Lessons Learned from a Statewide Gathering of NCDD Members in VA

On November 19th, Nancy Gansneder at the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service at the University of Virginia and I teamed up to host a 3-hour gathering and knowledge exchange for Virginians working in the fields of dialogue and deliberation. The event was held at UVA in Charlottesville, VA.

Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service      National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation

We’re posting the lessons we learned here for others who might be interested in hosting their own in-person gatherings in their state.

Outcomes

The results were good: 19 in-person attendees, 26 others who registered and indicated their availability for alternate days, sufficient interest to continue hosting statewide gatherings like this every six months, and one of the participants stepped up as the next organizer (success!!). There was consensus within the group that we should request a state-based email discussion list, hosted by NCDD; Sandy is setting this up for us.

Breakout Sessions Proposed during our Meeting

20131119_134109

  • How to bring in reluctant stakeholders?
  • What is a good “hook” to interest participants in dialogues?
  • What has failed miserably?
  • How to go from dialogue & deliberation to advocacy and long term maintenance of solutions?
  • Collaborative learning in dialogue and deliberation
  • What affect do modern communications platforms have on D&D?
  • Engaging the under-engaged
  • How to work with 2 or more communities with different identities when resources are limited and a the problem/solution involves both of them
  • Getting diversity at the table
  • Creative diversity in the community
  • Hosting dialogues with open topics
  • Who does and who should pay for D&D?
  • What does success look like?
  • General logistics and planning tips
  • Forums on mental health
  • Making the case for investment in process from within a government organization

Here’s What’s Needed to Make this Happen in Your State

  • One self-starter to get the ball rolling
  • A co-organizer to bounce ideas off (you can find this person with the initial invitation email)
  • A venue that can hold the participants (20-30 people is a great turnout); universities are a great place to start looking.
  • The NCDD Member Map and Member Directory will help you know who is in your area.
  • Office supplies (name tags, sharpies, pens, scrap paper, large notepads to brainstorm breakout sessions topics, and anything else you might find useful)
  • Funds for lunch or snacks/coffee for an afternoon meeting (we coordinated with Sandy Heierbacher prior to the event to secure $250 from NCDD for lunch; alternatively, you could charge $10 or $20 or ask a local organization to sponsor)
  • Basic familiarity with Google Docs, Excel, and Eventbrite.

Pointers for Setting Up a Statewide Gathering, Step by Step

  • Two months prior to the event: Create the invitation (2 hours)
    • Copy & paste email addresses from NCDD members in your state from the member map or directory into an email, or request a member chart from your state from Joy.
    • Draft the body of the initial invitation email (use this previous example as a starting point).  The purpose is to gauge interest, to find a co-organizer that has a venue, and to receive suggestions.
    • Let NCDD know what you’re planning, and have Joy send you some NCDD postcards to hand out and perhaps other materials that are available.
  • Collect feedback from invitees when they respond via email.  Decide whether or not to go forward.  Choose 3-4 dates that work for both organizers (1 hour)
  • The organizer with the venue reserves the space (0.5 hours)
  • One month prior to the event:
    • Set up the document for the meeting notes (see this template for meeting notes that you can copy) prior to sending out the invitation. (1 hour)
    • Create the Eventbrite invitation; see this previous example (there are probably several online tools that you can use for invitations, but Eventbrite seems to be one of the best invitation tools for free events).  Be sure to create a custom multiple-choice question for invitees to indicate which of the 3-4 possible dates you are offering is best for them (in Eventbrite after you create the event, this is under “Manage” and then “Order Form” and scroll down to “Add Question”.  Example text for the question: “Which days can you attend from 11am-2pm? Please choose all that apply.”). (2 hours)
    • Announce the event on the NCDD main discussion list and/or this blog (1 hour)
    • Ask Sandy Heierbacher to forward the invitation by email to all NCDD contacts (members and others) in your state with a note of support. (0.5 hours)
  • One week prior to the event: Pre-order lunch (0.5 hours).
  • Day of the event:
    • Print out the list of attendees so you can take attendance (from Eventbrite you can download attendees in an Excel file by going to “Manage” and then “Event Reports”).
    • Show up 1-2 hours early to verify that the furniture is arranged how you want it (1.5 hours).  It was important that the tables and chairs were mobile.  During the opening plenary discussion, chairs were oriented toward the center of the room.  We moved to small-group circles when the breakout sessions began.
  • After the Event: Write up a blog post detailing what went well and what could be improved (1.5 hours).  Clean up the Excel file of attendee contact information and distribute it to the attendees (if they requested it) and send it to NCDD to help them get a sense of the energy for these regional events (1.5 hours).

General Suggestions and Lessons Learned

20131119_123603

  • Greet each individual at the door to create a welcoming environment.
  • Set ground rules for the event when it begins.  For example, “If you don’t want something in the notes, please state that it is off the record.”
  • 11am-2pm was convenient for people who had to drive a long distance.  Some drove 2.5 hours each way.
  • With a group size of 20, we had breakout groups ranging from 2-8 people in size.  We had 4 separate small-group discussions during the breakouts on 3 different topics + 1 “open topic”.
  • During the plenary session we dove right into proposing breakout session topics.  Often the group picked up the topic for a moment and people built on each other’s ideas and the framing of the problem.  We didn’t interrupt when there was energy around any particular topic.
  • Keeping everything on time was important so that people could get back on the road for their long drives.  Rather than coming up with a perfect solution for grouping the breakout topics or allowing for a full-blown open space process for selecting the breakouts (there were more than we had time to discuss), instead we told participants, “Given that you see all these topics on the board and that we want to do this as efficiently as possible, we’re going to choose topics in the following manner.  If you are moved to host a topic, stand up, announce it and move to a corner of the room.  You will be the facilitator; it’s a group discussion rather than a presentation.  We’ll choose 4 breakout sessions in this manner right now and we’ll choose a few of the ones which will take place after lunch.  If you want to propose combining two topics in a session, please make the suggestion to the person who stepped forward to facilitate that topic.” After all, the group only needs to choose 6-8 topics, so this doesn’t need to be much more complicated than this.  In a three-hour workshop, time goes quickly, and if sessions are 30 or 45 minutes each, then it’s important to minimize this “process overhead” as much as possible without causing the participants to feel rushed.  Have fun with it!!
  • Give “5 min” notice with a piece of paper so that you don’t have to verbally interrupt the groups.
  • Rather than herding everyone towards lunch at the same time, let people flow through the lunch area organically after their breakout session comes to a natural conclusion; if they keep talking and they see everyone else with lunch, they’ll get the idea that lunch is served and they’ll be able to make the call as to whether they should continue speaking or finish the conversation and eat.  Some breakout sessions might reconvene informally through lunch.
  • Folks at our event took the stairs to get lunch and brought it back downstairs to continue the meeting; this enabled the participants to mingle.  The second breakout session began while some folks were still eating/drinking; they brought their food with them, and there was no problem.
  • If the breakout sessions run longer than expected (we blocked off 30 minutes per breakout, but there was energy for 40 minutes), then be prepare to have a shorter closing plenary discussion.  We chose to have a 20 minute closing and that worked for us.  The group came to consensus quickly about the need for requesting that NCDD set up an email discussion so that we can continue to stay in touch, and everyone was happy to have the organizers release their contact information to the other participants.
  • During sessions, recommend but do not require folks to take notes during their session.  If they don’t want to write them on the doc themselves, offer to transcribe the notes for them onto the meeting notes (in our template for meeting notes, we used a Google doc that anyone can edit).
  • Be sure to thank the host and any sponsors of the event at the closing plenary.  It can’t happen without them!

Of course, these are just methods that worked for us in Virginia, and we welcome your suggestions for improvement in the comments below.

Lucas Cioffi Interview from NCDD Seattle

At the 2012 NCDD national conference in Seattle, NCDD member and filmmaker Jeffrey Abelson sat down with over a dozen leaders in our community to ask them about their work and their hopes and concerns for our field and for democratic governance in our country.

Today we’re featuring the interview with Lucas Cioffi, founder of Athena Bridge and currently a member of the NCDD board of directors…

See the “NCDD 2012” tag for more videos from NCDD Seattle, which brought together 400 leaders and innovators in our field. You can also check out Jeffrey Abelson’s Song of a Citizen YouTube channel and our NCDD 2012 Seattle playlist on YouTube.

“Are We There Yet?” Residents of Central Arkansas use online game to create roadmap for the future

This article first appeared on EngagingCities but we’d like to share it here with the NCDD community.

How do you get citizens to give feedback about their ideas for the community, while also educating them on the inherent repercussions of their preferences? How do you involve the public in your 30-year plan, while instilling an appreciation for how every decision affects the overall timeline and outcome?

You get them to play a game.

Playing a game – planning a future

The residents of Central Arkansas have been helping to shape their region’s future through a FlipSides game – an online interactive activity – that allows them to give feedback on topics such as transportation infrastructure, emerging trends, walkability, and funding decisions. Responsive infographics help players envision the effects their ideas would have on the completion timeline for each topic. Appropriately named “Are we there yet?”, this playful tool has provided valuable feedback to the decision-makers for the region’s planning effort, Imagine Central Arkansas.

Since it’s mid-June launch, hundreds of Arkansas residents have played “Are we there yet?”, both online and at events throughout the area. People were encouraged to access the game to let their voice be heard while learning more about the factors that influence the final plan. As an extra incentive, each player was registered in an iPad mini giveaway. The iPad was won by a Searcy resident, but the whole community will benefit from increased understanding of the give-and-take type of decision-making that is native to complex projects.

Real-time results

One of the most valuable features of the game is the immediate visual feedback players receive as they answer questions and define priorities. Not only do citizens get to choose how to achieve the regional vision, they get to experience in real-time the trade-offs that come with any decision or development.

As you proceed through the steps of the game, you move a slider or checkbox to indicate your opinion about a specific topic – for example, your level of support for policies that accommodate pedestrians and cyclists. If you indicate strong support, the timelines on the right will immediately show that based on your response, the completion of “Local Transit Goals” would be accomplished by the year 2046. If you had not supported the pedestrian policies, but instead supported investing in current transportation systems before creating new ones, the “Local Transit Goals” would not be accomplished until 2050. Each step of the game contains multiple options and layers of effects, all depending on one another, that demonstrate the complicated nature of a regional plan.

Distinguishing it from other popular engagement methods, the game’s focus goes beyond mere opinion-gathering. It requires players to think through the “flip sides” of each decision and to realize that every action will have impact on all other parts of the project. It puts the citizen briefly in the driver’s seat, making the decisions that planners must deal with every day. In short, “Are we there yet?” is more about HOW we get there than WHERE we are trying to go.

The next 30 years

Imagine Central Arkansas has provided “Are We There Yet?” as one of the last phases in their outreach strategy before drafting the final plan for the region. This means the choices and information in the game are more refined than during previous engagement efforts. Prior campaigns have included “Treasured Places”, where residents were encouraged to photograph, map, and digitally explore their favorite local places; and “Choose Your Future”, another digital activity that allowed people to prioritize about everything in their future, from parks to mobility to economy and beyond. In this latest outreach, residents are finally asked to try to balance their opinions with realities and challenges.

“Are we there yet?” is powered by FlipSides, an online platform that allows decision-makers to engage the public about specific trade-offs inherent to planning projects. While Imagine Central Arkansas has used the platform to focus on goals and timelines, FlipSides can be tailored to fit any project and provides planners with valuable feedback about public opinion and priorities.

As urban planners look for more relevant ways to engage their audience, many are turning to online tools, and games in particular. Arkansas has joined other cities in the experiment of playful public outreach, and the results have been positive. Perhaps the greatest benefit will be to the citizens who, in taking a moment to stop and think about the future of their community, will leave with a greater appreciation for the complexities of public planning.

Developing “Text, Talk, and Act”: A new strategy for combining ‘thick’ and ‘thin’ engagement

NCDD members may be interested in contributing to the development of a new public engagement process that will roll out in December as part of the National Dialogue on Mental Health. “Text, Talk, and Act” has been developed by Matt Leighninger of the Deliberative Democracy Consortium (DDC), the other members of the National Dialogue’s Creating Community Solutions partnership, and the directors of two civic technology nonprofits: Michelle Lee of Textizen and Michael Smith of United Americans. Sandy Heierbacher of NCDD, Raquel Goodrich of the National Institute for Civil Discourse, and Mary Jacksteit and Sue McCormack of CCS have been instrumental in making this happen.

We developed this process because we were looking for a way to involve more young people, with the technology they use most, in a way that captures national excitement and produces meaningful small-group dialogue.

Essentially, what we are doing is combining the strengths of ‘thick’ and ‘thin’ engagement. Thick engagement has been a key element of public participation for a long time, though it has proliferated dramatically in the last twenty years; it happens mainly in groups, either face-to-face, online, or both, and features various forms of dialogue, deliberation, action planning, and policy choicework. Thin engagement has developed more recently; it happens mainly online, and is easier, faster, and potentially more viral – it is done by individuals, who are often motivated by feeling a part of some larger movement or cause.

Both thin and thick engagement have their merits – and their limitations. We wanted to find better ways to weave together these two strands, thickening the thin forms and thinning out the thick. “Text, Talk, and Act” resulted directly from this conversation.

Like most kinds of thin engagement, “Text, Talk, and Act” is easy to organize. You don’t need moderators, discussion materials, computers, or screens: just participants with text-capable cellphones. (If not everyone has a cellphone, you need only ensure that there is one cellphone per small group.)

  • Participants form into groups of 4-6 people, then start the 60-minute process by texting ‘START’ to 89800.
  • They receive a welcome text, followed quickly by a few polling questions about mental health, such as “1 in 5 people experience mental illness each year. Take a guess: Half of all mental health problems begin at age: A) 14, B) 24, C) 30”
  • Each time the participant texts in a response, they receive a text with the next question.
  • Aggregated results of the polling can be viewed online in real time.
  • Participants are asked to accept some guidelines: “Let’s talk guidelines: 1. Listen w/ respect, 2. It’s OK to disagree but don’t make it personal, 3. What’s said here stays here. Is this OK?”
  • The participants then receive the first of several dialogue questions, including: “Without naming names, talk about how mental health issues have affected you or people you know (Take 15 mins to discuss in groups & reply NEXT to go on.)”
  • Responses to these dialogue questions are not recorded. (And phone numbers are not kept in the system after the process has ended.)
  • Next in the sequence are polling and dialogue questions on the best ways to “make a difference” on mental health issues.
  • One of the final questions asks participants to “commit to 1 action to help make a difference” – participants can text in their ideas, which can then be viewed online along with other ideas from their school, university, or community.

The process is designed to last one hour, but the technology allows people to start any time they like (on December 5th), and take as long as they like. Participants will also be able to organize a “Text, Talk, and Act” event after the 5th.

We used the Textizen platform for the high school pilot of “Text, Talk, and Act,” held at Rex Putnam High School in Milwaukie, Oregon. “This exercise has created a more trusting environment in our class,” one student said. “We understand each other better now.” Our college pilot, at Roger Williams University in Bristol, Rhode Island, used the United Americans platform. Please contact either Textizen or United Americans if you are interested in using this process.

Meanwhile, please join us on December 5th in trying out this new process! There are three easy steps:

  1. Bring some people together on the 5th
  2. Have them form into groups of 4-5, with at least one cellphone per group
  3. Ask them to text “START” to 89800

Learn more and sign up for updates at www.creatingcommunitysolutions.org/texttalkact, and see Sandy’s previous post about the project at www.ncdd.org/13369 (including the infographic NCDD’s Andy Fluke created for the project!).

Audio from November’s Confab Call on Rockefeller’s GATHER

Confab bubble imageYesterday’s confab call (Nov 20th) on the Rockefeller Foundation’s new publication on convening was a great one! About 80 people participated, and our speakers and facilitator did a fabulous job.

If you missed it, you can listen to the audio archive here, and be sure to check out the dynamic Hackpad doc where many participants were taking notes, asking and answering questions, and introducing themselves.

Our confab speakers yesterday were instrumental in the Rockefeller publication GATHER: The Art & Science of Effective Convening:

  • Rob Garris, Managing Director at Rockefeller Foundation. Rob oversees their Bellagio conference center, and oversaw the creation of GATHER
  • Noah Rimland Flower, Monitor Institute. Noah is one of GATHER’s two co-authors and led the content creation

GATHER is a free hands-on guidebook for all convening designers and social change leaders who want to tap into a group’s collective intelligence and make substantial progress on a shared challenge. (Download or purchase it at www.monitorinstitute.com/what-we-think/gather.)

The gorgeous publication provides simple frameworks for the questions that are often ignored: whether convening is the right tool to use to advance a strategic agenda, and how a convening can be used to achieve a specific purpose. It helps you understand how to customize the design to fit that purpose, laying out a clear series of steps for what is a naturally chaotic workflow. It then offers principles to use for each of the many tactical choices involved. GATHER and its accompanying workshop materials are designed for you to use in your own work, with a team, and with larger groups both inside and outside an organization.

On yesterday’s confab, we discussed:

  • How convening is increasingly being used as a strategic tool for foundations
  • Mis-steps many convening designers make, and how to avoid them
  • Examples of how convening can be used for societal problem-solving
  • How the presence of funders can influence a convening
  • How do you know when you’re addressing the right problem and involving the right people
  • How to determine the best size (number of participants) for your convening
  • And much more!

And here are links to some great resources that were brought up on yesterday’s call…

  • Monitor Institute’s new publication Harnessing Collaborative Technologies, on the emerging tech tools that can be used to help funders work together
  • In addition to the gorgeous 43-page report, a super-useful interactive tool has been developed by GrantCraft at http://collaboration.grantcraft.org to help people identify tools to facilitate collaboration.
  • From the Kids’ Table to the Adults’ Table: Taking Relationships Seriously in a World of Networks, by John Esterle (Whitman Institute), Malka Kopell and Palma Strand.
  • New report by Special D Events prepared for the Kellogg Foundation, Convenings 2.0: Connecting adult learning, communication strategies and event logistics to build stronger relationships

To stay updated on NCDD’s future confab calls and all of our activities, be sure to join NCDD! Note that all confab audio recordings (and archives of the collaborative docs created during them) can be found in the NCDD Confab Archives tag.

Join us for “Text, Talk, Act” on Mental Health

On December 5th, we encourage all NCDD members to participate in the first-ever, nationwide text-enabled dialogue on mental health. All you need is 1 hour, 4 people, and at least 1 phone.

TXTTLKACT_Infographic

This is a project of Creating Community Solutions – a collaborative effort led by the National Institute for Civil Discourse, the Deliberative Democracy Consortium, AmericaSpeaks, Everyday Democracy, National Issues Forums Institute, and the National Coalition for Dialogue & Deliberation (with many, many partner organizations signed on — including some of you!). We’re excited to be experimenting with the use of text messaging technology to help groups of young people and adults, all over the country, get together in small groups for one-hour discussions on mental health.

Sign up today at bit.ly/texttalkact, and think about whether you can get your university, your classroom, your community group, your neighbors, or others involved in Text Talk Act!

And please share this infographic widely to help us promote the event! The infographic was created by Andy Fluke — NCDD’s Creative Director.

Small groups of 4-5 people will gather together for the event. Each group will need a cell phone and will receive polling & discussion questions and process suggestions via text message.

Results from the live polling questions will be tabulated almost instantly, so that people will be able to see how participants across the country responded. The discussion questions will provide a safe space for candid dialogue on mental health, one of the most critical and misunderstood public issues we face. The process will also provide an opportunity for participants to discuss actions they can take to strengthen mental health on their campuses and in their communities.

Harnessing Collaborative Technologies: Helping Funders Work Together Better

In November 2013, Monitor Institute and the Foundation Center released a new report called Harnessing Collaborative Technologies: Helping Funders Work Together Better. As part of the research, we looked at more than 170 different technological tools now available to funders, dove deeply into the literature on philanthropic collaboration, analyzed the results of recent Foundation Center surveys, and spoke with a wide range of experts from the worlds of both technology and philanthropy.

HarnessingCollabTech-coverThe Harnessing Collaborative Technologies report helps readers make sense of the dizzying array of technologies that are now available to help those engaged in both low- and high-intensity collaborations by parsing the different collaborative needs of funders. How can new tools help funders learn and get smarter about the issues they care about? How can the technologies help you find and connect with potential partners? How can they help you transact business together? Which technologies can help you assess collective progress and measure outcomes? The report encourages funders to start with these collaborative needs rather than with the technologies themselves, to ensure that solutions fit the wants, requirements, and limitations of users.

Harnessing Collaborative Technologies also provides a set of principles that offer guidance for tool developers and funders about how to make thoughtful choices when investing in the creation and adaptation of new tools that facilitate collaborative work.

In addition to the gorgeous 43-page report, a super-useful interactive tool has been developed by GrantCraft at http://collaboration.grantcraft.org to help people identify tools to facilitate collaboration. This must-see tool is a joint service of the Foundation Center and the European Foundation Centre.

The report’s main headlines won’t come as a huge surprise to anyone: (1) more than ever before, funders are recognizing that they will need to collaborate to effectively to address the complex, intractable problems that we now face, and (2) new technologies—from simple group scheduling tools to comprehensive online collaboration workspaces—are now available to help facilitate the often challenging process of working together.

But there’s a deeper story beneath the headlines: about how these emerging technologies are enabling new types collaborations that weren’t possible (or at least much were more difficult) just a few years ago.

While much of the talk about collaboration these days centers on large, formal “collective impact” initiatives and “needle-moving” collaboratives, these types of highly intensive collaborative approaches aren’t necessarily right for all funders, all situations, and all purposes. In some cases, funders are simply looking to learn together. In others, they’re just aiming to understand the broader ecosystem of activity so they can act independently but still align their efforts with those of others.

New technologies are changing the playing field and making it cheaper and easier than ever before to facilitate these different types of “lower-intensity” collaborative activities. New collaborative platforms are helping funders share files and information, and can provide important forums for ongoing dialogue and conversation. Online project management systems are streamlining processes for coordinating and aligning action. And new tools for aggregating data and visualizing information now allow funders to see the larger funding landscape that they are a part of in new ways.

These simpler, technology-facilitated collaborative activities may not yield the outsized results of more complex, formal efforts, but they often produce very real improvements and outcomes, while also helping to build relationships and momentum that can build towards higher-intensity efforts.

By getting smarter about how we develop and use these collaborative tools, we have an opportunity to alleviate some of the “friction in the system” that has made working together—even in lower intensity ways—difficult until now.  And in doing so, we can ease the path to collaboration and help aggregate resources and effort that can match the scale of the problems we now face.

Resource Link: http://monitorinstitute.com/blog/2013/11/07/collaborative-technologies-reducing-the-friction-in-the-system/

Grantcraft tool that helps you find EXACT tool you need:  http://collaboration.grantcraft.org/

Bouncing Back with Style and Grace

It isn’t often that we get to share wedding pictures on the NCDD blog, but this is a very special occasion.

I’m thrilled to share the news that two of our long-time members and supporters, Terry Amsler and Lisa Bingham, were wed on October 28th. Lisa sent me this photo to share with the community.

Lisa & Terry Amsler's Wedding Portrait

Many of you will remember that back in February, I shared the devastating news that Terry and Lisa were both struck by a bus during a trip to London they had been looking forward to taking together.  They were taken to separate hospitals in a city far from frienda and family, and though information was spotty, we did our best to keep the community updated via the comments thread at www.ncdd.org/10967 whenever we heard news of their progress or transport.

Support and encouragement poured in from our community, in the comments thread and elsewhere, and after the first alarming reports, news about Terry and Lisa’s recovery became more and more hopeful.  Their recovery has actually been quite amazing, and now they’ve surpassed all our hopes for them and gotten married!  Terry has moved to Bloomington, Indiana to live with Lisa.

Lisa is back to work at Indiana University (she’s Keller-Runden Professor of Public Service at the School of Public and Environmental Affairs), and as of October 1st, Terry is back on a part-time basis at the Institute for Local Government’s Public Engagement Program (check out the site at www.ca-ilg.org if you haven’t yet seen all the great resources Terry created for them!).

In an email to me the other day, Terry wrote “Nothing like a brush with mortality to help one focus on and consider what is most important in the lifetime we’re given or have left.”  Please join me in congratulating Terry and Lisa on their wedding and on their amazing recovery!

Peggy Holman Interview from NCDD Seattle

At the 2012 NCDD national conference in Seattle, NCDD member and filmmaker Jeffrey Abelson sat down with over a dozen leaders in our community to ask them about their work and their hopes and concerns for our field and for democratic governance in our country.

Today we’re featuring the interview with Peggy Holman, co-founder of Journalism That Matters and author & co-editor of the Change Handbook.  Peggy convenes and hosts conversations that matter, inviting people and systems to gather around the issues most important to them.

See the “NCDD 2012” tag for more videos from NCDD Seattle, which brought together 400 leaders and innovators in our field. You can also check out Jeffrey Abelson’s Song of a Citizen YouTube channel and our NCDD 2012 Seattle playlist on YouTube.

Launch of Voice of the People and its Campaign for a Citizen Cabinet

Here’s an important announcement from one of our supporting members, Steven Kull. Steven is Research Scholar and Director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland. I’ve been watching Steven’s work with great interest over the last few years especially, and I’m exciting about Voice of the People.

Dear NCDD Community,

I would like to announce that our new organization Voice of the People (VOP) and its Campaign for a Citizen Cabinet had its rollout last month. The website is now up at www.vop.org.

VOP seeks to give the American people a greater voice in government by:

  • Working with Congress to establish a national Citizen Cabinet, a large standing panel comprised of a representative sample of the American public, to be consulted on current issues, using new online interactive tools to give voice to the people on an unprecedented scale; and
  • Making these same online resources available to all Americans, so they can get better informed and more effectively communicate their views to their representatives.

In the short term we will be developing interim Citizen Cabinets in a number of states and Congressional districts as well as consulting the public on a national level on issues currently in front of Congress.

VOP-largepic

We have also been having many meetings on the Hill with Congressional staffers and some Members and have been getting a very positive response to the idea of establishing a new Congressionally-chartered National Academy for Public Consultation that would run a Citizen Cabinet as well as doing other forms of public consultation.

We hope you will go to the website, find out more, sign the petition and stay in touch.

At the rollout event at the National Press Club members of our advisory board spoke, including former Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND), former House Members Bill Frenzel (R-MN) and Martin Frost (R-TX), former House Member and Governor Mike Castle (R-DE), and Wendy Willis of the Policy Consensus Initiative. You can see the video of the event on the site.

The event led to press coverage in Politico, US News and World Report, Roll Call, the Christian Science Monitor and other places, as well as some television coverage.

The plan for the Citizen Cabinet goes like this… It will be comprised of 275 citizens in every congressional district—120,000 nationwide—scientifically selected to accurately reflect the American people, and connected through an online interface. Each Citizen Cabinet member will serve for 9-12 months, and Internet access will be provided to those who do not already have it, to make sure everyone is represented.

On a regular basis, members of the Citizen Cabinet will go through an online public consultation on a pressing issue facing the federal government. For each issue, Citizen Cabinet members will:

  1. Get Briefed: Get unbiased background information reviewed by experts and congressional staff from both parties;
  2. Weigh the Arguments: Learn about the policy options that are actually on the table and evaluate the pros and cons; and.
  3. Make Choices: Choose from a menu of policy options, or go through a more in-depth process that requires making trade-offs (e.g. creating a budget).

Finally, the Citizen Cabinet’s recommendations will be broken down by state and congressional district, and reported to each Member of Congress, the President, the news media and the public.

The Citizen Cabinet will be managed, with bi-partisan oversight, by a new National Academy for Public Consultation. All of the materials presented to the Citizen Cabinet—the briefing, competing arguments, and policy options—will be vetted by a bipartisan group of experts and available online for anyone to see.

VOP-graphic

While members of the Citizen Cabinet would be scientifically selected to be a representative sample of the public, VOP seeks to give all Americans the opportunity to use these same online interactive tools–getting briefed, weighing competing arguments and coming to conclusions on key policy options. We will also make these tools available to schools, community groups and other organizations.

Citizens will be able to better engage and make more effective recommendations to their representatives, as their input will be more informed and focused on the actual policy choices and tradeoffs Congress is facing.

We would be interested in hearing from people who have been doing related work. There may be ways we can work together. Please let us know.

Again, please do visit the website www.vop.org and sign up so we can keep you posted on how things develop.

Best,
Steven Kull