fair,andpoorisdisplayedinFigure8.

Figure8PerceivedCapacityoftheSouthernNevadaNon‐ProfitstoSuccessfullyCompeteforFunding;

N=240

ConclusionSouthernNevadaisanever‐changingcommunitywithadiversesetofsocial,economic,anddemographicchallenges.Nosingleorganizationisabletodealwiththesechallengeseffectively.AcoordinatedapproachtoservicedeliverycanhavemanyadvantagesfortheresidentsofsouthernNevada,aswellastheemployeesofnon‐profitorganizationsthemselves.Suchadvantagesincludethecomingtogetherofdiversestakeholderswithdifferingperspectives,thepoolingoftangibleandinformation‐basedresources,thesharingofideasandstrategies,thediversificationoftalentsandcapabilities,reductionsinoverlapinservicesandthecoordinationofexistingservices,researchandanalysesthatarebroaderinscopeandmoreexpansiveindetailthanthosedonebyasingleorganization,andauniquechancetobetterunderstandotherorganizationsinourcommunity.Collaborationdoesnotcomewithoutchallenges,however.Successfulcollaborationsdemandclearcommunicationbetweenorganizations,amutuallybeneficialandwell‐definedrelationship,acommitmenttomutualgoalsandobjectives,sharedresponsibility,mutualauthority,accountabilityandrespect,andthesharingofresourcesandrewards(Parkinson,2013).

WehopethatthisstudycanserveasastartingpointforalargerdiscussionaboutsouthernNevada’snon‐profitcommunity,thecapacityofourorganizationstosuccessfullycompeteforfundingandserveclients,andstrategiesforimprovingcollaborationandmakingsouthernNevadaabetterplaceforourresidentstolive,work,andplay.

 

Page12

ReferencesBlanchetK,JamesP.Howtodo(ornottodo)…asocialnetworkanalysisinhealthsystemsresearch.HealthPolicyandPlanning.2011;1‐9.

ColemanJS.Themathematicsofcollectiveaction.Chicago:Aldine.1973.

FreemanLC.Centralityinaffiliationnetworks.SocialNetworks.1979;1:215‐39.

FriedkinNE.Theoreticalfoundationsforcentralitymeasures.AmJSociol.1991;96:1478‐504.

LeavittH.Someeffectsofcertaincommunicationpatternsongroupperformance.JournalofAbnormalandSocialPsychology.1951;46:38‐50.

MorenoJL,JenningsHH.Whoshallsurvive?Anewapproachtotheproblemofhumaninterrelations.Washington,DC:NervousandMentalDiseasePublishingCo.1934.

ParkinsonC.Buildingsuccessfulcollaborations:Aguidetocollaborationamongnon‐profitagenciesandbetweennon‐profitagenciesandbusinesses.2006.RetrievedJune28,2013viahttp://www.cfc‐fcc.ca/link_docs/collaborationReport.pdf

WassermanS,FaustF.Socialnetworkanalysis:Methodsandapplications.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.1994.

Page13

AbouttheAuthors

ShannonM.Monnat,PhD,isanAssistantProfessorofRuralSociologyandDemographyatPennStateUniversity.ShewasanAssistantProfessorofSociologyatUniversityofNevada,LasVegasfrom2008‐2013.ShereceivedherPhDinSociologyfromtheUniversityatAlbany,StateUniversityofNewYorkin2008.Herinterdisciplinaryresearchfocusesonthesocialdemographyofyouth,children,andfamilieslivinginruralandurbanareasoftheU.S.withaparticularfocusonsocialandspatialinequalitiesandsocialdeterminantsofhealth.Sheisinterestedinhowthecharacteristicsofneighborhoods,families,andschoolscreatebarrierstoorprovideopportunitiesforwell‐being.

AnnaSmedley,M.S.W.,isastudentintheSociologyPhDprogramattheUniversityofNevada,LasVegas.Sheiscompletingherdissertationonvariationinoccupationalmobilityamongwhite,black,Mexican,PuertoRicanandCubanwomenoverthepastthreedecades.Since2007Annahasbeeninvolvedinon‐goingdiversityandcommunityengagementinitiativesthataimtocreateacollege‐goingcultureinsouthernNevada,increaseaccesstohighereducationforunderrepresentedgroups,andcreateamoreinclusivecampusenvironment.Sheisinterestedinracialandethnicvariationsinsocialmobilityandteachingforsocialjustice.

FatmaNasoz,PhD,istheseniorresidentscholarofinformationtechnologywithTheLincyInstituteatUNLV.Previously,shewasanAssistantProfessoratUNLV’sSchoolofInformatics.SheischargedwithleadingtheInstitute’stechnologyinitiativesthatwillenhancetheITanddatacapabilitiesofsouthernNevada’snonprofitandgovernmentagencieswithinthesectorsofhealth,educationandsocialservices.HeracademicresearchfocusesonArtificialIntelligenceandHuman‐ComputerInteraction.ShereceivedherPhDinComputerSciencefromUniversityofCentralFloridain2004.

Acknowledgments

TheauthorswishtothankTheLincyInstituteatUNLVforprovidingfundingandtechnicalsupportforthisprojectandtheDepartmentofSociologyatUNLVforprovidingcomputingsupport.SpecialthankstograduateresearchassistantsinTheLincyInstitutefortheirhelpinlocatingcontactinformationforthenon‐profitorganizationsandtoRobertLang,LucyKlinkhammer,AlexandraNikolich,SonyaHorsford,RamonaDenbyBrinson,andDeniseTanataAshbyfortheirfeedbackontheresearchplanandsurveydesignandtheirassistancewithidentifyingthepoolofeligiblenon‐profitorganizationsinClarkCounty.

AboutUNLV

UNLV,foundedin1957,isaninstitutionofapproximately27,000studentsandnearly2,900facultyandstafflocatedonthesoutherntipofNevadaminutesfromtheLasVegasStrip.ClassifiedbytheCarnegieFoundationfortheAdvancementofTeachingasaresearchuniversitywithhighresearchactivity,UNLVoffersmorethan200undergraduate,graduateanddoctoraldegreeprogramsincludinginnovativeacademicdegreesinsuchfieldsasgamingmanagement,entrepreneurship,entertainmentengineeringandmuchmore.Theentertainmentcapitaloftheworld,LasVegasoffersstudentsa“livinglaboratory”forresearch,internships,andawidevarietyofjobopportunities.UNLVisdedicatedtodevelopingandsupportingthehumancapital,regionalinfrastructure,andeconomicdiversificationthatNevadaneedsforasustainablefuture.Formoreinformation,visit:http://www.unlv.edu/

 

 

Page14

AboutTheLincyInstitute

Establishedin2009,TheLincyInstituteconductsandsupportsresearchthatfocusesonimprovingNevada’shealth,education,andsocialservices.ThisresearchwillbeusedtobuildcapacityforserviceprovidersandenhanceeffortstodrawstateandfederalmoneytothegreaterLasVegas.TheLincyInstitutewillalsohighlightkeyissuesthataffectpublicpolicyandquality‐of‐lifedecisionsonbehalfofchildren,seniors,andfamiliesin.RobertE.Lang,Ph.D.servesastheInstitute’sExecutiveDirector.Tolearnmorevisit:http://www.unlv.edu/lincyinstitute 

4505S.MarylandParkway,Box453067LasVegas,NV89154(702)895‐0088

Thisinformationmaybeusedandcopiesmadefornon‐commercialpurposes.Properattributionisrequired.

Forcitationpurposes,pleaseuse:Monnat,S.M.et.al.(2013,October).IdentifyingandDescribingtheNetworkofHealth,Education,andSocialServiceNon‐ProfitOrganizationsinSouthernNevada,SpecialReportNo.1,TheLincyInstituteatUniversityofLasVegas.