WOW Community Diagnostic Instrument by Rebecca Gafvert

WOW Community Diagnostic Instrument A. Stake-holder Engagement SYSTEM ELEMENTS

EVIDENCE/INDICATORS

RUBRIC

1. Is excellence in complementary education a priority for the community? a) For the federation?

reports, public statements by leaders, PR and campaign materials, history of financial support, staff time allocated

Consistently high

Intermittently high (i.e., for some or some of the time)

Medium

Low

b) For the central agency?

initiatives past and present, allocation of resources and staff time, participation in national initiatives (e.g., CTI), relevant PD for staff, agency PR

Strong history of involvement

Moderate/intermittent/uneven history of involvement

Low

None

personal involvement with educational program, visibility of education program in congregation (e.g., in services, sermons), treatment of ed director (team approach?), knowledgability about education and issues director full-time status, professional background and training, participation in professional learning, advocacy activities within congregation

Consistently high

Intermittently high (i.e., for some or some of the time)

Medium

Low

Consistently high

Intermittently high (i.e., for some or some of the time)

Medium

Low

budgetary support, personal involvement in learning, visibility of education program in congregational life (e.g., at meetings, events), visibility and respect for director and teachers within the congregation, Parental participation in educational activities, involvement with education program (e.g., service on committees, active PTA, etc.)

Consistently high

Intermittently high (i.e., for some or some of the time)

Medium

Low

Consistently high

Intermittently high (i.e., for some or some of the time)

Medium

Low

c) For the congregations? i) Rabbis

ii) Educators

iii) Volunteer leaders

iv) Families

v) Others

2. Are there any active coalitions focusing on aligning or improving complementary education in the community? 3. Are there complementary education initiatives underway in the community? 4. Are there any organizations/entities that have taken on or been charged with the task of “adding it up?” – figuring out how to bring the pieces together?

local newspaper coverage emphasizing issues of quality, innovation; funders making special donations/grants for complementary education relevant prof and/or lay leaders meet regularly, formal task force or commission or committee exists

formal mandate given to or assumed by local CA or equivalent, “linking” activities taking place (coordinating meetings, task force, community-wide events, etc.)

Consistently high

Intermittently high (i.e., for some or some of the time)

Medium

broad and active coalitions

limited scope and activity

none

Numerous, highly active, ambitious, multiple actors Clear mandate to organization/entity

Few or limited in scope and participation

none

Organization/entity assumes role but not clear/recognized by others

Organization/entity identified (by self or others) but has not taken on task

Low

No identified lead organization/ entity

B. Community Vision and Demand SYSTEM ELEMENTS 1. Is there a strong, positive vision for complementary education that is widely held? Does the community have an articulated measurable “big picture goal” for complementary education? 2. Is there a strong demand for change from young people, families, educators, rabbis, funders, community leaders, external authorities? (“urgency”) 3. Is the community informed and engaged regularly with data on improvement in complementary education? Community supports? Improvement initiatives? Policy/system changes? 4. Are the youth and families at the table in meaningful ways? How?

EVIDENCE/INDICATORS

RUBRIC

Formal statement, report, etc., articulating a vision; history of visioninfused activity in this area involving multiple stakeholders, conversations with stakeholders manifesting vision- or goaloriented thinking and energy

Wellarticulated, widely endorsed vision

Multiple uncoordinated visions

Little vision at community and/or program level

public statements by key leaders, institutions; “bottom up” initiatives underway or being developed; proposals being written, circulated; agitation at meetings; press coverage

Wellarticulated, widely endorsed demand

Some (fragmented/individual) demand

Little demand at community and/or program level

participation in one or more national initiatives; visits by, contacts with “experts” from outside community; relevant reports, other literature being circulated and cited by key stakeholders; CA or other body actively engaged in gathering, processing, locally disseminating relevant information participation on committees, task forces, etc. at community and individual congregational levels

Community leadership is “connected” with complementary education change movement High levels of participation by families and youth

Moderate awareness on the part of community leaders/some community leaders “in the know”

Some awareness on the part of community leaders (or a few community leaders) Minimal levels of participation by families and youth

Moderate levels of participation by families and youth

Minimal awareness on the part of community leaders

No participation

C. Community Support SYSTEM ELEMENTS

EVIDENCE/INDICATORS

RUBRIC

1. What are the funding sources for complementary education?

school and congregational budgets; allocations from federation / central agency; grants

Range of funding sources Consistently well-funded

Limited developed funding sources Diverse levels of funding

Limited possibilities for funding sources Consistently under-funded

2. What is the level of financial support for complementary education? 3. What additional resources are available for complementary education? What will be required to access these resources?

comparison with other communities, national statistics school and congregational budgets; funding for other educational programs in the community; philanthropic activity in the community

Range of identified and accessible resources

Limited identified and accessible resources

Perception that there are limited resources available/ or would be difficult to access

D. Intermediary Capacity SYSTEM ELEMENTS 1. With what national/ umbrella organizations do the community and complementary education providers work? What supports and services do they provide? 2. Has the community ever done communitywide planning around Jewish education issues? Complementary education? If yes, describe. 3. What is the degree of trust between: a. Federation and CA b. Federation and complementary education providers c. CA and complementary education providers d. Complementary education providers 4. How does the CA communicate/interact with complementary education providers (institutions) and networks within education provider institutions? 5. Can you provide some example of complementary education providers working together? What did they work on? Under what auspices? What brought them together?

EVIDENCE/INDICATORS

RUBRIC

statements from educational directors, central agency staff; reports by national organizations on their work

Wide/strong relationships with national/umbrella organizations

Intermittent/limited relationships with national/umbrella organizations

Weak/non-existent relationships with national/umbrella organizations

reports and minutes from previous planning initiatives; statements from participants

Full structured planning process

Limited planning process (either in terms of focus or implementation)

No community-wide planning

statement from key informants; press reports statement from key informants; press reports

Strong

Moderate

Weak

None/Negative

Strong

Moderate

Weak

None/Negative

statement from key informants; press reports statements from key informants; press reports Statements from educational directors and central agency staff; documents (minutes, memos, etc.)

Strong

Moderate

Weak

None/Negative

Strong

Moderate

Weak

None/Negative

High quality, ongoing interactions & communication

Sporadic, limited, non-substantive communication

No communication

statements of participants; documents

Multiple examples

Limited examples

No examples

6. For how many complementary educators do you provide professional development each year? What is the content of the professional development? Principals & senior educators

documents (meeting records, agendas, materials used, press accounts, evaluations); statements from participants 75-100% participation; strong consistent quality