Kettering Research Assistant Positions Now Open

kfWe want to give a heads up to our NCDD members, especially student and researcher members: It’s the time of the year when our organizational partners at the Kettering Foundation are taking applications for full-time Research Assistants for the next year.  This is a great opportunity that some of you may certainly want to apply for.

Applications are due by March 15, so don’t make sure to get started soon!

Here’s a little snippet of how Kettering describes itself and the position:

Kettering is an operating research foundation that explores practical ways democracy can be strengthened through innovation in public practices. Its research, done in collaboration with people and organizations around the world, emphasizes the roles of citizens and the qualities of their interactions as decision-making actors in public life.

The primary responsibility of research assistants is to provide Kettering staff with reviews of relevant scholarly and professional literature. We seek candidates whose interests complement and will be strengthened by the foundation’s interdisciplinary research. The successful candidate will have strong communication and writing skills, especially the ability to understand and translate technical ideas and language into coherent written reports.

Minimum requirements for the position include a bachelors’ degree. We especially encourage applications from scholars who have interests in topics such as deliberative democracy, civic engagement, social capital, civic education, civil society, and social movements.

To apply, applicants should send an CV, letter of interest, writing sample, and 2-3 letters of recommendation to abd@kettering.org. You can find out more about the openings at Kettering by visiting www.kettering.org/how-we-work/research-positions.

Good luck to all the applicants!

Betty Knighton Interview from Kettering

Our friends at the Kettering Foundation, a long-time NCDD organizational member, recently shared a great interview on their blog with Betty Knighton (also a member) that we found to be quite insightful. Betty is an accomplished public engagement professional in W. Virginia whose experience we can all learn from, so we encourage you to read the interview below, or find the original post at www.kettering.org/kfnews/betty-knighton.


kf You can learn a lot about an organization by who they learn from. One of the folks Kettering has learned the most from is Betty Knighton of Charleston, West Virginia. Betty is a master of citizen engagement, someone who’s figured out how to work with communities around her state. But unlike many folks with a supersized talent, she also has the even rarer ability of being able to tell you how she does what she does. If you haven’t had the pleasure of meeting Betty, either at one of Kettering’s many learning exchanges or in West Virginia, here are some of Betty’s unique insights into community engagement – in her own words.

Since 1998, Betty has run the West Virginia Center for Civic Life. The center, which functions as an impartial organization supporting public engagement on tough issues in West Virginia, believes in the motto of National Issues Forums: “Understand. Decide. Act.” Three simple words, yet many lament we rarely see this attention to public issues any more. The poor state of public discourse in many communities around the country makes her work all the more admirable and worthy of discussion. And like many people Kettering works with, Betty doesn’t fit the stereotypical public engagement personality: she isn’t an elected official, she’s not trained professionally in public administration, nor does she have a degree in political science. Betty is a former high school English teacher who was working at the West Virginia Humanities Council on a literature discussion program for teachers when she became interested in National Issues Forums. Through the council, she began to form a statewide coalition of partnering organizations to help West Virginians talk and work together on issues facing the state. Eventually, their work grew into the creation of a nonprofit, freestanding organization, the West Virginia Center for Civic Life.

Jack Becker: Can you talk about a current issue you’re working on?

Betty Knighton: We’re currently working on a project about the economic future of West Virginia. Like so many states in rapid economic change these days, West Virginia is struggling to find ways to move forward on many fronts. There are conflicting ideas in some of these areas, especially in how the state should use its natural resources. For us to be useful to the state and to communities, we’re focusing on identifying conflicting perspectives and helping community’s frame those perspectives into constructive conversations.

When we work with West Virginians to frame issues, we’re really engaging in a conversation with people about how they see the problem. The framing of the issue has to represent different points of view in order to help communities have a comprehensive discussion that leads to productive decisions. The framing of these discussions is integral to the integrity of the entire process. If the issue framework sidelines an entire group of people, it won’t help the state move forward in the way it needs.

We’ve also seen how important it is that the organizers of community discussions come from different sectors – nonprofits, faith groups, government agencies, educational groups, the private sector. Not only does this kind of coalition underscore the openness of the process, but also it allows working relationships to develop that will have a major impact as communities move from dialogue to action.

A big part of what you’re doing, then, is identifying when and where people come together, and sometimes catalyzing opportunities for that to happen. A lot of people are thinking about this as “civic infrastructure.” What are your thoughts on that?

While most communities don’t use the term “civic infrastructure,” those that are most intentional in building opportunities for people to talk and work together are actually thinking a great deal about what civic infrastructure entails. Recently, we’ve been working with several communities as they are identifying the existing connections and relationships in their areas.

They are asking themselves: Where do conversations occur naturally in our community? Or, what kind of informal relationships do we have that help our community move forward? People often have to think hard and dig deep to uncover what is happening in their communities since so much of it is outside formal processes and spaces. Everybody, from the mayor to any citizen, knows something about the civic infrastructure in his or her community. At the same time, nobody knows everything. The work community members are doing to “map” what is happening around them is increasing opportunities for connected work and for stronger relationships to carry that work forward.

Some communities have developed ongoing spaces for community conversations. Huntington has a weekly process they call Chat ‘n Chew – open to everyone – as a time Huntington residents can come together, talk about local needs, and often, to work to address the needs they’ve identified. During Chat ‘n Chews, they are also enjoying a social time together and building a more connected community in the process.

Many communities in our state are doing this, often at cafés or restaurants, over breakfast, lunch or dinner. What’s special here is that many people are intentionally building habits of coming together and to talk about issues. While these initiatives are all locally organized, we try to learn about what’s happening so we can share their practices with other communities in West Virginia.

So I’m hearing that there’s a bit of a tension between rapid response dialogue and the more long-term work of building civic infrastructure. Is that right?

In many cases, we’re seeing that communities that have been the most intentional about building – or surfacing – connections are the ones that are most equipped to respond to public issues. It won’t necessarily be done quickly; most of these issues are complex and difficult. But communities that have an informal infrastructure to support public framing of issues and productive dialogues are starting several steps ahead.

When we work with communities, we try to help them build on the capacity they already have. Sometimes, people think they have to have a great deal of professional expertise and training before they can bring the community together for a conversation. While certain skills are very helpful for these community moderators and conveners, most often, it’s a matter of redirecting the skills they already have into a new, more public purpose.

The language I hear you speaking is that of assets. Similar to what John McKnight and the Asset-Based Community Development Institute has worked on for years, you’re saying that focusing on a community’s assets rather than deficits can facilitate better problem solving?

Communities do have infrastructures and capacities; they just don’t always recognize them. In our work with communities, and especially in our current work on the economic future of the state, we are working with communities to build on existing assets rather than to develop a list of deficits. It’s important for people to understand the severity of problems, though. For example, many West Virginians’ eyes were opened to the severity of the state’s prescription drug abuse problem in the 120 community dialogues that have been held around the state. Fortunately, they also learned about much good work that was underway, and they were able to build on that and set directions for new work to fill the many gaps.

How does the infrastructure that supports dialogue impact the move to action?

We’ve seen that the strong community connections that support deep and broad public dialogue are the key indicator of whether community actions will evolve. No matter how good the discussion is, community actions don’t just spontaneously erupt afterward. The connections and relationships that create the dialogues, coupled with the new relationships that develop during the dialogue, provide a solid infrastructure to support the hard work of planning and implementing community actions. It’s been exciting to see communities work so intentionally and with such deep insight into the importance of these connections. We’re trying our best to learn along with these communities and to share their work with others.

Community Educators Youth Development Webinar Series

We are pleased to announce an exciting series of webinars created by the good people at Friends for Youth in collaboration with our organizational partners at the Kettering Foundation. The webinars are aimed at raising awareness of the importance of educating the whole child, which requires a broader community effort both inside and outside our schools. We highly encourage NCDD members to find out more about the webinars below or on the FfY website and register for the first webinar on Feb. 19th.


It Takes All of Us: A Seminar Series About Educating and Developing Youth

Friends for Youth, in collaboration with the Kettering Foundation, is pleased to host a four-part series of no-cost interactive online sessions in which we will discuss ways you and your community can transform the way you think about developing and educating youth. The series features Dr. Patricia Moore Harbour, author of Community Educators: A Resource for Educating and Developing Our Youth, who will share practices that encompass developing the whole child from communities across the US. Using Dr. Harbour’s book as a foundation, we will explore these strategies – like mentoring, leadership and character development – in each session. Along with special guests, we aim to raise the awareness of the value and importance of community educators and to stimulate a national conversation about how essential it is to educate and develop the whole child.

Join us for all four no-cost webinars to share your experiences, learn more about how your community is a resource for transforming the education of youth, and strategize how to engage others in similar conversations. Each session will include highlights from Dr. Harbour’s book, a strategy that has worked in a local community, and interactive conversations with participants.

This online series is designed for youth mentoring professionals, professional educators, youth, community and business leaders, parents, government officials and employees, non-profit organizations, and anyone concerned about the education and development of young people. Our goal is for participants to learn with and from each other and be inspired to take action locally, to engage positively with the development of one child, an entire neighborhood, an existing youth organization, or a community-wide effort.

We will be giving away copies of Community Educators during each webinar and sharing key resources from the Kettering Foundation. To purchase your own copy of Community Educators, visit www.kettering.org/publications/community-educators-a-resource, from Amazon, Kindle, or Audible. This series also serves as the launch of the new Community Educators Facebook page for sustained conversation and building community.

  • Part One: Is School Reform Enough? – Wednesday, February 19, 2014
  • Part Two: Education is Broader than Just Schools – Wednesday, March 5, 2014
  • Part Three: Engaging the Public Makes a Difference – Wednesday, March 19, 2014
  • Part Four: Actions for You and Your Community to Take – Wednesday, April 2, 2014

All webinars take place from 11:00am – 12:15pm Pacific / 12:00 – 1:15pm Mountain / 1:00 – 2:15pm Central / 2:00 – 3:15pm Eastern.

For more information and to register online, go to www.friendsforyouth.org/mentoring-institute/webinars.

The Ecology of Democracy: Finding Ways to Have a Stronger Hand in Shaping Our Future

This 2014 book written by David Matthews, president of the Kettering Foundation, focuses on how to put more control in the hands of citizens when it comes to shaping the future of their communities and country. It was published by the Kettering Foundation Press.

From the Publisher:

Ecology-CoverThe Ecology of Democracy: Finding Ways to Have a Stronger Hand in Shaping Our Future is for people who care deeply about their communities and their country but worry about problems that endanger their future and that of their children. Jobs are disappearing, or the jobs people want aren’t available. Health care costs keep going up, and the system seems harder to navigate. Many worry that our schools aren’t as good as they should be. The political system is mired in hyperpolarization. Citizens feel pushed to the sidelines.

Rather than giving in to despair and cynicism, some Americans are determined to have a stronger hand in shaping their future. Suspicious of big reforms and big institutions, they are starting where they are with what they have.

This book is also for governmental and nongovernmental organizations, as well as educational institutions that are trying to engage these citizens. Their efforts aren’t stopping the steady erosion of public confidence, so they are looking for a different kind of public participation.

The work of democracy is work. Here are some ideas about how it can be done in ways that put more control in the hands of citizens and help restore the legitimacy of our institutions.

David Mathews is a husband, father, grandfather, gardener, and a member of the Clarke County Historical Society. Although a nonpartisan independent, he served as a Cabinet officer in the Ford administration (Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare). He is a former president of the University of Alabama, where he taught history. Now president of a research organization, the Kettering Foundation, he writes books like Politics for People, which has been translated into eight languages. He doesn’t sail or ski and has no musical talents, but his dog loves him.

Table of Contents includes:

Dedication

Acknowledgements

Introducing the People Who Make Our Democracy Work

Part I. Democracy Reconsidered

1. Systemic Problems of Self-Rule

2. Struggling for a Citizen-Centered Democracy

3. The Political Ecosystem

Part II. Citizens and Communities

4. “Here, Sir, the People Govern.” Really?

5. Putting the Public Back in the Public’s Business

6. Citizens: Involved and Informed?

7. Public Deliberation and Public Judgment

8. Framing Issues to Encourage Deliberation

9. Opportunities in Communities

10. Democratic Practices

Part III. Institutions, Professionals, and the Public

11. Bridging the Great Divide

12. Experiments in Realignment and Possibilities for Experiments

Notes

Bibliography

Index

Ordering info: The book is currently available for purchase from the Kettering Foundation

Resource Link: http://kettering.org/publications/ecology-of-democracy/

Improving Deliberation on Health Care

We wanted to share this thought-provoking commentary on a recent study on health care opinions conducted by our friends and partners at Public Agenda and the Kettering Foundation. As our nation continues to grapple with reforming our health care system, we in the engagement community have a special role to play in helping our communities decide how to tackle the big questions of reform. We hope you’ll take a moment to read the commentary below or find the original PA blog post here.


PublicAgenda-logoAs is evident in “Curbing Health Care Costs: Are Citizens Ready to Wrestle with Tough Choices?“, there are disconcerting contradictions and inconsistencies in Americans’ views on health care that indicate the need for continued public information and deliberation. Several of these contradictions are worth noting, as they may hold a key for developing successful approaches to engaging the public in policies and practices that enable quality care and controlled cost.

Disconcerting contradictions and inconsistencies in Americans’ views on health care indicate the need for continued public information and deliberation.

As the report notes in its introduction, the current cost crisis is certainly not new, yet public consciousness and a sense of urgency have begun emerging only in the past five years. The reasons are many: unlike all other consumer services, the majority of health-care costs are indirect, handled through a third-party payer. Out-of-pocket costs were historically an issue only for the poor, uninsured and underinsured. The rest of the nation remained fairly protected and blissfully unaware. But those days have passed.

Many of the findings in this study ring true with our own at the American Institutes for Research and our Center for Patient and Consumer Engagement. Recent deliberations across the country that we conducted for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality found similar public interest in information, a variety of perspectives and a desire for a place at the table as solutions are found and implemented. As in the deliberations we conducted, the study participants walked in with both misinformation and an individual, rather than a social, perspective on costs.

It is no wonder that health consumers, who are informed more by direct marketing than science or policy analysis about health care, indicate in this study their belief that specialists and renowned hospitals justifiably cost more. Our own 2010 study found that most consumers believed that more care, newer care, and more expensive care was better. However, this study also shows the extent to which patients understand that doctors may order too many tests and treatments because they are financially motivated to do so.

These results, along with other similar findings, need to bolster the efforts now underway to engage consumers and patients in cost payment reform at a variety of levels.

There are many encouraging signs from this study, however, that need additional fostering. Our own experience echoes the experience in this study of witnessing a shift in perspective as participants become informed, an eagerness to learn more about the issue of health-care costs, and a sense of duty in “wrestling” with the complexities of health-care costs.

These results, along with other similar findings, need to bolster the efforts now underway — funded by both federal agencies and private foundations — to engage consumers and patients in cost payment reform at a variety of levels, ranging from cost-effectiveness conversations when deciding treatment with a doctor to engagement at clinics and hospitals considering new forms of payment systems, such as bundled payments.

Critical to the effort is the need for consumers to demand that cost and quality remain on the table together. Accountable Care Organizations, Patient-Centered Medical Homes, and a variety of new models for care are seeking both reduced costs and increased quality, and many are committed to involving patients and consumers in their efforts as the ultimate end-users of their work. We can only hope that a similar spirit of engagement can be found in public policy settings. Our patients have much to add to those discussions.

Nelson Mandela: His Legacy to Democracy

We recently read an inspiring piece from the Kettering Foundation, an NCDD member organization, that we hope you will take a moment to read. It is a heartfelt tribute to the amazing legacy of the late Nelson Mandela, written by KF Interntional Resident and graduate student at the the University of the Witwatersrand in South Africa, Jaco Roets. You can read it below or find the original here.

Mandela’s work in national reconciliation after his release from prison is perhaps one of the most significant examples in recent history of the power of dialogue to transform conflict. As dialogue and democracy practitioners, we are all heirs to his legacy, and we have some very big shoes to fill. This piece remind us of the importance of our work and the truly transformative impact it can have.


kf

Nelson Mandela stepped out of prison in February 1990 faced by a country more divided than ever. Celebrations surrounded his release, but as a nation South Africa was fragmented. Years of segregation and oppression have blinded citizens to the potential of collaboration towards positive change. Clouds of uncertainty and the smoke rising from violent clashes further obscured a shared vision for the future. And in this chaos, we discover the real Mandela. Mandela became what South Africa needed at the time. He gave us the courage to be who we needed to be. He was not perfect, yet he served as a voice for those who have been marginalized. He allowed us to rediscover our shared humanity.

In 1997 Mandela stepped down as president. His vision was of a nation of active citizens, allowing us to move away from years of debilitating paternalism suffered under colonialism and apartheid. One man could not drive the ideals of democracy alone. Democracy can only thrive where all citizens have the opportunity to agree and disagree concerning the road ahead. Mandela did not want to give us answers. Instead he chose to inspire us, allowing us to believe that if we work together, there can be a better life for all.

His long walk to freedom allowed us to consider the roads that we still needed to travel. He did not offer South Africa the solution to all ailments. He encouraged us to keep talking, to keep dreaming, and to keep on searching for solutions that would benefit us all. I would like to believe that South Africans will remember him for this. I hope that the world will remember him for this. His dream will remain; a vision of a nation where all had an opportunity to contribute and collaborate. A space where citizens have a voice, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, political orientation, religion or race. The power of Mandela did not lie in his politics or in his statesmanship. The power of Mandela can be seen in the reawakening of a people, eager to imagine a future that no one ever thought possible. The power of Mandela lies in bringing a diverse, divided public together. Ultimately he allowed us all to see that we are not that different at all. A rainy day in Johannesburg saw world leaders come together to say farewell to an icon. We are all different. We are often in conflict. We are rarely in agreement. But on that day, for a few hours, we were all Mandela’s children.

Hamba kahle Tata Madiba. In your spirit, we will continue to walk the unsteady road towards democracy. May we always cherish your ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony.

Public Agenda’s New “Beyond the Polls” Project

We are excited to share about a great new initiative from our partners at Public Agenda, in collaboration with the National Issues Forums and the Kettering Foundation. Together, they are launching Beyond the Polls, a new regular commentary on public opinion issues. We encourage everyone to check out the initial announcement about the project below, or find the original announcement here.

PublicAgenda-logoWelcome to Beyond the Polls, our regular commentary on what Americans are thinking about pivotal issues our country and communities face. Each month, we offer a second look — a deeper look — at public opinion. We try to put survey results in context and enrich them by drawing on our extensive experience listening to citizens in both research and community settings over the years.

Our aim is to explore and understand the hopes, values, concerns, and priorities people bring to today’s issues — the public questions and controversies we think about every day. Just as important, we want to juxtapose the views that polling typically captures with what happens to those views when citizens have a chance to absorb and weigh different options for addressing issues and hear what other citizens have to say about them.

So what led us to develop Beyond the Polls? Here is some of what’s behind the series:

  • Polls often reflect top-of-the-head thinking. Surveys capture what people may be thinking at any given time, depending on how they’re feeling about things, what they know, what they’ve heard, and what’s happening in their own lives and communities and in the media. Unless we also take a look at this context, polling results have limited value.
  • The public’s views are not static. Polling results can change over time as people move beyond this top-of-the-head thinking and consider the questions at hand more deeply. As Pubic Agenda co-founder Dan Yankelovich has pointed out, people’s views tend to shift based on whether or not they have had time and opportunities to learn about an issue, consider it from different perspectives and decide where they stand. When they do this, sometimes their thinking becomes clearer. Sometimes their outlook becomes less dogmatic and more flexible. Sometimes people re-arrange their priorities as they recognize and think through trade-offs. Sometimes people, by talking with others, discover something that is very important to them that may not have been evident beforehand. Polls can fail to discriminate between top-of-the-head reactions and these more stable views.
  • Leaders cherry-pick at times. With so many polls available, and so many people quoting them for all sorts of reasons, what appears in the media can be piecemeal and, at times, misleading. In addition to the reasons we mention above, survey results often change depending on how questions are asked and what aspect of an issue a survey organization chooses to address. Sometimes pundits, elected officials, candidates and others zero in on one or two poll results—the ones that best match their own preferences—and blithely ignore the rest. We don’t do that. We examine and comment on all the best polls and look at what they’re saying—taken together.
  • Polling can’t substitute for democracy. Don’t get us wrong, we love opinion polls. Public Agenda designs and conducts surveys, and the National Issues Forums and the Kettering Foundation regularly consult opinion research in their work to get citizens talking about tough problems and working together to solve them. But democracy means much more than conveying poll results on citizens’ preferences to elected officials. Citizens have a real job to do grappling with tough issues and listening to the views of others.
  • Sometimes polls are on the wrong side of history. Because all of us move through a learning curve as we think through issues and hear from others, polls can change dramatically over time. In some of the most important moments of our history, public opinion lagged behind the arc of change. For example, few public views have shifted more radically than those toward women in the workforce. In a 1938 Gallup poll, more than three quarters of respondents disapproved of “a married woman earning money in business or industry if she has a husband capable of supporting her.” Twenty-two percent approved. In the late 1980s, opinion had nearly reversed, with 77 percent approving and 22 percent disapproving. These days, the question seems outdated. Gallup and other polling organizations are now asking questions about equal pay for women and men staying home to care for the children. Historical shifts like this mean we need to view polling as one piece of information. Polling is not a full or complete rendering of what the American people support, or what they may come to support — and consider indispensable — over time.

We’re eager to hear your responses to Beyond the Polls. Sign up to receive an email update when we have a new Beyond the Polls post. And, if you have a question or issue that could benefit from our review, let us know. We’d be pleased to consider adding it to our list of potential topics. Interested in continuing the conversation? Join us on Twitter with the hashtag #BeyondPolls.

Original post: www.publicagenda.org/blogs/welcome-to-beyond-the-polls

Mental Illness in America: How Can We Address a Growing Problem? (NIF Issue Advisory)

In October 2013, National Issues Forums Institute (NIFI) released an Issue Advisory that contains materials that can be used in deliberating over the issue of the impact of mental illness in America. This “issue advisory” is not a full NIF issue guide, but a basic outline of the options, entitled Mental Illness in America: How Do We Address a Growing Problem? It can be downloaded here.

From the introduction…cover_mental_illness_advisory350

Many Americans share a sense that something is wrong with how we address mental health and mental illness. More and more of us are taking medications for depression, hyperactivity, and other disorders. Meanwhile, however, dangerous mental illnesses are going undetected and untreated.

According to some, recent violent incidents reflect the need to increase security and increase our ability to detect mental illness. Others point to increasing numbers of veterans returning from overseas with post-traumatic stress disorders as a major concern. One in five Americans will have mental health problems in any given year. Unaddressed mental illness hurts individuals and their families and results in lost productivity. In rare cases, it can result in violence.

This Issue Advisory presents a framework that asks: How can we reduce the impact of mental
illness in America?

This issue advisory presents three options for deliberation, along with their drawbacks:

  • Option One: Put Safety First – more preventive action is necessary to deal with mentally ill individuals who are potentially dangerous to themselves or others.
  • Option Two: Ensure Mental Health Services are Available to All Who Need them – people
    should be encouraged to take control over their own mental health and be provided the tools to do so.
  • Option Three: Let People Plot their Own Course – we should not rely on so many medical approaches and allow people the freedom to plot their own course to healthy lives.

Resource Link: http://nifi.org/stream_document.aspx?rID=25092&catID=6&itemID=25088&typeID=8 (pdf)

Launching a 3-year learning exchange with the Kettering Foundation

NCDD is pleased to announce that we are embarking upon an exciting three-year “learning exchange” with the Kettering Foundation.

This research with Kettering focuses on documenting and making explicit what NCDD is learning in areas of mutual importance to Kettering, to NCDD, and to our field. Specifically, under this agreement, we will:

  • Explore the capacity and track record of collaboration among practitioners in public dialogue and deliberation, while exploring new opportunities as well. This joint research will give us the opportunity to think through—with many of you—the obstacles to collaboration in our field and how to overcome them.
  • Leverage our network to help quantify the level of dialogue and deliberation in the U.S. We’ll be surveying you in a number of ways to find out where, when, and how often you’re engaging people; what your organizations’ strengths and specialties are; and what your hopes and challenges are. The goal is to inventory the assets that exist in our field as a whole—and present that information in ways that public administrators, funders, potential sponsoring organizations, the media, and all of you can access.

We will certainly need your help for these efforts to be successful. Many of you are working together on a wide variety of projects already. We ask that over these next few years, you help us to learn from your work and explore with us what’s possible. We’ll also be looking for people to help us catalog, report on, and map what we’re learning. Ideas, input and involvement from our members will be critical in all our upcoming work with Kettering.

I am so excited about this opportunity to work more closely with the Kettering Foundation and to create a better climate for dialogue and deliberation, at a time when our world so desperately needs it. Please join me in celebrating our new venture.

About the Kettering Foundation…

The Kettering Foundation is a nonprofit operating foundation rooted in the American tradition of cooperative research. Kettering’s primary research question is “What does it take to make democracy work as it should?” Kettering’s research is distinctive because it is conducted from the perspective of citizens and focuses on what people can do collectively to address problems affecting their lives, their communities, and their nation.

The foundation seeks to identify and address the challenges to making democracy work as it should through interrelated program areas that focus on citizenscommunities, and institutions. Guiding Kettering’s research are three hypotheses. Kettering’s research suggests that democracy requires:

  • Responsible citizens who can make sound choices about their future;
  • Communities of citizens acting together to address common problems; and
  • Institutions with public legitimacy that contribute to strengthening society.

The foundation’s small staff and extensive network of associates collaborate with community organizations, government agencies, researchers, scholars, and citizens around the world. A monthly meeting series brings together Kettering staff, associates, researchers, and others with whom the foundation works to explore a tightly focused research question or area. Those working on related problems share what they are learning at the foundation’s many meetings, which provide space for an ongoing exchange of ideas and stories in an effort to develop research interests.

As the foundation’s learning progresses, Kettering shares its research findings through books, research reports, occasional papers, videos, and its website. The foundation also disseminates its research in three periodicals: Connections, the Higher Education Exchange, and the Kettering Review.

In addition, Kettering produces materials, including issue books and starter videos, for the National Issues Forums (NIF), a network of civic and educational organizations whose common interest is promoting public deliberation. The foundation collaborates with NIF as part of its research efforts.

Established in 1927 by inventor Charles F. Kettering, the foundation is a 501(c)(3) organization that does not make grants but engages in joint research with others. It is an operating foundation headquartered in Dayton, Ohio, with offices in Washington, D.C., and New York City.