National Dialogue on Mental Health Turns 1!

A little over one year ago, on June 3rd, President Obama called for a national dialogue on mental health. Since then, the alliance of organizations running Creating Community Solutions (including NCDD) have been finding creative ways to get Americans talking about mental health in their communities.

It has been quite the year, with highs and lows and plenty of pleasant surprises along the way. Check out our Creating Community Solutions tag for all the NCDD posts on the project, and definitely explore the CCS website if you haven’t already.

As part of the project’s effort to link hundreds of community dialogues to action, CCS has been offering educational webinars. Visit www.creatingcommunitysolutions.org/resources and scroll down the page to “Training Opportunities,” where you’ll find the following webinars archived and ready for you to view on demand:

  • Local Education Agency Grant Opportunities in Mental Health
  • State Education Agency Grant opportunities in Mental Health
  • Preventing mental health problems and identifying issues early by connecting child serving systems
  • Text, Talk, Act & Connect!
  • “Now is the Time” Project AWARE State Educational Agency Grants

See many more resources for holding dialogues on mental health at www.creatingcommunitysolutions.org/resources, and check out all the write-ups from the dialogues that have taken place at www.creatingcommunitysolutions.org/outcomes.

CCS-Map-6-11-14

Register for Frontiers of Democracy Conference July 16-18

Tufts-logoIn case you hadn’t heard already, we wanted to make sure to tell encourage our NCDD members to consider attending the “Frontiers of Democracy” conference this July 16-18 in Boston, MA. Hosted annually at Tufts University, the conference has become an important venue for leaders in democratic thought and practice to gather to share ideas and network.

This year’s conference will feature talks from, among others, Ambassador Alan Solomont, the dean of Tisch College; Gloria Rubio-Cortes, president, National Civic League; Josh Lerner, Participatory Budgeting Project; John Gastil, Penn State (communication); Tina Nabatchi, Syracuse University (public administration); Shelby Brown, Executive Administrator, State of Connecticut’s Office of Governmental Accountability; Tim Eatman, Research Director, Imagining America; Sabeel Rahman, Harvard (government and law).

And to top it all off, the NCDD board and our director, Sandy Heierbacher, are hosting a workshop on engaging engagement practitioners. That workshop and others can be found in the detailed agenda, which features talks, discussions, and workshops on some of the most exciting and innovative work being done in our field, and you won’t want to miss it, so make sure to register here today!

You can get a taste of what the conference will focus on by reading the conference framing statement:

Who’s on the bus, and where is it going? The state of the civic field

Civic work is proliferating: many different kinds of people, working in different contexts and issue areas, are expanding the ways in which citizens engage with government, community, and each other. It is increasingly clear that growing inequality, social and political fragmentation, and lack of democratic opportunities are undermining our efforts to address public priorities such as health, education, poverty, the environment, and government reform.

But attempts to label the responses – as “civic engagement,” “collaborative governance,” “deliberative democracy,” or “public work” – or to articulate them as one movement or policy agenda under a heading like “civic renewal” or “stronger democracy” – immediately spark debates about substance, strategy, and language.

Though it is clear we have many principles and practices in common, we differ on what we should call this work and where it is headed. In order for “overlapping civic coalitions”* to form, the potential partners would have to work through goals, assumptions, and differences. Join us on July 16-18 at the 2014 “Frontiers of Democracy” conference, in downtown Boston, for an invigorating, argumentative, civil discussion on the state and future of the civic field.

Frontiers of Democracy is sponsored by Tisch College of Citizenship and Public Service at Tufts University, the Democracy Imperative, and the Deliberative Democracy Consortium, all of which have NCDD members in their leadership.

We know this conference will be a great space for NCDD members to gather, and we hope to see you then!

More information about the Frontiers of Democracy conference is available at http://activecitizen.tufts.edu/civic-studies/frontiers.

PBP Co-Hosts Event at the White House

We want to congratulate the Participatory Budgeting Project (an NCDD organizational member) on the advancement of their work with the White House to spread participatory budgeting in the US. PBP was officially included in the White House’s Open Government Action Plan, and they recently blogged about the day-long meeting they just had as part of their participation in the initiative.


PBP-logoOn Tuesday, May 13th, The White House and the Participatory Budgeting Project co-hosted a day-long meeting on participatory budgeting, as part of the White House’s efforts to advance PB. “Promoting Innovation in Civic Engagement: Exploring Community‐Led Participatory Budgeting in the United States” brought together over 60 city leaders, community organizers, residents, funders, researchers and technologists to share best practices and identify next steps for expanding and deepening PB.

Invited experts, including PBP Executive Director Josh Lerner and Associates Gianpaolo Baiocchi and Madeleine Pape, spoke about the latest developments in PB and about research efforts to measure PB’s impact. Our partner organizations Community Voices Heard and the Community Development Project shared their experiences from PBNYC, and we discussed key engagement, implementation, and research strategies in small break-out groups with dozens of partners from across the country, as well as representatives from the White House and federal agencies.

“Five years ago participatory budgeting was an obscure idea in the US,” concluded Josh Lerner. “Now, as the White House has recognized, it’s a best practice for civic engagement, used by over 40 cities, districts, universities, schools, and other institutions across the country.” Thank you to everyone who has contributed to this rapid transformation!

You can find the original version of the above post at www.participatorybudgeting.org/blog/the-white-house-pbp-host-national-convening.

NYU Launches Research Network on Opening Governance

In case you missed it, we wanted to share about an interesting new initiative on open government from NYU’s Governance Lab. The initiative will conduct research on governments that pursue innovative ways of doing their work and should be a project to keep an eye on for researchers or those interested in open governance. You can read the March announcement below or find the original here.

govlabThe Governance Lab (The GovLab) at New York University today announced the formation of a Research Network on Opening Governance, which will seek to develop blueprints for more effective and legitimate democratic institutions to help improve people’s lives.

Convened and organized by the GovLab, the MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Opening Governance is made possible by a three-year grant of $5 million from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation as well as a gift from Google.org, which will allow the Network to tap the latest technological advances to further its work.

Combining empirical research with real-world experiments, the Research Network will study what happens when governments and institutions open themselves to diverse participation, pursue collaborative problem-solving, and seek input and expertise from a range of people. Network members include twelve experts (see below) in computer science, political science, policy informatics, social psychology and philosophy, law, and communications. This core group is supported by an advisory network of academics, technologists, and current and former government officials. Together, they will assess existing innovations in governing and experiment with new practices and how institutions make decisions at the local, national, and international levels.

Support for the Network from Google.org will be used to build technology platforms to solve problems more openly and to run agile, real-world, empirical experiments with institutional partners such as governments and NGOs to discover what can enhance collaboration and decision-making in the public interest.

The Network’s research will be complemented by theoretical writing and compelling storytelling designed to articulate and demonstrate clearly and concretely how governing agencies might work better than they do today. “We want to arm policymakers and practitioners with evidence of what works and what does not,” says Professor Beth Simone Noveck, Network Chair and author of Wiki Government: How Technology Can Make Government Better, Democracy Stronger and Citi More Powerful, “which is vital to drive innovation, re-establish legitimacy and more effectively target scarce resources to solve today’s problems.”

“From prize-backed challenges to spur creative thinking to the use of expert networks to get the smartest people focused on a problem no matter where they work, this shift from top-down, closed, and professional government to decentralized, open, and smarter governance may be the major social innovation of the 21st century,” says Noveck. “The MacArthur Research Network on Opening Governance is the ideal crucible for helping  transition from closed and centralized to open and collaborative institutions of governance in a way that is scientifically sound and yields new insights to inform future efforts, always with an eye toward real-world impacts.”

MacArthur Foundation President Robert Gallucci added, “Recognizing that we cannot solve today’s challenges with yesterday’s tools, this interdisciplinary group will bring fresh thinking to questions about how our governing institutions operate, and how they can develop better ways to help address seemingly intractable social problems for the common good.”

About the Governance Lab (GovLab) at New York University

Founded in 2012, the Governance Lab (The GovLab) strives to improve people’s lives by changing how we govern. The GovLab endeavors to strengthen the ability of people and institutions to work together to solve problems, make decisions, resolve conflict and govern themselves more effectively and legitimately. The GovLab designs technology, policy and strategies for fostering these more open approaches to governance and active conceptions of citizenship and studies what works. More information is available at www.thegovlab.org.

About the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation supports creative people and effective institutions committed to building a more just, verdant, and peaceful world. In addition to selecting the MacArthur Fellows, the Foundation works to defend human rights, advance global conservation and security, make cities better places, and understand how technology is affecting children and society. More information is available at www.macfound.org.

For more information or how to become involved, contact:

Stefaan Verhulst, Chief Research and Development Officer at the Governance Lab, sv39@nyu.edu or visit http://www.opening-governance.org.

Members

The MacArthur Research Network on Opening Governance comprises:

Chair: Beth Simone Noveck

Network Coordinator: Andrew Young

Chief of Research: Stefaan Verhulst

Faculty Members:

  • Sir Tim Berners-Lee (Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)/University of Southampton, UK)
  • Deborah Estrin (Cornell Tech/Weill Cornell Medical College)
  • Erik Johnston (Arizona State University)
  • Henry Farrell (George Washington University)
  • Sheena S. Iyengar (Columbia Business School/Jerome A. Chazen Institute of International Business)
  • Karim Lakhani (Harvard Business School)
  • Anita McGahan (University of Toronto)
  • Cosma Shalizi (Carnegie Mellon/Santa Fe Institute)

Institutional Members:

  • Christian Bason and Jesper Christiansen (MindLab, Denmark)
  • Geoff Mulgan (National Endowment for Science Technology and the Arts – NESTA, United Kingdom)
  • Lee Rainie (Pew Research Center)

The Network is eager to hear from and engage with the public as it undertakes its work. Please contact Stefaan Verhulst to share your ideas or identify opportunities to collaborate.

The original version of this announcement can be found at http://thegovlab.org/new-research-network-to-study-and-design-innovative-ways-of-solving-public-problems.

Call for Proposals for NCDD 2014!

NCDD’s 2014 National Conference on Dialogue & Deliberation is coming up this October 17-19 in the DC metro area.

Table-group-600px-outlinedNCDD conferences bring together hundreds of the most active, thoughtful, and influential people involved in public engagement and group process work across the U.S. and Canada. 400 people attended our last national conference (Seattle in 2012), and we hope to beat that number this year!

If your work involves dialogue and deliberation, you’ll love the conference. Imagine spending three days with some of the most amazing people in our field, constantly forming new relationships and reconnecting with old colleagues and friends, hearing about innovative new approaches to the challenges you’re facing, and exploring together how we can shape the future of this important movement, all while using innovative group techniques… there’s really nothing like it. (See quotes from past attendees.)

Today we’re announcing our call for proposals for our concurrent sessions for NCDD 2014. We’re interested in finding many creative ways to highlight the best of what’s happening in public engagement, group process, community problem-solving, and arts-based dialogue — and we know you have lots of ideas!

Check out the Application for Session Leaders now to see what we ask for, and start cooking up those great proposals we’ve come to expect from you! For ideas, look over the results of our March Codigital experiment, where we asked the NCDD community to share what they’d like to see happen at NCDD 2014, and peruse the fabulous sessions offered at the 2012 and 2008 NCDD conferences.

We look forward to seeing what you’d like to offer! Please note that the deadline for proposals is Monday, June 16th.

Here is some guidance for those thinking about presenting sessions at NCDD 2014…

Our theme for the 2014 conference, Democracy for the Next Generation, invites us to build on all the innovative practices and tools that have been invigorating the dialogue and deliberation community in recent years. Now more than ever, we have both opportunity—and the increasing imperative—to bring this work to a much larger stage in order to build a stronger democracy that is able to address society’s most pressing challenges.

YoungLadiesWithMug-NCDDSeattleWhat do we want the next generation of our work to look like, and how can we work together to get there? We’ll address these questions through the 2014 NCDD conference goals:

  • Create new pathways, new partnerships, and new ways of thinking about how we can expand the scope of our work and find new ways to embed our practices in governance.
  • Provide attendees with insights and know-how for harnessing the emerging technologies that support dialogue and deliberation.
  • Connect seasoned practitioners to newcomers, for the benefit of all generations.
  • Inspire and invigorate attendees’ current work through exposure to new ideas and innovations in the field, and by boldly addressing how to break down persistent barriers to participation.
  • Map out the future tools of democracy that enable a thriving culture of engaged citizens and communities everywhere.

This “next generation” of democracy is the future that embodies the best of what we have to offer the world. Session presenters are strongly encouraged to help us explore these critical elements in moving the work of our community forward. Your proposal will be evaluated, in part, by its relevance to our theme and goals.

Some advice from the NCDD 2014 planning team for potential session leaders:

  1. Identify great co-presenters.  Most workshops at NCDD conferences are collaborative efforts involving multiple presenters from different organizations and universities. Have you thought about who you can co-present with? Now’s the time to contact them to see if they’d like to offer a session with you! (Use the NCDD Discussion list and the comments below to put out feelers for potential co-presenters if you’d like.)
  2. Look over past workshop descriptions. Peruse the list of workshops from NCDD Seattle to get a sense of the kinds of sessions the planning team selects. Sessions focused on innovative solutions to common challenges, ways to take this work to scale or to new audiences, and deep dives into great projects (and thoughtful explorations of failed projects!) are especially welcome. You can also scan the fabulous sessions offered at NCDD Austin.
  3. Be innovative with your session.  NCDD attendees are usually not too impressed with traditional panels or long speeches. Get them engaging with you and each other! Think about how you can get them out of their seats and moving around the room. And think about what you’d like to learn from them (not just what they can learn from you). Challenge yourself to run a session without relying on PowerPoint.
  4. Share your stories.  NCDDers prefer hearing your stories to getting a run-down of your organization or methodology.  People are interested in learning about what you did, what you learned, and how they may be able to learn from your experience.
  5. Share the latest.  What’s the latest research? What are the latest innovations in the field? What new challenges are you facing? What are your latest accomplishments?

Portland2010-cafetableNot quite ready to draw up a proposal yet?
Use the comment field (and/or the NCDD listserv) to float your ideas by NCDDers and members of the planning team. We may be able to match you up with potential co-presenters who can address the same challenge or issue you’re interested in focusing on.

Look over the results of our March engagement project, where we used Codigital to get 122 members of the NCDD community contributing 95 ideas for the NCDD conference, editing the ideas 174 times, and ranking the ideas through 5290 votes. There is a wealth of ideas and insight in those results!

Deadline for submissions

Complete the session application at www.ncdd.org/ncdd2014/session-app by the end of the day on Monday, June 16th.

Members of the conference planning team will review the proposals and respond by email to the first contact listed in your proposal by the end of the day on July 9th.

A Public Voice 2014

The Kettering Foundation’s annual DC event, “A Public Voice,” took place yesterday at the Newseum in Washington DC. The content of the event is off the record, so those from government can feel comfortable engaging in a deeper conversation in front of the audience that attends.

This year’s topic was Health Care: What Do We Want and How Can We Pay For It?, and the proceedings will inform the development of a National Issues Forums Institute discussion guide on this very timely and contentious issue. This roundtable panel bought together leaders with a deep understanding of healthcare policy, along with others who have similarly deep experience in engaging citizens on contentious public issues.

I was honored to have been asked to invite a dozen NCDD members to attend — members representing prominent organizations in our field and large networks of facilitators:

  1. Kyle Bozentko, Director of Policy and Research, Jefferson Center
  2. Courtney Breese, Board Member, National Coalition for Dialogue & Deliberation (NCDD)
  3. Steve Brigham, Former Executive Director, AmericaSpeaks
  4. Steve Clift, Executive Director, e-democracy.org
  5. David Isaacs, Co-Founder, The World Cafe
  6. Steven Kull, Founder and President, Voice of the People
  7. Carolyn Lukensmeyer, Executive Director, University of Arizona National Institute for Civil Discourse
  8. Martha McCoy, Executive Director, Everyday Democracy
  9. Bill Potapchuk, President, Community Building Institute
  10. Sarah Rubin, Program Manager, Institute for Local Government
  11. Steve Waddell, Executive Director, Networking Action
  12. Wendy Willis, Executive Director, Policy Consensus Initiative

I serve on the planning committee for A Public Voice, and also helped select the four panelists who represented the deliberative democracy community: Jean Johnson of Public Agenda and NIF, Matt Leighninger of the Deliberative Democracy Consortium, Val Ramos of Everyday Democracy, and Gloria Rubio-Cortes of the National Civic League.  In addition, I facilitated and helped organize a planning meeting at Kettering in February with about 8 of the NCDD representatives, to talk about their role in Public Voice and glean their valuable input for Kettering.

Here is a snapshot of most of the NCDD members who were present yesterday, including my invitees, the panelists, and some Kettering guests who are members of NCDD.

NCDD Group Attending Public Voice 2014

I also helped with the content of the event brochure and some great postcards that were distributed yesterday.  The event brochure included descriptions of the deliberative democracy organizations represented by my invitees.  It was designed to give policymakers who were present a sense of the breadth and expertise available to them if they are interested in engaging citizens more deeply.

The postcard (which I’m really excited about) features a map of the United States that highlights the areas where you will find members of the NCDD community, the National Issues Forums network, and Everyday Democracy community leaders. Look at all of the blue circles that represent NCDDers! The larger circles indicate a larger cluster of contacts.

PV14-postcard-600px

I really enjoyed yesterday’s event, and loved having the chance to introduce some new NCDD members to the Kettering crowd. NCDD is proud to be developing such a strong partnership with the Kettering Foundation, and we look forward to engaging more and more of you in our work with Kettering.

NCDD Member Endorsed by LA Times

We want to extend a big congratulations to NCDD organizational member Pete Peterson on being officially endorsed by the Los Angeles Times. In addition to being the executive director of the Davenport Institute, Pete is currently running for California Secretary of State, and he just received a nod from one of the state’s most prominent publications.

Peterson, center, participates in a March forum for Sec. of State candidates (LA Times)

The LA Times wrote a glowing recommendation for Pete. They commented that Pete “says he wants to be California’s ‘chief engagement officer,’ which sounds corny but is a fitting approach to a job that entails making it as easy as possible for people to vote, and to learn about whom and what they’re voting for.”

More definitively, the Times stated that “[t]he next secretary of state should be fully invested in the office, with a clear sense of its mission as well as the opportunities it offers to make California a leader in voting, political transparency and civic engagement. The candidate who best meets that description is Pete Peterson.”

Congratulations and good luck to Pete!

We encourage you to read the whole LA Times article, which you can find at www.latimes.com/opinion/endorsements/la-ed-end-secretary-of-state-20140504-story.html#axzz30s26lkyM.

And be sure to check out Pete’s speech from the 2012 NCDD conference if you haven’t already seen it: http://ncdd.org/10232.

New Gettysburg Project Seeks to Bridge Research & Practice

We wanted to share the post below from the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation’s Challenges to Democracy blog highlighting an interesting new initiative to watch called the Gettysburg Project. Led in part by NCDD supporting member Dr. Archon Fung, the initiative explores the decline of public engagement and ways that we might improve the scope, diversity, and impact of organizing and mobilization of the public. You can read Xolani Zitha’s piece on the project below or find the original piece here


Ash logoHarvard Kennedy School faculty Archon Fung and Marshall Ganz have shared so many conversations over the years on the problems of American democracy, and specifically on failed efforts to improve the state of public engagement, that they decided together to do something about it.

Some months later, Fung and Ganz — along with co-organizers Anna Burger, Hahrie Hahn, and several others — have launched a unique initiative named The Gettysburg Project. The effort aims to both influence, and to pull inspiration from, the world of research and the world of practice. It will bring together scholars and practitioners with a wide range of interests to develop new understandings of consequential civic engagement in the United States.

At a meeting hosted by the Hauser Institute for Non Profit Organizations in April 2013, Professors Fung and Ganz first shared The Gettysburg Project with students. Below is a recap of that discussion, which progressed from the project’s background through its theoretical framework to its core activities.

Identifying and Acting Upon a Common Purpose

Professor Fung began the conversation explaining that the essence of The Gettysburg Project is a celebration of the 150th anniversary of President Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, in particular the last line of the address—“government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from the face of this earth.”

And the Project’s first proposition is that democracy in the United States is in grave danger. Professor Ganz characterized the most salient challenge to democracy in the United States as the lack of opportunity for ‘equality of voice.’ This political inequality manifests itself in many ways, not the least of which is unequal voting participation. Ganz observed that this idea of equality of voice has been articulated by many, including Harvard political scientist Sydney Verba, who noted that liberal democracy is based on the deal that unequal economic resources be balanced by equality of individual political voice and participation.

Watch a presentation on The Gettysburg Project by Marshall Ganz and Archon Fung, hosted by the Hauser Institute.

Yet when we think of the common purposes articulated in the US Constitution, i.e. “forming a more perfect union,” what often comes to mind are establishing justice, ensuring domestic tranquility, and providing for the common defense. Thus Ganz posed the question, how does equality of voice translate into the capacity to achieve the primary functions of democratic government as spelled out in the Constitution?

Ganz went on to say that Alexis de Tocqueville observed that the knowledge of ‘how to combine’ trumps all other forms of knowledge. In his observations on the emerging democracy of the United States, de Tocqueville was concerned with the problem of radical individualism. He saw a solution in multiple stripes of civic associations, the point of which was not about having many competing groups but rather many ways in which individuals could come into relation with other individuals. Through the process of coming together, individuals learn to move beyond their narrow self interest. They move toward an enlightened self interest and a broader understanding of common interests and common purpose.

In addition to a critical role in articulating a common purpose, and thus making real the aspirations articulated in the Constitution, at the same time civic associations also develop our capacity to act on behalf of those interests. Through civic associations, or what de Tocqueville described as combination or coming together, equality of voice can translate into the power or the capacity to achieve common purpose.

Yet according to Ganz the mechanisms through which people come together and discern common purpose, then translate that purpose into collective action in the public domain, are dysfunctional and not working. Civic associations have become seriously crippled.

The Unresponsiveness of Public Institutions

Ganz argued that our public institutions are meanwhile too often opposed to preferences expressed by the public. For example, when Congress will not vote for issues that have overwhelming public support such as background checks for firearms licensing. Similarly, the debate over the cause of radical and growing inequality of wealth asks whether inequality is a manifestation of specific policy choices or the failure of public institutions.

This lack of responsiveness is a symptom of a deeper problem that economist Albert Hirschman has written about. Any political system will ultimately run down, and the challenge becomes correcting the deterioration. Hirschman found that voice mechanisms are one solution, in which those affected by the dysfunction of the system express their dissatisfaction in ways that will result in the system correcting itself. Through the process of competitive elections and public deliberation, democracy becomes a self-correcting mechanism through which ‘voice’ can work.

Archon Fung referred to Martin Gilens’ compelling research on the plutocratic nature of democratic government at present. On issues in which there are class differences in preferences, policymakers are responsive only to the top 10% of the population

If voice turns out not to work, then the alternative for citizens is to exit the system. Where there are competing institutions, individuals can choose to leave. There is a “tipping point” when everyone deserts an institution if no corrective action is taken. In the context of entrepreneurial capitalism in which firms compete, and the most efficient succeed, exit is an available strategy.

But in democracy, is exit an option? The Gettysburg Project is premised on a belief that it is an option with the ‘knowledge of how to combine.’ But a second premise is that the mechanisms for inputting an effective voice and something meaningful coming out the other end of the policy process are broken. Further, there are two strategies to exit in a political system. First, people can stop voting when they realize that voting does not make a difference. In only six states did it make a difference whether or not you voted in the 2012 presidential election.

The other exit is to seek private solutions for public problems such as contracting with private sector firms or non-profits. The result of this is that it weakens our capacity for public action, resting on the belief that privatization brings market mechanisms to solve public problems. There is some evidence to the contrary.

Building Organizational Capacity to Return to Equality of Voice

The focus of The Gettysburg Project is how to bring ‘voice’ back into the system in a meaningful way. But is the problem with individuals? Some would say that people don’t have enough civic virtue and are discouraged from participation, so they resort to an individualistic political culture. Or is the problem is with institutions? The electoral system itself is biased, while the role of money in politics makes the system dysfunctional.

There are a lot of people working on issues at the individual level covering civic education and culture, focusing on getting individuals to exercise more voice. There is a lot of other work on the structural side focusing on campaign finance reform, better voting machines, or getting rid of the Electoral College. In between the individual and the institution is the organizational level, at which people come together to exercise collective action in the de Tocqueville sense.

The Gettysburg Project assumes that none of these things will happen unless associations get together, especially the kinds of organizations that engage and mobilize broad sections of the American population in public life. In the 19th and 20th centuries, the organizations that did the job of integrating people are not able to anymore because the approaches that worked then are not working any more. Identifying the new structures that will replace labor unions and congregations will represent a solid step forward for American democracy.

Fung observed that The Gettysburg Project will also seek to build the capacity and strength of existing organizations that engage and mobilize people in public life. The Project will explore how much of the challenge has to do with internal organizational functioning, with how much organizations do or do not cooperate with each other, with the ways in which organizations try to influence public policy or electoral politics, and even with the effect of the Internet. There is an internal, horizontal, and external dimension to understanding the challenges of voice and public participation.

The Project’s intention is to bring together a group of 20-30 leaders of organizations with a successful track record in mobilizing people and activity. Individual participants are senior enough to have the capacity to change, the willingness and curiosity to figure things out, and many more years still left in their careers. They represent a variety of settings and contexts, allowing for a rich understanding of the nature of this problem from an organizational point of view.

An early meeting at the Roosevelt Institute in Hyde Park, New York brought together leaders from labor unions, community organizations, Dreamers, and others to test the idea. Surprisingly all organizations felt that they were in some way stuck in a rut in this area. And these leaders did not know about each other, even though they worked in the same field. Professors Ganz and Fung next hosted the first formal convening of The Gettysburg Project in March 2014. Check back on the blog for future updates on the key themes and discussion points that come up throughout the project.

You can find the original version of this post at www.challengestodemocracy.us/home/frontiers-of-democracy-research-the-gettysburg-project/#sthash.5fPnS9dZ.dpuf.

PBP Recognized with Brown Democracy Medal

We are proud to announce that our friends at the Participatory Budgeting Project – an NCDD organizational member – are the first-ever winners of Penn State’s new Brown Democracy Medal! Please join us in sending a huge congratulations to PBP for this well-deserved award. You can read more below, find Penn State’s original announcement here, or see PBP’s press release here.

PBP-logoA national organization that empowers citizens to exert greater control over public spending was selected as the first recipient of the Brown Democracy Medal, an award that will be presented annually by the McCourtney Institute for Democracy in Penn State’s College of the Liberal Arts.

The Brown Democracy Medal was endowed in 2013 by Penn State alumni Larry Brown (Class of 1971, history) and Lynne Brown (Class of 1972, education). The medal spotlights the best work being done to advance democracy in the United States and internationally. Under the award program, the McCourtney Institute for Democracy will recognize practical innovations, such as new institutions, laws, technologies or movements that advance the cause of democracy. In addition, future awards will highlight contributions in democratic theory that enrich philosophical conceptions of democracy and empirical work that promises to improve the functioning of democracies. Along with the medal, recipients will receive $5,000, give a public talk at Penn State, and have an essay published by a prestigious university press.

The inaugural medal winner, the Participatory Budgeting Project (PBP), is a nonprofit organization that promotes “participatory budgeting,” an inclusive process that empowers community members to make informed decisions about public spending. More than 46,000 people in communities across the United States have decided how to spend $45 million through programs that PBP helped spark over the last five years.

Participatory budgeting invites citizens to collectively determine how millions of their tax dollars are spent. Josh Lerner, executive director of PBP, said that participatory budgeting “offers a fundamentally different way to engage with government, and meaningfully engages people in the budget decisions that affect them.”

John Gastil, director of the McCourtney Institute for Democracy, noted that “The Participatory Budgeting Project exemplifies the essential features the award committee was looking for in its inaugural recipient. Political and economic inequality is part of the American national discussion, and participatory budgeting helps empower marginalized groups that do not normally take part in a process that is so critical for democratic life.”

Lerner said, “We are deeply honored to receive the Brown Democracy Medal, in recognition of our work to give thousands of people real power over real money. In just a few years, we have shown how a small nonprofit organization can bring together hundreds of partners to build a new model for local democracy.”

He will accept the medal on behalf of the PBP on Oct. 24 at a ceremony held at Penn State’s University Park campus. More information is at www.participatorybudgeting.org.

The Brown Democracy Medal review committee considered dozens of applications from across the globe, including creative policy innovations in Australia and Iceland. The committee evaluated submissions based on the criteria of the innovation’s novelty, its effectiveness and potential for diffusion across different societies and cultures, its nonpartisan orientation and the recency of the democratic innovation.

The McCourtney Institute for Democracy at Penn State promotes rigorous scholarship and practical innovations to advance the democratic process in the United States and abroad. The institute examines the interplay of deliberative, electoral and institutional dynamics. It recognizes that effective deliberation among citizens has the potential to reshape both the character of public opinion and the dynamics of electoral politics, particularly in state and local communities. Likewise, political agendas and institutional processes can shape the ways people frame and discuss issues. The institute pursues this mission, in part, through supporting the work of its partner units, the Center for Democratic Deliberation (CDD) and the Center for American Political Responsiveness (CAPR).

The original version of this announcement can be found on Penn State’s website at http://news.psu.edu/story/312850/2014/04/23/impact/participatory-budgeting-project-selected-brown-democracy-medal.

Registration open for our June 12th Confab with Peter Levine

Confab bubble imageWe’re excited to have Peter Levine as our featured speaker on our next NCDD Confab call. Sign up today to reserve your spot on June’s Confab, which is set for 2-3pm Eastern (11-noon Pacific) on Thursday, June 12th.

We’ll be talking to Peter about his new book, We Are the Ones We Have Been Waiting For: The Promise of Civic Renewal in America. This is an important book for us to discuss, and you have time to get your hands on a copy before the confab if you’d like (here’s the Amazon link).  I especially encourage you to check out Chapter 7, titled Strategies: How to Accomplish Civic Renewal, which is what we’ll dig into deepest on the call.

WeAreTheOnes-cover

Peter Levine is the Lincoln Filene Professor of Citizenship & Public Affairs in Tufts University’s Jonathan Tisch College of Citizenship and Public Service and Director of CIRCLE, The Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement.

Peter Levine’s We Are the Ones We Have Been Waiting For is a primer for anyone motivated to help revive our fragile civic life and restore citizens’ public role. After offering a novel theory of active citizenship, a diagnosis of its decline, and a searing critique of our political institutions, Levine–one of America’s most influential civic engagement activists–argues that American citizens must address our most challenging issues. People can change the norms and structures of their own communities through deliberative civic action.

Our confabs (interactive conference calls) are free and open to all NCDD members and potential members. Register today if you’d like to join us!

More about the book…

In the book, Peter illustrates rich and effective civic work by drawing lessons from YouthBuild USA, Everyday Democracy, the Industrial Areas Foundation, and many other civic groups. Their organizers invite all citizens–including traditionally marginalized people, such as low-income teenagers-to address community problems. Levine explores successful efforts from communities across America as well as from democracies overseas.

He shows how cities like Bridgeport, CT and Allentown, PA have bounced back from the devastating loss of manufacturing jobs by drawing on robust civic networks. The next step is for the participants in these local efforts to change policies that frustrate civic engagement nationally. Filled with trenchant analysis and strategies for reform, We Are the Ones We Have Been Waiting For analyzes and advocates a new citizen-centered politics capable of tackling problems that cannot be fixed in any other way.

A little more about Peter…

PeterLevine

Peter graduated from Yale in 1989 with a degree in philosophy. He studied philosophy at Oxford on a Rhodes Scholarship, receiving his doctorate in 1992. From 1991 until 1993, he was a research associate at Common Cause. In the late 1990s, he was Deputy Director of the National Commission on Civic Renewal. Levine is the author of We Are the Ones We Have Been Waiting For: The Promise of Civic Renewal in America (Oxford University Press, fall 2013)five other scholarly books on philosophy and politics, and a novel.

He has served on the boards or steering committees of AmericaSpeaks, Street Law Inc., the Newspaper Association of America Foundation, the Campaign for the Civic Mission of Schools, Discovering Justice, the Kettering Foundation, the American Bar Association Committee’s for Public Education, the Paul J. Aicher Foundation, and the Deliberative Democracy Consortium.