Section A

I do think we should move forward with this purpose.  Structurally I think we need to add in some more group development components so that the individuals in Level 2 have a sense of group identity and overall support above and beyond our professional development. In the past we have acheived that by AR as well as the individual coaching.  I know resources are limited but I think some structure centered around us as indivduals would act as a grounding force for our role in Level 2, whether that be individual or group coaching or some variation thereof.

I feel that as individuals we all uphold the purpose statements by the work we do.  I think of level 2 as a mechanism for sustainability and development in that work not necessarily the vehicle by which we achieve the purpose.  I think the only piece we are really missing is our connection to Level 1.  I know that individuals are connected to Level 1 Vergers but as far as a group we have not made that formal connection.  However, I also feel that what we have focused on up untill this point has been valuable and led us to the point where we can start to build that connection. This relates to our purpose in the sense that we are "committed to the OTV movement" and for me that movement it begins in Level 1.

Section B

The trainings worked for me.  I have found myself referring to my learnings in my everyday work.  What would help these to be more than just useful as content knowledge would be a way to directly apply the learning to my work and organization.  A plan of action, if you will, for the implementation of this learning in a concrete way.

It also worked for me to have AR seperately as I attend AR's regularly at VOICES.

The small groups did not work for me.  Ours never really got off the ground with a clear mission and purpose and given that we work together everyday seemed a bit redundant.  It was hard to take off the VOICES hat and put on the Level 2 hat to distinguish our roles and relationships within the Level 2 context.

I would love to have retreats!  I'm not sure when and who should attend but it is a great way to work on relationship building.

Alissa D. Gentille

Program Director - V.O.I.C.E.S.

Founding Member - On The Verge

(415)867-9459 cell

(707)251-9432 work

QUESTION 1) Given the information above regarding Level 2's purpose, do you believe Level 2 should continue with this purpose in mind? Did our work together over the first 4 months of Level 2 reach any component of this original purpose? If we did please list HOW we reached parts of this purpose. If not, please briefly explain your perspective.

Yes, I believe that Level 2 should continue with the original purpose of: Vergers being change agents in the their organizations, professional skill/knowledge building, and having Level 2 Vergers work with Level 1 Vergers. I do think that the first 4 months of Level 2 did begin to reach it’s goals. Specifically, for me I received individual coaching from etsuko to become a better supervisor (more effective change agent) which was both professional skill/knowledge building. Also I think there is something accurate about this “need to know mindset” for example the PI was important to learn about as we (VOICES) needed to make decisions about staff composition. However the financial management was not a time sensitive topic I needed training on.

Section B) EVALUATION:
Please provide an evaluation of the first 4 months of your Level 2 experience:

What worked for me was the individual coaching from etsuko and Diana about work issues. More importantly I think it was effective that there were times when etsuko was present at the center to observe and coach in real time. That way I could address concerns in a more timely manner. (I find this also true when Edd is “hanging out” at VOICES)

What did not work for me was the small groups. I think I could benefit greatly from the perspectives of other Vergers. Being in a small group with Ian and Alissa was convenient but not necessarily most effective since we already spend so much time together. My sense is that I would not eliminate smalls groups, but I would restructure them so that the composition took into account location, areas of work, different Verger groups, etc.

What was missing for me was that I felt disconnected from the larger group, being that my small group consisted of my co-workers. So I would have liked to form new connections to other Vergers. I also envisioned more interactions with the SMEs but I am not sure how that would look.

Section A) PURPOSE:
I think that the purpose we are working under is good for what we are working to be and in line with being a continuation of Level One. I might tinker with the wording slightly, but overall, I believe it suits us well.

As for what our work reached as part of our purpose I would say that the ongoing reflection and the 3 trainings were very beneficial and served the purpose of keeping us in (or building new) relationship(s) and also to build our skills. While the finance workshop was extremely helpful, I am not sure that it was centered on professional skills that we asked for in the context of planning for Level Two.

I think that a lot of OTV and my work for OTM gets a little blury in that my reflection is at work, so I am missing out on a component of relationship building with the other vergers (except for Alissa and Jonna at VOICES). But, that was my choice...so I need to decide if I would join in with the other Vergers for an *additional* reflection monthly. Overall, I like the idea of Level Two OTV, but it's not exactly meeting my needs. I'll explain in my eval, below.

Section B) EVALUATION:
What worked for me:

• reflection @ work was extremely helpful in getting us to think differently about something we are all so deeply "in", and to work more effectively as a true team
• the training on PI was very helpful on my understand of myself and how we work together as a team @ VOICES...we do comment frequently on each others' PI scores and letters (i.e., Ian's showing his D again!). I would like to refresh myself with the PI materials to be able to continue using the info from this training
• i also liked the personal finance workshop but it hasn't really played out in my work life (other than me thinking I need to earn more money and use it all more wisely!)

What didn't work for me:

• something with the timing or structure of meetings. i don't want *more* meetings...but for some reason it seems like we didn't get as much bang for our (proverbial) buck this time around.
• reflection: was great having it with my work team but I missed the connection with the rest of level 2
• small groups: we weren't effective in our meetings and didn't really have very many

What I'm getting from my own evaluation is that it wasn't necessarily Level 2 insufficency, but how I participated. Things are thrown off because I am employed by OTM, so I have an ongoing tie-in with OTM happenings, etc. But, at the same time, I feel disconnected with Level 2. I'm not sure yet if I would join in extra Level 2 reflections (seems most likely) or what...

I appreciate the extra boost that having my OTV L2 work with the VOICES ladies gives (it's right in line with the purpose of being change agents within our own org), but at the same time I miss the organizational and experiential diversity of the larger group. Maybe instead of doing my level 2 stuff with VOICES I get completely mixed up with other L2 vergers?

As for the trainings, I feel like it would be great to continue them but to have them pulled from the list of what we asked for. Or to remind us at the beginning of the trainings where on the list it was and how many asked for it?

Summary of my thoughts:

• I liked what we've done so far and found it useful but not always top-notch effective
• I would like to do more of my L2 activities with other vergers outside of VOICES
• We should regularly revisit our purpose and trainings "wishes" as a source of evaluation and ongoing realignment

QUESTION 1) Given the information above regarding Level 2's purpose, do you believe Level 2 should continue with this purpose in mind? Did our work together over the first 4 months of Level 2 reach any component of this original purpose? If we did please list HOW we reached parts of this purpose. If not, please briefly explain your perspective.

I believe Level 2 should continue to strive to meet the purpose developed by the founders. The first four months we achieved the spirit of the mission, but fell short of reaching the mission. We set ourselves up to fail, but not holding that mission together as a group. It puzzles me that many people were not aware of the mission. I frankly forgot we came up with such a clever mission in the founding group. This is a shame on both accounts because the mission should be what drives to be active participants in this organization. I would love to see us read the mission at the beginning of each group meeting to be clear that we are all on the same page. I know that we also stated we need to become clear on what defines social justice for OTV. I also don’t know how many people are committed to the movement of OTV and the work required to keep it going. That should have been part of one of our early meetings as well. Enough on how we fell short.

We definitely met the spirit of the mission in many ways. Reflection helped us continue to build relationships as well as our limited small group interactions that we have begun. I think we are all definitely serving people a wide variety of capacities at our jobs. I am definitely challenging systems at my work place, but could probably have used the small group structure earlier than later to be supported in organizational challenges and change. By nature of all of us having gone through Level 1 we should definitely be transforming and enhancing our organizations by taking what we learned and our personal transformations through our interactions with one another to our work places. We as a group definitely need to explore what means to be committed to the OTV movement. I have a feeling it means something completely different for everyone.

Section B) EVALUATION:
Please provide an evaluation of the first 4 months of your Level 2 experience:

What worked for you? How did it show up in your work/life?

• I enjoyed having the monthly workshops. I was able to take something from each one to sustain myself in different ways. Doing great work in the world means not only have skills to succeed in your organization, but to also be able to take care of yourself personally. The PI and financial workshop helped me to look at my personal care as it relates to work. The PI and stakeholders analysis are tools I can use in the future at work to think about the most effective ways for me to challenge my work systems. The financial workshop has allowed me to own something that I have let overrun my life and decisions I make for some time. The PI has allowed me to see why I may act the way I do in many situations and come to terms with that as my personality and nothing that needs to be changed, just something that needs to be worked with. The Stakeholders analysis I can see being useful in the future. Although I may not use it now, I am at least aware of the methodology, which is often half the battle.

• I enjoyed the little time I have had with my small group thus far.

• I enjoyed meeting with folks from Napa.

What didn't work for you? Would you eliminate this or restructure it and how?

• Although I enjoyed meeting with folks from Napa, I felt that there was no real purpose to us meeting, other than spending time in workshops together. There wasn’t really much in the way of having us mix up and get to know each other. Perhaps the workshops should be something completely different from the monthly meeting. Workshops might be something offered to the entire Level 2 committee for a fee (you could pay for one, or for a series) and should take place on a different day from the Level 2 Training group meeting. Level 2 Training might focus on support structures, learning about organizations, and networking. Perhaps that is a time for a person to present on their organization and what they do in a deep way and for people to ask questions and make solid connections to the person and their work. The second part can be used to meet in small groups. Part of the time could also be used to sustain the movement. And there you have three hours of what I think would be beneficial to all. We are definitely missing the networking element and dialoging with people about what it is they do. We also definitely need sometime for the silly get to know you games or some structure to have us know one another a bit deeper than you are from Group 4 and I and I from Group 2.

• It would have been nice to have the small groups determined earlier. I feel like we formed just before the holidays and haven’t had much time to formulate how we can work together and help support each other.

• I don’t mind driving anywhere as long as there is clear purpose. Every meeting we have gone to has had a clear purpose to me, so I do not mind driving once or twice a month for a workshop or meeting. Besides an hour to Napa surely beat the 2 hours it used to take me from Santa Cruz to go to Alameda and it was worth every little bit. I guess it is about how much you are invested.

• Reflection has worked for me well, but for me it does not have to take on the shape of Level 1 reflection. I think it is great place to be pushed, but I would like it to be a place I am not afraid to go to if I just feel the need to be supported and rejuvenated in the work I do. Sometimes I don’t want to be pushed and just want to talk and vent and by virtue of who we are I will be pushed to answer deep questions regardless.

What was missing for you? Were there elements that you had hoped would be included or that you would have liked to have added to the structure?

• For me the relationship building and networking are the key to having Level 2 thrive as something completely different from Level 1. I want to know what people do day to day. What is their day at work like. I want to figure out how we can connect and how I may use them to support me in my work. Something about a group of people taking a deep interest in what someone is doing is really exciting. Especially all the connecting and collaboration that could possibly take place. I like where I am working, but would love to collaborate with others on small projects that may or may not relate to my job, but relate to things I am really passionate about.

• I would also like to have some structure in place to put out ideas for programs or organizations, where collaboration and feedback can take place. That could be part of the Training Meeting where one hour is about sharing your workplace day to day or what you are passionate about and would like to start thinking about starting, but don’t know where to begin.

This may be kind of wacky, but I feel as though this might have been the first time I've seen the Level 2 statement of purpose.  Or the first time I've seen it in quite some time, if my memory is failing me.  So.  I like the purpose; I wish we could somehow have it more reflected in our time together; at the same time, I cannot commit to MORE time together or more work, so I'm not sure how to make it happen, since relationships and change are the result of time spent working together...  I do not know how many of the components we hit, other than I know some folks found the trainings valuable and therefore that must have reflected in the work places.  Since we do not do reflection as a full group, I do not know how OTV L2 has helped Vergers become agents of change in their organizations.  But I can speak to the third component, of Vergers sustaining OTV through Level 1 groups, since that is one of my roles, and that I have very much enjoyed and I very much feel a part of the OTV fabric.EVALUATION: What worked: The main thing about OTVL L2 that worked for me is my work as a consultant.  Leading reflection is challenging and learning about the educational sector is inspiring (insomuch as I'm determined to do what I can to create positive change in that sector).  I've also gotten MUCH out of working with Diana and etsuko, and have valued what little time my small group has had together.  And being on the Group 6 L1 retreat was amazing.  However, I'm not sure how this is showing up in my work life.What didn't work: The trainings didn't much work for me.  None of them were trainings I requested, and the one I missed due to a standing commitment- the stakeholder analysis- was the only one I can really use.  Both the PI and the financial stuff were interesting, but not necessary, and given the choice I would not have attended either one.  Only the individual coaching I've gotten in L2 has been effective in helping me transform my agency and grow personally.  I would eliminate mandatory trainings.  We are such a diverse group that there is, in my mind, no way that all the trainings would be beneficial to all of us.  I would also eliminate, in whatever way needed, the traveling.  It is such a hardship on every last one of us.  If this means we need to have place-based groups, so be it, but the time and the gas and the traffic are just too much.  I also think that regardless of where they are held, folks should be able to decide which trainings they want to attend, and also, that the trainings should be decided and booked in advance for say, six months, so we can plan for the ones we want to attend.  Just suggestions.Missing: really getting to know everyone in the group.  This was hard, since I get to see the Napa Vergers so rarely, so when I got to see them once a month I'd really want to catch up with them; and that left little time for me to get to know the other vergers.  Also, we never did any get-ta-know-ya exercises, which would have broken the ice.  Again, without common work, which I can't commit to, getting to know everyone is necessarily difficult, but I still wish there was a way.  Also, I would still love some of the trainings I originally requested- better management practices, strategic planning, etc.Anything else: I'd like a more clear understanding going in for the next round of Level 2.  As in, THERE WILL BE COMMON WORK or THERE WILL BE NO COMMON WORK or YOU WILL BE DOING WORK BEYOND THE SIX HOURS or YOU WON'T, etc, etc.  I know this was a first go, but that's the information I'll need to recommit.  And I really WANT to recommit, so I hope to be as helpful in possible in the redesign.

Section A) Purpose

Although my level of engagement is reflection group only, I think it would have been helpful to me to if at my first reflection group this mission statement could have been explained and fleshed out more.

Social justice is a term that is widely used and has many different connotations. What does "social justice" mean for Level 2? If it's the building relationships, serving people etc., then do we as Level 2 have any predetermined benchmarks that we are trying to hit to measure the goal of transformation and enhancements of our organizations and communities that have been decided on collectively as an OTV community?

My take on this is that this can still be apart of the "common work" and all the folks working in Napa would have an easier time predetermining these benchmarks because you all are working in the same community. The non Napa folks could find ways to supplement and support your work in achieving these benchmarks for the goal of transformation and enhancement of our communities. As a non Napa person, I have faith that the form (not the content) of the work done in your community are transferable and universal to all communities because the professional form in which you all work together is based on personal self awareness and interpersonal connections. Those skills, the ability to be REAL with yourself, others and accountable to each other in the work are skills that are universal and beneficial to all communities. I can learn these things by supporting you all in your work.

As for committment to the On the Verge movement, I am committed to the essence of this movement or at least of what I understand it to be and to Vergers that I have been blessed to work with. 

For those who aren't so sure, we all have the free agency to make choices. You can choose to leave altogether, change your level of engagement or to push for the programming to be what you need it to be to fit your needs. I have done all three of those with OTV and it hasn't been easy but it has been one of the safest places for me to practice making choices in which I was fearful that I would end up alone (sometimes I was alone for a short while) and trust that people in the end will still be there. 

Section B) Evaluation

I loved the level of engagements that were offered. I was very clear with myself that I was not a place where I could commit more than the once a month reflection. Reflection was often times an avenue in which if I didn't do anything to love myself that month, I could always count on reflection to remind me and also bring me back to earth when my head was in the clouds.

The one critical thing I have around reflection is I wish there were levels of aggressiveness in reflection. I've been thinking about this for years and thought maybe this is a good forum to bring it up in.  I think I need to be in reflection with people who are more aggressive or harder to crack and with facilitators can really push someone but I understand it's hard to gauge when there is a mix of people of who need hard pushing or gentle pushing.

Does anyone else feel the same way about the reflections?

Well that's all for me!

Peace,

Tiff

To address the purpose question of the evaluation, overall I do feel that we engaged in the mission of level 2 over the first 4 months. I beleive that I engaged in my work in alignment with social justice principals. I also have forged new relationships to create new opportunites for my students. As far as challengeing systems, in particuliar the Alameda Unified School District, I don't really know. I fell like that is yet to be seen. I would hope that I am having impact but as of now it is hard to see the results, systemically, of my work. When looking at the purpose question in terms of vergers as a whole without having detailed knowledge of each persons impact my assumption has been a positive one. We are lucky to work with some really talented people and my intution is that they are making change.Section 2: I will try and keep this concise so as not to create too much work for you etsuko. Most awesome thing about Level 2 was working with Diana again. The trainings where good and i would like to participate in more of them. My main question is that for myself Level 2 does not feel much different from Level 1. I have experienced it as, okay I am still in OTV. I am not sure if this is good or bad but I haven't felt a unique "level 2 ness" to this process. Also I miss Franklin and Nick, I wish they where still involved. 

QUESTION 1) Given the information above regarding Level 2's purpose, do you believe Level 2 should continue with this purpose in mind? Did our work together over the first 4 months of Level 2 reach any component of this original purpose? If we did please list HOW we reached parts of this purpose. If not, please briefly explain your perspective.

I have not been involved in Level 2 since last spring, therefore my feedback and concerns may have already been addressed since then. However, it's always a good thing to revisit previous issues to see if they indeed have been addressed. =)

My experience with Level 2 (spring) is that we spent most of this time building and defining it so I think this question predates my involvement. The fall group would be better equipped to answer this question.  

Section B) EVALUATION:
Please provide an evaluation of the first 4 months of your Level 2 experience:

• What worked for you? How did it show up in your work/life?
• This isn't going to be a popular answer, but the truth is that the best thing for me to do was step away from OTV this fall/winter. I was burnt out, emotionally and mentally, from my L2 experience in spring and needed time away. Also, I was worried that if I ever left the group, I'd feel excluded and wouldn't have a way to get back into the loop and community. I got over this concept of in versus out, after I left but realized that I have the personal power to push my way back in if need be. =) Sometimes you need take the safety net away to see if you can really stand on your own. Plus it gave me greater perspective to walk away for a bit and reflect. But also, staff had created different levels of involvement, such as Adult Reflection for all L2 folks, that let me feel like I could change my level of involvement every 6 months, which made me feel that the OTV community continues to be accessible and willing to connect to me. I'm still here for this community.
• What didn't work for you? Would you eliminate this or restructure it and how?
• I didn't have a positive experience with the small group structure. I felt that we were inundated with work to develop L2 and couldn't be emotionally supportive of one another. In addition, there was little staff check-in to see if this was or wasn't working.  Being task-oriented, I hid behind the overwhelming work, rather than question the structures in place. As a result, I felt burnt out after the whole process and didn't want to rejoin in the fall until L2 became more focused in its process and goals. Again, this issue may have already been addressed since then.
• I would eliminate small groups and keep L2 small and focused on its purpose. (The new structure of different levels of involvement seemed like a good step in the right direction.)   
• The energy of the group waxed and waned several times. There was little sense of immediacy or direction. My sense is that staff didn't want to ask more of L2 folks in terms of time and commitment, and therefore that created some lethargy in the group. This continues to be new territory for OTV so it's completely understandable that this was happening. Now how to actively address it with the help and buy-in of all L2 folks is another question. I'm not sure, but there should be a focused community (in-person) discussion.
• What was missing for you? Were there elements that you had hoped would be included or that you would have liked to have added to the structure?
• One of OTV/OTM's strongest traits, which continues to bring and keep folks to this community, is its ability to develop the interpersonal relationships of its members. OTV creates an unprecedented level of commitment and connection between members of its community. I think to sustain such a strong connection is going to be a bigger and bigger issue as OTV and OTM grows. 
• Perhaps what works best are seasonal retreats (not 100% work retreats) for all L2 Vergers to keep us invested and connected in the community. And then offer subsequent professional workshops, which I know L2 already offers, but these should organized by L2 Vergers not just staff. To maintain accountability, there should be 2-3 heads, beyond staff, that for those 6 months work together and coordinate these different projects with staff input and feedback. These heads will be voluntary and rotate every 6 months. 
• Anything else that you feel would be important to know?
• OTV should be asking members for tax-deductible, financial contributions for its services, and be on top of it! (Hint, set up PayPal on this site for debit/credit card contributions.) I was supposed to pay for Adult Reflection, but I didn't get a reminder and then no one talked about it again. Although we're all not rolling in the dough, we should all donate more than time to this organization as it's given us so much and elevated our previous work positions.

That's all from me. I will update this comment if I think of anything else. Thanks!

Answer to Question 1:

I do not think that Level 2, as I have experienced it, has fully met the three goals listed above. I think, depending on small group focuses, some members may have worked on being change agents within their organizations, but I have not been a part of any conversation or work around this. I enjoyed and learned form the three trainings, but only the first one impacted my effectiveness at work (the personal finance and stakeholder analysis did not provide me with practical/useful knowledge or skill building for work). I know that the consultant Level 2 Vergers have had experience leading Level 1 reflections, meetings, etc. I think we are moving in a direction of having Level 2 Vergers work to sustain the program, but it has not been clear to me what I've agreed to in joining Level 2. For example, I did not think I agreed to attending extra meetings and doing at-home work for an OTM project (i.e. the multi-media project) upon joining. It was my understanding that I would be involved in reflection and training meetings, and that any work to sustain OTV would be done at these meetings, with the focus being on professional development.

Evaluation:

1) I think there need to be practical and relevent trainings at each Saturday meeting, and that skill building should remain the focus of these meetings. Perhaps we should vote on topics at early meetings.

2) I think we should be given the option to sign up for additional work, or agree upon it as a team at one of the meetings, but this should not be assigned to us without our clear buy-in and agreement.

3) My small group meetings have been very beneficial and valuable to me.