Category Archives: gems

From Dialogue to Action: Climate Dialogues and Climate Action Labs

Posted on by
Reply

This 2008 article by Phil Mitchell shows how a global issue like climate change can be handled gracefully at the local level with little funds by working in collaboration with the existing infrastructure provided by local environmental organizations. (Vol 2 Issue 2 of the International Journal of Public Participation, December 2008)

Abstract:
The Greater Seattle Climate Dialogues is a climate change education and advocacy project with its roots in dialogue and deliberation. Using an adapted study circles model, the purpose of its Climate Action Labs is to change grassroots politics in such a way that people can bridge the ubiquitous gap between dialogue and action. In overview form, this is the story of the project, intended to share the thinking that motivated it and the activities, design principles, and actual process designs that shaped its implementation and outcomes. The story is not complete without articulating lessons learned to date, and these are shared to benefit others, as is the major political challenge we believe we all face. For others’ projects based in similar motivation, the design principles and lessons learned may be a useful, transportable resource.

Excerpt from the introduction:
Practitioners of dialogue and deliberation (D&D) are keenly interested in two of the facets of public participation that remain underexplored: action and scale (Levine, Fung, & Gastil, 2005). We need action, especially in the many situations where our motivation for applying D&D techniques is to solve real world problems that require action outcomes, often political ones. Too often, however, in otherwise excellent deliberative processes, the links between talk and action are tenuous. Secondly, we need scale, because while most applications of D&D techniques have been on a local scale, it is clear that many larger, even global scale challenges could benefit from such approaches. Climate change is a perfect example.

Climate change—that is, the human-caused disruption of the Earth’s climate system—is arguably the most pressing global challenge society faces (CNA, 2007; Stern, 2005). Yet despite a broad scientific consensus on the facts, the very existence of the problem remains bitterly contested in the public sphere. The use of obfuscation and uncertainty as a political tactic cries out to be addressed by the wisdom inherent in D&D approaches.

Some attempts have been made to do so, as for example, the Empowerment Institute’s Global Warming Cafe (World Cafe), the Northwest Earth Institute’s Changing Course (discussion circle), the National Conversation on Climate Action (21st Century town hall), Deliberative Democracy and Climate Change (World Cafe, then next steps forthcoming), and the Greater Seattle Climate Dialogues and Action Labs (study circles/hybrid/experimental).

The Climate Dialogues/Labs are the subject of this report. The Greater Seattle Climate Dialogues is a climate change education and advocacy project with its roots in dialogue and deliberation. From its inception, we attempted to bridge the gap between dialogue and action. The Climate Action Labs model is our response to challenges we found in using study circles to support participant action. Here, I offer an overview of the programs: how we prepared for launch, how we approached design, what happened in terms of implementation and outcomes, and finally, the lessons we have learned to date.

The question at the center of Climate Dialogues was, How can we build a mandate for strong global warming policy when there is no public consensus and when public discussion is frozen into camps and undermined by disinformation? Our answer: (a) Start with well-designed dialogue; (b) take people through a learning and community-building process that gets past the obfuscations; and (c) use that as a launching point for collective political action. Our premise was that if we could create an opening for the public to actually hear and understand what the scientists are telling us, that members of the public would be moved to act.

Resource Link: www.ncdd.org/rc/wp-content/uploads/Mitchell-ClimateDialoguesToAction.pdf (free download)

Collective Impact: A Game Changing Model for the Social Sector

Posted on by
Reply

I recently asked NCDD supporting member Marty Jacobs to write a primer for the NCDD blog on “collective impact.” This strategy for large-scale collaborative change has been gaining momentum among funders and nonprofit thought leaders, and we wanted to make sure NCDD members are aware of the concept.

Marty Jacobs has been teaching and consulting for 20 years, applying a systems thinking approach to organizations. As of September 30th, Marty is bringing her Collective Impact expertise to the VT Department of Mental Health in her new role as Change Management Analyst. Marty can be reached at marty.jacobs.sis@gmail.com.

Workgroup at Sydney R&P meetingOne of the key distinctions between a for profit organization and a not-for-profit one is that the former is focused on increasing shareholder value while the latter is focused on creating community value or impact. Creating lasting impact in the social sector, let alone measuring that impact, is one of the biggest challenges facing nonprofits these days. Past practices often focused on measuring outputs as opposed to measuring outcomes. A new model called Collective Impact is rapidly changing how nonprofits consider their work.

The idea of Collective Impact made waves when the Stanford Social Innovation Review published the article “Collective Impact” in its Winter 2011 edition. It was then followed up with a more in depth article, “Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work,” in 2012. In the first article, the authors suggest that the social sector, funders in particular, need to shift their focus from one of isolated impact to that of collective impact. In order for collective impact to be successful, the following five conditions must be present:

  1. Collaborating organizations must create a common agenda.
  2. These organizations must also share a measurement system that tracks indicators of success.
  3. Stakeholders must work together in mutually reinforcing activities.
  4. They must also engage in continuous communication.
  5. There must be a backbone support organization that coordinates, supports, and facilitates the collective process.

The second article outlines more specifics about implementation of the Collective Impact model. In particular, it outlines three phases of Collective Impact:

  1. Phase I: Initiate Action
  2. Phase II: Organize for Impact
  3. Phase III: Sustain Action and Impact

Within those three phases, the follow components for success need to be continually assessed:

  • Governance and Infrastructure
  • Strategic Planning
  • Community Involvement
  • Evaluation and Improvement

While the social sector has been buzzing about Collective Impact, it’s important to note that it is not the answer to every nonprofit’s dream. Here are some questions to ask to determine whether or not Collective Impact is the right approach for your particular situation:

  • Is this a complex problem, that is, one that can only be solved by involving multiple stakeholders?
  • Do we have the capacity to create the five conditions of Collective Impact?
  • Do we have community support on this issue? Will we be able to engage stakeholders successfully in this effort?
  • Can we find backing for the backbone support organization?

Boston 2010 dialogue groupIf you’re convinced that Collective Impact is the right approach, then here are some questions to ask about your group’s readiness for each of the three phases of Collective Impact:

Phase I:

  • Governance and Infrastructure: Who would be willing partners and do they agree that Collective Impact would be effective?
  • Strategic Planning: What data do we currently have and what more do we need in order to assess current reality? Is this feasible?
  • Community Involvement: Are stakeholders receptive to this idea? How well networked are they?
  • Evaluation and Improvement: What currently exists for measuring impact? Do we have the capacity and the systems to track progress?

Phase II:

  • Governance and Infrastructure: What do we need in place for infrastructure and governance in order to keep this effort moving forward? What are we all willing to let go of with respect to control, turf, etc. and what is non-negotiable?
  • Strategic Planning: What have we identified as potential common goals? Is that supported by the data? Does that align with all the partner organizations’ missions?
  • Community Involvement: Who are all the stakeholders and how can we fully engage them in this process?
  • Evaluation and Improvement: Do we all agree on what the best measures for impact are? How will we track it and communicate progress?

Phase III:

  • Governance and Infrastructure: What is working well? What more do we need to do to improve governance and infrastructure?
  • Strategic Planning: How do we stay on track with implementation? How do we deal with setbacks or unanticipated problems? How do we communicate progress?
  • Community Involvement: How do we continue to engage stakeholders? What does meaningful engagement look like over time?
  • Evaluation and Improvement: What are our measurement systems telling us? How do we know when we need to course correct?

While these questions only touch the surface of implementing a Collective Impact effort, they will help create the thinking needed to dig deeper as the process evolves. Collective Impact is a practice – something that will deepen over time as you become more skilled, and with that, you will see greater impact. 

© Marty Jacobs 2013

John Gastil Interview from NCDD Seattle

Posted on by
Reply

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 John Gastil, Head of the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences at Penn State University.  A long time member, friend and supporter of NCDD, John is one of our field’s most respected researchers. Many of you will remember John as our co-emcee at NCDD Seattle (with Susanna Haas Lyons). He has authored many books on deliberation, including Democracy in Motion: Evaluating the Practice and Impact of Deliberative Civic Engagement (with NCDD members Tina Nabatchi and Matt Leighninger), The Deliberative Democracy Handbook (with NCDD member Peter Levine), and Democracy in Small Groups — to name just a few!

Watch the blog over the next month or so 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 in our NCDD 2012 Seattle playlist on YouTube.

Awesome Interviews from NCDD’s 2012 Conference

Posted on by
Reply

looking_back_badgeDuring 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, their hopes and concerns for our field and for democratic governance in our country, and their ideas about how we might effectively combine forces to make a greater impact — questions that were very much aligned with our conference themes.

The result was a series of wonderfully rich videos focusing on the current state of public engagement in the U.S., all currently available here on Jeffrey’s Song of a Citizen YouTube channel and in our NCDD 2012 Seattle playlist on YouTube.

Over the next month or so we’ll be looking back at our fantastic event in Seattle, which brought together 400 leaders and innovators in our field. In a series of blog posts, we’ll be featuring Jeffrey’s videos along with other items from the conference. We’ll also be looking ahead to the 2014 conference, and asking you to engage with us about our next event!

This compilation video will give you a taste of the interviews and presentations that we’ll be featuring in the coming weeks…

Journalism to enhance citizen-based deliberative democracy

Posted on by
Reply

TomAtlee-borderPractitioners and advocates involved with group process, dialogue and deliberation, public engagement, and deliberative democracy are aware that ordinary people, under the right conditions, are capable of generating public policy guidance that is at least as wise—and often far wiser—than what we typically see produced by government bodies. Such forums facilitate productive reflection and interaction among diverse citizens—often informed by fair briefings and diverse experts—to come up with creative responses to major public issues that make sense to a very wide spectrum of their fellow voters.

By promoting such wisdom-generating public conversations, journalists could enable communities to step beyond unproductive special interests and polarized debates to co-create their own shared stories of what is happening to them now and how they will shape their future.

The journalists’ role would be vital at every stage. They would make everyone in a community aware of public wisdom–generating conversations before, during, and after they happened. Citizens would know why such a conversation was happening and what it was about. They would know who was participating—perhaps they would even attend an event at which future participants were selected with some fanfare. They may have been invited to prior and follow-up public conversations in person and online. They would know what the experience was like for participants because those participants would be interviewed by news media. They would have opportunities to say what they thought about it all. Thanks to news media, they would know if and how the recommendations were followed, who was involved, and what the successes and failures were.

This is an expanded vision of journalism, but solidly within its tradition of empowering democracy. Public wisdom–generating processes are extremely empowering to citizens and whole communities. The stories of participants make great human-interest features. The engagements themselves are dramatic, because heat is generated when we have diverse ordinary people coming together to discuss hot issues. News outlets love conflict. But deliberative conflict is different from the usual conflicts that preoccupy the mainstream news media. Hot conflicts that evolve into creative solutions are very different from hot conflicts that are chronic, suppressed, or violent. Journalists can show citizens what a profound difference working together can make in our politics. Not because they are biased, but simply because they objectively report instances where people actually work well together on important national and community issues.

An exemplar of this type of reporting is the 1991 “People’s Verdict” experiment done by Maclean’s magazine, Canada’s leading glossy newsweekly. Maclean’s devoted forty pages to describing their remarkable initiative—PDFs of which are available online at co-intelligence.org/S-Canadaadvrsariesdream.html. Perhaps most significantly, Maclean’s devoted half a page to each of the dozen citizen panelists scientifically chose to collectively represent the diversity of Canada—including a picture, so that readers could pick who they identified with and who they thought was an “enemy.” They then provided twelve pages covering the actual conversation—a day-by-day, hour-by-hour, blow-by-blow account of the conflicts and the ultimate healing and collaboration—including photos of every stage, from arms folded in opposition to former antagonists hugging. Other articles in the issue described the process of participant selection, the facilitation method used, and background about the issues that were discussed. The group’s final agreement was printed on pages colored like old parchment, with the signatures of all the deliberators at the bottom of the last page, like those of John Hancock and other Founding Fathers at the bottom of the U.S. Declaration of Independence.

Robert Marshall, Maclean’s assistant managing editor, noted that past efforts—a parliamentary committee, a governmental consultative initiative, and a $27 million Citizens’ Forum on Canada’s Future—had all failed to create real dialogue among citizens about constructive solutions—even though those efforts involved four hundred thousand Canadians in focus groups, phone calls, and mail-in reporting. “The experience of the Maclean’s forum indicates that if a national dialogue ever does take place, it would be an extremely productive process.”

Well, that dialogue did take place. Following Maclean’s July 1, 1991 issue and the related hour-long Canadian TV documentary, spontaneous national dialogue and forums cropped up across Canada organized by schools, churches, and many other groups. Citizens had energy to actually heal the country and confront the country’s issues together. But then the prime minister was ‘hammered’ in a few of the forums and accused the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation of fixing questions to make him look bad. He became a critic of the process, suspecting impure political motives by the process’s advocates. In the end, political agendas and personalities held sway, maintained their business as usual patterns, and the country as a whole returned to politics as usual.

Notice the several varieties of public participation we see here. We see the wisdom-generating archetypal participation of diverse voices in the mini-public convened through wise selection of typical participants. We see an often transformational vicarious participation of the broad public witnessing the deliberations among people they identify with and people they see as opponents unfolding in both print and broadcast media. And we see the direct mass participation in spontaneous and organized dialogues around the country. Another form of participation not present in the Maclean’s case, but present in other initiatives, might be called crowdsourced participation, in which hundreds or thousands of individuals offer their input, usually online.

In the midst of this appreciation, I want to focus for a moment on the biggest thing that was missing from the Maclean’s initiative: iteration. Imagine what would have happened in Canada if Maclean’s had done this same exercise again the following year. And the next year. And the next. Imagine that it had also reported on all the subsequent conversations, conflicts, citizen engagements, and activism that came out of those exercises. Talk about a catalyst! Nothing in such a repetitive exercise would violate objectivity or principled news reporting. But it would be a profound expansion of journalism’s primary function of promoting an informed citizenry and responsible, answerable leadership in an engaged democracy.

Versions of this could be done in any community, as well as at state and national levels. All it would take is journalists stepping into this new story of a more potent role for democratic journalism.

Citizen deliberations can produce excellent results—real public wisdom. But most of the public, if they have not been through those deliberations, can remain oblivious to that wisdom, or even can be swayed by well-financed public relations attacks into opposing it. Here again, the role of journalists is essential. They can help the public understand what went into the formation of that wisdom (as was done by Maclean’s) and can help increase general public respect for, and attention to, and demand for well-designed and realized citizen deliberations.

This should be seen as a major element in the emerging new ecology of journalism that will bring new life both to the profession and to democracy itself.

(Edited from Chapter 8 of EMPOWERING PUBLIC WISDOM by Tom Atlee)

Song of a Citizen Video Essays & Interviews with D&D Leaders

Posted on by
Reply

Song Of A Citizen has produced a second series of dialogue and deliberation-related videos. The first was a series of Video Op-Eds with esteemed political philosophers, academics, and leaders of major deliberative democracy organizations (see the NCDD resource listing here). Those were filmed at various locations around the country between 2008 to 2010.

EricLiuVid-screenshotThe more recent series features Q&A interviews with key practitioners and other experts in the dialogue and deliberation community, filmed at the NCDD Conference in October 2012. Most of them are on the SoaC site, and all of them are on SoaC YouTube Channel.

Now that “Song Of A Citizen” has produced a wide range of interesting and informative videos with field leaders and experts, as of August 2013 they are seeking funding for new productions designed to resonate with the general public.

Making films and videos that reach and impact millions of people is actually SoaC founder Jeffrey Abelson’s strong suit, as witnessed by his 30 year background as a creative filmmaker, whose work ranges from prime time PBS documentaries to high profile MTV videos. More about that can be found at http://jeffreyabelson.com.

Video interviews on the Song of a Citizens site: http://songofacitizen.com/songofacitizen.com/Video_Q%26A.html

Song of a Citizen YouTube channel: www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDlxTRB4Z8g&list=PLNmpXlQNJcSNo65iOeiSlBjxD16kZTBMY

E. Coast Forums on Lessons Learned from Hurricane Sandy

Posted on by
Reply

NIF-logoFor those of you working on the East Coast or in community preparedness, we recommend you check out a recent post from the National Issues Forums Institute on a series of public forums being hosted by WHYY and the Penn Project for Civic Engagement.  The goal of the forums is to engage local communities in discussion on the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy and what individuals, communities, and governments can do to be better prepared next time. With two forums already having been hosted, the next forums are slated for August 27th along the Jersey Shore.

The project description, dates, and locations for the forums can be found at WHYY’s website here.  You can read NIFI’s coverage of the project and find links to the audio commentary below, or you find the original post here.

Engaging the Public to Talk about the Jersey Shore after Hurricane Sandy – Listen to Audio Commentary by Chris Satullo at WHYY

Listen to “Restoring the shore is about emotions as well as engineering”
Listen to “Ready for next time? Rethinking the Jersey Shore after Sandy”
Project description with dates and locations

This summer in Philadelphia, WHYY/Newsworks is sponsoring a series of public forums titled Ready for Next Time? Rethinking the Shore after Sandy. Five public forums are being held during July and August 2013 in a variety of locations around Philadelphia. Forums are free to attend but registration is requested.

Chris Satullo, executive director of news and civic dialogue at WHYY, Inc. describes the public forums project in a number of brief audio, print, and photo pieces including:

Restoring the shore is about emotions as well as engineering (An audio file posted July 21, 2013):

Restoring the Shore is not just about flood maps, building codes and economic multipliers…

But as this nostalgia inspires, can it also blind and distort? Might we throw good money after bad, ignoring the storm’s clear evidence about where unwise risk lies?  In striving to hang onto what we love most about the Shore, might we strew too much treasure right in the path of the next storm.

Because there will be a next storm.

These questions sit at the heart of WHYY’s community forum series called: Ready for Next Time? Rethinking the Shore After Sandy…

Rethinking the shore forum zeroes in on better planning leadership (a slide show and article posted July 16, 2013)

It was a night for expressing hopes, and the skepticism that undermines them.

About 60 people gathered at WHYY Monday night for the first event in our summer-long civic dialogue project: “Ready for Next Time? Rethinking the Shore After Sandy.”

The group divided into four smaller breakout sessions, each led by a moderator from the Penn Project for Civic Engagement and using an issue guide we prepared. Folks talked through the long-term choices facing New Jersey as it responds to the challenges left behind by the storms known as Irene and Sandy….

Ready for next time? Rethinking the Jersey Shore after Sandy (listen to an audio file/read this piece posted June 24, 2013, describes the project and lists dates and locations of forums)

For the last year, a horde of Jersey Shore property owners have been muttering an F-word under their breath.

An F-acronymn, actually. As in FEMA – short for Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Post-Sandy, people down the Shore have had many complaints about FEMA – confusing rules, late-arriving checks and, above all, those flood maps.

FEMA issued revised maps last week, which sharply reduced the size of the highest-risk flood zones and let many homeowners sleep easier.

So perhaps this is a moment to invite some calmer discussion about how to respond long-term to the lessons of Sandy – and Irene before her…

For more information about this project, contact Chris Satullo at csatullo@whyy.org, or NCDD supporting member Harris Sokoloff at harriss@gse.upenn.edu.

Note from the White House from NCDD Board Chair Marla Crockett

Posted on by
Reply

A big congratulations to NCDD members Steven Clift and Anita Brown-Graham, who were among 15 Open Government and Civic Hacking Champions of Change honored by the White House on Tuesday for their work in connecting communities.  The Obama administration recognized the business, community and social media leaders for using high-tech tools to bring citizens closer to government at the state and local levels.

Steven, the executive director of E-Democracy in Minneapolis, has worked at the neighborhood level since 1994, connecting 1,000 citizens online by starting with what they need, including finding their lost cats. Technology helps break the ice, he said during a panel discussion, and has helped empower people.

Anita, director of North Carolina State’s Institute for Emerging Issues, said the state’s failure to reach people brought her to this work.  Her institute brings residents together from across North Carolina to consider complex problems that affect the state’s competitiveness.  Anita said her goal moving forward is to enhance the quality of deliberation and be an example for other organizations doing this work.

Pictured below are some of the NCDD members present today, including our two “Champs!”  From left to right:  Marla Crockett, NCDD Board Chair, Steven Clift of e-democracy.org, Anita Brown-Graham of NC State’s Institute for Emerging Issues, Leanne Nurse from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wayne Moses Burke from the Open Forum Foundation.

NCDD-Members-at-WH

White House to recognize two NCDD members at today’s “Champions of Change” event

Posted on by
Reply

Below is the press release for today’s White House event, which NCDD Board chair Marla Crockett and other NCDD members are attending.  I was honored to have been asked for my suggestions for who should be recognized at today’s event, and two of my four nominees were chosen:  Steven Clift of e-democracy.org and Anita Brown Graham of NC State’s Institute for Emerging Issues.

Congratulations to Steven and Anita!  We’re proud of you and your myriad accomplishments!!

You can watch the event live at www.whitehouse.gov/live right now.

White House Highlights Open Government and Civic Hacking “Champions of Change”

WASHINGTON, DC – On Tuesday, July 23rd, the White House will honor 15 leaders and organizations as open government and civic hacking “Champions of Change.” As entrepreneurs, innovators, organizers, and community leaders, these “Champions of Change” have made a tremendous positive impact by building high-tech tools to help health workers and disaster-response crews better serve communities; piloting innovative programs to involve traditionally disengaged communities in local governance; using new technologies to enhance government transparency and collaboration; and more.

When presenting his new management agenda earlier this month, President Obama said, “… We the people recognize that this government belongs to us, and it’s up to each of us and every one of us to make it work better…We all have a stake in government success — because the government is us.”

The White House Champions of Change program was created as part of President Obama’s Winning the Future Initiative. Through this program, the White House highlights individuals, businesses, and organizations whose extraordinary stories and accomplishments positively impact our communities.

To watch this event live, visit www.whitehouse.gov/live at 10:00 am ET today. To learn more about the White House Champions of Change program and nominate a Champion, visit www.whitehouse.gov/champions.

Here is the list of “Champs”:

Anita Brown-Graham, Director of the Institute for Emerging Issues at NC State University, Raleigh, NC
Anita Brown-Graham is Director of the Institute for Emerging Issues (IEI) at NC State University, a think-and-do tank focused on tackling big issues that affect North Carolina’s future growth and prosperity. From energy, to fiscal modernization, to improving our systems of higher education, IEI takes the lead in convening state leaders in business, higher education and government to address these issues in a comprehensive, long-term way to prepare the state for future challenges and opportunities. In her role at IEI, Anita led the development of the Emerging Issues Commons, a first of its kind civic engagement tool – both a physical space and an online hub that stands to transform how citizens across the state connect with each other, access information, and take action in the decades to come. Prior to her leadership at IEI, Anita worked as faculty of the School of Government at UNC Chapel Hill for 13 years, training communities in strategic planning to revitalize their distressed rural communities. Her work inspired both rural and urban communities to work together for a better future for the state. Anita is a William C. Friday Fellow, American Marshall Fellow, and Eisenhower Fellow.

Steven Clift, Founder of E-Democracy, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Steven Clift is @democracy on Twitter. He launched E-Democracy.org in 1994 and it is the world’s first election information website. His “government by day, citizen by night” insights were built as leader of the State of Minnesota’s first e-government initiative. He spoke across 30 countries for over a decade from Estonia to Libya to Mongolia on open government and civic participation to support non-partisan, volunteer-powered efforts for inclusive online local democracy. An Ashoka Fellow, today he is E-Democracy’s Executive Director. He leads a dedicated team with the BeNeighbors.org effort to connect all neighbors online (and off) in public life across race and ethnicity, generations, immigrant and native-born, and more. He lives with his lovely wife and two children in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Brad Lander, New York City Council Member, Brooklyn, NY
Brad Lander is a New York City Council Member representing Brooklyn’s 39th District, and a leader on issues of affordable housing, livable communities, the environment, and public education. Named one of “Today’s Social Justice Heroes” by The Nation magazine, Lander is co-chair of the Council’s Progressive Caucus and was one of the first councilmembers to bring “participatory budgeting” to his district, giving residents the power to decide which projects to support with their tax dollars. Prior to serving in the City Council, Brad directed the Pratt Center for Community Development and the Fifth Avenue Committee, a nationally-recognized community development organization.

Alderman Joe Moore, City of Chicago, 49th Ward, Chicago, IL
Known as a pioneer for political reform, governmental transparency and democratic governance, Joe Moore represents Chicago’s 49th Ward, one of the nation’s most economically and racially diverse communities. Moore became the first elected official to bring “participatory budgeting” to the United States. Each year, Moore turns over $1 million of his discretionary capital budget to a process of democratic deliberation and decision-making in which his constituents decide through direct vote how to allocate his budget. Moore’s participatory budgeting model has since been adopted by four of his Chicago City Council colleagues, as well as city council members in New York City, San Francisco, and Vallejo, California.

Steve Spiker, Director of Research & Technology at the Urban Strategies Council, Moraga, CA
Steve Spiker (Spike) is the Director of Research & Technology at the Urban Strategies Council, a social change nonprofit supporting innovation and collaboration based in Oakland for almost 25 years. He leads the Council’s research, spatial analysis, civic innovation, open data, and technology efforts. Spike has research experience in community development, housing, criminology, spatial epidemiology and reentry issues. He loves data, visualization, GIS and strategic technology implementation, especially open source tech. Spike is the co-founder of OpenOakland, a Code for America Brigade and is helping guide government technology decisions and civic engagement in the East Bay. In 2012 Spike was chosen as one of the Next American City Vanguard class. He is an outspoken supporter of open data and open government and speaks across the USA about data driven decision making. He also campaigns to end human trafficking and runs Stealing Beauty Photography.

Travis Laurendine, Founder and CEO of LA Labs, New Orleans, LA
Travis Laurendine doesn’t fit in the typical bio box any more than his hair fits into the typical hat. As a serial entrepreneur he has been on the cutting edge of both the web startup and entertainment industry for nearly 10 years. He launched his first web startup while an Economics major at Vanderbilt University, where he was also selected as the first Vanderbilt student with a film to make it in the Nashville Film Festival. When Hurricane Katrina struck his hometown of New Orleans, he stayed back in the city and found himself wearing the hats of startup CEO, concert promoter, restaurant general manager, standup comic, film/video producer and director, MTV News journalist, band manager/agent, investor, hackathon organizer, Entrepreneur-In- Residence, and cultural ambassador. Recently, he founded Louisiana’s first hackathon organization, CODEMKRS, which is currently being transformed into Louisiana’s only modern code school. This summer he has organized hackathons for giant music festivals JazzFest and Bonnaroo and is currently planning San Francisco’s Outside Lands’ first hackathon. His official job is being the founder and CEO of LA Labs, a startup laboratory focused on the marriage of entertainment and technology that uses New Orleans as the ultimate creative incubator. He is thankful for his loving family and friends and the daily inspiration he gets from the great city of New Orleans.

Scott Phillips, Co-Founder and CEO of Isocentric Networks, Tulsa, OK
Scott Phillips is the co-founder and CEO of Isocentric Networks, an advanced data center services company based in Tulsa, OK. He was previously the founder and CEO of a sensor technology company whose work included a project for NASA for use on a manned mission to Mars. Scott is also a founding board member of Fab Lab Tulsa, a 21st Century non-profit community center for innovation, entrepreneurship, and STEM education through a partnership with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Scott’s current passion lives at the nexus of entrepreneurship, the maker movement, and civic hacking, three transformative movements that he believes are democratizing how we live, work and play. According to Scott, it is easy to understand the impact of civic hacking on government when you view it in three steps; give citizens transparency, give citizens a voice, then give citizens ownership.

George Luc, Co-Founder and CEO of GivePulse, Austin, TX
George Luc is Co-Founder and CEO of GivePulse, a social network that matches people to causes and enables nonprofits, companies and affinities to manage volunteers, list events and track service hours in one central community. GivePulse launched earlier this year in 2013 and has since tracked over 100K service hours and mobilized over 5K volunteers in Austin alone. George has a BS and MS in Computer Science from Virginia Tech with an emphasis in Human Computer Interaction. He spent much of his early career developing technology for people with disabilities and has worked with companies like Daylert, IBM, ESO and HomeAway. He serves as a board member of City of Austin Volunteer & Service, Austin Convention Center and Visitor’s Bureau, KLRU, Open Door Preschool, and was a City Commissioner for Austin Mayor’s Committee for People with Disabilities.

Craig Michael Lie Njie, CEO, Kismet World Wide Consulting, Mountain View, CA
Mr. Lie Njie is CEO of Kismet World Wide Consulting, which he founded in 2002. Lie has over 20 years of professional experience and currently consults world-wide on a variety of topics including privacy, security, technology design and development, education, entrepreneurship, management, sales and marketing, and mobile application development. Lie was given his name as an honorarium for his three years of service (2005-2008) as a Peace Corps Volunteer in The Gambia, West Africa, where he designed, deployed, and taught the first two years of The Gambia’s first Bachelor’s in Computer Science program at the University of The Gambia (UTG). Today his program is still successful and sustainable. After returning from the Peace Corps, Lie recruited and managed a volunteer team to build and release the free WasteNot iOS app to help people world-wide share their good ideas for reducing environmental impact. He furthermore helped the United Nations as a technology consultant and researched and documented the privacy risks of health and fitness mobile apps.

Christopher Whitaker, Project Management Consultant at the Smart Chicago Collaborative, Chicago, IL
Christopher Whitaker is a project management consultant at the Smart Chicago Collaborative, utilizing his experience in government and community organizing to advance civic innovation in Chicago. Whitaker also serves as the Chicago Brigade Captain for Code for America, supporting civic hacking events and teaching a weekly Civic Hacking 101 class. He is a graduate of DePaul University (MPA) and Sam Houston State University (BA, Political Science). Previously, Whitaker served with the US Army in Iraq as a mechanized infantryman.

Jessica Klein, Co-Founder of Rockaway Help, Brooklyn, NY
Together with a group of journalists and residents, civic hacker and designer Jessica Klein co-founded “Rockaway Help” in the wake of Hurricane Sandy. Rockaway Help is committed to empowering the community to find solutions for emergency response, preparedness and rebuilding through hyperlocal open news and the development of innovative community-designed technologies. As part of the National Day of Civic Hacking, Jessica lead workshops and hackathons for designers, engineers and Rockaway Beach, New York residents to identify problems and prototype design or technology solutions in the devastated coastal community. Jessica is currently the Creative Lead of the Mozilla Open Badges project where she promotes openness and creativity in formal and informal learning environments and develops ways for learners to design their own unique narrative around their credentials. Jessica created the Hackasaurus project, the Web X-Ray Goggles and Thimble tools to help teens learn how to code through hacking. Over the last decade, she has worked at a variety of institutions dedicated to learning including the Museum of Arts & Design, The Rubin Museum of Art, The Institute of Play, Startl, The Hive and Sesame Workshop. She also founded OceanLab NYC, a project which asked parents, teachers and kids in the NYC community to investigate their urban coastal environment through casual interaction and play.

Caitria O’Neill, Co-Founder of Recovers, San Francisco, CA
Caitria O’Neill is a co-founder of Recovers, a disaster preparedness and recovery technology company in San Francisco. After a tornado struck her hometown, Monson, MA in 2011, Caitria and her sister Morgan worked within their community to connect survivors with local skills and donations. This kind of seat-of-the-pants organizing happens in every neighborhood, after every storm. The Recovers team has turned the best practices of many efforts into a user-friendly tech toolkit for risk mitigation and community response. In less than two years they have helped hundreds of thousands of people find information, aid, and ways to pitch in. Caitria holds a BA in Government from Harvard University, FEMA NIMS/ICS certifications, and was named an Up-and- Coming CEO by Forbes Magazine. Her work has been featured by CNN Opinion, TED.com, and Bloomberg Businessweek.

Gerrie Schipske, Councilwoman on the Long Beach City Council, Long Beach City, CA
Councilwoman Gerrie Schipske is currently serving her second term on the Long Beach City Council. She has championed open, transparent and accountable local government since she took office in 2006 by being the first elected official in Long Beach to disclose their calendar and to communicate daily via blog, email, Facebook and Twitter. In January 2012, she took public education and transparency efforts one step further with her “Open Up Long Beach” initiative and website which provide residents increased access to the city’s every day affairs and documents, and includes opportunities for residents to “ go behind the scenes” of city operations. These efforts were lauded in California Forward’s report: The State of Transparency in California: 2013. Gerrie also brought transparency to the Medical Board of California on which she serves by initiating the requirement that members disclose each meeting any contacts they have had with interested parties. Gerrie earned her JD from Pacific Coast University School of Law, her MA from George Washington University, her BA from University of California, Irvine and her RNP from Harbor UCLA Women’s Health Care Nurse Practitioner Program. She is the author of three books on the history of Long Beach, California

Robert Davis, Co-Founder of RadSocial, Cooper City, FL
Robert Davis is a recent marketing graduate from Nova Southeastern University in Davie, FL. His day job consists of managing a social media consultancy for small to medium sized businesses, and at night one can find him at the local maker and hacker spaces around Fort Lauderdale and Miami. Robert is a Code for America intern alumni (’12) and an avid supporter of creating civic tools with open data for the public good. Along with fellow Floridian Cristina Solana, the two created the Florida Bill Tracker, forked from the MinnPost and redeployed to easily track controversial Florida legislation. Robert is also an avid traveler and surfer, and hopes to inspire others to change their world regardless of age or expertise.

Deborah Parker, Tulalip Tribes Vice Chair, Tulalip, WA
Deborah Parker Tsi-Cy-Altsa (Tulalip/Yaqui) was elected to the Tulalip Tribes Board of Directors in 2012. As Vice-Chairwoman, Deborah brings to Tulalip leadership nearly two decades of experience as a policy analyst, program developer, communications specialist, and committed cultural advocate and volunteer in the tribal and surrounding communities. Serving as a Legislative Policy Analyst in the Office of Governmental Affairs for the Tulalip Tribes from 2005-2012, Deborah engaged in the legislative process on behalf of the Tulalip Tribes by providing quality analysis of issues most pertinent to the exercise of sovereignty and tribal governance, with particular emphasis in the areas of education, finance, taxation, and healthcare. Before joining legislative affairs Deborah developed two unique outreach and education programs for the Tulalip Tribes. Young Mothers was a culturally relevant program for teen mothers, and the Tribal Tobacco Program sought to inspire responsible tobacco use among tribal members, while acknowledging tobacco’s sacred place in Indigenous cultures. Prior to her work for the Tulalip Tribes Deborah served as Director of the Residential Healing School of the Tseil-Waututh Nation in Canada, and in the Treaty Taskforce Office of the Lummi Nation, where she was mentored by American Indian leaders such as Joe Delacruz, Billy Frank, Henry Cagey and Jewell James. As a passionate advocate for improved education for tribal members, and a belief in the inherent right of all Native Americans to expect and receive a quality education, one that is free from racial or cultural bias, Deborah is focused on educational reform, which includes developing curriculum that is a true reflection of an Indigenous ethics and knowledge system. Deborah remains committed to education by volunteering her time in the local schools where her children are enrolled. Deborah graduated from the University of Washington with a Bachelor of Arts degree in American Ethnic Studies and Sociology where she distinguished herself as a scholar and a young Indigenous leader. Deborah lives in Tulalip with her husband Myron Dewey (Paiute/Shoshone) and their five children.

Notes from NCDD’s Meetup at Tufts University

Posted on by
Reply

Here’s a snapshot from today’s NCDD meetup at Tufts University in Medford, MA. We had a great time together before the Frontiers of Democracy conference began, with over 30 NCDD members joining us for at least part of the meetup.

NCDD Meetup at Tufts

During an initial round of introductions, everyone shared one strength or gift they brought to the table that other NCDD members could potentially tap into. Later, we broke up into small groups to dig into four topics attendees were feeling challenged by at the moment:

  • the continuing need to institutionalize or embed dialogue and deliberation work into the way we do business (i.e. building civic infrastructure)
  • the national dialogue on mental health project (both online and offline aspects of it)
  • reaching out to underrepresented groups
  • standardization of the terminology, procedures and metrics we use
  • sustaining ourselves as practitioners; handling overload and retaining optimism

It was an energizing afternoon, and most of us are staying on for the Frontiers of Democracy conference at Tufts and continuing to enjoy each other’s company!