Site has been moved

This site has been moved. Please click here to be redirected to the new site, www.communityphilanthropy.org.

Status update - Report available at Fall CF Conference

On the Brink of New Promise - the long awaited report from the Futures of Community Philanthropy Project will be available at the Fall Community Foundations conference in Seattle (September 19-21). We'll also be launching a new website, which will have downloadable copies of the report and working versions of a toolkit and discussion guides for community philanthropy organizations.

Stay tuned!

Review Process

We have draft products from the futures project and now its time to improve them. We will be holding "review and revise" meetings in California in March, Flint, MI (Mott Foundation) and New York, NY (Ford Foundation) in April, Budapest, Hungary at the European Foundation Centre Conference in June, and at the CFLT meeting in June. We can't possibly invite everyone who's feedback we'd like to get to these day-long workshops, so if you'd like to find out more about where we are and what we have please email Lucy at lucy@blueprintrd.com for more information.

Our goal: Launch the materials and next phase in September, 2005. Stay Tuned.
In the meantime, here is the latest version of the issues list:
Issues%20List_The%20Futures%20of%20Community.pdf

Progress Report

The future is here...or, almost here. Katherine Fulton and Lucy Bernholz, Project Leads, are back from the Global Symposium on Community Foundations. This was a fabulous gathering of community foundation leaders from around the world. Community foundations and social justice, community foundations and community development, nurturing indigenous definitions of endowment (and indigenous endowments!) - were some of the key themes and accomplishments discussed and analyzed.

And now, the writing continues. We have drafted several version of a project report, are working on practical tools that foundations might use to guide themselves through the future we see, and are outlining ways to make the findings of this first phase of the study most useful. We'd be happy to tell you more, contact Lucy at lucy@blueprintrd.com or +1 415.677.9700. Better yet, contact us and tell us what you'd like to see from the work: papers? Charts? Workshops? Online resource lists? Social networking connections? New tax structures? We can't promise we can deliver, but we sure would like to know: "What about the future of community philanthropy matters most to you, and how would you like to learn about it?"

Stay posted....

We've been busy. The latest iteration of the issues list follows. Those who have informed the project so far are listed at the end.

We'll be in Minneapolis from October 8 - 12 at the Community Foundations Conference - come find us and inform the project yourself!

Major Forces of Change

Economic and Market Trends
There are multiple, varied challenges facing the American economy in the next generation. These include forces entirely outside the United States’ influence, such as the rising economic power of China, which is projected to be the world’s largest market by 2015. The list also includes issues arising from US decisions, such as the nation’s increasing reliance on both foreign investment and overseas energy sources, while pending US deficits make US a weaker debtor.

There are pressures on the US economically from within as well, including the pending “baby boom retirement” and its implications for pension funds, social security, workforce (3.5:1 workers to retirees by 2020), and lifestyles. We will soon experience the next generation implications of current deficit spending, tax cuts, and economic transition to offshoring.

The global wealth disparity continues to grow and the gap challenges society’s at local, state, national, regional and international levels.

Possible implications for community philanthropy:
Philanthropy industry as we know it matures and change comes from outside existing systems. Growing wealth disparity makes “great philanthropy” possible but social needs overwhelming. US experiences “culture shock” in not being ascendant or at the top of global economy and “formal” transnational giving dries up.
Diaspora giving – facilitated by banks, credit exchange, and commercial internet options – displaces “institutional philanthropy” in both scope and impact. Global “points of light” response from US foreign aid offices and philanthropy.
Philanthropy is marketed, measured and regulated as simply another product in the financial services industry.

Demographic Trends
The population of the US is growing in size, while also getting older and more diverse. Some key demographic issues to consider:
Estimates are that the US population will increase 49% by 2050 to 420 million people. Much growth is due to immigration.
Latinos – fastest growing and youngest; “New diversity states:” 15 states with three or more ethnic groups each representing at least 7% of state.
Whites – slowest growing and aging. By 2030 US as a whole will “look like Florida” with 1 in 5 people over the age of 65.

As the population gets bigger, communities (and community philanthropy) will be influenced by migration patterns within the US, rural and urban discrepancies, and new or emerging population centers.[1] The social dynamics and politics of places will shift as new population majorities are established or emerge. As an industry, philanthropy will finally come to realize how little it knows about wealth, poverty and giving traditions within communities of color and immigrant communities.

Aging populations put a different set of priorities before public policy makers and may significantly shift public resource flows from youth and education services to elder care and medical support. The balance between workers (who are increasingly diverse) and retirees (who are predominantly white) will be unlike any other point in history. This has already informed fairly dire predictions about tax revenue and the cost of public services; the cultural and social implications (e.g. on mobility, community concerns, safety, family structures) are subjects of much speculation.

Possible implications for community philanthropy:
Existing philanthropic institutions (community foundations particularly) built themselves around norms and assumptions of white long-term residents. Can they change to serve new populations of color, immigrants and migrants, or will existing authentic philanthropic structures from within these communities shift to the forefront?
Are endowments and perpetuity compelling selling points to younger donors, donors interested in immediate impact, and mobile donors?
As the population ages will the intergenerational transfer of wealth occur?


Regulatory Pressures
Philanthropy operates as a regulated industry. The nested systems of regulation are complex and involve tax structures at multiple jurisdictional levels (state, national, international) and can be shifted by new regulations on organizations (foundations) and/or individuals (the estate tax). Scandals within philanthropy have generated tremendous amounts of media coverage, and fueled a strong investigative interest in philanthropic and nonprofit accountability. The combination of increased public awareness, fueled by national disasters (natural and manmade) as well as glowing celebrity coverage of philanthropic mega-stars, and public oversight by legislators and regulators (from state attorneys general to the IRS to Capitol Hill), bodes well for an era of continued regulatory proposals and revision, even if the 2004 Congress ends without significant action.

Just as philanthropy is affected by changes in allied industries (see below) it is also subject to regulatory influence from many sectors, including intellectual property and copyright law, interstate commerce, communications, civil rights, immigration law, as well as the personal and corporate tax codes. The estate tax repeal is set to go into effect in six years, with significant projected impact on capital flows to nonprofits. Alternatively, a full-scale push to repeal the repeal will be needed between now and 2010, requiring an alliance and activism uncommon in the nonprofit or philanthropic world.

The locus of regulatory oversight continues to be dynamic and includes internal (standards and standardization) efforts as well as state, national and international policies.

Possible implications for community philanthropy:

The repeal of the estate tax stays on the books and the flow of new capital to philanthropy slows significantly.

Community philanthropy efforts to succeed as knowledge-based organizations are stymied by changes in intellectual property law that benefit proprietors and commercial vendors over public access.

New regulation creates new opportunities for innovation and new vendors or products (or both) emerge.

Trust in philanthropy and nonprofits diminishes due to scandal, and new donors/activists seek alternative structures with which to work.

Global Governance
Governance structures around the world are changing, as regional systems like the EU emerge and global corporations begin to outsize nations as economic powers. These global or regional structures are creating new levels of regulation, in the case of the EU, which will influence trans-border philanthropy. In addition, global corporations are interested in standardizing services and products as much as possible, and have the political and economic power to push for regulations that facilitate this. They are well-positioned to lead – and in fact, are leading – product, service, and regulatory innovation that involves transnational transactions. This is most visible in terms of diaspora philanthropy, which has been eased and expanded by commercial banks lowering fees and pushing for new regulations as well as by the advent of online micropayment services.[2]

Possible implications for community philanthropy:
How will established global forms such as commercial banks facilitate or inhibit transnational philanthropy? How might these entities work with community philanthropy organizations?
How will changing governance structures at the regional and global level influence community philanthropy? For example, how will the new EU structures interact with community foundations in EU countries?
How will the need to compete in global industries such as banking, finance, or insurance change the landscapes of local community philanthropic actors?
How will fears of terrorism, Patriot Act requirements, or other efforts to monitor overseas charitable activity influence community philanthropy?
How are regulatory structures for philanthropy and NGOs changing around the world, e.g., efforts in the U.K., Australia, or the EU and what do these changes mean for community philanthropy?

Changes in Allied Industries
Organized community philanthropy is tightly connected to several allied industries, such as accounting, tax law, estate planning, investment advising, and financial management. These industries change and innovate, merge and develop new services as regulations change, new markets emerge, and new technologies allow for congruent services. Some of these industries are changing in ways that will affect their relationships with community philanthropy organizations, for example, law firms are bringing in finance and philanthropy experts, family offices [JC1] are expanding to serve multiple families with asset management advisory services, and community banks are developing national networks to compete with global banks. Elsewhere, new opportunities for community banks have led to wholesale changes in Italy’s banking system and resulted in the spin off of community philanthropy organizations, in a manner not that different from health conversion foundations in the US.

Closer to home, the commercialization of philanthropic services continues apace. Venture capital investments, acquisitions, and IPOs for commercial technology providers focused on nonprofit and philanthropic markets are powering along (Kintera, FoundationSource). Clearly, industries like internet technology, database software, and financial services have “discovered’ the size, scope and potential of nonprofit and philanthropic markets. Family offices and wealth management advisors working with many families are growing in number and assets under management.[3] What might be the next big industries to focus on this market?

The past decade has seen rapid innovation and competition for transactional philanthropy services, effectively reducing the costs of conducting philanthropic transactions significantly and giving an advantage to “mass providers,” e.g., Fidelity, and the technology syndicate of Community Foundations of America. Once transactional philanthropy ceases to be a distinguishing factor for a vendor, what additional services will be offered to distinguish one from the other? Alternatively, how can community philanthropy use the new, cheap, accurate, quick, scalable transactional systems, get out of the transaction business, and maximize unique community niche?

Finally, these transactional systems have derivative products that philanthropy as an industry has not contended with before, such as large scale proprietary databases on donor behavior and grants. How will these products enter the market and shift the market for existing data providers, e.g., IUPUI, Urban Institute, Foundation Center?

Possible implications for community philanthropy:
If more industries begin to bring philanthropy “in house,” as did mutual fund companies in the 1990s and law firms now, what will that mean for the relationships (and investments in relationships) with these professional advisors that have been built by community philanthropy? How does the “distribution channel” of donors change?

Similarly, if EU regulations can change Italian banking systems overnight and commercial pressures can lead to the conversion of health care and loan providers in the US, what might be the next big source of “conversions,” “spin offs” or new types of community philanthropy?

How will nonprofit and philanthropic markets act differently when served by an aggregation of a few large vendors instead of many small regional vendors? Will this lead to faster adoption of industry standards or norms? Will it provide the basis for new databases of market information, new industry watchers, e.g., investment firms that invest in companies focused on this market?

New, proprietary data services, industry watchers, and metrics might emerge.

Areas of significant industry change
The trends we are observing are not necessarily new and, in some cases, community philanthropy has been adapting, responding, and proactively engaging with these opportunities for some time. As this happens, philanthropy changes and changes the system around itself. This dynamic relationship can be seen in:

Adaptation and use of technology
Standards and standardization
Changing vendors of philanthropic products
Shifting preferences and types of customers
Multiple definitions of community
Maturation of an industry
Business models for community philanthropy
§ Services and products innovation

List of project informants (to-date)

Katherine Acey, Astraea Lesbian Foundation for Justice
Sheryl Aikman, Community Foundation of Western North Carolina
Steve Alley, Community Foundation for Southern Arizona
Jocelyn Ancheta, The McKnight Foundation
Nancy Anthony, Oklahoma City Community Foundation, Inc
Rini Banerjee, The Overbrook Foundation
Andrew Blau, Global Business Network
Emmett Carson, The Minneapolis Foundation
Stephanie Clohesy, Independent consultant
Kit Conroy, New York Community Trust
Sandy Daniels, Johnson County Community Foundation
Susan Brown Davis, Community Foundation Serving Richmond & Central Virginia
Trinh Duong, The Funding Exchange
Lew Feldstein, New Hampshire Charitable FoundationSuzanne Feurt, Council on Foundations
Terri Lee Freeman, Community Foundation for the National Capital Region
Elan Garonzik, Mott Foundation
Linetta Gilbert, Ford Foundation
Helen Goodman, New Hampshire Charitable Foundation
Kaying Hang, Bluecross Blueshield of Minnesota
Sid Hartman, Marin Community Foundation
David Hatfield, Kalamazoo Community Foundation
Tom Hay, Pittsburgh Foundation
Susan Herr, Community Foundations of America
Bill Ong Hing, Rosenberg Foundation
Michael Howe, East Bay Community Foundation
Kathy Im, The John D. & Catherine T. Macarthur Foundation
Mary Jalonick, Dallas Foundation
Gregory Ben Johnson, Greater New Orleans Foundation
Gabriel Kasper, Independent consultant
Amber Khan, The Communications Network
Barbara Kibbe, Skoll Foundation
Colin Lacon, Northern California Grantmakers
J. Augustin Landa, Loteria Nacional para la Asistencia Publica
Jennifer Leonard, Rochester Area Foundation
Leslie Lilly, Foundation for Appalachain Ohio
Joe Lumarda, California Community Foundation
Winsome McIntosh, Rachel’s Network
Kathryn Merchant, Greater Cincinnati Community Foundation
Char Mollison, Council on Foundations
Darcy Oman, Community Foundation Servicing Richmond & Central Virginia
Ruben Orduña, Boston Foundation
Monica Patten, Community Foundations of Canada
Peter Pennekamp, Humboldt Area Foundation
Joy Persall, Native Americans in Philanthropy
Thomas Peters, Marin Community Foundation
Lisa Philp, JPMorgan Private Bank
Donna Rader, Winston-Salem Foundation
Cristina Regalado, The California Wellness Foundation
C. Dennis Riggs, Community Foundation of Louisville
Julie Rogers, Meyer Foundation
C.J. Liu Rosenblatt, Social Venture Partners, International
Peggy Saika, Asian Americans/Pacific Islanders In Philanthropy
Holly Sampson, Duluth-Superior Area Community Foundation
Henry L. P. (Hank) Schmelzer, Maine Community Foundation
Christine Searson, Saint Paul Foundation
Diane Sieger, Grants Rapids Community Foundation
Fred Silverman, Marin Community Foundation
Erik Smith, Global Business Network
Sterling Spiern, Peninsula Community Foundation
Molly Stearns, Seattle Foundation
Shannon St. John, Triangle Community Foundation
R. Andrew Swinney, The Philadelphia Foundation
Dave Uffelmann, Community Foundations of Canada
Clarence (Reggie) Williams, San Antonio Area Foundation
Timothy Wu, Small Change Foundation
[1] See American Demographics, September 2004.
[2] Xoom.com, Paypal, Bitpass.
[3] Bloomberg Wealth Management, Fall 2004

[JC1]Word missing???

Issues List 2.1

The Survey is available here .

The Issues List is pasted in below or available in Microsoft Word format here.

Community Philanthropy Futures Project

Emerging Issues: An iterative list

v. 2.1
July 16, 2004


The following list is both a repository of ideas and a catalyst for your thinking. As part of the community philanthropy futures project we are cataloguing key issues that face community philanthropy organizations and the innovations they are employing to address these issues. The ideas presented here represent important issues (both positive and challenging) facing community philanthropy. This list comes from our prior research and writing, our interviews and research to-date for this project, and our ongoing review of major industry literature and trend analysis. This list will evolve over the course of the project and your input is critical to its utility.

The bold face type in the list below represents broad categories of change. Within each category we’ve provided examples of the ideas or clarifying questions about the potential impact that needs to be investigated.

1. Economic trends
Specific to philanthropy
 Wealth creation—will the next 20 years be like the last in terms of creating new opportunities for community giving?
 Intergenerational wealth transfer—is this playing out? Is it really inevitable, given tax law changes? What can influence where the money goes?

2. Larger scale economic issues
 Changing concentration of economic markets, e.g. China replaces U.S. as world’s largest economy.
 New sources of wealth, e.g. biotechnology, elderly care innovation
 New challenges to economic security, e.g. water shortages around the world make water the most precious commodity.


3. Demographic trends
 Racial, ethnic and cultural diversity – how are culturally-specific philanthropic practices interacting with or bypassing mainstream organizations?
 Racial, ethnic and cultural diversity - how should community philanthropy respond to the slow but significant changes taking place, in governance, outreach, funding, etc?
 Racial, ethnic and cultural diversity – how are newly wealthy minority groups (e.g. some Native American tribes) using their wealth within their communities and in surrounding regions?
 Aging populations—what new opportunities for engaging older people will exist? What new services will have to be created? What effects will the fact that people live longer have on the amount of money that goes into their estates for philanthropy? On the pool of available volunteers?

4. Community Philanthropy in the World
As influence on donors interests
 How will globally connected populations and economies influence transnational or diaspora giving?
 How will the disparities between wealthy and poor countries be influenced by philanthropic action?
 How will the growing recognition of transnational remittances and/ indigenous philanthropy influence community philanthropy?
 How will established global forms such as commercial banks facilitate or inhibit transnational philanthropy? How might these entities work with community philanthropy organizations?

As influence on governance of community philanthropy
 How will changing governance structures at the regional and global level influence community philanthropy? For example, how will the new EU structures interact with community foundations in EU countries?
 How will the need to compete in global industries such as banking, finance, or insurance change the landscapes of local community philanthropic actors?
 How will fears of terrorism, Patriot Act requirements, or other efforts to monitor overseas charitable activity influence community philanthropy?
 How are regulatory structures for philanthropy and NGOs changing around the world, e.g. efforts in the U.K., Australia, or the E.U. and what do these changes mean for community philanthropy?

5. Standards and standardization
The implementation of national standards for community foundations may be one of great change drivers over the coming decades. With their implementation in 2004, we can look at the next 20 years as proof of concept time.

Practical implications
 What are the predictable consequences of the national Community Foundation standards implementation?
 What are some possible unintended consequences?
 Will there be a continued focus in the field on standards?
 On professional development?
 On ethics?
 If we narrow definition of community foundations, do we limit the potential impact of community philanthropy and invite fracturing?

Community organizing implications
 Is there alignment or is there a gap between the legal structures of community foundations and the traditions of community philanthropy?
 Will the implementation of standards foster more community philanthropy or create/further fissures in community?

Regulatory landscapes
 What are the likeliest sources of regulatory change on philanthropy and how will community philanthropy react to or attempt to influence these shifts?
 How will the repeal of the estate tax in the U.S. influence giving? How will community philanthropic organizations attempt to drive those changes?
 How will regulatory change play out at the state level?
 Given that there are organizations within philanthropy currently promoting various activist regulatory agendas, who will carry such proposals for other elements in philanthropy? What body should or will represent regulatory agendas that promote community philanthropy?


6. Vendors of philanthropic products
 As alternative funds and identity - or issue-based funds grow, how do they co-exist with community foundations?
 Does the changing geographic identity of individuals and families turn issues or identities into more relevant community organizing concepts for philanthropy?
 How will the rapid increase in the number and variety of donor advised fund vendors change the industry?
 What roles do workplace giving or alternative giving campaigns have on community philanthropy?
 How might global facilitators of small giving (e.g. Global GreenGrants) grow or spark imitators?
 What will be the lifecycle of donor circles moving forward?

7. Changes in allied industries
 Are the industries in which professional advisors work, specifically accounting, tax law, estate planning, investment advising, and financial management organizing in new ways that will effect their relationships with community foundations?
 How do community foundations retain relationships with advisory firms that begin to take philanthropic services in house, or law firms that bring on accountants?


8. Human capital in philanthropy
 Are community foundations experiencing the transition of a generation of leaders? (or does it just feel that way?)
 Who will be the new leaders? Where are they going to come from?
 What do leaders need to know or be able to do?
 Is there a need for wider / deeper policy skills to address systemic issues?


9. Customer bases
 What does market research tell us about donor desires / preferences?
 What does market research tell us about community desires/preferences?
 How are family dynamics and the active presence of multiple generations changing philanthropy?
 How is the Giving Portfolio changing donor behavior?
 Will we continue to see a proliferation of family foundations? How do they partner with CFs?

10. Multiple definitions of community
 Are we experiencing new tensions between communities and donors?
 How do new patterns of individual/family mobility affect donors’ relationships to place?
 What is a sustainable business model for serving communities and donors?
 Are we seeing:
o Local donors at wider ranges of net worth / giving?
o More or new ways of involving people in the community?
o Shifts toward or away from “democratization of giving?”
 How are community foundations defining their core communities and how does this change how they act?
 Are community foundations developing new relationships with local and regional governments? Is public policy an emerging area of work, revenue, expertise and/or impact for community foundations?


11. Maturation of an industry
 Where are community foundations, as an industry, in their lifecyle? Is it a mature industry, a start up field, or a declining industry?
 How are new community foundations coming into existence now? What kinds of issues or leaders galvanize communities to create foundations?
 What other kinds of philanthropic entities are communities creating instead of (or in addition to) community foundations?
 How will/should local conditions drive the community foundation form to be altered?


12. Business models for community philanthropy
 Are there new business models for community philanthropy?
 Does the current business model serve the varied field of community philanthropy?
 Have we developed new means of sustaining community organizations?
 How will the increased connectivity of community foundations to each other (decrease in
 Isolationism and increases in alliances, partnerships, and joint ventures) play out over the next 20 years?
 What are the implications for those who opt out of those alliances or joint ventures?
 As donor advised funds become commodities, what are the business models for services that will provide revenue to community foundations?


13. Services and products
 Of the current industry vendors, who are the likeliest creators of new philanthropic products and services?
 What external innovators might come onto the scene?
 What are the likeliest catalysts to product innovation?
 How will the past decade of innovation in terms of services for transactional philanthropy change the industry going forward? For example, will new databases of giving information emerge from sources like Foundation Source or National Charitable Services, LLC?
 What products will the transactional providers introduce next?
 How will increased attention to the actual costs of services and products influence community foundations and donors?

Conference Call Proceedings

Community Philanthropy Futures Project

July 16, 2004
Conference Call Proceedings


Meeting Participants

Lucy Bernholz, Blueprint Research & Design; Suzanne Feurt, Council on Foundations; Katherine Fulton, Global Business Network/Monitor Institute; Elan Garonzik, Mott Foundation; Linetta Gilbert, Ford Foundation; Helen Goodman, New Hampshire Charitable Foundation; Amita Govindaswamy, Global Business Network/Monitor Institute; Michael Howe, East Bay Community Foundation; Mary Jalonick, Dallas Foundation; Tina Joh, Blueprint Research & Design; Jennifer Leonard, Rochester Area Foundation; Char Mollison, Council on Foundations; Peter Pennenkamp, Humboldt Area Foundation; Diana Sieger, Grant Rapids Community Foundation

Meeting Highlights and Key Ideas

This call was a means of informing and gathering input from several key community foundation leaders who could not attend the initial launch meeting of this project in Toronto in April. The agenda for the call follows:

 Introduction and project background
 Principles and purpose of the project
 Process, methodology and products
 Discussion of each of three key concepts: Issues, Innovations, Typology
 Next steps

The principles of the project are to provide the field of community philanthropy with a broad, outside-in, independent analysis of the challenges it is facing and the many ways members of the industry are responding to the challenges. The research will be extensive, but not exhaustive, and the scope will be broadly on community philanthropy as this is the context within which community foundations work. Final products will include:

 Emerging Issues analysis/Agenda for the field
 Innovations prototype (process for gathering and disseminating in real time)
 Typology of community foundations
 Strategy memo and recommendations to the industry

The Emerging Issues list v 2.0 was a focus of the conversation, and participants provided the following input on missing categories or issues:

1. Need to clarify definitions of community philanthropy (as distinct from community foundations)
2. Change Globalization category to more accurately reflect the narrow focus on community philanthropy around the globe
3. Address issues of changes in allied industries such as financial advising, tax and estate law, and the influences those changes will have on community foundations
4. Specifically investigate the implications of the commoditization of donor advised funds and highlight alternative revenue options based on service that community foundations are using.
5. Address public policy challenges and changing roles of community foundations
6. Address the changing scope and definitions of community foundations, and how, as they change their own sense of boundaries or scope this influences how and what they address their work.

A revised version of the issues memo was developed and is available at http://philanthropy.blogspot.com/Futures/cpindex.html. It is also attached to this document.

The Inquiry process was explained, and participants help on two August activities was requested:
 A survey on emerging issues will be distributed in early August. It will be sent to hundreds of public grantmaking charities around the country (and internationally where possible). Participants in this call were asked to be sure to respond.
 Call participants – plus those attending the Toronto meeting – were asked to serve as the first round of informants on the innovations snowball research process. An email request for ideas and two referrals will be sent via email in mid-August.

For more information, please contact:
Lucy Bernholz, Blueprint Research & Design, Inc., lucy@blueprintrd.com
Katherine Fulton, The Monitor Institute, Katherine_fulton@monitor.com
Tina Joh, Blueprint Research & Design, Inc., Tina@blueprintrd.com
Avita Govindaswamy, The Monitor Institute, Amita_Govindaswamy@Monitor.com

TORONTO FOLLOW UP CALL

Community Philanthropy Futures Proiect

Friday, July 16th, 2004, 10:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. PDT

The call in information has changed to accomodate our callers from outside the U.S. Please use the information below

(Outside the USA) dial +1 212-812-2800 and enter 1171 0903

(From within the USA) Toll-Free Number: 1 (888) 550-5602 and enter 1171 0903

If you have web access when you are calling you can also use

For quick access go to: https://www.spiderphone.com/11710903
(This link will help connect both your browser and telephone to the call)

The call-in system we are using will allow us to record the call - which we plan to do.

AGENDA FOR CALL

Introduction and background to the project:
Katherine Fulton, Elan Garonzik, Linetta Gilbert

Overview of Issues, Innovations and Typology approach:
Lucy Bernholz and Katherine

Discussion of Issues, Innovations and Typology
All

Input into research design and resources
All
Specifically:
Who do you recommend we interview?
What trends research matters most?
Who is innovating and how? How can we track this information for you?

Attachments:

(NEW to this email) Issues list 071604
(Sent before & attached) One-pager that describes the project
(Sent before & attached) Notes from the Toronto meeting.