Search

HolyokeC3.org

Campus Community Compact

Upcoming Events

{startdate} {starttime} {dateseparator} {enddate} {endtime}
{title}

Connect With Us

Login Form

About HolyokeC3

Third Sector New England- The Capacity Building Fund: 2nd Year Application

1.                  Name of lead organization and contact person’s information.

Enlace de Familias, 299 Main Street, Holyoke, MA 01040.

Contact Person: Betty Medina-Lichtenstein, phone/email:  (413) 532-9300 /This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

2.                  Names of organizations that will participate in the learning network. 

 

Nueva Esperanza Inc. 401 Main Street, Holyoke, MA 01040. Contact Person: John Linehan, phone, email: 413–533-9442 This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. (member of original network)

Enlace de Familias, 299 Main Street, Holyoke, MA 01040. Contact Person: Betty Medina-Lichtenstein, phone/email:  (413) 532-9300 /This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.  (member of original network)

Amherst College, Center for Community Engagement,  Amherst  College Box1906 Amherst, MA 01002 - 5000  Contact person: Scott Laidlaw, Director, Community Outreach. Phone/email: 413-542-5766/ email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. (member of original network)

Hampshire College, Amherst, MA 01002. Contact Person: Mary Bombardier, Director, Community PartnersforSocialChange.Phone/email:413-559-5395, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

(member of original network)

 

University of Massachusetts, Umass Extension, 40 Campus Center Way, Amherst, MA 01003. Contact Person: Karen Barshefsky, COPC Co-Coordinator     Phone/email: 413-577-0758/ This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. (member of original network)

 

The Community Education Project Inc, 317 Main Street, Holyoke, MA 01040 Contact Person: Robin Hodgkinson. Phone/email: 413-538-5770/This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

3. How the plan was developed.

The plan complements and builds on the recommendations for next steps to further the goals of the Implementation grant that were developed by committees formed at the final retreat of the implementation grant. These committees included representatives from six colleges, five community groups and community leaders. A preliminary concept for how this second year grant could best support these next steps was sent to all members and was presented at the September monthly meeting of the Holyoke Planning Network – Community Outreach Partnership Center Project (HPN-COPC). This was followed up by a meeting of core HPN members to further discuss and refine the concept, which was then sent out to the committees and HPN membership at large for review and comment and invitation to join in this new effort. Further input was solicited by individual meetings, phone conversations and email to complete the final version of the application, and a number of the partners responded with additional ideas throughout the process of developing the final application.

 

4.Responses to all of the following:

a.       Current status of Learning Network’s progress.

The original Third Sector Implementation Grant had two overall goals. The first was to create management systems to effectively carry out the COPC projects. The second goal was to create a genuinely participatory, effective and sustainable partnership between the area institutions of higher learning and the community of Holyoke that would meet the community based learning goals of the campuses and the community development goals of Holyoke’s institutions and its residents.

 

The first goal was achieved with the formation of effective structures and processes to manage the complex partnership described above to implement the COPC projects.  The COPC project funding ends in January of 2008 and has been generally highly successful in completing the projects and achieving its objectives. The COPC initiative provided an excellent testing ground for problem solving and working together in the real world.

 

At the outset, it was recognized that this second goal would require a long term effort that incorporated a multi-pronged strategy. This strategy involved: developing effective organizational and governance systems for the complex requirements of managing multiple projects among a wide range of institutions and  a diverse population; creating an environment of trust, cooperation, and mutual understanding among Holyoke community institutions and residents and the local institutions of higher learning; developing processes to support collaborative problem solving and working together driven by the voice and needs of the community; agreeing on shared vision, values, goals and a mutual understanding of roles and responsibilities; and bringing about institutional change within the college campus community in order to establish policies that are more supportive of an approach to community engagement that takes direction from and is more responsive to the needs of the community and that is willing to commit resources to a campus - community partnership that will bring about real and tangible improvements to the community. This is a long list, but important as a context to understand the breadth and complexity of this endeavor and the goals of the second year grant. The second goal is a work in progress.

 

The Implementation grant was successful in at least partially addressing all of these strategies among the active COPC-HPN group. There were dialogues, planning meetings and retreats to address the challenges and to develop strategies and structures to help build an effective community driven campus-community partnership to improve the quality of life in Holyoke. There were regular monthly meetings that included people representing the area colleges, CBOs, community leaders and residents of Holyoke. These were used to address a broad range of issues from the nitty-gritty of implementing the projects to discussions around how to communicate, work and make decisions together. There were also workshops to address some of the fundamental communication and “culture” challenges between the two communities, and there were several retreats to address the fundamental issues of structural and institutional change and develop a plan for moving forward. The outcome of this effort was to form three working committees to pursue these key issues in more depth and to develop strategies for moving forward (see below). 

 

Accomplishments that were identified at the last retreat by participants of the implementation grant were: the process created a forum for networking and to discuss issues; development of theories for partnerships between community and academic world; closer understanding of the community; a better sense of academic responsibility to the community; helped to see communities as valuable resources; created a basic structure to discuss and plan projects; began discussion of academic buy in and collaboration across academia; brought together people with common ideology, passion; helped to foster strong individual and faculty commitment; created more extensive collaborations between college students, youth and facilitators; college students have been brought into the loop as active partners; mentoring of community leaders and college faculty; reciprocity issue kept front and center; helped to connect minds that would not normally connect; raised the expectations, level and quality of the activities; instrumental in creating name, identity, legitimacy; brought in new partnerships; and still working together.

 

The HPN Learning Network continues to be an active network that has been meeting on a regular monthly basis to continue the work initiated by the implementation grant and to develop plans to build the capacity and assure the sustainability of the project.  This group has primarily focused on how to further develop and sustain the Holyoke Planning Network and the initiatives that have been developed by the Network and the Community Outreach Partnership Center (COPC) project. The Network has also formed three subcommittees to focus on three key areas that were identified at the last retreat as a result of the work of the implementation grant. These Subcommittees are: Institutional Change within the Institutions of higher learning; Community Involvement; and Structure and Processes. These subcommittees have been working to develop strategies for moving forward in the areas they are focusing on.

 

·  The Institutional Change group: to catalogue the work and assets the academic community has brought to and can offer Holyoke; to promote institutional change within the academic community to enhance the effectiveness of community engagement so that it can be more responsive to the input of the community and more effectively addresses the community identified needs, and at the same time remain in line with the mission of the academic institutions. .

·   Community Engagement Group: to catalogue work the community has done and to come up with ways to build community leadership and engage community members in more meaningful and effective ways in the campus-community partnership so that they can have an effective voice and be part of the decision making process.

·  Forming a Structure Group to explore models of community-campus partnerships, come up with recommendations for structures that will support a community directed approach and the collaboration between multiple campuses and the community.

 

The second year grant will help to support the goals of these committees.

·  It will help to build public awareness of the accomplishment of the HPN-COPC effort and of the potential for change and benefit both to the community and to the campuses.

·  It will help to engage community leaders and to bring in more partners.

·  It will deepen and expand the dialogue and community problem solving that was initiated by the implementation grant.

·  These conversations will result in a set of recommendations for best practices for working together and for structures and processes that will support the collaboration of community organizations and local colleges to respond to and help to resolve community needs.

 

There are also some new developments in the greater community that offer some unique and well-timed opportunities to complement this effort.

·  There have been some important new developments at area colleges that support campus-community partnerships and will offer greater opportunities for the work of the Holyoke Planning Network to further it goals. These include: the newly formed Amherst College Center for Community Engagement that will bring new resources to this effort and will help to develop new models for working with the community; and in-depth re-evaluation of community engagement and new community engagement initiatives at several of the local colleges. These new developments are described in greater detail in the section on institutional change.

·  Holyoke Unites (Coalition of Coalitions) initiative and Healthy Cities approach. There has been several meetings with representatives of over 30 coalitions in Holyoke to explore how they can coordinate and work together more effectively. At the last meeting, this group now informally called Holyoke Unites decided to follow the Healthy Cities approach to engage people at the grass roots level in defining what the community needs are and what needs to be done to address those needs. (see healthycityfallriver.org to see how this approach is working in Fall River, MA). This new effort provides the opportunity to connect with a broad range of Holyoke organizations, and to collaborate with them on their efforts of resident engagement.

 

b.      Impact on understanding of working in a network and building capacity through shared learning of the original project.

There have been a number of lessons that came out of the activities of the implementation grant. These were also identified at the last retreat and include: CBOs and residents need to be in the lead in identifying community needs; community voice needs to be heard on campus and campus people need to know reality at the street level ; need established participatory process to involve community; there should be an orientation process for new people to understand the history and mission of the project; there should be a forum to understand each others histories and accomplishments;  need to create time to get to know each other; more retreats at beginning to build links trust and respect is essential; need to celebrate successes more; need more reflection time and time to identify problems and move forward with solutions; HPN should not be grant driven - money and funders can sabotage direction; need the capacity for fund raising and publicity; more effort to get and keep more partners; need to engage city more; and keep commitments realistic and doable.

 

The most basic learning has been that working in network and developing the network’s capacity is an organic process that evolves over time and that tends to defy a structured linear approach. This may seem to be overly simplistic and general and of course needs elaboration. In fact there has been much written on this subject (the Barr Foundation report: Network Power for Philanthropy and NonProfits; Pardoxes of Partnerships: Reflections on University-Community Collaborations by Linda Silka, University of Massachusetts, Lowell;  The Starfish and the Spider: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations by Ori Brafman and Rod A.Bekstrom). The experience of this network confirms much of what is described in those papers. One of the learnings of this network has been that a plan and structure for working together needs to be created by an combination of on-going dialogue and trying out of different approaches. This must be an open-ended process that allows for new players and new voices to be included in the dialogue as the network grows and forms an “identity”.  This can mean walking the edge of falling into disorganization and lack of direction on one side and becoming too rigid and frozen on the other. What keeps the process moving forward is the commitment and intention of the players to reach a common goal. Being able to continue this process of dialogue is one of the primary reasons for the proposed second year grant described below.

 

c.       Challenges of learning network during the implementation stage and what measures taken.

The network partners came up with a comprehensive list of challenges during the discussions and at the retreat. These include: transitions and turnover of faculty and community staff; lack of community driven process; not equal power sharing (academic heavy);  lack of transparency on how CBOs were struggling and how they were engaged as partners;  community partners did not know role in HPN power structure; lack of institutional support from colleges; sustaining values and principles; lack of faculty support in carrying out projects; need paid internships for graduate students; not enough promotion and dissemination of information; lack of expansion and inclusion of new people; lack of business and ecumenical community; not enough collaboration with the city;  hard to break in if not part of the original HPN group; no protocol for new students, new faculty; lack of orientation or materials; college folk over promise what they can deliver and no consequences or accountability; different calendars/schedules for academia and community; competing demands of academia and serving community create guilt; no clear decision making process; inadequate assessment strategies; inadequate accountability system; too many projects and not enough paid staff; did not leverage enough additional investment; funds not always the answer; and there are questions that still need to be asked.

 

Addressing these challenges is an on-going effort. As mentioned, HPN meets regularly and often discusses one or more of these issues to come up with ideas to resolve them. The dialogues, workshops and retreats of the implementation grant were very important for both identifying these challenges and taking some first steps towards resolving them. There also have been a number of additional community forums and cultural events that were designed to bring people from the community and from the colleges together to share knowledge, appreciate culture and to have fun and celebrate. These have done a great deal towards building trust and mutual understanding and have opened some important dialogues about community needs and issues. The Puerto Rican Studies Seminar has been a key component of raising awareness and increasing appreciation of Puerto Rican culture and politics. This seminar brings together college faculty, students and community folk to discuss these issues and also to travel to Puerto Rico to gain first hand experience of the culture and deeper understanding of some of the political issues. Also as noted, efforts have been made and there has been some progress to increase awareness at the academic institutions about the community driven approach to community engagement the HPN promotes. There also have been steps taken to train community leaders and bring them more into the HPN-COPC process. There also has been progress in increasing public awareness and support of HPN and the COPC project. The community events mentioned above have been an important part of this and a website has been developed (http://www.holyokepn.org}. In addition there have been several articles about the project (http://umassmag.com/2007/ Summer2007/Features/hope_holyoke.html, and http://www.umass.edu/outreach /news_events /archive_story/06_09.html).

 

d.      Network’s plans to add new organizations and steps taken to bring up to speed.

The self-evaluation that was described above shows that adding new organizations and bringing them up to speed was one of the challenges of this project. As mentioned above, the newly formed Holyoke Unites initiative offers a well-timed opportunity to include a broad range of organizations in Holyoke to this effort. Members of our Third Sector network have been actively participating in the Holyoke Unites effort and we have started some conversations about coordinating our efforts. The lead agency, Enlace de Familias, for this application has been a key player in the Holyoke Unites initiative. There are over 20 coalitions in this group representing at least 40 social service, community development and youth organizations in Holyoke. There have been several meetings of Holyoke Unites, and the HPN-COPC project has been discussed at these meetings as one of the important coalitions in Holyoke.

 

The Community Education Project (CEP) which has participated in HPN/Third Sector activities has now become one of the key partners of this application. CEP is one of a handful of truly grass roots organizations in Holyoke. CEP is dedicated to bringing about social and economic justice through resident education and leadership. It will be able help include the resident voice in future HPN/Third Sector efforts.

 

The community forums and workshops described in the section below will be the most important way of including new people and organizations in the conversation and bringing them into the project.

 

e.       How learning acquired from the initial implementation project become institutionalized within the member organizations.

The work of HPN and the conversations, workshops and retreats of the Third Sector  implementation project have been instrumental and or influential in a number of developments in the academic community and in Holyoke. HPN/Third Sector efforts have helped to raise awareness of the need for some fundamental changes in how “community service” is defined, what is the relationship between the Holyoke community and the campus community, and how campus efforts to work in the community are carried out. The work of HPN and the Third Sector implementation grant has been successful in engaging some key players in the academic community and the Holyoke community to help to educate and influence their respective communities, and to help to spark some change. Some of these on-going efforts and new initiatives are described below. These successes are just a start, and as mentioned this second year grant is designed to build on these first steps to bring the conversations and dialogues to a broader audience and to help to influence policies and institutional change at a deeper and higher level.

 

Amherst College and Hampshire College have both been important past partners and are also in the process of re-examining community engagement and in starting new initiatives. HPN/Third Sector has at least had some influence in these and/or be a part of the conversation, and looks forward to being a factor helping these initiatives to work in equal partnership with the community of Holyoke.

 

Amherst College has been a long time partner with programs in Holyoke and a strong supporter of community service. It is now embarking on a major initiative to promote and support community engagement at an even more intense level through the formation of the new Center for Community Engagement. This effort is well funded and has the full support of the president. The Director of this effort, Molly Mead, is actively seeking to engage in dialogue with the community on best ways to work together. She has already has had conversations with HPN members and expressed interest in working together. There is the potential here to work with an institution that appears to be committed to the kind of institutional change that would support the HPN mission and has the resources to move forward on this and to work with the community and other institutions of higher learning to create a model of community engagement that integrates the needs of the community with the needs of the colleges for promoting their mission to educate their students.

 

Hampshire College Community Partners for Social Change (CPSC) has been promoting a progressive vision of community engagement since 1987. It has worked to integrate academic pursuit with social action and encourages students to make community work a central component of their studies. CPSC also works to promote respectful and reciprocal relationships between local communities and the college. In addition Hampshire College along with several of the area colleges have each been undergoing a self study around community engagement and/or community -based learning.  Both Hampshire and Smith Colleges went through a year-long study of community-based learning at their campuses and are exploring opportunities to expand and strengthen their programs. These were at least in part stimulated by the efforts of HPN.

 

Smith College has yet to become a formal partner of HPN, but Smith College faculty and staff have been active participants. The HPN/Third Sector efforts have coincided with strategic planning for a community engagement initiative at Smith College. The highly intentional and organized work of the HPN/Third Sector, Holyoke Unites and associated coalitions has presented model opportunities for key actors involved in Smith's initiatives to participate in valuable community-based conversations, witness critical and productive models of collaboration, learn about and witness examples of reciprocal and ethical partnership, and build into the College's plans to develop a "Center for Community Collaboration" the kinds of resources and infrastructure oriented toward creating sustainable and meaningful projects.

 

The University of Massachusetts at Amherst has also committed resources to the HPN effort, and many very dedicated staff have committed countless hours to the project. It is the administrator of the COPC project and through HPN influence has made steps toward embracing the kind of model the HPN promotes. As a land grant institution, this is part of its founding mission - “to serve the Commonwealth, to educate its citizens, to conduct research relevant to its needs, to engage in public service to address its challenges." The University also awarded its Distinguished Community Partnership Award to one of the HPN partners. This kind of recognition of HPN and its efforts is a good indicator of the impact that HPN-COPC has had on this institution.

 

f.        How the learning network would use this funding to continue to build capacity to work together to further a social impact of mutual concern.

 

1.                  Describe the new project?

The new project builds directly on the learning of the Implementation Grant by answering some of the challenges identified and supporting the steps outlined in the final retreat and developed by the committees formed during that retreat. In particular: raising public awareness of the HPN efforts and success; engaging a broader spectrum of the Holyoke community and the academic community in dialogues around issues of working together; increasing mutual understanding and trust; and developing effective systems and processes to assure a truly collaborative effort that responds to the needs of the community while supporting the colleges mission to educate their students. The next step is to broaden and deepen the work of the implementation grant by involving more community leaders and organizations and more college faculty and administration officials in exploring how we can work more effectively and in a more mutually beneficial way together. The new Amherst College Center for Community Engagement initiative will help to foster greater involvement of the academic community and the Holyoke Unites initiative will help to engage a broader spectrum of the Holyoke community.  The learning process needs to go to the next level to gain broader mutual understanding and support within the community and the institutions of higher learning.

 

The key outcomes for this second phase of the Third Sector Capacity Building Grant effort are:

·  to engage a broader spectrum of participants in dialogues that result in: a deeper understanding of each others needs, resources, culture, ways of working; increased knowledge of best practices; and general agreement on ways to better work together.

·  from these dialogues to develop a set of recommendations for institutional change within the academic and Holyoke organizations and a five year plan for implementing those recommendations that will be endorsed by the community and the academic institutions.

 

The focus of this project will be to further explore and move forward through a series of well planned community conversations the issues identified by the learning Network and come to a general agreement among the network partners on best practices, policies, institutional change and effective structures and processes for working together. These issues include: building leadership in the community and increasing the meaningful engagement of residents, community leaders and community organization staff; bringing about institutional change that creates a more supportive climate for effective community engagement that will both support the goals of the institutions and the goals of the community being served; and developing structures and processes for decision making, and effectively communicating and implementing projects among diverse campuses and community organizations. These mirror the original and far reaching goals of the original implementation grant. As noted above, one of the lessons learned from pursuing these goals is that they are far-reaching, and require a concerted long term effort to bring about. One of the most effective ways to do this is to facilitate dialogue among the players to come to mutual understanding of each others needs, resources, capacities and how best to work together in a way that will be mutually beneficial. This new project will take this project into the next phase. In the implementation grant a number of key areas were identified that need to be further pursued in order to bring about institutional change, increased community participation and effective structures. As mentioned, these kind of long term and deep changes require creating an on-going and shared learning environment where the essential issues can be discussed and explored by the partners to be able to find common ground.

 

The main element of this project will be a series of forums and workshops on variety of subjects pertinent to the community-campus partnership. The final themes and content of the forums will be decided by a planning committee but there is general agreement that they will include at least some of the following themes among possible others identified by the committee:

·  Accomplishments, challenges and learning from the HPN-COPC project. This will follow up on the recommendation from the retreat to increase awareness about the successes of HPN-COPC and how the community-campus partnership can meet community needs. This will also help to inspire and engage people at the outset while identifying the real challenges that need to be addressed to be truly successful and sustainable.

·  Models and best practices of community-campus partnerships. As mentioned there are some very exciting models including nearby UMass Lowell and some new thinking about how diverse networks form and function most effectively.

·  How to empower community residents so that their voice and needs are heard. It is important to give the residents a chance to state their needs and to examine how their voice can be more effectively part of the conversations, and how their leadership skills can be developed and incorporated in the project.

·  Communicating and working together across the community and campus cultures. The very different cultures and ways of communicating have been an ongoing challenge. Simply working together over time helps to build trust and improve communication. At the same time, it is important to name the issue and to start to increase awareness and sensitivity.

·  Understanding the missions, resources and capacities of the community and of the institutions of higher learning and how they can complement each other. Lack of awareness and unrealistic expectations around these has created conflict. There needs to be a forum for developing a mutual understanding.

·  What policies and institutional change can support this effort. It will be important to translate the learning into recommendations for policies and institutional support to bring about change.

·  Structures and processes that can effectively support the partnership and give a meaningful voice to residents. Having clearly defined roles, decision making processes and some form of organizational structure (even if fluid and loose) will help to move forward effectively together.

 

The forums will be targeted to college students and faculty, community leaders and staff of community organizations, city officials, and residents. Outreach will be done by through a number of ways including utilizing existing coalition list serves that reach hundreds of people in the college and Holyoke communities. Local community based organizations will also encourage their staff to take part and will utilize their outreach capacities to engage their community residents. As mentioned above, this effort will work in conjunction with Holyoke Unites ( the “Coalition of Coalitions”) to utilize their network of organizations and build off their community engagement efforts.

 

There will be at least 6 forum/workshops that will occur generally on a bi-monthly basis and take place in Holyoke. There will be at least two initial forums in the spring of 08, and because of summer vacation for the campus community, the rest will pick up again in the fall and continue through the spring of 09. There will be a Planning Committee composed of the Learning Network partners and will have at least two representatives from the community and two from the colleges. The Planning Committee will be open to whoever is willing to commit the time and will be structured to maintain a balance of community and campus representatives. There will be stipends for up to three community program staff to make it feasible for them to devote their time. The meetings will also occur on at least a monthly basis and will be scheduled during lunch break and other times that allow for community organization staff and residents to participate.

 

The Planning Committee will select and work with an outside consultant with experience in designing and facilitation community conversations to design and plan the series and to provide them with basic training on facilitating community conversations. The consultant will also be used to plan and help facilitate a final event to summarize and prioritize the learning. They will also seek input and ideas from the network partners to determine the themes for the forums and workshops. The committee will also do outreach to identify and invite panelists, presenters and workshops leaders, and will be responsible for organizing and documenting the forums. The Project Coordinator will be responsible for the logistics and implementation of the forums, and for project documentation and reporting.

 

The forums/panels will include community program staff, community leaders, college faculty, admin, staff, and outside presenters. Local community leaders and leaders of community organizations will be asked to sit on the panels and make presentations or lead workshops. Honorariums will be provided for forum panelists and workshop leaders. There will be opportunities at each event for the participants to discuss the issues, share their point of views and ideas and reflect on the learning and to attempt to come to agreement on what the essential lessons were. Each event will be video recorded and a documenter will record the key points and learning outcomes. These meeting notes will be sent out to all the network partners.

 

At the end of the panel/workshop series, the Planning Committee will organize a final event to present the learning from the series and to come to general agreement on best practices and most promising recommendations. Key decision makers such as College President, Provosts, city and community leaders, and program Directors will be invited to this event. The outside consultant will be hired to facilitate this meeting. The Committee will then work to assimilate these lessons into a set of recommendations for best practices for working together, and policies and structures to support the effort. These recommendations will also be incorporated into a draft five year strategic plan to implement the recommendations. These recommendations and the strategic plan will be sent to the partners for endorsement. This will not be a formal agreement, but a set of guidelines to inform future practices, policy and ways to structure the partnership that the key players will all buy into.

 

2.                  How the group decided on this specific project.

As mentioned above (#3) this project builds on the learning and recommendations that came out of the Implementation grant and was developed out of a process that included presenting the grant to the HPN-COPC group, meeting with key partners and on-going dialogue by phone and email to develop the grant proposal.

 

3.                  How the network and the network members will benefit from this deeper learning.

This deeper learning will help the members to be able to better understand each others goals, needs and capacities so that they can develop a working partnership based on mutual understanding of each others needs and realistic shared expectations of what each can deliver. This learning will also help the members to have a deeper understanding of each others culture and modes of communication so that they will be better able to discuss issues and problem solve together. The recommendations and five year plan will provide a framework for moving forward and building a better and more effective partnership.

 

4.                  How the network’s community and constituents will benefit from this process.

There are two distinct “communities” in this network: the community of Holyoke including residents and other community organizations (not directly part of the network), and the campus community including faculty and students. The paramount goal is to benefit the residents of Holyoke. This process will help to develop more effective ways for the residents to be able to convey their needs and take an active role in leadership and direction of the projects. This will translate into having the resource of the colleges and of community organizations more effectively targeted to real community needs and in greater community participation and support of the projects. The process will help the community organizations by creating more effective structures and processes for them to work with the academic community. This will help to make sure that the community organizations are better able to convey their needs to the academic community and that they have a clearer understanding of how the academic community can meet their needs. It will also help to make sure the academic community better understands how they can support the needs of the community organizations. It will help the faculty of the academic institutions further their research by being able to apply their theory and knowledge in the real world. It will help the students by giving them real world situations to test and apply their learning, and will give them opportunities to conduct research, develop  their own ideas and  theories based on real world experience and develop leadership, planning, and decision making skills.

 

5.                  The steps of the process

Schedule

Main Activities

Jan -Feb 08

Planning Committee of community partners and campus partners works with consultant to plan series of forums.

Researcher/documentor and coordinators research best practices and identify presenters for first forum.

Mar08 –May 08

Planning committee organizes and puts on initial forums. One is on best practices of campus-community partnerships and the other is on successes and challenges, issues and priorities identified by the network.

June 08- Aug 08

Documentor and coordinators compile learning from the forums and send to participants for any additional feedback. (no forums or planning committee activity during summer months due to vacation for campus community)

Sept 08

Planning Committee uses the input from the first forums to design series of forums that follow up on key best practices and respond to the key challenges.

Oct 08- Mar 08

Planning Committee puts on a series of at least 4 community forums and dialogues around themes that will support the development of effective campus – community partnerships. Each forum is recorded and key learning is documented. The Planning Committee meets regularly to plan the workshops and for evaluation and improvement.

April 09

Planning Committee works with documenter to compile learning from the forums and works with consultant to plan final event.

May 09

Final forum to present the cumulative learning and develop agreed upon best practices, policies, institutional change ideas, and structures and processes for working together.

June 09

Planning Committee takes learning from the final event to produce an agreement and five year plan that is endorsed by the partners.

June 09

Final event to celebrate success and to pledge to support the recommendations and five year plan.

 

 

6.         Full cost of the project.

 

LINE ITEM

DETAIL

TSNE

MATCH

PROJECT COORDINATION

2 at 12 hr/mo - 18 MOS

$10,500

$2,450

RESEARCH/DOCUMENTATION

Student intern – 8 hrs / mo

$1,000

$2,000

PLANNING COMMITTEE

3  program staff, 3 campus faculty staff - monthly meetings

$3,600

$3,600

CONSULTANT

OD consultant for design of conversations and to facilitate final event

$2,000

0

HONORARIA/STIPENDS

 8 program staff/community leaders-$2000; 3 presenters and workshop leaders- $1,500: child care - $500

$3,500

$500

SUPPLIES

Meeting supplies

   $300

$200

OTHER

Food, printing, phone, misc

$1,600

$600

ADMIN

Grant management, bookkeeping

$2,500

0

 

TOTAL TSNE and MATCH

$25,000

$9,350

 

TOTAL PROJECT COST

$34,350

 

The match is estimated based primarily on past experience and will come from in-kind contribution of college faculty and staff time, supplies, food and some cash match.

 

7.         How the network shares the TSNE values of nondiscrimination and diversity (which is stated below).

All of the organizations in this network have policies that support nondiscrimination and diversity. In addition, the Implementation grant and this grant have as one of the primary goals to involve and empower diverse members of the network community in dialogue and decision making.

 

 

TSNE Values of Non-Discrimination and Diversity:

 

TSNE values inclusion of all people in the creation of healthy, vibrant and democratic communities.  Groups funded through the CBF cannot discriminate in regards to employment or membership in their organization on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation/identity, disability, age, country of origin, citizen status, veteran status or ethnic identity.

Joomla 1.5 Templates by Joomlashack

This site created by the UMass Amherst IT Capstone Course and hosted by The Boys & Girls Club of Greater Holyoke, Inc. (The Positive Place for Kids)