Author Archives: Roshan Bliss

Join a Confab Call on Brain Science in D&D THIS Thursday!

Posted on by
Reply

As we announced last month, NCDD is hosting another one of our ever-popular Confab Calls this Thursday, October 15th from 2 – 3pm Eastern.  This call is titled Planning from the Inside Out: How Brain Science Supports Constructive Dialogue and Deliberation and will feature the insights of two of our long-time NCDD members on how lessons from brain science can help us plan D&D processes that use emotions skillfully to help groups find common ground while helping us as practitioners be better prepared to play our roles. Confab bubble image

Make sure you register today to save your spot!

Our presenters, Mary V. Gelinas of Gelinas James, Inc. and Susan Stuart Clark of Common Knowledge, both apply the principles and teachings of brain science regularly as part of their D&D practices, and in this interactive discussion, they will share how a better understanding of key brain science topics can help us understand what’s going on “in our heads” when we participate in public meetings so that we can design better processes. The call will cover:

  • Triune brain theory;
  • What emotions are, along with why and how they get evoked in meetings;
  • Some key lessons from brain science for designing and conducting effective group processes;
  • How brain science can increase our ability to be instruments of change

Mary and Susan will share examples of the brain science they use in their work to provide a starting point for call participants to ask questions and share their own insights and experiences, so come with your questions and stories!

This Confab Call promises to be both interesting and highly applicable, so you don’t want to miss it! Make sure to register today, and invite a friend who might be interested! We look forward to talking with you all on Thursday!

New Toolkit Streamlines PB Evaluation in N. America

Posted on by
Reply

We were excited to learn recently that Public Agenda and the Participatory Budgeting Project – two of our prominent NCDD member organizations – have released a new participatory budgeting evaluation toolkit in collaboration with the North American PB Research Board. The toolkit will help municipalities across the continent document the impacts and effectiveness of their local PB efforts. We encourage you read more about it in the Public Agenda article below or find the original here.

Evaluation Matters: A New Toolkit for Assessing Participatory Budgeting

PublicAgenda-logoFor those of us exploring ways to deepen and expand public participation in democracy, we know how essential evaluation is to our cause. Both government officials and the public have limited time, energy and resources. And furthermore, many may already be disillusioned by current and past efforts to include the public in decision making.

We need to be able to demonstrate to officials, the public, interested funders, community partners, and others that their investment in new public engagement methods will be worth it. Will more people participate, particularly those who have been historically less civically engaged? Will the new form of engagement lead to better decisions and policies that residents support? Will the public feel like their voices have been heard, and will they come to understand the complexities and trade-offs inherent in many policy decisions? Will the method build trust among officials and the public and open pathways for collaboration among community-based organizations and the government?

At the same time, we as public engagement practitioners are very busy. Evaluation can be time consuming and complicated, especially when we’re attempting to measure something amorphous like deeper public participation. As such, evaluation too often gets lost among everything else we’re doing.

For these and other reasons, we are particularly excited about one of our current projects: an initiative to help make it easier for practitioners to evaluate participatory budgeting efforts.

Communities across the country are experimenting with participatory budgeting (PB for short), which is one potential avenue for deeper public participation and engagement. Through PB, local residents get to decide how their community will spend a set amount of public money. Many of these communities, including some in New York, Chicago, Long Beach, CA and Dieppe, in New Brunswick, Canada, are also trying to track and measure how PB is affecting residents, officials, and neighborhoods.

Community members evaluating PB often have questions that are locally unique and relevant. At the same time, because many PB processes across the U.S. and Canada follow a similar structure, these evaluators are also often looking to answer common questions shared by communities.

To help foster collaboration among evaluators and facilitate shared learning on these questions, we have been working since the start of 2015 to support and coordinate local evaluation work. Ultimately, we hope that this will also lead to a better understanding of the successes and challenges of the PB movement as a whole.

One of our first steps has been to develop a toolkit for those tasked with evaluating PB in their communities. We developed the toolkit in concert with the Participatory Budgeting Project (PBP), the North American PB Research Board and local evaluators from numerous PB sites across the U.S. and Canada.

The toolkit includes key metrics – 15 in all – for capturing important elements of each local PB process specifically and the movement in North America generally. These metrics describe the way PB could impact things like civic life, equity, and governance.

To help ease the evaluation process and data collection, these metrics are paired with survey instruments that address the 15 key metrics. Evaluators can customize these survey instruments and use as needed. We also developed a questionnaire for evaluators that will help us and local evaluators to collect and share comparable data about PB processes across North America and over time.

The toolkit also includes a timeline to help evaluators best determine where and how to undertake PB evaluation at different stages of the PB process.

Download the Toolkit Here

While we developed the metrics and survey instruments for participatory budgeting, the underlying concepts are applicable to evaluating other forms of public engagement, like deliberative meetings, community conversations, and citizen juries.

We hope these tools will help those working on participatory budgeting in their communities by taking some of the guesswork out of measurement and making time for other things like constituent outreach and engagement. If you’re interested in hearing more about evaluation and our work with PB researchers, you can join our listserv for the participatory budgeting community by sending an email here.

Have you voted in a PB process and want to get more involved? Or are you curious about PB and looking to introduce it to your community? The website and people of Participatory Budgeting Project are a great resource for those who are new to PB and want to know more. Introduce yourself to the Participatory Budgeting Project.

You can find the original version of this Public Agenda blog post at
www.publicagenda.org/blogs/evaluation-matters-a-new-toolkit-for-participatory-budgeting#sthash.SQWKGkAR.dpuf.

Centering the “Cathedral View” of D&D’s Work

Posted on by
Reply

We are pleased to share this thoughtful piece by NCDD member Beth Tener of New Directions Collaborative. She explores some deep questions about how we can keep the bigger picture of the work we do in focus when it may start to lose its luster. We appreciate Beth’s call to keep an eye on what we are building together as a field – stronger relationships, communities, and democracy – and we encourage you to read her piece below or find the original here.

The Meaning in Meetings

A few weeks ago, in the small talk before a meeting started, I was talking with a woman about our respective work. In reference to my work as a facilitator she said, “ugh, I couldn’t stand all those meetings!” I understand her reaction, particularly if you are used to the rather boring and tedious way many traditional meetings are run.

It made me think of the story of the stonecutters — all three doing the same job, one irritated and bored who saw his job as hammering rock, the second was a bit more motivated seeing how his stone cutting work was one part of creating a wall, while the third, who was most inspired, said “I’m building a cathedral!” The same work, imbued with a larger sense of purpose and meaning, created an inspired attitude to the work.

For me, the meaning in meetings is about building a field of collaboration and common purpose among people whose work is similar yet fragmented. Conversations are what weave together and connect the fragmented parts. The fruits of the labor are the magic moments when ‘emergence’ happens, when all the pieces come together and a new idea emerges out of this unique combination of people and perspectives. It takes good design to lay the foundation for this to happen, such as framing open strategic questions and creating a safe inviting environment for these kinds of cross-fertilizing conversations and good thinking to happen. Like a gardener who invests in good soil, it is a thrill to see a healthy seedling emerge.

The other kind of magic moments I love are when people’s varied perspectives and expertise combine and build on each other, almost like improvisational jazz. It happened in a recent meeting with New Hampshire Farm to School, as we discussed which communities around the state might be good candidates to evolve to the next level of “Farm to School 2.0.” In a short time we got perspectives from public health, current farm to school programs, educational curriculum, local farms and food businesses, hospitals that might support this work, and how this relates to other local food system work. You could see how all of us were gaining a fuller sense of the current situation from multiple related dimensions and starting to feel the potential if all these elements could work in an aligned way.

CathedralAnother way I see meetings in a “cathedral building” view, is that the process of the work (i.e., the quality of the conversations… the way we treat each other) is itself creating the world we want to see. I find it meaningful to be part of a global community of innovators (e.g., through Art of Hosting and NCDD) who are working to “rehumanize” and bring life back to our organizations and institutions, creating conditions for each person to experience fully contributing and working together effectively. As we create new ways of meeting that enable people to show up not just in their role or professional titles, but as full human beings, the lifeblood of authentic communication, connection, and creativity can flow again.

After working with many organizations, across business, government, and the non-profit sector, I have seen how traditional meeting structures and organizational cultures can lead to “co-stupidity” as Tom Atlee of the Co-Intelligence Institute says. And like him, I am inspired by the quest to see how we can come together and achieve “co-intelligence,” which involves “diverse people working really well together in ways that make things better from a bigger picture perspective.”

I recommend this video blog by Tim Merry, who names the price of what we take as normal ways of working, saying: “it is unacceptable to me that we create organizational structures and systems that de-humanize us and cause emotional and psychological damage to people. This over professionalism of our work places undermines our capacity to connect authentically and access different perspectives which would enable us to overcome some of our most pressing a seemingly intractable problems.” He speaks of the need for structures that support the quality of relationships among people so that we can get things done in ways that don’t fragment us, undermine our confidence, or undermine our sense of being in relationship.

Meeting structures, i.e., how we design and host conversations, are a key vehicle for making things better from a bigger picture perspective, for each of us as fulfilled people, and for our communities and organizations.

You can find the original version of this Beth Tener piece at www.ndcollaborative.com/blog/item/meaning.

Recap of Sept. Tech Tuesday Call with QiqoChat

Posted on by
Reply

Earlier this week, we hosted another installment of NCDD’s Tech Tuesday series, and if you weren’t there, you missed a great call! This Tech Tuesday event featured former NCDD board member Lucas Cioffi, the founder and creator of the versatile online engagement platform, QiqoChat, along with open space facilitator Michael Herman.

Lucas and Michael gave about 25 participants a virtual tour and demonstration of some of the varied and thoughtfully curated functions of the QiqoChat platform, which impressed quite a few of us. We also shared an insightful conversation on hosting online dialogues, the lessons learned from Lucas and Michael’s “online open space on open space” event, and what it takes to build these kinds of online tools. It was a great discussion!

If you want to listen in on what you missed, then we encourage you to check out the recording of this Tech Tuesday call by clicking here.  Lucas was also kind enough to write up some answers to the questions from the call along with a few links for more info, which you can find here.

If you want to know more about QiqoChat and online dialogue, we encourage you to register for their online event this Wednesday, Oct. 7th at 12pm ET called All You Ever Wanted to Know about Online Dialogue. You can also participate every Friday at 1pm ET to participate in QiqoChat’s experimental 30 minute “dialogue cafes” to get an in-person taste of the platform.

Thanks again to Lucas, Michael, and the folks who participated in the call! To learn more about NCDD’s Tech Tuesday series and hear recordings of past calls, please visit www.ncdd.org/events/tech-tuesdays.

Re-imagining Philadelphia’s Community-Police Relations

Posted on by
Reply

Relations between communities and police continues to be one of the most relevant yet difficult dialogue issues of our day, so we wanted to share this recent piece that the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation – an NCDD member organization – recently shared about a police-community dialogue event in Philadelphia on their Challenges to Democracy blog. It provides a look into how these dialogues can begin and the impact they can have on their participants – and their facilitators. Read more below or find the original post here.

Philadelphia Engages Young People in Dialogue on Community-Police Relations

Ash logoIn this post, originally published by MBK Philly, Harvard Graduate School of Design student Courtney D. Sharpe recaps the latest in a series of efforts by My Brother’s Keeper Philadelphia and city agencies to engage youth in a dialogue on community-police relations. The one-day summit, attended by over 200 young people, and subsequent roundtable in City Hall were intended as platforms for youth, especially youth of color, to be able to share their stories and offer suggestions for ways that police and the community can adapt behaviors or policies to work better together. Sharpe is working with My Brother’s Keeper Philadelphia this summer as an Ash Center Summer Fellow. Read more about My Brother’s Keeper Philadelphia, the local affiliate of a national effort launched by President Obama to tackle the opportunity gaps for boys and young men of color. 

This summer began with harrowing tales that exposed latent racism in communities and disproportionate police force used against minority communities across the nation. The tragic AME church massacre and subsequent church fires, the fight to keep flying the confederate flag, and the images of seeing innocent black children chased by police with guns drawn made for an emotional, and inherently politically charged, beginning to the season.

Like many parts of the rest of the country, Philadelphia looked on at these events with horror and sympathy – during this climate of heightened awareness we reflected to create opportunities for interaction among community members to prevent similar travesties from happening in our neighborhoods.

On June 3, My Brother’s Keeper Philadelphia, in partnership with the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations, the Police Advisory Commission, and the Mayor’s Office of Immigrant and Multicultural Affairs, hosted “Securing Our Future,” a one-day summit on re-imagining Philadelphia’s community-police relations. The event brought together youth from neighborhoods across the city of diverse ethnic backgrounds along with city officials and police officers to have a facilitated dialogue about the youth’s experience with police.

“Securing Our Future” Summit

The goal of the event was to provide a platform for youth, especially youth of color, to be able to share their stories and offer suggestions for ways that police and the community can adapt behaviors or policies to work better together. The event had over 220 youth and youth advocates who were mostly teenagers and young adults but one class of fifth and sixth graders were also present. The conversations were rich and the youth were engaged in the process.

As a Texan, in the wake of the images and video from McKinney, Texas, I felt particularly moved to be involved in the implementation and report back structure of the events developed for youth-police interaction. No one should see on the television neighborhoods that resemble their own, with people who look like them, being attacked for existing in space.

I was fortunate to be able to serve as a facilitator at one of the tables. One of our first questions asked the youth what positive experiences or memories they had with the police; I was struck that at my table they were not able to come up with any.

At that time city officials at the table began to interject with numerous stories of their own, mostly in their professional capacity. I felt that some of them spoke as if to teach or preach and I was grateful that at the break when people chose different tables my group did not have other adults. I was able to ask questions and get the youth to speak to each other. It was raw, honest, and cathartic. One of the girls at the table was a Chinese immigrant and she shared stories of negative police interaction in three states.

As a follow up to the summit, every young person in attendance that was interested was invited to attend a special meeting on June 10 at City Hall in the Mayor’s Reception Room for the presentations of the findings to the Police Department and to participate in a moderated discussion with police officers. Around fifteen youth participated in the roundtable discussion.

At the conclusion of the formal program, Deputy Commissioner Bethel announced his plans to create a youth advisory council and invited all of the youth present to join as they had demonstrated leadership and commitment to being a part of the change process. The formal event was followed by a pizza party in the Council Caucus Room where police officers, City staff and youth continued their conversations joyfully. It was an auspicious beginning to a necessary dialogue.

You can find the original version of this Challenges to Democracy blog post at www.challengestodemocracy.us/home/philadelphia-engages-young-people-in-dialogue-on-community-police-relations/#sthash.F9TlQVGw.dpuf.

New Research on Making Policy through Crowdsourcing

Posted on by
Reply

For those interested in democratizing more of the policymaking process, check out this recent post below from NCDD organizational member Davenport Institute and their Gov 2.0 Watch blog that highlights recent research into policy crowdsourcing. You can read the post below or find the original here.

DavenportInst-logo

Research: Policy Crowdsourcing

For anyone really interested in diving deep into the question of crowdsourcing for public policy, various techniques and available research regarding their relative benefits, challenges, and effectiveness, a recent paper by John Prpic of the Lulea University of Technology (Sweden), Araz Taeihagh of the Singapore Management University, and James Melton of the Michigan University, College of Business Administration may be right up your alley.

From the abstract:

What is the state of the research on crowdsourcing for policymaking? This article begins to answer this question by collecting, categorizing, and situating an extensive body of the extant research investigating policy crowdsourcing, within a new framework built on fundamental typologies from each field. We first define seven universal characteristics of the three general crowdsourcing techniques (virtual labor markets, tournament crowdsourcing, open collaboration), to examine the relative tradeoffs of each modality. We then compare these three types of crowdsourcing to the different stages of the policy cycle, in order to situate the literature spanning both domains. We finally discuss research trends in crowdsourcing for public policy and highlight the research gaps and overlaps in the literature.

You can download the paper here.

You can find the original version of this Gov 2.0 Watch blog post at http://gov20watch.pepperdine.edu/2015/08/research-policy-crowdsourcing.

An 8th Grader’s Path into D&D

Posted on by
Reply

As NCDD continues to seek ways to bring more young people in our field, we wanted to share a piece from NCDD supporting member Alissa Schwartz of Solid Fire Consulting that captures the powerful difference that involving young people in D&D processes can make. The young person she writes about happens to be her son, but his story highlights the wonderful results that are possible when D&D is in schools. We encourage you to read more about it Alissa’s piece below or find the original here.

8th Grader Lands $225K for NYC School: An Inspiring Story of Facilitation and Youth in the Civic Process

Solid Fire ConsultingIt’s March. Cedar, Max, and I are pumped. My daughter’s feet are coated in blue paint, my son has pasted on the final image he has photoshopped to perfection, and I’m knuckle bumping Jeff, our design angel who adopted our proposal as his own and helped shape our ideas into beautiful, presentational form. Cedar is darting through the crowd for cookies, glitter paper, and glue. I’m reviewing action words we’ve brainstormed, and Max is giving an interview. We’re working on one of 13 community-generated projects, crowded into a nonprofit media production studio, bent over trifolds, creating visual representations of dreams for Brooklyn’s District 39 in a tight, exciting, hilarious two hours. This is the Mardi Gras moment of Participatory Budgeting.

How did I get here? I didn’t choose this path. Max did. In 2011, I was asked to facilitate a Participatory Budgeting brainstorming session for Brad Lander’s district. Sure! Sounds like fun. I brought along my kids. Cedar happily played with a few other children in the school gym. Max joined me at our table, caught the facilitation bug, and began what I can now see with 20-20 hindsight a journey that brought him, his sister, and me to this glitter strewn table.

That first evening three years ago, Max very ably co-facilitated with me. He took on the role of scribe, writing everyone’s ideas down and later spoke before the full assembly of perhaps 75 participants about our group’s favorite ideas. He was a hit, and he wanted more. A few years passed, and Max and I co-facilitated another brainstorming session in the fall of 2014. This time, the bug bit him hard. “I want to join a delegate committee,” he told me. “Yeah, really?” “Yup.”

OK. This was some serious leveling up. Being a delegate meant going to lots of meetings, sifting through dozens or possibly hundreds of ideas, putting the best ones in proposal form, and basically seeing the project to the end. I was intrigued by Max’s interest, though, and I told him I would join a committee with him and follow his lead. He chose Education.

It turned out that a few ideas had been generated for Cedar’s school and needed follow-up and research.  One was to renovate an old room in a basement into a movement studio to serve the overcrowded school of 1,400 kids, in Pre-K through grade 12.  We happily took her school’s ideas on, meeting with the principals of Brooklyn New School and its sister middle/high school Brooklyn School for Collaborative Studies. We crafted a proposal, tweaked it so it could be approved by the municipal authorities, and then delighted in witnessing it become among the three proposals (from about 10) that our committee chose to put on the public ballot. A few weeks after the Mardi Gras poster-making session, Max spoke persuasively about the project with person after person at the Expo showcasing our proposals.

Brad Lander taking Max’s picture (Alissa Schwartz)

Wow!…  This could actually HAPPEN! I began to allow myself the fantasy of our proposal turning into reality. Max’s and my efforts might bring nearly a quarter million dollars to a worthy project for Cedar’s school. Amazing! Not that Max or I could even vote for the project we worked on. He’s 13 years old, one year shy of the lowered age requirement for this process. And we don’t live in District 39, so I couldn’t vote either. A number of students from Cedar’s sister school went on a field trip to Brad Lander’s office and exercised their rights, however. A rare privilege for youth normally excluded from making civic decisions based on their age.

Voting happened in mid-April, and Max and I waited a very long week to be among the first to learn of the results. As we gathered with delegates and many other volunteers, we watched as Brad Lander dramatically unveiled the results. The largest number of votes went to a different school initiative, and the second largest number of votes went to…. our project!!!! Wow, wow, wow, wow!!! We did it! Max and I high-fived and whooped and jumped up and down in joy. People came up to Max and told him that his persuasive speaking helped them decide to vote for the project. We were pumped!

After the initial excitement, Max took it all in stride, not even mentioning it to friends, teachers, and relatives. I, however, keep telling the story to everyone I come across. I am in awe of what can happen when you combine the energy and curiosity of youth with a participatory process with teeth. Great things can happen.

You can find the original version of this Solid Fire Consulting blog piece at www.solidfireconsulting.com/8th-grader-lands-225k-for-nyc-school-an-inspiring-story-of-facilitation-and-youth-in-the-civic-process. We first read this story on to the Participatory Budgeting Project’s blog – thanks PBP!

Don’t Miss Our Tech Tuesday Call with QiqoChat

Posted on by
Reply

As we recently announced, we are hosting another one of our free NCDD Tech Tuesday webinars this Tuesday, September 29th from 12-1pm Eastern/9-10am Pacific, this time featuring Lucas Cioffi and Michael Herman, Tech_Tuesday_Badgethe creators of the phone-based dialogue and video chat tool QiqoChat.

QiqoChat supports a variety of online D&D processes, and it is a great tool for practitioners to be familiar with. But spots for the webinar are filling up, so make sure to register today!

This Tech Tuesday event will be full of great insights on hosting online engagement events as well as a demonstration of the QiqoChat platform’s capabilities. Lucas and Michael have also hosted two online open space conferences for a global audience, and we will discuss the rich lessons they took from those experiences as well.

Join us this Tuesday to learn more about the wide world of open space and online facilitation – you won’t want to miss it!

 

10 Tips for Better Attendance at Engagement Events

Posted on by
Reply

Getting people to show up for public engagement events is a struggle many of us face in this field. But the great team of folks at NCDD member organization Everyday Democracy has years of experience hosting engagement events, and they recently published a list of tips for generating more turnout. We encourage you to read their strategies below or find their original piece here.

Where Did All the People Go? One Reason You’re Getting Low Turnout at Community Engagement Events and 10 Things You Can Do About It
EvDem Logo

If you’ve ever organized or attended a community event like a town hall meeting, a meet and greet with your lawmaker or a public forum and were surprised that not many people showed up, you’re not alone.

It sometimes seems like people are too busy or don’t care enough to take action. That’s probably true for some people. But for others, they’re tired of spending their time in programs or at events where people don’t value their opinion. They don’t want to participate in something that has a low chance of making any difference. No one does.

Unfortunately, traditional methods of engagement have gotten a bad reputation. Once people have participated in a poorly run event or community engagement program, they’re not likely to come back.

When you’re trying to mobilize people to become more engaged in their community, you have to overcome the negative connotation associated with public participation. It sounds like an impossible task to overcome this kind of barrier, but it can be done.

The good news is, when people get a taste of another form of engagement, they’ll want more. That means more people will want to participate again, tell their friends about it, and even volunteer to help coordinate the next program or event. It means you’ll be able to host a program or event that engages the community and see the room filled with people wanting to take part in creating change.

Here 10 ideas for how you can get started:

1. Acknowledge that some people may not have had a positive experience with public participation.

Whether your program or event builds on an existing form of engagement or you’re trying something new, preconceptions may affect your outcome. Now that you’ve recognized this reality, you’ll be able to take steps to build a good reputation for this kind of work.

2. Think like a skeptic when you are creating your messages and marketing materials.

What would you say to someone who has participated in the past and had a bad experience? How is your program or event different? People need to know that your way of engaging the community will be different, so let them know!

3. Invite people who haven’t been invited before or who don’t often attend community events.

The demographics of our communities are changing, and unfortunately the leadership doesn’t always reflect the diversity of our communities. Be intentional about reaching out to different groups in your community, especially ones who are underrepresented. Having those diverse voices, opinions, and ideas will make your event and your community stronger.

4. Start small.

Changing people’s perceptions won’t happen overnight.  Start with small events or activities and work up to a larger event if that’s your goal. Try things like incorporating engagement activities into your workplace or hosting sample dialogues at various existing community programs to start building a positive reputation.

5. Try different ways of engaging the community.

There is no one size fits all for any community or situation. Try different engagement processes or programs and adapt them to fit your unique needs.

6. Focus on quality.

When people participate in a well-run event or program, you’ll start to build a positive reputation for your organization, for the events you host, and for community engagement in general. Participants will recommend your event to their friends the next time around – that’s the best kind of outreach you can have.

7. Show participants that you value their opinion.

The best way to do this is to truly listen to what they have to say and to take action as a result of their participation. For example, if you’re inviting the community to talk about the city budget, perhaps the community can decide how to allocate a certain amount of funds. Even if the community is only able to influence a small percentage of the total budget, if they have a positive experience with the process then it will increase their respect and trust for the difficult decisions city officials have to make. Another option is to ensure that the city mayor is present in the conversations and will truly listen and take into consideration the community’s concerns. Whether or not people have a direct impact on decision-making, they want to know that their time, experiences and opinions are valued.

8. Get creative and make it fun.

People want to spend their free time doing something they enjoy. Think about how you can make your program or event something that people of all ages will want to attend. Food, entertainment, and activities for children are great additions to a more traditional program.

9. Keep track of what you’re learning about your community.

Test different locations, times of day, types of events, length of commitment, online and offline options, etc. Keep note of what works and what doesn’t so you can improve each time you ask the public to participate.

10. Share what you’ve learned with others.

We’ll be able to create stronger communities if we share what we’ve learned with each other.  Write an email, blog post or report with your findings to distribute with your network.

You can find the original version of this Everyday Democracy piece at www.everyday-democracy.org/news/where-did-all-people-go-one-reason-you%E2%80%99re-getting-low-turnout-community-engagement-events-and.

Join the National Deliberation on Health Care Costs

Posted on by
Reply

Three of our long-time NCDD member organizations – the National Issues Forums Institute, Kettering Foundation, and Public Agenda – are teaming up to host a national deliberation around health care issues, and NCDD members are invited to join them! The deliberation will produce a report for policymakers next year that could have a real impact. You can learn more about this collaborative project in the NIFI blog post below or by finding the original post here.

You’re Invited – Join a National Deliberation Project about Healthcare Costs

NIF logoYou are invited to help your group, organization, or community join a national deliberation project about possible directions in healthcare costs. This is a special opportunity to help forum participants be heard in a national report that will be prepared by the Kettering Foundation and Public Agenda, and presented to policymakers in May 2016.

For a limited time, the issue guide titled Health Care: How Can We Reduce Costs and Still Get the Care We Need? is available as a FREE download to use at your forums. Companion materials include: a moderator’s guide (free download), a post-forum questionnaire (free download), a preview of a video overview of the issue (watch online for free), and a full length DVD video overview of the issue (order for $6.00 plus shipping).

Please join this national effort by planning to hold at least one forum; posting your forum information in the Events section of the National Issues Forums (NIF) website; and having each forum participant complete a post-forum questionnaire and then return all questionnaires to the address provided.

Public Agenda is encouraging conveners and moderators to audiotape or videotape their forums (a cell phone recording would be fine) if possible, and to send the recordings to Public Agenda. A transcript will be made and a copy returned to the forum conveners. No participants or exact locations will be named in information derived from recordings. Conveners are encouraged to hold forums prior to March 2016, and to return questionnaires (free to download here) by May 2016. For questions about this project, or about recording or reporting on forums, contact Chloe Rinehart at crinehart@publicagenda.org or 212-686-6610, extension 143.

Thank you for your interest in helping people deliberate about this important issue.

More information about issue guide materials here.

You can find the original version of this NIFI blog post at www.nifi.org/en/groups/youre-invited-join-national-deliberation-project-about-healthcare-costs-free-materials.