News & Blogs Category: Guest Blog

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 granteesdid 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.

This blog originally appeared in eJewishPhilanthropy. Yael Kidron is a Principal Researcher at American Institutes for Research. Dawne Bear Novicoff is Assistant Director at the Jim Joseph Foundation. Read the full independent evaluation of the Education Initiative.

Editor’s Note: The Jim Joseph Foundation supports Jewish educator training programs at institutions of higher education around the country. These programs help develop educators and education leaders with the skills to succeed in a variety of settings. This blog–the fourth in a series of reflections from participants in these training programs (read the first, second, and third blogs)–is from Erin Dreyfuss, a graduate of the Program in Experiential Education and Jewish Cultural Arts at The George Washington University. She is the Development Associate at the Edlavitch DC Jewish Community Center.

Almost all of my Jewish education has been experiential. As a convert to Judaism, I have learned Judaism and created a Jewish identity by doing, celebrating, schmoozing, eating, and absorbing everything around me. Through that process, I have come to appreciate the power of experiences to shape identity and I was hopeful that I could find a career that would allow me to create meaningful Jewish experiences for others. It was with this goal that I joined the inaugural cohort of the Program in Experiential Education and Jewish Cultural Arts (EEJCA) at The George Washington University in the summer of 2014.

During our EEJCA orientation, we received this piece of advice from Carole Zawatsky, the CEO of the Edlavitch DC Jewish Community Center (EDCJCC): “Your passion is your career path.” In the two years that followed, the EEJCA program, supported by the Jim Joseph Foundation, blazed a trail between passion and career for my fellow educators and me. Through a cross-disciplinary curriculum that combines the arts, education, Jewish history, and museum management, the EEJCA program prepares its students to create innovative and engaging programs that enrich contemporary Jewish life and strengthen Jewish identities. I am extremely fortunate to have learned from community leaders and my students and co-workers in fellowships with the Jewish Primary Day School of the Nation’s Capital and the EDCJCC’s Washington Jewish Music Festival. Each of these experiences was contextualized by classes that ranged in scope from the history of Jewish music to the implementation of organizational change.

My extracurricular involvement in Jewish life has grown right alongside my professional development; I continue my annual tradition of personal reflection by counting the omer on my blog dedicated to Jewish learning and I recently joined my synagogue’s Board of Directors. These commitments reflect perhaps the most important lesson that I learned during my time in the EEJCA program – that my passion can be my career path and more.

Erin Dreyfuss is a graduate of the Program in Experiential Education and Jewish Cultural Arts at The George Washington University. She is turning her passion into a career as the Development Associate at the Edlavitch DC Jewish Community Center. Follow her blog at GoAndLearnIt.blogspot.com.

Editor’s Note: The Jim Joseph Foundation supports Jewish educator training programs at institutions of higher education around the country. These programs help develop educators and education leaders with the skills to succeed in a variety of settings. This blog–the third in a series of reflections from participants in these training programs (read the first and second blogs)–is from Michael A. Morris, who will receive his Master’s Degree from George Washington University’s program in Experiential Education and Jewish Cultural Arts.  He works as a Museum Tour Guide with the Jewish Historical Society of Greater Washington.

My journey in the George Washington University’s Experiential Education and Jewish Cultural Arts (EE/JCA) program began in August 2015.  Now, in summer 2016, I’m completing my Capstone at the Yiddish Book Center in Amherst, Massachusetts.  The one-year journey included academic courses in Jewish history and culture, Experiential Jewish Education and Museum Studies, as well as on-site work experience at the DCJCC and the Jewish Historical Society of Greater Washington (JHSGW), all located in the great city of Washington, DC.  As I near graduation, it is clear that the effect of the EE/JCA program is that I now think more critically and holistically about the visitor experience at cultural institutions and museums.  Ultimately, my goal as an educator in the field of Experiential Jewish Education is to curate an experience that is an honest and comprehensive view of the particular Jewish concept under study and to encourage an understanding of how the subject fits into the larger mosaic of history and culture.  One area in which I put this concept into practice was leading walking tours with the JHSGW.

As an individual who works in the field of history, it is important to know that learning opportunities are everywhere.  When one walks down a street in any city, he/she is passing by structures that once housed businesses, residences, places of worship, etc.  Some of the layers are visible, while others have vanished.  A historical, experiential educator’s responsibility is to survey layers of life and create a narrative as well as learner-centered initiatives to convey the significance of the sites.  Using this pedagogy should give participants a direct experience with the source under study rather than an unconnected, didactic experience.  One of many ways to accomplish this is by way of walking tours, presentations or exhibits.

Now, at my Capstone at the Yiddish Book Center, I’m gaining additional experience and skills that encompass the entire visitor experience.  This includes: reviewing docent notes to ascertain why visitors are coming and where are they coming from, drafting content for a future quarterly newsletter to publicize offerings, working with other members of the Yiddish Book Center staff to further enhance the visitor experience, designing and refining materials to help younger visitors experience the rich Yiddish history and culture on display and the general building tour for all ages.  I’ve also strategized connections with my Capstone supervisor, the Director of Communications and Visitor Services, to meet with representatives from surrounding universities and cultural institutions to reach a larger audience.  These experiences will allow me to further enhance my ability to convey educational material when I return to the DC area and resume my responsibilities with the JHSGW.

Assisting with Yidstock, the Festival of New Jewish Music at the Yiddish Book Center, was the final piece of my Capstone.  This all-encompassing event took place from July 14^th-17^th, 2016.  People from all over the world attended.  Some sang, some danced, some just watched, but they all came to experience the premier performers in Klezmer and Yiddish music and had an opportunity to explore the exhibits at the Yiddish Book Center.  As the audience enjoyed Yidstock, I joined the Yiddish Book Center staff behind the scenes to ensure that the guests were taken care of and that the performances and accompanying lectures and workshops ran efficiently.

All of this was the culmination of having a greater understanding of how to operate in an environment that offers an experience anchored in culture, history and preservation.  Of course, I did not get here alone.  In all facets of the EE/JCA program, the professors and on-site supervisors have demonstrated professionalism and innovation.  While my classmates and I read and discussed history, culture and experiential education, we were guided by professors and professionals who created an atmosphere to learn and re-learn, question and discuss.  For all of these reasons, the EE/JCA has meaningfully and significantly impacted my professional trajectory.

Michael A. Morris graduated in 2014 with an M.A. in Holocaust and Genocide Studies from Stockton University and continued his studies in 2015 with the George Washington University’s program in Experiential Education and Jewish Cultural Arts.  He will graduate this summer with an M.A. in Education and Human Development.  Currently, he works as a Museum Tour Guide with the Jewish Historical Society of Greater Washington.

Editor’s Note: The Jim Joseph Foundation supports Jewish educator training programs at institutions of higher education around the country. These programs help develop educators and education leaders with the skills to succeed in a variety of settings. This blog–the second in a series of reflections from participants in these training programs–is from Michael Kay, Head of School at Solomon Schechter of Westchester, who received his Ph.D. at New York University’s program in education and Judaic studies.

During the summer of 2014, a recent graduate of our High School experienced one of the preeminent rites of passage of those pre-college months: learning the identity of his soon-to-be-roommate. The excitement of the moment wore off quickly, however, as our graduate looked up his roommate on Facebook and found that his page was full of virulent anti-Israel rhetoric. One might have expected that such a discovery would bring about extraordinary anxiety or even paralysis in a student who was entering a diverse university after 13 years in the nurturing environment of a Jewish day school.

In fact, the opposite was the case. Our graduate confidently picked up the phone to introduce himself to his roommate. He explained who he was, what values were important to him, and why. He noted that an important part of his identity was his connection with the people, land, and State of Israel, having traveled there twice during his Middle School and High School years. In a self-assured but non-threatening manner, he asked the roommate about his own views and what motivated them. This profound conversation set the stage for a fruitful, intellectually vibrant relationship—and even led the roommate to reconsider his position and take down his incendiary postings.

A week later, I asked our student what prepared him to engage in such a sensitive, powerful conversation with a person whom he had only just met. He cited two particular elements of his Jewish day school experience. For one, his detailed knowledge of the history of the Israeli/Palestinian relationship equipped him to provide a factual basis for his own perspectives. But even more importantly, his experience in Judaic studies classes endowed him with what I call the skill of diversity: the comfort and wisdom to develop a strong, individualized viewpoint; articulate this view in a constructive, compelling manner; listen open-mindedly to people who represent different opinions; challenge when appropriate; and ultimately build positive connections with these people—even if they may never agree.

This conversation with our graduate brought into focus for me the practical benefits of my years of study in New York University’s PhD program in education and Judaic studies. My work during this time focused on defining and enacting pluralism in Jewish education, and I wrote my dissertation on leadership and community-building in ideologically pluralistic Jewish high schools. I studied theories of pluralism in the realms of philosophy and general education and sought in my field research to apply them to the very practical world of North American Jewish day schools. For me, my years at NYU turned out to be the perfect marriage of theory and practice, preparing me both to develop a philosophical vision of leadership in pluralistic settings and to implement it in real-world situations of curriculum-development and conflict in schools.

It has been clearly documented in research both outside and inside the Jewish community that learning in an environment that highlights exposure to multiple perspectives promotes—perhaps counterintuitively—the development of both robust individual identity and strong communal sentiment. This understanding, which was affirmed by my own qualitative dissertation research in the field, has played a significant role in shaping my practice through ten years of leadership positions in both denominationally-affiliated and non-affiliated schools.

One of the most prevalent critiques of Jewish day schools is that they are lacking in “diversity.” In fact, little could be further from the truth. In order for the concept of diversity to have significance, it must be understood not merely as aesthetic variety, but rather as an opportunity for people of divergent perspectives to interact in meaningful ways and craft community with one another without seeking homogeneity. This is a competence that can be taught and practiced, and there are few institutions in the world better equipped to teach it than Jewish day schools—after all, such vibrant, respectful articulation of strongly held viewpoints has been a hallmark of Jewish tradition for over 2000 years.

There may be no more important skill that we can impart to our students to prepare them for success in the 21^st century than the ability to develop individualized identities, articulate them eloquently, and engage constructively with people who think and act differently. Through my graduate school experience—in the seminar room, in the library, and at case-study sites—I became convinced that Jewish day schools are uniquely well suited to provide this training. And my years in the field have served only to embolden me further in this conviction about the value of our institutions—just ask our graduate who was confronted with a seemingly anti-Israel roommate.

Michael Kay is Head of School at Solomon Schechter of Westchester. He received his Ph.D. at New York University’s program in education and Judaic studies.

Read the first blog in this series from Ilana Horwitz, a Ph.D. Candidate in the Stanford Graduate School of Education Concentration in Education & Jewish Studies, with a focus on Sociology of Education

Editor’s Note: The Jim Joseph Foundation supports Jewish educator training programs at institutions of higher education around the country. These programs help develop educators and education leaders with the skills to succeed in a variety of settings. This blog–the first in a series of reflections from participants in these training programs–is from Ilana M. Horwitz, a Ph.D. Candidate in the Stanford Graduate School of Education Concentration in Education & Jewish Studies, with a focus on Sociology of Education. Ilana also is a Wexner Fellow/Davidson Scholar.

“This is Rebecca. She’s Jewish.” This was often how Rebecca’s high-school friend introduced her to new people in their small New York town where few Jews lived. In these brief encounters with others, Rebecca’s Jewishness made her different. It made her uncomfortable. Self-conscious. Teens usually want to blend in, not stand out. Now, in her twenties, Rebecca remembers those moments of difference when she recounts her life story. It was in those moments that Rebecca felt most keenly aware of her Jewish identity.

Rebecca’s story was one of 57 life narratives I collected as part of a research project in Stanford’s Concentration in Education and Jewish Studies. We wanted to understand how Jewishness fit into people’s overall life stories without asking them explicitly about their involvement in Jewish organizations, how many Jewish friends they had, or how often they lit Shabbat candles. When we started the project, I was a new doctoral student in the Education & Jewish Studies concentration at Stanford University. I realized fairly quickly that the concept of identity was far more complicated than I understood. After all, cultivating, strengthening, or enhancing “Jewish identity” was the goal of countless Jewish organizations and it had become part of my own lexicon. As I thought about other aspects of my life and realized that I might say I have a “White” identity or a “female” identity or a “Jewish” identity, but that the relationship between those social categories and myself was not at all stable.

Three years and multiple sociology classes later, I finally understand why it’s problematic to talk about strengthening Jewish identity. Jewishness, like ‘race’ and ethnicity are not stable and static qualities that inhere in individuals. Instead, ‘race’ and ethnicity are something constructed, negotiated, and reaffirmed through ongoing social interactions. I stopped thinking of ‘racial’/ethnic group membership as based on a relatively fixed ‘presumed identity’ and began seeing it as a dynamic and complex social phenomenon that ‘can change according to variations in the situations and audiences encountered’ (Nagel, 1994: 154).

I realize that this explanation sounds very academic, so let me illustrate with another story from the aforementioned research project. The key point I want to highlight is how the salience of our Jewishness changes based on our social situations and the audiences we encounter. Meet Dalia, who grew up in a highly Jewish area of New York and attended Jewish day school. She never felt particularly Jewish because many people around her were more observant or more engaged in Jewish organizations. In her twenties, Dalia moved to Texas and became a minority. Her curly dark hair was no longer the norm, but rather a feature that distinguished her from other people. But this difference was not an objective fact— her difference only became apparent when she came into contact with other people. And it was not just her appearance. Dalia’s Texan friends referred to her as the “rabbi,” a stark contrast to how Dalia perceived herself in New York where many people were more knowledgeable than her. Dalia felt obliged to educate others about Judaism and began hosting Shabbat dinners. By moving to Texas, Dalia’s sense of Jewishness moved into the foreground of her life, not the background. Her level of observance or belief may not have changed between living in New York and Texas, but her sense of Jewishness certainly became more salient. Being Jewish was not a stable and static quality that Dalia possessed, but was something she became more aware of because of her social situation.

If Jewish identity is socially dependent, what are implications for the Jewish education field? For social scientists and evaluators, one question is how to measure Jewish identity given its social nature. Surveys need to take into account the social and contextual factors that affect how Jews see themselves, and should ideally measure how one’s sense of Jewishness fluctuates over time. Meanwhile, practitioners may need to re-imagine how they affect and interact with program participants. Perhaps cultivating or strengthening levels of Jewish engagement (which relates to behaviors and participation in activities) may be more productive. Funders, who drive and support much of the work going on in the Jewish education field, would also have to adapt their mindsets and strategies to reflect the social—not fixed and inherent— nature of identity. And we should all remember that Jews are not vessels to be filled up with Judaism. Rather, they are dynamic beings who are shaped by the people they encounter, the places they live, and the myriad social situations they find themselves in everyday.

Sources:
Nagel, J. (1994) ‘Constructing Ethnicity’, Social Problems 41(1): 152–76.

Ilana M. Horwitz is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Stanford Graduate School of Education Concentration in Education & Jewish Studies, with a focus on Sociology of Education. She also is a Wexner Fellow/Davidson Scholar.

Editor’s Note:  An inaugural retreat in October 2015 launched a new network of experiential Jewish educators, comprised of more than 200 program graduates from HUC-JIR’s Certificate in Jewish Education specializing in Adolescents and Emerging Adults; The Davidson School’s Master’s Degree in Jewish Experiential Education program and Jewish Experiential Leadership Institute (in partnership with the JCC Association); and YU’s Certificate Program in Experiential Jewish Education. 

Earlier this summer, members of the Experiential Jewish Education (EJE)  Network gathered again for a Day of Learning on the topic of “Fostering Joy: How can we harness joy to meet our goals as experiential Jewish educators.” Network members had the opportunity to learn together, to challenge each other, to try new education strategies, to strengthen their relationships with one another, and to think about how they can bring joy into the lives of learners through the educational experiences they create.

The Jim Joseph Foundation supports the EJE Network through its Education Initiative with HUC-JIR, JTS, and YU. We are pleased to share the following reflections on the Day of Learning from three of its participants:

“Bringing More Joy into the Lives of Teens,” by Kara Liu, Youth Director of Temple Israel in Long Beach, CA and a member of cohort five of HUC-JIR’s Certificate in Jewish Education specializing in Adolescents and Emerging Adults

“Finding Joy in Data Analysis,” by David Rosen, Associate of Campaign Analytics and Support for JEWISHcolorado and  a member of cohort one of JTS’s Master’s Degree in Jewish Experiential Education

“Prioritizing Joy as a Solo Consultant,” by Lily Lozovsky, Director of Bring Back Shabbat and Network Engagement Manager for OU Next Gen and Platforma Global Network and a member of cohort three of YU’s EJE Certificate Program

This blog appeared originally in eJewishPhilanthropy. 

How do we hire and fire?

What constitutes leadership? And what’s the difference between leadership and management?

What are the values of Jewish institutions? And how should their executives display them?

One of us (Dov) has been CEO of his Jewish Federation for slightly more than 18 months; the other (Abby) starts officially in her new role July 1. And together, with nine colleagues from across the nation, we form the first cohort in the innovative CEO Onboarding Pilot Program.

We come from a diverse collection of Jewish federations, public/community relations and service organizations that work to create robust, vibrant Jewish communities. At this time when our American Jewish community is refashioning how it facilitates expressions of Jewish life, this CEO Onboarding program is an invaluable support for the heads of leading Jewish nonprofits who will wrestle with these challenges. And, CEO Onboarding is a laboratory for exploring how such support might create a pipeline for and buoy future leadership of our communal organizations. Through independent evaluation of the program and feedback from current cohort members, program organizers and other stakeholders are gaining a deeper understanding about the specific leadership support and learning opportunities most helpful to current and future Jewish nonprofit heads. Subsequent cohorts thus will receive even more refined and focused professional development. Ultimately, tens of thousands of employees of Jewish organizations, and the hundreds of thousands of community members impacted by our work, all will benefit.

Stewarded by TBF Consulting and operated in partnership with Leading Edge, the program offers us the unique opportunity to learn from mentors, from experienced CEOs, and from other leadership experts; to analyze work-place scenarios and case studies; and to discuss best practices and strategies for success. The one-on-one professional coaching and the webinars and conferences with elite consultants throughout the year create a support system within the cohort that aids the development of a community of practice among participants.

The cohort’s first conference just concluded in Chicago. What were the highlights? For some, it was the opportunity to learn from thought-provoking authors in the areas of adaptive leadership and American Jewish history and politics. We explored a number of complex questions that any communal leader today must address: Do we have one community? What are the core messages that we deliver? How are the messages transmitted through our generations and across our geographies? For others in our cohort, the highlight was the guidance and toolkits offered by skilled practitioners in the fields of psychology of philanthropy, financial management, and nonprofit governance. For others still, the in-depth peer coaching or best practice materials brought the greatest insights. For each of us, the opportunity to discuss these issues with leading thinkers, along with the foundation leaders who host the program, was unprecedented.

But the impact of the program is not just in the practical guidance and support we receive. Impact also is felt through the spirit with which the program is being delivered. The organizers have, time and again, explained their intention to learn from this experiment with evaluation and feedback. And we are mindful of the way in which moral leadership has been articulated in the program implementation. Our second convening was slated to be held in North Carolina. But with the passage of that state legislature’s HB2, the Public Facilities Privacy and Security Act, reversing a Charlotte ordinance that had extended rights to gay and transgender people, and nullifying local ordinances that would have expanded protections for the LGBTQ community, the organizers determined that they would model what it means to exercise leadership. Our convening was moved to a different state as a result of this discriminatory legislation. We in the cohort, observing this shift, were made aware again of the sacred obligation to demonstrate Jewish values of inclusion and fair treatment for all through our stewardship of our organizations and work.

We are grateful for the incredible support of the Jim Joseph Foundation, the Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation, the Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Foundation, and other generous funders. We’re grateful to our own Boards of Directors and organizations, who see the benefit of their new CEOs participating in a forum that shepherds our learning and growing together.

And we’re grateful for a Jewish community – here, in North America – that believes in the future of Jewish leadership, invests in that future, and commits to it.

We are:

Tami Baldinger, Jewish Women’s Foundation of the Greater Palm Beaches · Robert Bank, American Jewish World Service · Dov Ben-Shimon, Jewish Federation of Greater MetroWest NJ · Jodi Bromberg, InterfaithFamily · Marci Glazer, Jewish Community Center of San Francisco · Danny Grossman, Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco · Michael Hoffman, The Jewish Federation of Palm Beach County · Abigail Porth, Jewish Community Relations Council of San Francisco · Stefanie Rhodes, Slingshot Fund · Todd Schenk, Jewish Social Service Agency of Greater Washington · Elana Silber, Sharsheret

Dov Ben-Shimon is the (fairly new) CEO of the Jewish Federation of Greater MetroWest, NJ; Abby Porth is the (brand new) CEO of the Jewish Community Relations Council of the San Francisco Bay Area.

This blog appeared originally in eJewishPhilanthropy. 

Five years ago, the Nadiv program was launched as an innovative pilot program involving six camp-school partnerships whose primary objective was enhancing and deepening the quality of Jewish education at the camps and enriching experiential education at the schools while building a mutually beneficial and sustainable camp-school model. The Nadiv model created six new full-time positions for experiential Jewish educators, each shared by a camp and a school in geographic proximity to each other. The educators, whose responsibilities were defined by each camp and school based on its needs, toggled their responsibilities between them. In most cases, this meant spending four days in the school during the academic year with one day devoted to planning the camp program for the coming summer, with the entire camp season being spent in camp. The hope was to create a career path for select, talented educators. The program began with a preparatory year in 2011 and is concluding its active four-year phase this month.

You could say that the theme song of this pilot was “partnership,” since it involved not only camp-school partnerships but also a $3.3 million funding partnership of the Jim Joseph and AVI CHAI Foundations, which remained actively involved throughout the five years. In addition, the Union for Reform Judaism (URJ), which operates three of the six participating camps and with which three of the schools are associated, was represented in the inception of the project. The entire project was directed by Ramie Arian under the auspices of the Foundation for Jewish Camp, with intensive involvement of two veteran experiential educators in the role of mentors. From the outset, Nadiv was an enterprise with “many moving parts.”

Each camp-school partnership was unique in character, structure, expectations and possibilities. Four of the schools were Jewish day schools and two were Reform congregational schools. In addition to the three URJ partnerships (Camp Coleman and Davis Academy in Georgia; Crane Lake Camp in Massachusetts and Temple Shaarey Tefila in New York; Camp Kalsman and Temple De Hirsch Sinai in Washington), there were two independent camp-school partnerships (Herzl Camp in Wisconsin and Heilicher Minneapolis Day School; Camp Mountain Chai and San Diego Jewish Academy in California) and a Young Judaea-Solomon Schechter partnership (Camp Young Judaea Sprout Lake in New York and Solomon Schechter Day School of Bergen County, New Jersey).

Each Nadiv educator was mentored by a veteran experiential educator. In addition, the group had periodic conference calls with the Nadiv director and the two mentors, and a yearly two-day seminar.

The Nadiv model was compelling in its potential for:

• Improving the quality and consistency of experiential Jewish education in the camps and schools
• Nurturing collaboration between two major approaches to Jewish education in North America: the formal and the experiential
• Being an innovative experiment on behalf of engaging Jewish children through the intellect, the senses and the emotions.

On the other hand, it faced some daunting challenges such as:

• Creating camp/school partnerships built on shared goals and visions rather than only on the relationship with the shared educator
• Retaining Nadiv educators in the face of the heavy time demands of working in both school and camp settings
• Juggling the sometimes conflicting expectations of two sets of supervisors
• Handling the upheavals imposed by leadership changes in the schools and camps.

Nadiv was closely followed and its progress evaluated through its mid-point in December 2014 by the strategic consulting firm Informing Change. The executive summary of its report found gradual progress in improving Jewish education at the camps. A positive relationship of the Nadiv educator with camp staff influenced the extent to which change occurred in the camp’s Jewish program.

In the schools, the report found variance in the nature and scope of improvements in Jewish experiential education due to the differences in the roles of the Nadiv educators and in the schools’ priorities. In terms of the Nadiv camp-school partnerships, Informing Change reported communication between each partner camp and school, but little evidence of the kind of shared vision and mutual need that are characteristic of genuine collaborations. This last observation isn’t surprising, given that the original Nadiv vision was of a shared employee, not necessarily of a full collaboration.

In the final year of the Nadiv grant ending in June 2016, the three URJ partnerships remain intact. Of the three other partnerships, one of the schools appointed its Nadiv fellow as Judaic Studies Department Chair and Director of Jewish Life, and his new responsibilities made it impossible to continue in his camp position. The two other Nadiv fellows were dissatisfied with their school positions and took positions at other schools, which made continuation of the original camp-school partnership impossible.

What lessons can we share from Nadiv now that it’s approaching the end of its four-year active phase?

The Nadiv program resulted in positive results for the camps. Having a master’s level Jewish educator with camp experience (rather than an undergraduate or graduate student) overseeing and devoting time during the year to Jewish programming and education in camp raised the level and professionalism of Jewish programming in all six camps. It resulted in more creative and innovative educational programs and contributed to improving the preparation of teaching faculty in the camps. In addition, the Nadiv educator’s presence in the camp for a number of consecutive summers provided much needed continuity to the Jewish program that had often suffered from a high turnover of seasonal staff.

Depending on the educator’s role, Nadiv also resulted in enhanced experiential education in the schools, to an extent. The educators with responsibilities beyond the classroom, such as tefillah or “Jewish life,” were better positioned to introduce experiential elements into the life of the school than those who were primarily in the classroom.

Despite the heavy demands of switching between school and camp responsibilities, most of the Nadiv educators reported high job satisfaction and professional growth during their years in the program. The supervision provided by the partner organizations together with the intense mentoring and professional seminars provided by Nadiv added up to high-level, concentrated in-service training in both formal and experiential education.

There were nonetheless substantial challenges and obstacles to the goal of continued camp-school partnerships after the end of the philanthropic funding. None of the original partnerships will continue employing the same model after June 2016. The key challenges include:

1. The difficulty in building true camp-school partnerships and establishing an overarching common goal and vision, along with the lack of conviction on the part of some of the schools that an experiential educator adds real value that would otherwise be absent. In the case of Nadiv, the camps were the primary drivers, searching for a school with which to partner. True collaborations call for each partner to see a compelling need for the partnership, and to spend time and energy on exploring areas of mutual interest. In addition, partnership goals have to be reviewed with an open mind over time and revised or even discarded.
2. The high cost of the shared salary and of the ongoing mentoring and professional development. The budget limitations of camps and schools pose a serious challenge to an unsubsidized shared educator model accompanied by mentoring and professional development.
3. This year-round employment model places heavy demands on the educator, especially in the high intensity planning times of late spring (for camps) and late summer (for schools). This raises the question of the price exacted from an educator in terms of having sufficient time to devote to camp and school responsibilities as well as to personal and family life.
4. Leadership changes in the partnership organizations can, and usually do, have an impact on the work of a shared educator. The transition can disrupt lines of authority, and the new camp or school leader may not have the same buy-in to the model as the previous leader. Half the Nadiv partnerships experienced transitions in a camp or school leader.

Even when the camp-school partnership model does not continue, however, a positive ripple effect can be seen. The Nadiv partner camps value the professional planning and expertise that have raised the bar over the past four years for their Jewish educational programming. They are looking for different ways to maintain that level of professionalism. One camp hired its Nadiv educator as its associate director with the intent of keeping Jewish education high on its leaders’ priority list; another camp arranged for its Nadiv educator to continue during the summer and on a part-time basis during the academic year even after she left the partner school.

Inspired by Nadiv and by the model of the Ramah-URJ Service Corps, URJ is now supporting the creation of employment partnerships between selected congregations and URJ camps. Each congregation-camp partnership hires a full-time staff member, who usually serves as youth director in the congregation and unit head (or other senior staff role) in the camp. The staff members are generally early-career professionals with a bachelor’s degree and extensive camp experience. URJ contributes significantly to their salaries, and it provides a one-year training program that includes a professional development retreat in the fall, and webinars every six weeks throughout the school year. URJ anticipates that 20 such joint positions will be in operation for 2016/17.

A second example is a program supported by the Jewish United Fund of Metropolitan Chicago. “Springboard Teen Engagement Specialists” has engaged one professional this year in a year-round position to work with Jewish teens and will add one per year over the next four years. During the academic year, they work in the Chicago community providing teen programming for an array of Jewish youth groups, synagogues, and school clubs. During the summer, they will engage in outreach as part of the programming staff at a Jewish summer camp. The summer relationships they forge will help guide the subsequent year’s programming.

We owe thanks to all those whose dedicated efforts made the Nadiv pilot happen and to the talented Nadiv Fellows who pioneered this initiative, bringing their passion for experiential education into Jewish camps and schools. This pilot program enhanced Jewish educational programming in all six camps, brought camps and schools into working partnerships, and led others to consider what else can be accomplished by building bridges of collaboration between our educational organizations. We see Nadiv’s story as unfinished, and will wait and watch patiently to see what new collaborations it will inspire.

Rabbi Ramie Arian is a consultant working with Jewish camps and other programs of experiential education in the Jewish community. He serves as project manager for Nadiv.

Leah Nadich Meir is a Program Officer at The AVI CHAI Foundation.

Steven Green is Director of Grants Management/Program Officer for the Jim Joseph Foundation.

This blog on Hiddur ran originally in eJewishPhilanthropy

Think for a moment of nearly any activity you associate with Jewish camp. Whatever comes to mind, chances are that the experience is communal, engaging, and fun. Now, more camps increasingly recognize that any camp experience can also be a quality Jewish experience for their campers and staff – if designed in a thoughtful, intentional way.

Over the last decade, multiple investments by different funders have focused on developing the Jewish experience at camp, and camps now have a wide range of professional development and training opportunities with this focus available to their seasonal and year-round staff. The field’s enthusiastic reception of these offerings has shown a steady appetite for learning how to deliver a better Jewish program. Now, our three foundations – AVI CHAI, Jim Joseph, and the Maimonides Fund – are advancing this vision even further by helping camps look comprehensively and systematically at where and how they are delivering the Jewish experience, and introducing ways to do it better.

The result is Hiddur, a new program of Foundation for Jewish Camp (FJC). Camps work one-on-one with coaches who are highly experienced Jewish educators to develop specific Jewish experiential learning outcomes for their campers, staff, and camp community. Camps can choose to address a number of different areas, including Jewish peoplehood, connections to Israel, Jewish perspectives on nature and environment, Hebrew language, social justice (tikkun olam), marking sacred time through Shabbat and Jewish holidays, spirituality and mindfulness, and personal ethics (middot).

Hiddur is our attempt to answer critical questions, as explained by Michelle Shapiro Abraham, a Hiddur coach: “When children leave camp, what five or six Jewish components from the summer will the camp want them to retain? What outcomes from these summer experiences would we hope to achieve? How do we train our staff to support those outcomes? Jewish camp experiences shouldn’t be siloed – how do we bring the camp’s Jewish values to life, in every aspect of the camp experience, blended with that camp’s overall culture? Hiddur is like holding up a mirror and giving the opportunity for camp leadership to think about what’s important to them.”

The first Hiddur cohort is comprised of eight camps across the U.S., representing geographical, denominational, and mission diversity: Camp Daisy & Harry Stein (Arizona), Herzl Camp (Wisconsin), Camp Judaea (North Carolina), B’nai B’rith Camp (Oregon), Camp Sabra (Missouri), Emma Kaufmann Camp (West Virginia), B’nai B’rith Perlman Camp (Pennsylvania), and Camp Tel Noar (New Hampshire). These camps have committed to a three-year process and each has formed a Hiddur team – including professional and lay leadership – to work with their coach. The pilot camps also are participating in a Community of Practice to share their progress and challenges, as well as to further develop their skills to effectively implement Jewish experiential learning. Additionally, camps will have access to Ignition Grants to fund new Jewish initiatives during the summer.

Camps want to grow and evolve their Jewish experiences for a variety of reasons. Hiddur offers space to learn, experiment, and analyze regardless of why camps are driven to do this. Tom Rosenberg, a 27-year veteran of the Jewish camp field and current executive director of Camp Judaea, says Hiddur “provides the opportunity to increase the camp’s intentionality about the type of Jewish education being provided in camp. It does it in a systemic way, weaving together enrichment of diverse components of camp, from Ivritand Israeli music to daily middot and tefillah. As a pluralistic camp serving a pretty diverse Jewish population, we want staff to demonstrate that diversity so all our campers can learn the many flavors of Jewish life and practices of Judaism in the world. We want to reinforce that we’re all Jewish, and to create a stronger Jewish community worldwide.”

Another director, Efraim Yudewitz of Camp Tel Noar, explains how he sees Hiddur helping to integrate Judaism further into the camp experience. “Our campers love Shabbat. They love Israel Day. These are things we do Jewishly that we love. Then there are things they love about camp that happen more on a routine basis, that are actually also Jewish things, but we haven’t talked about them in a Jewish context. For example, what kids love the most, what keeps them coming back next summer, are the relationships – community, friends, role models. There’s lots of things we do to help foster those relationships. The way we treat and relate to each other in Jewish law – ben adam l’chavero – is a language we talk about in camp, but campers don’t understand it as a ‘Jewish’ concept. I want to help our kids understand and feel like the regular routine camp stuff is Jewish too.”

The Hiddur model is an unprecedented endeavor in our field – in terms of the length of the initiative, its collaborative funding structure, and who it involves. Hiddur involves camp directors, as well as the inner circle of camp leadership, both lay and professional. This makes it more likely that all of the camps’ desired changes will be implemented regardless of staff turnover, new priorities that arise, and other extenuating circumstances. Joe Reimer, Professor of Jewish Education at Brandeis University and a longtime consultant in the field serving as a mentor to Hiddur coaches, makes the argument, “When you bring the broader camp community, including staff, parents, and lay leadership, into the discussion, everyone can see how the enhanced Jewish mission of the camp is an asset to the overall vitality of the camp.”

We recognize that implementing this type of change effectively and sustaining it for the long-term takes proper planning. That’s why our foundations made Hiddur a three year investment, offering ample time for the coaches to work with the camp’s Hiddur team to assess strengths and weaknesses and plan for change. The cohort of camps and coaches will grow together, benefiting all involved. Yudewitz explains the important cohort dynamic: “We’re not doing it in our own bubble, but getting the guidance to be really reflective over a longer period of time about what’s working and what isn’t. It helps us stay on task, be productive, and also do it much better.” And the coaches themselves will be able to collaborate and learn from each other over this time period as well, helping to ensure that each Hiddur team receives the highest quality level of training.

As foundations that already have invested in Jewish camp, we believe deeply in the power of the immersive experiences it offers. FJC’s strategy of focusing intently on the Jewishness of camp experiences is potentially game-changing – for the pilot camps andfor the entire field. Learnings and strategies that come out of this initiative will be shared with the broader camp community.

Our three foundations now are working with FJC to help the pilot group with strategy and execution, and we again are reminded that there is much to be celebrated in the world of Jewish camping. We hope this program will drive success one step further by advancing the ability of Jewish camps to enhance and more effectively execute their Jewish missions.

Joel Einleger is a senior program officer at the AVI CHAI Foundation.
Aaron Saxe is a program officer at the Jim Joseph Foundation.
Aimee Weiss is a program officer at the Maimonides Fund

For many Jewish families, the bar or bat mitzvah is a child’s transition to Jewish “adulthood” and, unfortunately, the end of their active involvement in Jewish life. The jarring statistic is that less than 20 percent of Jewish teens remain involved in Jewish life post-bar or bat mitzvah.

In response, many in the Jewish organizational world are re-focusing efforts on those critical, formative teen years.  What more can we do to create connection and meaning for Jewish teens, both now and as they move into adulthood? The answers to this question should reflect the major engagement opportunity that the teen years actually present.

During these years, as identities are forming, young people want to explore, to question, and to learn. Organizations such as Moving Traditions, for example, have set a high priority on Jewish teens by presenting field-tested programs, such as Rosh Hodesh: It’s a Girl Thing, and Shevet Achim: the Brotherhood. These programs engage teens in conversations about ‘who am I’ and ‘who am I becoming’ as they navigate their adolescent years with Jewish context, peers, and mentors.  Through these and many other substantive Jewish opportunities, teens become more connected to themselves, to each other and to the Jewish community.

Thankfully, more and more of these programs are part of the Jewish teen landscape because of the innovative philanthropic experiment known as the Jewish Teen Education and Engagement Funder Collaborative. National and local funders in ten communities are working together to develop and support new teen initiatives that draw on the collective strength of local organizations.  And, for the first time, we can point to an evaluation about one of the local community initiatives—in this instance, the Denver-Boulder initiative—to understand some of the tangible outcomes on local teens, as well as the broader successes and challenges.

When launched in July 2014 with local funds from Rose Community Foundation and other donors and national funds from the Jim Joseph Foundation, the Denver-Boulder Jewish Teen Education and Engagement Initiative was an ambitious endeavor that looked to maximize the collective efforts of five local agencies. Moving Traditions and Jewish Student Connection were looking to scale their efforts in the community; jHub, Boulder Jewish Teen Initiative and PresenTense Colorado were all new.

The Year 1 local evaluation report (prepared by Informing Change, released November 2015) draws on a survey of teens and parents, and interviews with professionals and community leaders, to present a comprehensive picture of the engagement initiative so far. By increasing professional collaborative opportunities, and investing in agencies that support strong adult mentors and role models for teens, the Jewish communities in Denver and Boulder are making progress to engage local Jewish teens in Jewish life and learning.  We are excited to share a few key insights and lessons below:

Local Impact on Jewish Teens

“[To me, being Jewish means] a sense of community and belonging—a guide, more or less, to life.” – BJTI Teen

The findings for local teens are promising, while also prompting us to ask, “what more can we do?” The positives are that several hundred teens engaged in the Initiative’s programs in the first year. Overwhelmingly, Jewish teens are involved with the five grantees because they want to spend time with Jewish peers and because the offerings sound fun. The data point to two key areas to address: 1) expanding the Initiative’s reach to teens not previously engaged in Jewish life, and 2) continuing to find creative ways to bring Jewish life to teens where and when it makes sense for them. Not surprisingly, the evaluation found that homework and other extracurricular activities are the leading factors limiting teens from participating in Jewish opportunities.

The Emergence of JHub

With its roots in what was formerly called the Jewish Youth Professional Council, jHub supports professional development and collaborative opportunities for teen youth professionals throughout the Denver and Boulder communities. Through the Initiative’s funding this now staffed collaborative professional network has expanded far beyond the five Initiative grantees to include 27 current member organizations.

jHub offers these members a structure to share knowledge and data, draw on each other’s organizational strengths, build exciting new partnerships, and bring more Jewish teens together. Any challenges that arise can be confronted as a cohesive community with a sense of shared purpose. jHub also offers its members professional development and educational grant opportunities.

The evaluation shows that Jewish youth professionals now experience a more supportive peer network through jHub, contributing to increased job satisfaction. jHub professionals feel more connected to one another and the missions of their respective organizations. Moreover, they are interested in ongoing learning and growth, specifically to support them as they move through their careers.

“Through jHub, I have a greater understanding that we should let teens know about other programs and activities.  And if I do this, others will do the same for me when I have an event….” – jHub member

A New Level of collaboration

The Initiative’s five grantees report a great commitment to collaboration, rather than competition, for teen education and engagement in the area because of their work together in the Initiative. With the understanding that each organization is different and offers unique opportunities for teens with varied interests and personalities, the organizations work together to promote and support one another.

Each grantee organization models a structure where adults serve as mentors and role models for teens, while also emphasizing opportunities for teen leadership. The organizations focus primarily on a relational, rather than a programmatic, model, of Jewish engagement. Building on the approach in synagogue life outlined in Dr. Ron Wolfson’s book, Relational Judaism, the grantees are shaping the next generation of Jewish adults by facilitating relationships with adult mentors and empowering teens through different modalities of Jewish engagement.

Beyond the Initiative

On the ground, we also see that the Initiative’s mere presence brings a positive energy and attention to quality programming for Jewish teens outside of grantee programs. Parents of Jewish teens involved with Moving Traditions and BJTI report more individuals in the community dedicated to supporting Jewish teen engagement. Grantee professionals are raising communal awareness through meetings and one-on-one conversations with Jewish organizations and parents. This first year has been an important period of foundation-building and community awareness-raising.

Lessons Learned Year 1

As the evaluation notes, the Initiative’s first year was not without challenges. As a result, we learned valuable lessons that can inform future initiatives, particularly those in the similar teen education and engagement space. First, start-up took longer than anticipated. Bringing together this many partners for an entirely new approach to teen outreach and education necessitates significant planning and coordination before even one program is ready to officially launch. Second, we cannot minimize the challenge of recruiting uninvolved teens. Simply, it is very difficult. Reaching them alone is a major accomplishment. Persuading them to actually engage and to give something a shot is a true success story—and not easy. And third, there are limits to setting up shared data-systems. In fact, it may be unrealistic to build a single technology tool and database for all organizations to utilize and access. Yet, we realize that this is not the only way to share and aggregate data. Finding the most useful, effective, and efficient tool, however, will require a more nuanced solution. We believe this to be attainable, but appreciate that it will require additional time and collaboration among multiple stakeholders to come up with systems that work for all involved.

Concluding Thoughts

We are counting on the Denver-Boulder Jewish Teen Initiative to succeed. In our community, 25% of teens have a bar or bat mitzvah; only 16% attend post bar/bat mitzvah programs sponsored by or connected to the congregations, synagogues, and other Jewish institutions providing bar/bat mitzvahs.[1] So this is a crucial conversation we are having and a deeply important initiative we are implementing. We have to get it right.

And we believe the evaluation shows that we are making the right initial steps—and that other communities can too. By working with grantees such as Moving Traditions, Jewish Student Connection, Boulder Jewish Teen Initiative, jHub, and PresenTense Colorado, the Initiative reflects an investment in communal collaboration and new models of engagement. There are more and better opportunities for teens to find Jewish experiences relevant to their interests and needs and that can lead to ongoing engagement in Jewish life. As a result, teens build relationships with adult mentors and continue their own conversations about their development as young Jewish adults.

We look forward to sharing more as we learn more. To be sure, there are more successes and challenges to come. But this first look at the early, local results of the national-local Funder Collaborative, suggest that this is an exciting moment for all who care about Jewish teens.

Melanie Gruenwald is the Colorado Director for Moving Traditions. Ellen Irie is President and CEO of Informing Change.

[1] Kidron, Y. and Cohen, S.M. (2015) Jewish Teen Population Estimates: Denver/ Boulder Metro Area.

Throughout the Gathering, I was aware of what a privilege it is, as an educator, to immerse myself in a focused space of ideas and learning, removed from the day-to-day elements of my professional role. I am very grateful for this gift.
—Erica Frankel, Director of Strategy for the Jewish Learning Fellowship at Hillel International, graduate of Yeshiva University Certificate Program in Experiential Jewish Education

In late October 2015, 45 experiential Jewish educators came to the Kaplan Mitchell Retreat and Conference Center at Ramah Darom, in Clayton, Georgia, to learn, to reflect, and to form a network for experiential Jewish educators. This inaugural retreat launched a new collaborative initiative funded through the Jim Joseph Foundation’s Education Initiative—the combined $45 million grant to three leading educational institutions: Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion (HUC-JIR), The Jewish Theological Seminary (JTS), and Yeshiva University (YU).

Facilitating and supporting collaboration among the universities is a core focus of the Education Initiative. This work leads to increased knowledge-sharing and creative new learning opportunities. Other collaborations address areas such as e-learning and Jewish early-childhood education. The goal of this specific collaborative endeavor is to form and strengthen a network of graduates from each school’s experiential Jewish education professional training initiatives: HUC-JIR’s Certificate in Jewish Education specializing in Adolescents and Emerging Adults; The Davidson School’s Master’s Degree in Jewish Education program and Jewish Experiential Leadership Institute (in partnership with the JCC Association); and YU’s Certificate Program in Experiential Jewish Education. By bringing together participants from these different programs, the EJE Network hopes to strengthen individual educators, as well as the field of Jewish education as a whole.

The EJE Network Gathering centered on the topic of memory as a tool for educational program development and participant engagement. Erica Frankel explained, “The Gathering gave an opportunity to revisit and deepen attendees’ understanding of memory as it relates to experience-building. We investigated memory textually in our opening beit midrash (study session), intellectually through conversations with notable academics, and practically in sessions with experts from the fields of education, psychology, and business.”

Joshua Jacobs, Assistant Director of Eden Village Camp and graduate of The Davidson School’s MA program, picks up this theme as he continues, “Rabba Yaffa Epstein, [Director of Education, North America, Pardes Institute for Jewish Studies] led a thrilling text study. The lessons contained within about the Torah and memory, combined with Rabba Epstein’s enthusiasm for the material, made for a great opening to the seminar.”

A highlight for many participants was hearing from Dr. Ryan Hamilton, professor at Emory University and facilitator for Beyond Philosophy, a consulting group that focuses on consumer experience. Andrew Paull, Director of BBYO Manhattan and a graduate of HUC-JIR’s Certificate in Jewish Education for Adolescents and Emerging Adults, reflected on how he “greatly appreciated the focus on how we design an experience by keeping in mind the memory afterward.” Joshua Jacobs further explained, “His presentation showed how to utilize reverse engineering to strengthen a good experience in a participant’s mind. This was extremely interesting and applicable to my work at Eden Village Camp. Some of the behavior and psychology principles upon which he touched will affect the ways we market and price our camp, create the staff’s schedule, and plan the arc of the camper experience.” Erica Frankel added, “People evaluate experiences both cognitively (comparing it to their expectations of what will happen), and affectively (based on how they felt during the experience).”

A third component of the gathering, a structured Peer Consultancy experience, provided a unique opportunity for attendees to meet new peers and to collaboratively support one another’s initiatives. Small groups focused on current work challenges and brainstormed individualized approaches. Andrew Paull commented, “This was a valuable piece of the Gathering and helped [us] form deeper relationships with other people in this network.”

The Gathering concluded with a new beginning: formally launching an ongoing EJE Network that supports more than 200 program graduates as they implement experiential Jewish education across the Jewish spectrum. Participants had the opportunity to develop a set of future activities to be rolled out over the next year, including ongoing remote learning, additional in-person learning opportunities, formal and informal mentoring and networking, new resource creation, and interest groups to allow individuals working on similar projects to partner and support one another. As Erica Frankel concluded, “Most importantly, I’ve returned to my desk with a new set of helpful phone numbers from my peers.”

Rachel Meytin is Director of the Experiential Jewish Education Network, a joint project of Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, The Jewish Theological Seminary, and Yeshiva University

A version of this blog originally ran in Philanthropy News Digest

“We’re in the business of risk-taking,” is a frequent refrain of Chip Edelsberg, Executive Director of the Jim Joseph Foundation. Generally speaking, Edelsberg’s notion of risk-taking refers to the investments the Foundation makes in its grantees and their programs. The Jim Joseph Foundation is a foundation with assets in the range of $1 billion whose mission is to foster compelling, effective Jewish learning experiences for young Jews.  Between 2006 and June, 2014, the Foundation granted over $300 million to increase the number and quality of Jewish educators, to expand opportunities for Jewish learning, and to build a strong field for Jewish learning (Jim Joseph Foundation, 2014). Rarely is there an established research base for the kinds of initiatives the Foundation supports in Jewish education. In the spring of 2013, though, Edelsberg had another kind of risk in mind.

What might be gained, Edelsberg ventured, if the Foundation staff brought together a group of competing evaluation firms with whom they had worked in the past to consider ways to improve the Foundation’s practice and use of evaluation? The idea had emerged from a study of the history of the Foundation’s evaluation practices from its inception in 2006 through 2012, commissioned by the Foundation and conducted by Lee Shulman, President Emeritus of The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and Charles E. Ducommun Professor of Education Emeritus at Stanford University. Edelsberg thought it was a risk worth taking, and the board of the Foundation agreed. Edelsberg made another bold decision—to allow a doctoral student in Evaluation Studies from the University of MN to study this experimental venture.

In the winter of 2013, a colleague of mine from the field of Jewish education who was then a staff member of the Foundation heard about my research interest in the role evaluation plays in the work of foundations and their grantees. She offered to connect me with Edelsberg because of the Jim Joseph Foundation’s interest in and commitment to evaluation in their work. Edelsberg described the idea for what became the “Evaluators’ Consortium” and I asked about the possibility of studying the process as a case study for my dissertation. By the time the consortium met for the first time in October of 2013, and with the agreement of the Foundation board and the participating evaluators, I launched the research. The purpose of the study was to explore what occurred when a foundation inaugurated an innovative approach to evaluation practice, examining factors that supported successful implementation of the innovation and the impediments to its success. It sought to provide insights into the elements of organizational culture, practices, circumstances, and structures that can support effective practices of evaluation in the foundation sector. The Foundation gave me access to documents and invited me to observe meetings of the Consortium held both in person and electronically. Over the course of the first year of the Consortium’s operation, I interviewed all Foundation program staff members, Shulman (who served as the facilitator), a member of the board, and each of the participating evaluators.

In the initial stages of the work, the goals for this experiment were general and somewhat vague. The Foundation hoped to establish a more efficient process for selecting evaluators for foundation grants, to stimulate collaboration among the evaluators, to explore possibilities to conduct cluster evaluations or meta-analyses, and to examine ways the foundation could improve its overall program of evaluation.  One hope was that in their coming together, the evaluators would help the Foundation define an agenda for their work together. In spite of the uncertainty of the initiative’s outcomes, all the evaluation firms that were asked accepted Edelsberg’s invitation to participate—a testament to the nature of the relationship they already had with Edelsberg and the Foundation, and an indication of what a deeper relationship with the Foundation meant to the evaluators. The Consortium met for two face-to-face gatherings and two web-based conferences, and there was email communication among the participants between convenings. When the group gathered, members of the Consortium shared samples of their work with one another.

There was some discomfort among participants about the initial lack of clarity about the outcomes and timeline of the Consortium, especially since the evaluators were participating without compensation. Both Foundation staff and evaluators wondered how long they would be able to continue without a clear focus.  An idea that emerged toward the end of the first gathering gained traction in the months leading up to the second meeting—what if the group developed a set of outcomes and measures for Jewishness (or Jewish identity/growth/development) that could be used across organizations, initiatives, and programs? Nothing like this existed in the field of Jewish education. The notion of a tangible product, one that could be used by the evaluators, by the Jim Joseph Foundation, and by the field at large, had broad appeal. There were some concerns about committing to this goal among the evaluators–while worthwhile, such a goal was ambitious, difficult, and time consuming to achieve.

The Consortium’s work on measures of Jewish growth came at a critical time for the Foundation. At about the same time as the Evaluators’ Consortium was launched, the Jim Joseph Foundation had begun work on one of its most large-scale projects to date—the Initiative on Jewish Teen Education and Engagement. The initiative linked directly to the Foundation’s mission to “foster compelling, effective Jewish learning experiences” for teens and young adults. The initiative’s strategy included working in partnership with funders in up to ten local communities in the US to incubate new models of learning and involvement for Jewish teens. It grew out of an understanding of the importance of this stage of the life cycle in human development coupled with a reading of the data on low participation rates of Jewish teens in the Jewish educational experiences available to them in their communities (Informing Change, Jim Joseph Foundation, & Rosov Consulting, March 2013). On the eve of the launch of the Teen Initiative, the Foundation was particularly interested in measures of Jewish growth that could play a role in evaluating the work within and across communities.

Over the course of the first year of work, the Consortium helped the Foundation develop the vision for a cross-community evaluation of the Teen Initiative, including more in-depth work on outcomes and measures of Jewish growth.  In a step unprecedented for the Foundation, the staff asked the members of the Consortium for feedback on a draft of the evaluation RFP, and made changes on the basis of their suggestions. At the end of the year, the Foundation awarded a million dollar, four-year contract to two of the participating firms to conduct the cross-community evaluation. Another member of the Consortium is participating as a consultant on pieces of that work. The fourth member of the Consortium has been contracted by several of the local communities to conduct their community-based evaluations.

In addition to shaping of the cross-community evaluation and taking first steps on the development of outcomes and measures of Jewish growth, the initiative produced several other outcomes for the Foundation and for the participating evaluators. The foundation clarified its ideas about effective evaluation practices.  Foundation staff members developed the capacity to think differently about evaluation. Relationships were strengthened between Foundation staff and evaluators and between individual evaluators and evaluation firms. The initiative created relationships among competitors who entered into collaboration with one another to their own benefit and to the benefit of the Foundation and its grantees. Through its success with the Consortium the Foundation was emboldened to consider other new approaches to evaluation. Finally, as a result of the work done with the Consortium, the Foundation was able to introduce evaluators and high quality evaluation practices to other funders and communities.

The data collection for my dissertation came to a close in August of 2014, nearly a year after the first convening of the Jim Joseph Foundation’s Evaluators’ Consortium. Since then, the Consortium has continued to meet. Their current goals, according to a Foundation blogpost written by Sandy Edwards and Stacie Cherner (2015) of the Foundation staff, include:

• A plan for researchers, funders and practitioners to agree on common constructs [of Jewish learning and growth];
• The development of a set of standardized questions that can be utilized across the Foundation’s portfolio of grantees;
• Field testing of a “universal toolkit” for collecting data on common outcomes and demographics;
• A plan for longitudinal testing, and recommending resources to disseminate and encourage the use of universal sets of tools.

Various factors supported the success of the Consortium. One was the Foundation’s willingness to take a risk and to anticipate the possibility of failure. A learning culture at the Foundation and a commitment to field building were other contributing factors. Another contributing factor was the Foundation’s ongoing approach to evaluation.  Program officers work in partnership with grantees to develop evaluation RFPs and to hire evaluators; the Foundation then funds the evaluation of their grants. Members of the program staff are engaged in nearly all stages of the evaluations of grants they manage. The staff cultivates relationships with the grantees and evaluators with whom they work. The Foundation is committed to learning from evaluation, not just using it for accountability. They use evaluation for making decisions about grantmaking. The Foundation shares the majority of completed evaluation reports on its website.

To understand the success of the Consortium we also must consider its leaders and its participants. The Foundation’s professional leader, Chip Edelsberg, his commitment to the initiative in particular and to evaluation in general, and his ability to cultivate relationships with others played important roles. Also critical were the intellectual leadership and facilitation of Lee Shulman. For the participating evaluators there were benefits to participating—possibilities of evaluation contracts with the Foundation, enhanced relationships with Foundation staff, and opportunities for professional development and colleagueship. These incentives certainly encouraged participation, and all those invited agreed to participate. It was no small feat, though, that these evaluators agreed to work alongside the organizations with whom they compete for contracts, to share their expertise with one another, to participate without direct compensation, to engage without promises of future work—and to do so with an uncertain timeline and undefined outcomes in the early stages. The small size of the field of Jewish education and the sub-field of evaluation of Jewish education added other facilitating factors—the players were known to one another at least by reputation even if they did not know each other personally and the impact of the work of these participants had the potential to be felt in the field.

Establishing the Evaluators’ Consortium required overcoming a number of challenges.  The logistics involved in scheduling the leadership of the four evaluation firms took much longer than the Foundation anticipated. Some of the evaluators worried that the outcomes were not clear at the beginning, nor was the timeline. Some worried about the scope of the project and the amount of time they had to give. Some were concerned that the competing firms might be reluctant to be fully open and comfortable working with their competitors. While the Foundation worked to create an atmosphere of collegiality among all the participants, the power differential between the Foundation and the others operated beneath the surface.

The model of the Evaluators’ Consortium is worthy of consideration by other foundations engaged in strategic philanthropy. It is likely, however, to demand practices that are a departure from “business as usual.” Strategic philanthropy involves specifying outcomes in advance and looking at progress against those outcomes. When contemplating this type of innovation in the practice of evaluation, a foundation ought to be aware of the need for emergent goals and uncertainty. Not only is it impossible to specify all possible outcomes of an innovation, attempting to define the outcomes may limit the foundation’s consideration of promising courses of action. Working in an emergent way requires some faith in the process, trust in the people promoting the innovation, and some concrete promise of potential benefits. It requires a champion who is willing to take risks and to bring others along an uncharted path. The use of developmental evaluation to document and learn systematically about the work as it progresses could address strategic concerns.

It may be counter-intuitive to bring together competitors to work together on behalf of a foundation’s evaluation program. Convening competitors in a collaborative venture, though, can create capacity, build networks, and magnify potential outcomes. Careful consideration needs to be given to the conditions under which collaboration is done, who facilitates it, and what expectations are established throughout the process. Cultivating relationships is a critical step in introducing and sustaining innovation in evaluation practice.

Innovating in the area of evaluation practice through the convening of evaluators, staff, and outside experts requires a commitment of staff time and attention for a range of tasks from engaging potential participants to defining questions to address to making arrangements. Making staff available for this work may require the shifting of responsibilities and priorities among staff members. Financial resources are another consideration. It may not always be possible to draw on the good will and trust or even the promise of future contracts with a foundation or its grantees to induce evaluators to participate in an undertaking like the Evaluators’ Consortium. Foundations considering the use of this model ought to establish a budget that would allow for compensation of the participants.

The practice of risk-taking is central to the work of foundation leaders as they hone their strategies, strive to make effective investments in organizations and programs, and pursue their missions of social betterment. The model of the Evaluators’ Consortium is a risk worthy of consideration by foundation leaders. Working collaboratively with a diverse group of external evaluators who bring a range of skills, perspectives, and expertise has potential for significant pay-offs for foundations and, ultimately, for the spheres they hope to impact.

Cindy Reich is an evaluator and Jewish educator based in Minneapolis, MN. This article is based on her dissertation, Improving Evaluation Practice in the Foundation Sector: A Case Study of the Jim Joseph Foundation’s Evaluators’ Consortium, scheduled to enter library circulation in spring 2016. She received her Ph.D. in Evaluation Studies from the University of MN in 2015.

Bibliography

Informing Change, Jim Joseph Foundation, Rosov Consulting (2013, March) Effective Strategies for Educating and Engaging Jewish Teens: What Jewish Communities Can Learn from Programs That Work. Retrieved from https://jimjosephfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Report_and_Appendix_Effective_Strategies_for_Educating_and_Engaging_Jewish_Teens.pdf

Jim Joseph Foundation. (2014). Jim Joseph Foundation 2013-2014 Biennial Report . San Francisco, CA, USA.

S. Edwards & S. Cherner. (2015, April 9). A Behind-the-Scenes Look at an Evaluators’ Consortium (Blogpost). Retrieved from https://jimjosephfoundation.org/a-behind-the-scenes-look-at-an-evaluators-consortium/