The Problem: A major hurdle of the research was how to identify organizations successfully using technology for mission achievement? What is the definition of being innovative or successful in using technology? A common research method is to ask experts in a field to identify people as "key informants" to be interviewed. Circuit Riders were selected to serve as the identifiers of organizations using technology in innovative and/or successful ways. While innovation and/or success were not pre-defined, using Circuit Riders, appeared to be the best method to assure that all organizations identified would be innovative/successful technology users.

"Key Informants" (The Circuit Riders): E-mail messages were sent to the Circuit Rider listserv (413 subscribers), asking for help in identifying these organizations. Almost no responses were received from the listserv. This was followed up with individual e-mails and telephone calls to more than 50 Circuit Riders. Twenty Circuit Riders were interviewed by telephone, asking them to identify organizations for interviews. They identified a total of 45 organizations from across the country along with a key contact who was knowledgeable about the organization's use of technology.

Prior to conducting the interviews, a survey instrument was developed and field-tested by telephone interviews with five leaders of the Circuit Riders community for accuracy and applicability.

The Interviews: Twenty-four interviews were conducted with organizations identified by Circuit Riders as making innovative and/or successful use of technology. In the majority of cases, the person interviewed was a community organizer. The interviews were conducted by telephone and lasted about one hour. They occurred over a 4 week period from December 2001 through January 2002.

The twenty-four organizations interviewed comprised a wide array of activist groups. (See organizational listing below). They were located in fifteen states in areas described as metropolitan (46%), urban (21%), and rural (8%). The number of paid staff ranged from zero, with one group comprised of two nuns working for no pay and another with two staff working as volunteers, to a high of twenty. The average number of workers was seven. Their budgets ranged from a low of $40,000 to a high of $1.5 million with an average budget of $501,000.

Key Issues: The types of issues they focused on is summarized below:

Environment 9 38%
Poverty 4 17%
Coalitions 2 8%
Arts 2 8%
Other 7 29%

Total 24 100%

Note: Other includes one each from: Abuse, Addiction, AIDS, Day Care, Media, Prison and Reproductive Rights.

Significant Findings
The top barriers to using computer technology were:

Some of the more significant findings were:

The top barriers to using computer technology were:

1. Money and lack of Foundation support
2. Staff comfort with technology
3. Staff training
4. Time
5. Knowing what to do - a lack of understanding and technical knowledge.

The most important key factors leading to successful use of technology were:

1. Obtaining technical help
2. Leadership in the organization
3. Organizational competence
4. Staff attitudes towards technology
5. Money
6. Technology planning
7. Mission
8. Staff technical skills
9. Prior technology infrastructure

The themes which emerged are summarized below:

Common Themes for Achieving Innovative and/or Successful Applications of Technology to Promote Mission

Summary

1. A Technology Threshold must be Reached before Benefits can be Obtained.
2. Importance of Technology Grants
3. Circuit Rides Role is Critical
4. The Application of Technology was Targeted
5. Organizational Capacities
6. Major Technological Innovations are being done Collaboratively by Umbrella Organizations
7. Technology Planning
8. There are Always Trade offs
   
1. A Technology Threshold Must be Reached before Benefits can be Obtained - all of the organizations had achieved a certain level of new technology that enabled them to take advantage of and use information technology effectively but, this threshold was surprising low and achievable. The basic threshold appears to be for the majority of staff to have: 1) Computers less than three years old; 2) Internet access; 3) E-mail and 4) An Office Network for sharing files, printers and providing Internet access.
2. The Importance of Technology Grants - Technology grants were seen as crucial. When asked, What are the biggest barriers to using computer based technology?, the number one answer by a factor of two to one, was money and lack of foundation support. The majority of the organizations had received small dedicated technology grants to purchase equipment and technical help. This appears to have had a big payoff by allowing most organizations to reach the technology threshold and benefit from information technology use. The average dedicated technology grant was about $7,500. This amount seems to enable most small organizations to reach the threshold needed for success. It is surprising how far this relatively small amount of funding appears to go. Perhaps, by being dedicated to technology, the funds go a long way.
3. Circuit Riders Role is Critical - Knowledgeable, nonprofit focused, technical assistance of some type, was seen by almost all groups as crucial to organizational success. When asked, What helped you overcome the barriers you encountered in effectively using technology?, almost all interviewees mentioned the Circuit Rider by name as the crucial element in their success.
4. The Application of Technology was Targeted - Organizations that were particularly successful in using technology targeted their efforts to meet the critical needs of their constituency. This means that once organizations reached a minimal threshold of technology, they did not try to increase their technology overall, but instead focused on one area of technology that could greatly benefit their constituency. An example of this, was a small advocacy organization providing sophisticated GIS mapping to help indigenous Mexican and Native Americans visualize the cumulative effects of border damage. At the same time, this organization did not have a Web page.
5. Organizational Capacities - Organizations that are successful at using technology are usually well run, have well thought out goals, organizing strategies and good ideas. It appears that without these, technology cannot be effectively utilized. An example of this is the Welfare-Made-A-Difference campaign in New York City. They utilized former welfare recipients, who are now living successful lives, to make the case that welfare helps people and is not simply one more ineffective Great Society program. Technology allowed the campaign to mobilize more people, faster, with less effort. However, without the "good idea" of using former welfare rights recipients, the campaign would not have been effective.
6. Major Technological Innovations are being done Collaboratively by Umbrella Organizations - The major technology innovations identified through this study were being done in a collaborative fashion by umbrella organizations. Umbrella organizations consisted of coalitions, associations and technology and management support centers. Examples of this are:
   The Kansas Coalition Against Sexual and Domestic Violence comprised of 28 shelters across the state, developed a state-wide web database called ALICE, for tracking statistics, reports and bed availability for domestic violence programs. This provided the ability to find any available bed at a moments notice that a person seeking shelter from abuse might need.

The Conservation Voters Education Fund providing its membership environmental organizations free electronic advocacy web pages, e-mail list management and updates to their membership lists with voting and fund-raising information.

A State-wide Arts organization providing E-Learning to museum curators and arts directors through a collaboration with Cornell University. This provided small museums and arts associations the opportunity to take advantage of distance and on-site learning and upgrade staff skills to address pressing community problems.

7. Technology Planning - Circuit Riders over-rate the value of technology planning vis a vie organizers. Organizers do not appear to value the planning process as highly as Circuit Riders do. It appears that organizers see the value of the Technology Plan as primarily a means to get funding for technology. Organizers value more the advice and technical assistance provided by the Circuit Riders. Circuit Riders appear to under-estimate their own value to the organizations they are helping and perhaps attribute their value more to the technology plan. This issue is exemplified by the almost opposite ratings given by Circuit Riders and organizers. When asked, What are the most important Key Factors leading to success?, organizers rank technical help as number one while Circuit Riders rank this as almost last. Organizers rank planning as almost last while Circuit Riders rank this as number two.
8. There are Always Trade offs - Staff attitudes pose a major barrier to introducing and using technology. In addition, to the normal resistance to change found in any organization, there is a big fear felt by many organizers that technology will shape them rather than allow them to shape the tools. It's a notion that technology will rob you of your humanity, your ability to serve people. This is a major tension and limits the willingness of many organizers to adopt technology. This is a conundrum and requires tradeoffs.
   

A limitation of this study is that by using Circuit Riders for the selection process, this research only examined organizations that received help through the Circuit Rider model. It did not look at organizations successfully using technology that did not receive assistance from Circuit Riders, that received assistance in other ways or not at all.

To hear more about this study attend the Cool Tools Science Fair, Friday at 1pm.

To learn more or to receive a copy of the full report, contact: Mark Friedman
E-mail: friedman@voicenet.com

Note: A more detailed research report will be available following the Roundup at www.mycitymyplace.com/techthemes.htm

I would like to express my deepest appreciation to the following individuals, organizations, and Circuit Riders who participated in my study. This research would not have been possible without the many hours so many people donated to my efforts. Thank you all.

Organizations interviewed

1. Alliance for New York State Arts Organizations
2. Arts/Boston
3. Border Ecology Project, Arizona.
4. California Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (CARAL)
5. Clark Fork Coalition, Montana.
6. Coalition for Community Collaboration, Missouri.
7. Community Food Resource Center. New York City.
8. Community Media Workshop, Chicago, Illinois.
9. Community Voices Heard, New York City
10. Day Care Action Council of Illinois
11. Kansas City Neighborhood Alliance
12. Kansas Coalition Against Sexual and Domestic Violence
13. League of Conservation Voters Education Fund, Minnesota.
14. Leavenworth Audobon Adopt a Forest (Leaf), Washington.
15. New Jerusalem Laura, Philadelphia, PA.
16. New York City Aids Housing Network
17. Northern Plans Resource Council, Idaho.
18. Prison Moratorium Project, New York City.
19. Sacred Alliance for Grassroots Equality (SAGE) Albuquerque, NM
20. Southwest Alliance to Resist Militarization (SWARM) Tucson, NM
21. Washington Environmental Council, Washington.
22. Washington Toxics Coalition
23. Western Organization of Resource Councils (WORC), Idaho.
24. Working for Equality and Economic Liberation (Weels), Montana.

Circuit Riders participating

1. Alice Aguilar, Environmental Support Center
2. Audrie Krause, NetAction
3. Beth Kanter, Independent Consultant
4. Cheryl Hanback, Nonprofit Consulting Network
5. David Wendt, Teaming for Technology
6. Deborah Elizabeth Finn, TCN/Tech Foundation
7. Dirk Slater, LINC Project, Welfare Law Project
8. Ed Batista, NTEN
9. Frank Ordway, Npower
10. Jeff Forster, Bayer Center for Nonprofit Management
11. John Stahl, ONE/Northwest
12. Justin Maxson, Progressive Technology Project
13. Marc Osten, Summit Consulting
14. Michael Gilbert, Social Ecology
15. Rachael Daniel, Media Jumpstart
16. Rich Cowan, Organizers Collaborative
17. Rick Brimingham, MAP
18. Samantha Pearson, Project Alchemy
19. Stan Pokas, Network Technology Project
20. Teresa Crawford, The Advocacy Project
21. Tim Mills-Groinger, IT Resource Center
22. Tom Battin, Compass Point

Survey Instrument - Nonprofit Telephone Interviews

Name: _______________________________________ Date: _______ Time:__________

Organization: _____________________________ Phone:____________________________

Address:_______________________________________ FAX:________________________

E-mail:_________________________ Web:______________________________

Calling to ask your help in learning about organizations like yourself that are making successful and/or innovative use of technology to achieve their missions.

Research Question: What are the information technology "best practices" that small grassroots community organizations are using to promote and achieve social change.

Everything you say will be kept confidential. Only the raw data without any identifying names or organizations will be used publicly unless you give your permission to be identified.

___ May I tape record the interview to make sure I get everything in my notes?

Questions

Can you tell me a little about your organization. How it started? Its mission?

Current goals? ________________________________________________

Demographics of organization
Age: ______ Size:___________________ Budget: ________________
Type (i.e. division): _____________________________________________
Who is clientele? _____________________________________________
I am interested in groups that have been most successful or innovative. What does being successful in using technology for social change mean to you?
Explain your success or innovativeness in using technology to achieve your mission?
How has the use of technology changed the way your organization does business?
Are there other organizations that you look to and why?
What do you think were the reasons they were so successful?
What do you think makes an organization successful and/or innovative with technology? List
Which do you think are the most important?
How important were each of these "Key Factors" (1 being most important)
Leadership 1 2 3 4 5
Organizational competence 1 2 3 4 5
Technical help internal, external 1 2 3 4 5
Staff technical skills 1 2 3 4 5
Staff attitudes towards technology 1 2 3 4 5
Mission 1 2 3 4 5
Money 1 2 3 4 5
Prior technology infrastructure 1 2 3 4 5
Develop(ed) Technology Plan 1 2 3 4 5
Can you give me an example or two that highlights your most important item that made a difference?
What are the top 4 barriers to effectively using technology?




Which is #1 of these?
What helped overcome these barriers?
Did I leave anything out? Any other suggestions?