Consilience Group, LLC

We put proven practices for equitable people-centered services and systems to work for your specific environment.

Your organization, community and ecosystem are distinctive. Effective solutions must be tailored to the unique conditions that influence your success or failure. Yet ‘recreating the wheel’ can waste precious resources and slow you down.

We balance these two realities by engaging your stakeholders through human-centered design methods to shape what works in other settings to your specific situation.

And, rather than promoting any one model, practice, or framework, our work is informed by proven concepts for high performing people-centered systems and services.

We ground all our services in a Socio-Ecological Framework: This framework maps the complex interplay between individual, relationship, community, and societal factors for transformational change — and provides a holistic context to align projects for greatest impact.

Our system designs are shaped by System of Care Values and Principles: System of Care values and principles build reliable mechanisms for individualized, person-driven services through data-driven, cultural-responsive service collaborations across multiple providers and systems.

Our front-line service and program designs are framed by a Two-Generation (2-Gen) approach: 2-Gen services simultaneously provide holistic resources and social connections for children and adults in families, however families define themselves. Successful 2-Gen approaches require providers to organize around families, rather than the other way around.

Our metrics and performance management design apply Results-Based Accountability™: Our staff is trained in RBA, a disciplined method for planning, accountability, and performance measurement which rigorously maps the individual performance of programs, agencies, and service systems to shared outcomes of well-being for entire populations.

Our policy and funding strategies reflect Targeted Universalism: This way of thinking eliminates the false choice between investing in resources that benefit everyone in a community versus defined sub-populations. It establishes a universal goal, such as good health, while recognizing that some people will need more resources than others to reach that goal.