News & Blogs Category: From the Foundation Team

In just a few days, Jewish philanthropists, foundation professionals and communal leaders will join together in Atlanta at the Jewish Funders Network (JFN) 2017 conference. We will learn, question, and explore a range of topics of import to our collective work.  For our foundations—the Jim Joseph Foundation and William Davidson Foundation—JFN 2017 will provide a special opportunity to share and discuss just-released findings from Smart Money: Recommendations for an Educational Technology and Digital Engagement Investment Strategy, a new report based on research conducted by Lewis J. Bernstein and Associates this past year.

Our foundations chose to commission this study to address a core set of questions that feel pertinent in a world where technology has become such a prevalent part of our daily lives. How are new technological developments affecting learning—and Jewish learning in particular? How might funders develop the expertise to invest strategically in new tools, and in the people developing those tools, to advance our Jewish educational missions?

While we knew that significant opportunities existed for Jewish education in this space, we also knew there was much that we simply did not know. So as we decided to co-invest in research about educational technology and digital engagement, we sought to keep our minds open to new ideas. We were eager to learn from the experts.

Initially, we intended this report to be solely for our foundations’ internal purposes. However, after reviewing it, we understood that the learnings are highly relevant to others in the field: funders, practitioners, community leaders and anyone interested in how tools of Ed Tech could advance cultural and religious learning and engagement.

The report offers fascinating insights that begin to answer the big questions with which we wrestle. And it brings to the fore new questions as well. Divided into two sections, Smart Money first includes a set of recommendations for funders to consider, such as investment strategies, priorities, different structures for collaborations, and more. The second section provides a landscape analysis of educational technology and digital engagement tools and trends—both secular and Jewish. We find this section to be of particular interest, as it showcases the field’s efforts to date, the vast room for growth, and successful models from the secular world that we could adapt to Jewish contexts. As a whole, we believe Smart Money is a substantive starting point to explore this space and to build collaborations around shared interests to leverage these new tools to their fullest.

To that end, we are excited to release this report in coordination with Jewish Funders Network. We are pleased that JFN leadership has commissioned a series of white papers that will probe deeper into different topics raised in the report. This will stimulate additional conversation about the learnings. Over the course of the next few weeks, we all will have the opportunity to read some of those papers as they are unveiled in eJewishPhilanthropy.

Additionally, our partners at JFN are taking the leading role in developing a website to house this report and related white papers, and to keep the field updated on developments and collaborations around educational technology and digital engagement as they emerge. We look forward to sharing the website when it is live.

Finally, just as the findings and recommendations in Smart Money already have spurred us to advance this conversation publicly, we hope they also inspire you to consider dedicating time and resources to learn more and experiment with these ideas. We hope that together we can find new ways to use these powerful tools to help advance our collective work within the Jewish community and beyond.

Kari Alterman is Senior Program Officer of Jewish Life and Continuity at the William Davidson Foundation. Josh Miller is Program Director at the Jim Joseph Foundation. Read Smart Money: Recommendations for an Educational Technology and Digital Engagement Investment Strategy

originally appeared in eJewishPhilanthropy 

“It’s an incubator. All of it is a risk.” – Michele Friedman, Foundation for Jewish Camp, Director of New Camp Initiatives

When the Jim Joseph Foundation made a $10 million grant to the Foundation for Jewish Camp (FJC) in 2007 to launch the Specialty Camp Incubator, the field of Jewish camping was in a vastly different place than it is today. Jewish specialty camping was in its infancy, with only a smattering of specialty programs embedded in traditional Jewish overnight camps. While incubators were becoming a popular method to kick-start new ventures both in and out of the Jewish world, incubating a cohort of new camps was new to the field of camping writ large, let alone to FJC.

As a new foundation just beginning its relationship with FJC, the Jim Joseph Foundation challenged FJC for a “bold idea.” With a goal of increasing the number of children attending Jewish overnight camp, especially from new markets, and seeing the growing popularity of both incubators and secular specialty camps, FJC had its idea – the Specialty Camp Incubator. Launching five new Jewish specialty camps just two years later—through the still unfamiliar incubator process—was bold. It was big. It was risky. Nine years later, this grant remains one of the riskiest grants the Foundation has made.

Yet, by all accounts, Incubator I and Incubator II were, and continue to be, an overwhelming success. Nine camps were launched. Over 5,000 campers, and counting, have been reached. Enrollment increases summer after summer. Camps attract new campers instead of cannibalizing existing Jewish camps, and retain campers in Jewish camping for longer periods of times. Much of this success can be attributed to a few key decisions made during Incubators I and II, which effectively mitigated the risk of an inherently risky grant, including:

Prioritization of Data:

As with nearly all Foundation grants, evaluation and data collection were integral parts of the early work of the Incubator. They remain a valuable tool to understand where camps are succeeding and where additional work is needed. In 2008, FJC retained Informing Change to conduct a formative and summative evaluation of the Incubator. Informing Change also evaluated Incubator II and will evaluate Incubator III (the importance of continuity is discussed later). Prioritizing data collection benefited the Incubator in a few meaningful ways:

• Strengthened the Incubator: the early evaluation work focused on the Incubator model itself, allowing the Incubator team to continually strengthen and refine its approach.
• Helped camps focus their work: the evaluation explored the operational specifics of each camp, providing customized data to inform individual decisions.
• Confirmed that the goals and outcomes were being met: Among many positive findings, data showed that enrollment grew 138% from the first to fourth summer, camper retention was over 50%, more than 90% of campers and parents recommended camp to a friend, and camps generated positive changes in camper’s attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors about Jewish life.
• Assisted fundraising: having a proven model that effectively met its goals and outcomes helped fundraise both at the national level—The AVI CHAI Foundation provided funding for Incubators II and III—and at the local level for each individual camp.

Continuity of Staff:

Almost unheard of today, the Incubator team has remained completely intact since the program began in 2007. Michele Friedman is the Program Director, Jay Frankel is the Field Operations Director, Adam Weiss is the Financial Consultant, and Michelle Shapiro Abraham is the Jewish Education Consultant. Informing Change is the evaluator. In fact, the only turnover has been here at the Jim Joseph Foundation! Nine years of continuity has afforded the Incubator a great opportunity to mitigate risk along the way. Staff continuity results in deep knowledge about how each individual operates in the workplace. Trust is built. Strengths and personalities are known with responsibilities tailored accordingly. Learning curves reduce. Institutional knowledge remains. Past experience informs future decisions. Mistakes are not repeated. And challenges and changes that occur throughout the grant period are more easily overcome.

Sure, organizations can manage staff turnover. The Incubator would have too. However, over time, the Incubator became a less risky proposition because of the continuous, dedicated, and expert staff.

Staying Flexible:

Despite the proven record of success, the Incubator team did not rest on its laurels. This was not only because of its never-satisfied mentality, but also because it recognized that in an ever-changing field, it needed to change its approach over time too. For example, initially the Incubator team created the program design and drafted curriculum; each camp then proceeded through the process in roughly the same way. However, the Incubator team quickly realized that each camp and its director is unique, bringing different strengths and requiring different support. It adjusted its approach accordingly to assist directors through the process in a way that made sense to them and their needs. This played out in numerous ways over the course of the Incubator. A few examples include:

• At the cohort level, Incubator I directors brought more of a Jewish education background and required more support in launching and operating a business. Incubator II directors had the opposite background and need.
• Some camps had challenges with site identification and lease negotiations. Some struggled with board development and fundraising. Others still with Jewish programming. The Incubator team offered fully customized support based on each unique need.
• Incubator II initially employed two seasoned camp directors to serve as mentors for the Incubator camps. The Incubator team quickly added two more, recognizing the need for a one on one match to best serve the director and the camp’s specialty.

What works one day might not work the next. What works for one camp director might not be what another one needs. It would have been easy to recognize the early success and put the Incubator into autopilot. Yet this would have made the Incubator model a riskier proposition as the field evolved and new challenges emerged.

Big risks can lead to significant outcomes—either negative or positive. The Specialty Camp Incubator undoubtedly is the latter. Critically, acknowledging these risks at the beginning of a grant helps funders and grantees mitigate them and increases the likelihood of a positive outcome.

How do we as Jews authentically tell our stories to others and ourselves? How do we as Jews bring the relevance and meaning of Judaism—whatever that may mean to you—in our lives? How do we as Jews show up? These are just a few of the questions I have been asking myself, sometimes more explicitly, sometimes less, over the last few years. The noted novelist and writer, Zora Neale Hurston said, “There are years that ask questions, and years that answer.” The answers to some of these questions have come to me in the form of practice and process; and in both personal and professional ways.

Personally, I was privileged to attend my first Moishe House Meditation Retreat in Southern California during the week between Christmas and New Year’s. There were roughly 35 other 20 and 30 somethings who showed up from across North America and across Jewish spiritual practice. Most of the retreat was held for silent meditation, a practice with which I had no experience and had never thought I would. The first half day was disorienting. Not talking, not even really making eye contact with others, essentially being in my own space with no outlet save for my own self and my thoughts led me to a place of restlessness. I ate dinner looking down at my food, focused on the act of eating and not any social conversation starter. I walked by people without making eye contact. I sat next to folks to whom I did not speak. And then gradually I came to a different place; a place more akin to peace and contentment with the rumblings in my head. Similar to a fast, I experienced a deep opening of space in myself that led me to self-discovery, contentment, and some challenge.

The Jim Joseph Foundation, over the last number of months, has been on an exploratory path, a process to determine how to embed diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) into both the internal and external work of the Foundation. Why do this? There are a multitude of reasons; perhaps, the most pre-eminent among them however, comes back to this question of authenticity and relevance. How does the Jim Joseph Foundation create and imbue for its beneficiaries places and opportunities for authenticity and relevancy as Jews? As a professional staff we are increasingly looking to our grantee partners—Hillel, Repair the World, Moishe House, Hazon, to name just a few—for their insight, their wisdom, and their expertise on this subject. Further, we are looking to others in the Jewish world who may not be present beneficiaries or partners for their wisdom and expertise, as well, knowing that the best place for the Foundation at this point is to be situated in a place of listening and learning.

Practice and Process. It is no surprise that that the personal and the professional collided for me at the Moishe House Meditation Retreat. What I came away with from this experience was an appreciation—a visceral understanding—of how the personal informs the professional and how a Jewish practice can shape and sharpen the contours and boundaries of a Jewish process.  It is what is internal—whether personally in one’s self or professionally in one’s organization—that determines the path forward. The Foundation is encouraged to be doing this internal work over the next number of months to learn more about DEI. Throughout this process, the Foundation will continue to be informed by a humble practice of listening and learning to lead to action as we continue to write our story as an organization, and help others’ to write theirs.

As we wade into uncharted waters as a country, I want to try and step back just a bit to explore what I believe is an especially essential quality for organizations and organizational leaders within our field to exhibit at this moment: genuine leadership. I also want to offer some thoughts about the role and responsibility of Jewish education in fostering and supporting this leadership.

Over the last few months, many organizational heads, education leaders, educators, and yes, funders, have been asked in various ways to help make sense of the Presidential election, to formulate “a response,” and to devise some type of path forward about which all can feel positive.

Already, in the words written above, I have stepped into a challenging aspect of leadership within our community right now. Those words inherently create a narrative and paint a picture of our community with an exceedingly broad brush: “We are shocked at the results of the election.” “We can’t make sense of it.” “We need to push back.” These words to a certain degree exclude anyone who correctly predicted the election, supports the positions of President Trump, and can explain in no uncertain terms why and how he won.

When we think about civil discourse, it is easy to fall into a trap of speaking civilly only to people with whom we largely agree. Sure there may be differences here and there, but people who share basic principles and beliefs often remain civil if disagreements arise within that context. Step out of that boundary, however, and civility becomes a much more challenging proposition.

Yet, the interactions outside of that boundary are not just important—and in some cases inevitable—but also can be deeply rewarding. Eric Fingerhut, President and CEO of Hillel International, recently reflected that during his time in the Ohio Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives some of his “most lasting moments of personal growth and satisfaction were when I got to know someone who came from a very different background and perspective than me, and when I built a relationship of mutual respect with that colleague.” Eric’s reflections are part of a larger piece about the lessons we can glean today from the story of the debate between the Schools of Hillel and Shamai over a point of halakha—a story I too believe offers important insights about how and why to engage in conversations those with whom we disagree.

Yet while Hillel and Shamai argued their point for three years (and others argued it on their behalf for generations), it seems that our community today cannot argue for three minutes without resorting to anger and divisive behavior. Why?

Partly because in conversations that occur both inside and outside of our community, every single word matters; every framing of a conversation matters; every interaction is an opportunity for judgment or misjudgment. We all know that discussing the election, or Israel, or numerous other current issues can spark not just heated arguments, but tangible—I would argue deeply negative—outcomes. People may stop going to Jewish learning experiences, or stop financially supporting community organizations, because of a stance an individual or organization did or did not take about a single issue.

Genuine leadership, now more than ever, must account for these sensitivities. Let’s not presume to know someone’s beliefs or feelings until she or he tells us. Genuine leadership presumes that audiences are savvy enough to make up their own minds about their beliefs, and how they want to act on them. It may be especially difficult for community leaders to rein in themselves when an issue hits at their heart. But we see that the strength and civility of our community depends on an even keel approach, in which organizations offer resources and engagement opportunities that acknowledge a variety of perspectives on issues.

For the last couple of weeks, the Foundation has reached out to numerous grantees to learn more about their on-the-ground realities and efforts around civil discourse and social justice. In this first of a two part blog series, I want share a few quick examples and note some common themes around the work of grantees to promote civil discourse and, relatedly, civic engagement.

First, organizations exhibit genuine leadership by fostering civil discourse as a pathway to relationship building and civic engagement, as determined by their audiences.

All of the independent communities that comprise the Jewish Emergent Network—seven non-denominationally affiliated Jewish communities—have initiatives underway that promote civil discourse in some way. But what’s especially noteworthy is that the JEN communities’ leadership has made concerted efforts to bring together people of differing opinions and perspectives on issues and to build bridges to outside communities.

BBYO, too, offers another substantial example of genuine leadership. In the fall, it turned the focus of its ongoing “gamechangers” campaign—which offers teens a framework for creating positive change—to civic engagement. Teens committed to learn about the election and educate themselves on relevant topics of their choosing. 75 BBYO chapters used resource guides (created in partnership with Repair the World) to program around these topics. As a nonpartisan organization, BBYO helps teens better understand issues and formulate their own opinions rather than take a stance on a side of an issue. Again, no judgments and no preconditions about what constitutes worthwhile civic engagement.

Second, the Foundation also learned how organizations are deftly balancing the need for reactive and proactive efforts in the community. As a starting point, genuine leadership can entail just “being there and being a resource.”

Groups like Keshet, for example, had an influx of calls and emails from parents and youth immediately after the election. They asked questions like “What does this election mean for me or my child?” Keshet’s role in this regard simply was to offer information. It held a webinar for parents of transgender kids two weeks after the election; parents came to Keshet because trust had long been established. Similarly, Facing History and Ourselves heard from educators and education leaders looking for resources to facilitate conversations around the election and divisions in our country. Demand for its workshops on how to have difficult conversations, with its target audience of schools and teachers, has increased.

Finally, Hillel International worked to respond to students needs in November and, through its Ask Big Questions Initiative, crafted a new initiative launched just this week—the Campus Conversation Challenge—designed to spark thousands of new conversations between people who never spoke to each other before now or were mere acquaintances.

These all are examples of organizations being present for their audiences, facilitating conversations, and providing resources for others to facilitate conversations as well. They are responding to concerns and providing timely information while also formulating strategies and initiatives focused on civil discourse in a more proactive way.

I am especially interested in seeing how the efforts at promoting civil discourse take shape, given that opinions and perspectives may harden over the coming months. Can we, a collection of thought leaders, educators, funders, and others who comprise a field, truly be inclusive of others with whom we vehemently disagree? Can we, as a field, develop initiatives and materials that genuinely convey that we want to engage with “the other?” These are challenging questions with no easy answers.

Still, the Hillel-Shamai story, and certainly other Jewish teachings and values, again is a valuable reference: While the School of Hillel leadership modeled behavior that emphasized the study of “the other’s” perspective, leadership of the School of Shamai did not. The eternal optimist in me hopes our community’s leadership can model the former’s behavior and help to change the current dynamic of too often hateful and unproductive argument. If leadership can do that, our communities will be real examples to the wider community of how to conduct conversations and debate among people of varying perspectives.

The Jewish Teen Education and Engagement Funder Collaborative invests, with local funders, in new approaches to Jewish teen learning and growth in ten communities around the country. One strategic element of this endeavor is that each community builds an approach to teen education and engagement custom made for teens in their community. Often, the local partners in the Collaborative work closely with other local organizations to create and run these initiatives and programs.

In Los Angeles, the Jim Joseph Foundation and the Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles partnered to create the multi-faceted Los Angeles Jewish Teen Initiative (LAJTI), which unifies the geographic and denominational diversity of LA to engage teens, empower educators, provide resources and make connections across this sprawling city. The LAJTI’s work has fostered unique organizational collaboration and features an Accelerator program for innovative teen programs, scholarships for impactful immersive experiences, diverse professional development opportunities for teen educators, and improved marketing for teen programs.

One example of LAJTI’s new and creative programming is the Community Internship Program, which concluded its second year this past summer with 40 teen interns (from 85 applicants) placed in 23 Jewish nonprofit organizations. With each supervisor developing a specific “job description” for the interns, the teens had the opportunity to utilize their skills and talents and make meaningful change in the organizations. Some project examples included: writing legal briefs and attending court cases at Bet Tzedek Legal Services, writing editorials in the Jewish Journal while also managing the webpage and social media, and helping to develop a middle school curriculum for Israel education at StandWithUs.

Key Lessons from Year 1 of the Internship Program

While virtually all teens reported having a valuable experience and would recommend the program to others, through teen and supervisor surveys, focus groups, and select one-on-one interviews, the LAJTI staff learned valuable lessons to help refine the program moving forward. For example, the supervisors needed more clarity about their role in making the internship experience most valuable. This learning led LAJTI staff to add an Orientation Lunch before the second-year program began so that supervisors could learn more about the program, have an opportunity to connect with other supervisors throughout the community, and ask pertinent questions of LAJTI staff. The supervisors reported that the orientation made them feel more prepared for the start of the program.

The Community Internship Program seemed to be particularly successful in generating excitement and demonstrating impact in the community for several key reasons. One, it was perceived as a value-add by organizations throughout the city. Two, it addressed teens most pressing needs such as authentic work experience and earning a paycheck. Three, it was a 4-week program, which still allowed teens to use the rest of their summer for other priorities. Four, it had the bonus of bringing teens together from across the geographical and engagement spectrum of Los Angeles, thus expanding peer networks among the participants. Finally, for those teens able to fully take advantage of it, the internship offered teens a unique opportunity to develop a mentor-type relationship with a nonprofit professional in the field.

Is a Community Internship Program the Right Fit?

This Community Internship program is one that we believe can be replicated or adapted in other communities. Following are questions (with our tips or answers) and key considerations to examine before launching:

1. What are the goals for the program? What are the desired outcomes for teens and supervisors? The LA CIP program had clear outcomes for each constituent group.
2. What labor laws do you need to consider if “hiring” teens? HR played a critical role in LA’s implementation. There were many complex issues to understand and navigate.
3. What are the criteria for selecting teen applicants and how do we reach them? The LA CIP wanted to attract motivated teens who would likely benefit from this work experience. The selection criteria did not emphasize GPA but a reference was required. Interviews also helped ensure teens were a good match.
4. How do you ensure that you have the right organizational partners? What are the expectations for each partner? What happens if you need to make a mid-course correction with a match? LA CIP program director focused significant energy in outreach and discussions with organizations to ensure the right fit. Ongoing communication with both teens and supervisors was important.
5. What kind of staffing is necessary to implement this program? LA CIP employs a half-time position to direct this program.
6. What kind of research do you need to conduct before launching a program like this? LA Federation committed resources for a 6-month on-the-ground research to determine need and viability of the program.
7. How will you solicit feedback from teens and supervisors to improve the experience next time? LA CIP used surveys, focus groups, and select one-on-one interviews.

Successful teen internship programs are valuable experiences for both teen participants and the host organizations. Teens develop and build technical skills and work habits, explore and refine future career goals, and take advantage of a professional and personal growth opportunity. Organizations value the opportunity to support their community, share their wisdom, bring in new perspectives, identify future employees, and build the morale of employees by offering them a positive experience. This program has also proven to be an effective access point to both Jewish life and to the nonprofit sector. The nonprofit sector represents one of the largest growth areas for jobs in this country, and this program opens the eyes of young people to these possibilities.

Research on teens shows that they highly value experiences that blend Jewish learning and engagement with other aspects and interests of their life. They want to be challenged, and they want opportunities to co-create experiences for their peers. Thus, the opportunity to have a work experience in their local Jewish community – replete with the freedoms and responsibilities that come with that – speaks directly to the stage of life teens are in and to the type of leaders they hope to become.

Shira Rosenblatt is Senior Vice President of Jewish Education and Engagement at The Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles. Stacie Cherner is a Senior Program Officer at the Jim Joseph Foundation.

Originally posted in eJewishPhilanthropy 

That seems like the perfect title for this first blog. As I continue to settle into my role as President and CEO at the Jim Joseph Foundation, I feel welcomed by my colleagues, the Foundation Board, and so many of you who have sent congratulatory notes over the last month. For this, I want to express sincere thanks.

I have, first and foremost, a deep sense of responsibility—to the Foundation’s grantees, Board, my colleagues, peer funders, and other individuals with whom we interact. Jim Joseph, z”l, left an indelible gift. Working inside (and often outside) these walls is an ongoing reminder of how fortunate we are to carry out the vision that Jim so clearly outlined. 

As 2017 approaches, the Foundation continues its leadership transitions. After over a decade of service, Founding Board Member Phyllis Cook has completed her term on the Foundation Board. Along with the Foundation, the entire field of Jewish education has benefited—and will continue to benefit—from Phyllis’s wisdom and dedication. Additionally, Al Levitt served as the Foundation’s President and Board Chair since the Foundation’s inception. He was a close friend of Jim’s and worked tirelessly to lead the Board through the Foundation’s first decade. His commitment to Jewish education has helped the Foundation influence the field in deep and long-lasting ways. Just a few days ago, at our recent Board meeting, Al stepped down as Chair. We are forever grateful to Al, and are fortunate that he will remain on the Board through June of 2017. We also are proud and excited to have Dan Safier as the Foundation’s new Chair. Dan has been on the Board for the past three years and has been an active lay leader in many local and national Jewish organizations.

In the months and years ahead, we hope to share relevant insights, findings, developments, and other news with you through our new newsletter, A Closer Look. So, to you as well, welcome in, and please do take a closer look. Learn more about the grantees on the ground doing the educator training or creating meaningful Jewish learning experiences or helping to build the field. Learn about the evaluators on whom we rely to help determine what is working and what, if anything, might need course correction. And learn about our peer funders and colleagues in the field with whom we collaborate in increasingly deeper and more meaningful ways. It is these collective efforts that create vibrant Jewish life and advance Jewish education.

On a personal note, I look forward to being in touch and seeing you at various conferences and gatherings. I also welcome your feedback and thoughts on Foundation matters.

Wishing you a happy Chanukkah and a 2017 full of health, happiness, and peace,

Barry

On a Sunday earlier this month, I witnessed the burgeoning future of Jewish teen education in San Diego. As part of the new Motiv Initiative–the Jewish Teen Initiative in San Diego supported by the Jewish Federation of San Diego County, the Lawrence Family JCC, Jacobs Family Campus, and the Jim Joseph Foundation—hundreds of teens came to learn about, and to do, service at its first Teen Service Summit.

The Summit, which was well attended and filled with opportunities to engage in and to create meaningful Jewish service experiences, offers a brief case study of sorts for effective teen engagement.

First, a number of workshops throughout the day led by charismatic and passionate adults addressed everything from Passion to Profit: Social Entrepreneurship to Gaming for Good: Using Entertainment to Give Back to Telling Your Service Story Through Poetry and Performance. The Social Entrepreneurship workshop was led by Sarah Hernholm, Founder of Whatever It Takes (WIT), an organization that helps launch teen entrepreneur endeavors. Teens were challenged in the workshop to share what they care about, or challenges in peoples’ lives they want to address, and envision ways they could create change for good with help from WIT and fellow teens within the program. They shared their concern for environmental degradation of our oceans, for physical fitness and healthy eating, and a strong desire to tackle substance abuse.

At a fundamental level this session was about engaging teens where they are and making the intimidating (coming up with a great social entrepreneurship idea) reachable, doable, and fun.

Second, the Summit showcased scores of service and community-based organizations at its Non-Profit Expo. So, while engaging in inspiring and thought-provoking workshops, and meeting Jewish peers with similar interests and ambitions, teens also learned about the many relatively easy ways they could engage in Jewish service. I engaged with a number of organizations – both Jewish and secular – in this space, including Repair the World, Mitzvah Corps, Feeding America, Jewish Family Service, and the Surfrider Foundation to name just a few.

Third, the afternoon session was actually devoted to service, where organizations such as Habitat for Humanity, Keshet, Kitchens for Good, ReSurf, The Thirst Project, and more engaged teens in service with underprivileged neighborhoods and their community. It was a moving and motivating day of learning and action.

To my mind though, what makes Motiv’s launch and this Summit all the more inspiring is that it is a part of a larger service constellation. Indeed, I was privileged to attend Service Matters: A Summit on Jewish Service hosted by Repair the World in September in New York. As I have shared, service increasingly is a central part of lives for Jewish millennials; often it is the primary way they engage in Jewish life and learning. Partly driving this and partly as a result of this, numerous Jim Joseph Foundation grantees are building, testing, and learning about new platforms and models to engage more people and organizations in meaningful service and related Jewish learning. Organizations, their staffs, and boards, are asking significant questions about how to make service authentic for both the teens who are serving and for the populations with whom they serve; about who benefits and how to act as good partners; and about how to truly work with teens to drive change.
Over recent years, investments in research and experiments in the Jewish service field have brought our community closer to fully answering these questions. More and more organizations that engage teens and young adults recognize the immense promise in engaging youth in service—and will continue to seek answers to these questions. The Teen Service Summit in San Diego engaged teens in that community in new ways, showing the vast offerings in Jewish service, offering space for learning and growth, and offering the opportunity for them to create meaningful Jewish experiences.

Source: “Any Given Sunday: San Diego’s Jewish Teen Service Summit,” Jeff Tiell, San Diego Jewish Journal, December 9, 2016

This past summer, at the first ever Jewish Outdoor, Food, Farming, and Environmental Education (JOFEE) gathering at Isabella Freedman Retreat Center, a group of practitioners and foundation professionals came together around the shared purpose of building the field.

The Jim Joseph Foundation already shared some of the innovative learning and professional development that occurred, which certainly will help the field grow and mature. But another aspect of this gathering warrants an examination, because while at face value this type of gathering is not unique, a gathering that included such diverse funders is. Moreover, we were not there merely as listeners or as observers of a conference, our group of funders joined with practitioners for focused and deliberate visioning and networking conversations.

The gathering included the Jim Joseph Foundation and representatives from the Atlanta Jewish Federation, Emanuel J. Friedman Philanthropies, Gendler Grapevine, the Leichtag Foundation, the Lucious Littauer Foundation, Hazon, Pearlstone Center, Urban Adamah, and Wilderness Torah.  Just as each practitioner represented a different organization in this space—all of which complimented each other while not entirely duplicating efforts—each of the funders had a unique justification for its funding in this space.  So how did we all end up there together?

Inherently, while all the organizations at that first meeting to some degree address farming, food justice, the environment, and other kinds of Jewish outdoor educational interventions, there are important strategic differences to recognize. Whereas the Emanuel J. Friedman Philanthropies (founders of Jewish Initiative for Animals) and the Leichtag Foundation (founders of the Coastal Roots Farm) see JOFEE funding as a way of furthering combined environmental, humanistic, and Jewish educational missions, for example, the Jim Joseph Foundation sees this investment primarily as a means to funding its strategic priorities of educating Jewish educators and expanding opportunities for effective Jewish learning.

By making space for funders with different strategies and missions to come together, the field displayed a strength (and a potential for even greater impact) only possible by bringing together all of the issue areas of JOFEE. There are many benefits from this collaboration, and important lessons:

• Field leaders can engage more people in Jewish learning and experiences because an individual will opt in even if just one part of JOFEE resonates with her or him. Yet, once they do, they open themselves up to other elements of JOFEE that may pique their interest and offer new ways to engage in Jewish life.
• Since JOFEE essentially brings together even smaller, narrower fields under one umbrella, the environment is ripe for experimentation, creativity, and collaborative Jewish education and engagement efforts.
• A field with “collaboration” as an organizing principle helps to overcome the issue of funders and practitioners being siloed based on specific foci that do not equate to the exact priorities of others in a similar space of the same field. Instead, the gathering’s diverse group of funders and practitioners hypothesized together about a shared set of outcomes that were part of a burgeoning 2022 Visioning Statement for the JOFEE field.
• As a result of those first conversations at the gathering, each funder began to understand that individual foundation priorities are part of a larger vision that could increase the overall influence that the organizations in that room have on the broader community. Despite the differences in the organizations represented, each of the individuals in the room felt vested in the ultimate well-being of both the Jewish community and the underlying eco-concerns.

As the Jim Joseph Foundation has discussed, collaboration comes with real challenges. Yet time and again we see that the benefits—creative initiatives, greater reach, more opportunities to scale and to become sustainable—outweigh these challenges. A single funder has a ceiling on the amount of long-term success it achieves on its own. I am grateful to have been included in this initial gathering on behalf of the Jim Joseph Foundation, and to Hazon for assembling this group. The field is stronger as a result.

When the Jim Joseph Foundation was founded in 2006, board members and other leaders in Jewish education held a series of meetings to determine a set of “strategic funding priorities.” While the foundation’s generous benefactor, Jim Joseph, z”l, ensured that Jewish education would be the sole focus of grant awards, he did not specify how the Foundation should pursue his vision. Ultimately, the Board identified three funding priorities, one of which is to increase the number and quality of Jewish educators and education leaders. This priority paved the way for the largest bet the Foundation has made to date – the recently completed $45 million, six year investment in Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion (HUC-JIR), The Jewish Theological Seminary (JTS), and Yeshiva University (YU), known collectively as the Education Initiative.

As with nearly every major Foundation grant, independent evaluation was built into the grant from the outset. Annually, American Institutes for Research (AIR) provided the Foundation with a comprehensive evaluation of nearly every aspect of the Initiative – number of program enrollees and their experience in the workplace; how the institutions were working together; progress on programs achieving sustainability; and more. Now, with the final evaluation, recently completed, we believe the field has much to learn from the Foundation’s and grant partners’ experience with this investment.

Clear Communications and Supporting Long-Term Capacity

A crucial starting point of this Initiative was conversations with the presidents of each institutions. Getting their early buy-in, clearly outlining expectations, and building trust as grant partners all proved to be key ingredients as the Initiative progressed. With an investment of this scope, length, and ambition, each grantee experienced successes and challenges along the way. A genuine, transparent relationship between the Foundation and each institution helped to overcome the challenges, to allow for course corrections, and to amplify the successes.

The Foundation’s grantmaking practices certainly evolved as the Education Initiative did. As one example, many grantees today often rely on technical assistance for various practices. The Education Initiative demonstrated how crucial this can be. With support from experts in the field, HUC-JIR, JTS, and YU, the grantees made changes in their key marketing and enrollment management practices. The grantees revamped their websites, replaced blanket policies of granting full tuition waivers with systematic processes for allocating financial assistance, and began building robust databases of prospective students. These efforts led to professionalizing key enrollment management functions at the institutional level and to a dramatic increase in the number of inquiries. The work of the Foundation with the grantees ensured that the effects of the grant are long-term and can support an infrastructure for future new programs.

Supporting Change at Multiple Levels

The Education Initiative achieved three levels of measurable impact: institutional, program–level, and individual level. The grantees did the diligent, tedious, and ongoing work to develop the infrastructure needed to move programs from start-up to sustainability. Out of 20 programs funded by the Initiative, more than 50 percent have been incorporated into core program offerings and will continue. Meeting this “viability” goal was an integral part of ensuring that the investment continues to influence Jewish education long after the grant period concludes.

This desire for long-lasting impact guided the Board’s initial thinking six years ago to make an investment that would support the professional practice of more than a thousand professionals in all kinds of Jewish education settings. Strong educators and leaders are the not-so-secret ingredient for high quality Jewish education programs. The positive effects of the Education Initiative have been confirmed by participants and their employers as well as objective measures such as salary increase and job promotions. Especially noteworthy are the programs that were a result of unprecedented collaboration among the grantees, such as the eLearning Collaborative, a set of professional learning opportunities to faculty members; The Experiential Jewish Education Network, a program for alumni of the three institutions; and The Jewish Early Childhood Education Leadership Institute.

Well-Designed Programs = Deep Influence on Participants

The independent evaluation has uncovered the key mechanisms which take place between program enrollment and post-graduation employment outcomes. Evaluation data showed that HUC-JIR, JTS, and YU have accomplished a lot more than increasing the number of prepared educators. The grantees have demonstrated what well–designed programs look like.

The high program satisfaction of participants in the new programs developed under the Education Initiative is a direct result of a positive and meaningful program experience that exceeded expectations. At enrollment, most participants were interested in programs that aligned with their learning interests and that were offered at convenient schedules and locations. They came with little or no expectations regarding the program experience or their relations with faculty and peers. After program completion, participants reported that the program experience had much more impact than they anticipated. In cohort-based programs, participants have found professional networks that they felt they belonged to; through internships and project-based learning, they have gained professional self-esteem when they saw the results of their new skills; and, through mentoring and advisory, they have sharpened their career aspirations and brought value to their workplace.

In Their Words

A participant in Yeshiva University’s Experiential Jewish Education Certificate Program told AIR researchers: “When I first went into the program I thought this is going to be just a program that puts into words what I have been doing for quite some time. But what I found was, right from the very first session, much more than that. This [program] is about really thinking about the pedagogy of experiential education and tying it to relevant research in the field. And then learning how to create experiences based on serious academic study.”

According to a participants of HUC-JIR’s Executive Master’s Program, she enrolled seeking a degree and found that her overall leadership style and organizational thinking has changed: “I came to the program because of the value of the degree and to have a seat at the table [for decision-making]. But I have gained a lot more than that. Now, I am not able to look at the world the same way I used to. The courses gave me the ability to step back and look at things from a broader scale.”

A doctoral candidate who enrolled in JTS’ Executive Doctoral Program told AIR researchers that a good program is measured not only by its content, but also by the collegial relationships that faculty and students can develop in small Jewish higher education institutions: “I came to the program as an expert in youth engagement and with the intention to focus on the post Bar Mitzvah years. This program helped me come out of the narrow box [of professional focus] and ask different questions. It really broadened my thinking. I had the confidence to explore new questions because I had the access to experts that I did not previously have. I could call a professor and pick his brain whenever I faced a challenge.”

Final Thoughts

Based on these findings and other results summarized in the final evaluation report, it is not surprising that the Education Initiative successfully advanced professionals on the career ladder. Within a very short time interval – up to one year from program completion – one third of the degree program participants and nearly 10 percent of the professional development programs participants advanced to Jewish education leadership positions.

These educators, and those who follow them in Education Initiative programs, will continue to influence Jewish education. Together, HUC-JIR, JTS, and YU, took unprecedented steps – and risks – that have genuinely changed the landscape of the field. The learners who engage in Jewish education, in its variety of settings and through countless experiences, are the ultimate beneficiaries of these advancements.

Yael Kidron is a Principal Researcher at American Institutes for Research. Dawne Bear Novicoff is Assistant Director at the Jim Joseph Foundation. The full independent evaluation of the Education Initiative is available here.

Source: “Reflections on a Big Bet: The Education Initiative with HUC-JIR, JTS, and YU,” Yael Kidron and Dawne Bear Novicoff, eJewishPhilanthropy, October 27, 2016

I bet my parents are not surprised that I work for a Jewish organization. How could they be? After all, I have been an active member of the Jewish community from my earliest days. Attending Congregational School, spending summer after summer at Jewish day and overnight camp, starring as Joseph in my synagogue’s production of Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat (I couldn’t resist throwing this one in here), participating in youth group, spending time in Israel, and most recently, working at the San Francisco-based Jewish Community Federation. Being Jewish has always been an important part of who I am. Yet, reflecting back on these experiences, I note that my participation in Jewish life has never come in the way of traditional, text-based Jewish education or study.

There were many reasons that I was excited to join the Jim Joseph Foundation team in April 2015: working with a dedicated and expert staff; best in class board and professional leadership; the opportunity to contribute to the Jewish learning and growth of thousands of young people annually. But, an unexpected, yet welcome, outcome has been the Jewish learning and growth of someone else: me.

Some of the grants in my portfolio are in my sweet spot. I manage many of the Foundation’s camping grants, for example. I credit my own overnight camping experience as the one that most helped shape my Jewish identity and is the primary reason that Judaism is such an important part of my life. I can list the sessions I attended in chronological order and can still sing many of the session songs. My favorite is sung to the tune of the Friends theme song:

My friends they told me that if I went to Camp Swig
There’d be some people there that I would really dig
We’d form a bond of friendship oh so strong
And have a time creating memories that’d last a whole life looooong.

I digress.

Much of my portfolio, however, has pushed me beyond my own Jewish background. For example, managing the Foundation’s grant to Pardes Institute of Jewish Studies has shown me the importance of developing excellent day school educators; Pardes’ graduates are among the most desirable in the field. In my work with Sefaria, I navigate its online library of over 80 million words of Jewish text, explore source sheets, and learn about the important ways its technology eases and strengthens Jewish learning in day schools.

And recently, I had the opportunity to attend an evening program at Mechon Hadar, another grantee in my portfolio. While in New York for the Foundation’s board meeting, my colleague Dawne Bear Novicoff and I attended Embracing Teshuvah: A Conversation with Hadar Faculty. I’ll admit, I was a bit nervous, which was only amplified when I learned that my hevruta partner was a participant in Hadar’s full-time program and clearly way more versed in Jewish text than me. Almost immediately, the discomfort waned and was replaced by enjoyment, understanding, and personal reflection.

Perhaps my past didn’t include formal Jewish text study simply because it wasn’t how my parents and grandparents engaged in Jewish life. Or, perhaps this void was a result of never fully finding the relevance to it in my own life. But, the panel of four Hadar faculty members explained the texts in ways with which I immediately connected. In just a short evening, my appreciation for Jewish text study forever changed. I left with tools to become a better parent and husband. I left with a new appreciation for prayer and how it might be useful in my life.

My favorite part of the session included a lesson from Rabbi Elie Kaunfer about teshuvah (repentance) and the name changes of Sarai to Sarah and Avram to Avraham. Sarai gave up the letter yod (value of 10) and replaced it with the letter hey (value of 5). So, in changing her name, Sarai gave up a net value of 5. Avram only gained a letter, hey (value of 5), in becoming Avraham. Rabbi Kaunfer noted that Sarai gave up the same value of letter as Avram gained, and opined that repentance is as much about who you’re in partnership with as it is about just yourself. Pretty powerful and something that I reflected on during Yom Kippur.

Through its work increasing the number and quality of Jewish educators, expanding opportunities for effective Jewish learning, and building a strong field for Jewish learning, the Jim Joseph Foundation contributes to the Jewish growth and learning of thousands of young people annually. While perhaps unexpected, through my work with grantees like Pardes, Sefaria, and Mechon Hadar—and the deep Jewish growth and learning that it provides me—you can add one more learner to the list.

In this, my penultimate blog as Executive Director for the Jim Joseph Foundation (read the first blog in this series here), I revisit a theme I have discussed numerous times in the past decade.

For years, I have asserted that foundation personnel who conduct their business as transactions of authority and power—as opposed to a series of ongoing interactions in pursuit of partnerships to make enduring changes in the world—fail to optimize the potential of contemporary Jewish philanthropy. From both a professional grantmaking and Jewish values perspective, relational philanthropy that cultivates funder-grantee trust is an asset tangibly benefiting both participants.  The ultimate good, of course, redounds to beneficiaries of high performing Jewish 501c3 organizations and the righteous work they do.

Even a cursory review of journal articles, social media blogs, and association publications on education and philanthropy surfaces frequent references to “trust.” The references occur in diverse places: Education Week, Jewish Funders Network publications, Grantmakers for Effective Philanthropy monographs, eJewishPhilanthropy, Huffington Post, Stanford Social Innovation Review, Teachers College Record – just to name a few.

The ways in which trust is described are myriad, often invoking Jewish sources (for items in Jewish media publications), but rarely citing any of the considerable research on trust produced in the disciplines of psychology, communications, and economics. JFN’s newly released Funders and Power: Principles for Honorable Conduct in Philanthropy, for example, encourages funders to “take covenantal responsibility” for grantmaking as a relationship-based “sacred trust” with funders’ community of grantees. Stuart Mellan, CEO of the Jewish Federation of Southern Arizona, lauds network weaving as an effective community building strategy, noting that “community requires trust.” Mellan observes that “trust can be built, trust can be broken; and broken trust can be healed. In the end trust is achieved when individuals of good intention approach the building of their relationship with integrity.”[1]

In the secular world, an Education Week article from September of this year entitled “Are You Trusted? It Makes All the Difference” states flatly that “trust is the foundation for learning.”[2]  A July Huffington Post article highlights a GEO blog whose four authors claim “driven by a sheer desire to help philanthropy be most effective, leaders of philanthropy serving organizations are embracing a mindset characterized by trust, openness and generosity of spirit”[3].

We exercise trust in our daily lives. You trust your Uber driver will transport you to your desired destination efficiently and safely. You are piloted through clogged city streets by a person you have never before met in a vehicle you have no idea is fully operational with all of its functioning safety features. You bring a Task Rabbit contractor into your home for a two-hour job of assembling a freshly delivered set of Ikea bookshelves, not knowing this individual from any stranger on the street. Your doctor prescribes new medication for a chronic back pain and you dutifully ingest pills typically not having any real idea about what the chemical ingredients will do, iatrogenically, to your body. And you permit a certificated technician to take remote control of your computer to clean up a virus, never even meeting the empowered engineer face to face to whom you provide access to all kinds of confidential information.

The Science of Trust

These quotidian acts are neither baseless nor blind. There is actually science precipitating this behavior, believe it or not, that is both psychologically and biologically based. Humans could not manage their daily affairs in a viable manner without repeated acts entrusting others – and themselves – to do what is implicitly expected of them. Ultimately, “trust isn’t a luxury. It’s a tool we need to get by when we can’t make it on our own; it’s a means of survival for those that must depend on others”[4].

Moreover, while I am sometimes leery to reference research on the corporate sector for guidance in foundation work, ample study of consumer behavior and attitudes shows clearly that companies perceived to be trustworthy outperform those which fail to earn consumers’ trust.

Curiously, when it comes to philanthropy, my experience has been that trust is a currency in short reserve. Arguably, “too often, philanthropists behave like bank loan officers, giving grants in return for prescribed programs and outcomes. Instead, philanthropists should create collaborative relationships with grantees that cultivate critical thinking, learning, and adaptation”[5].

With an understanding of the importance of building trust, here is the conundrum: foundation employment confers privilege of status on its personnel, both professional and lay. Having access to largesse results in the appearance of belonging to a higher social class, which diminishes reliance on others. And “the data are clear: higher social class often equals less trustworthiness.”[6]

The Jim Joseph Foundation Approach

I realize it would be uncomfortable for my foundation colleagues who work ardently to support Jewish education to think that they might be taking advantage of their particular position of influence. My peers comport themselves with consummate professionalism. The position I have taken repeatedly, and the one I am assuming here, is a function of an approach—which I describe as relational philanthropy—the Jim Joseph Foundation has deliberately cultivated for more than a decade. Its modus operandi, as I wrote in 2012, is a one in which:

Funders, grantees, evaluators and consultants alike align around common, consensually agreed upon goals–both for projects themselves and for field-related knowledge creation and dissemination. Grantees’ transparent sharing of progress made and challenges encountered in ongoing conversations with foundation and evaluation personnel leads to real time learning. Foundations in turn become ‘conduits of the nonprofits’ knowledge’ to the field of Jewish education in what becomes effectively, a two-way distribution system[7].

I believe with conviction and a modicum of certainty that the grantmaking the practices with its grantee partners drives efficiencies and effectiveness into the field. At this moment of significant Foundation transition, to assist incoming President and CEO Barry Finestone and Foundation Directors in their future philanthropic enterprise, the Foundation is preparing to commission a meta-synthesis of 100 evaluations of grants it has awarded. This comprehensive information, coupled with feedback from two Grantee Perception studies previously completed, I am confident will create a convincing case motivating the Jim Joseph Foundation to continuously strive to improve its Relational philanthropy practices.

The kind of philanthropy the Foundation enacts is not formulaic. As I have noted in previous blog posts and articles, “business gets done in conversation. Relations develop. The philanthropic practice is one of active listening, networking, and sharing information in reciprocal exchanges of knowledge (see Ed Skloot’s Beyond the Money). Trust among all participants is paramount”[8].

Nothing is mechanistic about this work. Funders and grantee personnel, most often with appropriate technical assistance experts, interact regularly and on a scheduled basis. All individuals must bring good intention and positive attitude to every conversation:

• Foundation professionals must steadfastly evidence a propensity to accept at face-value information shared with them by grantees. They need as well to manifestly exhibit a valuing of grantees’ work experience, acknowledging grantee proximity to the initiative as a source for critically important data collection.
• Foundation professionals and evaluators ask relevant questions of grantees during update calls and/or meetings.
• Grantees contribute invaluable “on the ground” commentary and insightful self-reflections on the initiative they administer, manage, and/or implement. Grantees occasionally push back on what is seen as funder misperception of a key aspect of the initiative.
• Participants are forthcoming and candid. They devote relentless attention to the purpose of the funded initiative, its metrics and target outcomes, and its anticipated results. Midcourse corrections often occur, as is expected.

Together, funder and grantee expressly affirm shared commitment to achieving understanding of, and success in, objectives and goals of the funded initiative. The relationship is one of dynamic inter-subjectivity, in recognition of the mutual gain at stake, and without any compromise of respective professional standards of conduct.

Personal authenticity, especially as exhibited in dialogue that reveals a genuine appreciation for a world in which I/you interplay promotes mutual respect and interpersonal trust, is of superordinate importance. Conference and Skype calls, Google hangout chats, site visits and substantive grantee reporting, are woven together into a web of relationships.

Looking to the Future

The world has obviously changed in my nearly eleven years as Executive Director of the Jim Joseph Foundation. Consider the following, by way of a few examples: instant, real time access to information; field disintermediation; premiums placed on foundation transparency and accountability; blending of public, market, and social sectors; overt, verbally violent and physically destructive anti-Semitic and anti-Israel assaults on Jews and the Jewish people. Never in my lifetime have I been as aware as I am today of the benefits collaboration and carefully fashioned organizational interdependencies offer Jewish education.

“Different than the traditional approaches of coordination and cooperation, real collaboration creates the key opportunity model of today’s world,” grounded in “the ‘bedrock’ of collaboration: trust. Without trust, collaboration is merely cooperation, which fails to achieve the benefits and possibilities available to true collaborations in the knowledge worker age.”[9]

Finally, implicit in Relational philanthropy is an assumption that a community structure of knowledge production, enabling the Foundation and all of its stakeholders to interact with one another in relational contexts, creates the greatest likelihood that the Jim Joseph Foundation will be a demonstrably effective grantmaker (I will share specific examples of this knowledge production in future blogs).

My fervent hope is that founding Directors of the Jim Joseph Foundation, exceptionally dedicated professionals and staff, and I have bequeathed to successors purposeful, distinctive, practical, powerful relational approaches to strategic philanthropy in support of Jewish education.

[1] Mellan, Stuart. Weaving Community: One Perspective on Federation Work. eJewish Philanthropy. September 2016

[2] Berkowicz, Jill. Myers, Ann. Are You Trusted? It Makes All the Difference. Education Week.  September 2016

[3] Enright, Kathleen. Essel, Christine. Jamison, Nancy. LaPointe, Ellen. A Watershed Moment for Philanthropy Infrastructure. The Huffington Post. July 2016

[4] DeSteno, David. The Truth About Trust: How It Determines Success in Life, Love, Learning and More. Hudson Street Press, 2014. Pg. 126

[5] Easterling, Douglas. How Grantmaking Can Create Adaptive Organizations. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Fall 2016, Volume 14, Number 4. Pg. 46

[6] DeSteno, David. The Truth About Trust: How It Determines Success in Life, Love, Learning and More. Hudson Street Press, 2014. Pg. 132

[7] Frank Ellsworth and J. Lumarda in From Grantmaker to Leader. Edelsberg, Charles M. Working in a Relational Way. October 2012

[8] Edelsberg, Charles M. Working in a Relational Way. October 2012

[9] Covey, Stephen M.R. The Speed of Trust: The One Thing That Changes Everything. Free Press, 2006. pg. 256

In mid-September, we attended Service Matters: A Summit on Jewish Service hosted by Repair the World. We were there with more than 200 participants and 35 organizational partners committed to elevating the place of volunteer service in American Jewish life.

What an opportunity to see first-hand the evolution and growth of a field. Numerous observations from that day offer insights about educating and engaging young Jewish adults, how a field develops, and why Jewish service continues to offer such potential.

Jewish Service Unleashes Energy and Excitement
One of the high level observations and takeaways from the day was the particularly large number of people in their early to mid-20s who participated. Certainly at the Jim Joseph Foundation, we know that many young Jews engage in Jewish life and learning through social change and justice work. Indeed, the Pew Report published in 2013 notes that 69 percent of Jews say leading an ethical/moral life is an essential part of what being Jewish means to them. 56 percent say the same for working for justice/equality – and this report was not only on young Jews. So clearly, Jewish service and justice work is a prime way for many Jews to engage in Jewish life. However, at the Summit, we could put faces to these figures and we felt the Summit participants’ excitement and dedication to this cause. As representatives of a funder organization, this palpable energy reaffirmed how significant and essential this space is. Jewish service for young adults is a pathway for entry and for ongoing engagement with their Jewish selves and souls.

More Organizations Understand the Opportunity
Another observation from the day was the diversity of Jewish organizations present. This increasing diversity of Jewish service organizations—or of organizations that have service as an integral component of their work—helps to grow and build the Jewish service field into what we observed to be its “coming-of-age” moment. To see organizations such as Moishe House, Hillel, JDC Entwine, and BBYO, together with Avodah, Challah for Hunger, Keshet, Hazon, Bend the Arc, and so many others is a stirring testament to the power of service as a key engagement modality. This field is comprised of an astonishing variety of organizations in size, scale, mission, and vision, all of which are united in their capacity and desire to use service as a lever for their work.

These Jewish organizations also recognize they have much to learn from secular organizations with proven records engaging people on a large scale in ways that deeply impact local communities. This is why organizations like Points of Light, the Service Year Alliance and City Year not only were at the Summit, but also given time to share their strategies and learnings from their own work.

What it Means to be a Field
Certainly due in large part to many of the organizations mentioned above, the Jewish service movement is in fact a Jewish service field, replete with standards of practice, a common language, and tools that are accessible to all organizations. With these resources, more organizations can effectively engage and empower people in meaningful and authentic Jewish service learning experiences. Moreover, with the Summit as just one example, the structures and systems are in place to more easily share best practices, adapt more models and initiatives from one community to another, and overcome challenges together.

As an early investor in Repair the World, the Foundation understood both the potential of Jewish service along with the need to be patient as the field evolved. Jim Joseph Foundation grantees like Repair and JDC Entwine are building, leading, and expanding these efforts, as they test new models and continue to bring more people and organizations into the fold.

A Need for Continued Conversation and Collaborations
A final observation from the day, and one that perhaps left the most lasting effects, was the need for brave spaces such as these where individuals and organizations who care about service and social justice in the Jewish community can wrestle with deep questions together. Many in the Jewish community want to have authentic conversations about racial justice and other inequalities, addressing head on the big questions that we as Jews find ourselves asking in the context of the broader society in which we reside. We see institutions – both in the Jewish and secular service communities – reflect on what it means to do impactful work in local communities with others. How do we show up? How do act as good partners? How do we listen effectively to the needs and concerns of others?  This institutional reflection often is indicative of a generational shift in how young Jews today identify and belong both in Jewish and secular worlds simultaneously.

As a deeply relational funder, the Jim Joseph Foundation will continue to work with our grantee-partners to explore these questions to help foster compelling, effective Jewish learning experiences for young Jews.