CPN is designed and maintained by ONline @ UW: Electronic Publishing Group.

Essays on Civic Renewal

National Commission on Civic Renewal Second Plenary Session, continued
Panel Two: Community Service & Community Action

Contents

Panel One: Faith & Character
Panel Two: Community Service & Community Action
Panel Three: Youth
Panel Four: Politics & Civil Society

Panel Two: Community Service & Community Action

Witnesses:

Thomas McKenna
National Executive Director, Big Brothers Big Sisters of America

Jill Morehouse
Lum Member of Board of Directors, Hands On Atlanta

Paul Grogan
President, Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC)

WILLIAM GALSTON: Let us now continue with our second panel for this morning. The theme for this second panel is "Community Service and Community Action." As before, we will hear from representatives of three impressive organizations. Our first witness is Thomas McKenna, National Director of Big Brothers Big Sisters of America.

THOMAS MCKENNA: Thank you. You've got a "Quick Facts" sheet that has all of our state and city agencies—our five hundred and tens, as we call them—on the back.

One thing to say about Big Brothers Big Sisters of America—I think you're all familiar with our general approach of a one-to-one relationship with a caring adult and a child in need—one thing I always like to say, to get it in proper perspective, is that we're a volunteer-driven organization. What does that mean? That means if we got a hundred million dollars tomorrow, we couldn't mount a program unless we were able to gain the support of people in communities across America to volunteer to be Big Brothers and Big Sisters. And I think that's terribly important, because it speaks to our basic support in communities across America.

And I want to tell you just a little bit about how the program works, because we've been talking early today about single-parent moms. Well, single-parent moms are really the population of over 80 percent of the kids we serve. And they come to our program, and they're interested in their son or daughter getting a Big Brother or Big Sister, and they're involved throughout—not only in the process of selection of the Big, as we call he or she, but also in support groups beyond that, the same way that the young person himself is involved in the participation and the selection of the volunteer. So there's a careful process we go through, which I'll talk about a little bit more. But I just wanted to make it clear that there is that base of support in the community or we wouldn't have a program.

The second thing I want to say, especially after what's been said earlier today, is, we do not see ourselves as a substitute for the parent. If that were the case. . . Think about it this way: half of the kids we serve are girls; they're also coming from single-parent-mom families. Now they have Big Sisters. No one would say that Big Sisters are a substitute for the mom; I don't think they'd say they're a substitute for the dad. So that we see caring adults in a more general way. We think that probably all children, obviously all children need caring adults, and parents are caring adults. So, to a certain extent, I think what was created earlier today may have been a bit of a straw-man impression,—if at least that's what you were referring to with us, in terms of mentoring and parachuting into communities to substitute for parents. Because that's certainly not what our philosophy and approach is.

We do believe, however, that it is important to create an infrastructure for effective mentoring to take place. And that does include recruitment, selection, screening, training, and ongoing support. And we think that in order for there to be long-lasting relationships—and I agree with what Wade said earlier, that these shouldn't be just temporary relationships—there needs to be that support. And our average match, by the way, across the country, is over two and a half years. So that we're not in favor of creating mentoring all over the country in these so-called pop-up programs to solve the problems, because we don't think that's going to work. It's not a question of parachuting volunteers in and throwing them at the kids. That's definitely not our approach.

What is our approach? What is our philosophy? Our philosophy is essentially focused on positive youth development. Now that's an asset-based as opposed to a deficit-based approach. The deficit-based approach in this country—which I think has been predominant for many, many years—is, you identify a problem, whether it's drug abuse or school dropouts, and then you develop a program to deal with it. And they're called prevention programs, but really what they are is intervention, too little, too late. And I think if you look at the statistics and research, you'll find that often they're not very effective. Whereas our program, and that's Big Brothers Big Sisters . . . I think it has been proven that it works. I just handed this out, which is the latest description put out by OJGDP about the effectiveness of our program. And just to put it in context, for those of you who aren't aware, we had (and I think this was the first significant study done—and I'll be interested if people can challenge me on this—in the last 30 years), where you have a multimillion-dollar, independent research study that's done with many sites across the country, with a significant sample and a true control group, in a social program. In other words: the same kids—you get a Big, you don't. Random. At the end of 18 months, the results that are illuminated here were quite dramatic.

But if you want to talk about specific deficits, for example, overall statistics. Kids that had a Big were about half as likely to get involved in first use of drugs, and about half as likely to skip school, and about a third as likely to get involved in violent behavior. If you were an African-American boy between 10 and 14, you're one third as likely to get involved in first use of drugs if you had a Big Brother, as compared with a similar population, randomly selected, of kids that didn't. And this was a sample that was larger than the Head Start sample nationally, so we're talking about something we think is very significant and substantial. Now, just a little bit more about our program. We like to say that it's as elementary as putting a friend in a child's life, as essential as putting hope into a child's future. Our mission is to create competent, caring, and confident young people. And our vision is caring adults in the life of every child in need. Caring adults doesn't mean you have to be a Big Brother or Big Sister. But we do have a challenge, and the challenge is to move from success to greater significance. So that we're looking at ways to expand and export what we do. We're looking for partners such as schools, corporations. We think that site-based mentoring has some real possibilities, and we're also looking to export our program into Boys and Girls Clubs, Salvation Armies, other places where we think they could sponsor a Big Brother Big Sister program in much the same way they would sponsor Scouting, for example, now.

We have a big challenge to reach underserved communities. We made some inroads through partnerships with One Hundred Black Men in the African-American community. We need to do a lot more to engage blue-collar workers, and also senior citizens. Less than 15 percent of our Bigs are over 40, for example. We want to do a lot more with unions, and we're working with now with AFL/CIO to develop something. And we need to be much more effective in reaching out into the Latino or Hispanic community with our program.

Now what's the relationship of all this to civic renewal? How do we fit in there? We have an effort now, that's been under way for close to a year, that's taking a look at the notion of: What if we got our volunteers (our Bigs, as we call them) involved, in essence, in thinking of themselves as advocates for positive youth development? If they saw that their role as being a Big Brother or Big Sister, was trying to have an influence on the environment that Johnny or Sally, their Little, is part of? Think of the kind of connection there, in terms of citizenship, in terms of involvement. And it's not abstract. It's because they have a relationship, an ongoing semi-monthly or weekly relationship, with a young person, and they have a particular understanding or capacity to therefore get involved and engaged. So we're very interested in looking at that. Because there's an enormous potential there.

Well, let me just close, since there's a minute left, by saying that I'm a little concerned about some of the cynicism that I hear about the summit, about some of the things that are happening. In our society, we tend to be an either/or: you know, we got to do this or there's that. And people talk about the summit and they say, "You know, gee, it didn't deal with government's programs," or "Gee, it's the new welfare establishment," or whatever. But it seems to me that we ought to be talking more about both/and. I mean, if you want to talk about the spirit that came out of the summit, that, it seems to me, is looking at the glass as half full. We ought to be thinking about how we can develop and promote and utilize that, not how we can tear it down. And so I feel that probably that's the most important message overall of our service and our program, and of your work—and that's looking for things that do work, for positive assets, and building on them. To try to get to this civic renewal that we know that you're after, and certainly we're after in Big Brothers and Big Sisters of America. Thank you.

GALSTON: Well, Tom, thank you very much for that very important testimony. We will next hear from Jill Morehouse Lum, who is a member of the Board of Directors of an organization called Hands On Atlanta.

JILL MOREHOUSE LUM: Thank you for having me here today. I really feel like our story is extremely compelling, so I'm happy to be here to share it with you all. I'd like to give you a quick overview of our work in relation to civic engagement and the way we do business, and share our Citizen Schools initiative with you. I also hope to put some pictures in your head, some mental snapshots about the results of the work that we do.

Hands On started with 12 young adults sitting in a living room in 1989 discussing the trials of trying to volunteer. They believed that there had to be easier way to get involved in the Atlanta community, and took it upon themselves to create the way. Over time the tag line for the organization changed from "volunteering for a better community" to "building a better community through service."

In the late '80s it seems that established organizations weren't capitalizing on the energy or compassion of youth and working people, particularly young professionals. The old models didn't create ways for people to flexibly volunteer. The City Cares model is all about helping people creating their own opportunities to make a difference. None of the Cares organizations were started as projects of existing institutions like United Ways. These organizations are volunteer-led at every level. And that's why I'm here with you today—I'm a Hands On Atlanta volunteer.

We believe that volunteer service is essential to strengthening the Atlanta community. Our mission is build community by offering an incredible spectrum of volunteer opportunities, deploying a diverse and committed corps of more than 13,000 volunteers, and cultivating service leaders. We believe service is a reciprocal exchange in which both the people serving and the people served share and learn from one another.

Hands On Atlanta's approach weaves the fabric of community by bringing people of diverse backgrounds and perspectives together to work towards a common goal. We have a special interest in giving children and youth the opportunity to serve, and we help volunteer tutors and mentors to capitalize on the talents of young people. We think service is transformative. As volunteers take an active role and learn more about the issues facing our community, they take on increasingly greater roles both within our organization and as leaders with our partner agencies. Their world gets a little bigger, their expertise grows, and their sense of community deepens.

Hands On Atlanta came into being through the energy and desire of young working people to have a deeper relationship with the greater community. All the City Cares organizations—Greater DC Cares, New York Cares, LA Works, Hands On Charlotte, etc.—respond to existing needs as stated by the community through citizen-led efforts. Hands on Atlanta is absolutely "of its time" in the way it began and the way it works.

Hands On Atlanta quickly learned that there was quite a demand among Atlanta's citizens for a one-stop shop which both put volunteers in touch with literally hundreds of volunteer opportunities and provided an avenue for serving side by side with other folks. On the flip side, community agencies were struggling to attract working people to volunteer service. Hands On Atlanta took responsibility for addressing both critical community needs and the call among citizens for diverse opportunities and flexibility in scheduling volunteer time. Since 1989 Hands On Atlanta has grown from a few dozen friends to a corps of 13,000 volunteers who take part in more than 2,600 projects each year. In 1996 alone, HOA volunteers contributed more than 263,000 service hours to the community.

Hands On Atlanta serves the needs of today's volunteers and the 78 agencies we support through the talents and time of those volunteers. It's quite a balancing act to manage the creative tension that exists between meeting the needs of the community and the needs of the volunteer. Many organizations either focus exclusively on making volunteers happy or on addressing a critical need. The former approach sometimes focuses on the volunteer at the expense of the impact, and the latter sometimes fails to invest in volunteers to get important work done.

In addition, we know that the only way citizens are going to "vote with their feet" and keep coming back is if what they do addresses a genuine need. We've become experts in investing in people so that they are prepared to serve, and in helping schools and agencies to effectively utilize volunteers. Funders and large institutions aren't the only ones talking about outcomes and measurement! Citizens don't have to volunteer. If the work doesn't seem to be making a difference, if the volunteer doesn't have an opportunity to influence the work and help solve problems, you can bet they won't make a long-term commitment. We only invest in what works—we are volunteers. We're not going to waste time on programs that aren't working. We don't have to.

Hands On Atlanta is like a translator. We try to understand the language of the community and the language of the volunteer. And we look for mutually beneficial ways to connect these two universes.

Virtually all our programs are designed to naturally draw people in at a level they are comfortable with. It is a new model. Other models for volunteer service—which require membership, or an up-front commitment of 50 hours at the same placement or agency, or a minimum of three tutoring sessions a week—work extremely well for some people. Hands On Atlanta meets the volunteer needs of people who want to start by first putting their big toe in and testing the water. If a year-long commitment or volunteering in the middle of the workday were the only way to get started, lots of folks would never make the first step to get involved.

Once people come to a HOA volunteer orientation and become familiar with our monthly guide to service, The Citizen, Hands On Atlanta's staff and volunteer leaders work hard to support the learning and leadership development needs of volunteers so that they can be an asset to our partner agencies.

Hands On Atlanta is realistic. We know what can be accomplished with casual, short-term volunteers and where they will fall short. We also know that caring is not enough—and we, as volunteers, don't make commitments that we can't keep. The 250 volunteer-led projects in The Citizen show all the ways there are to make a difference. The Citizen illustrates that there is no excuse not to get involved. We provide a mechanism for connecting people to evening, weekend, one-time, small group, or big-event projects to fit every schedule, skill and interest.

There are great one-day projects, like "Ramps for Champs," where eight volunteers come together to build ramps at the homes of low-income seniors. On Hands On Atlanta Day as many as 10,000 people pledge hours of service and get an incredible introduction to volunteerism and the work Hands On does 365 days a year. Even Discovery, our Saturday enrichment programs at our 17 school sites, encourages self-described first-time and "just this time" volunteers to join in for the day. Most of these seemingly casual volunteers get hooked as they learn with and laugh with the students. Many become regular volunteers and eventually take on leadership roles as volunteer curriculum coordinators and weekend principals. But I'll tell you, very few of these leaders would be with us if they had been required to start as a curriculum coordinator with a 6-8 hour-a-week commitment! Actually, if you asked around, you'd find that lots of our board members initially got involved with the organization as Discovery volunteers.

I think our huge success at drawing literally tens of thousands of people out of their comfort zones and into the larger community offers an important perspective in the conversation about moral decline. My friends at Hands On Atlanta would probably say that the problem is not apathy, but barriers to opportunity. Prior to Hands On Atlanta's founding, there were a lot of false barriers that actually prevented people from volunteering. Hands On Atlanta projects occur primarily on weekends and evenings. When people know that they are meeting a need and making a real difference, when they are enriched by the experience and their skills and time are well used, and when they have opportunities to learn and grow and contribute in new ways, they keep coming back. Hands On Atlanta serves the needs of the volunteer and the needs of the community.

One area of our mission I want to focus on today is our work with children and youth and our Citizen Schools initiative. It all began seven years ago, with a volunteer named Richard Goldsmith. Incidentally, Richard received the Presidential Service Award in 1995. He read an article in the newspaper about a school that had the lowest test scores in the state of Georgia. Richard called the principal and said, "How can I help? I am part of this new volunteer organization. Is there anything we could do?" The principal suggested Saturday tutoring. On that first Saturday, 40 volunteers and 150 kids showed up! Now Hands On Atlanta volunteers run tutoring and mentoring programs in 17 elementary and middle schools engaging more than 700 citizens. It seems like the most sensible thing in the world now—using school facilities during non-school hours and tutoring kids during the one day when volunteers have the time. But seven years ago it was pretty revolutionary for teachers to share curriculum ideas with weekend volunteers, and principals to open their schools on Saturday mornings, and kids to have easy access to tutoring support in the neighborhood.

Our Citizen Schools initiative is based on the premise that every adult citizen has a role to play in supporting Atlanta's schools and that schoolchildren, Atlanta's youngest citizens, should have the opportunity to serve and make a difference as part of their learning.

Citizen Schools is a response to what we know about what we do best—leveraging all the resources of the community to support the education of its youngest citizens. As a former teacher in the Atlanta Public Schools, I can tell you that it is not just another program; it's a way to strategically and sustainably address the needs of schools and kids. I am always intrigued when people beam about the 50,000 Olympic volunteers. Everyone says we couldn't have done it without them. They were part of the strategic plan. Through Citizen schools, Hands On Atlanta provides a detailed infrastructure and tested experience in managing volunteer efforts in the schools.

Historically, there's been a lot of frustration among corporate and civic volunteers trying to support public schools. Volunteers complain that schools are not prepared to use their time effectively, and schools stress the lack of resources available to manage successful volunteer programs.

Each day Hands On Atlanta's education programs support more than 4,000 students. The Citizen School framework utilizes AmeriCorps members to create a proven infrastructure, award-winning programming and tools to allow hundreds of volunteers to step into meaningful roles as tutors, mentors and project leaders. The Citizen Schools initiative joins corporations with communities to engage thousands of volunteers and cultivates invaluable partnerships between community partners, parents, Hands On Atlanta volunteers, and the public schools.

UPS is an excellent example of a model corporate partner. For years UPS had enjoyed a partnership with Marshall Middle School. UPS sponsored contests and provided incentive prizes, and employees volunteered in a small mentoring program. With Hands On Atlanta's addition as a partner with Marshall, the involvement of UPS volunteers tripled. Hands On Atlanta takes responsibility for communicating with teachers and parents to extend learning beyond the school day, coordinating human and financial resources coming into the school, training and supporting volunteers, and evaluating the impact of volunteer-led programs. The UPS mentors and tutors knew that their time at the school would be well spent and that their contribution would be measured.

As I mentioned earlier, there are lots of different levels at which volunteers can become involved in the life of a school. If you come to one of our partner schools on Saturday to paint lockers or build reading lofts, you will take part in an orientation and quickly understand that you are part of a much larger volunteer picture. You'll see the Discovery program in full swing and learn that other corporate volunteers, parents, and AmeriCorps members will be there all week long to tutor kids and engage kids in service projects and use the loft you built. This of course, will make you feel very different about the contribution you're able to make in a single day. And, if you choose, there are myriad ways for you to get involved at a deeper level to make a difference in the life of the child.

Hands On Atlanta's success is due to the incredible collection of well-coordinated resources we bring to schools—corporate funding and volunteer tutors, AmeriCorps members, training for teachers, leadership development programs and service opportunities for kids, a 25 percent increase in parent involvement. So it's not just one answer—not just a caring adult, or an after-school program, or individual tutoring, or community support, or assistance for the teacher, or workshops for parents. We work within the context of the school experience. After all, that's where the kids are.

In closing, we're creating a sense of a reliable community through service, one that anyone can tap into. Recently, I was driving down the road in the neighborhood of Hands On Atlanta and I wanted to see if the neighborhood kids knew where our offices were. I am always curious to see if students have a sense of the resources and opportunities in their own backyard. I rolled down the window and yelled, "Hey, do you know where Hands on Atlanta is?" And a middle-school youth replied, "Hands On Atlanta? It's everywhere, like the schools and stuff." That answer was better than I could have hoped for.

GALSTON: Thank you very much, Jill. Our final witness on this second panel is Paul Grogan, who is the president of the Local Initiatives Support Corporation. Paul, the floor is yours.

PAUL GROGAN: Good morning, and it's a pleasure to be with you all this morning.

I have every intention of providing, really, the required commercial for my own organization in the course of these remarks. But I do want to say, first, my essential mission, to bring what I think is some good news to this Commission: that there is already an enormous process of civic renewal under way in this country that we are engaged in trying to build.

It's occurring in perhaps the least likely of places—the worst inner-city communities of this country, places we used to call slums; and it is being driven by the citizens of those communities. It has labored in obscurity until very recently, but I think it is about to burst on the scene as one of the hopeful and stunning and counterintuitive developments that's occurred in the last twenty years in this country.

What I'm speaking of is variously called the community development movement or the grassroots revitalization movement. And essentially it consists now of thousands upon thousands of neighborhood and community organizations that have been formed by the residents, usually of specific neighborhoods or towns, to spearhead the revitalization of those distressed communities in the absence of any successful public effort that has occurred, and in the absence of any prospect that they are going to be magically rescued by the private market all by itself as well. There are two to three thousand of these organizations, and they are already responsible for some of the most stunning turnarounds that have occurred in the history of this country.

And I think the South Bronx, perhaps, is the most powerful laboratory of this approach. The South Bronx was, and still is probably, universally seen in this country as the ultimate terminus of urban blight. Two American presidents went up there a while back and stood in the rubble; the images were confirmed by novels and movies. So if you asked someone in South Dakota to tell what they associate with the South Bronx, I think you'd get a pretty clear image. We enjoy taking people to the South Bronx today, because there are square miles of stunning revitalization, and now a process of significant public and private investment that has momentum of its own. But it was all spearheaded in the gloomiest and darkest and lowest days by a group of citizens' organizations, called Community Development Corporations, who, counter to all received wisdom and forecasts for the prospects of their neighborhood, wanted to do something about it.

LISC, or the Local Initiatives Support Corporation, is a private, nonprofit company founded by foundations in corporate America about seventeen years ago. Our mission is to build the capacity of such grassroots revitalization efforts, and to speed the flow of private capital into these communities. In our history, we have assembled about two and a half billion dollars in private money, contributed, lent, or invested through us by more than 1,500 corporations and foundations. And we have used that capital to support the work of more than a thousand of these community development corporations, who, among other things, have built or renovated more than 70,000 homes and built or renovated more than 10 million square feet of commercial space, again in some of the most damaged communities in this country.

This movement is often misunderstood as a housing or physical development movement. True, housing and other development activities are a critical vehicle for the development of this process of civic renewal; but it is only its most surface consequence. Housing is desperately needed in these communities; I don't want to minimize that for a moment. But this is really operating on a number of other levels.

The citizens who form these organizations understand that physical blight depresses everyone—depresses the prospects of their communities, serves as a magnet for social pathologies like drugs and drug dealers, and has a devastating impact on the morale of young people. So they seek to reverse the very negative signals, the loudest negative physical symbols that have existed in their communities—abandoned housing, abandoned cars, weed-filled empty lots, and so on—by beginning to restore the physical landscape. That, to them, is far more important, actually, than the provision of housing per se, because they understand the power of symbols.

Secondly, they are a citizens' movement. They want to create stakeholders who believe in the community, who will stay and work for its future. And those stakeholders can be enlarged by visible victories, however modest those initial victories are. On another level, they are seeking to restore political power to these damaged communities, small-p political power. We all understand, it's axiomatic, that declining communities experience the withdrawal of public services. In effect, the citizens in those communities have lost the capacity to bargain effectively with the local jurisdiction. So the trash doesn't get picked up, the police don't respond as quickly, park improvements are not made, and so forth. And this is one of the big negative multipliers that speeds communities on that downward spiral. These renewal efforts, and the citizens behind them, have a magical effect of beginning to again extract a response from the public jurisdiction; so one begins to see, as if by magic, park improvements, police response, a community being served again and holding its own with its local political jurisdiction.

And finally, this is a very powerful strategy to break down the isolation, the utter isolation, of many of these inner-city communities from which mainstream institutions have withdrawn. People in the mainstream of American life have little contact with these communities. Well, these community development corporations, through undertaking development, form lasting business relationships with banks, foundations, local and state government, to draw in the necessary capital and expertise initially to accomplish these concrete projects that they set upon. But over time, they open up channels through which ideas and capital can flow. And this breakdown of isolation, of course, has much broader, positive consequences.

As I said, this process is well under way. It's had a very quiet field test for the last twenty years, and we can take you to city after city in the country and give you an experience of jaw-dropping surprise. Because what is going on these communities simply doesn't square with the conventional wisdom or the image of cities that most people who aren't in them have—images which are powerfully reinforced by the media every night with their emphasis on lurid murders and broken families. And the media is going to take quite enough pounding without my help at this session—I can tell from just hearing a little bit of the first one. But it is true that particularly local newscasts in most cities focus relentlessly on the negative, and news of this progress and phenomenon is only slowly reaching the public.

That may not have been an altogether bad thing—because it had an ability to get its legs under it, to get a substantial body of accomplishment under its belt, without being subjected either to excessive expectations, or too much money too fast. So the achievements of these thousands of organizations are built on a very solid foundation of modest steps successfully undertaken, and then built upon from there.

Why are they succeeding and growing and exhibiting all this vitality, when the conventional wisdom says this shouldn't be happening? I think they display four attributes that resonate in the American soul and imagination, and that is why they are succeeding. First, it's a pure expression of self-help. Self-help is a universally held American value, and this is powerful self-help at work. Second, this all proceeds by partnership. These groups are not asking the government to do it alone, although the government is critical. Private capital has been at work here from the beginning, with the discipline that that brings.

Third, they focus relentlessly on tangible accomplishments, even laughably modest ones, at the outset: Could we fix up a house? Could we get that drug dealer off the corner? and so forth. But it is the tangible result that provides the assurance that this is worth pursuing. And finally, they display that high-octane fuel of America, optimism, in the most unlikely places. They really shouldn't be optimistic, particularly when they start; and if they sought the counsel of any urban expert, the counsel they would get was, "Don't bother. What you want to do is all very laudable, but you can't possibly make a difference, because there are giant forces operating on your community. Don't you understand?" And fortunately, these thousands of citizens either did not seek that counsel or did not listen to it when they got it, because they have proceeded to create an enormous movement in this country.

What would help this? I think one of the things that would help it is if it were more widely known. If people in communities like these who haven't started a process knew that people just like themselves, in their church or on their block or neighbors in similar circumstances, had achieved what they have achieved, I think we could accelerate what already is a kind of contagion that is going on. We also need to make larger investments in these communities. This isn't smoke and mirrors; we need public dollars and private dollars to make these communities better. And so this is a kind of critique of government implicit in what I'm saying, but government remains vital. Thank you for having me.

GALSTON: Thank you very much, Paul, not only for your testimony but for the more than ordinary efforts that you've made to be with us today. We're grateful for that. Senator Nunn, the first question is yours.

NUNN: Jill, I'd like to ask you about the relationship between the new organization when you all started and existing nonprofits. How did you go about that relationship, and what are you doing now in terms of working with existing non-profits, and which ones?

LUM: We work with 78 agencies in which we have 250 ongoing projects every month, every day of the year. The agencies and issues we support with well-trained volunteers include homeless shelters, 17 schools with a range of programs, conservation projects, meal, furniture and tool-sorting programs, senior centers, literacy programs, and refuge centers. The Atlanta Community Food Bank was a huge supporter at the beginning when we began working initially with nonprofits to understand and meet their volunteer needs.

When Hands On Atlanta started, the United Way Volunteer Center (then called Volunteer Atlanta) and the Junior League were the primary players on the volunteer scene. The Junior League is a member organization, all women, with very strict requirements. What Hands On Atlanta had to offer was flexible and inclusive, and we were only asking for people's time, not their money or influence. Plus, our volunteer work focuses exclusively on direct service that meets a critical need, not fund-raisers or special events. We are very different organizations and enjoy a good relationship.

The Volunteer Center's approach at that time was to match individuals with agencies. A potential volunteer calls the Center and is mailed information about 4-5 agencies which seem a good match. It is up to the individual to call the agency and get involved. Neither the United Way nor the potential agency follows up to see if the individual ever called the agency, actually volunteered, was satisfied with the experience or became a long-term volunteer. The Volunteer Center doesn't keep records to track the number of volunteers who actually follow through with an agency.

Hands On Atlanta requires potential volunteers to attend an orientation and gain an approach to volunteering. We track volunteer hours and volunteer impact, and provide extensive and varied opportunities for learning and leadership. When we got started eight years ago, I don't think anyone realized the potential impact of a flexible, diverse menu of volunteer projects available from one source, coupled with limitless opportunities for leadership and learning in a community of volunteers.

Hands On Atlanta's focus was to support volunteers, create volunteer-led opportunities to serve, build a community of volunteers, create an environment conducive to learning from one another, and measure the impact of citizen engagement both in terms of trees planted and kids tutored as well as lives changed.

Recently, the Volunteer Center has considered abandoning their matching program and referring people to Hands On Atlanta. As you know, the United Way is making some important changes nationally. The Metro Atlanta Volunteer Center is reviewing their mission and determining their niche. They will most likely focus on promoting volunteerism among their donors and creating ways to better recognize and celebrate community volunteers.

NUNN: Tom, what has been your experience in terms of the length of mentorship that is required for a productive relationship with positive results? How long, and what kind of continuity, is required?

MCKENNA: Well, we think you start with a commitment of one year. And it takes a few months before the bonding really takes place, if that's what you're saying. But you know, one of the things that's very important to realize is, you don't have to be a super person or a special person to be an effective volunteer. The research that's been done by PPV again shows that volunteers who are there, who are consistent, who are listening, who are supportive, are much more likely to be successful than those who come in with a prescription for what they'd like to see happen to a particular kid. And it's that ongoing, consistent support—and we think it should be for more than a year—where it really begins to pay off.

NUNN: Do you find some of the mentors really are willing to stay with the young person three or four years?

MCKENNA: Oh yes, yes. The average is 2.7, so that means many more are longer than that. We stop counting once you get through high school; but we have, of course, many people throughout our organization who still maintain the relationships that they started as Bigs.

GALSTON: The floor is now open for questions from the Commissioners.

ANNA FAITH JONES: We're here with the Commission because we are concerned about the future of our democratic society. Without getting into any of the words that tick us off here, I think we want to know, learn something about, how to regenerate the constructive substance of our lives together in a society that is increasingly diverse and increasingly inequitable. What makes our lives together work for everyone, and what makes it meaningful? You bring us good news. Clearly what you do affects people within a certain range in a positive way. You yourselves are to be commended for your commitment to this.

Two questions. What do you think would be the tipping factors that will enable what you do—or what a lot of us in this country are doing that's good and that affects people—to tip the scales: to make the broader community have a sense that there is a future for our unique type of democracy and that it can work for all of our children and for all of us? How do we make these good, small enterprises have a much more far-reaching effect? What will it take to make them have a tipping factor?

And I ask this because I have worked in my field of supporting good things for over twenty years; and yet the sense of trust, and that things work for everyone, has gone downhill. So more and more, I think we're looking at how can we affect things in a larger way that will effect that tip? And in that connection, all of you here are doing good work and I commend you. But in fact, you are all from the majority community here. Why do we not see any representation here from the groups that we are concerned about in terms of their equitable participation in the society?

GROGAN: Well, I'm as puzzled as others about the poor morale of our society today. I don't fully understand it. We are ending what has become known as the American Century with our values and our system being emulated around the world. It seems to me that we should be celebrating, even as we seek the sources of renewing our own experiment; and we're not. We're awfully gloomy about our prospects—I think, wrongly.

But I'm deeply affected by, as I said, daily contact with this process taking place in some of the worst places. And so it does tend to make you an optimist. Perhaps it has to do with the fact that we . . . There is a cycle at work here. We had a certain set of ideas about how to make things better, how to extend opportunity in this society. And those ideas have run their course. And we're in a period of ambiguity, of transition to a new set of values. And there are various caricatures of that being offered, about what that new set of values is going to be: It's going to be all private; it's going to be this; it's going to be all community. And I think the needed synthesis has not been performed at the national level in a way that's going to get the necessary attention. But I believe that that will occur if we can continue to set in motion these kinds of activities and growth.

MCKENNA: Just to pick up on that. I'm glad to see . . . This is the first time this morning that the issue of race has been even raised. I thought it was amazing in its absence in the first session, frankly. And the point I'd like to make is, again, it depends on who you invite to participate. You're the Commissioners. I'm the chief paid functionary of our organization, so I felt I ought to be here. But I could have an African-American Big Brother, a Latino Big Brother, someone else to speak.

The broader issue of what kinds of approaches are most needed in order for us to think in a more, in a larger scope, and really have larger impact. From my little perspective—and again, we've got a program, we're not social philosophers—but I think that from my perspective, this is what the summit has helped us to think about: developing strategic alliances focused on important issues. And if you look at the five resources the summit represents, caring adults is one, giving back in service is one. And I didn't mention in my presentation that one of our commitments to the summit is to get every one of our relationships, the Big and the Little together, engaged in community service through the year 2000—which I think is a powerful kind of empowering experience. But they're also talking about marketable skills and safe places and constructive activities and a healthy start.

Now, what we're trying to do through the spirit of the summit is to find ways that groups and organizations can really collaborate around these issues. And I think, of course, that has to happen at the local community. That's where the rubber hits the road. And unless we find a way to have strategic alliances, I think a lot of the good ideas, as you said, are just going to go away. We're very serious about wanting to not only export our program but to adapt it to different situations and different kinds of organizational auspice—in church auspice. So that's, I guess, the best I can say in terms of our thoughts about how to move forward.

LUM: The goal of the City Cares Network is to support fledgling groups in cities and towns around the nation committed to the City Cares model. Hands On has grown from 12 to 13,000 volunteers in eight years, contributing 263,000 of hours in direct service in 1996. The "tipping factor" is Hands On Atlanta's approach to introducing people to the Atlanta community. We give individual citizens, youth groups, and corporate teams a strong beginning—a reasonable first step, an opportunity to work as a team, understand the critical issues through direct service experiences, and consider what their unique contribution just might be.

I also think that there is a huge point to be made about young people and adults working in partnership. That is certainly a tipping factor. There's a lot of work to be done. The youth are ready. Are the adults prepared to give these kids a voice? So few nonprofits take the talents, compassion, and energy of young people seriously. Fewer still have developed the skills and capacity to connect kids and adults in meaningful learning and service. A program at HOA that I am particularly proud of is called TeamWorks With Youth. Imagine young people and adults, corporate executives and kids, parents and children, considering their community's needs, developing service projects, and serving side by side. Young people begin to see that adults care and have a few redeeming qualities, and adults see firsthand the assets of youth. Working in partnership, believing that everyone has a unique gift worth sharing, will certainly serve us well over time.

MICHAEL JOYCE: Jill, you mentioned that the act of volunteering has an effect of changing something about the volunteer. And I wondered if you could elaborate, by way of an example, the kind of thing you're talking about. And then I'd like to inquire of Tom whether the experience of Big Brothers and Big Sisters is some fundamental change, perhaps in outlook, that volunteering brings you.

LUM: Your question brings up an important point. While Hands On Atlanta has been able to create a well-oiled machine for coordinating efforts, the real success is seen in the relationships made and hopes renewed. People keep coming back because they begin to feel a part of the larger community. They become committed. I guess the biggest evidence of changed lives is that thousands of volunteers come to a project once, see that they have a unique contribution to make and even more to learn, and come back again. There's a quote by Kurt Hahn that goes something like this: "It is wrong to coerce people into opinions. It is a duty to impel them into experiences."

The notion of reciprocal service and building community through one-on-one relationships is nothing new under the sun. Hands On Atlanta's contribution is simply that we are helping a lot more people—thousands each year—to make a first step. It's a matter of scale, I suppose. Just about every one I know has their own story about how their life has been enriched, their friendships broadened, their assumptions challenged, their respect for differences increased, or their hopes renewed.

Liz Turner came to Hands On Atlanta as a 21-year-old mother of four. She spent a year in public service as an AmeriCorps member at one of our elementary partner schools. She saw firsthand that her students were suffering because their parents were not involved in the life of the school. She took a close look at her own involvement as a mother of four. The very next year, at age 22, while working and going to school, she became the PTA President at her own child's school. A year with Hands On Atlanta AmeriCorps—a new view and an opportunity to contribute and learn—led to what I am certain will be a lifetime of volunteer leadership. She's quite an inspiration and actually carried the Olympic Torch on behalf of Hands On Atlanta last summer.

David Taube comes to mind, too. This successful architect has been volunteering as a school captain—volunteer principal—for a number of years. Next year he'll pursue a Master's in Middle Grades education and a life of teaching. Now that is quite a switch. I know dozens of Davids who have made decisions to join the nonprofit and public sectors as teachers, youth workers, and nonprofit administrators as a result of their volunteer experience.

I guess I am a good example, too. I started volunteering with Hands On Atlanta three years ago and last year I chaired the board of directors. Now, I definitely don't have the experience to govern a not-for-profit organization with a $3,000,000 budget. Just like the other 1,600 volunteers who serve in leadership roles, I learned by doing. And I was humbled, challenged, and rewarded beyond my wildest imagination. Hands On Atlanta, thanks in large part to our executive director, Michelle Nunn, is an environment that encourages risk-taking and visioning and getting outside your comfort zone.

Other volunteers candidly explain that opportunities to explore new talents, learn from the expertise of others, try out leadership roles, and be creative and entrepreneurial are more available to them through Hands On Atlanta than in their "day jobs." One newly trained project coordinator for one of our Senior Center projects recently told me, "I've always loved spending time with the seniors, but I wanted to take on this new responsibility to develop some leadership skills. I want to look for a better job, and I know this experience will help me grow."

In general, Hands On opens people's eyes to how the community works. Through direct participation, volunteers confront the city's problems and enhance their awareness of the city's needs. This involvement does more than introduce them to the needs and assets of Atlanta's inner city. Volunteers become educated about the nonprofit sector and charitable infrastructure. They become more conscious of the organizations that fill the gap that the government and marketplace can't. On some level, Hands On Atlanta puts the world of nonprofits on citizens' "radar screens."

MCKENNA: Probably the best example I could give is, whenever we have meetings and we ask Big Brothers and Big Sisters, or even focus groups, to talk about their relationships, invariably the first thing they'll say is, "I get more out of this than I give." And they'll talk about the mutuality that's in the process. And to me, that's what makes volunteering so special. The kids know that that's a volunteer, too. They can walk, and they know that the adult —the Big, in our case—doesn't have to be doing this. So it creates a dynamic that is exciting and energizing. That's what we're trying to convert, if we can, into this notion of advocates for positive youth development, which is the trick. Can we get our volunteers to be thinking more broadly about citizenship and engagement around the issues that have an impact on the environment of that young person? Or will we blow our approach by making it too prescriptive? That's what we're struggling with now. If we can get the energy that's in those volunteers focused more broadly on citizenship as it relates to their being a Big Brother/Big Sister . . . that's what we're trying to look at, to see what we can do.

ROBERT WOODSON: Yes, two questions and a comment. We heard from other witnesses that children at risk in these communities are already faced with insecurity of relationships that are temporary—in and out of their life—and what they need is stability. And we have heard, from Boys and Girls Clubs and others, that the average volunteer stays around about 2.7 years. And so the question about that. And also, you mentioned a public/private ventures study, where they isolated having a Big Brother. If you would look at other studies, they would find that church attendance of kids in those communities would also produce the same consequences as well. So that's something for consideration.

And I guess some discussion I'd like to hear among the panel is that when we started our poverty programs, it was implemented without serious examination of the basic assumptions. Because it was armed with good intentions, the assumption is, it would produce positive and meaningful results. And my fear is that we're entering the same era with volunteerism—we're allowing it to proceed because it is armed with good intentions. And I fear that there is a tension between what Paul Grogan was talking about, as far as effectiveness in revitalizing communities, and what I'm hearing from the other two witnesses, who are talking about an army of volunteers coming in. And the prospect of a landing pad versus parachuting scares me to death. So I would like to have that discussed.

And a footnote to that is, I was one of those that was critical of the event, and I spoke at the plenary session—not critical of the intentions, but just to try to introduce a word of caution. When I talk about 4,000 volunteers going, being recruited to go down Germantown Avenue—I'm from Philadelphia—and painting off graffiti, with cameras there and celebrating this great victory, go back there now and you'll see the graffiti has been replaced. By contrast, you have in southeast Washington here, one of the most dangerous neighborhoods, Benning Terrace public housing, where the lives of concerned men, eight men, who have been volunteering out of their own pockets, their own time, for six years in these troubled neighborhoods, were able to negotiate a truce between warring gangs. And these 30 young men were recruited to remove graffiti at a cost of $6.50 an hour. And if you go out there now, you will see that not only is the graffiti removed, but children are playing and the community is on its way, as Paul was saying, of being revitalized. So there is a tension between, Where do we invest our money? And if it's not either/or, then where is that point of tension? Because to date, not a single corporation, foundation, has stepped up to the plate and said, "We enjoy this peace, and therefore we're going to invest in this." Not a single investment has been made, except on the public side with the housing; we see not a single foundation or corporation said, "There's peace in one of the most dangerous neighborhoods in the city, and therefore we want to see it sustained." But if a General Powell were to show up with an army of volunteers, he could receive support for that. Would you all speak to that?

MCKENNA: Good, Bob, there's quite a few questions there. Let me start off with, we're Big Brothers Big Sisters of America, not Boys and Girls Clubs. A lot of people make that mistake. (You mentioned Boys and Girls Clubs.)

The first thing to say about the summit is, personally, I don't think that cleaning graffiti on Germantown Avenue was the best project to select, and I certainly will hope that the summit's not going to be judged on that. I hope what the summit will be judged on is the fact there were close to a hundred mayors that were there; there were governors; there were delegations that are going to go back into their communities and craft approaches to help relate to these five basic resources. The proof is going to be in the pudding; but I think a lot of energy was created there. And I know in terms of our organization, we're very interested.

But we can't talk about "armies of volunteers" in sort of an abstraction. Basically, we have to talk about what's needed in communities. What I tried to say in my presentation was that we're very interested in working in communities across America where we're not now, with underserved populations. We feel that we're part of those communities, because of the involvement of the moms and of the children themselves in the service. And we want to get more involved—we want to get more involved through some of the organizations that I mentioned.

As far as studies go, let me just caution you. Frankly, I don't know, maybe you could cite one. If there was a study that was done with a control group about church, where there were the young people, and with an exact same group—you go to church, you don't—and then with some measurement after 18 months to see what the impact was . . . if that's been done, then that's fine. But that's basically what happened here. There's a lot of talk about research out there, but this was with a real control group. And most social programs don't want to lend themselves to that. And you can understand why: with the experiment that went on down south with black GIs, you know, you're denying someone the opportunity to get a service. We're able to do it because we have long waiting lists—at least to think it through in terms of its impact. But the research, to me, is very significant that shows that our program works. And we have a responsibility, knowing that, to try to expand it and develop new ways for it to continue on to work, to put hope in the lives of children.

BENNETT: Can I ask for a quick clarification? What's your waiting list for, kids or volunteers? Do you have a shortage of volunteers?

MCKENNA: Yes. Not for kids.

BENNETT: Got it. How big is it?

MCKENNA: It's a little over 40,000 right now.

BENNETT: Nationally?

MCKENNA: Across the country, yes. It could be three times that if we didn't close down waiting lists after a period of time. There's a tremendous interest in the program among people in communities.

GROGAN: May I just comment on something Bob said? Everybody's saying it's not either/or. But I think you have to grant Bob Woodson's point: that there isn't anything like the discussion going on today about how do we identify and recruit and build the capacity of leaders in these communities? There isn't anything like that kind of a discussion going on, compared to the discussion about voluntarism and doing for others—which we all think is terribly important. But something is really being missed here, in view of the substantial hidden record of successes that we can all talk about, when local leaders come together and chart their own course. Because there's nothing more powerful than that.

LISC is an outside entity. And communities need connections to expertise and capital, and that's what we think we're bringing. But we're bringing it on the basis of, we will not work in a community unless we're doing it through a local organization that we think is legitimate and is accountable to that community. And building those kinds of leaders is a big, big job, too. And we're not talking about that today.

LUM: Actually, I'd like to think we are talking about it. We work with agencies that are well-managed and respected in their communities and public schools with visionary principals and a clear plan. When organizations call on Hands On Atlanta for volunteer support, we work together to ensure that volunteer support includes strong representation from the community served. We are reactive in that sense—responding to stated needs of community agencies and working in partnership with schools to create an action plan that furthers the school's annual and long-term goals.

In addition, our work with young people is centered on cultivating service-oriented leaders for the future, giving students an opportunity to serve and make a difference in their neighborhood, and helping kids utilize and capitalize on community assets. Through our partnership with the Children's Museum, high school students conduct walking tours of their community, gather oral histories and pass their learning on to 2nd and 3rd graders. This helps build community through storytelling.

ISMAR SCHORSCH: I agree that this is a very important discussion, and I would like to push you to think further. I would like to draw a distinction between local volunteers and local politicians. And I do that because of your remarkable story about the South Bronx. Thirty years ago, New York City decentralized its school administration. And the pendulum is swinging back, and the central administration is taking back more of the power for the conduct of the school system. And that is because the local school systems became vehicles for individual political leaders to exercise a monopoly. And so the sharing of political power, it seems to me, in the educational arena, prompted individuals to see power as an end in itself, and local school boards actually became a vehicle for keeping people out of sharing responsibility for local education rather than bringing them in.

And that's why I draw the distinction between volunteers and politicians. I am struck by the degree to which local inhabitants participate in the revitalization of their community life, and I wonder if there is any value to the distinction between volunteers and politicians. The South Bronx was revitalized through an extraordinary coalition that included government—city and federal government—but it brought in a large number of local organizations that were not politically oriented but rather oriented toward revitalization.

GROGAN: One way I like to describe this phenomenon of revitalization is that these community organizations manufacture good government—because they give government very different choices than it would otherwise have for its conduct and investment in communities. And they are hostile to bureaucratic systems. They're very pro public investment, and they believe in a vigorous public sector in that sense; and I think that's with a sense of how this country was built. But they're very hostile to the bureaucratic systems.

And in fact, if you look at the major barriers to the progress of these groups, even in the South Bronx and other areas where there's been dramatic progress, the big public resources have been tied up in systems that have been very difficult for these groups to affect: the welfare system, public schools, and public housing. Now, these public systems are now—belatedly, in my view—undergoing very significant transformation, which is going to lift the limits of the possible in these cities. And it's a very exciting prospect to imagine that we are moving to a degree where citizen impact could be magnified very much greater than it's been. Because everything that's been done up until very recently, these groups have been flying in the face of a very stiff head wind: in terms of those bureaucratic systems, and in terms of some macro trends, in terms of crime and drugs, and so forth. And the wind is a little bit at their backs now. So I think it's an exciting period.

PETER GOLDMARK: My comments are going to be an elaboration. These are three very good presentations, and I want to say a word about the one I know most about, which is the community development movement. And I think it would be good for us to reflect on as we think about what's going on in the country. What are the lessons and what are the paradoxes?

First paradox: This movement, which has an accomplishment in America's central cities unlike any other one by any other sector over the past 20 years —very interesting fact—was embraced, for these 20 years, neither by conventional liberalism nor conventional conservatism. Very interesting. What is the lesson of that?

Number two: It took twenty-plus years. That's something we Americans don't seem very good at—understanding the time horizon of things that work, things that endure, things that have to do with values and standards as well as bricks and mortar. Graffiti can come back in a day. Once you've reintroduced social standards back into a neighborhood, they endure. And that's what the community development movement is really about. Not those housing projects: it's about the social standards that built them and maintain them and knit the families on those blocks and in those housing developments to get them.

Third of all: The media didn't get it and, by and large, still doesn't get it. What is the lesson of that? You find for me, where is the coverage of the community development movement in this country—a success this spectacular? Now because the media hasn't gotten it and doesn't get it, by and large, for most Americans, including most politicians, it hasn't happened. Fascinating. What is the lesson of that?

Fourth of all: It is, to me, a lesson, as Paul has underlined very dramatically, in partnership among the sectors. It does not yield very well to axiomatic statements about, "The private market should do everything" or "Government has to be cut back automatically." What it's about is about finding different roles for each of the three major sectors in our society: private, public and non-profit. And that's where it worked. And that is a much more subtle task. But it's a task to which the most important stance and attitude to bring is partnership and openness to new roles. Those are some of the lessons and paradoxes that I think are important.

Now, since I decided to make this an elaboration rather than a question, I got to yield and you guys get equal time on that.

GROGAN: You said it.

MCKENNA: Just agree, I think.

HENRY FERNANDEZ: Two kind of different questions. For Big Brothers and Big Sisters: You've kept bringing up this idea of, I think you called it "advocacy for youth development." And that does seem like that would be a very significant change. I also remembered someone on the last panel—a school principal, a school headmaster—said, teaching kids about social justice, that at a certain point, there is something which is right, true, good. And I can understand, I think, why you're struggling with, Do we now ask our volunteers to start to move in that direction? But I'd like to know a little bit more about that struggle, as my first question. (And I'll hold my second question; it's more for the other two.) But that's very interesting to me.

MCKENNA: Good. Well, let me tell you how we're approaching it. Because it's not . . . Advocacy, unfortunately, is a loaded term; it takes on lots of different meanings. But if you're familiar with the Search Institute's model of assets that are needed in a community or in an individual, we're looking at those. And five of them are what the summit represents, in the five resources. And we're thinking of ways that we can help our volunteers to look at what's in their community: Which assets do they have? Which do they need? And how does that really directly impact on the life of the young person that they're mentoring?—as a way of beginning to get, in essence, our volunteers to think about having an impact as citizens as being very important in what they're doing. So what we're trying to do is begin to identify, in a non-charged, non-political, non-, if you will, advocacy way, volunteers in thinking really about citizenship. Because we think that there's so much that they have to contribute if they really do focus more of their energies in this area.

FERNANDEZ: Is it nonpolitical or non-partisan? I understand why you're running from it. But at a certain point you're talking about, as someone said, how power is distributed, how dollars are distributed, who gets elected.

MCKENNA: Yes, yes. No, I wouldn't shy away from that. I think ultimately that is what happens. And if we had . . . for example, if you had a way where we could connect with hundreds of thousands of volunteers across the country and they were to say, you know, in one month, for example, here are the issues that affected Johnny or Sally that we think are important, this is authentic reporting. What's happening, I think, in our society is the people who are engaged in advocacy either are paid functionaries or they're people who are clients' groups. And kids don't vote, so there's no client group there. You can count us as advocates, you know, because of the paid workers. So how do you get into a new . . . Everybody talks about wanting to get to a new citizen source. Here you got one that's already volunteering; they're committed, they're connected with young people on a regular basis. So what an opportunity to make a natural transition. But as you point out, it's a challenge as to how to do it so it doesn't just become rhetoric or it doesn't just become something that really doesn't work.

FERNANDEZ: Thanks a lot. The second question may apply to Big Brothers/Big Sisters, but I'd be interested in what role, if any, AmeriCorps members play in the organizations that you work in. I should say, It's a loaded question from my perspective, because we train a couple of hundred AmeriCorps members and place them to work in their own communities to provide service. But I'd be interested from different perspectives, what role they play and how you feel about the benefits or the negatives from having AmeriCorps members involved, if they are involved at all in your efforts, nationally and locally.

GROGAN: Well, we have used AmeriCorps. We do use it. But we've used it very differently, in the sense that we have used it to recruit individuals out of these communities in which we're working and getting them hooked up with the organizations in those communities, as opposed to having them come from outside and go in. And in that sense, it's become a significant human capital strategy for us: identifying most young, most minority people from those communities who don't really know about this, don't really understand the opportunities that may be there in community revitalization work. And it's been very powerful. Just to use one statistic: 40 percent of the AmeriCorps people we have had end up getting hired into permanent jobs with those community organizations. So we applaud that. And if the program were even more flexible than it's been, I think you could increase it, to direct it at least partially at what we've been talking about here, which is the need to create opportunities for people in those communities as well as people to come in from outside.

LUM: Hands On Atlanta uses AmeriCorps members to leverage additional volunteers in the schools. We actually have the largest AmeriCorps program in the Southeast, and we are one of the few volunteer service organizations to have that resource. These 100 full-time public servants allow us to think on a much higher level and larger scale about how to maximize academic achievement and citizenship development among youth through the effective use of volunteers.

Our AmeriCorps members are absolutely a cross-section of a community. More than 25 percent of them come directly from the communities where they're serving. A number of them attended the schools where they now serve. Many go on to pursue teaching careers.

Our approach is multi-faceted. Teams of 4-10 AmeriCorps members are in each of our schools full-time. They act as teacher assistants, run the after-school program, provide an infrastructure and mechanism that uses corporate and community volunteers effectively. In 1996 Hands On Atlanta AmeriCorps members provided over 90,000 hours of tutoring assistance to 2,790 students, They engaged 41 percent of the student body in after-school programming on a daily basis. Over a three-year period, schools served by Hands On Atlanta AmeriCorps volunteers showed an 11 percent increase on standardized test scores and a average of 25 percent decrease in incidents of discipline. Teacher attendance is up and parent participation has increased in these schools.

RICHARD LAND: I wanted to ask some specific questions about the Big Brothers program.

MCKENNA: Big Brothers Big Sisters.

LAND: Big Brothers Big Sisters. (I was using shorthand verbiage.) You say you have a 40,000 waiting list, and that you have a shortage of people over 40. Did I hear you correctly? What you described as seniors—which I'll try not to take personally. I'd like to ask some specific questions about that. Number one, what numbers are Big Brothers and what numbers are Big Sisters that are on that waiting list? Do you have more of a shortage of Big Sisters or Big Brothers? Second, what's the minimum age to become a Big Brother or a Big Sister? What's the maximum age? Do you have any ideas as to why you do not have more over-40s who are involved? Do you have a requirement, or an encouragement, of matching race and ethnicity or not? And if you do, does that increase the waiting list? And if you do have it, why do you have it?

MCKENNA: Good. I should have been taking all those questions down. I think I've got most of them, because they're familiar questions. But which one should I start with? If you're talking about the . . . probably your last questions about the senior citizens. I think there is some ageism in the way we've portrayed our program and gotten it across. I mean, you tend to think . . . even the name, Big Brother/Big Sister, has not been as effective in getting our message across to older people. And we have several initiatives under way now to try to do a much better job to recruit volunteers from the over-40 population. And there's no limit to how old someone can be to be a Big Brother/Big Sister. But that's taking some internal cultural changes.

LAND: Is there a minimum age?

MCKENNA: To be a Big Bother Big Sister, it depends on the city. Generally, the old paradigm was, you have to be out of high school. But the new paradigm is . . . one of our most popular programs, in over 90 cities, is using high school students as Bigs, which is a terrific service kind of connection, in school-based settings. So that's what's happening in terms of the age. It's going down, and hopefully we can get people that are older and younger, to really get more volunteers.

In terms of who's on our waiting lists: The children are on our waiting lists—not the Big Brothers and Big Sisters—are predominantly male, but there are lots of young girls that need our service. In terms of the percentage, our service is about 50-50, amazingly close to 50-50.

When you talk about race, the race of the Big versus the child: That's something that's discussed with the parent. And that's something . . . We have a bias: we believe that it is important to get same race, especially with younger children. Our focus is on the 10-to-12 year old age group. That's where the second largest number of changes are taking place, physiologically and every other way, and when kids growing up in that age period really need a caring adult—in terms of getting their own identity, of who they are and what they can become. And we think it is important to have same race. We're not able to get it as often as we'd like. And that's why the kids who are waiting to be matched . . . Unfortunately, about 50 percent of the kids that are waiting to be matched are of color; in the total numbers of kids we serve throughout the country, a little over 30 percent are people of color. So that presents a challenge for us, in terms of targeting our recruitment more effectively. Right now we are developing partnerships with groups, as I mentioned, like the One Hundred Black Men, Alpha Pi Alpha. We'd like to do more with unions. Did that touch on all your questions?

ELAINE CHAO: I'm going to pass. I would say, I know Tom from my previous work at United Way of America, and his organization does wonderful work.

MICHAEL NOVAK: I would like to ask Jill a couple of questions. I'm having a little trouble imagining what the clearinghouse does. Does it do things like this—and maybe I should just know this, but I'm having trouble with it. Say the Atlanta Symphony is putting on a benefit concert or something like that. They need somebody to put out chairs.

LUM: No.

NOVAK: Okay. And could you give me some more instances of things you'd say no to, things you'd say yes to?

LUM: Absolutely. We do direct service only.

NOVAK: What do you mean, direct service?

LUM: Volunteers choose from a wide array of projects addressing needs expressed by the community. Projects focus on issues of homelessness, education and mentoring, the environment, the needs of senior citizens, home renovation, urban gardening, and many other areas. We support the volunteer needs of close to 80 agencies and schools. When I say direct service, I mean that volunteers are actually involved in the larger community getting things done, versus raising the money to get things done or advocating for policies.

In our community-based projects we recruit, train, and support the volunteers who work with an existing program or initiative of an agency. Nonprofits are quite creative. I understand that they may get up to one third of their work accomplished through volunteer help. But few schools have a track record in using volunteers strategically to increase student success. In our school-based projects Hands On Atlanta works in partnership with schools and corporations to design, manage. And evaluate volunteer-staffed programs, in addition to providing the volunteer power to do the work.

I should also add that we work hard to offer opportunities for direct service that are appropriate for families with young children. For example, our Citizen Guide will tell you that the Sprouts and Vines Community Gardening Project is well-suited for elementary-aged kids and their parents. Not surprisingly, the volunteer who took the lead on developing that project and recruiting other volunteers is a young mother with a commitment to family volunteerism.

NOVAK: So if somebody has a need just for a day, some kind of a bake sale, you don't supply those needs?

LUM: No. It's always ongoing projects managed by volunteer project coordinators. A volunteer makes the commitment to be the link between the agency and Hands On Atlanta. What you see in The Citizen are projects that are happening over time. Some projects—like sorting food—work fine if a different group of folks show up every time. Other projects—mentoring, for example—require a long-term commitment. We work in partnership with agencies and set up an agreement. If we recruit 10 volunteers for a Saturday renovation project, it is critical that there is enough work for 10 people to do. The agencies also work with Hands On Atlanta's volunteer project coordinators to determine what kind for training or expertise or ongoing commitment is required, if any.

NOVAK: So over time, while it's always an ongoing relationship with an agency, it may be a different project with the agency. But you keep going back.

LUM: And we're adding projects all the time. For example, last month a woman who had been volunteering with the meal program at the Children's Shelter wanted to start a Read With Me Hour for the kids. She attended a Hands On Atlanta Project Coordinator 101 Training, the project was listed in The Citizen to recruit volunteers, we helped her with the supplies she needed, and now the program is in full swing every Thursday afternoon.

NOVAK: I read somewhere, I think I read, that there was a program in Atlanta, if not in some other cities, where food merchants have gotten together with bread and so forth, which has to be used within a certain time. Now, would your volunteers help set up a distribution network for that for homeless shelters?

LUM: I am aware of the program you are talking about—Atlanta's Table, through the Atlanta Community Food Bank. We have a long-standing relationship with the Food Bank. We support their food-sorting program and they supply snacks for our after-school program. I do not know if we are working with Atlanta's Table, specifically.

NOVAK: And the homeless. Do you have a program to help homeless people find medical care, for example?

LUM: I don't know the answer to that question. We certainly work with a number of programs that serve the homeless, and some volunteers may be doing work to connect people to resources. Certainly, if a potential volunteer leader or agency approached us with a plan for assisting in that area, Hands On Atlanta would engage in a conversation to consider how volunteers could help and what the commitment might look like. We may not be able to get an infinite number of additional long-term mentors, but we may be able to surround enough people with the resources that are needed and have them know that there are single organizations that can help them know where to go —that it's going to make a difference. . . In the Citizen Schools, we find kids who really think that when they grow up it's all going to be great, and they're going to get to go to college, and they're going to do all these things. And they haven't a clue what the steps are to get there. And so I think that, again, what we're trying to do is help moms to do what they can, have absolute leverage to coordinate these efforts, but also bringing people in who can do certain pieces, to help with test scores and help them connect in any way over the long term.

GALSTON: That, I believe, is the end of the second panel, right on time.

Back to Panel One
Forward to Panel Three