text:
Performance Management for Every Nonprofit: An Interview With Isaac Castillo
In today's Social Velocity interview, I'm talking with Isaac Castillo, Director of Outcomes, Assessment, and Learning at Venture Philanthropy Partners, where he leads VPP's approach to data collection, data reporting, and outcome measurement.
Prior to coming to VPP, Isaac served as the Deputy Director for the DC Promise Neighborhood Initiative (DCPNI). At DCPNI, Isaac led efforts to improve outcomes in the Kenilworth-Parkside community in Ward 7 of the District of Columbia through the strategic coordination of programmatic solutions and research-based strategies. Prior to his time at DCPNI, Isaac served as a Senior Research Scientist at Child Trends where he worked with nonprofits throughout the United States on the development and modification of performance management systems and evaluation designs. In addition, Isaac was also the Director of Learning and Evaluation for the Latin American Youth Center (LAYC) where he led the organization's evaluation and performance management work.
You can read interviews with other social change leaders here.
Nell: You have spent your career using data to improve the performance of the nonprofits for which you worked. Why do you think performance management is so important for nonprofits? Do you think all nonprofits should pursue performance management? When does it make sense and when doesn't it?
Isaac: I believe that every nonprofit should pursue some form of performance management because they owe it to the clients they serve. Most nonprofits will assume that they are making a positive difference in people's lives, but in the vast majority of cases they are just guessing. Using some form of performance management will allow every nonprofit organization to confirm this thinking and to identify areas that can and should be improved so that the next cohort of participants can get better services than the last.
Unfortunately, one of the greatest challenges preventing a nonprofit from implementing some form of performance management isn't a lack of resources, expertise, or time. It is fear. The fear that they will find out that their work isn't having a positive effect. This fear is what nonprofit leaders need to overcome, not for the benefit of themselves or their organization, but because they owe it to the clients they serve today and the clients they will serve in the future. I believe that every nonprofit should strive to serve tomorrow's clients better than today's clients, and one of the only ways to ensure that this happens is the sustained use of performance management.
The type of performance management that each nonprofit should pursue should vary by the size and scope of their work. At a minimum, small nonprofits should be tracking basic demographic and attendance information on their participants, and hopefully at least one meaningful output or outcome. Whether this occurs in a computerized system or in a spiral paper notebook is up to the nonprofit. But it doesn't have to be costly, and it doesn't take expertise. It only takes the will and desire to improve as a nonprofit.
Nell: In the nonprofits in which you've worked how have you been able to secure resources to fund performance management? What is the case you and your colleagues have made to funders and what do you think it will take to get more funders investing in performance management?
Isaac: Raising funding for performance management work usually takes a mix of several different strategies and approaches for potential and existing funders.
First, I strongly encourage nonprofits to include some percentage (1 to 5 percent – possibly more) of funding in each grant submission or proposal dedicated to supporting performance management and outcome measurement work. By placing this small percentage into each proposal, a nonprofit can begin to raise funds for internal evaluation and performance management activities. It may not seem like a lot, but it can add up, and eventually generate enough funds for a half-time or full-time position to support in-house performance management work.
Second, I also strongly encourage nonprofits to engage in regular 'funder education' – where a nonprofit proactively meets with their funders to have ongoing conversations about outcome measurement and evaluation. This allows both the funder and the nonprofit to come to agreement on measurement expectations and to ensure that both groups are focused on the same concepts. I often suggest that the first of these types of meetings focuses on each group's definitions of three commonly misunderstood terms: outputs, outcomes, and impact.
Finally, I would recommend that the nonprofit and funder have an honest discussion regarding expectations of results and the funding necessary to support the related evaluation work. If a funder is expecting an random control trial (RCT) to be completed to determine 'impact,' then the nonprofit should be willing to push the funder to support a large investment to pay for a high quality evaluation. If the funder is only willing to support a small amount for outcome measurement, then the nonprofit should clearly articulate what is possible.
Nell: Ken Berger and Caroline Fiennes recently argued that we may have gone too far by asking nonprofits to produce research about their own outcomes. What's your response to that argument?
Isaac: I fully support Ken and Caroline in their argument that most nonprofits should stay away from trying to produce impact research. The desire for 'impact' is something that has been (and continues to be) pushed unfairly (and without financial support) by the funding community.
I honestly think a lot of confusion in this space comes from inconsistent use and understanding of the term 'impact'. The term 'impact' has a precise definition among researchers but is often used in a much broader context among funders, nonprofits, and the general public. In the research and evaluation world, impact is used to describe the effectiveness of a program while eliminating as many potential confounding factors as possible. That is why the use of random control trials (RCTs) is usually the cornerstone of impact research – RCTs are the easiest way to control for and eliminate confounding factors.
When most non-researchers use the term 'impact' however, they are usually just asking if the program or organization works and if it is making a difference for its intended service population. That is a much lower bar to set, and yet it is a critical distinction in this discussion. If you are thinking about 'impact' as a researcher, you will need a large amount of resources and expertise to determine 'impact,' which usually means completing one or more formal evaluations. If you are thinking about 'impact' in the more general sense and less strict way, then pursuing some form of performance management system will allow a nonprofit to determine if their efforts have been successful.
I do think every nonprofit should pursue some form of performance management to ensure that their work is having a positive effect as a complement to existing research that others have done. Relying only on the use of others' research does not guarantee that a nonprofit will provide effective services and achieve positive outcomes. This type of research is a like a recipe – it shows what has worked in the past and provides a guide for the nonprofit – but a recipe can still be ruined with poor implementation or planning.
Every nonprofit has an obligation to the people they serve (and not to their funders) to ensure that their programming is having a positive effect (or at the very least not causing harm). Without some form of performance management system in place (even one that just uses paper and pencil), a nonprofit will never know if they have strayed too far from the recipe provided by previous research.
I also think there are a growing number of very sophisticated nonprofits that should be using AND producing research on effective programs. Every year, I see more and more nonprofits that hire talented and unbiased researchers dedicated to internal evaluation and outcome measurement work. These individuals are just as talented and unbiased as their colleagues working in traditional research and evaluation organizations. They can, and should, produce original research that can help inform the nonprofit field. The real challenge comes in nonprofit organizations finding the resources to support the hiring and retention of these individuals. Not every nonprofit will have the resources or capacity to hire one or more of these individuals – but those that do should absolutely be trying to produce original outcome and impact research to provide 'recipes' for effective programming that nonprofits with fewer resources can use in the future.
Nell: Your former organization, DC Promise Neighborhoods, is part of the national Promise Neighborhoods Initiative launched by the US Department of Education in 2010 and modeled after the famous Harlem Children's Zone. How successful has this national replication of a successful local model been? Have you been able to replicate outcomes? And what hurdles, if any, have you and other replication sites found?
Isaac: I think that there has been some initial success among the Promise Neighborhoods. Part of the challenge that all the Promise Neighborhoods face is that the Harlem Children's Zone did not achieve their success overnight. They have been working in Harlem for decades, so it would be unrealistic to believe that the Promise Neighborhoods would be able to create large scale change in a matter of a few years.
However, there are signs of progress across all of the Promise Neighborhoods. Each of the Promise Neighborhoods started to address a few outcomes with the initial round of funding, and these outcomes varied. Some focused on math and reading proficiency for students, some focused on obtaining medical homes for young children, and others sought to increase the amount of healthy food consumed by residents. In DC, we focused on improving school attendance.
I do think that most of the 12 Promise Neighborhood Implementation grantees were able to make progress on the outcomes they identified as initial focus areas. However, the very nature of the work (creating community level change) doesn't lend itself to the rapid accomplishment of multiple outcomes in a short period of time. Each of the Promise Neighborhoods had to prioritize certain outcomes for their respective communities, and only several years later are they able to claim success and begin to identify the next set of outcomes to be addressed. So while certain outcomes haven't necessarily been replicated across all the Promise Neighborhoods, that is due to the differences in priorities and community conditions rather than any problem with the model itself.
Photo Credit: Venture Philanthropy Partners
Getting More Transparent About Foundation Results
Note: I was asked by The Center for Effective Philanthropy to review their latest research report, Sharing What Matters: Perspectives on Foundation Transparency, released in late February, and provide my thoughts about it for their on-going blog series on the report. Below is my post which originally appeared on the CEP blog.
Sharing What Matters: Perspectives on Foundation Transparency provides some startling data about the state of transparency in the foundation world.
While for the most part, foundation leaders recognize the importance of transparency and are trying to be more transparent, the report shows there is still much work to do.
To me, this question of foundation transparency is part of the larger, ever-present power imbalance in the nonprofit sector between those with money (funders), and those who seek that money (nonprofits). Funders often encourage nonprofits to be transparent about their results and when they have succeeded or failed. But it appears that in these two areas (results and lessons learned), funders are less transparent than either their grantees want them to be, or they would like themselves to be.
This is all critically important because a more transparent philanthropic sector — particularly if foundations were more transparent about how they assess their results and what has worked and what hasn't — could mean more money flowing to more social change.
CEP's report delineates two levels of foundation transparency. First is transparency about grantmaking: who leads the foundation, how they have made grants in the past, how they make decisions. The second is transparency about the results foundations themselves achieve: how they assess the performance of their investments, how they share successes and failures.
This second (and I would argue much more interesting) level of transparency is about foundations reporting the very thing they are often asking nonprofits to report: their performance.
In particular, the research uncovers three stark disconnects:
- Foundations Don't Share How They Assess Their Performance
Of the foundation leaders surveyed, 61 percent said they believe being transparent about how their foundation assesses its performance could increase effectiveness to a significant extent. Yet, only 35 percent of foundations reported actually being very or extremely transparent about it.
- Foundations Aren't Transparent about Successes and Failures
While 69 percent of foundation leaders think that being transparent about what's worked in their grantmaking could increase their effectiveness, only 46 percent report being very or extremely transparent about what's worked. And transparency about what hasn't worked is even worse. 30 percent of foundation leaders say their foundations are very or extremely transparent about what does not work, which makes failures the lowest-rated area of foundation transparency. And nonprofits agree that foundation transparency is lowest when it comes to sharing what hasn't worked.
- Foundations Want to Be More Transparent, But Aren't
While 94 percent of foundation leaders surveyed say that increased transparency is a medium or high priority at their foundation, 75 percent of foundation leaders say that their current levels of transparency are not sufficient. And shockingly, 24 percent of foundation leaders say that nothing limits their ability to be more transparent. So it's a big priority, yet it's not getting done.
The report suggests some reasons why transparency about performance and lessons learned is recognized as important, but still far from ubiquitous in the philanthropic sector:
- Lack of Strategy: Foundations aren't creating clear enough goals around which they can actually assess their performance.
- Lack of Capacity for Evaluation: Foundations aren't allocating enough resources to assessing their performance.
- Fear of Diminished Reputation: Foundations are afraid of harming their own or their grantees' reputations by revealing what has or hasn't worked.
Surprisingly (or maybe not so surprisingly), these impediments to foundation transparency mimic the hurdles nonprofits find (or place) in their own way. Nonprofits often pour as much money as possible into programs and skimp on investing in organization-building efforts like strategy and evaluation. This bias against organization-building is often encouraged (or demanded) by their funders. And so it appears that funders put these same hurdles in their own way. Perhaps foundations, just like their nonprofit grantees, need to acknowledge that with sufficient investments in smart strategy and performance evaluation, greater results can be achieved.
The third and final impediment to foundation transparency about performance and lessons learned is trickier. Fear of harming the reputations of their grantees by sharing lessons learned is a real issue. Foundations tend to invest in packs. So if a foundation reveals investments that have failed, there is a risk that other foundations will flee.
But if we truly want to move to a place where more resources flow to what works, don't we have to be more transparent about what worked and what didn't work? If a foundation investment failed because of the foundation's shortcomings (the investment didn't fit with foundation goals, the foundation didn't invest enough, or it didn't invest in capacity as well as programs), the foundation (and other foundations learning from these lessons) could learn to become more effective investors. And if the investment didn't work simply because it was the wrong intervention, then isn't it better to move investments to interventions that do work? Fear can be a debilitating thing, and for the sake of greater results, I think both foundations and their nonprofit grantees must work to overcome it.
Ultimately, the CEP report is hopeful. It uncovers a desire among both foundation leaders and their grantees to move from a basic level of transparency toward a deeper (and more important) one that reveals performance and lessons learned.
Let's hope that this stated desire for a change in foundation transparency, and the requisite changes in how foundations invest in strategy and performance assessment and overcome fear, becomes reality.
Photo Credit: The Center for Effective Philanthropy
10 Great Social Innovation Reads: Jan 2016
From an historic blizzard that blanketed the country, to tackling poverty, to the leadership of Black Lives Matter, to technology in the new year, to using social media to stop ISIS, to advice for Charity Navigator, January was an interesting month in the world of social change.
Here is my pick of the 10 best reads in January. If you want a longer list, follow me on Twitter @nedgington. And to see past month's 10 Great Reads lists go here.
- Winter storm Jonas dumped several feet of snow across the country, but also offered a couple of interesting lessons in social change. First, the sheer amount of snow piled up on east coast urban streets provided a glimpse into better urban design. And after the blizzard hit Washington, DC it seems only female senators were brave enough to come to work. Among them, Senator Lisa Murkowski wondered: "Perhaps it speaks to the hardiness of women…that put on your boots and put your hat on and get out and slog through the mess that's out there."
- Writing in the Nonprofit Quarterly, Tom Klaus took issue with those who criticize the Ferguson and Black Lives Matters movements as being "leaderless." Instead, he argued that they demonstrate a more effective "shared leadership" model: "Shared leadership…means that multiple members of a team or group step up to the responsibility and task of leadership, often as an adaptive response to changing circumstances. Multiple members may emerge to lead at the same time, or it may be serial as multiple leaders emerge over the life of a team or group." And The Chronicle of Philanthropy profiled three of the leaders of the Black Lives Matter movement.
- One of my favorite bloggers, David Henderson, has made a new year's resolution to write more often. Let's hope he keeps it up because he offered us two great ones this month. First, he wrote a scathing critique of the nonprofit and philanthropy sectors for not standing up against presidential candidate Donald Trump's hate-filled ideology. And then he took it further in a later post arguing that the philanthropic sector must get more political: "It seems a strange consensus that philanthropy and politics do not mix. Yet it is our politics, and more specifically our collective values, that creates the maladies we aim to address. Martin Luther King was a civil rights pioneer not for creating a nonprofit that provided social services to help African Americans live a little better, but by challenging the laws and social values that subjugated a significant portion of our community. Social interventions like homeless shelters, food pantries, and tutoring programs are fundamentally responses to injustice. While these programs are wrapped in apolitical blankets, they are plainly and intuitively critiques of the system we live in."
- And speaking of critiques, columnist Tom Watson wrote a sharp commentary on American philanthropy arguing that it is going the way of American politics — moving from democracy towards plutocracy: "The disparity between democratic philanthropy and its plutocratic cousin is nowhere more apparent than in the importance placed on the Facebook co-founder's commitment to giving away much of his vast personal fortune compared with the potential of the largest digital social network in the nation. Mr. Zuckerberg's billions may create major causes and eventually steer public policy, but many nonprofits will struggle to find in their budgets the money required to purchase desperately needed social-media eyeballs from his advertising department. If there's a better example of the power gulf in American philanthropy, I'm not sure what it is."
- And other critiques of philanthropy in January went even further, with some arguing that modern American philanthropy attempting to address growing wealth inequality (illustrated by a new Oxfam infographic "An Economy for the 1%") is a paradox because philanthropy itself emerged from the wealth excesses of capitalism. A new book by Erica Kohl-Arenas argued that philanthropic interventions to solve poverty have been flawed because they don't address the structural issues causing the poverty in the first place. And her argument was extended when she wrote about her view of a January 7th public event at the Ford Foundation where Darren Walker (who recently announced a new foundation focus on overcoming poverty) and Rob Reich discussed these issues.
- Caroline Fiennes argued that nonprofits should not try to "prove their impact," since proof of impact is impossible, but rather use evaluation to gain knowledge that can help "maximize our chances of making a significant impact." Patrick Lester, writing in the Stanford Social Innovation Review, offered a similar caution about outcomes, but this time to the Obama administration: "A dose of…realism, combined with a greater reliance on evidence and a willingness to learn from the past, could transform the administration's focus on outcomes into an important step forward. By openly acknowledging the challenges and dangers, recognizing the difference between mere outcomes and true impact, and demonstrating how this time we will do better, the administration could show that what it's really calling for is not just an outcomes mindset, but an Outcomes Mindset 2.0."
- Speaking of proving results, Charity Navigator's new leader, former Microsoft exec Michael Thatcher, and the board that hired him came under attack in January for not moving quickly enough away from rating nonprofits on financials and towards rating them based on results. But Doug White, writing an opinion piece in The Chronicle of Philanthropy and who created the beginning data behind Charity Navigator many years ago, took it even further took it even further: "Charity Navigator is far worse than nothing. The best that could happen is for the group to sink into oblivion, with no charities, no news outlets, and no donors giving it any thought. Or the group could take serious steps to grow up, humbly taking the time and effort to truly try to understand the charitable world."
- Wanting to get further into the social change game, Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg announced a new effort to use Facebook "Likes" to stop ISIS recruitment efforts on social media. It will be interesting to see how effective this slacktivism effort becomes at creating real change.
- Kivi Leroux Miller released her annual Nonprofit Communication Trends Report, including lots of data about how and where nonprofits are marketing. And while she found that YouTube is currently the #3 social network for nonprofits, that may change since YouTube just announced new "donation cards" that allow donors to give while watching a video.
- And finally, in January we lost David Bowie. But Callie Oettinger urged us not to be sad, but rather, inspired: "I [am] comforted in thinking of Bowie…on Mars, mixing it up with other artists…a place where the greats go to keep an eye on the rest of us and send down jolts of inspiration from above." Yes.
Photo Credit: Northside777
The Social Innovation Fund Six Years On
There is an interesting report out today on the effectiveness of the Social Innovation Fund (SIF). Authored by the Social Innovation Research Center (SIRC), a nonpartisan nonprofit research organization, the new report details what has worked and what hasn't in the six year history of the SIF.
Launched by the Obama administration in 2009, the SIF — a program within the Corporation for National and Community Service — provides significant funding to foundations that follow a venture philanthropy model by regranting that growth capital, along with technical assistance, to evidence-based nonprofits in "youth development, economic opportunity, and healthy futures" areas. In 2014, SIF expanded its efforts to include a portfolio of Pay for Success (social impact bond) grantees.
Now, 6 years on it is interesting to take a look back to understand what, if any, effect SIF has had on the nonprofit sector. The effect of the SIF is also critical given that, as of right now, the House and Senate have both defunded SIF in their respective funding bills.
To date, the SIF portfolio is made up of $241 million of federal investments and $516 million in private matching funds, which was invested in 35 intermediary grantees and 189 subgrantee nonprofits working in 37 states and D.C.
The SIRC report focuses on the current progress of SIF grants made during the first three years of the program (2010-2012). The report finds two clear positive results for the SIF so far. The SIF has:
- Added to the nonprofit sector's evidence base about which programs work, and
- Built the capacity of nonprofit subgrantees, especially in the areas of "performance management systems, evaluations, financial management, regulatory compliance systems, and experience with replicating evidence-based models."
On the negative side, however, the report finds that the SIF put real burdens on funders and nonprofits with its fundraising match requirements and the federal regulatory requirements. The report also finds that the SIF has had little effect on the sector as a whole because the SIF has not very broadly communicated their learnings so far.
To me, of course, most interesting are the report's finding about capacity building at nonprofit subgrantees. There is such a need for nonprofit capacity building in the sector, and this was a clear goal of the SIF.
The SIF is one of few funders that do more than pay lip service to performance management by actually investing in building the capacity of nonprofits to do it. However, the SIF has been criticized for mostly selecting nonprofits that already had strong capacity. And indeed, the SIRC report finds that the SIF was most successful among those nonprofits that already had high capacity (in performance management, fundraising function, etc.) prior to SIF funding. Indeed, the report found that "poorly-resourced intermediaries working with less well-resourced community based organizations have been at a disadvantage."
One SIF grantee in particular, The Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky, really struggled to build the capacity of their subgrantees whose starting capacity was so low. As they put it:
During the course of participation, it became clear that…[SIF] was really better suited for replicating existing programs or, at a minimum, investing in well-established programs that had some level of sophistication around organization systems and evaluation.
This mirrors earlier criticism of the SIF that it was set up to grow only those nonprofits that were already doing well, while those nonprofits that struggled with basic capacity issues were left out. The SIF has struggled to determine whether it is funding innovation (new solutions with limited capacity), or proven solutions (with a long track record and the corresponding capacity). It seems the two are mutually exclusive.
What the SIF is trying to do is such tricky business. To identify, fund and and scale solutions that work is really the holy grail in the social change sector. Certainly there are hurdles and missteps, but I think it's exciting when government gets in the social change game in a big way. Six years is really too soon to tell. So I hope that this brief SIF experiment is allowed to continue, and we can see what a social change public/private partnership of this scale can really do.
To read the full SIRC report go here.
Photo Credit: Obama signs the Serve America Act in 2009, Corporation for National and Community Service
A Nonprofit Culture of Measurement: An Interview with Mary Winkler
In today's Social Velocity interview I'm talking with Mary Kopczynski Winkler, senior research associate with the Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy at the Urban Institute. Mary is a nationally recognized expert in the field of performance measurement and management. She is a founding member of the Leap of Reason Ambassadors Community, a private community of nonprofit thought leaders and practitioners committed to increasing the expectation and adoption of high performance in the social sector and who released the Performance Imperative earlier this year.
You can read past interviews in the Social Velocity interview series here.
Nell: PerformWell is an effort among Urban Institute, Child Trends and Social Solutions to offer tools and strategies for human services nonprofits to measure their work. How successful has this effort been and what are your plans for continuing to grow the capacity of nonprofits to measure their work?
Mary: PerformWell is a free, interactive, web-based resource designed to help human services nonprofits gain knowledge about performance management, access tools and resources they need to better service clients and meet outcomes, and obtain strategies for effective, efficient service delivery. Launched in March 2012, the demand for PerformWell has exceeded our expectations with more than 400,000 visitors (from all 50 states and more than 200 countries); 25,000 individuals have registered for our webinars; and more than 140,000 assessment tools have been downloaded from our site. Webinar survey results are routinely high, but we are working to put additional systems in place to track how nonprofits are using various aspects of PerformWell and to what end.
In 2013, the PeformWell partners engaged in a business planning process with Root Cause. Market research confirmed our views about a large unmet need for performance measurement knowledge and high interest in the resources offered through PerformWell, but that additional products and services are also desired, such as webinar training series, regional user conferences, and customized engagements with nonprofits. Users wanted a more interactive web-experience.
Our short- to medium-term goals include substantial updates to the website to improve the user experience (we also plan to solicit user feedback during and after these changes are implemented); development of additional products and services better aligned with the feedback obtained from the market research undertaken by Root Cause; and exploration of partnerships and sponsorships with nonprofits, consultants and funders to generate additional revenue and resources to expand the content, reach and use of PerformWell to improve the adoption and application of performance measurement and management practice across the nonprofit sector.
Nell: Some believe that measurement is perhaps more straightforward for human services nonprofits — you can measure change to an individual's behavior or life circumstances — but measurement is more difficult for arts organizations or advocacy groups. What are your thoughts on that?
Mary: Sometimes I think this argument serves as a convenient excuse for organizations to avoid putting even the most basic systems in place to track progress or otherwise hold themselves accountable to their constituents. In 2007, with support from the Hewlett Foundation, the Urban Institute and the Center for What Works, we published a series of simple frameworks, as part of our Outcome Indicators Project, to help nonprofits in 14 program areas engage in performance measurement. Two of these areas are advocacy and performing arts. The Urban Institute also provided research support to the Performing Arts Research Coalition (PARC) to develop standardized surveys to help performing arts organizations across the country obtain more routine and better data from audience members, subscribers, and the community.
Establishing a causal link between advocacy or arts interventions and impact is, in my view, more challenging than for human service organizations. In the case of advocacy organizations, it can be very difficult to isolate the contributions of a particular campaign or even organization to a policy or legislative outcome.
It is, however, possible to devise strategies for capturing information on earlier stage outcomes, such as increased awareness.
I recently participated on a panel at the annual OPERA America conference – on "internal metrics for civic impact." As much as measurement activities have evolved from the days of the PARC coalition, I observed that most of the metrics and data points were still very internally focused on measures of participation and attendance and fall well-short of anything approximating community or civic impact. I encouraged those present to consider stepping away from a focus on the impact of an individual opera company's contribution to civic impact, and recommended instead more of a collective impact approach in collaboration with other arts, civic, and education organizations in a community.
In this case, I even hesitated to use the word "impact," and suggested the group consider distinguishing between collective contribution toward a modest set of civic outcomes (e.g., performing arts promote understanding of other cultures or are a source of pride for those in the community) and the more traditional causal attribution usually reserved for the term "impact."
Nell: Caroline Fiennes, among others, has argued that individual nonprofits should actually do less evaluation and rather rely on larger research studies to prove their theories of change. What do you make of that argument and the difference between evaluation and measurement?
Mary: I agree with some of what Caroline puts forth here – particularly her observations about "withholding (unflattering research) and publication bias" – an issue that University of Wisconsin-Madison professor Donald Moynihan has termed "performance perversity." I also agree both with her suggestion that evaluations be done by a third-party to reduce any tendencies toward subjective reporting or bias and her endorsement of a greater consideration of shared metrics.
I am troubled, however, by the fact that only 7% of UK social-purpose organizations are interested in improving services, and her somewhat cavalier suggestion that monitoring and evaluation "wastes time and money." Although she is not alone in this second argument (see for example Bill Shambra's "take-down" of Charity Navigator's efforts to encourage greater use of performance metrics in "Charity Navigator 3.0: The Empirical Empire's Death Star?"), such sweeping generalizations undermine the legitimate and courageous attempts of many nonprofits to use data for program improvement efforts.
I agree with Phil Buchanan in that there is a "moral imperative" to make an honest attempt to understand if resources are being used effectively and certainly to guard against the possibility that programs could be doing more harm than good as organizations like Latin American Youth Center and Harlem Children's Zone have discovered and since corrected.
I see measurement as a necessary practice for every nonprofit. But measurement is different from evaluation. Nonprofits need to start by developing a measurement infrastructure that makes sense for their organization – one that supports their mission and commitment to serve and improve the lives of their clients or constituents – not one that is reactionary and responsive to funders. It is precisely this kind of infrastructure that can lay the groundwork for a more rigorous evaluation, at a time that is right and appropriate for the organization's stage in development.
I see measurement and evaluation along a continuum of inquiry that should be designed to support the learning objectives of an organization. Measurement helps organizations to take the day-to-day or month-to-month pulse of various activities and program results – these snapshots in time or scorecards help managers and service providers understand trends and provide an opportunity to correct, modify or otherwise adapt operations.
Evaluation is, by definition, more rigorous, more expensive, and takes considerably more time to see results. Evaluation serves a very important role as organizations make decisions about whether to continue, grow, scale or otherwise expand services, but it needs to occur at the right time – and certainly not as an organization is just getting off the ground.
Nell: It is difficult for most nonprofits to find funding for measurement work. For example, in the most recent Nonprofit Finance Fund State of the Sector survey, 69% of nonprofit respondents said their funders rarely or never cover the costs of measurement. How do we change that, or can we?
Mary: Although I am sympathetic to this argument and argue frequently that foundations have a unique and critical role to play in helping to build the capacity of nonprofits to better engage in measurement and evaluation, I think we need to change the conversation to one that focuses on the shared responsibility between nonprofits and funders for making the necessary investments in measurement and evaluation.
If nonprofits are truly ready to embrace a culture of measurement and high performance, then they need to reorganize operations in ways that embed measurement practice at every level of the organization, and change expectations from front-line workers all the way to the board of directors.
This means things like: defining expectations about data collection in job descriptions; setting aside a small percentage of funding for evaluation as a line-item in every grant request; and using data in meaningful ways in everyday discourse. Likewise, funders need to work more collaboratively with grantees to understand the data needs and capacity of nonprofits, consider funding longer-term grants that build in support for measurement and evaluation, and stop asking for data or reports that aren't part of the conversation about continuous improvement and learning. Funders, too, can support field-building efforts to develop additional tools and resources in support of the measurement work nonprofits seek to accomplish.
There are a number of exemplary efforts already underway including Edna McConnell Clark Foundation's Propel Next and the World Bank Group's support of Measure4Change and the East of the River Initiative. Each of these efforts feature: targeted grants to build measurement and evaluation capacity of participating nonprofits; access to technical assistance resources; and a community of practice to help grantees learn from each other, share successes or failures, and reduce what is all too often a sense of isolation among measurement and evaluation practitioners.
Photo Credit: Urban Institute
10 Great Social Innovation Reads: September 2014
There were some pretty exciting things happening in the world of social innovation last month. From a new fund to make philanthropy more effective, to a new blog series written by funders making the case for investing in nonprofit leadership, to some ideas for making performance measurement more accessible to small nonprofits and arts and culture organizations, to some interesting partnerships between philanthropy and city government.
It all made for a great month of reads. Below is my pick of the 10 best reads in social innovation in September. As always, add what I missed to the comments. And if you want a longer list, follow me on Twitter, Facebook, Google+ or LinkedIn.
You can read past months' 10 Great Social Innovation Reads lists here.
- The Fund for Shared Insight, a collaboration among seven major foundations, launched in September. The group plans to "pool financial and other resources to make grants to improve philanthropy…to encourage and incorporate feedback from the people we seek to help; understand the connection between feedback and better results; foster more openness between and among foundations and grantees; and share what we learn." They plan to be very transparent with this entire experiment. I can't wait to see what develops.
- Another development in the realm of improving philanthropy was the launch of the Stanford Social Innovation Review blog series where foundation leaders discuss why and how they have invested in nonprofit leadership development. As I mentioned earlier, Ira Hirschfield from the Haas Foundation kicked off the series, and Surina Khan from the Women's Foundation of California was next up. To have such an open dialogue about nonprofit capacity investments, particularly around leadership development, is amazing. Let's hope it encourages similar conversations outside the blogosphere.
- And the third piece from the world of philanthropic enlightenment, Daniel Stid of the Hewlett Foundation wrote a great post about ending the nonprofit starvation cycle. As he put it, "Effective leaders need to be willing to take the risk of saying something that a funder might not want to hear when their organization's long run effectiveness is at stake. If they are not, then shame on them. Funders, for our part, should fund the full cost of the work we are asking our grantees to undertake in a way that leaves their overall organization and its finances whole; if we don't, then shame on us." Amen!
- There is further evidence that philanthropy as we know it is changing – a new report by The Economist takes a hard look at how Generations X and Y (those born between 1966 and 1994) are transforming philanthropy, particularly around "a strong desire to have a measurable, enduring impact." This is exciting because if donors increasingly invest based on results, we can shift more money to social change. As the authors of the report put it, "The young generation of givers is focused on data, measurement and demonstrable results. More than any other generation, they want to check facts, know all the information ahead of time and ensure that they are well-informed at every stage of the process."
- And there was lots to say about measuring performance this month. The Foundation Center and WINGS, a global network of 90 support organizations serving philanthropy in 35 countries, announced the creation of The Global Philanthropy Data Charter to gather and share philanthropy data for public benefit.
- Measuring impact is complex and costly, but Carly Pippin from Measuring Success, offers 4 steps for how small nonprofits can assess impact affordably.
- Measurement is particularly challenging in the arts and culture arena because, as Natasha Bloor of The Old Vic Theatre explains, "There is an understandable reticence within the cultural and creative industries when it comes to proving the social value of art. For many, the arts have an intrinsic worth that cannot be mapped or measured, with the primary benefit found in creative self-expression itself, rather than the longer-term effects experienced afterwards." But she offers a new approach that they have found very effective.
- And for a completely free way to assess the social value of building low-cost housing, child-care centers, and health clinics there is the Social Impact Calculator, developed by the Low Income Investment Fund. They developed the tool to measure the effect of their own work and then decided to share it.
- Stephanie Jacobs of the Nonprofits Assistance Fund offers some tips to turn your board into the financial leaders they need to be.
- And finally, there were some interesting examples of partnerships between local government and philanthropy aimed at strengthening cities. Rona Jackson from Living Cities described 5 ways philanthropy and local government can work together. And the Kalamazoo Promise, a partnership between local philanthropists and city schools that pays tuition at a Michigan college for any student who graduates from a Kalamazoo school, shows these ideas in action.
Photo Credit: Valerie Everett
10 Great Social Innovation Reads: August 2014
Between my own time away from social media in August, the general end of summer quiet, and of course, the glut of posts about the Ice Bucket challenge (of which I have already said my piece), my list of great reads in August is admittedly slim.
But there was some interesting debate, most notably about "strategic philanthropy" and about ratings agency Philanthropedia. Also, calls for more nonprofit leadership development and for nonprofit leaders to get out of their own way by taking the Overhead Pledge. Throw in a little Mark Twain, some sharing economy, and a dash of Millennial analysis and you have a pretty good month in the world of social change.
So below is my pick of the 10 best reads in the world of social innovation in August. For an expanded list you can follow me on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn or Google+. And you can see past months' 10 Great Reads lists here.
- Leadership development is a woefully underfunded need in the nonprofit sector. Indeed from 1992-2011 only $3.5 billion of the nearly $287 billion dollars granted by foundations went to support leadership. In order to get more foundations investing in leadership development, Rusty Stahl offers case studies of 9 foundations who already do.
- In the summer issue of Stanford Social Innovation Review, the lead article "Strategic Philanthropy for a Complex World" caused quite a stir in the philanthropy world with many arguing that there is not much new there. In August, Alliance Magazine ran a series of editorials by philanthropy leaders as counterpoints. Most interesting among them was Avila Kilmurray's, former director of the Community Foundation of Northern Ireland, response, in which she said "Can we not just recognize that when any funder sets her/himself the task of addressing complex issues…there needs to be provision for continuous consultation, practice, reflection and change?"
- An interesting article in the New York Times paints the Millennial generation as a very communal-minded one, where "the highest value isn't self-promotion, but its opposite, empathy — an open-minded and -hearted connection to others." From working, to eating, to shopping it seems Millennials bake social into everything they do. How will the world be different if that holds true as they age?
- Writing in Forbes, Tom Watson asks whether nonprofits should participate in GivingTuesday. As he puts it, "Is #GivingTuesday a well-meaning marketing promotion – or is it a real, organic movement for change?…[Does it] seek to increase U.S. giving from 2% of GDP (where it's been stuck for two generations) to some higher point?" Amen to that!
- Rating nonprofit effectiveness is such a tricky challenge. Philanthropedia, one rating system that is driven by crowdsourced feedback from experts, comes under fire from the clean water space for being just "a popularity contest." But others claim it's an improvement over previous evaluations.
- Writing in the Chronicle of Philanthropy Nicole Wallace shows the value of sharing data by profiling Crisis Text Line, which gives other nonprofits, researchers and government agencies access to their data of 60,000 counseling sessions with teens in crisis to use in their own programs. It begs the question whether other social change data could be shared and how we make that easier to do.
- Sue Dorsey from Water for People was among a group of nonprofit leaders at the InsideNGO conference who took the Overhead Pledge in August, vowing to fully disclose the true costs of their nonprofits. And she encourages other nonprofit leaders to follow suit. This is exciting because it is not enough for funders to get over the overhead myth, nonprofit leaders must as well.
- I am always a sucker for connecting literature and/or history to social change, and even better both, so David Bonbright's post about how Mark Twain would have viewed recent trends in business is fascinating. Bonbright argues that Twain wanted American business to fully integrate profit and community. And we are beginning to witness this trend again where companies are "embracing the full implications of what they are – what they mean for the environment, for communities, for the most marginalized people affected by their supply chains…[because] this is best way to remain competitive and successful over time." Let's hope!
- The new "sharing" economy is not all good, but not all bad either, as Daniel Ben-Horin argues that "there are enormous opportunities for the social sector to engage with the values-driven segment of the sharing economy."
- Finally, some guidance on making your nonprofit email marketing more mobile friendly and your website better able to connect people to your cause. It's all about responsive, engaging design.
Photo Credit: Seth Anderson
Guest Post: Intellectual Curiosity is the Cornerstone of Social Progress
Note: Third in my list of guest bloggers this summer is David Henderson. David's professional focus is on improving the way social sector organizations use information to address poverty. Here is his guest post:
I was recently turned down for a position at a startup-up big-data company focused on the philanthropic sector because I'm "too pessimistic". This company initially sought me out since they don't have any social sector expertise on staff, a likely requisite to make successful nonprofit software. Our courtship turned sour when I expressed my view that we have a lot more social sector initiatives than evidence that those interventions actually work.
My skepticism that social sector initiatives by and large work was wrongly misconstrued as pessimism that social progress is possible. Skepticism is a critical driver of intellectual curiosity. I spent a pretty penny on two degrees that essentially taught me how to critically assess the divide between rhetoric and results. Indeed, the null hypothesis in a statistical model assumes the intended effect is not present. I guess statisticians are just a bunch of pessimists.
Fundamentally, I believe the company I interviewed with was mirroring the widespread lack of intellectual curiosity that plagues the social sector and impedes real progress. Too many nonprofits are terrified of having their claims of social impact investigated, lest their effects are discovered to be more modest than claimed. And I don't blame them. The funding community's emphasis on investing in "what works" has resulted in a proliferation of noise as every nonprofit steadfastly argues their interventions cure everything. It's no wonder evaluators are seen as Angels of Death.
I generally don't favor taking cues from the for-profit world, but venture capital and angel investors' practice of investing in people and teams over ideas is far more conducive to intellectual honesty in product (and social intervention) development. The basic premise of this investment strategy is that initial product ideas are generally wrong, but smart people will investigate, iterate, and innovate.
Compare that philosophy to the social sector, where the expectation is that nonprofits already have the answers, they just need money to scale them up. This assumption is largely incorrect, but by making funding contingent on the perception of effectiveness, the nonprofit sector is incentivized to not question the efficacy of its own work. In this model, continued funding depends on a lack of intellectual curiosity at best, and intellectual dishonesty at worst.
A better alternative is for nonprofits to embrace intellectual curiosity, and to be the first to question their own results. Under this model, nonprofits would invest in their capacity to intelligently probe the effectiveness of their own interventions, by staffing those with the capacity to sift through outcomes data and investing in the growing list of tools that are democratizing evaluation. Of course, this would require a shift in the funding community away from "investing in what works" to more humbly "investigating what works".
A shift toward intellectual curiosity would create more space for the sector to solicit beneficiary feedback in the design of social interventions, as organizations would no longer be incentivized to defensively "prove" existing approaches work, and instead would be rewarded for proactively evolving practices to achieve better results. It is this very intellectual curiosity that led organizations like GiveDirectly and the Family Independence Initiative to invest in the poor directly, a departure from long-standing anti-poverty practices that the evidence suggests might actually work. It's a shame that organizations imbued with a mission of experimentation deviate so far from the norm.
I don't consider it pessimistic to question whether the sector is achieving its intended social impact. To the contrary, it's rather cynical to set aside what should be the critical question for any nonprofit organization in the name of self-preservation. In order to achieve social progress, the sector needs to expel anti-intellectual policies and actors in favor of a healthy skepticism that questions everything, and is willing to try anything.
Photo Credit: NASA
- Download a free Financing
Not Fundraising e-book
when you sign up for email
updates from Social Velocity.
Sign Up Here
- What's your nonprofit's
Theory of Change?
Learn how to create it
in the step-by-step guide.


text:
2 pounds ricotta cheese
8 eggs, separated
8 tablespoons sugar
8 tablespo... (continued)
Preheat the oven to 400 F.
Grease and flour a 9-inch springform pan with a mixture of flour and sugar, tapping out the excess.
In a large bowl, beat the egg yolks and 4 tabl... (continued)
Get Access To This AND Hundreds Of Other Recipes With A Nick Stellino VIP Subscription!
An All-Access Pass To Over 750 Recipes!
Nick's VIP Subscription includes 24/7, year-long access to every recipe on Nick's website!Also includes exclusive videos and news!
Includes your choice of a free e-book! A $14.95 Value!
For iPad®, iPod Touch®, iPhone®, Nook®, Kindle®, Mac®, or PC.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Cloud Cover Episode 10 - Table Storage API
Download this episode
In this episode:
- Learn about the Table storage model - PartitionKeys, RowKeys, and more.
- Walk around the API using the StorageClient library and learn how to query the service without first building a data model.
- Hear the latest news and announcements for the platform.
- Troubleshoot a common query error when using Table storage.
Show Links:
Windows Azure Guidance - Failure Recovery (via Eugenio)
SELECT INTO with SQL Azure
Application Infrastructure Virtual Learning
Windows Azure Firestarter videos
Protecting Blobs from Application Errors
Protecting Tables from Application Errors
Table Storage Backup and Restore on CodePlex
Available formats for this video:
Actual format may change based on video formats available and browser capability.
More episodes in this series
Cloud Cover Episode 11 - Drives and IIS Hostable Worker Core
Related episodes
Azure WebSites - Traffic Manager and Global Load Balancing
Introduction to Azure Batch with Mark Scurrell
When to Scale Azure Web Sites - with Stefan Schackow
Azure Service Bus 102 with Dan Rosanova
Azure Service Bus 101 with Dan Rosanova
Azure App Service
Azure WebJobs 101 - Basic WebJobs with Jamie Espinosa
Azure Queues 101 - Basics of Queues with Mark Simms
Azure Service Bus 104 with Dan Rosanova
Azure Blob Storage 101 with Jai Haridas
The Discussion
The biggest issue I have with Azure Table Storage is the lack of string comparison operators.
If I can do
.Where(a=>a.Age > 21)
then why can't I do
Is this an architectural constraint or rather an implementation limitation?
If it's an implementation limitation, then I can hope that it will be fixed in a future release.
If it's architectural, then I will have to find an alternative solution such as SQL Azure.
Hi DaveSn,
Currently, this is a limitation in the actual storage service. The LINQ provider eventually boils down to a URI with some syntax that is or isn't supported on the service head. It turns out that certain operations that are supported in relational sources are not supported in Windows Azure tables. Your specific question would entail a full-text search to be performed on an arbitrary column in Windows Azure. This is not currently supported (there is no LIKE operation). This limit might be removed over time as more features are added to the service.
If you really need full text search capability over your data - take a look at the Lucene implementation here:
Comments closed
Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.


text:
HIARCS Chess
By Applied Computer Concepts Ltd.
Open iTunes to buy and download apps.
HIARCS is a multiple World Championship winning chess program and the only handheld chess program in the world which has won matches and tournaments with Grandmasters. It twice won the Mercusor Cup in Buenos Aires, Argentina ahead of Grandmasters with a performance of 2900 Elo, the best chess performance rating for any handheld device in history.
In 1997 the World's strongest ever human chess player, Garry Kasparov, said "HIARCS is much better positionally than Deep Blue" and even the current World champion, Vishy Anand, in a recent interview when asked what chess program he uses to analyse with said "generally I use HIARCS".
This power enables your iPhone to play chess like a super Grandmaster, analyse games and chess problems with you, or play at whatever weakened chess strength you want from beginner to GM strength while offering numerous features to help you learn and improve as you play with HIARCS. An advanced set of coaching features helps players of all strengths improve their chess play.
HIARCS Chess has a full range of realistic weaker opponent strengths and playing styles catering for players of all abilities from absolute beginners to Grandmasters. On the weaker playing levels HIARCS will make human-like mistakes appropriate to the level of play and this together with the integrated coach advice, assessments and alerts allow you to learn and improve quickly. HIARCS also monitors your chess performance and provides you with an Elo chess rating which tracks your chess ability in every game. It can continuously adjust its playing strength to give you challenging but beatable opponents as you improve.
HIARCS Chess will save battery life by using much less energy on the weaker levels, allowing more playing time on long journeys etc.
HIARCS Chess supports PGN chess game databases and has all the games between Fischer & Spassky and Kasparov & Karpov for you to play through and enjoy.
HIARCS has a large tournament book which is up to date with chess theory with over 235,000 variations. The book moves are displayed on screen with chess symbols and the opening variations are named and ECO coded.
Key features:
+ Strongest chess program on iPhone and iPod Touch, genuine strong GM-level performance
+ Suitable for all players from absolute beginners to strong Grandmasters with many handicap levels and opponents styles and advanced coaching
+ Intuitive and friendly user interface with multiple high quality pieces set, colour schemes and icons including high res support for iPhone 4 and 5 retina displays
+ Multiple playing modes: play white, black, both sides in two player mode, continuous analysis and interactive replay
+ Fully adjustable Elo strengths, adaptive levels and multiple playing levels and opponents
+ All levels below maximum are low energy to increase battery life
+ Rates your chess play and gives you an Elo rating which is updated after each game
+ Advanced coach can provide move options, give hints, indicate move safety and quality highlights and watch your play and warn about mistakes
+ Transfer PGN databases to/from HIARCS chess via iTunes file sharing, email games and PGN DBs from HIARCS
+ Launch HIARCS from PGN email attachments
+ Load, save or delete games to/from PGN databases
+ Set up or edit a position to analyse or play from
+ Advanced game navigation with game move slider and VCR buttons for rapid and precise game navigation
+ Many selectable preset blitz, incremental and average time clock settings for timed play
+ Large HIARCS tournament opening book as used by the professionals!
+ Permanent brain for enhanced playing strength
+ Numerous chess display functions for showing chess moves, analysis, book moves, coach advice, move quality even legal moves, offer draws or resign
+ 8 Piece sets and 9 colour schemes
+ Integrated Html manual and help screens
A discount coupon is included with a $10 USD discount on other HIARCS products on Mac and PC from www.hiarcs.com.
What's New in Version 13.71
Fix for promotions on rotated board using single taps
Display improvements
iPhone Screenshots
Customer Reviews
HIARCS is slick.
Having tried a fair few Chess Apps this is my favourite in all respects and a perfect companion to the Desktop version. Nice graphics, good engine, good coaching features and good customer support etc. Recommended.
Hiarcs in the power
Excellent chess program. Very hard to beat. Recommend for all players
One of the best I've played.
- £9.99
- Category: Games
- Updated: 14 October 2014
- Version: 13.71
- Size: 18.1 MB
- Language: English
- Developer: Applied Computer Concepts Ltd.
- © 2009-2014 Applied Computer Concepts Ltd.
Compatibility: Requires iOS 4.3 or later. Compatible with iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch.


text: Without fail, GWAR put on what is possibly the most fun concert I've ever been to. I came in wearing a white shirt and left red, blue and purple. I was covered in blood and god knows what other fluids they decided to spray on the crowd. Plus, Devildriver had just opened up, so the crowd was already having a total blast.


text: PINCHITOtapas EC1 32 Featherstone Street, London, EC1Y 8QX Mediterranean Overview Countries Location Average Main Course £10 Food Spend £25 Hours of Operation: Open from 08:00 to 24:00 Monday to Friday, and 17:00 to 24:00 on Saturday. More about PINCHITOtapas EC1 PINCHITOtapas EC1 is one of two independent, award-winning neighbourhood tapas bars in London, individual in style - authentic and cheeky in character. The philosophy is a genuine respect for the innate quality of ingredients, a true passion for the culinary arts and desire to impress our guests. PINCHITOtapas is unpretentious, serving good quality fresh fare prepared quickly and cheerfully alongside award-winning cocktails.The tapas experience is driven by the pleasure of sharing small plates of delicious food with cocktails surrounded by friends. Founder Jason Fendick comments that the staff's love of the Spanish sociable dining scene and coffee culture inspired them to open PINCHITOtapas. The seasonal dishes, authentic produce and relaxed atmosphere are indicative of the bars you can visit in the El Born district in Barcelona.Come visit PINCHITOtapas in EC1 or WC1 and choose from the full tapas menu or the ever-changing specials board. Great Offers! Delivered direct to your inbox. No registration required! Where do you normally eat?AberdeenBasildonBedfordshireBelfastBirminghamBournemouthBradfordBrightonBristolBuckinghamshireCambridgeCardiffChelmsfordCheltenhamChesterColchesterCoventryDerbyDudleyDundeeEdinburghEssexExeterGlasgowGloucesterGuildfordHarlowHerefordHullIpswichKing's LynnKingston-upon-HullLeedsLeicesterLiverpoolLondonLutonMaidstoneManchesterMiddlesbroughMilton KeynesNewburyNewcastleNorfolkNorthamptonshireNorwichNottinghamOxfordPeterboroughPlymouthPoolePortsmouthPrestonReadingSalfordSheffieldSouthamptonSouthend-on-SeaSt AlbansStevenageStoke-on-TrentSunderlandSwanseaSwindonTelfordWalsallWatfordWelwyn Garden CityWeymouthWolverhamptonWorcestershireWrexham You're done! Great deals coming your way soon Customer Reviews for There are currently no reviews for this restaurant. PINCHITOtapas EC1 32 Featherstone Street, London, EC1Y 8QX General: +44 2074900121 See other restaurants in Old Street & Finsbury Unfortunately you cannot reserve PINCHITOtapas EC1 online on this site Your restaurant? Edit this listing Edit this listing Restaurants nearby you can reserve online now for FREE The Artillery Arms BRITISH 130 m AVG. MAIN: £10 (5) 1 review The Angel BRITISH 140 m AVG. MAIN: £10 (5) 1 review The Grill at McQueen STEAKS & GRILLS 260 m AVG. MAIN: £19 (4.3) 15 reviews Sabor Iberico SPANISH 350 m AVG. MAIN: £10 (4.1) 16 reviews Tonic & Remedy BRITISH 360 m AVG. MAIN: £15 (4.4) 45 reviews See other Mediterranean restaurants in London


text:
|Page 2 of 2 <
The tea party warns of a New Elite. They're right.
When they leave college, the New Elite remain in the bubble. Harvard seniors surveyed in 2007 were headed toward a small number of elite graduate schools (Harvard and Cambridge in the lead) and a small number of elite professional fields (finance and consulting were tied for top choice). Jobs in businesses that provide bread-and-butter goods and services to individual Americans, which make up the overwhelming majority of entry-level openings for aspiring managers, attracted just 1.7 percent of the Harvard students who went to work right after graduation.
When the New Elite get around to marrying, they don't marry just anybody. One of the funniest and most bitingly accurate parts of "Bobos in Paradise" was Brooks's analysis of the New York Times's wedding announcements. Go back to 1960, and the page was filled with brides and grooms who grew up wealthy but whose educations and occupations did not offer much indication that they were going to set the world on fire. Look at the page today, and it is studded with the mergers of fabulous résumés.
Three examples lifted from last Sunday's Times: a director of marketing at a biotech company (Stanford undergrad, Harvard MBA) married a consultant to the aerospace industry (Stanford undergrad, Harvard MPP); a vice president at Goldman Sachs (Yale) married a director of retail development for a financial software firm (Hofstra); and a third-year resident in cardiology (Yale undergrad) married a third-year resident in pathology (Columbia undergrad, summa cum laude).
The New Elite marry each other, combining their large incomes and genius genes, and then produce offspring who get the benefit of both.
We are watching the maturation of the cognitive stratification that Richard J. Herrnstein and I described in "The Bell Curve" back in 1994. When educational and professional opportunities first opened up, we saw social churning galore, as youngsters benefited from opportunities that their parents had been denied. But that phase lasted only a generation or two, slowed by this inescapable paradox:
The more efficiently a society identifies the most able young people of both sexes, sends them to the best colleges, unleashes them into an economy that is tailor-made for people with their abilities and lets proximity take its course, the sooner a New Elite -- the "cognitive elite" that Herrnstein and I described -- becomes a class unto itself. It is by no means a closed club, as Barack Obama's example proves. But the credentials for admission are increasingly held by the children of those who are already members. An elite that passes only money to the next generation is evanescent ("Shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations," as the adage has it). An elite that also passes on ability is more tenacious, and the chasm between it and the rest of society widens.
What Herrnstein and I did not fully appreciate 16 years ago was how relentless this segregation would be. It is hard to get numbers -- no survey has samples large enough to calibrate precisely what's going on with the top percentiles of the population that I'm talking about -- but the numbers we do have, combined with qualitative data provided by observers such as Brooks, Florida and Bill Bishop, in his book "The Big Sort," are persuasive.
We know, for one thing, that the New Elite clusters in a comparatively small number of cities and in selected neighborhoods in those cities. This concentration isn't limited to the elite neighborhoods of Washington, New York, Boston, Los Angeles, Silicon Valley and San Francisco. It extends to university cities with ancillary high-tech jobs, such as Austin and the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill triangle.
With geographical clustering goes cultural clustering. Get into a conversation about television with members of the New Elite, and they can probably talk about a few trendy shows -- "Mad Men" now, "The Sopranos" a few years ago. But they haven't any idea who replaced Bob Barker on "The Price Is Right." They know who Oprah is, but they've never watched one of her shows from beginning to end.
Talk to them about sports, and you may get an animated discussion of yoga, pilates, skiing or mountain biking, but they are unlikely to know who Jimmie Johnson is (the really famous Jimmie Johnson, not the former Dallas Cowboys coach), and the acronym MMA means nothing to them.
They can talk about books endlessly, but they've never read a "Left Behind" novel (65 million copies sold) or a Harlequin romance (part of a genre with a core readership of 29 million Americans).
They take interesting vacations and can tell you all about a great backpacking spot in the Sierra Nevada or an exquisite B&B overlooking Boothbay Harbor, but they wouldn't be caught dead in an RV or on a cruise ship (unless it was a small one going to the Galapagos). They have never heard of Branson, Mo.
There are so many quintessentially American things that few members of the New Elite have experienced. They probably haven't ever attended a meeting of a Kiwanis Club or Rotary Club, or lived for at least a year in a small town (college doesn't count) or in an urban neighborhood in which most of their neighbors did not have college degrees (gentrifying neighborhoods don't count). They are unlikely to have spent at least a year with a family income less than twice the poverty line (graduate school doesn't count) or to have a close friend who is an evangelical Christian. They are unlikely to have even visited a factory floor, let alone worked on one.
Taken individually, members of the New Elite are isolated from mainstream America as a result of lifestyle choices that are nobody's business but their own. But add them all up, and they mean that the New Elite lives in a world that doesn't intersect with mainstream America in many important ways. When the tea party says the New Elite doesn't get America, there is some truth in the accusation.
Part of the isolation is political. In that Harvard survey I mentioned, 72 percent of Harvard seniors said their beliefs were to the left of the nation as a whole, compared with 10 percent who said theirs were to the right of it. The political preferences of academics and journalists among the New Elite also conform to the suspicions of the tea party.
But the politics of the New Elite are not the main point. When it comes to the schools where they were educated, the degrees they hold, the Zip codes where they reside and the television shows they watch, I doubt if there is much to differentiate the staff of the conservative Weekly Standard from that of the liberal New Republic, or the scholars at the American Enterprise Institute from those of the Brookings Institution, or Republican senators from Democratic ones.
The bubble that encases the New Elite crosses ideological lines and includes far too many of the people who have influence, great or small, on the course of the nation. They are not defective in their patriotism or lacking a generous spirit toward their fellow citizens. They are merely isolated and ignorant. The members of the New Elite may love America, but, increasingly, they are not of it.
Charles Murray is the W.H. Brady scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and the author of "Real Education: Four Simple Truths for Bringing America's Schools Back to Reality." He will be online Monday, Oct. 25, at 11 a.m. ET to discuss this article. Submit your questions and comments before or during the discussion.


text:
Investors will be encouraged to use Switch and Delta debit cards to settle their bills.
The new system for private clients will be based on the existing Talisman system, and will be switched to a five-day rolling settlement as soon after mid-1994 as possible. Users will then have to pay by debit card, since the postal and cheque-clearing systems would take too long.
A three-day rolling settlement system had previously been mooted, but significantly this will not figure in the Bank of England's conclusions on a Taurus replacement to be published shortly. A working party was set up under the Bank director Pen Kent after Taurus was cancelled. Cost of cancellation to the City now appears to have been about pounds 300m rather than the pounds 400m suggested at the time.
A majority in the securities industry now favours removing responsibility for development of new share trading systems from the Stock Exchange, which lost credibility in the Taurus fiasco. The Bank of England is favourite to take over the role.
- More about:
- Banking
- Bank Of England
- Securities
- Smart Cards


text:
Wedding Lighting Florida Wedding Lighting Florida fort lauderdale
- Publish Date: 10-20-16
A Hot Party is pleased to offer a variety of Event Production resources for rent mostly all in-house, contains Wireless Up lights, Washlights, Moving Head Lights, etc for wedding lightning in Florida. http://ahotparty.com/ 5309 W. Broward Blvd. #118…Read more


text:
Spanish regions catching-up to Europe: an analysis based on the IB-MPI unit root procedure
This article investigates the pair-wise convergence hypothesis of 17 Spanish regions with respect to the European Union (EU) and Euro-Zone (EZ). Several definitions of convergence are taken into account. The IB-MPI unit root testing procedure is then applied. A simultaneous approach based on the gap in levels and logs is developed to study convergence. The empirical results show incomplete catching-up in six cases with respect to both EU and EZ, and complete catching-up in nine with respect to EU and four with respect to EZ. When taking into account the behaviour of both gaps and loggaps, we further get four cases of cointegrated regions with respect to EZ and only one with respect to EU. Finally, there are four regions that diverge with respect to EU, but do converge with respect to the EZ. Only Baleares diverges with respect to both of them. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2013
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 45 (2013)
Issue (Month): 2 (October)
Pages: 715-733
|Contact details of provider:
| Web page: http://www.springer.com
|Order Information:
|Web: http://www.springer.com/economics/econometrics/journal/181/PS2
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Jeffrey A. Frankel & Andrew K. Rose, 1996.
"The Endogeneity of the Optimum Currency Area Criteria,"
NBER Working Papers
5700, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Frankel, Jeffrey A & Rose, Andrew K, 1998. "The Endogeneity of the Optimum Currency Area Criteria," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(449), pages 1009-25, July.
- Frankel, Jeffrey A & Rose, Andrew K, 1996. "The Endogeneity of the Optimum Currency Area Criteria," CEPR Discussion Papers 1473, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Aránzazu Juan & Antonio Arroyo, 2009. "European incomplete catching-up," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 385-402, May.
- Graham Elliott & Thomas J. Rothenberg & James H. Stock, 1992.
"Efficient Tests for an Autoregressive Unit Root,"
NBER Technical Working Papers
0130, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Elliott, Graham & Rothenberg, Thomas J & Stock, James H, 1996. "Efficient Tests for an Autoregressive Unit Root," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(4), pages 813-836, July.
- Perron, P., 1987.
"Test Consistency with Varying Sampling Frequency,"
Cahiers de recherche
8752, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
- Perron, Pierre, 1991. "Test Consistency with Varying Sampling Frequency," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(03), pages 341-368, September.
- Perron, P., 1989. "Test Consistency With Varying Sampling Frequency," Papers 345, Princeton, Department of Economics - Econometric Research Program.
- Gregory, Allan W. & Hansen, Bruce E., 1996.
"Residual-based tests for cointegration in models with regime shifts,"
Journal of Econometrics,
Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 99-126, January.
- Tom Doan, "undated". "GREGORYHANSEN: RATS procedure to implement Gregory-Hansen test for Cointegration with breaks," Statistical Software Components RTS00082, Boston College Department of Economics.
- Allan w. Gregory & Bruce E. Hansen, 1992. "residual-Based Tests for Cointegration in Models with Regime Shifts," Working Papers 862, Queen's University, Department of Economics.
- Tom Doan, "undated". "RATS programs to replicate results from Gregory and Hansen(1996) JOE article," Statistical Software Components RTZ00081, Boston College Department of Economics.
- Gregory, A.W. & Hansen, B.E., 1992. "Residual-Based Tests for Cointegration in Models with Regime Shifts," RCER Working Papers 335, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
- Peter C.B. Phillips, 1985.
"Understanding Spurious Regressions in Econometrics,"
Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers
757, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
- Phillips, P.C.B., 1986. "Understanding spurious regressions in econometrics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 311-340, December.
- Peter C.B. Phillips & Sam Ouliaris, 1987.
"Asymptotic Properties of Residual Based Tests for Cointegration,"
Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers
847R, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Jul 1988.
- Phillips, Peter C B & Ouliaris, S, 1990. "Asymptotic Properties of Residual Based Tests for Cointegration," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(1), pages 165-193, January.
- Mauro Costantini & Claudio Lupi, 2005. "Stochastic convergence among European economies," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(38), pages 1-17.
- Peter C. B. Phillips & Donggyu Sul, 2007.
"Transition Modeling and Econometric Convergence Tests,"
Econometric Society, vol. 75(6), pages 1771-1855, November.
- Peter C.B. Phillips & Donggyu Sul, 2007. "Transition Modeling and Econometric Convergence Tests," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1595, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:empeco:v:45:y:2013:i:2:p:715-733. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla)or (Rebekah McClure)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.


text:
Hotel Gangothri
Bangalore, Karnataka, India (BLR)
Check Rates for
Hotel Specials
Hotel Specials
Hotel + Flight from
Check Rates for
Package Specials
Package Specials
Check Rates for
Package Specials
Package Specials
Room & Rates
Deluxe Double Room
2 beds
Hide room details
Deluxe Double Room
2 beds
Hide room details
Standard Double Room
2 beds
Hide room details
Executive Double Room
2 beds
Hide room details
Hotel Gangothri
14, 80 Feet Rd, 6th Blk, Geetha Mansion<br/>Near Hanuman Temple, Kormangala, Bengaluru, India 560095
Make yourself at home in one of the 34 guestrooms. Dial-up Internet access (surcharge) keeps you connected, and cable programming is available for your entertainment. Conveniences include phones and desks, and you can also request irons/ironing boards.
Enjoy a meal at a restaurant, or stay in and take advantage of the hotel's 24-hour room service.
Business, Other Amenities
Featured amenities include a 24-hour front desk, laundry facilities, and a safe deposit box at the front desk.
Based on 22 reviews 0
Be the first person to review this property!
Hotel Gangothri Review of food only
Raghuraman C from Chennai
Submitted on 10-19-2016
I was here for a quick dinner, the restaurant is part of the hotel ( the restaurant carries a different name as Sri Sai Food Court). I asked for Onion Rava Dosa and it came in very quickly. The restaurant is very traditional style of layout and has a family dining room ! The dosa was good, it didn't upset my stomach on next day. The staff were extremely nice and polite.Overall hygiene was acceptable, although a dog on the steps could be an issue for some.
Hotel Gangothri Good one
Saumyasanta from Bhubaneswar, India
Submitted on 08-21-2016
Good one with affordable price. Clean and staffs are cooperative. You ll have other food option also and obviously it placed in a happening place. So you can roam arround in the weekend also. Nearby you ll get almost everything. So overall rating is good for this
Hotel Gangothri overall review
padhiarybhadrak from Bhadrak, India
Submitted on 08-18-2016
Quite good and affordable, staff behaviour is quite good, cleanliness is very good, rooms are in good condition, communication facility to reach anyplace of the city is very good. service and attending to customer is satisfactory.
Hotel Gangothri Overall good experience
Jenson410 from Thrissur, India
Submitted on 08-13-2016
We stayed for 2 days, rooms are good for this price, hotel staffs are cooperative and well behaved. Restaurant is vegetarian and nice food and good price also. Free Wifi is there in a specified area only. If you are looking for budget hotel and going with family i recommend this hotel.
Hotel Gangothri Good location, Budget Hotel
Aastha2015 from Bengaluru, India
Submitted on 08-03-2016
We had some work going in our home so i booked it in order to save my 2 month old baby from disturbance. The hotel location is great. You have Oasis mall, and 100s of restaurants nearby. The hotel was not expensive, room was clean, They have there own restaurant which is pretty decent. I would recommend staying here. ANd the service was good.
Hotel Gangothri Stay at Gangothri
kamsjune from Bengaluru (Bangalore), India
Submitted on 07-22-2016
Stayed at this hotel for a day as we were leaving to pilgrimage immd The place is located at Sony signal, Koramangala hence easy access They have a restaurant which serves good south Indian food The room was okay, this is typical budget hotel with very basic facilities
Hotel Gangothri decent
Avimanyu B from Warsaw, Poland
Submitted on 06-13-2016
pretty decent and well connected. the staff is helpful and the food is reasonably price. though they serve only vegetarian food, it's quite tasty. the masala dosa is recommended. taco bell and life style is just around the corner, at stone throw distance
Hotel Gangothri Location is the USP
Partha57 from Kolkata (Calcutta), India
Submitted on 06-13-2015
Of late, we have visited Bangalore and stayed in Hotel Gangothri on two occasions, two nights on each stay, in the first week of June. The hotel is conveniently located, very close to Sony World Signal crossing in Koramangala with many shopping malls and eateries nearby. The rooms are of average quality, though the Suite, in which we stayed on the second occasion as well as the services are very good. The Hotel also has a moderate restaurant on its ground floor.
Hotel Gangothri Visit to Bangalore
devaky2015 from Mumbai (Bombay), India
Submitted on 05-29-2015
I visited Bangalore and I stayed in Hotel Gangothri . What I liked most is the helpful attude of the staff. They arranged taxi and other arrangements for my travel. My room was okey, but the washroom is not up to my satisfaction, but it is okey.
Hotel Gangothri Reviewing the restaurant only
Jennifer M from Guruvayur, India
Submitted on 04-29-2015
A middle to low end place for vegetarian Indian food - fairly cheaply priced but clean and fresh food. The waiters are responsive and helpful. We were a 12 member group of moms, we had preordered and food arrived on time. When we ordered more food it arrived quickly as well. Overall happy with the experience. The ambience and place was nothing to write home about but its placed conveniently in the heart of the Sony world signal right next to the shopping areas like Oasis mall and others. If th... A middle to low end place for vegetarian Indian food - fairly cheaply priced but clean and fresh food. The waiters are responsive and helpful. We were a 12 member group of moms, we had preordered and food arrived on time. When we ordered more food it arrived quickly as well. Overall happy with the experience. The ambience and place was nothing to write home about but its placed conveniently in the heart of the Sony world signal right next to the shopping areas like Oasis mall and others. If the thought of fresh veggie food appeals to you look past the dimly lit and slightly dingy interiors- its worth a try. The food is a trifle on the spicy side for some - but this is South India, so, its not too remarkably so in my opinion. We ordered mostly North Indian things- assorted platter of rotis, a paneer curry, a plate of noodles, some manchurian type curries- a biriyani. Everything was palatable. Read more
Similar Hotels


text:
PQ cash on delivery option
This project received 4 bids from talented freelancers with an average bid price of $285 USD.Get free quotes for a project like this
Project Budget$30 - $250 USD
Total Bids4
Project Description
we have Wroupon application on Site and we need to add Cash on Delivery (COD) option to it, all other options and site has been built and completed, remaining COD only.
Skills Required
Looking to make some money?
- Set your budget and the timeframe
- Outline your proposal
- Get paid for your work
Hire Freelancers who also bid on this project
Looking for work?
Work on projects like this and make money from home!Sign Up Now
- Forbes
- The New York Times
- Time
- Wall Street Journal
- Times Online


text:
Black Hills trail runners
Just how many Jeepers on here are from, or frequent, the hills? I'm not talking the rock crawlers, just jeeps that go trail riding. Tired of the crawling and the (heavy) mudding and looking for a group that has fun but doesn't trash the snot out of their rig everytime out. Did that with the YJ but with the TJ I'm looking to take the expense down a few ($thousand$) notches, just got too expensive!! So how about it? How many on here?
That many huh? Alrighty... I'll look elsewhere.
|All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:15 PM.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.


text:
A number of Knesset members and ministers from the Likud party signed, Sunday, a letter to be sent to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in which they expressed their support for him and his decisions regarding the Iranian nuclear threat.
The letter, initiated by Member of Knesset Tzipi Hotovely, states, in part: "We express full confidence in the way a decision will be made on the Iranian issue and are sure that any decision will be made from a responsible perspective of the existential interests of the state of Israel."
Tags:Netanyahu, Likud Party, Polls, Iranian Nuclear Threat, letter, MKs, signatures


text:
Gaza and Israel begin to resume normal life after truce
23 November 2012 Last updated at 00:07 GMT
People in Gaza and southern Israel are starting to return to normal life following Wednesday's ceasefire between Israel and Hamas.
A number of rockets were fired from Gaza in the first few hours of the truce, but Israel did not respond.
Jeremy Bowen reports.


text:
Want to know how your Thanksgiving turkey ends up on your dining room table? Check out this animated trip to holiday slaughter, as experienced by a little boy who becomes trapped on the turkey murder conveyer belt. The message comes from the masters of subtlety at PETA, which wants you to see first-hand how the Fowl Farm is really the Foul Farm.
The cartoon becomes increasingly harder to stomach as it progresses, with full-on torture and mutilation of the little boy. But that's the point. If you wouldn't gnaw on the limbs of a small child and subject him to a series of unthinkable bodily assaults, then why would you do the same with a turkey? Especially PETA's turkeys, which not only know right from wrong but love to cuddle. So "Go Vegan." You'll sure want to after watching this.


text:
podcastingPodcasting is similar in nature to RSS, which allows subscribers to subscribe to a set of feeds to view syndicated Web site content. With podcasting however, you have a set of subscriptions that are checked regularly for updates and instead of reading the feeds on your computer screen, you listen to the new content on on your iPod (or like device).
The format used for podcasting is RSS 2.0 with enclosures. The podcasting enclosures refer to all binary (non-text) downloads. You can read the text description of the enclosure before downloading the item to view.
Stay up to date on the latest developments in Internet terminology with a free weekly newsletter from Webopedia. Join to subscribe now.
Like everything in technology, AI touches on so many other trends, like self-driving cars and automation, and Big Data and the Internet of Things... Read More »DevOp's Role in Application Security
As organizations rush to release new applications, security appears to be getting short shrift. DevSecOps is a new approach that holds promise. Read More »Slideshow: Easy Editorial SEO Tips to Boost Traffic
This slideshow reviews five easy on-page editorial SEO tips to help drive organic search engine traffic, including the page title, heading,... Read More »
Java is a high-level programming language. This guide describes the basics of Java, providing an overview of syntax, variables, data types and... Read More »Java Basics, Part 2
This second Study Guide describes the basics of Java, providing an overview of operators, modifiers and control Structures. Read More »The 7 Layers of the OSI Model
The Open System Interconnection (OSI) model defines a networking framework to implement protocols in seven layers. Use this handy guide to compare... Read More »


text:
News & Politics, Society & CultureFollow
From razor-sharp analysis of current events to the hottest debates in politics, science, philosophy and culture, Late Night Live puts you firmly in the big picture.
December 23rd, 2015
Episode 544 of 997 episodes
A look at the origins of the religious right in the US and Australia.
You'll need to sign in to write a comment.
Welcome to the daily audio workout for your head.


text:
Satire from The Onion: "President Obama announced today he will drastically scale back his agenda for America after a visit to a Denny's restaurant ... caused him to 'completely reconsider what our nation is capable of achieving.' "
The Onion:
Posted on Feb 21, 2017
A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion
Publisher Zuade Kaufman | Editor Robert Scheer
About Us | Contact Us | Advertise or Partner with Truthdig | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Comment Policy
© 2017 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.
Website development by Hop Studios


text:
It has come to our attention that there has been incorrect information posted on social media regarding a possible arrangement between Wilson School District (WSD) and Reading Area Community College (RACC). The following is intended to provide clarification and to address concerns.
Q: What is the arrangement being considered?
A: Under the proposed arrangement, RACC will use for evening instruction seven to nine classrooms and a small work area at Southern Middle School, starting with the 2017-18 school year.
Q: Will RACC classes occur during the school day?
A: No. RACC courses will occur in the evening, after Southern's instructional day has ended.
Q: Will RACC have access to all of Southern Middle School?
A: No. RACC will be restricted to the agreed classroom and work area. No further access will be available to RACC. RACC will have its own entrance and will provide security to monitor the area it is using.
Q: Why is this arrangement being considered?
A: This arrangement is expected to benefit both our District and our community. In addition to generating revenue for the District, it will deepen the relationship between RACC and WSD, with the potential to provide numerous opportunities for our children.
Q: What should I do if I have additional questions?
A: Contact Wilson's Superintendent of Schools at 610-670-0180, Ext. 1113 or at email@example.com.
PTO Fundraiser
Southern's PTO will be having a fundraiser at Austin's on February 23. Be sure to take this flier with you so 20% of you meal can be donated to the PTO. You can also just show the flier on your phone instead of having to print it out.
Wilson Families:
One of our school goals is to create a home and school partnerships which enhance our students' educational success. We believe that communication is an important part of creating this partnership. Mrs. Stoudt (our Director of Assessment, Data, & Analysis) has created a survey which will be used for a doctoral class to determine the best means to communicate to parents/guardians. Below is a link to a very brief communication survey. Your feedback will be used to assist us in planning more effective family and school communications. Thank you in advance for your input. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r
Recruiting Meeting
In an effort to educate our parents and athletes about athletic scholarships and the college recruiting process, Mr. Kaufmann (the district athletic director) has contracted Dynamite Sports to conduct an hour-long seminar entitled "Guiding the College-Bound Athlete" on Wednesday, February 22, 2017, at 7:30 p.m. in the HS Auditorium. The invitation for the event is attached here.
Girls on the Run
Girls on the Run is coming back to Southern! Registration will open on February 6. The program will start on March 6 and will run on Mondays and Wednesdays from 2:45-4:15pm.
Southern Newsletter
Check out the new newsletter from the Southern Counseling Department!
Wilson Lunch Menus
Just visit www.WilsonSD.org/Lunch to view and print the District's monthly lunch menus.
Lots of information for you!
Click here for information reguarding school closings and delays.


text:
This is a shot from an older project of mine. A rendering of a LED-backlit metal power button. Large version can be viewed on my website: http://olivervogel.net/work/article/28/power_button.html
keyboard shortcuts:
L or F like
post comment
Show and tell for designers
What are you working on? Dribbble is a community of designers sharing screenshots of their work, process, and projects.
Copyright © 2009–2017 Dribbble LLC. All screenshots © their respective owners. Shipped from Salem, Mass. USA.


text:
Browse other items in the Bedford collection from Wayside Furniture in the Akron, Cleveland, Canton, Medina, Youngstown, Ohio area.
You will be proud to add this night stand that is made in the USA to your bedside. Raised drawer fronts and bracket feet with an arch detail add easy sophistication for your master bedroom decor.
The Bedford Night Stand - 2 Drawers by Vaughan Bassett from Wayside Furniture. We proudly serve the Akron, Cleveland, Canton, Medina, Youngstown, Ohio area. Product availability may vary. Contact us for the most current availability on this product.
Furniture from this manufacturer is proudly made in America in Virginia and North Carolina. They are committed to manufacturing furniture in a responsible and environmentally friendly manner as a founder of the Sustainable Furnishings Council.
Casual elegance comes easy with the Bedford bedroom furniture collection. Each piece is made in America with sustainably harvested wood to continue longstanding traditions of American craftsmanship. Transitional style bedroom storage pieces mix with your choice of a slat poster bed or more contemporary upholstered bed with low-profile footboard.
The Bedford collection is a great option if you are looking for Transitional furniture in the Akron, Cleveland, Canton, Medina, Youngstown, Ohio area.
These images are representative of this group as a whole and may differ from this item.
This item has been tagged as: Nightstand, Night Stand, Commode, Bedroom Nightstand, Bedroom End Table, Accent Table, Accent Cabinet, Bedroom Storage, Bedroom Magazine Stand, Night Table, Small End Table, Night Stand with Drawers, Nightstand with Pull-Out Shelf, Night Cabinet, Bedside Table, Bedside Nightstand, Bedside Commode, Door Nightstand, Bachelors Chest
Nothing on this page may be copied or reproduced without explicit permission.
Drag anItem Here
To start a new blank room plan, enter the desired room dimensions below and click Create Room.
To request a new password, enter your username or e-mail address and click submit. A new password will automatically be emailed to you.
If you are still having trouble logging on after receiving your new password, please email email@example.com