Community-Engagement Governance Assessment

Community-Engagement Governance Assessment September, 2015 Conducted by Judy Freiwirth, Psy.D., Principal, Nonprofit Solutions Associates Judy@NonprofitSA.com 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only

Alameda Point Collaborative Community Engagement Governance Assessment Conducted by Judy Freiwirth, Psy.D. I. INTRODUCTION and PURPOSE OF ASSESSMENT Alameda Point Collaborative (APC) decided to embark on developing a new governance model, based on Community-Engagement Governance 1, an innovative framework that engages community stakeholders and constituents in shared and distributive governance decisionmaking. The organization would like to use the new governance model as a way to engage its residents in meaningful decision-making in order to align with its mission of empowering resident, to increase its ability to be responsive to environmental changes, and to increase the quality of its governance decision-making. As part of the first phase of the planning process, a Community-Engagement Governance Assessment was conducted by Judy Freiwirth, Principal of Nonprofit Solutions Associates, and primary developer of the framework, to help inform the customized design process for Alameda Point Collaborative. To learn more about this Framework, link to: Community-Engagement Governance. The assessment was primarily focused on perceptions of residents, staff and board members as well as organizational readiness that have been demonstrated through our action research to be important success factors. For example, for a successful governance transformation, our research has found that a relatively high level of staff morale and satisfaction as well as board functionality is a key success factor. In addition, we have found that staff will have more difficulty in sharing decision-making with constituents and other stakeholders if they themselves feel disempowered from organizational decision-making. Some of the areas of inquiry include the following: Current level of staff engagement in decision-making Board and staff s willingness and comfort level with shared power and decision-making with key stakeholders, beyond input and feedback. Board s willingness and comfort level with ambiguity Opinions regarding resident involvement in different types of shared decision-making Perceptions regarding needed skills for residents for effective engagement in shared decision-making Trust level among and between key stakeholder groups Board s current level of functioning Staff s current level of functioning II. METHODOLOGY The assessment included the following methods of data collection: 1 Freiwirth, Judy. Community Engagement Governance: Systems Wide Governance in Action. The Nonprofit Quarterly, 2013. 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 1 of 19

A board member focus group Group interview with the Board Co-chairs and Executive Director A group interview with the staff, comprised of a cross-section of staff of managers, administrative, and direct service staff A resident survey A resident group interview A staff survey Several executive director interviews Review of relevant organizational documents III. ASSESSMENT FINDINGS A. APC BOARD A focus group of board members was conducted to assess the board s readiness for engaging in Community Engagement Governance. This included assessing the following: a) current functioning, including decision-making practices, b) shared vision of APC s strategic directions, c) the Board s interest and willingness to include residents in governance decision-making beyond the board, d) interest in new, research-based practices, e) comfort level in sharing power, and f) ability to tolerate ambiguity and experimentation. During the discussion of APC s strategic direction, the board raised the issue of self-sufficiency as it relates to the organization s mission. The board raised important questions for the organization as it moves forward, such as how self-sufficiency for residents leads to residents eventually moving from services and supportive housing to housing outside of APC? Does it mean continuing to receive services and supportive housing on a permanent basis? These issues will be important to answer through the governance design process so that there is a shared vision of this issue as well as other strategic directions for APC among its stakeholders. The APC board expressed a great desire to find ways to engage residents in governance and other organizational decision-making and looks forward to the new governance model. They appear willing to think out of the box, and ready to tolerate some ambiguity as we move to the design phase. At this point the board has remained a small board rather than engaging in board recruitment at this time, given the transitionary period to a new governance model. The board has had resident representation on the board in the past, but according to current board members, the effectiveness of resident representation within the board s current model has been mixed. Similarly to many boards with constituent representation, the definition of representation is not always clear that is, often there is little accountability or two-way communication of board members to their respective constituencies. The new governance model will address this issue in some very different ways. As the Design Team moves into this next phase, the board s future composition, and types of board members that will be aligned with the new model will be part of the discussion and design. 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 2 of 19

B. STAFF Of the 36 staff asked to complete the survey, 28 staff (77%) completed the tailored staff survey, with thirty one staff (86%) answering the first twelve questions. Staff from every department completed the survey and every job level represented. Of the respondents, 42% of the staff worked at APC for one to three years, and 42% worked at APC for a year or less. Fourteen staff participated in the focus group, representing a cross-section of the staff. Although the focus group was intended as a semi-structured group interview with a set of planned questions, the participants focused their comments on areas of needed improvement for the organization. The following is a summary of some of the integrated key findings from the staff survey and staff focus group. a. Connection to the Mission Almost all the staff respondents (94%) reported that they felt that their work was meaningful and connected to the mission of APC. b. Communication Practices The following were results from the staff survey regarding communication practices: Over 61% of staff either disagreed or strongly disagreed that there was good communication between departments at APC. One hundred percent of the direct service staff disagreed that there was good communication between departments and 75% of managers also disagreed. About 48% of the total staff respondents did not feel that the decisions made by management were regularly communicated to the staff; Seventy-five percent of the direct service; and 50% of managers did not feel that decisions made by management were regularly communicated to the staff. About 77% of staff indicated that they understood how work in other departments was contributing to APC as a whole. Eighty-one percent of the full staff indicated that their supervisor informs them of important decisions for their work, while only 50% of the direct service staff indicated that their supervisor informs them. 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 3 of 19

Table 1: Communication Practices Staff opinion regarding communication practices: Answer Options There is good communication between departments. I understand how work in other departments is contributing to the work of APC as a whole. Decisions made by the management team are regularly communicated to the rest of the staff. My supervisor regularly informs me of important decisions and information I need for my work. Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Don't Know 19.4% 41.9% 32.3% 3.2% 3.2% 6.5% 12.9% 54.8% 22.6% 3.2% 12.9% 35.5% 38.7% 6.5% 6.5% 9.7% 12.9% 41.9% 29.0% 6.5% Similarly, the staff focus group participants also spoke to the need for more transparency throughout the organization and generally felt that there was an urgent need for more communication between departments. Some spoke more specifically about the need for managers to better communicate changes in policies and procedures. Generally, there was agreement that there was an overall need for more transparency throughout the organization. c. Supervision Most of the staff (77%) indicated that they have regular supervision meetings with their supervisor. However, only half of the direct service staff report that they have regular supervision meetings. Focus group participants spoke to a need for more regular supervision and a greater level of support from their supervisors, given challenging resident situations. The focus group identified the need for more follow-through by supervisors, and a need to resolve some ongoing differences between directors and mangers regarding policies and procedures for APC. d. Job Meaningfulness, Responsibilities and Contributions Almost all the staff respondents (96%) indicated that they understood their job responsibilities and how their work contributes to their department s work as a team, while focus group participants spoke about the great need for clearer job roles and responsibilities. Ninety-three percent of staff felt that their work was meaningful and connected to the mission. e. Training and Staff Development in New Models and Practices The staff survey revealed that there are significantly fewer managers and direct service staff who felt that training and staff development in new models and practices is encouraged than the full staff. 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 4 of 19

Seventy-five percent of managers agreed that training and staff development in new models and practices are encouraged, while only 45% of full staff agreed that it is encouraged. Only about 12% of the direct service staff indicated that training and staff development is encouraged at APC. Seventy-five percent of the managers thought there were opportunities for training, while only 38% of the full respondents and 12% of the direct service staff thought there were opportunities for training. Feedback from focus group participants was similar in that many spoke about the need for much more professional development at APC. f. Trust and Appreciation Lack of trust was a significant issue reflected in both the staff survey and in the focus group. There were many comments in the section on trust and appreciation as staff. The lack of trust was one of the major themes throughout the survey lack of trust between direct service staff and managers, and between residents and staff. Two other common themes was the strong divide between directors/managers and front line staff and the lack of connection and coordination between departments. Many comments focused on their feeling underappreciated and undervalued. Other themes included: a) the need for more training, staff development, and support for dealing with challenging situations with residents, b) the need for more structure and consistent policies, and; c) lack of participation in organizationalwide decision. Some respondents connected the lack of consistency as an important factor leading to the mistrust and confusion. Over 45% of all staff respondents indicated that they thought that there was not a high level of trust within APC; 100% of direct service staff and 75% of managers stated that there was not a high level of trust within APC. The staff focus group also rated the current staff morale as low, with 12 of the 14 participants giving a score of 5 or below on a 1-10 scale, with 10 being the highest. Six participants rating the morale as a 1, 2, or 3. Although 74% of the respondents felt appreciated by their supervisors, over 45% of the total respondents indicated that staff is generally not appreciated at APC in general (with only one person strongly agreeing that staff was appreciated); about 75 % of direct service staff felt that the staff are not appreciated at APC. Over half (55%) of the full respondents felt appreciated by senior management -32% disagreed that they were appreciated Sixty-five percent felt that the Executive Director will help set the right course. 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 5 of 19

Table 2: Trust and Appreciation Staff opinion regarding trust and appreciation: Answer Options Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Don't Know There is a high level of trust within APC. 16.1% 29.0% 38.7% 6.5% 9.7% Staff are generally appreciated at APC. 9.7% 35.5% 48.4% 3.2% 3.2% I feel appreciated by my supervisor. 12.9% 6.5% 45.2% 29.0% 6.5% I feel appreciated by the senior management of APC. 16.1% 16.1% 41.9% 16.1% 9.7% I trust the Executive Director of APC will help to set the right course. 6.5% 12.9% 38.7% 25.8% 16.1% g. Staff Morale A low level of staff morale within the staff was revealed in both the survey and in the staff focus group. When asked to rate the current staff morale level on a scale of one to ten, about 52% thought the staff morale was low or very low, with very low being 45% and only three people indicated it was very high. Managers rated the staff morale at a slightly lower level, with about 63% of the managers rating staff morale as low; 75% of the direct service staff rated the staff morale as low or very low. There were numerous comments in both the survey and focus group about concerns about staff turnover and that some staff are currently are looking for new jobs outside of APC. h. Participation in Decision-making Inclusion in decisions about own work: Most staff (68%) felt that they have ability and authority to make decisions about their work; however, 25% of the managers disagreed and 37% of the direct service staff disagreed. Only about half felt that they are included in decisions affecting their department and only 38% of the direct service staff felt that they were included in department decisions. Inclusion about decisions that affect the whole organization/support for diverse opinions About 60% of the total respondents indicated that they are not included in decisions that affect whole organization, such as future directions. One hundred percent of the direct service staff do not feel included in decisions that affect whole organization. About 50% agreed that staff meetings are used to engage staff in some decisionmaking. 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 6 of 19

The need for an increased voice in organizational decision-making was an important theme within the staff focus group as well. The focus group participants also spoke to the need for a common strategic direction in which all staff were engaged in formulating. i. Clarity regarding decision-making Almost 60% of the staff were not clear what decisions were made by the management team. One hundred percent of direct service staff were not clear what decisions were made by the management team, Executive Director, or the board. Seventy-eight percent of the full respondents were not clear what decisions are made by the managers or board while an interesting high number of managers -50% were not clear what decisions are made by management team j. Innovation and experimentation/diversity of opinion Fifty-two percent of the staff (and 75% of the managers) indicated that APC was strongly committed to innovation and experimentation with new models and practices within APC; only 25% of the direct service staff agreed. There appears to be a division within the full staff regarding the question of whether diversity of opinion and new ideas from staff are encouraged. About 50% indicated it was encourage, and 50% disagreed. Only 13% of the direct service staff agreed that diversity of opinion and new ideas are encouraged. k. Perceptions Regarding Residents Staff Diversity Reflecting Community About 65% of the staff stated that the staff reflects the ethnic/racial diversity of residents and feel they deliver culturally-competent services. Trust Issues as relates to Residents Only 25% of the staff felt that the staff has great trust in the residents, and only 32% of the staff felt that the residents had great trust in the staff. None of the direct service staff indicated that that the residents had great trust in the staff. The trust issue between the residents and staff was also discussed within the focus group as a significant issue that needed to be addressed. They spoke about the high level of tension between staff and residents. Staff raised some of the following issues as some of the reasons: o Inconsistent organizational policies and resulting inconsistent treatment of residents by staff because the policies remain unclear; this sometimes results in residents going to other staff when they are not satisfied with their current direct service staff or liaison. 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 7 of 19

o Resident fear of retaliation if they complain about APC policies, especially as it relates to property management; focus group participants felt that residents had a general lack of trust for property management staff. o Lack of transparency and communication about changes in resident and organizational policies and procedures. o Residents complaining to the Executive Director about staff treatment o Misunderstandings about confidentiality protocols- lack of clarity what information remains confidential and to whom in the organization. o The misunderstanding and lack of communication regarding reasons for ending the community events had a significant impact on resident dissatisfaction, resulting in lack of trust. l. Engagement of residents in decision-making APC staff were very positive about including the residents in meaningful organizational decision-making. About 89% of the staff agreed that residents should be involved in some meaningful organizational decision-making. About 43% of the staff agreed that APC residents have the skills necessary to engage in shared decision-making in some key governance functions, with 29% disagreeing and 29% indicating that they didn t know. m. Perceived Benefits of Involvement of residents in shared decision-making The following are some of the themes cited by the staff: Identified Benefits for residents APC will have a better sense of success with community engagement. Residents will gain skills and resources that will allow them to be successful both inside and outside of organization (critical thought, independency, team work, community values, and organizational skills. Involvement in shared decision making will: o increase in personal responsibility and accountability o Increase problem solving skills o offer empowerment o strengthen community bonds, o strengthen self-sufficiency o provide residents with a sense of pride Identified Benefits to APC Although the survey did not ask what the specific benefits to APC for engaging residents in decision making, numerous staff offered the following: Will help APC provide better services that lead to self-sufficiency 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 8 of 19

Will improve APC s governance decision-making Will bring services closer to the actual needs of residents Will increase APC s quality of services n. Identified Challenges: Staff cited the following possible challenges: Trust between staff and residents and between residents Lack of consistency in leadership Additional resources needed for training Will take time Many residents are not open to dialogue and collaboration There may be some residents who will focus on disruption Some residents may stall decisions if decisions are unfavorable to them. Some residents may not be able to participate due to personal issues There may be a lack of commitment Follow through by residents May raise expectations, and then if APC does not follow through, it may discourage residents from participating in the future o. Successful Resident engagement The staff in the focus group were asked to identify the most successful ways that residents have been engaged. They identified the following: Women s empowerment event Health and wellness class, baseball, Cinco de Mayo, Barbeques Breakfasts and planning process p. Perception of needed skills for residents to fully participate in shared decision-making The staff identified the following key skills for residents: Community organizing skills (75%) Managing conflict (72%) Working with people of different backgrounds (72%) Understanding APC finances (61%) How to facilitate a meeting (57%) Outreach skills (57% Evaluating programs (57%) Strategic planning and thinking skills (57%) Public speaking (54%) How to facilitate large group forums or community meetings (54%) How to design an agenda for a planning meeting (50%) 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 9 of 19

Table 3: Resident Skills and Knowledge Needed for Shared Decision-making Skills or knowledge residents need to fully participate in shared decision-making Answer Options Response Percent How to design an agenda for a planning meeting 50.0% How to facilitate a meeting 57.1% Facilitating large group forums/community meetings 53.6% Outreach skills 57.1% Understanding APC finances (broadly) 60.7% Strategic thinking and planning skills 57.1% Fundraising skills 39.3% Community organizing/advocacy skills 75.0% How to design programs 39.3% How to evaluate programs 57.1% Managing conflict 71.4% Public speaking skills 53.6% Working with people of different backgrounds (e.g. race/ethnicity, class, culture, sexual orientation, etc.). 71.4% Don't Know 10.7% Other (please specify) 3.6% q.staff perceptions of self-sufficiency for residents The staff were asked to indicate which definition of resident self-sufficiency best described what a definition should be for APC residents. Only 54% of the staff indicated that it includes moving to more permanent housing outside of APC. 16% indicated that residents graduate from services, but remain in APC housing permanently. 9% indicated that residents continue to receive services from APC and live at APC permanently 6 % indicated that some residents need to remain at APC permanently, and others move on to housing outside of APC 13% didn t know. C. APC RESIDENTS The following findings describe the resident survey responses and discussion themes from the resident focus group. 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 10 of 19

a. Resident Respondent Background There were 193 residents invited to participate in the resident survey, and 88 residents completed it. The ages of the respondents ranged from 14-84, with 63% of the respondents with an age range of 25-64. Almost 17% of the respondents were between age 14 and 18 years old. See the tables below for further detail. Table 4: Resident Respondent Ages Age of Respondents Answer Options Response Percent Younger than 14 0.0% 14 to 18 16.7% 19 to 24 17.7% 25 to 44 31.3% 45 to 64 31.3% 65 to 84 3.1% 85 or older 0.0% Length of time at APC About half of the respondents, (56%) lived at APC from three to nine years. About 24% lived at APC for 10 or more years. About 20% of the respondents lived at APC two or less years. Table 5: Residents Time at APC Length of Time at APC Answer Options Response Percent Less than a year 2.1% 1-2 years 17.7% 3-4 years 31.3% 5-9 years 25.0% 10 years or over 24.0% I am not a resident 0.0% 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 11 of 19

Use of current and past services Table 6: Comparison of services use by respondents Service Currently (all respondents) Used in Past (all respondents) Youth respondents 14-18 (current) Case management 66% 63% 43% Employment services 26% 33% 19% Children s programs 29% 42% 31% Teen/youth programs 34% 51% 56% Counseling 19% 37% 0% Not current participating in 14% 0% APC services Other 9% 9% 13% Have not used APC services at any time 7% b. Definition of Self-Sufficiency for Residents Residents were asked what they thought best describes what a definition of self-sufficiency should be for APC residents. 45% indicated that self-sufficiency means that residents could function without assistance and supportive housing from APC and were able to move to more permanent housing outside of APC. 18% indicated that self-sufficiency means that residents graduate from APC s services, but remain in APC s supportive housing permanently. 19% indicated that self-sufficiency means that residents continue to receive APC s services and live in supportive housing on a permanent basis. 2% thought that all options should be available. c. Community Meetings Participation in Community Meetings in Past Year 53% percent of the respondents indicated that they had attended an APC community meeting in the past year, while about 42% had not; 6% were unsure. The following themes emerged from the resident comments: What was Useful About Community Meetings It provided a forum for residents to have input Helped to understand the issues behind the cuts to activities and the finances of APC Several residents stated that they appreciated the E.D. apologizing to the residents 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 12 of 19

What Can be Improved Residents indicated that additional structure for the meetings was needed, including written agendas with a clear purpose for every meeting, clear guidelines and rules for the meeting; food served before or after meeting, not during the meeting. There was interest in residents decreasing complaining and focusing on the past. Why Residents Chose Not to Attend Community Meetings The themes ranged from a lack of comfort at the meetings, work conflicts, and the high level of arguing among residents that has occurred at the meetings. Others were unaware of the community meetings. d. Engagement in Community Activities In the past, almost 68% of the respondents participated in community social and recreational events and about 43% participated I the summer recreation activities. About 30-35% participated in the National Night Out, Women s Empowerment Conference or community gardens. Only about 25% of the respondents participated in the Resident Council Table 7: Resident past involvement in APC Activities APC-sponsored activities residents their families have been involved with in the past. Answer Options Response Percent Community social and recreational activities, (e.g., barbeques, breakfasts, family outings, field trips, holiday events, summer baseball league) 68% Summer recreation activities 43% National Night Out (safety issues) 36% Community gardens 34% Women s empowerment conference 32% Resident Council 26% Community organizing such as preserving the bus service to and from APC 15% Mural creations 14% Advocacy, such as voter education and registration 14% My family and/or I have NOT participated in any APC activities 9% Other (please specify) 7% e. Effectiveness of Community Activities in Engaging Residents The activities rated at the highest level for effectiveness (very effective and effective rating) included the following: o Community social and recreational events (46%) o Community gardens (38%) o Summer recreational events (35% ) very effective or effective 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 13 of 19

o Women s empowerment conference (30% o Advocacy (28%) o National night out (28%) Table 8: Perceived effectiveness of activities For APC-sponsored activities respondents have been involved with above, how effective they were in engaging residents: Answer Options Not Effective Somewhat Effective Effective Very Effective Don't Know Community social and recreational activities 7.9% 27.0% 22.5% 23.6% 3.4% 15.7% Women s empowerment conference 6.7% 13.5% 10.1% 20.2% 9.0% 40.4% Mural creations 7.9% 12.4% 15.7% 7.9% 10.1% 46.1% Advocacy, such as voter education and registration 9.0% 10.1% 15.7% 12.4% 12.4% 40.4% Community organizing, such as preserving the bus service 11.2% 12.4% 11.2% 11.2% 11.2% 42.7% Community gardens 10.1% 12.4% 20.2% 18.0% 7.9% 31.5% National night out (safety issues) 6.7% 19.1% 20.2% 7.9% 12.4% 33.7% Resident Council 10.1% 15.7% 16.9% 6.7% 14.6% 36.0% Summer recreation activities 6.7% 19.1% 18.0% 18.0% 6.7% 31.5% N/A f. Involvement in Resident Council Only 19% of the respondents indicated that they worked with the APC Resident Council The comments focused on the lack of accomplishments, the high level of infighting during the Council meetings, and that there was little structure and focus to the meetings g. Resident Engagement in Sharing Some Decision-making with APC Board and/or Staff The residents were asked what role they believe residents should have in sharing in decisionmaking with the APC and Board and/or staff. All of the types of decisions received high scores, and fairly evenly matched. The highest scores were for the following: Helping to determine advocacy and community organizing activities (84% agreed) Help make visual improvements such as playgrounds, landscaping, and murals (84%) Help determine reconstruction of APC housing (83%) Help develop leadership skill training for residents (82%) Help make decisions regarding adding new programs or changing existing ones (82%) 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 14 of 19

Table 9: Role in Shared Decision-making at APC The role residents should have in sharing in decision-making with the APC Board and/or staff for the following functions: Answer Options Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Don't Know Help develop surveys for identifying APC community needs 5.7% 2.3% 45.5% 37.5% 9.1% Help review the results of the surveys and decide how APC should change 5.7% 5.7% 37.5% 37.5% 13.6% Help develop new leadership skill training for residents (e.g., how to design and conduct a meeting, how to develop committees, public 3.4% 5.7% 39.8% 42.0% 9.1% speaking skills). Help make decisions about adding new program/services or changing existing ones 4.5% 1.1% 42.0% 39.8% 12.5% Help make visual improvements to the APC community, such as playgrounds, landscaping, 4.5% 0.0% 36.4% 47.7% 11.4% murals Help determine future reconstruction of APC housing, communal buildings, open space 5.7% 2.3% 31.8% 51.1% 9.1% Help evaluate current programs 5.7% 2.3% 36.4% 43.2% 12.5% Help board and staff with fundraising events and other fundraising 3.4% 5.7% 43.2% 37.5% 10.2% Help determine effective ways to communicate news to community and solicit ongoing feedback 4.5% 3.4% 44.3% 36.4% 11.4% Help determine advocacy/community organizing activities on behalf of APC community (e.g., advocating with city for services, cleaning up abandoned buildings, voter education) 4.5% 0.0% 40.9% 43.2% 11.4% The final question on the summary asked for additional comments. The themes included the following: The trust between staff and residents was a significant issue both in this question and throughout the survey. APC was perceived by many of the resident respondents as the staff, rather than being inclusive of the residents. The need for residents to gain the skills needed to participate in some of the decisions Others spoke to the great need for residents to be engaged in decision-making within APC and appreciated the survey and this process APC has embarked on. III. ANALYSIS and RECOMMENDATIONS Communications: Increase communications to all departments and staff regarding change in policies and procedures, new developments, and other issues affecting the whole organization or its direction. This could be accomplished through a weekly e-newsletter from the 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 15 of 19

Executive Director, Directors, or a committee of interested staff. (And hard copies for those that have no access to computers). We understand that the support services department is now meeting weekly with property management in order to increase communication and to align policies and procedures cross department. This appears to be an excellent step forward to begin to address the soloed issue and increase coordination and consistency across departments. We understand from the Design Team that 25-35% of the APC staff do not have access to the internet, particularly while in the field. Others have limited computer skills. Seek funding for increased technology capacity, with a goal of all staff having access to email and computers. Institute a practice in which managers allocate a brief time out of their regular team meetings to convey important communication to their team. The data clearly demonstrates that the staff desires additional support from their supervisors and for weekly supervision. This could be provided in a number of ways: o Supervisory training for managers could be very helpful, especially in focusing on effective strategies for proving positive feedback and appreciation, while still encouraging accountability. o Regular weekly supervision should be instituted for all staff as a vehicle to providing more support and communication. This should be part of every manager s workplan. Staff Development: We understand that staff development training is a challenge to find funding. We understand from the executive director, that funding may be more likely if joint training for residents and staff is proposed to funders. Given that governance skills will be important for residents to gain for effective participation in decision-making, this approach could be very effective. Staff Morale, Trust and Appreciation The data reveals that trust and appreciation were key themes in both the staff survey and focus group and are often tied to morale level, a usual gauge of a number of factors affecting the organizational culture. As we will be discussed later in this report, trust is one of the most prevalent themes in the resident survey in terms are areas that need addressing. We recommend these issues be addressed in several ways: Generally one time awards or one time recognitions to not address the deeper level of appreciation; rather instituting supervisory training, in which strategies for integrating positive acknowledgement of skills and accomplishments which are built into supervision may be more effective. Inclusion in organizational discussions and decisions of APC- issues usually lead to an increased sense of ownership, efficacy and ultimately a higher sense of appreciation, trust and morale. (discussed later in report) 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 16 of 19

Staff Engagement in Decision-making As a key stakeholder group in APC, the staff generally felt that they have the ability and authority to make decisions about their own work, although about a third of the direct services staff do not feel they do. However, with only half indicating they are included in department decisions, and 60% indicating they are not included in organizational wide decisions, we recommend that this issue be addressed as part of the overall governance design for APC. Lack of engagement in decision-making has been shown to be a key determinant of low staff morale. As part of the design process, we will address which types of decisions staff and/or residents will be engaged in and/or sharing. Part of the design process will include determining which decisions to engage staff and residents. Staff meetings and half-day working meetings may be useful forums for engaging staff in participatory organizational decision-making. In summary, include staff engagement in decision-making within the governance design and consider use of longer staff meetings and working sessions to engage staff in designated organizational-wide decision-making. Innovation and Experimentation/Diversity of Opinion Only about half of the staff indicated that APC was strongly committed to innovation and experimentation, but 75% of the managers indicated that there was this commitment. This discrepancy may reflect some issues in communication from directors and managers to the direct service staff. For example, APC s commitment to resident engagement and the Community Engagement Governance process, while on the cutting edge of innovation, may not have been thoroughly conveyed to the full staff. The data reveals that the active encouragement of staff introducing new ideas and opinions should also be integrated into the new governance design for APC. Perceptions Regarding Residents/ Trust between Staff and Residents A strength of the staff is that they are reflective of the racial/ethnic diversity of the staff and feel they deliver culturally-competent services. Trust between the staff and residents, however, is a significant issue for APC to address as evidenced by the survey and focus group the residents confirmed the low trust level in both their focus group and survey. The misunderstandings and lack of clarity regarding some of the funding decisions (e.g., cut-off of funding for community events by HUD) and some perceived inconsistency in resident policies seem to be too key factors contributing to the high level of staff-resident destruct. The following recommendations may help to address some of the issues The acknowledgement of the Executive Director for mistakes in the communication process to residents was acknowledged by residents as being very helpful in the resident survey. Increased use of the community meetings and newsletter for conveying. We recommend that this be repeated at several meetings and included I the newsletter. Regular resident newsletters could include a regular column from the ED, which updates residents on any funding or policy changes. 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 17 of 19

Using resident community meetings as an opportunity to help residents understand funding sources and challenges as well as confidentiality policies and rationales also will be helpful. Increased consistency and transparency regarding resident policies will help alleviate some of the tension. Integrate building trust as part of the new governance model. Perceptions of Self-sufficiency for residents. The data shows that only 54% of the staff and 45% of the resident respondents defined selfsufficiency for APC residents, as residents can function without assistance and supportive housing from APC and are able to move to more permanent housing outside of APC. Twentyfive percent of the staff respondents and 37% of the residents defined self-sufficiency to include remaining at APC supportive housing permanently. These responses raise some important questions about APC s mission of self-sufficiency for residents and how that is actualized. We recommend the following: As it is important for the three stakeholder groups to be aligned around the mission of APC and its implications, we recommend that the Design Team include structuring discussions about the mission and about the goals for APC residents as part of the joint decision-making process. Resident Community Meetings The community meetings will benefit from a structured meeting design, with clear desired outcomes, meeting groundrules, and skilled facilitation. This structure may change, however, depending upon the new governance design. Resident Interest in APC Organizational Decision-making The residents expressed high interest in being involved in APC organizational decision making, with the highest scores, (although all identified areas in the survey received high scores) for helping to: a) determine advocacy and community organizing activities; b) make visual improvements such as playgrounds and landscaping, c) determine the reconstruction of APC Housing, and d) develop leadership skill training for residents. After addressing the trust and communication issues among the stakeholder groups, we expect that this high interest level will facilitate the resident engagement support and implementation process. The resident engagement process with Midpen Housing provides a first opportunity to include residents in the housing rebuilding process and should be connected to the Community-Engagement Governance design. The APC Board The board appears ready to embark in the governance transformation and as the board is a critical part of the design process, we recommend engaging the board at various 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 18 of 19

points in the design process to ensure alignment with the proposed changes in governance. As the governance model will have implications for board composition and the type of board members that will most align with the changes, we recommend that the board hold off from adding new board members until the approval of the new governance design. The design will include recommendations for the types of skills, experience and personal attributes that will help the organization move forward to its next stage. IV. Conclusion We recommend that the trust issue between the residents and staff continue to be addressed, as well as some of the staff issues raised in this report be addressed in the next few months. At the same time, the Design Team will move ahead, informed by these findings, into the design phase of the Community-Engagement Governance process in a parallel way. The assessment findings will help shape the priorities, structures and processes for the new model. In addition, we recommend that the summary of this report be distributed to the full board, staff, and residents and that this full report be available for those that would like more detailed information about the assessment. 2015. All rights reserved. Nonprofit Solutions Associates. For use by Alameda Point Collaborative only. Page 19 of 19