Archive Page 2

Broadband Media Centers as Anchor Institutions


Click here to listen.

2011 Alliance for Community Media International Conference and Exhibition
Tucson, AZ
July 27, 2011

Broadband Media Centers as Anchor Institutions

Among the Broadband Networks funded by State grants and Federal programs such as BTOP and BIP, are Community Media Centers that have partnered in some of these grant programs and position themselves as Community Anchor Institutions.

This preconference will put the spotlight on how these CMCs have positioned themselves as Libraries. What role will these CMCs play in design, construction and implementation of these networks? What new community communication  services will they be able to offer using these wireline and wireless networks? Come and learn the vision and plans of these CMCs and how they will be the prototypes and models for the future of Community Media.

Panel I: The BTOP Grant Process, the Role of CAIs and the Future of Federal Funding

Moderator:
Chuck Sherwood, TeleDimensions

Speakers:
Kathy Bisbee, Community Media Access Partnership
Tony Shawcross, Open Media Foundation

Panel II: Connected Broadband Media Centers and Their New Services

Speakers:
Jay April, Akaku Maui Community Television
Jen Gilomen, Bay Area Video Coalition
John Hauser , Access Humboldt
Craig Sinclair, Amherst Media

Evaluating BTOP Projects

I just returned from two days at the CBAIS conference in Cleveland, OH. I blogged about a few of the sessions here, here and here. I had the privilege of leading a breakout session, entitled “Data Gathering Tools & Process for Evaluation” with my colleague James Losey of the New America Foundation.

One of the questions that came up during our session was “How do we measure broadband adoption?”  In other words, what is broadband adoption and how do we know when it has been achieved? After a bit of back and forth, a challenge was put forward to BTOP grantees to use the ambiguity as an opportunity.  There is room for grantees to create their own definitions of broadband adoption and to define what success looks like to them and the communities they serve.

I have also been reading Dara O’Neil’s (2002) “Assessing community informatics: A review of methodological approaches for evaluating community networks and community technology centers” for a paper I’m writing with my colleague Adam Kehoe at UIUC. In O’Neil’s paper, she provides a list of “ICT evaluation guides” that have been designed to help researchers and practitioners evaluate the impacts of their community technology projects. While many of these papers are a bit dated, I thought I’d include a short bibliography below that might be helpful for those interested in creating their own definitions of broadband adoption:

Chow, C., Ellis, J. and Walker, G. (2000), CTCNet Evaluation Toolkit, Education Development Center, Newton, MA.

City of Seattle (2000), Information Technology Indicators for a Healthy Community, City of Seattle Department of Information Technology, Seattle, WA

Westat. (2000), Technology Opportunities Program Evaluation Guide: Community Networking and Services Projects , US Department of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, Washington, DC.

O’Neil, D. (2002), Assessing Community Informatics: A Review of Methodological Approaches for Evaluating Community Networks and Community Technology Centers. Journal of Community Informatics, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 76-102.

TechSoup and Community Technology Network are also offering a free webinar tomorrow on evaluating digital literacy projects.  Here are the details:

WHAT: Evaluating Digital Literacy Programs
WHEN: Thursday, June 30, 2011, 11 am PST
REGISTER: https://cc.readytalk.com/r/14jcx57poov4
COST: FREE!

If you have an evaluation guide to share, please leave a comment below with details.

UPDATE JULY 8, 2011

Here are a few more resources from the NTIA and the archive of the TechSoup webinar:

BTOP: User v. Subscriber v. Adopter???

At the CBAIS conference in Cleveland today, Laura Breeden of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration helped to clarify the following questions: “Who is an adopter, who is a subscriber, and who do we count?” for BTOP grantees in the audience.

Breeden said the NTIA is asking BTOP grantees to count household broadband subscribers, business subscribers, and users of public access computing facilities. She said it’s very important for grantees to keep track of people who become subscribers. It’s also important for grantees to track numbers of people who complete, and express interest in, training. Breeden told the audience that the NTIA for as much information as possible across the entire continuum of participants. The data will help to explain the story of the people who will continue to do this work long after BTOP is over.

Breeden told the audience that the NTIA also plans to provide more clarification on the definitions of users, subscribers, and adopters in July. She said that the NTIA is very interested in understanding the paths that people take towards becoming broadband adopters. Breeden reassured grantees that their investment in training and outreach is also important.

The Continuum

On one side of the broadband adoption continuum, Breeden explained that there are people who are afraid of the Internet. These individuals have not had success learning how to use the Internet.  On another side, there are people who use public access computer centers. These people have a Facebook page, a Gmail account – they are using broadband.

Then there are those who are, and are not, household broadband Internet subscribers. Some may be connecting to the Internet for free at the beginning, but they eventually move toward becoming a customer of broadband Internet service providers.

Q&A

Here are a few questions asked by audience members, followed by summary responses by Laura Breeden:

Q: If a person lives next door to a computer center and can get a wireless signal in their home, does that person count as a subscriber?

A: No. The individual is not a subscriber if he/she is not paying for it. The person is a user.

Q: If somebody is not paying for a broadband connection, but paying for Luminosity, a monthly service that you can get online, does that person count as a subscriber?

A: NTIA needs to look into this.

User, adopter, subscriber . . . The NTIA is looking to collect more of these stories in order to help them define these terms.

Sustainability Through Community Engagement

I’m here at day two of the CBAIS conference sitting in on the Sustainability Through Community Engagement session. Bill Callahan from OneCommunity introduced the session by proposing two questions to all the panelists:

1. What does sustainability mean?

Callahan said that we use the term vaguely, like community. In this context it’s clear what it means, i.e. where are you going to get more money? When you are done spending money, where are you going to get more?

He continued by saying that we all know that very few organizations become permanent stewards of any funders. Or we hope to get on the United Way list, and it’s hard to stay on the list once you’re there. There is pressure for United Ways to support everything.

2. Where are we all trying to get to?

We’re trying to get to a status somewhere in our realm where we have the stature and the sense of necessity and the relationships so that instead of going back to the same funders every year, you are in ongoing relationship – seen as an integrated part of the community – that people feel that they need to talk to you.

We’re all trying to figure out how to make ourselves sufficiently useful so that local governments, funders, and feds are saying “of course we have to keep these people going”. How do you get closer to that? How do you build the right partnerships and stature in the community so that it becomes easier?

New Routes to Community Heath

Cecilia Garcia, Executive Director from the Benton Foundation began the presentation by talking about “Authentic Community Engagement: Lessons from New Routes to Community Heath”.

New Routes is not a BTOP project. It’s a project that the Benton Foundation administers and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation supported. The Benton Foundation began the project “Sound Partners for Community Health”. Benton has been looking at lessons learned from the project. Over time, it developed a complex community collaboration model that can be applied to other areas beyond health care. The report also on the wiki.

New Routes is a three year project funded by Robert Wood Johnson located in 8 sites across the country. Sites in LA, Chicago, St. Paul, Atlanta, Oakland, Boston, Philadelphia and San Francisco.

It’s comprised of immigrant led organizations, health care, and a media outlet (community media, etc.) The goal is to create programming that speaks specifically to the needs of the population in that area.

In LA, the program created Chinese language programming that helped to provide health care information to that community. In St. Paul, there is a project that works with the Somali community.

The report puts a high premium on community and community engagement. The Benton Foundation believes there is a correlation between community engagement and sustainability. It will continue because the communities are so invested that they will not be able to afford to let it go.

Lessons Learned

Engage community member in all aspects of the process:

  1. Generating priorities for the project
  2. Offering opportunities for leadership and risk taking
  3. Envisioning a different future
  4. Participating in evaluation of the project

Build on existing community strengths:

  1. Organizations working in community gain power when they connect themselves to existing assets
  2. Youth, especially immigrant communities, often act as brokers among language, cultures and service systems.
  3. Active engagement often occurs on those places where community members feel most comfortable and sage.

Leave communities better equipped when the project started:

  1. Foster collaborative leadership within the community
  2. Bridge divides and help build social capital in the community
  3. Urge others to speak
  4. Enhance the capacity of community organizations

Resources

New Routes of Comnunity Heath: http://newroutes.org
Benton Foundation: www.benton.org
Cecilia Garcia: cgarcia(at)benton(dot).org

Technologyforall

Will Reed of Technologyforall explained that the organization began in 1997 focused on using technology as a tool to empower low-income communities. They started with an “Idea, Donor, Partnership” model with one community partner, the M.D. Anderson YMCA, which continues to be a key partner that they work with today.

They were the first organization serving as an umbrella organization working in Houston. They developed a relationship with Enron and had a wonderful relationship with them. Enron poured in a lot of money and people capacity. The relationship was that they were going to bring broadband connections to community tech centers across the nations.

Enron withdrew their funding and Technologyforall had to lay off nine people. Lesson is that you don’t always know your partners.

Technologyforall also discovered a myth and a reality. One myth among non-profits is that if they partner with organizations then their pie will get smaller. The reality is that when you share expertise across orgs then the pie, in fact, gets bigger. But so often we get stuck in the idea that the pie gets smaller when we collaborate.

Technologyforall has partners with SBC, BP, COMPAQ, ENRON, TOP, Microsoft, and SmartForce in the past. Reed says that they continued the model with the YMCA, they have worked with multiple partners in multiple cities. The bottom line is that there was deep relationships with partners in the community.

It was key that they developed partnerships with organizations who are embedded in their communities.

For example, they worked on a project with Rice University to provide Internet access through the white spaces that were opened up in the digital television transition. There are 9,000 users who use the network in the neighborhood.

The Texas Connect Coalition BTOP grant serves a portion of Texas. Free Net is a key partner in this work. Austin Free Net brings their community relationships and also does training very well. They brought a key asset to the BTOP grant.

Continued deep relationships in the community are going to be key moving forward.

Technologyforall approach is about “WE” – What can we do together that is mutually beneficial and how can we get something out of the situation together by working together.

One Community & CYC

Lynda Goff, OneCommunity used to work for Wake Forest as the IT Director. WinstonNet was hoping to pay low cost fee access to technology in Winston-Salem. There was a membership fee for board members involved in the project and they used this as operating capital to pay for digital inclusion efforts in the city.

Their first goal was to set up community tech centers. They now have 44 centers located in city rec centers, libraries, community faith based organizations, and the YMCA. They received donated computers. They hired a community tech firm to manage the computers in the labs.

They used a thin client to manage the desktop centrally. They have worked with CIOs at each city, county, and colleges. They approached their project by asking the question “What are we going to do in our community? How do we sustain it with no money?”

The project influenced policy in the city and it influenced corporations.

They have very strong community based organizations that are thinking about digital inclusion and have a sustainable model.

Time Warner / Cleveland City Council Neighborhoods Technology Fund

Bill Gruber of the Time Warner / Cleveland City Council Neighborhoods Technology Fund began his talk by explaining that he used a combination of regulation and deregulation to find funding for digital inclusion. They went to the State Utilities Commission to leverage telephone funds for community tech centers. Those funds dried up and other funds kicked in for other groups. There was not a lot of sustainability.

They next thing that people in Cleveland did, when Adelphia bought out Cablevision, was to approach the cable provider to leverage local franchise fees to leverage funds for community tech centers. This was in 1999-2000.

The cable company agreed and they used the funds to fund community technology centers. They formed a board made up of community organizations, city council members, and others to create a grant fund.

The initial funding was 3.5 million. They started with the Cleveland Foundation, focused the money on neighborhood tech centers across Cleveland.

Over nine years the funds were used up to create sustainable computer centers. The tech fund has given out 159 grants over 9 years. Roughly 19 grants a year. 270 million

The funding went to fund summer programs, some were used for job training centers, senior centers, connecting children to do homework or performance art projects. In a deal with Adelphia, they provided free Internet connections to all neighborhood tech centers and provide at cost connections to other centers across the city.

This also helped them because it was free advertising and to get more customers.

Towards the end of the session, Bill Callahan said that all of the discussions that people are talking about in terms of building strategic partnerships are key in moving things forward towards sustainable models for community engagement.

« Previous PageNext Page »


Delicious

Flickr Photos

IMG_1908

IMG_1900

IMG_1909

More Photos

Creative Commons

Community Media in Transition is licensed under an Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike 2.5 Creative Commons license.