Community Collaboration: Lessons Learned
As this projects concludes, we will document our Lessons Learned here so that all communities can stand on the shoulders of Golden & Area A's efforts with Community Development.
Communication
Over the last few years, GCRS and I have been involved in a learning journey. We knew there were gaps in understanding with respect to local organizations, but we didn't know how to fill them or who to turn to.
In fact, the non profit sector is only there to fill service or opportunity gaps. And as organizations fills these (perceived or real) gaps, they often don't focus on marketing or communication. To some organizations with more of a puritanical slant, marketing and communications for charities and community development organizations are seen as luxuries - luxuries that they should afford or spend time on. (For a concise understanding of this issue, please read Chapter 1 of Dan Palotta's Uncharitable or watch his TED Talk.)
However, with this communication void, other concerned individuals often don't know about the existing organizations and decide to pay the $36 BC Registry Services to start their own organization. Now, there are 2 organizations that don't have the capacity or resources to get their message out and work with others to solve it. This further compounds community development issues.
In fact, the non profit sector is only there to fill service or opportunity gaps. And as organizations fills these (perceived or real) gaps, they often don't focus on marketing or communication. To some organizations with more of a puritanical slant, marketing and communications for charities and community development organizations are seen as luxuries - luxuries that they should afford or spend time on. (For a concise understanding of this issue, please read Chapter 1 of Dan Palotta's Uncharitable or watch his TED Talk.)
However, with this communication void, other concerned individuals often don't know about the existing organizations and decide to pay the $36 BC Registry Services to start their own organization. Now, there are 2 organizations that don't have the capacity or resources to get their message out and work with others to solve it. This further compounds community development issues.
Vision & Mission
Inheriting a puritan philosophy of traditional charity to those 'less fortunate,' some non profits are often unable (or unwilling) to think long-term. This keeps them treading water and jumping from 'the frying pan into the fire.'
Other organizations are focused on maintaining their organization. Should food banks be something communities (or Canada, for that matter) wants to maintain forever? Or should there be focused energy on eliminating the need for them?
Should cycling clubs be responsible for the development and maintenance of hundreds of kilometres of mountain bike and hiking trails? Or should there come a point when government management affords these amenity efficiencies of scale and scope?
Should non profit organizations be responsible (and want to be responsible) for the management of expensive capital assets like buildings when they are there for the greater good of the community? Golden has so much community space, but all with very low utilization rates. When and how does the community decide they need a new building? Unfortunately, currently, we need a new building when a large grant is available - not when we've out-grown the old one. There is often an unsupported vision or no vision at all.
All too many non profit organizations do not have an end in mind or achievable mission and end up doing one of 2 things: 1) The organization tries to grow like a business and find other activities to be involved in well away from the founders' original mission. 2) The organization is very successful, meaning that they have solved the original need they came together for, but tries to continue on with declining member engagement.
Other organizations are focused on maintaining their organization. Should food banks be something communities (or Canada, for that matter) wants to maintain forever? Or should there be focused energy on eliminating the need for them?
Should cycling clubs be responsible for the development and maintenance of hundreds of kilometres of mountain bike and hiking trails? Or should there come a point when government management affords these amenity efficiencies of scale and scope?
Should non profit organizations be responsible (and want to be responsible) for the management of expensive capital assets like buildings when they are there for the greater good of the community? Golden has so much community space, but all with very low utilization rates. When and how does the community decide they need a new building? Unfortunately, currently, we need a new building when a large grant is available - not when we've out-grown the old one. There is often an unsupported vision or no vision at all.
All too many non profit organizations do not have an end in mind or achievable mission and end up doing one of 2 things: 1) The organization tries to grow like a business and find other activities to be involved in well away from the founders' original mission. 2) The organization is very successful, meaning that they have solved the original need they came together for, but tries to continue on with declining member engagement.
Human Resources
In Golden's, there is not one person dedicated to human resources. EDs and GMs and Boards are doing it on the side of their desks or not at all. This was one of the most troubling discoveries of this project.
The opportunity to work with the BC Non Profit Sector Labour Market Partnership (and eventually StepUp BC) for 2 years revealed how challenging it is for small and rural non profit organizations to support their staff and directors.
Performance reviews? Not part of the culture.
1 on 1s? Not done.
Training of HR practices? Maybe 1 day per year - if a director can get a day off and if a staff member can get paid to attend.
Board development? No budget for this. It is this lack of understanding and capacity that reduces the impact of the organizations and programs each offers.
Career planning? Not done.
The only way to improve human resources is to budget for them. Budget funds annually. Budget time in programs and projects to review staff. Budget time to review staff performance quarterly. Budget time and money to send people to courses (or, better yet, bring the courses here). Budget time to update job descriptions and standard operating procedures. If organizations continue to skip this key step in organizational development, they will fail to learn from their mistakes; will not improve; will lose staff and volunteers; will not reach their mission - possibly resulting in a loss of trust in the community.
As non profits often are thin on physical assets, their offering comes down to the people designing and providing the services. It is critical that staff be supported with a living wage ($18.69/hr x 35 hrs week), professional development and benefits. While one organization may not be able to provide all of these requirements on their own, collaborating with other similar groups may achieve these ends (job sharing, benefit pooling, group training, etc.). It is important to not forget that roles and projects need to be designed to be attractive to employees and provide a living wage from the beginning. If a grant or service contract does provide for this, it is time non profits didn't bend - negotiate yes, but not bend to the powerful funders or government ministries.
The opportunity to work with the BC Non Profit Sector Labour Market Partnership (and eventually StepUp BC) for 2 years revealed how challenging it is for small and rural non profit organizations to support their staff and directors.
Performance reviews? Not part of the culture.
1 on 1s? Not done.
Training of HR practices? Maybe 1 day per year - if a director can get a day off and if a staff member can get paid to attend.
Board development? No budget for this. It is this lack of understanding and capacity that reduces the impact of the organizations and programs each offers.
Career planning? Not done.
The only way to improve human resources is to budget for them. Budget funds annually. Budget time in programs and projects to review staff. Budget time to review staff performance quarterly. Budget time and money to send people to courses (or, better yet, bring the courses here). Budget time to update job descriptions and standard operating procedures. If organizations continue to skip this key step in organizational development, they will fail to learn from their mistakes; will not improve; will lose staff and volunteers; will not reach their mission - possibly resulting in a loss of trust in the community.
As non profits often are thin on physical assets, their offering comes down to the people designing and providing the services. It is critical that staff be supported with a living wage ($18.69/hr x 35 hrs week), professional development and benefits. While one organization may not be able to provide all of these requirements on their own, collaborating with other similar groups may achieve these ends (job sharing, benefit pooling, group training, etc.). It is important to not forget that roles and projects need to be designed to be attractive to employees and provide a living wage from the beginning. If a grant or service contract does provide for this, it is time non profits didn't bend - negotiate yes, but not bend to the powerful funders or government ministries.
Funders
Funders are becoming increasingly organized, but not necessarily more effective. The requirement for 'matching funds' or 'last money in' does not show leadership. In fact, it shows the opposite. That may be fine for some funders, but community-based funders need to be learned leaders and support projects that address priorities.
One could anticipate organizing funders will be more difficult than organizing service delivery organizations.
However, if your funders are true leaders they will see the importance of true community development and allocate sufficient and sustained resources towards it.
One could anticipate organizing funders will be more difficult than organizing service delivery organizations.
However, if your funders are true leaders they will see the importance of true community development and allocate sufficient and sustained resources towards it.
Review of Activities
The Community Collaboration project organized many meetings, brought in expert guest speakers and educators and helped local champions communicate with their community.
Health & Social Service Organizations
Health & Social Services Organizations was one key area of focus. A series of meetings were hosted, trust was built and timely guest speakers shared their experiences so that these local organizations could stand on their shoulders. We even developed a consolidated income statement and balance sheet which outlined the total revenue of the local Health & Social Services Organizations. While this provided the groundwork for the Health & Social Services Organizations to call their own meetings together, it did not take as intended. Instead, another funding opportunity came by way of BC's CAI. Four of these organizations, led by GFCS, applied and hired a consultant to see what efficiencies could be realized.
Trails
While a significant amount of resources have been dedicated to improving collaboration with trail organizations in Golden & Area A, there was little pick up from the groups. Some of the leaders in trails development from across BC were brought to Golden and while there are 40+ local trail stakeholder organizations, meetings usually only involved a handful of attendees. It wasn't until the dying days of the project that an invite came from GBRAC to attend one of their meetings, which was effectively too little, too late for meaningful engagement.
The only way for trails organizations to collaborate or make long-term plans is through direction from their funders. If the funders don't require it, they won't do it.
The only way for trails organizations to collaborate or make long-term plans is through direction from their funders. If the funders don't require it, they won't do it.
Sports & Recreation & Youth
While a local Sport For Life champion was away for much of the 3rd phase of this project, focus was put towards a couple groups that showed common challenges - the Kicking Horse Gymnastics Club and Golden Youth Centre. Discussions around a shared space involved touring both current venues and one potential location. A rough consolidated income statement was drafted, too.
However, mixed messages from local government officials (elected and staff) and no dedicated capacity to pursuing this project left it on the shelf when the Community Collaboration project ended.
However, mixed messages from local government officials (elected and staff) and no dedicated capacity to pursuing this project left it on the shelf when the Community Collaboration project ended.
Local Intelligence Gathering
The LIG was the riskiest activity of the Community Collaboration project. This event sought to create a mini-TEDx event in Golden, using a mix of local and regional speakers. While attendance hovered around 100 people, the greatest legacy of this event will be that everyone in the world will be able to watch these presentations through GCRS's YouTube channel for years to come.
SFU CED Course in Golden - Part 2
Approximately 18 months after the first round of SFU CED course in Golden, GCRS hosted another 3 courses specifically selected to best support the opportunities and interests of the local cohort. While attendance was down from the 1st series, we were able to attract new students.
One disappointment from this activity was the fact that non of the students chose to finish their Certificate in CED. However, the trust and connections that were developed in the week-long course will last for years to come - and that was the real goal of the course and of community economic development.
The other disappointment from this activities lies with the local government. Golden hosted this course at a time when local government was not funding a CED office. This is a HUGE missed opportunity as that office could have utilized an army of promising CED practitioners. I would hate to think that local government has delayed funding a CED office because a social service organization organized a CED course and trained up 18 volunteers that could do the same CED work for free.
One disappointment from this activity was the fact that non of the students chose to finish their Certificate in CED. However, the trust and connections that were developed in the week-long course will last for years to come - and that was the real goal of the course and of community economic development.
The other disappointment from this activities lies with the local government. Golden hosted this course at a time when local government was not funding a CED office. This is a HUGE missed opportunity as that office could have utilized an army of promising CED practitioners. I would hate to think that local government has delayed funding a CED office because a social service organization organized a CED course and trained up 18 volunteers that could do the same CED work for free.
Community Team Prototyping
After carefully reviewing many community issue prioritization, decision-making and resource allocation models, a draft diagram was created for Golden's community to review. In July 2015, a facilitator, Charles Holmes, was brought in for a 1 day Community Team Prototyping workshop. While 30 local leaders attended and agreed on the need for change, Mayor Oszust made it clear that resources could not be committed.
Councillor Moss offered to has a solution for some of these issues by November, but could not comment on what it would look like or what it was dependent upon.
As a community developer, this was a low point in the project. And with no resources and no clear next steps, it left GCRS and the Community Collaboration project with no where to go.
Councillor Moss offered to has a solution for some of these issues by November, but could not comment on what it would look like or what it was dependent upon.
As a community developer, this was a low point in the project. And with no resources and no clear next steps, it left GCRS and the Community Collaboration project with no where to go.