1. COSEE National Network Meeting, Apr. 6, 2007 A. deCharon, R. Fortner, V. Robigou COSEE Network Operating Agreement - Governance Review April 2007 This review is representative of the state of the network as of the first quarter of 2007. It reflects the natural evolution of a large experimental partnership among ten centers (dozens of individuals) located throughout the U.S. and in various stages of funding, programs implementation, and growth.

2. Network Needs - Today for a better Tomorrow Well-structured Leadership - clear decision-making path - Executive Committee? - Executive director ? - National COSEE Council? - National Advisory Board? - Central Coordinating Office? ANDEffective Communication - supportive of network - Web? - Briefing Books? - Blackboard? - Listserv, Email? - Meetings? (Network, Council, Others) ANDUnifying Network Themes - unifying projects - Themes that spark the imagination & compel centers to work together - They are the engine, the driver of the network efforts - They should drive the choice of leadership, choice of projects, choice of meetings, etc. - They should be informed by “world-need” evaluation (informed by non-COSEE world’s needs and centers’ approaches, successes and challenges)

3. Today's apparent COSEE governance model... Governance The act of affecting government and monitoring (through policy) the long- term strategy and direction of an organization. In general, governance comprises the traditions, institutions and processes that determine how power is exercised, how citizens are given a voice, and how decisions are made on issues of public concern. [From the Institute of Governance]

4. CENTER REPRESENTATION & WEB

5. NCC: One representative (vote) per Center works well Web: Clear functions but not workable solution for pro-active, vibrant web site - Suggestion? Outsource to a sub-committee formed by center members NCC: One representative (vote) per Center works well Web: Clear functions but not workable solution for pro-active, vibrant web site - Suggestion? Outsource to a sub-committee formed by center members

6. EVALUATION & CCO FUNDING

7. Evaluation: Results have yet to inform next steps for network - Suggestion? Find ways to use internal & external evaluation to drive activities Evaluation: Results have yet to inform next steps for network - Suggestion? Find ways to use internal & external evaluation to drive activities

8. NATIONAL ADVISORY BOARD

9. NAB: Not structured to positively inform network nor vice-versa - Suggestion? Partial representation of Centers' Advisory Boards NAB: Not structured to positively inform network nor vice-versa - Suggestion? Partial representation of Centers' Advisory Boards

10. NETWORK MEETINGS & REPORTING

11. Meetings and Reporting (communication): Number of meetings drive activities instead of vice-versa; Briefing books & blackboard are passive (vs. pro-active) - Suggestion? Vote on minutes, make available on web & searchable (to anyone)? Meetings and Reporting (communication): Number of meetings drive activities instead of vice-versa; Briefing books & blackboard are passive (vs. pro-active) - Suggestion? Vote on minutes, make available on web & searchable (to anyone)?

12. MEETING AGENDA & EXEC. COMMITTEE

13. Executive Committee (ExCom): Central role but barely defined ED & CCO: Ties to ExCom not clear; NCC-ED relationship needs definition - Suggestion? Functions / funding distributed & decentralized through sub committees (populated by network members) Executive Committee (ExCom): Central role but barely defined ED & CCO: Ties to ExCom not clear; NCC-ED relationship needs definition - Suggestion? Functions / funding distributed & decentralized through sub committees (populated by network members)

14. "UNIFYING PROJECTS"

15. Unifying Themes-Projects: First project had clear connections to the network; Subsequent themes created more work but less feedback into the system - Suggestion? Find ways to restructure governance so it is more "theme-driven" Unifying Themes-Projects: First project had clear connections to the network; Subsequent themes created more work but less feedback into the system - Suggestion? Find ways to restructure governance so it is more "theme-driven"

16. POLICY & FUNDING IMPACTS

17. Changes & opportunities: No systematic way of assessing impacts -Suggestion? Conduct some sort of cost-benefit analysis on case-by-case basis. Over the long run, does the network need someone to work on fundraising/sustainability? Changes & opportunities: No systematic way of assessing impacts -Suggestion? Conduct some sort of cost-benefit analysis on case-by-case basis. Over the long run, does the network need someone to work on fundraising/sustainability?

18. Governance The act of affecting government and monitoring (through policy) the long- term strategy and direction of an organization. In general, governance comprises the traditions, institutions and processes that determine how power is exercised, how citizens are given a voice, and how decisions are made on issues of public concern. [From the Institute of Governance] REMEMBER: The strength of COSEE is in its Centers Dedicated, innovative individuals could better “cross-fertilize” and enhance the network (with a funding structure for support) Many network efforts are volunteer-based. What are we willing to invest in to move the network forward?

19. Questions and Next Steps? This review is a preliminary compilation of issues/concerns as a framework for discussion of governance. Governance is complex: issues, entities, and functions are overlapping and intersecting. How can we reconcile all these issues with a reconfigured governance? Does reconfiguration of governance help COSEE become more flexible and responsive to the needs of the outside world? How does reconfiguring governance facilitate direction of the COSEE network's long-term strategy? Blueprint is one step forward but is it time to revisit the network long-term strategy?