in non profit managment principle practice Do NSV reletionship with the city government seem to be collaborations or partnership or is it principally a government contactor?

2010, there was nothing left to shave off," said Miriam's executive director Tim Fretz (Small, 2012). In addition to the economic downturn, Miriam's House was adjusting to changes in the need for its services. Miriam's hospice model was becoming outdated, as medical advances were extending the lives of people with HIV and increasing the need for HIV treatment programs (Small, 2012). Given the environment, Miriam's House, like NSV, began looking for a partner. The partnership began with NSV offering mental health and employment services at Mir- iam's House, which Miriam's would have been unable to provide with its strained resources (Tomassoni, 2011). But talk soon turned to the possibility of merger. As Stribling recalls, "Given the very strong mission-fit and positive chemistry between our two organizations, it occurred to me right away that we could make a successful merger that would strengthen our collective impact.... [We) quickly progressed to candidly proposing a merger-a 'partnership on steroids'" (FitzGerald, 2013). NSV retained Peter Shields, an attorney experienced in corporate mergers, to manage the process. It began with an exchange of for- mal letters covering points such as real estate, programming, intellectual property, corporate structure, government contracts, and human resources. Both boards began considering the tough questions: What would happen to the executive director of Miriam's House? What about other staff of both organizations? What Page 238 of 531 43% about the name of Miriam's House (FitzGerald, 2013)? In September 2011, N Street Village and Mir- iam's House agreed to merge. Miriam's would continue to house homeless women in one of its facilities, but its board would be dissolved and its programs would become a part of N Street Village. The Miriam's name would be preserved, but as a program of NSV. Reflecting on the merger, Stribling stated, "This feels like a marriage" (Tomassoni, 2011). The process had required 10 months. As Shields explains, "In a for-profit merger, it's full speed ahead and get it done as soon as possible. This was the opposite. The driver was the mission, so it required sensi- tivity and attention" (Small, 2012). How had success been achieved, when obstacles had derailed other proposed mergers in the nonprofit sector? Reflecting on the experience, Stribling cites three factors. First, the merger had positive endorsements from key constitu- ents, including key funders, founders, and donors. Major Washington foundations pro- vided financial support for the merger. Stribling conducted "insider previews" for other donors and constituents throughout the process to keep them informed and prepare them for what might result. Second, both executive directors kept their staff members informed and planned social activities to build relationships and trust among them. As Stribling describes, "We did a lot of gathering, greeting, socializing, pro- cessing, and celebrating both during and after Page 238 of 531 44% the process ... to try and honor and preserve and promote the positive culture and morale that both organizations enjoyed" (FitzGerald, 2013). And, third, the process was carefully managed, by Shields and by Tracy Cecil, an NSV senior staff member who was assigned as project director. Shields's involvement was critical, as Stribling explains, because "He was able to represent our board in the negotiations and also take some sensitive staff elements ... offline and into the board-to-board communica- tion" (FitzGerald, 2013). But the period following the merger also required continued sensitivity. One member of Miriam's former board who had financial expertise was added to the NSV board, and Tim Fretz moved from Miriam's staff to become operations manager at NSV. Sam Collins went on to serve as president of the Lutheran Volun- teer Corps. NSV implemented combined staff training programs and clients adjusted to the change. As one client explained in a newspaper interview, she previously had lived at Miriam's House and was reluctant to go to another organ- ization at a different location to receive services. Following the merger, she continued to live at Miriam's but also attended classes and groups at NSV, several blocks away. Despite her initial discomfort, she eventually reported, "It pretty much feels like a family" (Tomassoni, 2011). Looking back on the merger process, Stribling offers advice to other organizations, frankly noting costs as well as benefits. She observes Page 238 of 531 44% that while mergers offer the efficiencies of larger scale in the long run, there are high immediate investments that need to be made and hidden costs over the long run, both tangible and in- tangible. Those include, for example, needed investments in IT infrastructure and the greater commitment of effort required to maintain organizational culture in a larger organization (FitzGerald, 2013). The principal benefits relate to mission: By joining forces with Miriam's House, we were able not only to reinforce the finan- cial position of both organizations, but we have been able to expand HIV services to hundreds of women, AND we have opened the potential to add to our supportive housing inventory even further at more moderate cost than we could have other- wise. These are significant positive out- comes that will have a lasting impact for the people we exist to serve. (FitzGerald, 2013) As the economy improved and the benefits of the merger came to be realized, N Street Village sought new ways to grow and increase its im- pact. But growth would require new strategies and new partnerships. NSV "had exploited every inch of space at its flagship property on N Street, which occupied an entire block (Neibauer, 2012). Expansion at that location had been foreclosed by changes in Page 238 of 531 44% Housing First model] is a direction we've been hoping the district would move in" (Driessen, 2012). Consistent with the city's new strategy, in 2012, N Street Village opened its third residential site to provide supportive services for 31 of the city's most vulnerable homeless women. Located five blocks from NSV's main building, the new residence was named Erna's House, in honor of Erna Steinbruck, cofounder of N Street Village (N Street Village, n.d.-a). The building, once fore- closed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, was purchased and reno- vated in 2011 by private developers and then was leased by the city's Department of Human Services for $750,000 a year. Operation of Erna's House would be the responsibility of NSV and would cost about $400,000 a year, with NSV covering about $100,000, and the city funding the balance (Neibauer, 2012). NSV initiated a new round of strategic planning in 2014, focusing on strategies for continued growth. In 2016, the organization opened its fourth housing site, the Patricia Handy Place for Women, offering emergency housing and hous- ing for women receiving on-site intensive med- ical care (N Street Village, n.d.-a) Using funds from its successful capital campaign, NSV also completed renovations to Miriam's House and added new units and amenities at that location (N Street Village, n.d.-b). Growth continued in 2017 with the opening of new programs at the Phyllis Wheatley YWCA, giving NSV a presence Page 239 of 531 44% in three of the city's eight wards (N Street Vil- lage, n.d.-a). Amid the dramatic gentrification of Washing- ton, DC, during the first two decades of the 21st century, some of its most vulnerable citizens had been left behind. A rapidly decreasing sup- ply of affordable housing and growing income disparities increased the number of such citi- zens and exacerbated their needs. Fifty-three percent of NSV clients were at least 50 years old. Seventy-five percent had chronic health problems, and 11 percent were living with HIV. Eighty-four percent had a history of trauma. Ninety-two percent had a history of mental ill- ness, substance abuse, or both (N Street Village, 2014). There were more than 6,500 homeless people in Washington in 2012, about 24 per- cent of whom were women (Neibauer, 2012). N Street Village served 1,400 of them. As Stribling (2014) explained, We have a lot of work to do ... and it will take every community-every board/ group/mission/organization AND our gov- ernment partnersto make progress and to address deeply entrenched poverty and its related problems.... I always encourage us to remember and share the idea that 'we are more alike than we are different.' A few small turns of fate or circumstance could render us in one another's position. Whether we are motivated by our faith or a sense of justice or compassion, we Page 239 of 531 44% 2010, there was nothing left to shave off," said Miriam's executive director Tim Fretz (Small, 2012). In addition to the economic downturn, Miriam's House was adjusting to changes in the need for its services. Miriam's hospice model was becoming outdated, as medical advances were extending the lives of people with HIV and increasing the need for HIV treatment programs (Small, 2012). Given the environment, Miriam's House, like NSV, began looking for a partner. The partnership began with NSV offering mental health and employment services at Mir- iam's House, which Miriam's would have been unable to provide with its strained resources (Tomassoni, 2011). But talk soon turned to the possibility of merger. As Stribling recalls, "Given the very strong mission-fit and positive chemistry between our two organizations, it occurred to me right away that we could make a successful merger that would strengthen our collective impact.... [We) quickly progressed to candidly proposing a merger-a 'partnership on steroids'" (FitzGerald, 2013). NSV retained Peter Shields, an attorney experienced in corporate mergers, to manage the process. It began with an exchange of for- mal letters covering points such as real estate, programming, intellectual property, corporate structure, government contracts, and human resources. Both boards began considering the tough questions: What would happen to the executive director of Miriam's House? What about other staff of both organizations? What Page 238 of 531 43% about the name of Miriam's House (FitzGerald, 2013)? In September 2011, N Street Village and Mir- iam's House agreed to merge. Miriam's would continue to house homeless women in one of its facilities, but its board would be dissolved and its programs would become a part of N Street Village. The Miriam's name would be preserved, but as a program of NSV. Reflecting on the merger, Stribling stated, "This feels like a marriage" (Tomassoni, 2011). The process had required 10 months. As Shields explains, "In a for-profit merger, it's full speed ahead and get it done as soon as possible. This was the opposite. The driver was the mission, so it required sensi- tivity and attention" (Small, 2012). How had success been achieved, when obstacles had derailed other proposed mergers in the nonprofit sector? Reflecting on the experience, Stribling cites three factors. First, the merger had positive endorsements from key constitu- ents, including key funders, founders, and donors. Major Washington foundations pro- vided financial support for the merger. Stribling conducted "insider previews" for other donors and constituents throughout the process to keep them informed and prepare them for what might result. Second, both executive directors kept their staff members informed and planned social activities to build relationships and trust among them. As Stribling describes, "We did a lot of gathering, greeting, socializing, pro- cessing, and celebrating both during and after Page 238 of 531 44% the process ... to try and honor and preserve and promote the positive culture and morale that both organizations enjoyed" (FitzGerald, 2013). And, third, the process was carefully managed, by Shields and by Tracy Cecil, an NSV senior staff member who was assigned as project director. Shields's involvement was critical, as Stribling explains, because "He was able to represent our board in the negotiations and also take some sensitive staff elements ... offline and into the board-to-board communica- tion" (FitzGerald, 2013). But the period following the merger also required continued sensitivity. One member of Miriam's former board who had financial expertise was added to the NSV board, and Tim Fretz moved from Miriam's staff to become operations manager at NSV. Sam Collins went on to serve as president of the Lutheran Volun- teer Corps. NSV implemented combined staff training programs and clients adjusted to the change. As one client explained in a newspaper interview, she previously had lived at Miriam's House and was reluctant to go to another organ- ization at a different location to receive services. Following the merger, she continued to live at Miriam's but also attended classes and groups at NSV, several blocks away. Despite her initial discomfort, she eventually reported, "It pretty much feels like a family" (Tomassoni, 2011). Looking back on the merger process, Stribling offers advice to other organizations, frankly noting costs as well as benefits. She observes Page 238 of 531 44% that while mergers offer the efficiencies of larger scale in the long run, there are high immediate investments that need to be made and hidden costs over the long run, both tangible and in- tangible. Those include, for example, needed investments in IT infrastructure and the greater commitment of effort required to maintain organizational culture in a larger organization (FitzGerald, 2013). The principal benefits relate to mission: By joining forces with Miriam's House, we were able not only to reinforce the finan- cial position of both organizations, but we have been able to expand HIV services to hundreds of women, AND we have opened the potential to add to our supportive housing inventory even further at more moderate cost than we could have other- wise. These are significant positive out- comes that will have a lasting impact for the people we exist to serve. (FitzGerald, 2013) As the economy improved and the benefits of the merger came to be realized, N Street Village sought new ways to grow and increase its im- pact. But growth would require new strategies and new partnerships. NSV "had exploited every inch of space at its flagship property on N Street, which occupied an entire block (Neibauer, 2012). Expansion at that location had been foreclosed by changes in Page 238 of 531 44% Housing First model] is a direction we've been hoping the district would move in" (Driessen, 2012). Consistent with the city's new strategy, in 2012, N Street Village opened its third residential site to provide supportive services for 31 of the city's most vulnerable homeless women. Located five blocks from NSV's main building, the new residence was named Erna's House, in honor of Erna Steinbruck, cofounder of N Street Village (N Street Village, n.d.-a). The building, once fore- closed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, was purchased and reno- vated in 2011 by private developers and then was leased by the city's Department of Human Services for $750,000 a year. Operation of Erna's House would be the responsibility of NSV and would cost about $400,000 a year, with NSV covering about $100,000, and the city funding the balance (Neibauer, 2012). NSV initiated a new round of strategic planning in 2014, focusing on strategies for continued growth. In 2016, the organization opened its fourth housing site, the Patricia Handy Place for Women, offering emergency housing and hous- ing for women receiving on-site intensive med- ical care (N Street Village, n.d.-a) Using funds from its successful capital campaign, NSV also completed renovations to Miriam's House and added new units and amenities at that location (N Street Village, n.d.-b). Growth continued in 2017 with the opening of new programs at the Phyllis Wheatley YWCA, giving NSV a presence Page 239 of 531 44% in three of the city's eight wards (N Street Vil- lage, n.d.-a). Amid the dramatic gentrification of Washing- ton, DC, during the first two decades of the 21st century, some of its most vulnerable citizens had been left behind. A rapidly decreasing sup- ply of affordable housing and growing income disparities increased the number of such citi- zens and exacerbated their needs. Fifty-three percent of NSV clients were at least 50 years old. Seventy-five percent had chronic health problems, and 11 percent were living with HIV. Eighty-four percent had a history of trauma. Ninety-two percent had a history of mental ill- ness, substance abuse, or both (N Street Village, 2014). There were more than 6,500 homeless people in Washington in 2012, about 24 per- cent of whom were women (Neibauer, 2012). N Street Village served 1,400 of them. As Stribling (2014) explained, We have a lot of work to do ... and it will take every community-every board/ group/mission/organization AND our gov- ernment partnersto make progress and to address deeply entrenched poverty and its related problems.... I always encourage us to remember and share the idea that 'we are more alike than we are different.' A few small turns of fate or circumstance could render us in one another's position. Whether we are motivated by our faith or a sense of justice or compassion, we Page 239 of 531 44%