Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
289844693
label
Sagawa, Shirley – Overnight Reading – President’s Summit [2]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
289844693
contentType
document
title
Sagawa, Shirley – Overnight Reading – President’s Summit [2]
citationUrl
collections
Records of the Office of National Service (Clinton Administration)
Shirley Sagawa's Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
289844693
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
99905611-20130661F-Seg2-029-007-2023
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
9db45c33b235c862
ocrText
FOIA Number: 2013-0661-F (2)
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton
Presidential Library Staff.
Collection/Record Group:
Clinton Presidential Records
Subgroup/Office of Origin:
National Service
Series/Staff Member:
Shirley Sagawa
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
24265
FolderID:
Folder Title:
Sagawa, Shirley - Overnight Reading - President's Summit [2]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
S
66
1
9
1
Ideas for Summit Commitments
I. Business
1. "Caring Adult" (Goal One) -- Business establishes a mentoring program at its
work sites
2. "Healthy Behavior" (Goal Five) -- HMO uses volunteers to help the frail
elderly; LensCrafters provides eyeglasses for 2 million
3. "Work that dignifies (Goal Three) -- Pillsbury "KAPOW" program at all plants
worldwide
4. Airline provides free/discounted fares for volunteers to travel to Habitat sites
5. "Educational experiences" -- Prudential's youth service program in elementary
schools
6. General Mills uses back of cereal boxes to tell kids about service
II. Youth and Education
1. Colleges commit 25% of their work/study jobs towards service
2. Colleges give preference in admissions to those who have done significant
service
3. Students/school commit a fixed number of volunteer hours to a specific
nonprofit.
4. Schools match education awards earned by national service participants
5. A medical school commits to having a certain percentage of residences in low
income clinics.
6. An education school could pledge to have volunteer teaching a part of the
graduation requirement
III. Foundations
1. Make service part of the grantmaking criteria
2. Community foundations: create a central "citizen's fund" that individuals can
donate to
3. Foundations sponsor national training for service leaders
4. Family foundations "adopt" local family that is trying to get off welfare
5. Create local entrepreneurial venture capital funds for citizens with innovative
ideas
6. Foundations support post-Summit local summits; foundations support citizen
service around one of the five national goals
IV. Communities of Faith
1. Churches, synagogues or mosques could each adopt someone on welfare and
make it their mission to get this person off welfare ("work that dignifies")
2. Churches, synagogues and mosques provide "safe" places for citizens to meet
V. State Governments
1. Each state matches California's pledge by committing to make sure that every
disadvantaged young person who wants a mentor can get one.
COMMITMENTS STRATEGY
The Summit will ask organizations from the three major sectors -- private (business), nonprofit,
and public -- to make commitments towards increasing the volume and effectiveness of citizen
service in the country focused on achieving our five national goals. These commitments would be
announced and celebrated at the Summit and, along with commitments made subsequent to the
Summit, implemented between the Summit and the Year 2000. The W.K. Kellogg Foundation
will work in partnership with the Points of Light Foundation and The Corporation for National
Service (the co-sponsors of the Summit) to develop a core leadership group that will lead the
commitment process and will serve as an important "think tank" on citizen service in the future.
The following concept paper proposes a strategy for the commitment process.
The Nature of the Commitments
The commitments made by organizations at the Summit must be bold, national in scope, and local
and profound in their impact. They must serve as models for what other organizations in the
sector could do to increase citizen service across the country; either individually, or in
collaboration with others. The commitments could be defined in three ways:
1) An organization could commit to changing its own organizational policies or systems; for
example, a private foundation could make citizen service a criterion for all of its
grantmaking or an airline could provide free transportation for volunteers.
2) An organization could commit to do something "structural" that would help millions of
citizens get involved in service; for example, a division of colleges could give preference in
admission to those who have done service or the major television networks could agree to
carry regular programming related to service.
3) Every organization could commit to increasing citizen service towards achieving one of
the national goals defined by the Summit. These goals include:
a) Caring and supportive adult relationships in the life of every child;
b) Safe places in every community to gather, meet and work together;
c) Educational experiences that create confidence, teach life-long lessons, and
develop skills for employment;
d) Personal prospects for work that encourage healthy behavior;
e) Opportunities to give back to others through one's own associations and
organizations.
For example, a business who wants to help achieve the first national goal could commit
to establish a mentoring program in all of its worksites; or a church could help achieve the
second national goal by committing to providing sites for teens to gather. Or, a company
could target the fourth goal by providing job training to welfare recipients.
In order to define its commitment, each type of organization in a sector would draw on the
interests of its people, its own "distinctive skills and competencies," and the work it has already
done in communities. In order to achieve the Summit vision, organizations from all three sectors
would be asked to make commitments. They include:
I. The Private Sector: Businesses -- large and small, from a variety of industries
II. The Nonprofit Sector:
a. Communities of Faith -- individual congregations, as well as national
organizations, representing a variety of faiths
b. Human Service organizations -- national and local nonprofits
C. Educational institutions -- K-12, as well as the college and university level
d. Private and community foundations
III. The Public Sector:
a. Local, state and federal government (represented by elected officials such as
mayors and governors)
b. Government institutions (e.g.: Post Office; IRS; HUD)
The most powerful and important commitments could come from "intrasector" commitments,
where organizations collaborate across sectors to increase citizen service and make a significant
impact on communities. Often, the barriers to achieving community change occur not because of
a lack of resources, but because organizations within a community (or, on a national level) are not
working together. Nonprofits and government organizations could commit to work together to
better provide services to families and their children, using citizens to increase their impact;
businesses, churches, and schools in a community could develop year-round learning
opportunities for youth and adults. Or, through the Summit, barriers to citizen service itself
such as volunteer liability issues or increasingly limited time for individuals to volunteer -- could
be addressed through the commitments made by organizations working together. Although these
"intrasector" commitments would be difficult to develop prior to the Summit, we will set out to
accomplish such commitments long-term.
The specific commitments should be defined through a process in the months leading up to the
Summit event, from now until February 1997. The commitments would be announced at the
Summit event itself, in Philadelphia, and implemented between February, 1997 and February,
2000, where the actual outcome of the implementation of the commitments could be shared with
the country at a second national Summit.
The nature and scope of the commitments is very important for two reasons. First, the scale of
the country's serious social problems demands that every institution and individual play a role in
addressing them; however, the current volume of effective work is not sufficient to change these
problems nationally. There is an urgent need for organizations to tap their resources and find
pragmatic ways to restore citizen engagement as a way of life in America. Therefore, this
commitment strategy is an important way to launch that process.
Secondly, these commitments will serve as examples to others, and will be unveiled through the
Summit process through the press, through the Internet, and through special events involving the
Presidents of the United States (such as a televised signing ceremony at Independence Hall during
the Summit event). Therefore, the commitments must be bold and impactful so that other
organizations nationwide will be inspired to make their own commitments in their own
communities.
2
By the time of the Summit, the goal would be to have hundreds of commitments from every
sector. However, we would hope to have as many as 35 "leadership" commitments from the
three sectors that would be highlighted through the Summit process and who could serve as the
core leadership group that would challenge their peers nationally to make commitments. This
"two part" strategy for the commitment process is outlined below.
The "Leadership 18," an affinity group of the largest 18 national nonprofits in the country, has
determined that it will make a collective commitment to the Summit. They will also be
represented in the Core Leadership Group.
Gaining Commitments: The Process
We would gain commitments from organizations using two strategies:
1) working with a leadership core group of 25-35 CEOs/organizations; and
2) making a broad-based appeal for commitments to organizations and associations of
organizations across the country, through the individuals and organizations that attend the
Summit, and through media outreach during and following the Summit event in
Philadelphia.
Leadership Core Group
A leadership core group of the CEOs from 25-35 major organizations from the private, nonprofit,
and public sectors would be convened in the fall prior to the Summit event to:
a. Define commitments within and across sectors that would increase citizen action
significantly within the country;
b. Commit their own organizations to take (an) action;
C. Help the Summit stakeholders reach out to other organizations within their respective
sectors.
This leadership core group would be comprised of perhaps as many as 7 businesses from the
private sector; 21 from the nonprofit sector (with 7 each from three subsectors: communities of
faith; nonprofits and private and community foundations; and educational institutions); and 7 from
the public sector.
By convening these different sectors, we would hope that both the level and the impact of the
commitments would be consistent; in addition, by sharing ideas across sectors, the commitments
could possibly lead to greater collaboration and communication, leading to greater impact.
This core group, comprised of leaders in their fields, would help communicate the seriousness and
potential of the Summit plans to other organizations and the American public. We would
communicate the commitments made by this group through our outreach to national media and
coverage on the Summit Internet Web page. This group would be asked to attend special
event(s) with the Presidents at the Summit event; for example, an agreement signed by the
leadership core group could be presented to the Presidents in Independence Hall on the opening
day of the Summit.
Our plan is to convene another national Summit in the Year 2000, in order to celebrate what has
been done and to share the results of the work that was done in the three years following our
3
initial convening. Therefore, it is important that this leadership core group continue to work
together following the Summit event in February to help pursue ideas nationally or regionally that
may be suggested by local post-Summit activities in communities around the country, and to serve
as an important "think tank" for citizen action.
The Points of Light Foundation, The Kellogg Foundation, and The Corporation for National
Service will convene the leadership group in early fall at Kellogg in Battle Creek, so that this
group would have enough time to develop their own commitments and assist the Summit
stakeholders in their outreach to other organizations.
Broad-Based Appeal for Commitments
Once the Leadership Core Group and their peer commitments have been announced at the
Summit, a call would go out to the country for other organizations to also make commitments.
Clearly the 25-35 organizations would be "standard setters" for a far more extensive process of
other leaders and organizations making commitments. This longer-term broadbased request for
commitments could be made in two ways: through the community delegations that attend the
Summit and through the media.
Through the Summit Participants. We anticipate that 75% of the attendees at the
Summit event will be individuals from over 200 communities nationwide. Their goal will
be to attend the Summit, learn from others, meet together in their individual community
groups at the Summit itself, and then return to their own communities to develop and
implement a plan that focuses on one or more of the national goals. Many of these
individuals will represent organizations in the three sectors defined above. As part of
their involvement in the Summit, we are asking that they hold their own summits following
the February meeting and that they develop their own core leadership "commitments"
group as a part of that process that would reach out to their peers for commitments.
At the Summit event in Philadelphia, the community delegates would learn from each
other and from the sessions as to how to develop and implement such a strategy. With
this "cascading" approach, the Summit could then multiply the number of commitments
across the country.
Through the Media. The drive for commitments could be announced at a press
conference at the Summit with interested organizations invited to call an 800-number for
further information. (This press conference would follow months of media outreach in
which the examples are given of outstanding actions that are being taken by organizations
around the country, and would highlight the commitments of the leadership core group
35). Though the most significant commitments are expected to be generated through
personal, rather than public appeals, we must make this opportunity open to everyone.
By developing materials that could be sent out to organizations following the Summit, we
would provide information about the entire Summit process and how organizations could
become involved over the three year period. We would track the results of this effort
through an evaluation and tracking process developed by FERA (the Summit evaluators)
over the three years.
4
SENT BY POLF
; 9-19-96 ; 3:56PM ;
POINTS OF LIGHT-
# 2/ 7
cc: Melinda Shirley
September 19, 1996
Harris Wofford
Chief Executive Officer
The Corporation for National Service
1201 New York Avenue, N.W.
8th Floor
Washington, D.C. 20525
Dear Harris,
1 want to thank you again for the extraordinary meeting that we had on Monday.
You were very generous with your time and your counsel. I am equally grateful for your
willingness to continue to help lead this effort.
Attached is a memo from Rhonda and Chad. They have attempted to briefly
capture your insights regarding approximately 150 individuals playing the major role of
selecting a local community delegation or designing their own local process to select the
delegates. This is only a piece of the invitation strategy, and we will want each of you to
look at the final product before we submit it to our Joint Board Steering Committee for
approval.
With regard to the names of individuals who might fit into the description in the
following memo, we will be asking that if a person or place is selected to participate based
on your recommendation, we hope that you would be willing to make the initial contact to
describe the Summit. I believe your personal connection with each of these people could
make a real difference in their commitment to the Summit itself Again, thank you for
your time and assistance
Sincerely,
Guy
Gregg Petersmeyer
Chairman, The Presidents' Summit
1737 H Street, NW. Washington, D.C. 20006 Tel 202-223-9186 Fax 202-223-9256
BY POLF
; 9-19-96 ; 3:56PM ;
POINTS OF LIGHT-
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Summit Planning Group
FROM:
Rhonda Taylor and Chad Mayer
DATE:
September 19, 1996
RE:
Invitation Strategy and "Community Individuals"
First, thank you for participating in the meeting on Monday. We and the rest of the staff
feel as if we accomplished many things pertaining to the invitation strategy and planning
for follow-on initiatives for the years between the two national summits. Also, we feel
blessed to have had a chance to get all of you in the same room for a day of work.
Looking over several pieces of the notes from our meeting, we have put together some
ideas that we felt would be beneficial for you while you are thinking about who should be
the contact person in the 150 or so communities. Please look over and comment on this
singular piece of the invitation strategy. We will be sending to you a full proposal for your
review in the first part of next week.
Please take the week-end to think more about who ought to be involved at this stage from
the communities in which you have worked. Please feel free to fax your suggestions of
individuals to contact with regards to the invitation strategy to us on Monday. The fax
number at the Points of Light Foundation is 202/223-9256. Again, thank you for your
willingness to help.
SENT BY POLF
: 9-19-96 ; 3:56PM ;
POINTS VI Lium
itl 1
Strategy for Inviting Summit Participants
The Summit will be held for approximately 2,000 active citizens who represent a broad cross-
section of individuals, institutions, and communities. There will be three major types of
participants at the Summit:
1. members of community and state "delegations" from across the country;
2 individuals representing organizations who will make commitments to support the work of
these "delegations" over the next three years; and
3. national leaders. including the Presidents and First Ladies
Local Delegation Selection Process
Most of the Summit's participants will come from 150 - 200 communities from all 50 states. The
communities will represent a mix of large and small cities, metropolitan and rural areas. Each
community will send a delegation of 10 or so people Collectively, each delegation will represent
exemplary front-line "doers" as well as those with institutional power and administrative authority
in the community.
In order to create a process that leads to good community attendance at the Summit in
Philadelphia and follow-up in local communities after the Summit, the staff is requesting the
assistance of local, state, and national leaders (including the Summit Planning Group) They will
be asked to select individuals who can assemble the kind of delegations we seek and who can help
those delegations work over the next three years to achieve the goals to which they commit
themselves as part of the Summit process We scck at least one individual from each of the 150 -
200 communities to be responsible for assembling a community delegation.
We realize that this is a somewhat informal "word of mouth" strategy. If done well, however, we
believe the process will result in delegations that will come together with surprising effectiveness
at the Summit and will accomplish great things in the three years between the first Summit and a
cclebration Summit in the year 2000. We hope that delegations are highly unconventional in both
their make-up and in their ultimate effectiveness
Clearly individuals must be chosen carefully and must be fully committed to the three year
process. This is admittedly not an institutional approach We are emphasizing individuals for two
reasons
1. individuals, of course. not institutions, solve problems; and
2. "institutions" as such are more likely to have a vested interest in naming someone for
political, funding or institutional gain, than is an individual as long ins he or she knows the
BY POLF
:
9-19-96 : 3:57PM :
POINTS OF LIGHT-
community, is in fact, and is considered by others to be, a person who works in a truly
collaborative way and possesses real moral authority in the eyes of his or her peers.
Role of the 150 or so Community Leaders are
Agrees with the vision and the goals of the Summit
Has led/does lead an organization, initiative or program in the community that has used citizen
service as a critical element
Is well-respected in the community as an individual who gets things done for the food of the
community
Has access to, and knowledge of a wide variety of publics/organizations/individuals.
Is willing to lead a selection process that would result in a delegation with the appropriate
characteristics
Will be a part of the delegation that attends the Summit, and will support the local community
action following the Summit
Be as diverse as our country
Factors to consider in assembling я delegation:
1. Keep in mind diversity of race, age, economic ability and physical ability.
2. Choose a delegation that reflects persons from the following areas reflective of their
community: elected official, professional manager (like the city manager), communities of
faith, educators (both k-12 and higher ed), corporate (largest employer and small
business); neighborhood leaders (like homeowner associations or neighborhood councils);
social service delivery agencies, philanthropic groups (community foundations, private
foundations or corporate foundations): media, and youth
3. Delegations should include 10 individuals with at least 3 members being individuals doing
exemplary work in their community. These 3 individuals should be an example of the
positive force of citizen action.
4. Individuals included in the delegation should either be persons who are in positions to
advance the capacity of citizen action or are alrcady doing SO
Additional responsibilities of the community individual include.
act as the primary convenor of a meeting of the local delegation prior to the Summit. in order
to review the objectives of the Summit;
help locate assistance and connection to resources within one's community to financially
support those attending the Summit who may not otherwise be able to attend;
be a member of the local delegation that attends the Summit, and
provide support and leadership in the follow-on initiatives agreed upon by the community
delegation in their work at the Summit
2
SENT BY POLF
: 9-19-96 : 3:57PM :
POINTS OF LIGHT -
; # 6/ 7
Wc would hope that people selected to be a part of their community delegation would share many
of these personal traits (regardless of institutional affiliations, age, gender, etc.):
Those from local communities:
-
People with known track record, excellent results.
-
People with faith in possibilities
-
Activists: can do!
-
Team players.
-
Those who celebrate success of others
-
Know their community and its key players
-
"Political" savvy.
-
Organizers; delegaters; visionary, inclusive
-
Prejudice-frec: fact-finders, not assumers.
-
Love challenges, especially of meshing divergent efforts into one powerful force
-
People who you would call on at 2 .00 am in an emergency; they can help
-
TRUSTED, TRUSTED, TRUSTED!
Those from State perspectives:
-
People who really know state
-
People who are not politicized and would therefore present barriers to involvement
-
People already familiar with key helpers and activists in communities
-
People with clout and leverage of persuasion.
1
People who see the vision of the Summit as real, not hype
-
People who are mature and self-assured, self-reliant.
And we would hope to avoid the following:
-
People looking for self-grandizement
-
All talk, no results
-
Prima donnas.
-
Title-impressed
-
I
Status-quo defenders.
-
Ego maniacs
Note: (We are grateful to Suc Vincyard for this section)
Additional Thoughts
The ability for increasing the volume of effective citizen action in local communities and creating
opportunities to meet the national goals of the Summit rests largely in that community. The
importance of the individual identified to manage the selection process for a community's
delegation can not be overstated. They must understand the critical value of citizen action at this
3
BY POLF
; 9-19-96 ; 3:58PM ;
POINTS OF LIGHT-
stage in the life of most communities and the possibilities to increase the effective volume of that
activity to meet one or more goals as a result of a three year process beginning with a national
Summit. Because they must also commit to the follow-on initiatives in their own community. it is
double important that they carefully choose a delegation of individuals who also understand the
value of citizen action and/or are in positions to support increased capacity for citizens to solve
community problems.
The community individual will either select the community delegation or create a local process
with others to select the community delegation, keeping in mind the delegation's ultimate goals of
increasing the volume of effective citizen action and putting in place community strategies for
achieving the national goals. He or she may seek counsel from individuals associated with
community foundations. volunteer centers, communities of faith, chamber of commerce, business
leadership organizations committed to service, corporate volunteer councils, private foundations,
foundation associations, cooperative extension associations, interdenominational organizations,
United Ways or other "Leadership 18" social service agencies.
4
SENT BY: POLF
: 9-19-96 : 3:55PM :
POINTS OF LIGHT-
:# 17 7
FAX
POINTS OF LIGHT
FOUNDATION
Date September 19, 1996
Number of pages including cover sheet 7
TO: Harris Wofford
FROM:
Greer Forsyth
Points of Light Foundation
1737 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20006
Phone 202-606-5000
Phone
202 223-9186 X 196
Fax Phone 202-565-2784
Fax Phone 202 223-9256
CC:
REMARKS:
Urgent
For your roview
Reply ASAP
Please Comment
MEMORANDUM
To:
Bob Goodwin
Joel Orosz
Shirley Sagawa
Harris Wofford
From: Pat Bland
Gregg Petersmeyer
Date: September 23, 1996
RE:
Planning Group for the Commitments strategy and the ISLG (Intrasectoral
Leadership
Group)
We look forward to meeting with you this Wednesday, September 25, from 3:30 to 5:30
here at the Foundation to discuss the commitments strategy of the Summit. We will
constitute a "planning group," that will refine the specific plan of action for developing an
"Intrasectoral Leadership Group" (ISLG) that will ultimately make the "lead"
commitments and declare their support for service.
Attached is an agenda for a meeting on Wednesday. We have also attached Joel's draft
plan of action for the ISLG, as well as our latest concept paper on commitments. Also,
please find attached some suggested names of leaders in each sector that we developed
with the help of many people over the last few months. From this list, we can begin to
identify the "captains" for each sector that can help us develop the ISLG.
AGENDA
Meeting of the Planning Group for the Summit ISLG (Intrasectoral Leadership
Group)
September 25, 1996; 3:30 - 5:30 PM
I. Discuss concept of ISLG, and draft brief statement of principles and memorandum of
responsibilities for ISLG members
II. Draw up prioritized list of potential "captains" from each of the three sectors
III. Discuss how to approach an individual (hopefully, President Bush) to assume
responsibility for ISLG and personally make request of captains
IV. Discuss proposed staff positions to support ISLG (ideas for individuals)
V. Agree on next steps for the planning group
W.K. KELLOGG FOUNDATION
To help people help themselves
MEMO TO: Dan Moore
COPY TO: Chris Kwak
Bob Long
Frank Taylor
FROM:
Joel Orosz
Joel
DATE:
September 9, 1996
SUBJECT: Draft Summit Action Plan
Given the fact that the clock is ticking with regard to the Summit, I think it is important that we
agree upon an action plan as soon as we can The following plan is completely in draft, and I
really need your input on improving it. Again given the timeline, ! would appreciate receiving
your suggestions as scon as possible
DRAFT SUMMIT ACTION PLAN
! Partners (CNS, POLF, WKKF) agree on the formation of an intersectoral leadership group
(ISLG). Timeline: As soon as possible
a) Given the short timeline, we will aim for three from the public and private sectors, and up to
five from the nonprofit sector
b) The ISLG will be expanded subsequent to the Summit, with the exact size and proportions
among the sectors to be determined later.
=) ISLG is to be chaired, on a retating basis, by a former President
2 Partners agree on mission of ISLG. Timeline As soon 35 possible
a) Overaching Mission: Serve as the national voice in support of citizen service for America
This includes advocating nonparisan, supportive public policy; recommending local action
to solve socia. problems; and, promoting intersectoral cooperation to make it all work.
b) Mission at the Summit: To announce a "declaration of support for service" to support and
give form to the Presidents' more general advocacy for service at the Summit The
secondary mission will be to announce concrete commitments to service made by their own
organizations
C) Mission after the Summit. Expand ISLG to its fuil size; work with other leaders in each
sector to develop further commitments to service; meet twice yearly to receive reports ñom
a research arm, which could well be Les Salamon's Futures Project. In turn, ISLG will
make recommendations to Congress for support of public policy, and to the National
Council of Nonprofit Associations. the Conference Board, and the Council on Foundations
(representing nonprofit organizations and their major funders, for local Emplementation)
to
812022239256
d) Make a summary report to the nation at the second Summit in the year 2000, documenting
progress made to date, and underlining further recommendations for future action.
3 Partners agree to appoint a small planning committee to operationalize these recommendations.
Timeline: As soon as possible. This committee would consist of no more than two persons
each from CNS, POLF, and WKKF.
a) Draft brief statement of principles and memorandum of responsibilities for ISLG members
b) Draw up prioritized list of potential "captains" from each of the three sectors.
c) Secure agreement on part of the general chairman of the Summit (hopefully, General Colin
Powell) to personally request three captains to join ISLG, and assume responsibility for
further organization of ISLG
d) Work with the captains to make prioritized list of potential ISLG members
e) Agree or. needs for additional staff to carry out plans. It is likely that two staffers will be
needed; a senior staffer, to create think pieces and work directly with captains to organize
ISLG; and a jurior staffer, who would be in charge of the details of implementation.
4. Caprains make calls, secure remaining members (three, three, up to five). Timeline: By
November 1, 1996
5 First face-to-face ISLG meeting in Chicago (or some other centrally-located city) Timeline.
Mid-November 1996
a) Get acquainted agree on agenda
b) Presentation of draft declaration of support for service (which has been written by the
senior staff member, and vetted by the planning committee). Suggest revisions to this
statement.
c) Agree on draft Summit activities for ISLG, brainstorm post-Summit plans
d) Inform each other of individual Summit commitments.
e) Agree to hold a meeting on Sunday, February 16, 1997, immediately prior to the Summit.
Agree on date of conference call to finalize declaration of support for service and Summit
plans.
f) Agree on a media strategy
6. Summit Preparations
a) Senior staffer rewrites declaration of support for service along lines suggested by ISLG
members. Planning committee makes needed further arrangements.
b) ISLG members to hold conference call by mid-December 1996 Sign off on final
declaration of principles and Summit itinerary for ISLG
c) Former Presidents are briefed on ISLG and their interest in chairing is gauged
7 ISLG meeting, February 16, 1997
a) Review and walk through itinerary, and brief or media situation.
b) Rehearsal of spokespersons for role.
c) Agree on date for next meeting after Summit
I: is clear to me that this is 2 very rough first draf., and I will look forward to receiving your edits
Thanks very :nuch for your consideration.
JJO/rh
SAVOLNTEERIDOCIRAH-MEMOSISUMMIT.CTL
TOTAL PAGE.03 **
MI COMMUNITY SERV CUM Fax:517-373-4977
SEP 11 YO LI-Ur
STATE OF MICHIGAN
CC: Gene/Melinda
Susan R.?
Shirly
JOHN ENGLER, Governor
MICHIGAN COMMUNITY SERVICE COMMISSION
Chairperson
111 S. Capitol Ave
Michelle Engler
Olds Plaza Bldg. 48h Floor
Lansing, Michigan 48913
Executive Director
Telephone (517) 335-4295
Frank Dirks
MEMORANDUM
FAX (517) 373-4977
TO:
Gregg Petersmeyer
CC: Michelle Engler
Robert Goodwin
AB
Harris Wofford
FROM: Frank Dirks, Michigan Community Service Commission
RE:
Comments on Summit Planning from 9/6/96 memo and 9/10/96 call
DATE: September 11, 1996
Thank you for this opportunity to share these comments on your planning memo dated September
6, the Invitation Strategy fax sent September 10, and the conference call of that same date.
1) There is little that I could add usefully to the consideration of Summit names.
2) The goals generally strike the balance between breadth and specificity. Recognizing that
Dr. King and Sen. Wofford recommended that goal #2 should be stretched to include the
whole community, I would suggest that you consider using the term "public places". The
use of public place in community, as distinguished from private places, would be consistent
with the interest in and emphasis on the 'public square' among civil society advocates. It
also would help set a useful context for discussions of community.
With regard to Mr Goodwin's concern that another set of national goals may risk being
viewed through a cynical lens as just another set of national goals, I think that the relevance
and importance of these goals will not be determined by the contributions made to their
wording now or at the summit but in the action taken in their name during the three years
after the summit.
3) The above point leads to what I am sure everyone recognizes is the most problematic aspect:
the Invitation Strategy. A few observations:
The Invitation Strategy should be based on a post-Summit implementation strategy, How
will the gap be closed between the three-year national goals and the activities during the
summit? How will the momentum be maintained? Who will be responsible at the local,
state, and national levels? How does this effort connect with other national initiatives like
John Gardner's Alliance for National Renewal? Without thoughtfully developed answers to
these questions, Mr. Goodwin's concerns about public cynicism will be realized.
A Division of the Michigan Jobs Commission
-
FAPER
MI COMMUNITY SERV COM Fax:517-373-497
Sep 11 '96 11:07
P.03
Gregg Petersmeyer
September 11, 1996
Page Two
Post-summit implementation should rely on state-level networks and infrastructure. An
initiative that connects local community efforts to a nationally framed message is a good
communications strategy, but not a good organizing strategy. A major barrier to community
problem-solving is that many community nonprofits are better connected to their national
organization than they are to groups around the corner. National organizations are not
naturally in a position to advance local community interests, only the interests of their
affiliates in local communities.
Since one of the aims of the summit is to build community connections, the implementation
strategy should work to build integrated support networks in communities and states.
Whether it is through state commissions, state United Way associations, volunteer center
networks, community foundation associations, Corporation for National Service state
offices, or cooperative extension networks, the implementation strategy should challenge
state level follow-up and continued organizing for community action. The summit planners
should rely on state-level advisory groups composed of representatives of these and other
networks to identify state delegations made up of diverse communities and their
representatives.
Build on the strongest state networks and infrastructure. Certainly not all states have the
same networks or infrastructure, but the planners should have enough information on the
states to contact the leading organizing groups in the states. Almost every state has at least
one strong organizing institution (service commissions, cooperative extension, foundation
associations, etc.) and many have several. The summit planners should work through these
leader groups and challenge them to work together where they are not already.
Use the consolidated state service plan development process as a common element across the
states. Beginning this year, the Corporation for National Service (CNS) is asking states to
develop comprehensive plans for service and volunteerism. These plans are intended to link
all aspect of national service programs (VISTA, RSVP, SCP, FG, AmeriCorps, Learn and
Serve) with traditional volunteer and philanthropic efforts in a coordinated and unified state
effort. I think it would make sense for CNS and the Points of Light Foundation to work
together to encourage that this collaborative planning process be used to draw local
community problem-solving activities into state plans for service and volunteerism.
I hope that these comments are useful. Please don't hesitate to call me if I can clarify something or
add anything further. Good luck on a great undertaking.
MI COMMUNITY SERV COM Fax 517-373-4977
Sep 11 '96 11:07
P.01
Michigan Community Service Commission
111 S. Capitol Avenue, Olds Plaza Building, 4th Floor
Lansing, Michigan 48913
(517) 335-4295 (517) 373-4977 Fax
Fax Cover Sheet
To:
Harris Wofford
(202) 565-2784
Robert Goodwin
(202) 223-9256
Gregg Petersmeyer
(202) 223-9256
From: Frank Dirks
Date: September 11, 1996
Number of pages including the cover:
Message:
SENT BY: POLF
; 9-10-96 ; 1:19PM ;
POINTS OF LIGHT-
# 1/ 5
FAX
POINTS OF LIGHT
FOUNDATION N
Date
9/18/96.
Number of pages including cover sheet
5
TO: Shirley Sagawa
FROM:
Pat Bland
Points of Light Foundation
1737 H Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20006
Phone
Phone
202 223-9186 X 107
Fax Phone 202 365 - 2784
Fax Phone 202 223-9256
CC:
REMARKS:
Urgent
For your review
Reply ASAP
Please Comment
Shirley
Attached is the document I refored
to in my Voicemail.
I look Forward to discussing it
win you
Thanks!
Put
SENT BY: POLF
; 9-10-96 ; 1:19PM ;
POINTS OF LIGHT-
# 2/ 5
Document 1
COMMITMENTS STRATEGY
The Summit will ask organizations from the three major sectors -- private (business), nonprofit,
and public -- to make commitments towards increasing the volume and effectiveness of citizen
service in the country focused on achieving our five national goals. These commitments would be
announced and celebrated at the Summit and, along with commitments made subsequent to the
Summit, implemented between the Summit and the Year 2000. The W.K. Kellogg Foundation
will work in partnership with the Points of Light Foundation and The Corporation for National
Service (the co-sponsors of the Summit) to develop a core leadership group that will lead the
commitment process and will serve as an important "think tank" on citizen service in the future
The following concept paper proposes a strategy for the commitment process.
The Nature of the Commitments
The commitments made by organizations at the Summit must be bold, national in scope, and local
and profound in their impact. They must serve as models for what other organizations in the
sector could do to increase citizen service across the country; either individually, or in
collaboration with others. The commitments could be defined in three ways:
1) An organization could commit to changing its own organizational policies or systems; for
example, a private foundation could make citizen service a criterion for all of its
grantmaking or an airline could provide free transportation for volunteers.
2) An organization could commit to do something "structural" that would help millions of
citizens get involved in service; for example, a division of colleges could give preference in
admission to those who have done service or the major television networks could agree to
carry regular programming related to service
3) Every organization could commit to increasing citizen service towards achieving one of
the national goals defined by the Summit. These goals include:
a) Caring and supportive adult relationships in the life of every child;
b) Safe places in every community to gather, meet and work together,
c) Educational experiences that create confidence, teach life-long lessons, and
develop skills for employment;
d) Personal prospects for work that encourage healthy behavior;
e) Opportunities to give back to others through one's own associations and
organizations.
For example, a business who wants to help achieve the first national goal could commit
to establish a mentoring program in all of its worksites; or a church could help achieve the
second national goal by committing to providing sites for teens to gather. Or, a company
could target the fourth goal by providing job training to welfare recipients.
In order to define its commitment, each type of organization in a sector would draw on the
interests of its people, its own "distinctive skills and competencies," and the work it has already
done in communities. In order to achieve the Summit vision, organizations from all three sectors
would be asked to make commitments They include:
SENT BY: POLF
; 9-10-96 ; 1:20PM :
POINTS OF LIGHT-
# 3/ 5
I. The Private Sector Businesses large and small, from 8 variety of industries
IL The Nonprofit Sector:
a. Communities of Faith -- individual congregations, as well as national
organizations, representing a variety of faiths
b. Human Service organizations - national and local nonprofits
C Educational institutions -- K-12, as well as the college and university level
d. Private and community foundations
III. The Public Sector:
a. Local, state and federal government (represented by elected officials such as
mayors and governors)
b. Government institutions (e.g.: Post Office; IRS, HUD)
The most powerful and important commitments could come from "intrasector" commitments,
where organizations collaborate across sectors to increase citizen service and make a significant
impact on communities. Often, the barriers to achieving community change occur not because of
a lack of resources, but because organizations within a community (or, on a national level) are not
working together. Nonprofits and government organizations could commit to work together to
better provide services to families and their children, using citizens to increase their impact:
businesses, churches, and schools in a community could develop year-round learning
opportunities for youth and adults. Or, through the Summit, barriers to citizen service itself --
such as volunteer liability issues or increasingly limited time for individuals to volunteer - could
be addressed through the commitments made by organizations working together Although these
"intrasector" commitments would be difficult to develop prior to the Summit, we will set out to
accomplish such commitments long-term.
The specific commitments should be defined through a process in the months leading up to the
Summit event, from now until February 1997. The commitments would be announced at the
Summit event itself, in Philadelphia, and implemented between February, 1997 and February,
2000, where the actual outcome of the implementation of the commitments could be shared with
the country at a second national Summit.
The nature and scope of the commitments is very important for two reasons. First, the scale of
the country's serious social problems demands that every institution and individual play a role in
addressing them; however, the current volume of effective work is not sufficient to change these
problems nationally. There is an urgent need for organizations to tap their resources and find
pragmatic ways to restore citizen engagement as a way of life in America. Therefore, this
commitment strategy is an important way to launch that process.
Secondly, these commitments will serve as examples to others, and will be unveiled through the
Summit process through the press, through the Internet, and through special events involving the
Presidents of the United States (such as a televised signing ceremony at Independence Hall during
the Summit event). Therefore, the commitments must be bold and impactful so that other
organizations nationwide will be inspired to make their own commitments in their own
communities.
By the time of the Summit, the goal would be to have hundreds of commitments from every
sector. However, we would hope to have as many as 35 "leadership" commitments from the
2
SENT BY POLF
; 9-10-96 ; 1:20PM ;
POINTS OF LIGHT-
i# 4/ 5
three sectors that would be highlighted through the Summit process and who could serve as the
core leadership group that would challenge their peers nationally to make commitments. This
"two part" strategy for the commitment process is outlined below.
The "Leadership 18," an affinity group of the largest 18 national nonprofits in the country, has
determined that it will make a collective commitment to the Summit. They will also be
represented in the Core Leadership Group.
Gaining Commitments: The Process
We would gain commitments from organizations using two strategies:
1) working with a leadership core group of 25-35 CEOs/organizations: and
2) making a broad-based appeal for commitments to organizations and associations of
organizations across the country, through the individuals and organizations that attend the
Summit, and through media outreach during and following the Summit event in
Philadelphia
Leadership Core Group
A leadership core group of the CEOs from 25-35 major organizations from the private, nonprofit,
and public sectors would be convened in the fall prior to the Summit event to:
a. Define commitments within and across sectors that would increase citizen action
significantly within the country,
b. Commit their own organizations to take (an) action;
C. Help the Summit stakeholders reach out to other organizations within their respective
sectors.
This leadership core group would be comprised of perhaps as many as 7 businesses from the
private sector; 21 from the nonprofit sector (with 7 each from three subsectors communities of
faith; nonprofits and private and community foundations, and educational institutions); and 7 from
the public sector.
By convening these different sectors, we would hope that both the level and the impact of the
commitments would be consistent; in addition, by sharing ideas across sectors, the commitments
could possibly lead to greater collaboration and communication, leading to greater impact
This core group, comprised of leaders in their fields, would help communicate the seriousness and
potential of the Summit plans to other organizations and the American public. We would
communicate the commitments made by this group through our outreach to national media and
coverage on the Summit Internet Web page. This group would be asked to attend special
event(s) with the Presidents at the Summit event, for example, an agreement signed by the
leadership core group could be presented to the Presidents in Independence Hall on the opening
day of the Summit.
Our plan is to convene another national Summit in the Year 2000, in order to celebrate what has
been done and to share the results of the work that was done in the three years following our
initial convening. Therefore, it is important that this leadership core group continue to work
together following the Summit event in February to help pursue ideas nationally or regionally that
3
SENT BY POLF
; 9-10-96 : 1:21PM ;
POINTS OF LIGHT-
# 5/ 5
may be suggested by local post-Summit activities in communities around the country, and to serve
as an important "think tank" for citizen action
The Points of Light Foundation, The Kellogg Foundation, and The Corporation for National
Service will convene the leadership group in early fall at Kellogg in Battle Creek, so that this
group would have enough time to develop their own commitments and assist the Summit
stakeholders in their outreach to other organizations
Broad-Based Appeal for Commitments
Once the Leadership Core Group and their peer commitments have been announced at the
Summit, a call would go out to the country for other organizations to also make commitments
Clearly the 25-35 organizations would be "standard setters" for a far more extensive process of
other leaders and organizations making commitments. This longer-term broadbased request for
commitments could be made in two ways: through the community delegations that attend the
Summit and through the media.
Through the Summit Participants. We anticipate that 75% of the attendees at the
Summit event will be individuals from over 200 communities nationwide. Their goal will
be to attend the Summit, learn from others, meet together in their individual community
groups at the Summit itself, and then return to their own communities to develop and
implement a plan that focuses on one or more of the national goals. Many of these
individuals will represent organizations in the three sectors defined above As part of
their involvement in the Summit, we are asking that they hold their own summits following
the February meeting and that they develop their own core leadership "commitments"
group as a part of that process that would reach out to their peers for commitments.
At the Summit event in Philadelphia, the community delegates would learn from each
other and from the sessions as to how to develop and implement such a strategy. With
this "cascading" approach, the Summit could then multiply the number of commitments
across the country.
Through the Media. The drive for commitments could be announced at a press
conference at the Summit with interested organizations invited to call an 800-number for
further information (This press conference would follow months of media outreach in
which the examples are given of outstanding actions that are being taken by organizations
around the country, and would highlight the commitments of the leadership core group
35). Though the most significant commitments are expected to be generated through
personal. rather than public appeals, we must make this opportunity open to everyone.
By developing materials that could be sent out to organizations following the Summit, we
would provide information about the entire Summit process and how organizations could
become involved over the three year period. We would track the results of this effort
through an evaluation and tracking process developed by FERA (the Summit evaluators)
over the three years.
4
CORPORATION
FOR NATIONAL
SERVICE
September 12, 1996
From: Steve Waldman
To: Harris Wofford
Shirley Sagawa
J Toscano
September 12, 1996
To:
Gregg Petersmeyer
CORPORATION
FOR NATIONAL
From: Steve Waldman
SERVICE
Re:
Edelman Communications Strategy
There are some great ideas in this strategy but it suffers from a misreading, in my opinion, of the
media's mood. I agree that there is more interest than in years in "what works" stories. That
creates an opportunity. But we need to be realistic that those stories are still the exceptions and
the dominant mood of editors is still cynical.
Specifically, while editors may believe that individuals can make a difference, they do not
connect that to solving social problems on a large scale. Volunteering is thought to be "nice" and
"worthwhile" but ultimately not important. Second, there is a skepticism that these stories can be
done in an interesting manner. This is a well-grounded skepticism. Most stories about volunteer
activities are not, in fact, compelling. There is a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy here: editors
don't think individual action stories are important so they assign B-team reporters who turn in
underwhelming work. But at a basic level, it really is easier to make bad news stories interesting
than good news stories.
That's why the strategies for coverage of the individual stories will not work unless it is preceded
by some jarring big-league news that says to editors: hey, this isn't just a story for the feature
well; this is important. There are only a few elements that work on that level:
The Presidents - If we don't get a good showing among the presidents, the summit probably
won't get much initial attention. Once they agree, in addition to the announcement, we
should try to get them all in a room to do a public service ad. That would be dramatic. Also,
to me the real key to this all along is Colin Powell. He should be viewed as just as important
as the Presidents.
Neck Wrenching Bi-Partisanship - Another attention-grabber would be if the strangest of
bedfellows seemed to be working together on this. Getting Clinton and Bush is a good start
but you need to do more. How about: a joint public service ad with Hillary Clinton and
Elizabeth Dole, both of whom, in their own way, have championed volunteerism and service.
1201 New York Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20525
Telephone 202-606-5000
Getting Things Done.
AmeriCorps, National Service
Learn and Serve America
National Senior Service Corps
Think about other unlikely combinations: Jesse Helms and Ted Kennedy; Ralph Reed and
Jesse Jackson; the head of the NAM and the head of the AFL-CIO; Charlton Heston and
Denzel Washington; Luciano Pavorati and Bon Jovi; Jack Kemp and Al Gore etc. In fact,
you might want to build the public service ads around a mix of famous people and ordinary
people in their communities coming together to solve problems.
The Commitments - This probably goes without saying but just in case: if you don't have
awesome commitments all the public relations help in the world won't mean a thing. Big
commitments will signal to reporters and editors that this is not just about celebrating
volunteerism but about a fundamental shift in thinking about problem solving.
Incidentally, I don't think the polling questions work. If I were an editor, I would not write a
story about a poll saying people think we have serious problems and would like (other) people to
volunteer more. It's simply not newsworthy. On the other hand, editors do love polls. I would
point the questions toward the fundamental lack of faith people have in all institutions about
problem solving - perhaps contrasting that with views about whether service or individual action
can help. Try doing a series of questions about people's sense of hopelessness about specific
problems and the institutions that are supposed to deal with them.
We should not be appealing to the media's sense of altruism. As with the Corporate world (and
these are just corporations, after all) it has to be a pitch around enlightened self-interest. We
don't want to urge them to write about these things because it's the right thing to do but because
there's evidence that the readers want it. In fact, why not have that be a poll question. Generally,
this plan has a naïve, and sometimes insulting, view of what press will cover when it suggests
that we "encourage them to write editorials on voluntarism"; have a documentary shown
nationally the night of the summit; or that newspapers cover the "delegate's departure at the
airport."
Overall, this plan is quite ambitious. If we were paying for it all, I'd say it was way too gold-
plated. If it's donated labor, though, it could be helpful.
Office of Public Affairs
Memorandum
To:
Harris Wofford
From:
Office of Public Affairs
Cc:
S. Sagawa, S. Waldman
Date:
September 13, 1996
Re:
Analysis of Edelman Proposal and Recommendations for Action
We've discussed with Shirley and Steve our assessment of the Edelman proposal and developed
recommendations for a Corporation response. This memorandum addresses three issues pertinent to the
planning for "A Summit of the Presidents and the People on a New Era of Citizenship in America"
(hereinafter "Summit"), evaluates the merits of the Edelman proposal and recommends next steps.
In light of the July 1996 memoranda and the Edelman proposal, the following issues must be
addressed:
1. What is the theme for the Summit, is it consistent with the Corporation's core messages, and
what benefit accrues to the Corporation's programs?
2. What resources will the Corporation commit to the Summit and how much "message control"
and decision making authority will the Corporation exercise? Is our role that solely of advisor
and sponsor with no ability to influence communications strategy?
3. How can we best use the Summit, including pre-Summit and post-Summit activities, as a vehicle
for generating Corporation media coverage?
The Summit can be a significant opportunity to pump up national service programs, attract
corporate partners and increase public support. We ought to put time and money into a Summit
that directly supports local programs that get things done. We do not need yet another event that
engenders a string of forums, conferences and other forgettable gatherings, the significance of which
largely wilts the minute they end. Our review of the Edelman proposal raised a number of serious
concerns.
Analysis of Edelman Proposal
The words "national service" do not appear in this document, nor are Corporation programs
mentioned. If we put serious taxpayer-funded resources into the Summit, then we should expect
a significant return on that investment awareness of our programs, recruitment support, focus
and reinforcement of our messages, recognition of our service leadership.
For example, the President has done a number of high-profile, one-time summits, i.e. business
leaders, with Hollywood, et al. And while these may have gotten some things started and
incrementally raised public consciousness, by and large they were one-day stories. Our concern
is that's what our Summit will end up being--a one-day (or two-day if we're lucky) story. An
event isn't a strategy. Our deepest concern is that, to date, the message is that of "a National
Summit to announce a series of mini-summits, to culminate in a Summit 2000."
We're concerned ( but not surprised) that the Edelman Summit communications strategy relies
upon huge expenditures for outside consulting services. Like many "pro-bono" plans written by
PR firms, this should be seen more as a "bid" than a "strategy." The promotion ideas offered are
solid and unremarkable--the obvious activities--target the morning shows, pitch Generation Xers'
magazines, do an op-ed campaign, announce a press conference with a famous person, et al.
without a plan of implementation or set of clear goals.
An issue raised at the joint Board meeting in San Francisco remains un-addressed - the Summit
plan does not segment-out target audiences with a specific plan to reach each one. Rather, it
continues to refer to the "general public" as "the" audience. Unless they can secure an all-
network roadblock for the "national showing" of the documentary, the plan, as written, is
unlikely to have an impact on public opinion.
Some of Edelman's suggestions should not be executed -- particularly research and polls
designed to arrive at the conclusion that a Summit is necessary. Is it worthwhile to the purpose
of the Summit to pay Gallup to find out if Americans think "the social problems we face
constitute a crisis?" Or whether they think "one person can make a difference in another's life?"
Another idea--sponsor a TV documentary and offer corporations and foundations a chance to
fund it. This program "will be shown nationally." What's the outgoing message? Who are you
trying to reach? Who is right now committed to a national airing? Next, the idea for a new toll-
free number 1-800-CITIZEN. Yet another toll-free number to "transform inspiration into
action." What about our current ones? What about Points of Light's current number? Then, a
new President's citizenship award. We already have one. The annual President's service awards-
-they've been around since Reagan--are of interest in the home markets of recipients. They have
no national news or marketing value.
You may recall the ceremonies that accompanied the launch of the Points of Light. They kicked
off with an excellent TV PSA campaign--they had big communications partners and the
networks ate the ads up. These moving and powerful ads urged people to call an 800-line if they
wanted to "do something real." The 800-line referred people to local Volunteer Action Centers.
Supposedly the callers were to linked with service opportunities. Bill and Mike remember at the
time that local agencies complained they had no means to enlist more volunteers or place many
of the callers. We never heard that this huge and costly Points of Light push added anything to
volunteer programs. We hope the Summit doesn't end up that way.
To wrap this up--Edelman's general media-targeting ideas are fine, but much of this plan is just a
compendium of ideas drawn from PR101, with no prioritization or strategy. The Corporation's goal should
be to make sure it aims at promoting and/or supporting national service -- it should set concrete,
measurable goals. As written, it aims chiefly to promote the notion that volunteering is good and more
Americans should do it. Most people already think so. The Corporation's goal should be to ensure that the
Summit strategy helps build identity and support for AmeriCorps, Senior Corps and L&SA, and tighten
the links between national service and the larger world of volunteering.
Message Control
If we are not the principal decision maker with regard to development and implementation of
communications strategy for the Summit, then we have two major problems. First, we can not
guarantee that the Summit's themes and message will reinforce the Corporation's core messages - in
fact they may contradict or weaken them. Second, we are in a defensive mode where we have to
2
scramble to react to whatever twists and turns the Summit's communications strategy takes. In terms
of planning and scheduling our communications efforts, these are inherently fatal flaws.
This is not an event where we can cut and run-we want to participate and we must participate. The
challenge is to participate in a meaningful manner, get the results we want ( honor our core messages
and limited resources) and strengthen our partnership with POL.
The Corporation's Communications Strategy re: the Summit
We aggressively position the CEO as "the" spokesperson on national service prior to the Summit
(see "Reading" communications strategy memo). The CEO walks in having successfully
positioned "Service As Strategy" using the Reading initiative as the model - and the Corporation
as a laboratory of successful models to be replicated.
The CEO and President Clinton announce the 5 recommendations produced by the post-election
task force to take national service to the next level, the challenge being something like this:
When folks on both sides of the aisle agree that government cannot solve all of our problems,
that citizens must take more responsibility, that communities must be strengthened, that
providing educational opportunity is a key priority - and, critically, the smoke of the election
season has cleared - how do we employ "service as strategy" in meeting the challenges we face?
The coordinated national service campaign is launched, using "Service as Strategy" as the
message and "NS Heroes" as a thematic tool (see Public Affairs FY1997 Annual Plan), positing
National Service as a laboratory of successful, replicable models of community problem-solving.
The Corporation's aim for the Summit should be to shape it for specific results that benefit
national service and it's programs "Galvanizing and sustaining a new era of citizenship" and
bringing Americans the message that "volunteering is a means of connecting with others" is
wonderful rhetoric, but our mission is to bolster our program's specific needs (e.g. "recruiting
the next generation of heroes") The Summit communications plan says we should use the
Summit to deliver -- as "core messages" -- a list of hopes and generalities that people already
believe ("Individuals--just like you--can make a difference and are doing so every day.").
Individuals just like me? REALLY? This is not exactly exciting stuff, and it does not directly or
indirectly strengthen our programs.
We should assure that, two months after the Summit, The Corporation has actual
accomplishments to show for it, and its "messages" should aim at results in communities--more
kids taught to read, more rivers cleaned--goals--numbers--not fluff.
3
Recommendations
Knowing that the Summit has too little time to carry out the broad, direction-less, un-funded plan
as presented, we recommend the Corporation focus our efforts on leveraging the CEO's
involvement in the National Summit rather than the Summit itself. The existing proposal spins
out into mini-summits, school workshops, town meetings, annual commemoration -- a
bureaucratic quagmire. Don't commit scarce taxpayer-funded Corporation resources to a series
of feel good events that do not benefit our programs.
Do use the Summit's as a means to promote Corporation messages prior to the Summit, as
another hook for press, and to launch our coordinated national service marketing/recruitment
support efforts.
The CEO should request that Public Affairs be represented at all summit communications
planning sessions and serve as the Corporation's communications liaison, not to lead or take
responsibility for the Summit's strategy, but to ensure that our plans complement and reinforce
each other.
The CEO and General Counsel should issue clear guidance to Corporation staff on their summit
roles and boundaries, assuming significant oversight from Congress and the Inspector General.
The CEO and the Board should decide ASAP the level of resources you are willing to commit to
the summit and be explicit on the criteria you will use to evaluate the return on this investment.
4