From sarena@u.washington.edu Tue Sep 1 14:51:21 1998 Received: from jason03.u.washington.edu (root@jason03.u.washington.edu [140.142.77.10]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW98.06) with ESMTP id OAA87450 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 1998 14:51:20 -0700 Received: from homer04.u.washington.edu (sarena@homer04.u.washington.edu [140.142.76.11]) by jason03.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW98.06) with ESMTP id OAA11374 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 1998 14:51:19 -0700 Received: from localhost (sarena@localhost) by homer04.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW98.06) with SMTP id OAA111700 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 1998 14:51:18 -0700 Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1998 14:51:17 -0700 (PDT) From: "Sharon E. Sutton" To: ccp@u.washington.edu Subject: Re: UIF proposal - the scope and focus of the Center Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII I favor the "Centers within a Center" approach, or an elaboration of your third idea. To have a central office that would manage community contacts and maintain continuity with them, create opportunities for intellectual exchanges and data sharing among faculty, sponsor major public events and so forth seems excellent and a real savings through large-scale economy. Within this umbrella I envision a variety of initiatives, some funded in part or totally by UIF, others not. Some initiatives might be primarily research-oriented, others primarily teaching-oriented. Some might go on forever, others might be short term. And so forth. In short THE center could be an incubator for other community-based efforts, and the failure (or success) of one effort would not affect the integrity of the whole. It would provide the stability of big scale and the flexibility of small scale. It would allow us to access UIF funds while not allowing that funding source to totally drive the intellectual thrust of the faculty collaboration. At 12:32 PM -0700 09/01/1998, Sarena Seifer wrote: >Dear CCP List-Server Participants and others with whom we have emailed >about this UIF proposal, > >From the various responses we have received to the idea of a community >partnerships UIF, it is clear that there are two concepts of how to >approach this. > >First, it would be possible to do multiple UIF proposals each focused >around a specific kind of community partnership effort--for example, the >partnership between UW and K-12 education, or a partnership between UW and >various community development corporations focused on >design/planning--economic revitalization/housing; or partnerships around >public health, and so forth. Each of these UIFs could support a "Center" >with a specifically focused mission and focus. The advantage would be >that each of these would be clearly focused and targeted. A disadvantage >is that some will win, and others will lose; and this approach would not >create the sorts of synergies among community partnership efforts that we >are interested in seeing. > >Second, it would be possible to do a UIF that is in support of an >"umbrella" center that addresses and supports community partnerships >generally. This would provide support for all kinds of community >partnership/service learning and research activities across campus. Such >an "umbrella center" would not have any specific kinds of project focuses, >but would offer general suppport for community partnerships of all kind - >ie, faculty development, assistance in developing partnerships, raising >funds for community partnerships, monitoring and disseminating >opportunities to present and publish, developing recommendations for >institutional policies to support community partnerships, etc. The >advantage of this would be the breadth of support; the disadvantage might >be loss of focus and competition within the center among all the >participating faculty and groups for staff and funding support--would it >be spread too thin? > >Can we find a way to combine the two approaches? Could we create an >"umbrella center" within which there are certain "modules" or "faculty >clusters"; each module or cluster would have its mission/focus area. The >Center as a whole would provide support across all groups, but each would >be guaranteed some support--so no single group would be too "high powered" >and take over. The center could also develop formal linkages existing >centers and community partnership programs that would not be >administratively contained within the center. > >At present, our sense is that a broadly conceived center which maintains >specific focus groups within it and external linkages might have >the best chance. It could seek substantial funding ($1.2-1.5 million >annually) and could have sufficient staff and synergy to make a >significant impact. However, it may be that some would prefer other >approaches. > >Let us know what you think so we can go ahead and develop this in one >direction or another. > >Thanks. > > > > > ********************************************** Dr. Sharon E. Sutton, FAIA College of Architecture and Urban Planning 208T Gould Hall Box 355720 The University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195-5720 (206) 685-3361 FAX: (206) 616-4992 Home: (206) 624-4173 .