Skip To ContentSkip To Content
    Community Engagement Toolkit Information Technology Advisory Committee Selection
    Posted on 02/01/2019

    Initial Planning

     

    What is the problem to solve? What is the decision to be made?

    Establishment of Information Technology Advisory Committee (ITAC)

     

    Situation Analysis / SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats)

     

    Strengths: Increased collaboration and transparency between the Department of Technology Services and community stakeholders.

     

    Weaknesses:  Potential delays of project implementation, ability to get representative group

     

    Opportunities: Planning and prioritization of current and future information and education technology projects. Threats: Projects delayed, Building, Excellence (BEX V) levy funding, harnessing data to address strategic goals.

    How will the final decision be made and who will make it?

    The School Board is scheduled to approve iTAC on April 4, 2018. Eighteen members total will make up the committee consisting of community members and employee organization members with the final selection by the Board Sponsor.

     

    All recommendations and decisions of the committee shall be made either by consensus or by voting process with the committee reporting directly to the Seattle School Board.

     

    Which stakeholders will be impacted and how might they be impacted?

     

    Stakeholder

    Category of Impact

    Potential Impact

    Staff

    Primary

    Time and resources

    Students

    Primary

    Addition of new technology

    Community Based Organizations

    Secondary

    Increased engagement

    Parents

    Primary

    Student resource allocation

    Business Community

    Secondary

    College & Career Ready citizens

     

    What level of engagement do you think stakeholders will expect?

     

    Given the decision-making process, how can stakeholders (e.g., families, students, community partners) influence the decision or elements of the decision?

    Stakeholders will be on the committee, thus making their input and feedback pivotal. The committee is being established to leverage the staff’s and community's expertise and background with the goal of ensuring every student is provided equitable access to technology.


    What do you hope to achieve by involving stakeholders in the decision-making process?

    The hope is to establish an advisory committee made up of staff, and community stakeholders who together can plan and prioritize projects and initiatives related to Technology.

     

    What positive or negative impact could this decision have on students of color, students experiencing poverty, ELL students, or students receiving individualized education supports?

    Please refer to the attached Racial Equity Toolkit.

     

    Do you have enough time and a supporting budget for authentic community engagement?

    Yes.


    Community Engagement Level

    Internal Public Expectations Worksheet

     

     

    Assessment Questions

    Very Low

     

    Low

     

    Moderate

     

    High

     

    Very High

    What is the legally required level of stakeholder participation?

    x

     

     

     

     

    How much interest have stakeholders expressed regarding this decision/project?

     

     

     

    x

     

     

    What level of influence do stakeholders have on the final decision?

     

     

     

     

     

    x

    What is the likelihood that decision makers will fully consider stakeholder input?

     

     

     

     

    x

     

    How likely is it that resources will be available to support level 2 or 3 engagement?

     

     

     

     

     

    x

    Is there funding to implement what stakeholders might want?

     

     

     

    x

     

    What is the anticipated level of controversy if we don’t engage our stakeholders?

     

     

     

     

    x

    How likely is it that new information will come to light during community engagement?

     

     

     

     

    x

     

    Scoring: Total the number of checks in each column

     

    1

     

    0

     

    1

     

    3

     

    3

    Multiply the total of checks in each column by the weighting in each column

     

    X1

     

    X2

     

    X3

     

    X4

     

    X5

    Enter result for each column

     

    1

     

    0

     

    3

     

    12

     

    15

     

    Add the weighted, column scores together and enter in box to the right.

    TOTAL SCORE: 31

    Divide the total by the number of questions

    /8

    Enter the result in the final score in the box to the right.

    FINAL INTERNAL EXPECATION SCORE: 4


    Community Engagement Level

    External Public Expectations Worksheet

     

     

    Assessment Questions

     

    Very Low

     

    Low

     

    Moderate

     

    High

     

    Very High

    What is the probable level of difficulty in addressing the problem/decision?

     

     

     

    x

     

     

    What is the potential for public outrage related to the project?

     

     

    x

     

     

     

    How important are the potential impacts on the community?

     

     

     

     

     

    x

    How much do stakeholders care about the problem/decision to be addressed and the decision to be made?

     

     

     

     

    x

     

    What degree of participation does the public appear to want?

     

     

     

     

    x

     

    Scoring: Total the number of checks in each column

     

    0

     

    1

     

    1

     

    2

     

    1

    Multiply the total of checks in each column by the weighting in each column

     

    X1

     

    X2

     

    X3

     

    X4

     

    X5

    Enter result for each column

     

    0

     

    2

     

    3

     

    8

     

    5

    Add the weighted, column scores together and enter in box to the right.

    TOTAL SCORE: 18

    Divide the total by the number of questions

    /5

    Enter the result in the final score in the box to the right.

    FINAL EXTERNAL EXPECATION SCORE: 4


    Community Engagement Level

    SPS Community Engagement Expectation Summary

    Using the summary document, finalize the level of community engagement most appropriate for the decision to be made. Please see the community engagement framework on page 12 and 13 that describes engagement tiers and public promises for each tier of the framework.

     

    Expectations of the Key Participants

    Inform

    Consult/Involve

    Collaborate

    What tier is appropriate based on external expectations?

     

     

     

    X

    What tier is appropriate based on internal expectations?

     

     

     

    X

    Based on your racial equity analysis (see the SPS Racial Equity tool) or related question in Step 1 above what Tier seems appropriate?

     

     

     

     

    X

     

    Based on the evaluation of external and internal expectations and analysis using the race and equity tool, what tier of engagement would you recommend?

    Collaborate.

    Why?

    In order for this advisory committee to be successful, active engagement, partnership and collaboration needs to happen. The committee will be made up of community based members who will influence and guide the Department of Technology Service's decisions regarding technology purchasing, funding, etc.

     

    Are there some benefits and opportunities for some elements of the decision process to be at a higher tier? If so, what might they be? What would be the benefit? Please keep in mind that for some projects/initiatives multiple decisions need to be made. The level of engagement of each decision may be different.

     

    Scale

    1-2          Indicates very low to low; Tier recommendation: at least Tier 1, inform

    3-4          Indicates low to moderate; Tier recommendation: at least Tier 2, consult/involve

    4-5          Indicates high to very high; Tier recommendation: Tier 3, involve, consider opportunities to collaborate (e.g. Taskforce, workgroup, advisory committee)

     

    N/A

    Engagement Objective:


    SPS ENGAGEMENT PLAN and TIMELINE

    To recruit eight community members and one student and nine staff members who represent the community at large in decision making and recommendations to the School Board regarding technology funding and project implementation.

    Decision to make:    Select the members

    Final Decision Maker:  Rick Burke, School Board Director

    Recommended Level(s) of Engagement:

    Tier 3, Collaborate

    Stakeholders/Audience:

    Students, Community Based Organizations (CBO's), families/guardians, DoTS staff, business and community

    Key Questions/Messages: (what input/feedback do you want from the community? What 2-3 messages do you need to share)

    Engagement Tier

    Stakeholder/

    Audience

    Action/Tactic

    How are you reaching underrepresented stakeholders? How are you reaching the most impacted community members?

    Tool

    Associated Budget

    Measure/Outcomes

    Deliverable Date

    Person Responsible

    3

    CBO's

    CIO school visits, public webpage, etc. School Levy Meetings Community Meetings

    Friday Memo (3/23/18)

    NewsBrief

    BEX V Community Meetings

     

    N/A (staff time)

    Member applications, increased interest around how SPS is using technology and future proposed initiatives and programs

    Ongoing

     

    4/2/18 – Aki Kurose

    4/3/18 – Madison

    Upcoming:

    4/23/18 – Seattle World School

    4/24/18 – Jane Addams

    4/26/18 – Salmon Bay

    CIO, DoTS Admins

    3

    Families

    FAQ's, demonstrations,

    translated copies of both the charge and application available online,

    School Levies Community Meetings

    DoTS homepage quarterly Program Report,

    Facebook, Twitter, email to parents (4/5/18)

    Charge and application translated in Spanish, Somali Chinese and Vietnamese

    BEX V Community Meetings

    N/A (staff time)

    General funds used for translation costs.

    Member applications, general interest in future Technology initiatives

     

    Ongoing

     

    Translated copies available online 4/24/18

    4/2/18 – Aki Kurose

    4/3/18 – Madison

    Upcoming:

    4/23/18 – Seattle World School

    4/24/18 – Jane Addams

    4/26/18 – Salmon Bay

    CIO, DoTS Admins School Board, Communications Dept. ELL Dept.

     

    3

    Staff

    Existing communication channels

    SLC (3/22/18), (4/19/19 Upcoming)

    News Brief (3/21/18)

    MySPS posting (4/5/18)

    Tuesday Tech Tip (3/29/18)

    N/A (staff time)

    Member applications, increased awareness among teachers who know of student’s that are interested in the direction of the District’s technology vision.

    Ongoing

    CIO, DoTS Mgmt, Instructional Support resource teachers

    3

    Union Leaders

    CIO direct contact

    Email (3/21/18)

    N/A (staff time)

    Member applications

    Ongoing

    CIO

    3

    Public at large

    Seattle PTSA direct contact

    Translated copies of both the charge and application available online

    School Levies Community Meetings

    Technology Access Foundation (TAF)

    Seattle School Board Meetings

    Principal Communicator (to relay to their communities)

    Board Members relaying message

    Email (3/29/18)

    Charge and application translated in Spanish, Somali Chinese and Vietnamese

    BEX V Community Meetings

    CIO email to Trish Millines Dziko, Executive Director of TAF and Troy Hilton, Education Technology Program Manager, TAF.

    Executive Committee – 3/15/18

    School Board Introduction – 3/21/18

    School Board Action – 4/4/18

    N/A (staff time)

    General funds used for translation costs.

    Member applications, increased interest from groups not directly involved with SPS but want to advise on funding, etc. Increased presence of individuals with backgrounds in technology and education.

    Ongoing

    DoTS, Principal Project Manager, CIO, Seattle School Board Directors

    3

    City of Seattle

    CIO membership to City of Seattle Community Technology Advisory Board (CTAB)

    CIO Meeting with City’s Education and Youth Policy Advisor, Chris Alejano

    In person 3/13/18 and 4/11/18

    In person 4/9/18

     

    N/A (staff time)

    City representation on committee, word of mouth to general public that may not have direct connection to SPS.

    Ongoing

    CIO

    3

    Area Businesses

    Contact and/or meet with area businesses including:

    Amazon, Microsoft, F5, UW, T-Mobile

    Email, talk, meet

    N/A staff time

    Member applications, general interest in future Technology initiatives

     

    Ongoing

     

    CIO, DoTS