Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Next Steps: Takeaway Actions for the Coalition of Stewardship Organizations and Agencies

Below are some next steps which participants brainstormed and brought up repeatedly at the forum. Feel free to add more actions to the list and add your thoughts about the ones listed here:

-Check “egos and logos” at the door to build a strong coalition of stewardship organizations and agencies with common goals and a leadership structure in place.

- Create a unified message about stewardship that can be easily understood by the public and funders. Engage with the public relations and marketing sectors to create a brand that sticks and resonates socially and economically.

-Engage with other sectors (health, education, agriculture, entertainment, etc.) to expand the coalition and build momentum around the message.

-Develop and use a statewide database which tracks volunteers, volunteer opportunities, agency needs, and measurements of accomplishments. This tool can be used to recruit volunteers and compile concrete numbers to present to funders. (volunteeroutdoors.net is such a tool that already exists)

-Collaboratively conduct a state-wide gap analysis in order to demonstrate collaboration, a unified message, and concrete metrics and goals to funders.

-Identify the expertise of our different agencies and organizations. Focus on the skill-based and geographic niches so we do not dilute our message or spread thin our volunteers and resources.

-Develop ways to train more volunteers in order to build the leadership capacity of volunteer stewards and leverage paid staff time. Engage the young population and recruit them to lead while encouraging older leaders to pass on their knowledge.

-Expand ways to engage more diverse groups of volunteers (volunteers across the spectrums of time available, skill level, geographic location, age, ethnicity, socio-economic status, etc.)

Thursday, November 11, 2010

Continue the Conversation

Summarized notes from the four roundtable discussions and corresponding breakout sessions are posted below. Please post your comments and follow-up thoughts to continue the great conversations we started on Monday and Tuesday.

Use the Blog Archive list on the right of this page to find specific sets of notes.

Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Roundtable 4, Tuesday afternoon: Taking Citizen Stewardship to the Next Level: Next Steps in Expanding this Movement

Facilitator: Wendy Newman

Participants:
Connie Myers: Executive Director, Carhart National Wilderness Training Center
Robert Searns: Chair, American Trails Board; Founding Associate, GreenWay Team, Inc.
Beth Conover: Consultant, Author; formerly Director of GreenPrint Denver
Mike King: Director, Colorado Department of Natural Resources
Ann Baker Easley: Executive Director, Volunteers for Outdoor Colorado

WN: Let’s get down to the basics. What are those logical next steps that we need to focus on in order to create a powerful movement? What are one or two of those logical next steps?

-Clarify and build a mission. We need to articulate in simple, effective, credible, concrete, and unemotional ways the economic and social benefits of the places we’re trying to protect. Give people a reason to get outside and go do this stuff. Create a brand/message that sticks.
-Connect to a sense of urgency. Identify a compelling need, mobilize the resources, create a mandate, coming from ideally as high as possible. Concerning policy and finance.
-From perspective of land management agencies, we have several things going in our favor. And a lot of hurdles. State of CO is in state of fiscal crisis.
- People feel passionately about natural resources. We need to make sure we’ve identified projects that create a sense and source of pride.
-Plenty of people here ready to go to the next level. If we make this higher profile and partner we have the capacity and capability to do that.
-Check egos and logos at the door and really have a set of committed folks to sit down as equal partners and take next steps to incrementally make this happen. What would it really take to build that capacity.
- How do we get every user to be a steward? Not only the ppl who go out and volunteer, but the people who camp, hunt, fish, use the facilities.

WN: We’ve been talking about missing parties here and how do we work with obvious partners who may not think they’re partners. I think the next step is to engage the health community, transportation, outdoor rec, environmental educators, etc. How do we take this need for integration and actually do it?

-Integration is not something government does well. Concerning DNR, there are tons of disconnects that create themselves over 100 years of state gov’t. Before integrating outside DNR needs to go back and create some centralized clearinghouse within DNR first. We can dream big.
-Even with all the challenges, what are the best ways to reach community? What do we have and what do you have. There’s the Colorado Kids Outdoors initiative which will be critical to Hickenlooper’s admin. Confident we’ll get this moving in the next two months and the admin will take it forward.
-Does it make sense within stewardship movement to maybe just tackle one sector. Maybe just focus on the backlog within state parks for example to have concrete needs/results?
- Move people from self-interest to mutual interest (same with orgs. True collaboration comes with understanding where individual organizations’ interests align). Individual parties have to get act together, have a shared vision.
- Need to have some kind of a leadership structure if you truly want to collaborate. Need to coalesce around a common set of ideas.
- There are always reasons that it’s hard to work together, but you only get the funding if you come together
- The Crisis issue: The fiscal crisis and the politics of scapegoating. It is really easy to hit on objectives that are perceived as weak. Sadly there are those that will make us the scapegoat.
-We’re going through a generational shift—there’s a lot of gray hair in the natural resources field. Are we going to be able to engage the next generation to engage in this fight with the same zeal?
-The general economy. We need some very radical changes in our economy and that isn’t going to happen overnight. We’re in for the fight of our lives in the next 10-20 years. We need to build on that and find ways to engage people. Will probably have to rely more on philanthropic sectors.

WN: How do we really truly collaborate? How do we create a mechanism for doing that when quite honestly we don’t even often agree and it’s a white elephant in the room that there is a lot of conflict even among entities here today.

-It comes back to the power of a shared vision. Agencies and organizations don’t like to play together because they like to shine on their own. It’s not as easy to talk about there being too many of us, someone has to get cut. It’s easier to say, at the end of the day, what really matters? What is it really about?
-Each organization can do a certain piece of larger vision. Partnerships are about relations and relationships are investments of time and emotion. It takes a while to build trust.

WN: We know this is great beginning but we need to understand the level of commitment it will take to move this forward

-It is going back with specific nuggets from this and turning them into action. Take the salient things we’ve heard and do something with them.
-example of VOC: the board is continually looking at what we do. Raising money. VOC has had a 16% cut in the last 2 years. The realities of what the organization is trying to do in this movement are austere and in our face.
-It is critical to engage all aspects of leadership (Staff, volunteer leaders, Board members)
- If each of us took a piece of our infrastructure and applied it toward this collective goal, we could really make some substantial changes. We are willing to put in that investment.
-What drives it is urgency. That there’s no alternative.

WN: Is there anything that we have missed out on?


-We need to engage all kinds of volunteers. Engage citizen scientists. As we talk about mobilizing volunteers, we need to provide opportunities that run the gamut from “I have 15 minutes” to “I have 15 days with my family”
-We need to prioritize steps to fill in the gaps between what the problems are, where they are and where we are.
-Agencies have all the data but where is it consolidated to make sense of the prioritie?. How in the world do people prioritize what you take on first?
-We need to know the baselines. Create a baseline base camp. Volunteers’ jobs would be to do continued monitoring on public lands, identify needs by agencies and NGOs.
-1. Funding side 2. Identifying what we want this to be all about. Is it Keep it Colorado? Is it Step into it—you can make a difference? We need to be careful about how we talk and think.
-We need to realize that with all our threatening realities, you can still make a difference. Folks want to know that they can still make a difference and world isn’t coming to an end no matter what.
-4 elements
1. Defining mission in projects that have to be accomplished
2. Engaging stewards. Need incentives and marketing
3. Having the coordination capabilities—tied to money.
4. How to engage corporate sector to fully step up to the plate and take on responsibility. Outdoor Rec industry 750 billion$ /year industry but message not getting out there. Here’s one industry that’s benefitting from this and will lose if this doesn’t work. How do we get part of that 750 billion? Gov’t may be able to do it but can’t do it alone

Let’s assume that demand and need for volunteers is fully valued, recognized, and presented, do we have the volunteer supply to meet it? And if not, how do we go about meeting it? How to generate more interest?

-From VOC’s experience, it teeters a bit on both sides. This year our volunteer numbers increased 30%. Because we increased our projects by 40%. You have to provide opportunity in ways that help engage the public. It’s not predictable. We have to be very creative in the engagement process.
-It is incremental. When we thought out the number 1 million. That’s 20% of CO population volunteering. At first thought we thought that wouldn’t happen, but it might happen incrementally. Not just with shovel in hands, but lots of ways. Financial donations, recycling, or committing one day to carpooling, voting. We have to educate people that it’s bigger than actually being on the ground.
-State public land is everywhere. That proximity is key to making sure that everyone who has an interest can go connect with the land and with the resources.
- We need to make sure opportunities we provide are across the board. There are wonderful, intense projects, but only certain people at certain stages of their lives can do them. Different levels of commitment and abilities.
-There are a lot of people out of work and hurting. People may be capable of going out and working and doing things. Look at the history of the WPA and the stewardship ethic developed. Is there a way or model to put together where the corporate sector steps up and pays people to be stewards? Are there ways to put different incentives together and putting together new revenue sources? Creative ways to find the money to do that and create a model in CO.
- Colorado Youth Corps is one way already. Youth involvement. Getting kids from their urban environments. Kids get paid, not a lot, but at a time in their lives when it will stay with them forever.
- There is a model in NY where ppl over 65 can get tax benefits for volunteering. Perhaps there’s a model with that.

WN: Before we were talking about if you build this movement will people come? What I took away is if we do truly collaborate, then we will be able to respond to that call to action.

-There is a continuum of opportunity. Not everyone enters commitment to service or stewardship at the same level. Whether it’s the structure of the opportunity or the population that’s serving.
-We need to better aware of who’s doing what so we can refer to each other. If someone comes to my org and I can’t help them, I can pass them on to you. Being able to have a continuum of opportunities and better understanding what everyone else is doing.

WN: audience questions. Some user groups self-fund stewardship projects (like OHVs and hunter groups). What are your thoughts on this?

-Argue that it’s not sufficient and not appropriate. I don’t have a problem with users providing the base funding, but we need to look closely at who benefits.

WN: is there an opportunity for a national stewardship coalition? Not just CO?

-The federal gov’t is doing this in a way. The White House conference on America’s Great Outdoors talked about 1. Protecting natural lands and ecosystems 2. Reconnecting people in urban systems 3. Let’s Move program 3. Local initiative to preserve natural farms and ranches. Probably the strength in a lot of this will come from the local level by example. CO has always been a leader.

Breakout session 3, Tuesday morning: Setting Funding Priorities

Goals:

-Determine whether our goal is to change lifestyles or affect concrete results
-Determine statewide priorities
-Find a way to connect the tangible projects to bigger more long-term priorities. Otherwise we can win every battle but lose the war
-Unite stewardship projects with environmental education
-Go beyond GoCo and REI to the rest of the corporate world to buy in to what we are doing and to expand the pot of money that is being directed toward the stewardship mission
-Provide evidence to the funders that the programs they are funding will be sustainable over the long term
-Determine what we mean by funder: state-level to foundations to individual volunteers

Actions:

-Form a unified message before we approach funders. (A strategic plan?)
-Tie our missions to the missions of funders so that funding relationships can be institutionalized and sustainable
-Determine collectively the economic value of our work on the environment
-Put together shared metrics and accomplishments to present a more unified, easy-to-understand message for funders of what has happened and what needs to be done
-Tie the stewardship movement into the popularity of Colorado as a place that people move to for the lifestyle and link our marketing into the model that exists for parks
-Reach out to other sectors to include them in the conversation about our collective goals
-Establish work groups that will include representatives from many sectors such as: heath, education, policy/advocacy, state and federal governments with the goal of creating unity around the stewardship movement on volunteer issues, marketing issues, economic issues, best practices etc.
-Identify special resources and expertise that individual organizations have such as VOC crew leader trainings.
-tap into fact that many organizations are funded based on effective volunteer programs

Resources:

-The existing expertise and resources of individual organizations
-existing relationships with funders and organizations in other sectors
-a collective database of accomplishments and needs (needed)

Breakout session 2, Tuesday morning: Giving Funders What They Need

Goals:

-Identify a clear definition of stewardship
-Keep the momentum of the forum going
- Think of funders as collaborators and not just moneybags. There’s a two way street in utilizing
-Put together shared metrics to present a more unified, easy-to-understand message
-Think about ways that funders can work collaboratively to fund this movement
-Be creative in fundraising and reaching different audiences through technology and social media
-Be honest with funders about what we need and don’t assume we know what they need
-Asses how to measure qualitatively in addition to quantitatively to present to funders
-Have funders understand the difference between communicating/presenting information to the public, and educating
-Know our individual funders and their priorities (political v. not political, issue-focused v. not)
-Continue the communication among our organizations (through the stewardship forum blog or other media)

Actions:

-Convene a broader coalition and identify who is at the table and who is not. (eg. Environment, agriculture, schools, public health, tourists, entertainment)
-Clearly connect our goals to programs/issues that funders already want to fund (ex: GOCO and youth and families)
-Identify mapping statewide priorities and gap analysis current funders
-Create a clear message or brand to present to funders (from the definition of stewardship). Perhaps make a video or multimedia message. Stress the passion of individual organizations and of the collective movement in this PR campaign.
-Create a one-page summary or youtube video of the overarching goals of the stewardship movement to present to funders
- Funders are looking for collaborative projects. Identify overlap and show that we can leverage resources by sharing them with each other
-Invite funders to participate on projects, see work on the ground
-Keep an open dialogue between funders and fundees
-Do a gap analysis on a large, state-wide scale
-every organization should contribute resources to the gap analysis
- Set goals for committees/teams for timelines to draft vision statement, next steps, start outlining the steps to put strategic plan together.
-Reconvene on 19 January lay out specific steps for ad hoc coalition.
-Ask funding panelists if/how their thoughts on funding this movement have changed due to the forum

Resources:

-current funders and supporters
-the forum blog and Jan 19 meeting
-a shared, standardized metric system (needed)
-marketing and branding experts

Breakout session 1, Tuesday morning: Understanding What’s Missing

(Driving questions: What are public agencies' maintenance backlogs and needs? How do we address those needs?)

Goals:


-Find a way to be more internally involved in monitoring and evaluating needs
-Find a better way to work around federal reporting timelines in order to address needs on the ground
-Be more consistent in organizing and quantifying needs to relay them to the public. Have a centralized database of needs for all agencies
-Build an infrastructure to match volunteers who want to help with work needed

Actions:


-Cooperate amongst agencies and non profits to engage the funders
-Define target audience and then expand it
-Tell the story of this forum/movement(define stewardship)
-Use VolunteerOutdoors.net as the clearinghouse
-Develop Leadership amongst this collaboration. We need leaders and people lobbying for more $
-Provide volunteers with training so they can have as a transferable, tangible skill
-Provide staff training for working with volunteers
-Create long term training incentives (for volunteers as well as staff) ex: certifications for resumes
-Creating Internship opportunities in a pipeline setting to keep individuals engaged in the natural resources field
-Agencies and non profits need to “drop their shields/lose the turf” and cooperate

Resources:


-VolunteerOutdoors.net as the clearinghouse
-Land manager survey 2010 analysis (executive report coming soon from VOC)
-Extending Your Reach manual (volunteer management and coordination guide coming soon from VOC)

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Roundtable 3, Tuesday morning: Funders: Working Together to Grow our Resources (full transcript)

Facilitator: Wendy Newman

Participants:
Thomas A. Gougeon: President, Gates Family Foundation
Lise Aangeenbrug: Executive Director, Great Outdoors Colorado Trust
Peter Streit: Market-based Grants Program Manager, REI
Nicole DeFord: Senior manager of charitable contributions/Vail Resorts Echo
Mary Mitsos: Vice President, Conservation Programs, National Forest Foundation
Matt Hamilton: Sustainability manager, Aspen Skiing Corporation/Executive Director of the Environmental Foundation

WN: Obviously funding is an extremely important part of what we do in stewardship, and this is a critical partnership. We have strained resources—both financial and human. We’ve got increasing responsibilities and a limited pie. How to expand the pie? Is that even possible? Or, how do we more effectively use our limited piece of pie?

I think the way the stewardship community sees it and I think the way the funding community sees it is that we have a symbiotic relationship. When we build capacity in our organizations and collectively, we’re also supporting you. What’s one thing we can do to more effectively collaborate with you?

PS: We’re focusing on that partnership aspect. We’re trying to move away from the donor/charity model. We want to ensure that when we’re funding somebody, we’re bringing our full organization resources to the table. More than just funding and getting logo on newsletter, etc. We also have all these other resources that we’d love for organizations to take advantage of. Use our e-mail, employee base knowledge. We have tremendous potential, particularly with social media, to target audiences.

ND: A lot of what we do for stewardship is through the National Forest Foundation. Something that’s critical for us is making sure that the nonprofit we’re funding is working with the gov’t agency so that we know that what we’re funding is actually happening on the ground and making a difference. The partnership piece is huge for us. We want it to hit every segment. We want it to touch our employees. We want our guests to understand where our dollars are going. We look to the nonprofits to help us with our messaging so that we really reach those people

MM: Be honest as a partner. We all go through organizational struggles. Don’t only give us the rosy picture because we’re funders. Tell us the truth and we’ll help us out as we can.

MH: How do you take the next step to get those employees, volunteers, guests engaged in the political issues? We look at projects, whether volunteer or funding related, through the lens of how the projects lead to a larger political agenda.

TG: Obviously we represent different kinds of funders. For us, (Gates Family Foundation and GOCO) we don’t have a customer or employee base. In some ways, we just have money and money only gets you so far. We don’t have the tools to go out and put this topic on people’s agendas. Funders can be supporters of those things but they can’t drive that activism. We have to look for the organizations that may have the capacity to do that.

LA: What this movement is really missing right now is it’s really difficult for large foundations, or people making decisions at very high levels, to understand definition of problem—the overall needs and what collectively the stewardship community wants to accomplish. There are a lot of great projects at the local , small level that funded now, but it’s difficult to spend more money. Ex: of Land trust community. What was missing was strategic plans on the local level, regional or state level. That has changed over the past 20 years. Prioritizing projects makes the case more compelling to funders. At the end of the day, it may mean there are fewer organizations; there may be more organizations. There’s a huge need to be strategic. Especially looking at state and federal budgets and foundations having declining endowments.

WN: We need to be strategic in our planning so that funders can pinpoint where to give money

LA: (about where GOCO investing money) Youth and families. That is a competitive advantage for stewardship communities. People want to engage. You have a unique niche where you can offer something for people who want to volunteer and engage. People say they care about this issue, you need to be able to communicate what your competitive niche is. GOCO would love to see a statewide gap analysis. It’s difficult for me to see to our board why they should make an increased investment to stewardship without knowing what are the needs, what are the gaps.

PS: I neglected to mention that we’re at a time when communication is really flourishing. A lot of what we see as a need to engage people depends on these forms of communication. I think there is a chronic underinvestment in communication. Example of people “checking in” at REI stores on facebook, $1 donated to nonprofit from REI, and customer directed to org’s facebook page.

WN: We’ve talked about how we can more effectively collaborate as a group. I want to ask you as funders and grant-makers, is there a possibility of a multi-organizational approach? How can you work more effectively together? Each of you have different priorities for funding, calendars, funding sources, but how can you more effectively collaborate?

MH: Look at Save the Colorado Initiative. Give away collective grants. Partners match grants according to missions. Great example of corporate and private foundations looking at Colorado watershed. An effort from New Belgium

MM: I’m happy to say that partnerships already exist among representatives on the table. A little different because we’re also a nonprofit. Raising money and giving it away.

TG: I think one of the things that’s different is that sometimes groups like us find it easier to work around something that’s event-driven. Public lands are protected places and we need to engage—that’s the premise. It’s the reality. You’re trying to create a culture around that belief and act on it. It’s so much harder to make the bigger case when you’re looking at small organizations one-on-one. It needs to be elevated in people’s perceptions that this needs to get done—it’s needs to be a generational thing. People need to see that this is an infrastructural need that we don’t currently have. It needs to be a top priority in that way in order for funders to really rally around it.

WN: Going back to the issue of decreasing state, federal, foundation budgets, etc. Under these constraints, the concept of a really valuable strategic plan for stewardship foundations sounds like it would really benefit us in the long run. But how would we fund that initiative?

LA: The plan needs to be very specific. What organizations, how many people, top priority sites, etc. Not just something that says we need more resources, more partnerships, more collaboration—that’s too vague.

WN: Are there other states that you’ve worked with that have had such an initiative? (A strategic plan for the stewardship world)

MM: Oregon. The lens is a little different because it’s not just through volunteerism. They have a job creation component. Montana is trying hard to do it too.

WN: We agree that something needs to be done and there is urgency. So, from funders’ perspective, what do you think the biggest challenges are?

PS: A couple things: needs to continue to be audience driven. Driven by public and changing nature of the public. Has been brought up many times, but public is changing—recreation activities, how public spends time, etc. Some of the priorities around stewardship are more focused on funding projects that are most accessible to most diverse audience. Not just hard-core trail workers but families who have little experience in the outdoors. Stewardship is a great way to introduce families to the outdoors. A lot of people understand service but not the outdoors and haven’t made that connection

ND: It goes back to making sure that everything we do connects the Vail brand, employee, and guest. We don’t take a political road at all—it’s all about education and forest health. Need to be locally based, in our communities where employees live and work. We want to be recognized for the things were doing—it’s important for us as a company so employees feel good about working there and guests feel good about spending money there. (important for Vail to phrase it as forest health instead of something like “ecological restoration” it’s about environmental sustainability but also community)

TG: This still boils down to what’s the model we’re all working towards? Maybe this group of funders is the consistent sources, but maybe not. Maybe in 30 years it will look very different. Everyone’s doing the best with what they have at the moment but maybe that’s the not the sustainable strategy. We need to work on the strategy—work on the model as well as understanding the need right now.

WN: Is there something that comes to mind when you think outside the box in terms of funding?

ND: At Vail, every guest receives the question of do you want to contribute to forest health? At the chairlift, at the lodge, etc. We facilitate the funding but it doesn’t come from Vail. Look beyond the corporation and foundation to get people to make that small contribution and get them interested in the organization.

MH: It’s not only how can partnerships help our bottom line, but how do we leverage our two brands to leverage more dollars for philanthropy? In conversations with corporate partners, we’re increasingly asking question of what is important to them from stewardship/environment perspective

PS: For alternative funding strategy: how do we bring communications infrastructure to benefit the outdoor community. People and eyeball movement can translate to engagement and funding. There are new ways to turn people into sustained, engaged people, and ways to turn them into financial supporters. Great way to diversify funding with broad base of individual donors. Also, REI has the opportunity to do a lot better by leveraging local locations. We drive through local bases, because each REI location is a hub for local community. Great opportunity for us to leverage that hub of knowledge in a way that connects groups more.

WN: Funding plays an integral role in creating a sustainable effort to build a collaboration/coalition/partnerships. What are other strategies for funding coalitions?

LA: It’s still important to stay focused on diversified funding. It’s still important and part of making the case. There’s still responsibility on part of government—don’t completely go away from government funding. GOCO can’t solve it all; while 55 million is a lot, it’s not enough to fund everything. There needs to be diversified funding. Corporate plays an important role, as does state and local government. No silver bullet idea. Triad of public sector, corporate funding, and private foundations. And we haven’t talked about individuals, which people tend to avoid because it’s the hardest but also a great way to engage more people. I think it needs to come from all these sources. There’s a very important role for each

MM: Funding operations for nonprofits is the hardest money to raise. Funding for coalitions is equally challenging. A strategy is for members of coalition to give up some of their own precious, unrestricted funds to fund coalition.

TG: I think sustaining a coalition over time needs real revenue streams. You need a good story of what you’re doing and why—example of taking it to the ballot—how do you make a case to tons of people that this is important.

WN: I think the beginnings of this, this discussion and forum, is leading to that. Is there a role for funders for providing that leadership role to make that compelling argument and bring it to a level of awareness that we can address this compelling need?

MH: I think there is a responsibility among the funders here to make a financial commitment if that right plan comes along with strategic goals.

MM: Not all of us can fund, but we could fund technical assistance, and models. Could assist but just not through financial resources.

WN: question from audience. In terms of grant applications and reporting requirements, it’s often about miles constructed, number of plants removed, etc. We have been reporting statistics of on the ground accomplishments. But we’ve also been talking about building a culture of stewardship. As funders, do you look for the actual work or the work building the culture? How do we build both into our reporting mechanisms?

PS: We track all the on-the-ground accomplishments. Not just because that’s the most important but because it’s easy to track. Less administrative burden. Also, a good indicator. I think we’re open to the idea of a coalition emerging and saying this is the most meaningful performance indicator that measures engaging the public. I’d love to have that conservation. I think today we somewhat just lack something better.

ND: The customer base wants to involved and cares but everyone’s busy so you have to give them tangible goals and accomplishments. If you can share lots of those little nuggets, people will start to care on a global level

WN: This will require not just leadership but political will. Given the results of the most recent elections, how do you think that factors into our movement?

LA: I don’t think it’s a major challenge. Stewardship is a bipartisan issue. It’s not a lighting rod issue. True of land conservation as well.

MM: I agree with that on both the state and federal level. It’s to our detriment if we don’t believe that and decide to work with only one side

PS: I agree. Ultimately this movement has to be public driven—the individuals out there

TG: Also, budget deficits are bipartisan as well. It doesn’t matter who’s in control of government—we have same fiscal problems.

MH: I don’t disagree, but I do find it challenging. Stewardship to what end? Look at climate change for example. A very political issue. To a certain extent I think it does fall to us to find a common ground on those issues. I think even though stewardship is bipartisan, there are partisan components within. Whether you’re a motorized user or mountain biker, etc.

WN: Open up to audience to answer unanswered questions. What is the feeling when donating to a potentially controversial organization or cause? Is this a worry for corporate donors?

MH: Our environmental funding is done through the foundation. When we’re confronted with these issues, we talk about them in a transparent fashion. We fund issues and confront them head on. We’re comfortable with that, starting the conversation, taking criticism. In the end, it’s about the company.

ND: At Vail, we don’t fund political or adversarial issues. Strictly education and on the ground improvements to forest health.

PS: We’re mindful of the face that we’re a cooperative. And that we have customers on all sides of political spectrum. Around stewardship we can feel confident because everyone involved in the outdoors cares about it.

WN: Any closing comments?

PS: From a national perspective, I have a great sense of where happening in the country. I want to applaud this group—first time as far as I’m aware that this is happening. All the resources are here. The organizations and agencies here are the most able, capable anywhere in the country to move this issue forward. Remarkable and if anyone can answer these questions, it’s this group

TG: There’s a version of these topics that is sort of a manpower problem. There are bigger challenges that volunteer stewards can’t fix (can’t put water back and can’t fix ozone layer). Even basics are in a context that will always be challenging. The world is still changing in bigger ways.

LA: we are leaders that can figure this out and be leaders for the nation

Monday, November 8, 2010

Breakout session 3, Monday afternoon: Building Capacity

Goals:

-Identify gaps in capacity
-Establish alignment around high-level goals and execute them well at the local level
-Obtain enough volunteer leaders to accomplish stewardship goals
-Engage the private sector including corporations, which can provide both financial resources and volunteers
-Secure funding for and implement effective volunteer leadership trainings
-Consolidate knowledge to make it accessible to all parties

Actions:

-Create metrics to measure what capacity has been built
-Develop volunteer management manual
-Get a champion to promote this effort – politician or celebrity
-Expand relationships to explore grant partnerships
-Make an investment in and make personal a personal connection to the volunteers
-Provide list of all organizations and staff members at the stewardship forum and post to the blog and/or send out to attendees in order to facilitate collaboration
-Attend January meeting to pursue forum ideas

Resources:

-Existing models for crew leadership programs such as VOC, Youth Corps and Golden Gate National Recreation Area partnership model.
-A high number of successful volunteer organizations in Colorado that can work together
-Cost-effective temporary staff opportunities such as AmeriCorps VISTA
-Volunteer Clearinghouse websites such as volunteeroutdoors.net

Breakout session 2, Monday afternoon: Partnerships Across Sectors

Goals:

-Build capacity for volunteer monitoring
-Acknowledge and work to overcome barriers to communication between NGOs and agencies. Identify common ground
-Have agency employees and non-profits spend time working together and learning from each other
-Further co-housing of stewardship NGOs and land management agencies. Identify what isn’t working and what is.
-Create a system to match non-profits with agencies.
-Non-profits and land management agencies develop a long-range work plan to take to funders
-Possibly create a community-based clearinghouse of volunteers
-Possibly have a county-level volunteer coordinator to coordinate among stewardship agencies
-Find ways to reach new volunteers
-Address challenges: Conflicting policies that might effect how projects get completed; Different timetables for agencies and non-profits ie different fiscal years, funding cycles, etc.; Training requirements that federal or state agencies have that might not align with non-profits.

Actions:

-Do a cost/benefit analysis of stewardship programs to find out which are most effective
-Compile a directory of CO stewardship organizations, their expertise and contact info.
- Share information on the monitoring and reporting collaborations that are already occurring
-Market trainings to other NGOs and agencies and their volunteers
-Set up feedback structure between government agencies and NGOs
-Work together among NGOs to limit the number of different contacts that agencies have to manage (CYCA model)
-Survey of government agencies to see how public-NGO partnerships are and are not working

Resources:

-Agencies already have monitoring and reporting protocol in place
-Land management agencies have compiled a common “tool box” resource
-Successful existing partnerships between NGOs and agencies to learn from
-A directory of stewardship NGOs and their expertise to facilitate collaboration
-NGOs need better info from agencies on what kind of time line they work on

Breakout session 1, Monday afternoon: Collaboration among Non-profits

Goals:

-Address competition for resources (funding, volunteer pool, identity, leadership for future organizations). Is there actually a scarcity?
-Work towards common goal of, “Use of Public Lands and to take care of it,” sustainable and responsible use of public lands
-Work together on overlap (programming, curriculum, orientation, management overhead)
-Integrate strategic planning across organizations on key issues
-Co-locate (physically and on the internet) to share resources
-Create a clear, concise message for the need for all this work and decide who it is for
-Join together for: funding, training, agency resources, to inspire, connect to a larger world outside CO, constitute a movement

Actions:

-Identify expertise in different organizations
-Identify key areas so not “Re-inventing the wheel”
-Tease out what collaborations have worked and what tools are successful
-Work to change the mindset of open source (hoarding, protection)
-Work together on already established days (CORRP, National Public Lands Day, National Trails Day, National Get Outdoors Day, etc.)
-Focus on expertise and geographic niches so we don’t dilute messages and resources, spread thin volunteers and supporters

Resources:

-Existing expertise in organizations
-Existing management overhead (volunteeroutdoors.net, volunteer management materials)
-Existing days (CORRP, National Public Lands Day, National Trails Day, National Get Outdoors Day, etc.)

Roundtable 2, Monday afternoon: Collaboration and Capacity Building within and between Public Land Agencies and Stewardship Organizations

Facilitator: Wendy Newman

Participants:
Tim Wohlgenant: Executive Director, Trust for Public Land
Harry Bruell: CEO and President, Southwest Conservation Corps
Mike Roque: Director, Denver Office of Strategic Partnerships
Brian Ross: Executive Director, Colorado Conservation Trust
Elise Jones: Executive Director, Colorado Environmental Coalition
Mary Mitsos: Vice President, Conservation Programs, National Forest Foundation

If we build it – will they come? And do we have the infrastructure to handle it?

Collaboration isn’t easy – How do you manage the egos and logos and make it work in your collaborations?

-It is tough. It is easier if you have political weight behind it and can say, “The Mayor wants this done and will come to your event.”
-Working together makes the pie bigger for everyone. There is the scarcity mentality – only a certain number of resources. But national funders want to fund innovation, collaborative efforts and not individual programs.
-Don’t partner just to partner. 5 of the largest land conservation groups in state have come together to show funders (state and national) that we are all working together on 25 essential landscapes in the state.
-Political clout. Don’t collaborate unless you can get something you can’t get on your own. Took a lot of failure for organizations working on their own in advocacy to start working together to influence state legislature.
-Big foundations want to fund joint fundraising opportunities, not individual. Sweeten the pot to give some of their own resources to bring more people to table.
-Collaboration means sitting down with people you don’t agree with. All ends (or at least all that will come to table). You can’t get what you want individually but can get more of what you want by working with other people.
-Mission capability between partners – can’t force things. Associations have to check their egos at the door.
-There are five steps to collaboration: 1. Broad goal that everyone can rally around (50 million dollar goal that everyone can buy in). 2. Right composition of people – media, politicos, etc to be at table. 3. Right timing – sense of urgency + sense of opportunity. 4. Leadership – sense of organization, charisma, normal meetings, minutes, etc. 5. Leverage for future – next steps rather successful or not.

People here today are representing a wide array of folks but there are still groups missing (health, transportation, education). How do we reach out to those folks and form our message to get them to the table.


-Make sure that partners you want to bring to the table have a reason to come. Tie your needs to their priorities. Changed the conversation to how they can work together
-Public health community is focusing on smart growth and city/community layouts to address obesity rates and getting kids outdoors. Significant health impacts. How do we get more kids riding their bikes and outdoors?
-Working with gov’t employees can be challenging – they don’t know how to work with non-profits. Engage these people and teach them how to work together – show them the benefit.
-Diversity is important. The environmental sector still one of the most whitest. Reach out and engage communities of color in ways that affect them. Must watch how we message - Careful with word choice “citizen engagement” has a certain stigma because of immigration debate. Many people of color care deeply about the land but don’t call themselves environmentalists. (example of hunters in the San Luis valley) Must build the structure with them and not build it and invite them – they will only be guests.

How do we do that? (Build structures with communities of color)

-Engage them. Embrace their causes and they will support our causes. Example of immigration and how this coalition could support them to win their support.

What are specific challenges when conceptualizing this coalition of getting one million and one Coloradans? What else do we need to be aware of?

-Need to focus on the one million for what? The goal isn’t the number, it’s what you get from the number.
-Need to focus on and collaborate with the people who use the public lands (example of Trust for Public Land developing a park in a vacant lot in Denver)
- It takes a lot of work. Money, people and time. These barriers are always going to be there and will take resources to get around how we want these million people to look.

To clarify around the million Colorado concept – just an idea. Want to point out that it’s more than daydreaming. This gathering is about how we make this a reality with goals, barriers, what we need to look at.

There has been success with collaboration with the people here. But, there are limited pots of money, competing missions…what will happen if we don’t collaborate?

-There are real, external threats: climate change, consumption, the state budget in terrible shape, population rising and demographic shifts. These things will happen whether we change or not. Working together we can start to help.
-State demographers office says 5.1 million people in CO today. 8 million in 25 years. That is a given. We can’t stop that. But these trends will not make current land use patterns work. What is the effect on water, transportation, wildlife? Population densities in Chicago, Manhattan is different and how will we be able to make that happen. More innovative land use planning is needed.
-Single issue organizing (environmentalists, gay/lesbian, immigration) will continue to allow us to be divided. We must have messages we can all agree on to make sure we coalesce around that.

As panelists, if we do this, can all of you pledge to work together with us?

- Folks that are missing must be involved as well. Get involved with health folks and education folks.
-Be careful about what we call an environmentalist. A lot of people care about land but don’t want to be pegged as environmentalists.
-This is a great time to be doing this. People want to be engaged in a positive, community building concept after a nasty, dividing election. Future Governor Hickenlooper could be handed this and want to run with it.
-Future governor could reach out to bring everyone together (diverse groups) to work together on this. We have a golden opportunity to bring these unlikely partners to keep this movement with a way to keep moving forward.
-Pull together a Colorado Great Outdoors type movement to capture this.

There are many wonderful folks working on the same issues. How do you break down barriers and work together with organizations that truly have overlapping missions? How to be a more effective, unified voice? Can we pull these groups together without duplication?

-Plan events together, get political power together.

Who is it we are seeking to coalesce? Who is the target audience for this message?

- Most folks come for the resources of this state whether for recreation, aesthetic or whatever. Must be able to nest local coalitions into regional and statewide ones. Find better way to connect grass-roots orgs with statewide coalitions.
- Depends on the mission. (example of Audubon Society partnering with golf courses) Organizations with different purposes often want the same thing.

How can one organization build its capacity to collaborate with other folks?

-Find those partners with the same goal and make them your friends. Folks with common interests will be able to find a way if they know they can work together to get more than they could alone.
-Finding time to make partnerships must be a priority.

Are there too many organizations, non profits working on the same thing?

-Yes. There are over 20,000 non profits in CO – 12,000 in Denver. Not like private sector, people don’t shop around. Our clients don’t bring the funding. Funding comes from govt, foundations.
-So many out there with similar names, similar missions that it dilutes the work we do and confuses the public. (Polls the audience with a large agreement)

Does Co-housing concept (FS, BLM, etc) better engage citizen volunteers?

-In Durango area, people don’t know what land they are in at one time. Crisscrosses from FS, BLM land. Have found it very easy to work with partners, logistically easier and more efficient.

What else would panelists like to share to make collaboration more effective in Colorado?

-Big opportunity for partnerships for stewardships and advocacy groups. Stewardship is a nice entry point for people to get onboard and can get them introduced to the idea about why public policy is important
-Collaboration is hard but only way we can win. We are underfunded, overworked etc versus the folks working against us.
-We must use technology to our advantage.
-Educate funders to continue incentives to partnerships and not individuals. Partner with orgs that can help you and not big v small, weak v strong, etc.
-Identify the strengths and expertise different people bring to the table. Make sure they complement each other and build from there.

Breakout session 3, Monday morning: Public Policy Needs

Goals:

-Allocate more dedicated and sustainable funding sources: non-public, local/grassroots, private sector
-Develop and maintain a statewide shared database of volunteers, which includes skills, background checks, trainings, etc.
-Create framework of collaboration among NGOs and localities
-Create incentives for people to volunteer: certifications to put on resume, tax incentives
-More requirements for volunteer service (controversial)
-More public-private partnerships
-Look beyond immediate term; commit to the future
-Think in terms of health of citizenry, not just public lands
-Make consistent policy at different levels

Actions:

-Create a set of “best practices” for managing a good volunteer program
-Get public health and education sectors on board; engage with bureaucracy
-Make sure there are enough quality projects and volunteer managers for the existing number of volunteers
-Keep volunteering fun
-Evaluate volunteerism within agencies. Set metrics and create a long-term culture
-Minimize duplicate reporting
-Create more trainings and guidance for volunteer management staff. Must start at upper management level and empower staff

Resources:

-Current Policies in Place: Boulder County Comprehensive Plan – Goals for volunteers and volunteer funding, Arapahoe County – Goal to increase employee and volunteer engagement, BLM – Policy to encourage volunteer engagement
-Some staff and funding (GOCO)
-Existing organizations (VOC, WRV)
-Ready, willing and able volunteers (individual and corporate groups)
-Individual Activists (turn our volunteers into advocates?)
-Dedicated funding for volunteers
-Mechanism for greater coordination between agencies and organizations for sharing volunteers
-Review of existing public policy as it relates to volunteerism in CO

Breakout session 2, Monday morning: Managing Citizen Engagement on the Ground

Goals:

-Standardize volunteer training: train volunteers to feel empowered, give volunteers knowledge, encourage them to return
-Get funding for increasing trainings
-Identify specific educational resources
-Use urban parks to bring diversity into nature
-Understand volunteer motivations
-Make volunteer programs sustainable

Actions:

-Make crew leadership mandatory
-Entice volunteers with incentives
-Clearly understand how non-profits coordinate, recruit and manage volunteers. Understand how they relate to agencies and what they need
-Understand the cultural diversity of potential volunteer populations
-Create comprehensive education programs: to get youth outside; bilingual trainings; cultural diversity
-Create opportunities for different layers and levels of volunteers
-Incorporate the mobilization of volunteers into existing work plans of land management agencies
-Develop more ongoing opportunities for smaller-scale groups

Resources:

Funding
Expertise of individuals already involved

Breakout session 1, Monday morning: Citizen Mobilization

Goals:

-Encourage people to be politically active
-Create a sense of community from a positive experience
-Educate a broad sector. Education leads to credibility and empowerment
-Start a cultural shift with the integration of the private sector and bipartisan groups
-Break down the notion that stewardship occurs only in the mountains. It takes place the minute you step outside—people should be engaged in stewardship on an everyday level

Actions:

-Create opportunities for ownership and leadership in volunteer programs, which leads to repeat participation. Use different types of volunteers and offer different projects
-Create streamlined messaging amongst the stewardship community that can be easily translated to the general public
-Move beyond polarization of politics: work with like-minded user groups on a broad level; engage with the science of restoration; focus on economics—stewardship is good business for restaurants, hotels, fishing/hunting industries, etc.
-Provide opportunities for business to engage in positive volunteer experiences, beyond one-time projects
-Reach out to private sector for pro bono PR, give them a stake
-Work with private retailers for volunteer opportunity outreach
-Work with school systems and administrators to get kids outside
-Use multi-cultural, Colorado-specific, inclusive messaging

Resources:

-Identify current stewardship organizations, what they do, and share models
-A central database for stewardship/volunteerism (existing ones include volunteeroutdoors.net, the Children and Nature Network)
-Funds for volunteer stewardship infrastructure
-Media involvement to get the message out
-Government and non-profit involvement and coalitions

Roundtable 1, Monday morning: Civic Engagement as a Natural Resource Management Strategy

Facilitator: Wendy Newman

Participants:
Jackie Norris: Jackie Norris Consulting, Retired executive director of Metro Volunteers
Barbara Lane: Western Region Director, AmeriCorps National Civilian Community Corps
Doug Blankeship: US Dept. of Interior, volunteer.gov portal manager
Parry Burnap: Executive Director, Denver B-cycle
Merlene Mazyck: Youth and Volunteer Programs Manager, Recreation, Heritage & Volunteer Resources, United States Forest Service


WN: We talk about engaging citizens as current and futures stewards. I want to hear a one word/phrase answer of what it means when we ask for stewardship.

-We need to clarify what “stewardship” means. It is a word used in the natural resources world and needs to be translated to the rest of the world.
-Knowledge.
-Help, prarie fire.
-Mindfulness about our choices at every moment
-Treasuring their ownership. People don’t understand that public lands belong to them. Once we help people understand that they own this land and its up to them to treasure it.
-Safeguarding.
-Personal investment in the earth that we live on
-Responsibility
-Collaboration
-Fun

You all have been involved in various capacities in creating behavioral change. How can we adapt your successes and move it into realm of stewardship and volunteerism?

-Capitalize on the power of a moment. When you have a moment that is completely immovable, you can really mobilize people.
-Work with youth. Build stewardship into their lexicon through education and recreation
-Make the first volunteer experience positive, engaging and accessible.

What makes this so urgent? How do we call people to action?

-You pick your solutions and you create a sense of joy around them. You think of bikes—they’re so fun. You want to nurture relationships, regular meetings, etc. but you also have to have celebrations and acknowledge ideas. It’s about community. Maybe joy can translate into a sense of urgency
-People start volunteering for different reasons but the longer people are involved with an organization or issue, the more passionate they become. There are as many motivations for volunteering as there are people. Find out what those needs are and engage them.
-Some words turn people on and some turn them off. If we have everyone in this room appealing to a different sensibility, we would be good stewards of public land. It’s a matter of trying to make that connection and appealing to whoever it is that resonates with your idea and trust that others are doing the same.
-Collaboration
-Kids change adults’ behavior. I don’t know how you change adults’ behavior. It has to be through children and education, through required environmental education. If we can convert them, they will convert their parents and other adults.
-It’s about how people are first introduced to the outdoors. When we try to encourage people to recognize what public lands are, we have to be strategic in the marketing of our place. It’s just signage. And then they take the next step.
-Not just signage but branding. Were trying to build a legacy of stewardship and bringing like-minded people on the same page and to compete/cooperate to lift all the boats at the same time. We need messaging/branding to relate with the public. Maybe the brand should not me one million but one million and one.

How do we both serve our organizations/already-there constituents and engage citizens on a higher, broader level?

-The rising boat lifts all tides. It’s not about “I want these volunteers and you can’t have them” It’s about doing this in a collaborative, cooperative arrangement.
We need to train volunteers to be leaders. We need to move away from command and control. Especially young people—they’re not going to come to the table to help unless we empower them to help.

Going back to youth. Looking at millennials (’78-’90). They are the most critical people for creating change and are constantly connected to technology.

-Service in its broadest sense is really key. It’s to a specific organization or task. Bring them right into that leadership training. Then they can turn around and work with others.
-Young people don’t just want to come in and do something. They want to come in and be recognized. They often want to be tapped for leadership. They are impatient with the process—they want to be used in a meaningful way quickly. And it’s fun. There’s always the go out and have a beer piece after. Make it social, fun. Let these folks know we recognize what they have to offer
-Reference to Outdoor Nation. They just published several reports. They are digging very deep into data of what motivates kids and are approaching from a recreation perspective. To get kids on public lands to have fun. There is a huge disconnect with the urban populations that we have. We need to begin there.
-Communicate through Facebook because it is how young people communicate. The brilliance of Facebook is in creating and maintaining a community. It’s a high-tech/high touch strategy. Creating events for youth around music/culture. There is a sense of community and eruption of passion. The internet is powerful and young people get it.

How do we build volunteer leadership?

-Need to keep older generation in the mix. Seek ways to get the inter-generational connection. To pass on the knowledge. There is an opportunity with the boomers retiring who have high levels of skill and education. It’s important to value that and giving them a chance to use it.
-We get a lot of episodic volunteerism. We need to look at how individual opportunities add up to action.
-Strategic planning. Organizations that do one-time events can build to a long-term goal, and volunteers can move into leadership roles. That way when the large events happen, they’re run by the volunteers. Use your limited resources to mobilize a bigger group of trained volunteers. Leveraging. And the tangible outcome—at the end of the day having them see the outcome
-Recognizing that volunteers can be and should be the leaders to help expand the capacity of the organizations.

Have you been able to see organizations let go of the “egos and logos”?

- Absolutely. Because they see it’s a good thing to do or maybe even because by default they have to partner because of funding. You just can’t survive without larger collaboration.

I think one of the things we’ll be talking about a lot is leadership. Executive directors, boards, etc. What is it we’re looking for in terms of leadership?

-There needs to be a career track for volunteer management/administration.
-Volunteerism needs to change to connect with the youth and new technologies.
-We need to look towards more training for working with people.
-Mention of Betty Stallings, who has done a lot of work recently on how CEOs of nonprofits and other organizations can be effective with volunteers. 12 actions a CEO can take to effectively engage volunteers.
-Mindfulness. Something we do with every choice every day. There’s a whole wealth of people in the urban environment who need to make those connections. The kind of leadership we need is leadership that doesn’t see stewardship as something public lands does, but is a filter/criteria for every decision. The kind of leader who does not put stewardship in a box.
-A need for metrics. We can talk about volunteerism, but for what? We’ve got to be able to connect volunteerism with outcomes, not just outputs. We’ve got to be able to talk about the so what.
-Look at tracking systems. The axiom of what gets counted gets funded. Outcomes really matter. We need better records of where volunteers are working. From the intake, to what kind of training they have, what they’re doing. Speaks to recognition, retention and engagement.
-Tie in accomplishments to larger, strategic goals. That’s when people really feel the connection and commitment.
-The infrastructure for volunteerism/stewardship has to be there. Think about all the times you’ve volunteered and it just hasn’t been run well. Need to recognize that there are key people that need to leverage that good volunteer experience.
-Decision-makers in organizations need to understand what it takes to run a truly effective volunteer organization.

What about the leadership we’re asking for on the public policy level? We’re developing another generation of conservation voters who are willing to help us expand or at least maintain the conservation.

-The collaboration piece is huge. Once higher leadership recognizes that volunteerism is an important part of how missions are accomplished, higher leadership will allow us to dedicate staff to support what we’re doing at the local level. We need to do a better job of letting leadership know what get’s done at volunteer level.
-The question also gets at elected officials. All of the opinions about cutting staff, limiting budget and bringing in volunteers may not be bad. Those volunteers then speak to their elected officials.
-Help volunteers be educated about who candidates are so that volunteers can ask specific questions about public land stewardship. It is all so circular and important. -Including volunteers in your organization can be a beneficial boon for building awareness in the public about public policy and elected officials.
-Need for funding of strong, effective volunteer programs. We need to be really thoughtful about “bring in the volunteers” not being a substitute for valuing volunteers, and building an infrastructure to making volunteer programs strong and effective.

Are we naïve to think that this is possible to engage this level of citizens in a stewardship movement?

-It is easy to just say “a million volunteers.” What is the real need? Look at your organizations—how many volunteers do you have and how many do you want to have. What does that number relate to?
-How do we define stewardship? Is it only on public lands or is it in urban backyards too? We’re talking about stewardship on a broader level. Not just shovels on public lands.

Monday, November 1, 2010

Welcome!

Welcome to the Stewardship Forum's blog. Once the forum begins, we will be posting notes from the panel discussions and breakout sessions. We encourage you to comment on these notes and use them as a starting point to continue the conversation with your ideas and suggestions.