SIFP 2011 Comprehensive Survey of Social Innovators:
Quarterfinalists, Semifinalists, Finalists, and Winners
October 20, 2011
PAGE: 1
2. My organization is a |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 41 | ||
| Response Percent |
Response Count |
||
| Quarterfinalist | 39.0% | 16 | |
| Semifinalist | 24.4% | 10 | |
| Finalist | 7.3% | 3 | |
| Finalist and award winner | 29.3% | 12 | |
3. Please confirm the type of your organization |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 41 | ||
| Response Percent |
Response Count |
||
| Independent nonprofit 501(c)(3) or equivalent | 46.3% | 19 | |
| Nonprofit via a fiscal agent of registered 501(c)(3) | 12.2% | 5 | |
| Student team working through Ashoka | 14.6% | 6 | |
| For-profit: C-corp, B-corp, or LLC | 26.8% | 11 | |
PAGE: 2
4. (Only for non-profits working through a fiscal agent): Enter the organization name of your fiscal agent and your primary contact there, including their phone number and email. |
||
|---|---|---|
| answered question | 4 | |
| Response Count |
||
| 4 | ||
PAGE: 3
5. Age of your *organization* (not program) for which you applied to SIFP: |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 40 | ||
| Response Percent |
Response Count |
||
| Under 1 year | 27.5% | 11 | |
| 1-2 years | 35.0% | 14 | |
| 3-5 years | 10.0% | 4 | |
| 6-10 years | 5.0% | 2 | |
| 11-24 years | 2.5% | 1 | |
| 25+ years | 20.0% | 8 | |
6. Age of your *program* for which you applied to SIFP, measured in months since formation. If program and organization are the same, enter the age of your organization, in months: |
||
|---|---|---|
| answered question | 40 | |
| Response Count |
||
| 40 | ||
7. Age of primary SIFP participant (who presented in quarter/semi/finals) |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 40 | ||
| Response Percent |
Response Count |
||
| Under 18 | 7.5% | 3 | |
| 19-24 | 7.5% | 3 | |
| 25-30 | 15.0% | 6 | |
| 31-40 | 25.0% | 10 | |
| 41-50 | 17.5% | 7 | |
| 51-60 | 22.5% | 9 | |
| 60+ | 5.0% | 2 | |
8. Where did you first hear about the SIFP program? |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 40 | ||
| Response Percent |
Response Count |
||
| Social Venture Partners | 15.0% | 6 | |
| Washington Women's Foundation | 2.5% | 1 | |
| United Way | 5.0% | 2 | |
| Microsoft Alumni Foundation | 10.0% | 4 | |
| Seattle Foundation | 2.5% | 1 | |
| ZINO Society | 2.5% | 1 | |
| Alliance of Angels | 2.5% | 1 | |
| Other angel group | 2.5% | 1 | |
| University of Washington | 0.0% | 0 | |
| Seattle University | 0.0% | 0 | |
| Bainbridge Graduate Institute | 2.5% | 1 | |
| City Club | 0.0% | 0 | |
| TiE | 2.5% | 1 | |
| Ashoka | 7.5% | 3 | |
| SIFP email forwarded from a friend | 15.0% | 6 | |
| Other (please specify) | 30.0% | 12 | |
9. Do you remember when you first heard about SIFP? |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 40 | ||
| Response Percent |
Response Count |
||
| Early July | 30.0% | 12 | |
| Mid July | 17.5% | 7 | |
| Late July | 12.5% | 5 | |
| Early August | 12.5% | 5 | |
| Mid August | 17.5% | 7 | |
| Don't Remember | 10.0% | 4 | |
10. EXTRA MOTIVATION to complete this survey: |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 39 | ||
| Response Percent |
Response Count |
||
| When I finish the survey, I would like to be put in a drawing to win a limited edition "SIFP Social Innovation Volunteer" T-Shirt. | 66.7% | 26 | |
| I don't care about T-Shirts but am happy to be 1/3 of the way through already! | 33.3% | 13 | |
11. Would you feel more comfortable giving the SIFP team feedback in an anonymous survey? |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 39 | ||
| Response Percent |
Response Count |
||
| Yes | 15.4% | 6 | |
| Maybe | 10.3% | 4 | |
| Does not matter one way or the other | 74.4% | 29 | |
PAGE: 4
12. Which aspect of SVP's SIFP program is the MOST valuable to your organization? |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 40 | ||
| Response Percent |
Response Count |
||
| Access to grant awards (or investments) | 20.0% | 8 | |
| Fast pitch training (pitch clinics, etc.) | 10.0% | 4 | |
| Connections with peer orgs made through SIFP | 2.5% | 1 | |
| Mentoring from SIFP volunteers | 20.0% | 8 | |
| Promotion of my organization to the community | 20.0% | 8 | |
| Connections to donors and/or investors | 27.5% | 11 | |
13. What aspect of SVP's SIFP program is the SECOND most valuable to your organization? |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 39 | ||
| Response Percent |
Response Count |
||
| Access to grant awards (or investments) | 20.5% | 8 | |
| Fast pitch training (pitch clinics, etc.) | 15.4% | 6 | |
| Connections with peer orgs made through SIFP | 7.7% | 3 | |
| Mentoring from SIFP volunteers | 17.9% | 7 | |
| Promotion of my organization to the community | 15.4% | 6 | |
| Connections to donors and/or investors | 23.1% | 9 | |
14. What aspect of SVP's SIFP program is the THIRD most valuable to your organization? |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 38 | ||
| Response Percent |
Response Count |
||
| Access to grant awards (or investments) | 10.5% | 4 | |
| Fast pitch training (pitch clinics, etc.) | 21.1% | 8 | |
| Connections with peer orgs made through SIFP | 10.5% | 4 | |
| Mentoring from SIFP volunteers | 15.8% | 6 | |
| Promotion of my organization to the community | 26.3% | 10 | |
| Connections to donors and/or investors | 15.8% | 6 | |
15. If there is something else you've gained from the SIFP program, or expect to benefit from, please describe it here: |
||
|---|---|---|
| answered question | 21 | |
| Response Count |
||
| 21 | ||
PAGE: 5
16. Participating in the SIFP program has been an excellent use of time for me and/or my organization. 1=unfavorable, 5=favorable: |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 39 | ||
| Response Percent |
Response Count |
||
| 1 | 0.0% | 0 | |
| 2 | 5.1% | 2 | |
| 3 | 20.5% | 8 | |
| 4 | 25.6% | 10 | |
| 5 | 48.7% | 19 | |
17. I would highly recommend someone with a socially-innovative program, plan, or company to participate in the 2012 SIFP program. 1=unfavorable, 5=favorable: |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 40 | ||
| Response Percent |
Response Count |
||
| 1 | 0.0% | 0 | |
| 2 | 2.5% | 1 | |
| 3 | 12.5% | 5 | |
| 4 | 12.5% | 5 | |
| 5 | 72.5% | 29 | |
18. Thinking back to the beginning of the SIFP program, please rate the following elements on a scale of 1-5, where 1 is most unfavorable and 5 is most favorable. Leave blank if you did not participate / don't have an opinion. |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 40 | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Response Count |
|
| Application process | 0.0% (0) | 7.7% (3) | 17.9% (7) | 43.6% (17) | 30.8% (12) | 39 |
| Length and clarity of application | 0.0% (0) | 7.7% (3) | 33.3% (13) | 38.5% (15) | 20.5% (8) | 39 |
| Andy Goodman webcast (either live or playback) | 0.0% (0) | 6.9% (2) | 20.7% (6) | 41.4% (12) | 31.0% (9) | 29 |
| Pitch clinics & pitch coaching | 0.0% (0) | 8.3% (3) | 13.9% (5) | 44.4% (16) | 33.3% (12) | 36 |
| Pixelflow access to each of your pitches | 0.0% (0) | 5.7% (2) | 17.1% (6) | 48.6% (17) | 28.6% (10) | 35 |
| Mentoring via SIFP-matched mentor(s) | 5.4% (2) | 10.8% (4) | 2.7% (1) | 35.1% (13) | 45.9% (17) | 37 |
| Quarterfinals pitch and judging session | 0.0% (0) | 5.4% (2) | 21.6% (8) | 35.1% (13) | 37.8% (14) | 37 |
| Semifinals pitch and judging session | 0.0% (0) | 8.0% (2) | 20.0% (5) | 40.0% (10) | 32.0% (8) | 25 |
| SIFP event: process to create Posters | 13.0% (3) | 4.3% (1) | 65.2% (15) | 8.7% (2) | 8.7% (2) | 23 |
| SIFP event: on-stage presentation | 4.0% (1) | 0.0% (0) | 8.0% (2) | 36.0% (9) | 52.0% (13) | 25 |
| SIFP event: effectiveness of Poster-Table reception | 7.7% (2) | 11.5% (3) | 26.9% (7) | 38.5% (10) | 15.4% (4) | 26 |
| Overall resources provided via SIFP.net site | 0.0% (0) | 6.5% (2) | 29.0% (9) | 41.9% (13) | 22.6% (7) | 31 |
| Angelsoft/Gust capabilities and performance | 0.0% (0) | 13.3% (4) | 50.0% (15) | 26.7% (8) | 10.0% (3) | 30 |
| Communications from SIFP team throughout the program | 0.0% (0) | 10.8% (4) | 21.6% (8) | 29.7% (11) | 37.8% (14) | 37 |
19. For anything you rated 1 or 2, could you please give feedback on how we should improve. |
||
|---|---|---|
| answered question | 18 | |
| Response Count |
||
| 18 | ||
PAGE: 6
21. Please comment about anything in the program that was valuable to you that we have neglected to ask about, or leave blank if we covered the bases: |
||
|---|---|---|
| answered question | 12 | |
| Response Count |
||
| 12 | ||
22. Many feel that SIFP 2011 was on a overly-rushed timetable. For the 2012 SIFP program, the SIFP team should adjust time and resources in the following areas: |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 40 | |||
| Much more time (3-4 more weeks or hours) | More time (1-2 more weeks or hours) | About the same | Response Count |
|
| Time between when I first heard of SIFP and when applications were due | 22.5% (9) | 25.0% (10) | 52.5% (21) | 40 |
| Time between applications and quarterfinal competition | 20.0% (8) | 35.0% (14) | 45.0% (18) | 40 |
| Hours available from mentors over entire program | 37.5% (15) | 37.5% (15) | 25.0% (10) | 40 |
| Elapsed time over which I can work with mentors and coaches | 35.0% (14) | 35.0% (14) | 30.0% (12) | 40 |
| Time between semifinals and SIFP public event | 13.5% (5) | 37.8% (14) | 48.6% (18) | 37 |
23. We are looking into running some workshops in the spring, well in advance of when applications will be due for 2012. Thinking of where you were in April/May of this year, or where someone you might recommend for the 2012 program might be, please rate your interest in these potential workshops. |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 37 | ||||
| Not interested | Maybe interested | Likely to attend | Would definitely attend | Response Count |
|
| Measuring and reporting social impact | 5.6% (2) | 33.3% (12) | 36.1% (13) | 25.0% (9) | 36 |
| Business modelling & org sustainability | 8.1% (3) | 27.0% (10) | 29.7% (11) | 37.8% (14) | 37 |
| Innovating in service delivery with new technologies | 18.9% (7) | 40.5% (15) | 21.6% (8) | 18.9% (7) | 37 |
| Leadership and team development for non-profits | 18.9% (7) | 24.3% (9) | 32.4% (12) | 24.3% (9) | 37 |
| Developing your board and board of advisers | 16.2% (6) | 27.0% (10) | 27.0% (10) | 32.4% (12) | 37 |
| Spreading the word on a limited budget (mkt/PR, social media) | 8.1% (3) | 27.0% (10) | 32.4% (12) | 35.1% (13) | 37 |
| Pitch clinics - similar to September clinics (10-12 people 15 min each) | 5.4% (2) | 37.8% (14) | 32.4% (12) | 27.0% (10) | 37 |
| Pitch clinics - smaller groups (4-5 people 30 mins each) | 0.0% (0) | 36.1% (13) | 30.6% (11) | 33.3% (12) | 36 |
| Other (please specify) | 3 | ||||
24. Do you have other recommendations on how we should run the program, from a timing perspective? |
||
|---|---|---|
| answered question | 16 | |
| Response Count |
||
| 16 | ||
PAGE: 7
25. Would you like to have more/less/the same of the following areas *after* applications are accepted, with an understanding that doing more of things that cost money/resources will mean doing less of other things that have costs: |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 40 | ||||
| 2011 program was about right | Would like to see much more of this | Do not need this, can get elsewhere | No opinion or N/A | Response Count |
|
| Pitch coaching sessions | 59.0% (23) | 28.2% (11) | 0.0% (0) | 12.8% (5) | 39 |
| Mentoring | 32.4% (12) | 54.1% (20) | 2.7% (1) | 10.8% (4) | 37 |
| Additional workshops (business model development, use of technology, fundraising, etc.) | 15.4% (6) | 51.3% (20) | 15.4% (6) | 17.9% (7) | 39 |
| Judging sessions with real time verbal feedback | 38.5% (15) | 51.3% (20) | 0.0% (0) | 10.3% (4) | 39 |
| Social and peer connection opportunities | 39.5% (15) | 15.8% (6) | 28.9% (11) | 15.8% (6) | 38 |
| Networking opportunities with mentors, coaches, judges, donors, investors | 20.0% (8) | 72.5% (29) | 0.0% (0) | 7.5% (3) | 40 |
| Other (please specify) | 4 | ||||
26. Are there any specific things we asked you to do that in retrospect you feel were not a good use of time? |
||
|---|---|---|
| answered question | 11 | |
| Response Count |
||
| 11 | ||
27. Please rate the quality of the mentoring you received, from the primary, secondary, or other SIFP-connected mentors. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 40 | ||
| Response Percent |
Response Count |
||
| Not helpful | 0.0% | 0 | |
| So-so | 7.5% | 3 | |
| Good | 22.5% | 9 | |
| Very helpful | 42.5% | 17 | |
| Exceptional | 25.0% | 10 | |
| Didn't get mentored | 5.0% | 2 | |
PAGE: 8
28. Which mentor(s) was/were most helpful to you? |
||
|---|---|---|
| answered question | 26 | |
| Response Count |
||
| 26 | ||
29. We had many debates about how to configure awards. There are pros/cons of any model chosen. Putting aside whether you received an award or not, which of the following models do you feel would make the SIFP process and competition most attractive to innovators and most effective in achieving its objective (of increasing the speed and sustainability of social innovation in our region): |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 39 | ||
| Response Percent |
Response Count |
||
| The model used was about right | 61.5% | 24 | |
| Fewer and large grants & investments and no smaller ones would be better | 23.1% | 9 | |
| Broader distribution to all who make the finals would be better, even though each award would be smaller | 15.4% | 6 | |
30. Please add other thoughts on how we awarded grants & investments: |
||
|---|---|---|
| answered question | 17 | |
| Response Count |
||
| 17 | ||
31. Have you received, or are you confident you will receive, any donations or investments other than SIFP's publicized awards as a result of participating in the SIFP program? |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| answered question | 35 | ||
| Response Percent |
Response Count |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| No | 65.7% | 23 | |
| Yes, less than $1,000 | 5.7% | 2 | |
| Yes, between $1,000 and $4,999 | 8.6% | 3 | |
| Yes, between $5,000 and $9,999 | 2.9% | 1 | |
| Yes, between $10,000 and $19,999 | 2.9% | 1 | |
| Yes, $20,000+ | 14.3% | 5 | |
32. Are there other things we could add to the program that would have a material impact on how fast and effectively you pursue your venture or program, and/or that would increase your long-term organizational sustainability (via business model innovation, new forms of revenue, better fundraising, etc.)? |
||
|---|---|---|
| answered question | 19 | |



