Awesummit2014:Trustee Diversity

From AwesomeWiki
Revision as of 08:39, 7 September 2014 by Alexdc (talk | contribs) (Created page with "AMD will clean up on 9/7/14 Detailed Notes Jeffrey (Seattle): (accessibility) expanding, diversity. Value in being a trustee in being a trustee, not only do I feel good about g...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

AMD will clean up on 9/7/14

Detailed Notes

Jeffrey (Seattle): (accessibility) expanding, diversity. Value in being a trustee in being a trustee, not only do I feel good about giving money, gained deeper connections into the community. Something that would be valuable for people in all sorts of different places, gain that kind of trustee experience. Financially (Knight Foundation), background and outcomes. Has given more people access.

Lee-Sean (NYC): Up state and suburban areas. Make up of the trustees ourselves, make-up of the trustees is not representative. Start to share solutions: Sharing trusteeships (instead of $100, 50/50). Time commitment. Hard to commit to one thing a month.

Ramanjot/Valerie (Ottawa): Tech background, more diverse now. Aboriginal community, class diversity (because of $100). Missing out on interesting perspective and networks. Fund diversely, low income community (a lot of those applications that come in).

John (Sarnia): Are we losing out on applications because we can afford it? Look at the trustees and say it's that come group.

Tung (New Orleans): Founded under the Knight grant, 8 of our original grants were directly funded by that. Tried very hard to be very diverse. Class diversity, racial, gender, sexual orientation, religion - not so much industry, along all those lines. The commitment: finanical, time, geography. Didn't have to worry about the finances, can we meet somewhere where everyone can get to. Near to communities of least opportunity -- everything was really good. Always had good conversations, wanted to do all the things (grant diversely) Because there was no financial commitment, started -- hard to maintain a good level of engagement. It was taxing to have a good conversation. People who wanted to spend time. By not having a good way to coach the conversation, none of us were really professional facilitators, people who could move away. Lower class trustees, who don't have the ability to make the commitment. To effect that, relieve those spaces. Facilitation keeps the group on track. - Do you have a dean? Pass the meeting facilitation through all trustees (had all agreed that we all have our agendas). The reason I am in the Awesome Foundation. Not a part of your community and want to know more about it. Came at it from an altruistic standpoint?

50/50 (one person, one pair one vote) - whoever, (rob and rachel), one vote between the two of them. In our process, voting is a last resort, prenominate - discuss (champion) voting. Co-chairs and co-trustees. All of the higher-income were co-trustees, they knew and trusted.

Jeffrey (Seattle): Willing and interested in donating the money, want the trustees to be engaged in the process. Is the trustee. Seem to help the money commitment, time and geographic commitment.

Ramanjot -- people who WANT to be there are the ones who give money. No point, that's the fun part of it. Be a trustee and not be coming to the meeting.

If we are talking about working through. Having sponsors.

Lee-Sean (NYC): Guest trusteeship slot (lower commitment), easy out, money and vote -- doesn't work out.

Valerie (Ottawa): Two co-chairs (one focused on internal stuff and one focused on external stuff). For that turnover piece, external person, with external focus. Getting the word out -> helps for attracting.

Originally in NYC, the dean was an operations person who give time and not money. Setting up meetings, doing public outreach, (connecting and distributing), less onerous on any one person.

Mechanisms to solicit trustees - friends and family, in the span of reaching people who are giving access, different vehicles. Reaching out to the grant winners, give grants to, came back and joined. - 1 for 1 - Open House - Information session for guest trustees (email list). Hopefully can get passed around. - Targeted specific groups (get more applications from that community) - Messaging to your grantee winners (just people who apply). export to the system. - Contact everyone who has applied. (Check box on applications). - Identified

Does it matter that the trustees are diverse? Good quality applications -- good diverse friends, better applications. Good reason for that, we have a really different makeup.

Separate bank account. - Ask for money in advance - Shame list - Venmo/Simple -- free send a check.

Framework for recruitment? Checklist Cap the number of trustees Ambassador Program (trustee who goes and helps someone present).

A way to submit an application without online (not diversity) - pitch nights. Presentation vs. the written word.

Easy for trustees to try to choose diverse awards Can become an ambassador.

Some of our people who are past winners are trustees, but not Non-paying trustees (they do have responsibilities)

You are in or you are out. Dropped out for lack of time. Write a check for the year. Show up and money.

Invite the media - debriefing, as long as you vote.

People - (diversity of environment)

--> what does the lack of diversity mean for us? Does board change and applications - applicant just a friend of the trustee Signaling the kinds of things you are interested in by the makeup of the board skateboard Awesome London page -- all of our media is about the applicants. Who is next -- different faces, and different voices.

How did you hear about us? 40 percent of the time

If you don't get support from us, will this project still happen? The experience of being a trustee is valuable - denying people the opportunity.

Having a diverse trustee group, more diverse value (we all see projects through the same lens)

DEAN 101 - workshop