​

Cohort Selection

Oregonians represent innumerable and intersecting identities, races, ethnicities, sexual orientations, countries of origins,sectors, geographic homes, abilities, ages, socioeconomic statuses, religions, political affiliations and perspectives. Oregon has a history of racism and discrimination including orchestrating the violent oppression of communities of color, as well as other marginalized communities. This history means that leaders of color as well as leaders representing other marginalized identities have been excluded from leadership spaces. Holding this reality, Cohort Member Selection was focused on bringing together as much diversity within the Cohort as possible, while recognizingthe barriers that to apply an individual had to be an ALF Oregon Senior Fellow and attend the majority of the Project’s events.

​

Given the Project’s focus on urban-rural connections, selection prioritized including Cohort members from each of the six regions that hosted Regional Dialogues, which also insured diverse geographic leaders stewarding the Project. This intention was carried forward into the recruitment of the Project’s Co-Facilitators, who represented distinctive identities including their distinct geographic identities. This was specifically crafted, so that at each level of Project’s leadership and coordination there would be diverse leaders representing both urban and rural communities.

 

Cohort Preparations + Debriefs

The Cohort and Co-Facilitators were leading the Project and Regional Dialogues, so it was vital for them to have time to plan and debrief prior to the first Regional Dialogue, immediately following each Regional Dialogue and at the conclusion of the six Dialogues.

​

Planning Retreat

In January 2018, the Cohort gathered for the first time for a planning retreat in Silverton, Oregon. Over two days, the Cohort spent time exploring and sharing:

• Their personal identities relating to both their geographic identities and the other identities and perspectives they brought to the process

• How to prioritize a diversity, equity and inclusion lens in guiding the Project

• Effective and open facilitation and notetaking strategies

• The proposed Regional Dialogue Facilitation and Notetaking Process

  • This included the Cohort doing a full mock Regional Dialogue to practice how the structure would flow and any needed alterations.

​

Planning Dialogues

Dialogues were highly structured to create opportunities for each Regional Participant to share their experience and insights. This structure was particularly important since there was limited time (3 hours) and large groups (30-45 Regional Participants). There were some schedule alterations depending on the Regional Dialogue, for example, at the start of the Warm Springs Regional Dialogue, the Tribal Chairman and other tribal leaders opened the day with an overview of the Tribe’s history and current affairs, as well as, an opening song. These changes were made in order to honor and learn from the leadership in a particular region.

​

Cohort Members arrived the day before each Dialogue to prepare for the Dialogue, meet with a local ALF Oregon Senior Fellow to learn more about the specific region, share a meal at a local restaurant, and discuss any needed improvements to the Regional Dialogue model.

​

Regional Dialogue Schedule Example

​

Large Group

​

8:30 – 9:00 - Regional Participants Arrive – 30 minutes

• Check-in and enjoy continental breakfast

​

9:02 – 9:10 – Project Overview + Meeting Guidelines – Vicki, 8 minutes

​

9:10 – 9:20 - Introductions: Name, Community, ALF Class (if applies) – Vicki, 10 minutes

​

9:20 – 9:23 - Overview of Today’s Meeting Structure – Mariana, 3 minutes

​

Small Groups

​

9:25 – 9:40 – Small Group Introductions, 15 minutes

• Possible questions to ask:

– What are your hopes and dreams for your community? Can you see those hopes and dreams coming true?

– Why are you here today?

–What does Oregon mean to you?

​

9:40 – 10:20 - First Small Group Session – Cohort Facilitators and Note Takers, 40 minutes

• Note-taker + Facilitator Cohort Pairs open small group discussion of 5-7 Regional Participants

1. Facilitator asks FIRST question: How would you describe urban rural differences and please give examples from your perspective? What assumptions negative or positive, impact how the differences show up?

• Each Participant has 2 minutes to answer the question. Facilitator turn phone on airplane mode and set for 2 minutes for each participant. Time tracking is key for the success of every participant answering each question.

• Note-taker tracking: Note taker use template (by writing or laptop/tablet) to track responses. Note-taker turns on recording device.

• After each Regional Participant answers first question, open the remaining minutes to dialogue. You have 40 minutes total for Participants to answer question and open it to dialogue.

• Possible Probing Questions:

–What is happening in each community?

–Why is it happening?

–What are the barriers and opportunities?

–This is what I heard, is that what you meant?

​

Participants used personal experiences and observations and their view of community challenges to define urban and rural communities. All Dialogues included people that identified as urban, rural and in between.  Some also used the geographic boundary of the Cascade Mountain Range as the line dividing urban (Portland and the Willamette River Valley) and rural (eastern Oregon), with the region south and east of Eugene also being included within the rural description.  

 

10:20 – 10:30 - Break

​

10:35 – 11:15 - Second Small Group Session – Cohort Facilitators and Note Takers, 40 minutes

2. Facilitator asks SECOND question: What are the top 1-3 issues experienced by your community? What are the barriers in getting those issues addressed?

• Each Participant has 2 minutes to answer the question. Facilitator turn phone on airplane mode and set for 2 minutes for each participant. Time tracking is key for the success of every participant answering each question.

• Note-taker tracking: Note taker use template (by writing or laptop/tablet) to track responses. Note-taker turns on recording device.

• After each Regional Participant answers second question, open the remaining minutes to dialogue. You have 40 minutes total for Participants to answer question and open it to dialogue.

• Possible Probing Questions:

– What is happening in each community?

– Why is it happening?

– What are the barriers and opportunities?

– This is what I heard, is that what you meant?

​

11:15 – 11:20 - At the end of this discussion, 5 minutes: Identify 3-6 issues identified in question 2 to share with the larger group. This is not consensus but can be from 3-6 different individuals.

​

​

Large Group

​

11:20

• Groups move inward, but stay in group and form semicircle

​

11:20 – 11:45 - Small Groups Report to the Large Group 3-6 commonalities or shared opportunities from their discussion – Mariana, Vicki, Jake, 25 minutes

• Each group will send a representative to write their 3-6 on their group’s hanging poster.

•  That representative or another from the group needs to be ready to report to larger group the findings of the group

​

11:45 – 12:00 – Wrap Up, OCF Participant Surveys, closing – Mariana, 15 minutes

• Thank you for sharing your time, leadership and insight with us! This Project’s work is only possible, because you have donated your time. A hearty thank you to our three Project funders Meyer Memorial Trust, Oregon Community Foundation, and Ford Family Foundation.

​

Regional Dialogue Debriefs

Immediately following each Regional Dialogue, the Cohort met, typically for 2-3 hours, to reflect on and process the issues shared during the Dialogue. This practice created the opportunity to focus on each region as opposed to waiting until the Project’s completion to contemplate and identify the issues and themes that arose, how they were similar and different to previous Dialogues. Additionally, Cohort Members discussed needed improvements for future Dialogues and whether the group was on track or needed additional resources to accomplish their goals.

​

Final Retreat

Prior to the Cohort’s final meeting to discuss themes and challenges they heard across Oregon and to select the Priority Issues for the Project’s second phase, the Cohort members individually developed priorities based on their individual notes and experiences. They used the following questions to select the priorities they heard statewide:

​

• Identify a priority issue. Explain where and how it was discussed in the Dialogues.

• Does this issue align with ALF’s mission, “to join and strengthen leaders in order to better serve the public good? It enhances leadership by building on the strengths of diversity and by promoting collaborative problem solving within and among communities?”

• What other statewide or local initiatives are addressing this issue?

• Is there expertise on this issue on the ALF Senior Fellow Network?

• Is this an issue where progress could be made over six to eight months? Or will it be a significant project requiring many resources?

​

During the 2-day retreat, the Seeds for Change Consensus Decision Making Model was used to create consensus among the Cohort. The Cohort identified three Priority Issues, listed below, that were critical to multiple regions across Oregon and that aligned with the mission and resources of ALF Oregon. With each Priority Issue, the intention is to let each Committee determine how and where they focus their efforts. The full report and the products of the Committees may potentially serve as a resource for future ALF Oregon volunteer projects.

​

Regional Participant Outreach

ALF Oregon boasts a network of nearly 700 Senior Fellows around Oregon and beyond. Harnessing the Senior Fellows' collective capacity to listen to difference, find community, and create opportunity was the core of the Regional Participant Outreach strategy.

​

The Cohort Members, Senior Fellow Engagement Committee, Board of Directors, and Staff volunteered to reach out to Senior Fellows and Regional Participants across the six dialogues. These ALF Oregon leaders were equipped with the necessary personalized materials and support to successfully engage new Regional Participants. Different outreach tactics worked for each individual. However, at the core of successful recruitment were previously held relationships that fostered trust in this new initiative and persistence along multiple outreach channels (phone calls, emails, texts, ALF email blasts, social media and in-person meetings). The momentum created by these diverse recruiters’ efforts created a momentum and level of interest in each region that meant both ALF Senior Fellows and other Regional Leaders got word about the Project and had the necessary confidence in the new Project to give their time.

​

As the Dialogues moved along, a relationship web was created through these recruitment efforts, creating the opportunity to follow up on leads of other potential participants from community leaders. Since there were Cohort members from each region, they were able to be particularly helpful at leading the recruitment of Regional Participants in their home region.

 

Co-Facilitator Vicki Nakashima facilitated an Outreach Committee of Cohort Members and other community leaders that met six weeks prior to each Dialogue to utilize an equity lens in each recruitment cycle, which helped ensure diverse voices were welcomed to the table and Committee Members with clear outreach objectives.

​

Regional Dialogue Locations + Set up

The Dialogue locations varied across the state, taking place at public, private and non-profit institutions. Locations weredetermined based on size, accessibility, cost and geographic location centrality within a region.

Regional Dialogue Locations

• Willamette Valley Dialogue

  • Willamette University, Salem

• Coastal Region Dialogue

  • Lincoln City’s City Hall

• Southern Oregon Dialogue

  • Harry & David’s Corporate Headquarters, Medford

• Central Oregon Dialogue

  • Kah-Nee-Ta Resort, Warm Springs

• Eastern Oregon Dialogue

  • Baker City High School, Baker City

• Portland Dialogue

  • Mercy Corps Action Center, Portland

Dialogue locations needed to have a large enough single room for the full group 30 – 50 people to begin and end the Dialogue in a single circle, while also having enough space or multiple proximate spaces for the participants to break into small groups for the bulk of the Dialogue. The locations were ideally spacious and private enough for individual groups to interact without straining to hear one another, while not being distracted by the level of noise from other small groups. Each Dialogue began with enough chairs for each participant set in a half moon, so that a communal tone was set from the beginning. If space allowed there was also chairs (5-6) set up in small circles apart from the circle for the small group discussion. If space was more limited, the chairs would be moved into small circles after the initial full group introductions. The large and small groups were intentionally set without tables to facilitate a more casual and intimate dialogue.

​

In each Region the staff worked with local caterers to bring in pastries, fruit, coffee, tea and water. Participants were gifting the Project their mornings (9 AM – 12 PM), so we wanted to make that they were as comfortable as possible.

​

The Project Co-facilitators, Cohort Members and Staff all arrived early to the space and were the last to leave, so that they were actively on hand to help Participants navigate the space, create connections with them and make them feel as comfortable as possible.

​

Regional Dialogue: Overview of Day

The Urban Rural Project was new, which means its structure and rhythm was unknown to Regional Participants. Therefore, at each step of the recruitment process there was intention in offering detailed information to ease any concerns about the Dialogue process, location questions and remove barriers to entry. Recruiters routinely expressed their openness to scheduling a phone conversation or opening an email exchange to answers questions. Additionally, a detailed overview of driving directions, parking, location, contact information, schedule for the day, food availability and any other regionally specific information was sent to all participants two weeks prior to each Dialogue and again two days prior to the Dialogue.

​

The Project’s Co-Facilitators Vicki Nakashima and Jake Gibbs would jointly introduce each Regional Dialogue (unless one of them was absent). During the introduction they would share:

• Each of their personal back stories with emphasis on their geographic differences and commonalities

• Origins and Intentions of ALF Oregon and Urban Rural Connection Project

• Project’s Deliverables and future opportunities to engage

  • Making it clear that this Project would not only generate a report, but would create infrastructure to utilize the report findings for change

• Space/Regional Dialogue Overview

  • How to access restrooms, food, parking and any other amenities

  • Daily schedule and confidentiality pledge, since the conversations were taped and manually recorded, they wanted to make sure participants knew names would not be associated

• Community Conversation Expectations

  • Treat each other respectfully, acknowledging that respect is cultural and means different things to different people.

  • Listen to understand one another and not primarily just to respond.

  • Be open to participating in dialogue without judgement.

  • Courage to speak candidly and honestly.

  • Differences are welcomed – there is plenty of space in the room for differing perspectives

  • Confidentiality – do not repeat personal information shared by others.

  • Surface and focus on your real issues, experience, insights and questions.  

  • Have fun and enjoy our time together.

• Surface and focus on your real issues, experience, insights and questions.

• Have fun and enjoy our time together