Reporting on All Narratives/ Hidden Common Ground in Unprecedented Times

The growing sense of division in our country has been felt  strongly this year in conjunction with the physical separation of pandemic life and elections right around the corner. This article published on USA Today, written by David Mathews, President of Kettering Foundation, explores a narrative that is rarely reported on. USA Today networks and America Amplified, a public media collaborative, equipped with research provided by organizations including Public Agenda and the Kettering Foundation want to uncover the common ground. The main findings reported demonstrate more common ground exists than we realize, and sustains the possibility of collaboration as divergent narrative for Americans and journalists alike.

To read the op ed in detail read below and for the original posting on USA Today click here.


How Americans can learn once again to solve our nation’s problems together

To solve really difficult problems, people realize that they have to work with others who may be different.

The year 2020 will go down in history as extraordinary. Americans, by most accounts, are deeply divided. They can’t even talk to those they disagree with.

Many people appear traumatized by fear. Some insist that change is long overdue. Some see the country sliding into moral chaos and want to preserve what they value in the American way of life. But there is little agreement on what needs to change or what needs to be preserved.

That’s the dominant story. But it isn’t the only one.

In covering the 2020 election, some journalists are telling another story. The group includes the USA Today Network and America Amplified, a public media collaborative. They are drawing on nonpartisan research provided by organizations including Public Agenda and the Kettering Foundation, where I work.

Kettering’s research draws on nearly 40 years of results from local deliberative forums held by a nationwide network known as the National Issues Forums. Here are the main findings from our research:

►There is more common ground on policy issues than is recognized. People favor such policies as increasing economic opportunities, providing for affordable childcare and keeping jobs in the U.S. But the thing Americans agree on most is that there is too much divisiveness — even if they contribute to it sometimes.

►Citizens and government officials often talk past one another, which makes the loss of public confidence in government grow even greater. For instance, on health policy, those in government are naturally concerned about the cost to their budgets. But NIF forums show that people are most concerned about a health care system so complex it is almost impossible to navigate.

►Despite the tendency to favor the likeminded, in some circumstances people will consider opinions they don’t like. There is a space between agreement and disagreement, an arena in which people decide, “I don’t particularly like what we are considering doing about this problem, but I can live it — for now.”

This is the arena of pragmatic problem-solving. Observers of National Issues Forums have seen people move into it even on explosive issues like immigration. Described as a pivot, it changes the tone of decision making. When it happens, problem solving can move forward, even without total agreement.

This pivot occurs when issues are described in terms of what people find deeply valuable — not “values” but age-old imperatives like safety and being treated fairly. When issues are described in this way and framed with several options for solutions, with both advantages and disadvantages clearly laid out, people will confront tensions between what they prefer and consequences they may not like.

Recognizing that everyone is motivated by the same basic imperatives removes barriers to listening to others who may not be like us or even like us. Even if people disagree, they become aware of greater complexity. They explore the tradeoffs inherent in difficult decisions. That opens the door to understanding the experiences and concerns of others.

National Civic Review Fall Edition Recently Released with Kettering Foundation

NCDD member org, The National Civic League released the 2020 Fall Edition of the National Civic Review, published in collaboration with NCDD member, the Kettering Foundation. This esteemed quarterly journal offers insights and examples of civic engagement and deliberative governance from around the country. Friendly reminder that NCDD members receive the digital copy of the National Civic Review for free! (Find the access code below.) We strongly encourage our members to check out this great resource and there is an open invite for NCDD members to contribute to the NCR. You can read about NCR in the post below and find it on NCL’s site here.


National Civic Review Fall Edition 2020 – Access Code: NCDD20

As this edition of the National Civic Review goes out, our nation is approaching a crucial presidential election, dealing with a terrible pandemic and grappling with vexing racial disparities. An article by Martín Carcasson discusses approaching the challenge of public deliberation as a “wicked problem,” in other words, an issue or challenge with conflicting underlying values and no technical solution. Perhaps at this juncture we are in a wicked time, a period with similar attributes of conflicting values and complexity. This edition of the Review was published in collaboration with  Charles F. Kettering Foundation. We hope the articles in the edition will provide some ideas and tools to rally communities across the country to address complex issues and thrive.

You can access this edition by going directly to the table of contents and entering your access code (NCDD20) when prompted.

One of the Nation’s Oldest and Most Respected Journals of Civic Affairs

Its cases studies, reports, interviews and essays help communities learn about the latest developments in collaborative problem-solving, civic engagement, local government innovation and democratic governance. Some of the country’s leading doers and thinkers have contributed articles to this invaluable resource for elected officials, public managers, nonprofit leaders, grassroots activists, and public administration scholars seeking to make America’s communities more inclusive, participatory, innovative and successful.

NCDD Proud Partner of Online Facilitation Unconference – #OFU2020!

NCDD is proud to be a partner of the Online Facilitation Unconference 2020 (#OFU2020), hosted by the Center for Applied Community Engagement LLC! Mark your calendars for October 19-25th, to join the 7th annual OFU event where attendees will have the opportunity to strengthen their virtual facilitation skills. FYI NCDD members can receive a 20% discount on tickets (see below for promo code)! We encourage you to read more about #OFU2020 in the post below and register here.

In addition, you can get a teaser of some helpful civic tech tools for virtual engagement work at NCDD’s Online Engagement Summit happening next week! This free event is co-hosted with the Center for Public Deliberation at Colorado State University, and will be this coming Tuesday, September 29th from 1-3pm Eastern, 10am -12pm Pacific – more info on the summit here.


Mark Your Calendars: OFU20, October 19–25

For the seventh time since 2013, the Online Facilitation Unconference (OFU) will take place this October 19-25, once again alongside and as part of IAF’s International Facilitation Week.

OFU is an event for newbies and experts alike. Whether you are a seasoned facilitator pro or a beginner, whether you are already highly skilled using technology for this work or still trying to figure out the possibilities – OFU provides a venue where you can ask and answer questions, share and solicit advice, discuss your latest project, challenge or idea, explore new tools, discover new tricks, and find like-minded colleagues.

Register to join here! Folks in the NCDD network can use the discount code “OFU_NCDD_20” to receive 20% off your tickets.

The Program

At its core, OFU is an unconference, meaning the vast majority of the program will be created by the participants in real time based on everyone’s interests and needs. The unconference sessions will take place in the second half of the week (Thursday through Saturday, October 22–24).

To help everyone warm up a little, we will offer a handful of pre-scheduled “seed” sessions, which will take place earlier in the week (Monday through Wednesday, October 19–21).

New this year, we will offer a mix of sponsored sessions from our tech exhibitors. These may include demos, guided tours, cases studies, or conversations about where the industry is headed, though how a sponsor structures their session(s) in terms of duration and format is completely up to them. These sessions will also take place earlier in the week, and we encourage our participants to explore the tools further during the unconference and – where appropriate – possibly integrate them into their sessions.

With that in mind, here’s what’s on the agenda… [Click Here to learn more about the OFU agenda!]

We expect to see a lot of new faces this year, particularly those practitioners who until recently were still on the fence regarding delivering their skills and services in virtual environments but have since been forced to jump in with both feet due to the pandemic.

Can’t wait to see everyone. Hope you can join us!

You can find even more information on the OFU site at www.ofuexchange.net/.

Register for the Virtual Annual Civic Institute on August 21st

This announcement comes to us from our friends at the David Matthews Center for Civic Life. ICYMI on Friday, August 21st, the Matthews Center will be hosting their annual Civic Institute with this year’s theme, Common Bonds: Collective Purpose and Civic Resilience in Uncertain Times.  The event this year will be entirely online and open to folks outside the state, as well as free-of-charge! Make sure you see Dr. David Mathews, President and C.E.O. of the Kettering Foundation, give the keynote address sharing from his experiences at the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, during a past global epidemic. Read more in the article below and find the original posting here.


Common Bonds: Collective Purpose and Civic Resilience in Uncertain Times

The Mathews Center will host its annual Civic Institute on August 21st, 2020. The event will be held entirely online. The theme of this year’s event is Common Bonds: Collective Purpose and Civic Resilience in Uncertain Times.

Dr. David Mathews, President and C.E.O. of the Kettering Foundation, will deliver a (pre-recorded) keynote address drawing on his experiences at the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare—where he served as Secretary during the Swine Flu outbreak of 1976.

Our first digital-only Civic Institute will explore strategies deployed by individuals and communities as they respond and adapt to the challenges posed by a global epidemic. Community leaders across Alabama will showcase the innovative ways in which they have resisted social isolation by forging new connections with their fellow citizens and by exploring alternative perspectives uncovered through local historical research. This three-hour event (9:00am – 12:00pm CST) will be packed with the same quality thoughtful discussions and meaningful connections that you have come to expect from us each year.

  • 9:00 am – Opening Remarks by Cristin Brawner
  • 9:05 am – Pre-Recorded Keynote by Dr. David Mathews
  • 10:00 am – Short Talks with Panelists
    • Terrance Smith, Director of the Mayor’s Innovation Team in Mobile will discuss how his city is adapting to the challenges posed by the pandemic.
    • Margaret Morton of SAFE Sylacauga will discuss a new community resilience initiative with Laura Strickland (Director of the Sylacauga Chamber of Commerce) and Brigadier General Robert Holmes (retired).
    • Dr. John Giggie of the University of Alabama’s Summersell Center and students from Tuscaloosa’s Central High School will discuss The History of Us, a year-long course created to help students explore the African American history of their own community. Dr. Giggie co-taught the course with his graduate teaching assistant, Ms. Margaret Lawson, who will join the panel alongside students from the course.
  • 11:15 am – Breakout Discussions: Rebuilding, Recovering, and Reimagining Our Future
  • 11:50 am – Closing Remarks

Because the event will be offered entirely online this year, registration will be free of charge! If you are able, we ask that you consider making a donation to the Jean O’Connor-Snyder Fund here. One-hundred percent of your donation goes directly to support the JOIP internship program, which provides immersive civic learning opportunities for college students to research deliberative practices and asset-based approaches for working with Alabamians in community-based projects. Those who donate $25 or more will receive a DMC care package full of our latest resources and a special gift!

Register Now

You can find the original version of this event on the David Matthews Center for Civic Life site at  www.mathewscenter.org/common-bonds/.

Kettering and NIFI Release Publications on Developing Deliberation Materials


Kettering and NIFI: Developing Materials for Deliberation

The Kettering Foundation researches and develops issue guides, and the National Issues Forums Institute (NIF) shares the materials across the country along with the deliberative practices on which they are based.

How Kettering and NIFI think about developing materials that support public deliberation is freely available in two publications: Naming and Framing Difficult Issues to Make Sound Decisions, which outlines the conceptual foundations of this approach, and Developing Materials for Deliberative Forums, which is aimed at people in communities who might want to do this work themselves, in their own contexts on their own issues. When KF and NIFI work on national materials, we use the same approach. There are many ways to do this, and the more one does it the more readily it comes. In this way, this work is a “practice,” learned and improved upon by doing, yet accessible to all. It does not take experts. (Another resource, a little more schematic, is this two-page overview.)

This is not necessarily the best way to develop such materials, but it is the one that we have developed and used over decades. Other innovations are most welcome, and we are always interested to hear about them.

What we mean by “public deliberation” is simple: people deciding together about how they should address a shared problem by weighing options for action against the things they hold valuable. It is particularly useful, and some might even say it is needed, on certain kinds of problems, including when the cause of the problem is in dispute, people from all walks of life will need to act, there is no objectively correct solution, and any potential path forward brings with it drawbacks that affect things that are held deeply valuable. Some call such problems “wicked.” The main idea is that they don’t have a correct solution, but the problems are pressing, so we must still decide how to move forward in the absence of complete agreement. NIF issue guides are designed to be a support to deliberation by people in communities on a range of these kinds of issues. People deliberate all the time in their personal and professional lives. It is not a new skill that needs to be learned. The NIF issue guides are simply designed to prompt the process. (Some people use them for educational purposes, but their main intended use is to support direction-setting that leads to public decision-making.)

The challenge for anyone trying to develop a document that supports people deliberating on such a problem is to 1) describe the problem in such a way that it is universally recognized as a problem that merits discussion and 2) present options for action that lay bare the tensions between the things that we might do. The first item is called naming, and the second framing.

All of this work starts with research. It is not work suited to just one or two researchers who go off and write—it is collective work aimed to be useful to collectivities of people. In terms of “desk” research, the chief areas of inquiry are: What arguments are being made about this issue? By whom? How do they differ? What solutions are being proposed? The public research is the most important aspect of developing these materials.

This public research starts with gathering concerns of people. This is usually done in small groups, as people share their concerns about a topic. The name of the issue is not yet known—it will develop and emerge iteratively throughout the process. We are trying to learn two things: What is the question that people feel we must grapple with? How does this issue relate to the fundamental things that everyone holds valuable, but in differing degree? By talking about their concerns, people lay bare these things. We typically try to have broad-based concern gathering sessions, eliciting input from many groups, across difference. The broader the better.

Once there is a good, broad set of concerns (usually hundreds), we begin to “cluster” them according to things that are held deeply valuable that appear to be driving them. They typically will readily narrow down to a handful of main driving concerns such as collective safety, equity and being treated fairly, having freedom to act, having control over one’s future, and so forth. It is useful to get down to three or four main groupings. These clusters will become the options of the resulting issue framework, and three or four options is about as many as one can get through in one discussion.

What emerges from this clustering work is a name for the issue and the beginnings of a framework of options (each a major direction for addressing the problem). To give a sense of specificity to the options, it is useful to have examples of specific actions that each option suggests. The result of all this work is the “grid” format that you can see at the back of most NIF issue guides: a description of the problem, three options for action, each with a set of actions. Each of these options will have a trade off—the downside will be unpalatable, or it will pull against one of the other options, or both.

At this point, we develop a draft of such a framework and test it by holding deliberative forums with groups of people. We are looking for how well it sparks deliberation.

We have learned that a useful framework will:

  • Name the problem in such a way that people immediately respond
  • Include a range of options that are in tension with one another
  • Give voice to marginal and sometimes unwelcome views
  • Clearly and fairly show the downsides of any suggested course of action
  • Shake up the dominant left/right polarized discourse
  • Often leave people stewing as they consider ideas they may not have encountered

In my own experience in doing this work, this testing almost always results in improvements and sometimes major revisions. Sometimes an option needs a complete rework. Sometimes the name is clearly wrong. For instance, once we thought we were framing an issue related to “campaign finance,” and people in concern gathering sessions literally laughed at how narrowly that was drawn and insisted that the problem was almost the entire political system.

One of the challenges of doing this work is that it works best if one approaches it with openness and a willingness to alter course based on what is learned. It makes it difficult to create hard-and-fast timelines and to provide early specificity.

Once the overall framework is working, we develop a full-length issue guide. These are all reviewed anonymously by people who are familiar with the topic at hand before publication. At this point, we are looking for balance between major viewpoints and major gaps or errors.

You can find the original version of this announcement on the Kettering Foundation site at www.kettering.org/blogs/kf-and-nifi-developing-materials-deliberation.

Read New 2020 Summer Edition of National Civic Review

If you are looking to get some more civic reading under your belt, NCDD member org, The National Civic League, announced the release of the 2020 Summer Edition of the National Civic Review. This esteemed quarterly journal offers insights and examples of civic engagement and deliberative governance from around the country. Friendly reminder that NCDD members receive the digital copy of the National Civic Review for free! (Find the access code below.) We strongly encourage our members to check out this great resource and there is an open invite for NCDD members to contribute to the NCR. You can read about NCR in the post below and find it on NCL’s site here.


National Civic Review Summer Edition 2020 – Access Code: NCDD20

2020 is turning out to be a year of sudden, unexpected crises and angry civil unrest. The need for people to distance themselves from one another has led to feelings of anxiety, loss and social isolation. Anger over police brutality and racial inequity is making this a time of tough conversations but also increased civic activism. In this issue of the National Civic Review we learn about efforts to engage the public in collaborative efforts to make our communities more sustainable, resilient, age-friendly, democratic and healthy. We also take a look at some examples in history where civic leaders and members of the public have faced tough challenges and risen to the occasion by experimenting with new ideas and practices.

To access this edition, go to the table of contents where you will be prompted to enter your unique access code: NCDD20.

One of the Nation’s Oldest and Most Respected Journals of Civic Affairs
Its cases studies, reports, interviews and essays help communities learn about the latest developments in collaborative problem-solving, civic engagement, local government innovation and democratic governance. Some of the country’s leading doers and thinkers have contributed articles to this invaluable resource for elected officials, public managers, nonprofit leaders, grassroots activists, and public administration scholars seeking to make America’s communities more inclusive, participatory, innovative and successful.

Amani’s Story of Facilitation, Triumph and Friendship

Often times the emotional toll immigrant students experience while adapting to the learning curve is overlooked and can have profound consequences on academic performance. In this post via the Interactivity Foundation, an NCDD member organization, we shine the spotlight on Amani and her experience navigating higher education D&D classes as an international student in the US from a middle eastern country. This story communicates an array of emotions from the uncomfortable isolation she felt during in-class prompted discussions, to the eventual ease she discovered in facilitation harnessed by the support of her peers. This article is a reminder of the importance of cultural humility and understanding when designing and implementing engagement practices. Read the beautiful story of Amani in full below and find the original post here.


Internationally Speaking

Amani came to study in the United States from a middle-eastern country. She was on a government scholarship and had to meet specific academic benchmarks to keep it. Her freshman year consisted primarily of general education courses plus freshman English. Amani did well in her courses except for the parts that were discussion-based.

In her courses, Amani would be placed into small discussion groups to explore a topic related to the course content. Many of the topics made her veryuncomfortable because they focused on cultural issues within American society. She was afraid to express her own views because of her cultural differences. Her classmates didn’t help. They often made ill-informed comments disparaging her background. Amani was also afraid to make comments that might threaten her scholarship. She was aware that some students from her country might be keeping tabs on their fellow students. They might report any comments that could be seen as critical of her government. As a result of these constraints, in any course with a discussion component, Amani resigned herself to receiving a letter grade lower than she might otherwise have earned. Amani moved into her major in her sophomore year. While many of her major courses still used discussion or project groups, they were set up to allow her to stay with the same students in each group. She especially bonded with a few of the women students in her group who really wanted to know about her home country. Amani was very stylish. The other women loved talking about the clothes she wore and especially her jewelry. The discussion groups gradually became easier for Amani. One thing that helped was that the students were taught how to discuss topics more collegially, and especially how to value the thoughts of others.

Amani was expected to facilitate discussions as well. She was terrified of doing this. When her facilitation day arrived, the first thing that she noticed was that her female classmates were all wearing hijabs. Her confidence soared because her classmates really went out of their way to show they were on her side. At the end of the class, her professor complimented her on very successful facilitation. This was another great boost to her confidence.

In contrast to her first discussion-based classes, her classmates showed her respect. They would often ask follow-up questions to better appreciate the culture that she came from.

Amani’s experience is like that of many international students who come to America. How might we better understand the issues they’re facing before they enter into classroom discussions? How might we better frame discussion experiences to foster cross-cultural understanding? How could we use discussion groups to develop learning communities that are sustained beyond just one class? What background in the process of discussions do we need to provide for our students so that discussions boost rather than diminish their self-confidence?

* * *

Discussion experiences can have a great multiplier effect if designed and executed properly. Without careful design, they can also be damaging. We need to think of how our students are entering into classroom discussions—and where they are coming from.

You can find the original version of this interview on the Interactivity Foundation site at www.interactivityfoundation.org/internationally-speaking/

Interview with Joan Blades of Living Room Conversations

This story about Living Room Conversations, a longstanding NCDD friend and member organization, articulates the vision and relevance of gathering with others to practice communication in spite of differences. In 2010, Joan Blades in collaboration with friends from different political identities, created Living Room Conversations when they noticed the increasing difficulties in communicating with people across political divides. Living Room Conversations provides an important practice space where people can meet and discuss issues that matter greatly to communities across America.  These online gatherings allow, respect, and celebrate the diversity of viewpoints which are as varied as topics and participation.

The entire interview can be read below and you can find the original posting on the Gratefulness site here.


Grateful Changemakers: Living Room Conversations

Living Room Conversations envisions a world where people who have fundamental differences of opinion and backgrounds learn to work together with respect and even joy. The non-profit’s open-source conversation model — developed by dialogue experts — provides an accessible structure for engaging in meaningful, civil conversation — anywhere in the world, even virtually — with those who may have different viewpoints. Anyone is welcome to use Living Room Conversation’s free resources, which can be adapted to address the needs of any community working to bridge divides. Co-founder Joan Blades (who also co-founded moveon.org) shares more about how Living Room Conversations build relationships that support collaborative problem-solving and generate compassion.

What sparked the creation of Living Room Conversations?

In 2004, I wanted to understand why conservative people saw things so differently than I did. This required intentional effort to spend time with people that have very different views. I made friends and learned a lot, but by 2010 it was actually harder to have a good conversation about the climate with a conservative than it was in 2005. This inspired me to work with dialogue experts to design a simple and small conversation format that is massively reproducible, and so I co-founded Living Room Conversations with a conservative and independent friend.

How does Living Room Conversations fill a need for our society?

We have teased ourselves apart so that we primarily spend time with and talk to like-minded people. This is making it easier and easier to demonize good people who have different beliefs than we do. Living Room Conversations invite us to reach out and get to know people who have different views than we do. The conversations allow us to deepen our own understanding as well as deepen relationships with friends and family. They improve our listening and connection skills. We have over 100 conversation guides based upon the current interests and needs of our users. The upcoming presidential election has inspired conversations about how we want to contribute to the political conversation.

A few years ago I began to describe this work as domestic peacebuilding. Terrible things can happen when we demonize people. Everybody I know from across the political spectrum wants good things for their community, their family, and the world. This is an important starting place. To address the big challenges we face, we need everyone’s best ideas and the capacity to work together.

What do you think inspires people to participate in Living Room Conversations?

Sometimes the motivation is an invitation to join a friend. Sometimes it is curiosity about a particular topic. Or the opportunity to get to know new people. Faith communities, libraries, and other groups offer Living Room Conversations to their members to deepen ties and also invite in missing voices. We have over 100 conversation guides on different topics, and the reasons for participating are as numerous as our many guides! As polarization has escalated in the U.S., more and more people no longer want to talk to “those people,” while there are others who are recognizing the deep dysfunction of dismissing entire segments of our population. And now with the coronavirus, there are people looking for meaningful connections at a time when they are feeling cut off from their normal social connections.

How does Living Room Conversations bring gratitude to life?

I’m grateful for the wonderful people I meet and the friends that join me. I’m grateful for increased understanding and sometimes increased confusion because I better understand the complexity of a challenge. I think everyone gets something different out of the conversations, but my experience may be a good sense of how this practice enriches our lives.

How does Living Room Conversations help cultivate qualities like awareness, appreciation, and compassion?

Living Room Conversations are a listening practice. Listening fully to others is generous and fulfilling. Awareness, appreciation, and compassion flow naturally out of the human connection that is nurtured.  Conversations about forgiveness, hope, status and privilege, finding meaning, and many others offer space for self-reflection and more intentional living.

What are some of the common barriers, obstacles, and fears that arise for participants? How are they navigated?

Many people feel like they don’t have the time for a 90-minute or hour conversation. I think one of the reasons our model has been embraced in faith communities is that this practice speaks to our desire to be the best version of ourselves, which is what I think we seek in faith communities. Also some people are anxious about conversation with people who hold different views. It is easy to choose a conversation topic that is reflective, such as Forgiveness, rather than one that is focused on a controversial topic, such as Guns and Responsibility.

What has been the impact of the project thus far?

We have some sense of the impact but not nearly as much as we would like because our model is open-source, and we often don’t hear about outcomes. Fortunately there has been some research that has revealed evidence of immediate and longer-term impacts:

  1. Immediate – improved mindset, listening skills
  2. Immediate – learned something new every time
  3. Longer-term – application of tools to other parts of life
  4. Longer-term – interest in systemic change spurred by mutual understanding and “humanizing the other”

How does Living Room Conversations plan to grow/move forward?

We are working to support individuals and communities around the country in their use of Living Room Conversations. Also, we have wonderful partners. We know that the conversations have been used around the world, but our focus is the U.S. because this is where we have maximum cultural competence, which is key for this kind of work. These conversation guides are free to all that want to use them, and no fancy event or skilled facilitator is typically needed. We hope that massive numbers of people will choose to have Living Room Conversations and help create the kind of community we all want to live in.

In this particular time of transformation, Living Room Conversations have adjusted course to adapt to new needs — to help our in-person communities transition to video and enable people who are feeling isolated to connect in meaningful conversations. Our Minnesota leaders were having conversations about Covid-19, and now they are using our Race in the Time of Corona and Police and Community Relations conversations guides as well as writing new conversation guides to meet the needs in their community. These conversation guides are available for communities anywhere.

I dream of this work creating culture change — a world in which respect and dignity for all people is the norm. And even though we have not yet achieved this big vision, each conversation is beautiful and enlightening on its own. I am incredibly grateful to be able to work on this!

If you could share one message about gratefulness with the world, what would it be?

This world is amazingly beautiful. And the people I meet want good things for their communities and future generations. This gives me hope that we can do what we need to do if we can discover each other. I am grateful for this. If you too dream of a world in which respect and dignity for all people is the norm, please help us share this practice in whatever way you see it may serve this purpose.

You can find the original version of this interview on the Gratefulness site at gratefulness.org/grateful-news/grateful-changemakers-living-room-conversations/.

EP Student Facilitator Joins Anti-Racism Education Project

The following story is shared by our friends at Essential Partners, an NCDD sponsor member, who recently announced one of their student alumni has joined the international initiative, the Anti-Racism Education (A.R.E.) Project. 17-year-old Clay Thornton from North Carolina, who previously participated in Essential Partner’s program and is taking his facilitation skills into the important work of race dialogues. We are so excited to hear the youth are involved and powerful in this conversation. We encourage you to read more in the post below and find the original on the EP’s site here.


Impact Snapshot: Essential Partners-Trained Student Joins The Anti-Racism Education Project

The Los Angeles Times today reports on a new international initiative, the Anti-Racism Education (A.R.E.) Project. A.R.E. is a platform to connect interested young people with “existing educational resources, a supportive community, and opportunities to engage with Black scholars, activists, and artists who are willing to teach about the Black experience,” according to their website.

Since its launch at the end of May, the project has gained more than 400 members and 100 organizers in 17 countries and counting.

One of those organizers is Clay Thornton, 17 years old from North Carolina. Thorton participated in Essential Partners’ collaboration with his school, Cary Academy, one of many secondary schools where EP has trained students, faculty, and parents to engage constructively in tough conversations, both in and outside the classroom.

Thornton is now bringing his EP facilitation skills to the Anti-Racism Education Project, leading online dialogues among members from across the globe, ages 14 to 21.

He says that young people have the power to spearhead tough conversations about race.

“Young people are willing to reach out to their families and their friends who are older and have conversations with them about these topics,” Thornton told the LA Times. “People are going to go to the family dinner table and talk about what they’ve learned” through the A.R.E. Project.

He notes that these dialogues “are not about debating or proving one viewpoint is correct.” Rather, the purpose of these discussions will be “to understand the materials they’ve consumed for the month.”

Read the rest of the story online. If you’re interested in gaining the skills to design and lead dialogues about race in your own context, contact us today for a free consultation.

You can find the original version of this announcement on the Essential Partners’ site at www.whatisessential.org/impact-snapshot-ep-trained-student-joins-anti-racism-education-project.

National Civic Review 2020 Spring Edition is Now Available!

NCDD member org, The National Civic League, announced the release of the 2020 Spring Edition of the National Civic Review. This esteemed quarterly journal offers insights and examples of civic engagement and deliberative governance from around the country. Friendly reminder that NCDD members receive the digital copy of the National Civic Review for free! (Find the access code below.) We strongly encourage our members to check out this great resource and there is an open invite for NCDD members to contribute to the NCR. You can read about NCR in the post below and find it on NCL’s site here.


National Civic Review: Spring 2020 – Code: NCDD20

This issue of the National Civic Review goes out as our nation is dealing with the biggest pandemic in over 100 years, and we are in awe at the creativity and will power of America’s communities in addressing this challenge. While this edition does not address the epidemic directly, we offer ideas about the need for public engagement and civic innovation in addressing community challenges. The issue was published in collaboration with the Charles F. Kettering Foundation. Two articles were contributed by participants in the Richard S. Childs Fellowship, a program that assisted local government managers in reflecting on their experiences with community problem-solving and public deliberation.

To access this edition, go to the table of contents where you will be prompted to enter your unique access code: NCDD20.

One of the Nation’s Oldest and Most Respected Journals of Civic Affairs
Its cases studies, reports, interviews and essays help communities learn about the latest developments in collaborative problem-solving, civic engagement, local government innovation and democratic governance. Some of the country’s leading doers and thinkers have contributed articles to this invaluable resource for elected officials, public managers, nonprofit leaders, grassroots activists, and public administration scholars seeking to make America’s communities more inclusive, participatory, innovative and successful.