Place-based initiatives often begin with promising pilots, but the real challenge lies in building models that endure, evolve, and create lasting change for communities. From knowing when to sunset a project, to adapting an initiative as conditions shift, or to nurture long-term, community-driven impact, place-based work raises important questions about what success truly looks like. Should scale always be the goal—or are shifts in power and resources, and other changes representative of deeper measures of progress?

On November 13, NationSwell hosted a virtual Leader Roundtable event designed to explore what it takes to move beyond the pilot phase and built place-based impact that lasts. Some of the most salient takeaways from the discussion appear below:

Center on-the-ground leadership and lived experience. Effective place-based work starts with local leaders, residents, and young people as co-designers and decision-makers, not just “voices in the room.” When communities define the problems, interpret the data, and choose strategies, funders are able to support work that is more trusted, relevant, and durable.

Shift from standalone projects to long-term strategies. Moving from a collection of disconnected pilots to a portfolio and strategy approach allows leaders to track progress over time, reallocate resources, and adapt without “killing” programs overnight. This zoomed-out view makes it easier to align partners around shared outcomes.

Treat scale as systems change, not just numbers served. In place-based work, scale often looks like stronger civic infrastructure, policy shifts, better-aligned funding streams, and new local capacities, rather than big “vanity” reach numbers. What equally matters is what lasts after a grant cycle ends: local organizations that can attract new resources, shared data systems, and cross-sector tables that keep working.

Lead with values over metrics and logic models. Shared guiding principles – such as non-negotiable youth leadership, community involvement in all decisions, and non-extractive partnership – create the trust and alignment needed for complex collaborations. When values are explicit, they shape governance, grantmaking practices, and how power is shared between parties.

Use national power to open doors, not dictate direction. Large institutions can add enormous value by validating local models, attracting co-funders, and lending policy or communications support. But they don’t need to dictate the agenda. Showing up with humility, naming reputational or political risks transparently, and “walking alongside” community partners helps make sure big brands amplify local leadership instead of overshadowing it.

Standardize the framework but localize the solution. What transfers across communities is the evidence base, theory of change, and shared indicators for success; what must be locally tailored are the specific strategies and programs. The work is a continuous loop: look at the data, ground-truth it with residents, choose evidence-informed approaches that fit local realities, test, learn, and adapt.

Measure both the journey and the destination. Robust, shared data systems are important, but so are simple, practical signals: who’s showing up, which relationships are forming, and whether local leaders feel more connected and capable. Tracking process indicators alongside long-term outcomes helps manage leadership expectations, tells a more honest story of progress, and keeps everyone committed to the multi-year horizon real systems change requires.