1. FOR EDUCATION SFR - 1conf99-ses5-post Session V: Decision Making Process 2nd Asha for Education Conference 1999 Asha has more chapters now than 2 years ago We have many more activities on a national scale than ever before As a result, our current decision making process is becoming inadequate An informal survey was conducted from Mar-Apr 1999. Four key concerns emerged -some volunteers feel excluded from national level decisions -some feel too many decisions are left to them to make -others feel that although the current system is adequate but “something” is missing -almost everyone agreed that the current voting process is cumbersome We need to improve the current decision making process to address these concerns.

2. FOR EDUCATION SFR - 2conf99-ses5-post 2nd Asha for Education Conference 1999 Current Process Structure Coordinator Treasurer (Informal Record Keeping) Focus groups Volunteers ~10-20 Process (Most Chapters) Clear Regular Meetings Focus group presentations Focus groups have decision making power Coordinator & long-term members provide guidance On issues where consensus cannot be reached, voting is conducted to decide issue Chapter LevelNational Level Structure President Treasurer Secretary Some Focus Groups, some ad-hoc groups Active Volunteers ~30-40 Executive Committee (=coord of each chapter) Process Murky No Meetings Erratic emails to ashawide Groups & Teams have limited power President & long-term members provide guidance but their voice is often drowned (e.g. Sandeep) All issues require time-consuming voting process

3. FOR EDUCATION SFR - 3conf99-ses5-post 2nd Asha for Education Conference 1999 Proposed Change Four pronged approach: Modified Structure (official posts, responsibilities, accountability, etc.) Focus Groups at the national level (for day to day decisions and tasks) EC Voting Process (quick and decisive) NCC: National Coordination Committee (guide consensus building)

4. FOR EDUCATION SFR - 4conf99-ses5-post 2nd Asha for Education Conference 1999 Structure of Asha President, Secretary, Treasurer -clearly identify responsibilities in writing Chapters -clearly identify responsibilities at the national level -punitive clause for non-responsive chapters (to be determined by focus group) Executive Committee -Current:  coordinators of all chapters (~30)  Ashawide Treasurer -Proposed:  coordinators of all chapters (~30)  President  Secretary  Ashawide Treasurer  Board of Directors Proposal at the ConferenceRecommendation of Conference Attendees Yes. -Detailed proposal to be presented Ashawide for everyone’s feedback (owner: Richa) Yes. -Detailed proposal to be presented Ashawide for everyone’s feedback (owner: Richa) Modified: Only chapters should have a vote, no- one else. The President should have tie-breaker vote only. -Detailed proposal to be presented Ashawide for everyone’s feedback (owner: Richa)

5. FOR EDUCATION SFR - 5conf99-ses5-post 2nd Asha for Education Conference 1999 Focus Groups Example: at a chapter, project selection is handled by project focus group -anyone interested can join -rest of chapter trusts and supports the decisions of the project focus group Proposal: We should use the same system at the national scale. -e.g. the national project focus group should decide WAH project selection rather than a voting process. “Day-to-day” operations can be handled by focus groups just as at the chapter level, with focus groups having some decision making authority Proposal at the ConferenceRecommendation of Conference Attendees Those present at the session agreed in principle with the proposal. A focus group should be formed to hash out outstanding issues of accountability and transparent process. A proposal should be presented to Ashawide for feedback and voting (owner: Prithvi).

6. FOR EDUCATION SFR - 6conf99-ses5-post 2nd Asha for Education Conference 1999 Executive Committee Current Situation: Voting takes forever and is cumbersome. Need improved implementation (result of survey) -Faster process -regular & scheduled just like chapter meetings (once every 3 months?) Proposal: If focus groups run day-to-day affairs (e.g. WAH project selection), minimal voting would be needed. Also, the process could be streamlined through the web. Proposal at the ConferenceRecommendation of Conference Attendees Those present at the session agreed in principle with the proposal, but wanted to ensure that proper checks and balances are included in the process. The proposal should be presented to ashawide for feedback and voting (owner: Richa)

7. FOR EDUCATION SFR - 7conf99-ses5-post 2nd Asha for Education Conference 1999 National Coordinating Committee Why? -be the wisdom of Asha -provide guidance on key issues if needed (note: these are suggestions, not decisions) Who? (needs to be give more thought) -President -Secretary -Treasurer -coordinators of 4 elected chapters (elected every 2 yrs by EC) -3 long-time elected members (elected every 5 yrs by EC) Note: EC is the final authority on all matters. On any given open issue, until the EC makes the decisions through deliberated voting, the NCC may be used to identify the voice of Asha. Proposal at the ConferenceRecommendation of Conference Attendees Not needed at this time.