October Partnership Meeting Report
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION ITEMS, FEEDBACK, RESULTS, AND NEXT STEPS
Meeting Date: October 7, 2021, 3:00 PM
Meeting Agenda
Meeting Recording
Presentation Deck
Number of Participants: 92
Meeting Purpose
Provide updates regarding the Place Matters: Memphis work and next steps to move the work forward.
Meeting Results
Partners are updated and informed on the work to date from the 4 Summer Planning Committees and Data & Tech Work Group.
Partners identify their level of comfort in moving forward with the work through a sense vote.
Next steps and opportunities for future engagement are shared with the PMM partnership.
Meeting Notes
The meeting opened with a check-in activity using Menti WordCloud
ANCHOR COLLABORATIVES UPDATE
The Anchor Collaborative selection process is ongoing.
12 Proposals Received
Written Review and Interviews Completed
NEXT: Selection Panel Discussion to Finalize 6 Recommendations
FINAL: Phase 2 Governing Body Review and Ratify Recommendations
Tentative Next Steps:
Late October/Early November: AC Announcement
November/December 2021 - AC Onboarding & Training; Work Group Recruitment
January 2022- Focus Area Work Groups Begin
February 2022 - Public Launch (confirming dates)COVID-19 Investments Committee
COVID-19 Investments Committee
Report given by Sonji Branch, Executive Director of Communities In Schools of Memphis
The COVID-19 committee has met three times since launch. Planning for near-term investments is aligned to the Mid-South COVID-19 Regional Response Fund administered by the Community Foundation of Greater Memphis. CFGM Executive Vice President & COO Sutton Mora provided an overview of COVID-19 investments to date to understand where and how have funds been spent.
The committee has:
reviewed current COVID data including new variants to understand area not impacted for potential support. Pastor Keith Norman presented on neighborhood-level efforts to address COVID-19.
developed recommendations for the next round of investments criteria based on what has been done, what are the current needs, and potential alignment to the six focus areas of Place Matters: Memphis Phase 2 work.
developed strategies/recommendations for outreach to additional orgs/coalitions.
There are no next steps for this committee. Their work is complete.
Branding & Marketing Committee
Purpose: Deliver a set of core recommendations on a name/brand identity that are grounded in the Memphis culture and context as well as a draft marketing plan for raising awareness of the initiative city-wide.
Report given by Champions Design.
They began with research and exploration in which they reviewed findings pertaining to Place Matters: Memphis. This included an analysis of the initiative’s goals and challenges, and pursuance of a deeper cultural understanding of Memphis neighborhoods and communities. This data was compiled through group interviews of summer committee members, examination of Place Matters: Memphis work that has been completed to date, and responses from a survey that was distributed via partnership emails and social media promotion through Seeding Success channels.
The branding strategy and naming framework were presented, as well as, two name and two tagline options to provide a direction and guidance to the naming process. Meeting participants (excluding project management and S2 staff) voted on these name and tagline options to temperature check overall viability and what was preferred. The feedback will be used to give the committee and Champions Design a better sense of brand direction.
Name options
All Rise
Re-Source Memphis
Taglines
Creating an equitable future in Memphis.
Dismantling systems that keep people in poverty.
Results
The poll captured nearly 50% preference for each name option.
The poll captured “Dismantling the systems that keep people in poverty” as the majority preference.
49% of the group opted out of voting, and some expressed that neither options resonated with them.
Feedback
More representation needed in surveying.
Language is bordering on too jargon-y and not immediately clear upon reading.
Split on whether “Memphis,” “901” or something denoting location needs to be in the name.
“All Rise” invokes justice system language which may have negative connotations for individuals with justice system involvement
Next Steps
No decisions have been made regarding a name. The feedback will be shared with the committee. They will continue to work with Champions Design to explore naming options and develop a stronger method of obtaining community feedback entering the design phase.
Feedback was captured via Jamboard
Equity & Community Engagement Committee
Purpose: (Race) Equity must be at the center of social and economic initiatives to achieve inclusive economic growth. This committee will develop an Equity Framework to include a draft Theory of Change, shared analysis and a community engagement strategy for Phase 2 implementation.
Equity:
Committee member Olliette Murry-Drobot walked the partnership through the Theory of Change.
A super majority of voting meeting participants, 69%, were comfortable moving forward with the Theory of Change as a living and iterative document that will provide guidance to prioritize race equity and Black Memphians in this work. The Theory of Change was developed by the Equity & Community Engagement summer committee and was presented in multiple feedback loops including summer committee members, joint summer committee leadership and an open feedback session with the larger partnership.
The TOC will next be presented to the Phase 2 Governing Body for ratification prior to being informed and adopted by the Anchor Collaboratives. AC's will incorporate feedback and determine how the TOC will be operationalized in their work. It will continue to be adapted as the community focus area workgroups and anchor collaboratives draft their strategic plans. As a living and iterative document, it will continue to be adapted as the community focus area workgroups and anchor collaboratives draft their strategic plans.
Community Engagement:
Recommendations for community member representation in Phase 2 were approved to move forward with a super majority of 84%. These recommendations included; at least 60% of workgroup and committee members in Phase 2 should be community members with living experience, representing themselves as individuals and 25% of representatives should be youth (ages 24 and younger)
Meeting attendees provided the following feedback specific to Phase 2 Community Engagement which was captured to be discussed and integrated in future committee and community member meetings:
Strategies and practices must be developed to ensure that the recommendations for community participation are held.
Diversity in voices at the table to inform the process and the initiative is imperative.
Community engagement needs to be done in a way that makes the community excited to participate. This involves going to them and meeting them where they are, not putting the burden on them to join in.
A clear plan to remove barriers must be made (technology access, stipends, meetings scheduled when community members can attend, etc)
In order to engage diverse populations across Memphis, neighborhoods and communities need to be defined.
A strong plan for authentically engaging youth must be created, not just recruiting them but ensuring they have the access, support and voice to contribute and lead.
Call to Action: We will be inviting members of the partnership during the month of November to provide insight and feedback to who and how community members are identified, engaged and living experience is represented in the work. Please look for these opportunities to participate!
Governance Committee
Purpose: Develop a comprehensive set of recommendations to guide how the Phase 2 planning process is organized and operates to achieve strategic goals for the grant opportunity.
Report given by Dorsey Hopson
The two primary deliverables for this committee are:
Organizational Structure for Phase Two Planning
A corresponding set of By Laws for the Governing Body
Discussion Items
Organizational structure for Phase 2 planning
Corresponding set of By Laws for the Governing Body
Should funders serve on the Governing Body as ex officio (non-voting) members to avoid conflict of interest?
Can the guidance on Community and Youth (developed by the Equity Committee) also apply to the composition and selection of the Governing Body?
Should government officials be represented on the Governing Body?
Results
A super majority (75%) were comfortable with the Organizational Structure advancing to the Governing Body for ratification.
Funders as ex officio members: A super-majority of 87% agreed that funders should not have voting privileges.
Community & Youth Representation composition & selection: A super-majority of 85% is comfortable with the guidance developed by the Equity & Community Engagement committee being applied to the Governing Body.
Presence of government officials on Governing Body: No resolution. There was a nearly 50/50 split for and against among partners remaining on the call.
Next Steps
Partnership feedback will go back to the Summer Governance Committee for integration to finalize Phase 2 Governance composition and bylaws recommendations.
The Summer Governance Committee will send a recommendation to the Partnership for an e-Vote.
Feedback captured via Jamboard
The meeting ran over time. The Data & Tech Workgroup was not able to present. The report is now available on YouTube.