<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Building Capacity</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.foundationreviewblog.org/2009/03/building-capacity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.foundationreviewblog.org/2009/03/building-capacity/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 12:12:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Elissa Perry</title>
		<link>http://www.foundationreviewblog.org/2009/03/building-capacity/comment-page-1/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>Elissa Perry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.founcationreviewblog.org/?p=14#comment-10</guid>
		<description>I think one other danger in trying to &quot;go to scale&quot; is falling into a part and parcel notion of &quot;best practices&quot; and replicating a model.  We all know that the same strategies don&#039;t often work the same way in different contexts.  We also know that success may look different and mean something different to different neighborhoods and communities.  Yet, we often try to take a strategy that has been successful in one place and create the same results in another place without taking into account that particular context and what success may mean there.  I have begun using the language &quot;successful practice&quot; to try to keep expectations open (and open to local adjustment and definition) and recognize that what&#039;s best in one place is not necessarily going to be the best in another.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think one other danger in trying to &#8220;go to scale&#8221; is falling into a part and parcel notion of &#8220;best practices&#8221; and replicating a model.  We all know that the same strategies don&#8217;t often work the same way in different contexts.  We also know that success may look different and mean something different to different neighborhoods and communities.  Yet, we often try to take a strategy that has been successful in one place and create the same results in another place without taking into account that particular context and what success may mean there.  I have begun using the language &#8220;successful practice&#8221; to try to keep expectations open (and open to local adjustment and definition) and recognize that what&#8217;s best in one place is not necessarily going to be the best in another.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom David</title>
		<link>http://www.foundationreviewblog.org/2009/03/building-capacity/comment-page-1/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 22:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.founcationreviewblog.org/?p=14#comment-7</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve heard the capacity building needs of these kinds of initiatives referred to as a &quot;bottomless pit.&quot; But we target communities with little infrastructure and expect big results. What approaches to capacity building seem to work best? What are the challenges?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve heard the capacity building needs of these kinds of initiatives referred to as a &#8220;bottomless pit.&#8221; But we target communities with little infrastructure and expect big results. What approaches to capacity building seem to work best? What are the challenges?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
