►
From YouTube: Q and A With Phil Peterson
Description
This video is a discussion with Phil Peterson, founder/consultant at KidSucceed LLC, as he discusses Pay for Success/Social Impact Bonds, a new and innovative way gaining traction in some states to finance social service programs.
A
I'm
Phil,
Peterson
and
I
am
the
principal
of
kids
succeed,
LLC,
it's
a
pay
for
success,
advisory
services
firm
and
what
I
do
is
I
help
jurisdictions.
Communities
around
the
country
explore
the
viability
of
pay
for
success
and
help
them
build
a
strategy
to
work
towards
pay
for
success
feasibility,
so
I
am
providing
upstream
advisory
services
prior
to
a
pay
for
success,
project
actually
being
constructed.
B
A
Pay
for
success
is
a
an
arrangement,
that's
contractually,
based
between
multiple
parties
and
operated
through
a
public/private
partnership,
and
it's
meant
to
address
one
or
more
societal
issues
that
are
problematic
and
it
should
be
supported
by
quality
programs
that
are
evidence
supported,
and
the
primary
goal
is
twofold
of
pay
for
success,
one
to
improve
outcomes
for
the
targeted
population
in
the
program
and
two
to
reduce
government
costs
of
what
otherwise
might
be
remediation,
so
pay
for
success
can
be
curative
and
it
can
be
preventive.
Both.
A
First,
you
need
to
have
a
quality
program
that
you're
going
to
administer
for
folks
and
generally,
these
programs
are
administered
for
at-risk
families,
children,
the
area
I
work
in
is
early
childhood,
but
also
up
through
all
the
rest
of
the
educational
years
and
at-risk
families.
Children
and
students
are
the
ones
that
will
benefit
the
most
from
this,
so
quality
programs
that
are
evidence
supported
are
very,
very
important.
A
A
Another
one
is
that,
with
all
the
interest
and
I
know,
NCSL
is
doing
a
lot
of
work
in
this
area
with
all
the
interest
in
evidence-based
policy
making
and
budget
decision-making.
It's
critical
that
the
community
has
some
sensitivity
or
some
predisposition
towards
evidence-based
budgeting.
It
will
help
them
understand
the
pay
for
success
model,
much
better
and
help
them
to
adapt
it
to
the
societal
issues
that
they're
trying
to
remediate,
and
then
I
would
say.
Another
issue
is
pay
for.
A
Success
should
not
be
entered
into
simply
to
capture
short-term
cost
avoidance
savings,
that's
really
the
tip
of
the
iceberg
and
what
we're
starting
to
focus
more
and
more
on,
and
especially
policymakers.
This
is
very
important
to
them
is:
are
the
long-term
longer-term
outcome
improvement
areas,
because
we
understand
that
those
are
the
things
that
will
have
much
more
powerful
returns
to
society,
to
the
family,
to
the
community
and
to
the
individual.
A
I
think
it's
a
little
soon
to
be
talking
about
definitively
how
government
might
be
changing
as
a
result
of
pay
for
success
interventions,
because
there
are
really
only
10
projects
in
the
United
States
right
now
that
are
in
that
are
in
full
operation.
I
think
we'll
start
to
see
more
of
a
trend
towards
sensitivity
in
government
concerning
what
kinds
of
programs
are
supported.
Are
these
programs
quality
programs?
Do
they
have
evidence
to
support
their
code,
there's
their
sustainability?
A
That
also
starts
to
affect
how
money
is
spent
by
policymakers
and
and
and
and
decision
makers
in
government,
and
what
that
really
means
is
that
there
will
need
to
be
a
new
discipline,
and
this
is
slowly
growing.
A
new
discipline
where
critical
decision-making
is
infused
into
government
based
on
what
works,
so
that
programs
that
work
will
get
support
programs
that
don't
show
that
they
work
will
not
get
support.
B
A
I
think
it's
of
interest
to
legislators,
because
legislators
obviously
hold
the
purse
strings
in
in
states
and
communities
on
behalf
of
taxpayers.
They
have
a.
They
have
a
sacred
trust
to
be
able
to
wisely
spend
taxpayer
money.
So
this
new
discipline
that
we
were
trying
to
infuse
into
government
assessment
of
projects,
decision
making
and
transparent
communication
to
taxpayers
is
exactly
what
pay
for
success
is
a
tool
to
facilitate.