4 nonprofit strategies for addressing complex social issues

Nonprofits across the country are grappling with complex social issues—challenges shaped by interconnected factors that are difficult to understand and solve, such as housing instability, food insecurity, and health inequities. These problems resist single-program solutions and are exacerbated by today’s environment of funding cuts, rising costs, political polarization, workforce shortages, and staff burnout.

As president and CEO of the bi3 Fund—a grantmaker in health—I’ve seen how these four strategies can help nonprofits make headway across issue areas. These are not models to replicate but rather approaches to adapt flexibly to each organization’s work.

1. Let data guide decisions and nonprofit strategies

“Data-driven” can sound obvious. In my experience, quantitative data—drawn from sources such as polls, censuses, academic studies, or public records—can clarify what a problem’s main causes are, who is most impacted, and where inequities exist. This information can help determine where to pilot and scale solutions.

Yet, nonprofits often make decisions based on incomplete information or assumptions rather than reliable evidence. That’s in part because the most useful data for refining nonprofit strategies is not always readily available. Organizations may need to collect, aggregate, and analyze new information to fully understand the multifaceted problem they want to address.

For example, bi3 is part of Hopeful Empowered Youth (HEY!), a Cincinnati coalition focused on improving youth mental health and well-being. While crisis metrics like suicide rates and emergency department visits are available, no regional metrics exist to measure well-being. So, HEY! partnered with Surgo Health, which conducted a national study in 2024 on youth mental health and well-being. Surgo Health is currently conducting a similar population-level, survey-based study in Greater Cincinnati, which will measure outcomes like life satisfaction, social well-being, ability to recover when things go wrong, and social support.

Data development takes effort, but metrics can align partners around shared goals, track trends, and inform decisions about where to focus limited resources.

2. Challenge assumptions by listening to lived experience

Organizations sometimes look at available data and assume they know how to solve the problem. But before committing time and resources to specific strategies, nonprofits and funders should listen to the experts: those closest to the problem who have lived experience.

Effective listening goes beyond focus groups or surveys. Ongoing conversations help build trust, particularly in communities where existing challenges or historical experiences have created skepticism toward systems. Listening to learn, without judgment, allows leaders to focus less on what they believe should happen and more on what those with lived experience say they need. When community voices contradict professional expertise, the resulting dialogue can reshape priorities, reveal overlooked barriers, and redirect nonprofit strategies toward addressing root causes.

For example, Cradle Cincinnati, a joint initiative of a network of cross-sector partners, focused on improving access to early prenatal care in its initial efforts to reduce infant mortality. However, conversations with women revealed a broader set of barriers to receiving care, including lack of transportation, child care, and paid leave. So, the partner organizations put additional strategies in place to address social barriers to care. Had medical providers only opened new appointments, they would have missed the mark.

3. Start small and try something new

Pilot programs are sometimes seen as tentative steps, but in practice they’re essential learning environments. Starting small allows nonprofits to test new solutions—then learn, adapt, and try again more readily.

Effective pilots have defined goals, clear success metrics, and short timeframes. They generate evidence that helps leaders decide whether to expand an approach and what to change before doing so.

For example, Cradle Cincinnati piloted a new model of care designed around mothers’ needs in a neighborhood with particularly high preterm birth rates. When the pilot showed a statistically significant reduction in extreme preterm births, the model was adapted to 11 additional neighborhoods. Data showing measurable impact also attracted additional partners and funding.

4. Center those closest to the problem as leaders

Systems change requires shifting power and shared decision making. People closest to the problem know what they need and want, so co-designed solutions tend to be relevant, trusted, and sustainable.

Centering lived experience means creating real decision-making roles, not merely advisory ones, for those closest to the problem. It means paying people for their time and contributions. These steps can challenge traditional hierarchical structures and require nonprofits to balance professional knowledge with community insight.

To that end, Hopeful Empowered Youth (HEY!) has created a paid youth fellowship program in which students play a central role in all work and decision making. Most recently, they were tasked with helping bi3 design a request for proposals, review and evaluate applications, and recommend which organizations should receive support.

Sharing leadership with those closest to the problem can feel unfamiliar, but in my experience, no organization can solve a complex social issues alone. Instead, when various organizations and sectors choose to share power and work together in new ways, they become well positioned to address the interconnected challenges facing communities across this country.

Photo credit: bi3 Fund