UROC Strategic Planning Phase 1 Report (PDF format) - Urban ...

Strategic Planning ProcessPhase OneReport on Interviews,Findings, & Preparationfor the Futures ConferenceA Partnership FormationUniversity of Minnesota andNorthside CommunityPeriod Covered September to December 2008Prepared by The Lyceum Group

www.uroc.umn.eduStrategic Planning ProcessPhase OneReport on Interviews,Findings, & Preparationfor the Futures ConferenceA Partnership FormationUniversity of Minnesota andNorthside CommunityPeriod Covered September to December 2008Prepared by Erline Belton and Reynolds-Anthony Harris,The Lyceum GroupThe University of Minnesota is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access toits programs, facilities and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin,sex, age, marital status, disability, public assistance status, veteran status or sexual orientation.This publication/material is available in alternative formats upon request. Direct requests toStephanie Wilkes at wilk0268@umn.edu or 612-626-8839.

Table of ContentsContents1. Introductiona. Purpose and Process Page 1b. Executive Summary Page 2c. Recommendations Page 62. University Interviews and Summary Findings Page 7a. Comments from the University Interviews for the UROC to Consider Page 83. Community Interviews and Summary Findings Page 10a. Community Comments for the University to Consider Page 11b. Recommendations to Improve Community Partnership Page 124. The Futures Conference Page 14a. Key Concepts to be Addressed by the Conference Page 145. AppendicesA. Interview Questionnaire Page 15B. List of Interviewees Page 16C. Proposed List of Faith-Based Collaborators Page 18

Lyceum Group & PartnersNovember 24, 2008IntroductionReport of interviews with University and Community Partners: September 15-17, October 23-24,2008Purpose and ProcessThe purpose of the interviews was to gain the insight and perspectives of the various stakeholder groupswho have an investment or an interest in the Urban Research and Outreach/Engagement Center (UROC)and its implementation. Our intent was to get their current understanding of the UROC and its role, aswell as to determine what should happen at the upcoming Futures Conference scheduled for February20-21, 2009. We asked questions to determine what people saw as the challenges and opportunitiesfacing the formation and implementation of the UROC concept.Fifty (50) people from many different stakeholder groups were scheduled and interviewed by twoconsultants of The Lyceum Group. Their selection was determined by Dr. Irma McClaurin, Dr. RobertJones and President Robert Bruininks, in consultation with others at the University of Minnesota; wealso received recommendations from community members with whom we met. The interviews ranged induration from 45 minutes to 2 hours, and took place across the campus and the city. There were twogroup meetings, one of which involved a community group at the Minneapolis Urban League—thoughonly one person was originally scheduled and he invited the others—and the second group meetingoccurred with Extension at the university, which has several different programs scheduled to be housedin the UROC. We interviewed key decision makers, including the president of the university, the mayorand city council members, individuals in the city‘s department of economic development, as well asclergy. A list of those interviewed is attached (Appendix B). It should be noted that prior to this processand throughout, Lyceum held ongoing meetings and discussions with Robert Jones, Senior VicePresident for System Academic Administration (SAA), the administrative unit in the university withinwhich the UROC is located, and Irma McClaurin, Associate Vice President for SAA and ExecutiveDirector of the UROC.The interview questionnaire posed 10 questions that would enable us to acquire the broadest possibleperspective on the UROC and its future in the Northside community. We used the inquiry questionnaireto discover what has gone well and what those interviewed perceived as the major challenges; we alsoasked those interviewed what role they or their organization might be in the future relative to workingwith the UROC. We also provided information about the Futures Conference and discussed with themthe role it could play in helping to shape the UROC‘s strategic plan, and how it might clarify theirrelationship(s) with the Center. We have attached the inquiry questionnaire (Appendix A).1

Executive SummaryIn our opinion, the story of the university and the community partnership is a story that continues tounfold. While there is history between the university and the community that carries a cloud of mistrust,the UROC itself is truly in its formative stage. The challenge before the UROC is to frame its futurebased on the mission and vision that will grow out of this planning process. We believe people werevery forthcoming and shared a range of perspectives, as you would expect. Most interviewed would loveto have the story that will be told in the future to be one of ―true partnership.‖ The opportunities and thechallenges ahead are to engage the community and the university in respectful and informative dialoguesas they define together what makes each a ―true partner.‖Overall, the story today suggests a lack of understanding about what was intended as the UROC‘sprimary focus. The Executive Director has called it ―The Shape of the Elephant.‖ No one is inagreement or clear about what the UROC‘s role is or is not. There also exists confusion about thedistinction between the University Northside Partnership (UNP) and the UROC, and whether they are(or should be in the future) the same entity or two different entities. Regardless of whom we interviewedinside the university or across the city and community about the role of the UROC and the role of theUNP, the same questions continued to surface. Do they both need to exist? If both do exist, what is theirdistinct role and purpose? How do they complement or support the partnership? Despite this confusionand questions, there is a fair degree of optimism and enthusiasm about the potential significance of thecontributions the UROC could make to the community.Many of the comments we heard simply reaffirmed that this story is in its early formation. We heard,over and over again, whether it was a community member or university people, that there is a real needto define these partnerships and make them what we want them to be. In many ways there is a uniqueopportunity to be realized in the planning and implementation of the partnership between the Northsidecommunity and the university. Serious consideration must be given to outcomes that make a differencein the day-to-day reality of community life, and also respond to the educational and research mission ofuniversity research and outreach programs and projects that are being proposed.While opportunities exist, the main challenge going forward is to define clear short and long term goalsthat speak to how the UROC will provide concrete benefits to the community, the university, and otherpartners that include the city and county, as well as local businesses and the philanthropic community.MOVING FORWARD WITH COMMITMENT AND ―DELIBERATE SPEED‖There is a real sense of urgency both in the community and the university that the latter needs to ―movequickly and deliberately.‖ As one interviewee put it, “the university must have a „new story‟ to tell thatwill compel the community to use and collaborate with the UROC as a partner.” The communityspeaks of its concerns with a unified voice. If the interviews tell the story correctly, though interviewedseparately there was strong consensus among the perspectives about the current relationships and thepotential for a strong partnership in the future. We heard consistently that “the university needs to get itsown house in order before coming to the community.” The community is desperate for ―one-stopshopping;‖ they desire a single point of access to acquire university resources and information about allthat might be available. Many respondents lamented, ―the university is so big, it is often a maze to figureout where you go to get information, or to get answers about what is available.‖ This theme was2

consistent across all the interviews and will require specific strategies and processes around thecoordination and communication to address it. Simply responding to the community‘s desire for greatercoordination of activities emanating from the university into their community alone has the potential tobe a significant short-term goal that could result in a big win for the university, and gain it tremendouscredibility in the community. We believe there is a genuine interest to see the university as a ―friend anda helper with the ‗little stuff,‘ so that the community can tackle the larger issues,‖ as one person framedit.The former chair of the Minneapolis Urban League (MUL) Board, Clayton Taylor, expressed an interestin working more closely with the UROC. He sees the potential for synergy between the UROC and theMUL. From the perspective of the faith-based community, there was a strong recommendation fromFather O‘Connell that a faith-based support team be formed to support the UROC initiative. Hesuggested the following people be part of a team to offer advice and counsel: Rev. Kelly Chatman, thesenior pastor at Redeemer Lutheran Church, Rufus and Diane Thibodeaux of the Word of Life, and thePatchwork Quilt group who work with Al McGuire, former CEO at United Health and retired executive(Appendix C). The UROC should consider this proposal, as these people are well-respected in thecommunity. Father O‘Connell also suggested that Bill English and Randy Staten be included inwhatever community strategy is used to get community support. [We learned later from the ExecutiveDirector that both Bill English and Randy Staten, as representatives of the Coalition of the BlackChurches and African American Leadership Summit, are members of the University NorthsidePartnership (UNP).]TRANSFORMING A CULTURE OF INDIVIDUALISM AND SILOSInternal to the university, we heard voices that reaffirm the same story we heard from the community.Several people interviewed shared experiences similar to those described by the community. Those weinterviewed inside the university talked about the lack of interdisciplinary collaboration andaccountability that is needed to facilitate cross pollination and a sharing of research. They felt that insidethe university many people were unfamiliar with what is being done in the Northside community, andlacked knowledge about who from the university is doing research or programs in North Minneapolis.The community and university interviewees all raised the following critical questions several times:How do we make research applicable to the daily lives of people in the community? As a Universitypartner, shouldn‟t it be that you are there to serve the community needs? Shouldn‟t there be somestrategic collective thinking around how to teach the community to use the results from the researchthe university is doing? These are important questions from both sides that we recommend the UROCaggressively pursue with the stated outcome being the development of a framework and guidingprinciples for how future research and outreach in the Northside is to occur. While the university maynot be able to guarantee this with everyone working in North Minneapolis, it can be a core set ofprinciples for any researcher or program affiliated with the UROC. Doing this will encourage thecommunity to make judgments about whom they will partner with, thereby encouraging researchers towork through the UROC structure.3

DEVELOPING ―CHAMPIONS‖ FOR UROCMany of those interviewed agreed that there was a real need for a focal point for both the university andthe community. The concept of the UROC as a response to this need was accepted as an important stepin the right direction, despite their limited understanding of the UROC concept. It should also be notedthat inside the university many of those interviewed expressed a willingness to help make the idea of theUROC a reality; they simply felt either they had not been asked or didn‘t know how they couldcontribute resources from their departments. Examples of departments with resources that hold thepotential for stronger collaboration with the UROC include: the University of Minnesota Foundation,government and community relations, the Office of Equity and Diversity, and the Office of PublicEngagement.When university people were asked to define what they thought the UROC should be, the responseswere varied. They ranged from some seeing it as simply a building that houses university programs to anentity with a coordinating function that will provide a focal point of entry and integration ofinterdisciplinary research that originates from the university and takes place in North Minneapolis andwill benefit the community. With only one exception, most of those interviewed inside the universityfelt there was a lack of interdisciplinary integration across the multiple campuses.THE NEED FOR RESEARCH AND PROGRAM COORDINATIONThere was not one person with whom we spoke who could state specifically the number of researchprojects currently taking place in the Northside community. Most felt this was a problem that neededto be addressed, and wanted someone to take the leadership to do it. Many went on to say that this willbe very difficult to do, because most departments within the university work in their own ―silos‖ andwant to do their own thing. Several suggested that the university structure, systems and budgetingprocesses do not support collaboration. There was also some ―sensitivity‖ among some to the fact thatthe UROC is being touted as something ―new;‖ existing programs want public acknowledgment of thework others have done prior to the UROC concept. For others, there remains confusion about thedifferentiation between the UROC and other university efforts in the Northside. There is a need forpublic recognition of the other related and similar projects that have occurred in the past, in other partsof the metro area, or are currently in progress in North Minneapolis. This is a task clearly complicatedby the fact that no single, coordinated database of faculty research and university outreach exists at thistime. Also, for the most part, previous research has been transactional in nature, in that, the universityleaves the community after the project is done.MOVING FORWARDDespite the challenges described above, there is a tremendous opportunity here to leverage the UROCas the permanent axis of the university so that it may become a living, breathing, and sustainablemember of the community. This would be a welcomed change for the community. One good startingpoint would be to strengthen Dr. McClaurin‘s visibility in the community. From their perspective, she isnew to the community and has not had a ―proper formal introduction‖ to key community stakeholdersand leaders. She is relatively unknown and needs to be more visible in the community. We recommendshe make appointments with key stakeholders and leaders to discuss the UROC and get support for theconcept.4

CONCLUSIONMany community stakeholders view the university as unorganized. As several community intervieweesnoted, ―No one seems to know what others are doing in the university or in our community.‖ Effectivecommunication was identified as a serious problem both internal to the university, as well as from theuniversity to the community. We note that the UROC has created information packets and established awebsite and has an extensive listserv, yet many in the community feel that they ―do not know‖ what isgoing on. The UROC will have to dig deep into understanding exactly what this means, and whatmediums they should use to inform the community. This requires immediate response.Another area that requires attention right now is the fact that the community, for the most part, does notfeel as if they are treated as equal partners, and not just by the UROC but by many individualresearchers as well. The community has a real mistrust of ―Research‖ and how any forthcoming resultswill be used. Some noted that ―the use of drugs on our kids for research is unacceptable.‖ Someexpressed the following: they feel that projects are driven by what the university wants to do, versuswhat can be useful to the community. On the other hand, the community and government officials alikebelieve that if the university could marshal the expertise and knowledge gained from the research toeffect changes to improve the lives of those who live in the Northside community that this could make asustainable difference in the quality of life for residents. The main question most posed is “what haschanged in the community as a result of the university‟s research?” This is the question that shouldbe answered as a prerequisite for every research project proposed for the Northside community; this maybe one of the guiding principles of the UROC and those affiliated with it.NEXT STEPSWith respect to the Futures Conference, most believe it is a good idea and welcome the opportunity toparticipate and influence how the UROC partners with the Northside. There is a genuine willingness, onthe part of those whom we interviewed both inside the university and outside, to help shape and definethe goals of the UROC‘s strategic plan. The challenge for the UROC will be to take the university andcommunity stakeholders‘ voices seriously as its mission and vision unfold and move forward; theUROC will need to visibly show that these voices and needs have influenced its strategic plan. Thisprocess, from the interviews to the Future‘s Conference, is providing an opportunity for the university tobegin to re-establish trust in the community. Accomplishing this will require that the UROC staff, theUNP-UROC Core Team, chief administrators and the President consistently model new ways of doingbusiness and research inside the university (culture change and paradigm shifts), as well as outside theuniversity walls in the community. The university must commit itself to defining in a transparent andhonest way what it means to be a “true partner” with the community, and through the UROC facilitatethe process of engaging the community in defining what partnership means to them.5

RecommendationsBased on extensive interviews with 50 internal and external stakeholders, the Lyceum Group makes thefollowing recommendations as the first phase of the UROC developing a strategic plan to guide it overthe next five years:1. Define the UROC‘s mission, vision, and the role it will play in the community.2. Define the role of the Executive Director, clearly delineating the expectations forcollaboration as well as those areas over which she has authority.3. Develop a consistent description of the UROC based on the mission and vision, and ensurethat it is used by everyone throughout the university and in SAA and becomes part of thebranding and marketing for the UROC.4. Establish an interdisciplinary university advisory the UROC team to work with the ExecutiveDirector that includes representation of Deans, the University of Minnesota Foundation,community/government relations, communications and marketing, and representativepartners from the community. This may be a Champions group that is distinct from anadvisory committee.5. For the Northside compile a database on all existing research projects occurring, with contactinformation, the benefits to the community, the relevant department and make available tothe community through the UROC.6. Establish systems and processes to create a central resource document (as per above) as theUROC unfolds to identify all research/outreach efforts that are being proposed for the futurein Northside community.7. Develop a strong communication strategy with funding that informs and updates thedevelopment stages of the UROC to internal and external audiences. As part of the above,make the UROC‘s strategic plan a public document and communicate its progress in clearand accessible terms and formats.8. Facilitate a process with university/community voices to clarify the governance structure ofthe UNP and its relationship to the UROC, and ensure similar input for the governancestructure of the UROC moving forward. Facilitate greater inclusion of different culturalgroups, broad-based clergy, media, other non-profits, and individual residents‘ voices instructures going forward, such as the UNP Community Affairs Committee.9. Consider possible ways to strengthen the inclusion of the faith-based community.10. Develop strong branding, marketing, and evaluation strategies to support the UROC‘sstrategic plan.6

Comments from the University Interviews for UROC to Consider1. The UROC must not take on or promise more than it can deliver; the UROC can‘t appear to bethe savior.2. The university‘s interdisciplinary research in the Northside community cannot continue to dobusiness as usual; this is an opportunity to leverage and maximize resources. The questions andchallenges raised by the community dictate that internally university people must get on the samepage (i.e., better coordination of research, information, and requests to the community); also,every researcher working in the Northside must be required to share data, their methodology, andkey learnings with the community and with colleagues across the university. Eliminate the silos.3. Develop new models for how the university can work internally—i.e., find points ofcollaboration, encourage transparency and sharing of information, encourage honesty amongthose working in the community and less competitiveness, and support those research efforts thatwork towards interdisciplinary solutions that benefit the community.4. There must be university-wide clearly defined policies, values and guidelines for how theuniversity will conduct outreach and research in the Northside community in order to buildhealthy sustainable partnerships (look at the University of Louisville as a potential model forhow they centralized all research in the community through a single office).5. Find more effective ways to communicate university successes to the community; people don‘tknow what the university is doing, what has been successful, and what has not. The UROC canbecome the vehicle for this information delivery and create the opportunities (through programsand outreach activities) to teach and share knowledge about the research occurring in NorthMinneapolis.6. Engage the community in genuine and authentic ways that demonstrate the university cares (theNorthside Seed grant program is a good example of how a small amount of resources ($50,000)can yield significant good will; these kinds of outreach and support should be continued andpublicized). Towards this end, systematic follow-up is critical—i.e., doing what you say you willdo is essential to rebuilding trust.7. The university must present a unified face to the community; this means that individuals,especially those working in SAA, cannot describe the UROC or the outreach activities in theirown terms, but must agree to use a common set of agreed-upon descriptors. These should bedeveloped by the UROC with input from key stakeholders. Ultimately, the UROC is responsiblefor creating the messaging. This is especially important with regards to the UNP work groupsand the FIPSE work groups. The latter is sometimes described as the FIPSE Project, as if it hasno connection to the UROC, and other times it is described as FIPSE-UROC. There must be aconsistent description internally, which all staff, regardless of whom they report to, adhere to.Clarification is needed about the Center for Innovation and Economic Development. This is akey area for community concern and scrutiny. It has been described as a center within theUROC, and other times it is described as an expansion of the Office for Business andCommunity Economic Development (BCED). This is confusing because as a core programwithin the UROC, its mission is clearly linked to the outcomes that the UROC hopes to achieve.8

8. Every research or outreach effort must be accountable to someone at the university for how itimplements and has a presence in the Northside community (one-stop shopping and a singlesource of accountability).9. The university should encourage new models, processes and norms for how work is doneinternally to promote collaboration, transparency, accountability, financial cost effectiveresearch, and reduced competiveness. SAA and those who report to the Senior Vice Presidentshould be first in line to reflect this behavior. The ability to eliminate silo behavior must bemodeled in SAA and everyone associated with the UROC‘s development.10. Find ways to invest in and celebrate one another‘s successes (no more silos).11. Develop clear guidelines and policies for occupants of the UROC building (this will set the toneand dictate standards to those who are willing to follow the new model; in addition, the UROCmust establish regular ongoing meetings with occupants to reinforce a culture of collaborationand interaction). These should be distributed before the building renovations are completed.12. The UROC must develop an internal/external communication strategy. (We are aware that theUROC has expanded the position of University Liaison to include Communications Coordinator,and that they have been working on strategic communications since the arrival of the ExecutiveDirector. Still, more needs to be done, and the position, which is now occupied by a 25%person, must be replaced full-time. The Strategic Plan can guide the breadth of experience theCommunications Coordinator should have, and might be combined with another area of need,such as Evaluation).13. All of those associated with the UROC (occupants, work group leaders, etc.) must set clear goalsand expectations, and be held accountable for their own actions with each other (the leadershipof the Senior Vice President will be crucial in this area; he must hold individuals accountable forfollowing the UROC party line, and consider what he will do with those who deviate. Internalsupport for the UROC is vital to its success).9

Community Interviews and Summary FindingsSome voices in the community believe that it is important to ask the community what they wanthelp with, rather than to assume that the “university knows best.” There was significant discussionabout the closure of the General College. Most know nothing of the Minnesota promise and have littleinformation about the fact that the numbers of students from the Northside community entering andgraduating have outperformed those who attended the former General College. This is only one examplethat points to the lack of information being shared about successes that the university has had in thecommunity.The concept of the UROC has the potential to be seen by the community as an indicator that theuniversity is sincere in its desire to be a true partner, and is willing to do things differently. Some in thecommunity see a dysfunctional system within the university. This is reflected by the numerous researchprojects that seem to have no relationship to one another, or that duplicate efforts in one way or another.Some non-profits have complained to the Executive Director that they receive as many as twenty-fiverequests to be partners and have difficulty managing how to respond to these requests. They are alsohesitant to say no because they feel they will be cut off, and so they redirect needed attention from theirown programs to collaborate with university researchers.Within the community there is a sincere fear of how research is done, particularly as it relates to the useof drugs. They want to see a process put in place to have research projects clearly state theirrequirements for implementation and have each outreach component defined and described in languagethat they can understand. They want to also have clear program descriptions that state in very specificterms how the research will serve their community‘s growth both economically by providing jobs and inways that are health-sustaining and improve the quality of their lives for the long-term. The communityacknowledges that there will be the potential for conflict and want to see the university manage thatconflict in a healthy way. The community believes strongly that the university must be more visibleand share the knowledge and wisdom they have gained from their research with the community.They insist that all research must be positioned in the context of making their lives better. Trust inresearch is a major issue in this community with a long history and must be treated with respect as theUROC moves forward in reestablishing the belief that research can be useful and helpful to thecommunity and the university.The people we interviewed spoke of an acknowledged recognition of a class divide developing withinthe Northside community as whites and other ethnicities move into the different neighborhoods of NorthMinneapolis. The challenge for the UROC will be to create programs and processes that will allow alldiverse voices to be heard. Finally, the UROC must be cognizant that there are naysayers, the ―selfappointedleaders‖ who do not speak for everyone, yet it is important to hear their voices too. We wishto reiterate the statement that there cannot be more broken promises. It will be important to the UROC‘ssuccess that whatever commitments are made that they be honored. As mentioned in the executivesummary, it is very important that Dr. McClaurin be ―formally‖ introduced to the Northside community,and the community at large, if she is to be accepted and legitimized by the community.10

Community Comments for the University to Consider1. Northside is the most studied community; what have been the benefits to our community?Where are the data on past research located? How can the community access thisinformation?2. We see an opportunity to study and influence the impact of violence in our community.3. We would like to see more seed grants and also would like to see community people trainedto do research, which would create jobs in the community.4. Where are the reports that scholars promise to send back to the community on researchresults, and the benefit to us?5. We would like to see projects that celebrate and honor what we have done in our owncommunities to make our lives better.6. Trust must be rebuilt between the university and the community.7. There must be some thought given to how we can begin a healing process.11

Recommendations to Improve Community PartnershipIt is our belief that there is a real opportunity to improve how the university defines its relationship withthe Northside community. It must be a thoughtful and transparent process that engages all parties, bothinternal to the university and in the community. There is a clear indication from our interviews that thereis a strong need for a dedicated and seriously focused coordination of how researchers should approachpartnering with the Northside community. If the UROC is to serve as this focal point, its role would beto work with interdisciplinary departments within the university to commit to providing a unified face tothe community (We understand that currently a committee headed by Dean Frank Cerra is working todevelop principles and guidelines for faculty doing outreach and engaged scholarship; the UROC mustincorporate these into its operating principles and guidelines to ensure consistency).The UROC, as it was conceptualized, is uniquely positioned to provide this service with an eye towardsa systemic, holistic, and sustainable approach that is a working model of what a true partnership can be.As the UROC‘S mission, vision, and charter become more defined, it is essential that it communicatesand reflects this new model and framework of how to approach an authentic collaborative urbanpartnership internally to the university and externally with the community. For this model to besuccessful, it is important that the lines of authority of the UROC‘s Executive Director be clear, thatexpectations for accountability (within the university and within the community) are defined, and that ithas a permanent operating budget to support its progress and to sustain itself. Finally, the UROC‘svision must be sanctioned and championed by the leadership of the university, and it must establish acadre of Champions external to the university as well.A central reoccurring theme throughout all of interviews was that of the necessity of rebuilding trustand healing past disappointments between the university and the community. This issue is one thatdemands serious focus and attention. It has the potential to help or hinder the partnership in itsformative stages and in the future. Some of what we state below has been stated previously, but werepeat it as a way to stress the urgency that it has for the community.1. The university must not promise more than it can deliver. The current atmosphere of mistrust andbroken promises is a scar that must be healed.2. The university cannot continue to conduct business as usual when doing research in NorthMinneapolis. Its faculty and staff must present a unified and informed face to the community andspeak the same message when they appear before the community.3. The university must have the following as a value and guiding principle: to engage thecommunity before research is proposed and ask the community what they need and want (theUROC must find ways to systematically survey community needs and communicate this to theuniversity‘s research faculty).4. There must be a commitment by the university to develop jobs for the community related toresearch being conducted in the community wherever possible, if the university is to be viewedas credible (seed grants, research training, lab assistants on campus, etc.).12

5. University research and outreach must concretely describe the real benefits it will provide to thecommunity and help the community feel less ―helpless.‖6. Outreach and Engagement activities must also teach the community how to use research data andfindings, and make them applicable to their lives.7. Outreach and Engagement efforts must find ways to celebrate and honor the strengths of thecommunity rather than operate on a deficit model (the UROC now uses the language of―enhancing capacity‖ versus ―building capacity‖).8. The UROC must develop short and long term strategies; the former should be aimed atsupporting the community with small stuff. That is, the UROC needs a win to begin to rebuildtrust, and through short-term successes can demonstrate the perceived value of its presence inNorthside.9. The UROC must model an inclusive approach and process throughout its development. Thecommunity now has multiple ethnic groups and media represented, which should be reflected inthe UROC staffing, as well as committee or advisory council representations. At the largersystems level, the university itself must respond to the new and changing demographics (forexample, the ―Driven to Discover‖ ads are often only done in the mainstream (white)newspapers; ethnic media should be viewed as outlets for these messages and for the economicopportunities they provide, since advertisements generate revenue for the media. The universityshould consider how ethnic media might be engaged to recruit ethnically diverse students to theuniversity through their outlets).13

The Futures ConferenceThe frame for the strategic plan is to hold a Futures Conference that convenes a diverse group ofstakeholders to shape and influence the concept of the UROC as a partner in the community. Thepurpose of the conference is to gather the voices of the community and the university to focus on thefuture of the partnership and make recommendations. Further, the intent is to take the recommendationsgenerated from up to 80 stakeholders at the Futures Conference to develop the strategic goals for thefinal strategic plan. The interview data collected in Phase One of the UROC‘s Strategic Planning processwill be used to frame the questions and format that will inform the design of the conference.The inquiry questionnaire used for the interviews generated excitement about the conference, and thoseinterviewed were encouraged that perhaps there was hope for a ―true partnership‖ that was collaborativeand responsive to the community and the university. The university voices were excited to consider thepossibilities of working in new ways internally and with the community.Finally, it is our belief that the Futures Conference will model a process of inclusiveness and opennessthat reflect the values and structures needed to rebuild and expand the relationships between communityand university partners.Key Concepts to be addressed by the Conference1. Define the vision for the UROC.2. Develop a set of guiding principles for how the UROC will operate in the community.3. Explore long held beliefs of stakeholders and create possibilities for new ones to form.4. Document recommendations for key strategic goals for the UROC‘s strategic plan.5. Honor the voices and role of key stakeholders by clarifying next steps; be clear about follow–up and commitments.6. Develop the process of rebuilding community and trust.14

Appendix AUROC Inquiry QuestionnaireDate: Name: Position: Role:Contact Information: Telephone: E-mail: Cell:1. What has your role been with the UROC?2. What are your expectations, hopes and dreams about what it can be?3. What has gone well from your perspective?4. What have been the challenges?5. What do you see as challenges going forward?6. What do you see as opportunities for the university and the community?7. What do you want to see happen at the futures planning gathering?8. What outcomes are a must to feel the session was successful from where you sit?9. What do you want your role to be going forward? How do you want to be communicated with?10. Is there anything that is important for you to share that we haven‘t discussed?Additional comments:Interviewer‘s notes/observations:15

Appendix BUROC Strategic PlanningInterviews Conducted by Erline Belton and Reynolds-Anthony Harris of the Lyceum GroupSeptember 15-17 & October 23-24, 2008NameC Judy BakerC Gary CunninghamC Betty Ellison-HarpoC William EnglishC Henrietta FaulknerC Al FlowersC Archie GivensC Kelly HardemanC Josie JohnsonC Anne LongC Zack MetoyerC Barbara MilonC Father Michael O‘ConnellC Sherrie PughC Reverend Randy StatenC Clayton TylerC Wesley WalkerC Stella Whitney-WestU Darlyne BaileyU Rusty BarceloU Dale BlythU Barbara BrandtU Frank CerraU Dante CicchettiU Kathie DotyU Bev DurganAffiliationDirector of Operations, Parents in Community Action, Inc. (Tour of PICA)Vice President of Programs, Northwest Area FoundationCommunity MemberCo-Chair, Coalition of Black Churches/African American LeadershipSummitCommunity MemberCommunity MemberAlumni, UROC Building Owner‘s Representative, CEO, LegacyManagement and Development Corp.Community MemberHuman rights and social justice activist, former Senior Fellow at the HHHInstitute of Public Affairs, Associate Vice President and RegentExecutive Director, Plymouth Christian Youth CenterCommunity MemberDirector, Phyllis Wheatley Community CenterPastor, Church of the Ascension (North Minneapolis)Executive Director, Northside Resident Redevelopment CouncilChair, Coalition of Black Churches/African American Leadership SummitFormer Minneapolis Urban League Board ChairDirector, Northway Community TrustCEO, Northpoint Health and Wellness CenterAssistant to the President, UNP Workgroup FacilitatorVice President and Vice Provost for Equity and DiversityAssociate Dean of Youth Development, U of M ExtensionAssistant Vice President for Education, Academic Health CenterSenior Vice President for Health Sciences, Academic Health CenterDirector, Child and Family Center (UROC Space User)Hennepin-University LiaisonDean, U of M Extension16

U Wokie FreemanU Andy FurcoU Lori GravenU Robert JonesU Pam LoweU Geoff MaruyamaU Irma McClaurinU Scott McConnellU Jan MorlockU Kathleen O‘BrienU President Robert BruininksU Mike SchmittU Tom ScottU Dick SeneseU Karen ShirerU Hawona Sullivan JanzenU Craig TaylorU Makeda Zulu-GillespieOutreach Manager, Government and Community Relations, UniversityRelationsAssociate Vice President of Public Engagement, Office for PublicEngagementUniversity Conference Services and Program PlanningSenior Vice President for System Academic AdministrationDirector of Development, U of M FoundationAssociate Vice President, FIPSE-UROC Workgroup FacilitatorAssociate Vice President and Executive Director of the Urban Research andOutreach/Engagement CenterProfessor and Director, Center for Early Education and Development(UROC Space User)Director of Community Relations, University RelationsVice President, University Services, Former City Coordinator, City ofMinneapolisPresident, U of MSenior Associate Dean & Associate Director of MN AgriculturalExperiment Station, U of M ExtensionCenter for Urban and Regional AffairsAssociate Dean of Community Vitality, U of M ExtensionAssociate Dean of Family Development, U of M ExtensionUROC University Liaison and Communications CoordinatorDirector, Center for Innovation and Economic Development, Office forBusiness and Community Economic Development (UROC Space User)UNP-UROC Community LiaisonG Mike ChristensenG Barbara JohnsonG Mayor R.T. RybakG Councilman Don SamuelsDirector, City of Minneapolis‘ Community Planning and EconomicDevelopmentCouncil President, City Council Ward 4 (Northwest Minneapolis)Mayor, City of MinneapolisCity Council, Ward 5 (North Minneapolis)Key: C = Community, G = Government, U = University17

Appendix CProposed List of Faith-Based CollaboratorsName Affiliation ContactPastor Kelly Chatman Redeemer Lutheran Church Contact: (612) 374-4139kchatman@redeemermpls.comCo-Pastor Diane ThibodeauxHolding Forth the Word of LifeMinistriesContact: (612) 522-5807Senior Pastor Rufus Thibodeaux Holding Forth the Word of LifeMinistriesContact: (612) 522-5807Patchwork Quilt groupChurch of St. Philip, work with AlMcGuire, former CEO at UnitedHealth and retired executiveContact: (612) 529-312518