Carol:

I’m sorry I haven’t responded to your note sooner. My excuse is stress. Anyway the question you raise is excellent and I needed to reflect on it.

This note reflects the view that individual members of the Network should consider joining, if they support and care to advocate for (1) choice and (2) quality services. And also, that the Board of Directors should endorse the creation of such a coalition.

Of course we hope other client groups like the NEC-West, SOS, the People of Color Client Network, and local groups will also endorse this and encourage their members/associates to join and become active.

What is expected of organizations that endorse the formation of the coalition? What does it mean in concrete terms?

This ‘bottom-up’ coalition is meant to provide an organizational form where we can work at overcoming the factionalism that divides us, that is used against us by the advocates of Force and Services-As-Usual.

What is really required of the organizations is that they endorse this approach and work sincerely from within their own frameworks to see that factionalism is reduced. The tasks inspired by the ‘bottom-up’ coalition are mainly incidental in that the organizations are already fighting for Choice and Quality Services after their own fashions and are mainly expected to continue doing what they do already.

The expectation I cited was agreeing formally to endorse the coalition. That request was aimed especially at the Network because it is into taking formal positions on things. But it would apply to any group in accordance with its process, whatever that may be.

Along with that, there is a matter of members participating. It seems to me it would be best if the people who are actively involved in issues related to policy and especially legislative outreach were generally involved in the coalition. That’s how the work they are doing would get shared in the broader coalition. It is the responsibility of the organization to encourage some kind of meaningful participation by these people, not just token accommodation of the situation.

I guess there is a general expectation that the organization would stand for Choice and Quality Services. Or at least be willing to work with individuals of such persuasion. The groups I mentioned I’d imagine are up for this, but there are others in the state, both statewide and local, who may not care to meet this expectation. [!]

On the other hand, the organizations are not expected to provide money or other resources or newsletter space or other things, except on an occasional/ad-hoc basis as it may suit them. The contact persons would be volunteers, the principal communication would be by e-mail and snail mail as a supplement. Thus no heavy items like conference calls let alone travel expenses. Hehehe we are not ‘on the money’ in this advocacy and we’d better run it starting from our own dedication/limited resources.

Don’t know if this fully responds to your question.

Respectfully

Andrew