From sarena@u.washington.edu Wed Aug 26 19:09:58 1998 Received: from jason05.u.washington.edu (root@jason05.u.washington.edu [140.142.78.6]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW98.06) with ESMTP id TAA32036 for ; Wed, 26 Aug 1998 19:09:58 -0700 Received: from homer12.u.washington.edu (sarena@homer12.u.washington.edu [140.142.78.13]) by jason05.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW98.06) with ESMTP id TAA03228 for ; Wed, 26 Aug 1998 19:09:57 -0700 Received: from localhost (sarena@localhost) by homer12.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW98.06) with SMTP id TAA62368 for ; Wed, 26 Aug 1998 19:09:57 -0700 Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 19:09:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Sarena Seifer To: ccp@u.washington.edu Subject: results of the May 1997 meetings Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Hi everyone - you'll see from the meeting minutes below that the UIF proposal is a logical next step. Excerpts from the minutes might be good to include in the proposal itself - it serves as a sort of "needs assessment" generated by faculty across the campus who are engaged in community partnerships. OK, this is the last email from me. Your turn! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To everyone who participated in a May 1997 urban agenda meeting and to everyone who expressed interest but was unable to attend - OBSERVATIONS About the UW 1. UW needs to be more user-friendly...it's a maze for people who work here, even more so for people from the community. 2. The university doesn't really understand what the community's needs are. 3. We need to make a commitment to concrete benefits for both the university and the community. 4. There is concern that the University Initiatives Fund may continue to fund "big science" projects and overlook other worthwhile collaborative efforts involving the community 5. Community colleges and Washington State University seem to be active and visible in the community, but UW is not. In some cases, UW programs do operate in the community but go unrecognized because they are not clearly identified as "UW affiliated." 6. The responsibilities of working with communities should not be relegated to land-grant colleges. 7. The UW needs to be a good neighbor. 8. We need to be more accountable as an institution to the state legislature. 9. UW's reputation is that we are only concerned about the I-5 corridor. 10. The university wants to "throw a party" and no one wants to come - the communities don't perceive the value of participating. 11. The university's goals and the community's goals are different 12. There is poor communication between the university and the community 13. Universities can't implement changes when they're focused on generating scholarly papers 14. Fundamental issue is power and dollars. When you are the fiscal agent, you have the power to make decisions and spend money. This does not create an even playing field for the community. 15. We don't evaluate the work we do in the community About UW partnerships with other educational institutions 1. We need to develop stronger ties to the K-12 public education system. 2. We need to work better across universities, community colleges and 3. technical colleges to prepare a competent workforce About Seattle 1. Using census data on Seattle makes us look "good" compared to other urban 2. areas, yet it overlooks pockets of poverty that exist in Seattle. About faculty involvement in community partnerships 1. Tenure-track faculty are less committed to community involvement. Promotion and tenure policies are a major barrier to faculty community involvement. The President's Task Force Report on Public Service and Outreach recommends a review of these policies. 2. Many faculty are frantic about securing funding. About curricular reforms 1. More schools are requiring internships and field experiences. Some have placement officers or community placement coordinators - we need to involve them in this group. 2. Interdisciplinary attempts are often stymied by logistical issues such as finding a time when all the students can meet. 3. The SPARX program in the health sciences (Student providers aspiring to rural and underserved practice) is trying to achieve "interdisciplinary Mondays" when each health professions school would set-aside curricular time for an interdisciplinary course or activity. About students 1. Students can often build trust between the university and the community. 2. Students do well in teaching roles. An example was given of a street law course, where law students go into the high schools to teach about law. About data needs 1. Some departments and offices (ie, the Dean's office in the school of medicine) already attempt to track and catalogue community-based activities. 2. We need to inventory programs by legislative district. 3. We need to do an inventory of university involvement in the community - going department by department, faculty member by faculty member - and develop a database. 4. Many of us say we are involved in "community development" but each of us may mean very different things. About the potential for this group 1. We enrich what we are doing by collaborating. 2. We need to continue to talk to to each other in greater detail, perhaps through a seminar series 3. We can use each other for feedback when new programs are in the development stage 4. We can work together to develop interdisciplinary community site placements for our students 5. We can convene community and university representatives and first focus on our strengths before delving into specific tasks PARTICIPANT'S VISION OF AN URBAN AGENDA FOR UW Community partnerships 1. Mutual partnerships - where each partner gains and contributes to a greater good and common vision 2. Partnership should be broad, not just for a subgroup of minority and disadvantaged 3. All partners work together, based on their strengths and needs University strengths 1. The university as objective purveyor of policy-relevant information that community groups can use for lobbying and leverage 2. The university building community capacity by providing higher education, research skills, grantwriting skills ,etc. 3. We ought to do what we do best - as a university, that means to teach. For example, we could create a fund to provide free education to community members 4. The university as an honest broker, a convener 5. UW should use its resources to become more involved in K-12 public education - a system that is fragile 6. Hook into something ongoing and bring multiple resources to the table - direct services,students, faculty, administration University structures and policies 1. Institutional policies and development so mission is to serve communities, reflected in the promotion and tenure policy 2. Highly effective mechanism within the university to coordinate public service and outreach to communitie 3. Mechanisms to connect research and results in the community 4. UW should make a strong statement, formalize its support Important benefits of community partnerships 1. Developing good primary care for underserved, healthier communities 2. All UW graduates understand their obligation to give back to the community and to use their education to benefit the community 3. Make UW more user-friendly, so people can find out what they need to find out 4. A way to bring more resources to local communities 5. Beneficial relationships will be formed 6. Get beyond grant cycles and look at long-term partnerships and relationships ISSUES THAT ARE STILL PUZZLING US About community-campus partnerships 1. How do we meaningfully involve community partners? 2. Is it possible to find a common agenda between community and university? 3. What else is going on in the university related to community partnerships? 4. How can we overcome turf issues - should everyone's turf issues be brought to the table? 5. How do you effectively work with people and organizations who have multiple agendas? How do you pool resources when the trend is that everyone is downsizing, paring back and protective over their own resources? 6. How can community agencies become more interested in having students? 7. How do we connect resource-rich communities with those that have less resources? 8. The university is large and complex - where do we start in putting the pieces together? About institutional culture and support 1. How do we change the values of the university? 2. Why is community work not valued? 3. How can we pool resources effectively? 4. How beneficial to the community is our work in the long-term? 5. How can we get institutions to change their culture and embrace community partnerships? 6. How can the university be encouraged to make partnerships? 7. How can an efficient, self-sustaining mechanism be created in the university to place students in community sites? About the sustainability of community partnerships 1. How can we build sustainable partnerships that are mutually beneficial? 2. How can we sustain the good work we're involved in and the partnerships we've developed? 3. How can we sustain community relationships over time? 4. How can we overcome language and cultural difficulties? 5. How can we build sustainable partnerships between communites and universities that are asset-focused? About funding 1. Do funders really understand collaboration and the time involved in developing these relationships? 2. Who are the funders who are willing to support partnerships? About other issues 1. What are the boundaries of public health practice? - local community groups have concerns about housing and economic development - is this our role? 2. What is the real state of access to health care for people in Seattle? 3. How can people's behavior be changed? 4. What age should one target to intervene in the lives of at-risk youth? MENTORING POSSIBILITIES WITHIN THE GROUP This section is incomplete - if you can mentor someone in a specific area, please let Sarena (sarena@u.washington.edu) or Michael (mverchot@u.washington.edu) know. Mark Doescher - health services research, epidemiology, biostatistics, survey design, analyzing data sets Laurie Anderson - identifying social and health indicators in local communities, survey research Laurie Deppman - grantwriting, fundraising, service-learning Bonnie Beck - development of student-led and student-based initiatives Elise Chayet - community relationships and linkages Sarena Seifer- service-learning, identifying funding sources for community partnerships Peter House - community development, meeting facilitation, group decisionmaking around complex problems Ann Marie Kimball - thesis mentoring, public health assessment Jackie Gardner - public health roles for pharmacists Rick Brandon - communications, policy development RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FOLLOW-UP TO THE MEETING Recommendations about applying for the HUD grant Both groups agreed that it would be worthwhile to meet again, but felt it was premature to undertake an effort to apply for the HUD grant in the absence of an explicit commitment to "an urban agenda" on the part of university leadership. Instead, participants voiced support for working with the university leadership to shape an urban agenda. Recommendations involving university leadership 1. Link up with the people involved in the President's Task Force on Public Service and Outreach to let them know of the range of community-campus programs in Seattle involving the UW and to find out more about the planned follow-up to the Task Force (see more on this below) 2. Invite the Provost or President to speak to the group about their vision for the role of UW in Seattle 3. Meet with the Provost to assess his commitment to an urban agenda for UW. Recommendations for ongoing communication and agenda-setting 1. Establish a listserv for ongoing communication (see more on this below) 2. Consider expanding this group to all those interested and involved in community-campus partnerships (not just urban ones), especially if we are not going for the HUD grant. 3. Sponsor a monthly seminar series to explore topics of interest and to learn more about each other's programs and areas of expertise. Proposed topic areas included: interdisciplinary, service-learning, community and economic development, community-based health initiatives, rural community development (see more on this below) 4. Connect with the Metropolitan Forum being led by Betty Jane Narver in the School of Public Affairs. The forum involves community and university leaders. 5. Explore existing community revitalization efforts underway in Seattle that this group might become involved in 6. Personally commit to reading the President's Task Force Report on Public Service and Outreach. NEXT STEPS Disseminate the meeting minutes The meeting minutes are being disseminated to all participants and everyone who expressed interest but was unable to attend. Create a listserv discussion group A community-campus partnerships listserv has been established. Everyone who attended the meeting or expressed interest in becoming involved will be automatically subscribed to the group. Schedule monthly meetings to discuss business and foster collaborative learning Sarena will contact everyone for good days/times for a monthly meeting beginning in June. 1. The June meeting will feature a speaker from the President's Task Force on Public Service and Outreach 2. The July meeting will feature a seminar on community and economic development 3. The August meeting will focus on everyone's plans for the coming semester to see where connections might emerge .