Bluecoats 2023 Diversity & Socioeconomic Impact Report

[Terri Schehr]

I didn’t read it but if it’s of benefit to the Canton area young people, more power to them.  The underserved communities have been ignored for decades in the marching arts.  A step back from when I marched, IMO. 

[scheherazadesghost]

32 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

Can anyone explain what the purpose of this report is?  Because all I see here is three largely disconnected sections:

• survey results on demographics of the primary program
• assertions made without supporting data
• secondary programs incompletely referenced
   

The purpose is stated in the executive summary. All info is firmly united under the purpose stated there.

First steps into this work are nearly always shaky. That's why so many initiatives like this fail. Bloo is doing something that no other corps is openly actively doing. I give them that grace because I appreciate the work so much.

If they want a seasoned academic eye on their language and clarity, I'd be willing to consider helping.

VMAPA's similar initiative seems dead in the water. Tried to help there and it was like touching a hot stove. As I said, I'm quite weary of PWIs for that very reason. They tend to struggle with the listening part of the work. You know, like, the first step. That's what Bloo's mainly doing here: collecting data and analyzing it.

A good step might be to partner with a group like ArtEquity for a more seasoned approach to such work.

Edited March 12 by scheherazadesghost

[cixelsyd]

14 minutes ago, scheherazadesghost said:

The purpose is stated in the executive summary. All info is firmly united under the purpose stated there.

First steps into this work are nearly always shaky.

As they point out, this is their fourth annual report.

The executive summary is unclear on at least three basic counts:

1.  Its opening is essentially a mission statement.  Bluecoats have a different mission statement, posted on their website.  I suppose they can try to run a non-profit with two missions, but it would be more likely to succeed with one.

2.  The summary, like the report itself, wanders off to address data from only one program, then bounces over to initiatives largely focused on other programs.  Does the mission apply only to the sum of the organizational parts, or to each of its programs individually?  And where is the data for the other programs?

3.  How is success defined?  They could proceed without this, but if there are going to be any judgmental assessments of status (and clearly there are, on pages 28-29), then there has to be a corresponding definition of success.  What is equity?  When is diversity diverse enough?  What is the context for evaluation?

[scheherazadesghost]

1 hour ago, cixelsyd said:

As they point out, this is their fourth annual report.

Given that they're the only corps doing the work, AFAIK, and they're only four years in, that's still new in the equity world. Most fail within that time period. It's called an initiative rather than a project or program for that reason, if I had to guess.

1 hour ago, cixelsyd said:

The executive summary is unclear on at least three basic counts:

Yes, this is why I proposed partnering with an org whose sole focus is equity work. Even if Bloo's D&I committee has experience with this type of work, they can only be so loud if they're butting up against the board, which they admit, is not as diverse as they'd hope. Also, I get the sense that the committee has plenty of crucial lived experience, but that's not the same as professional development and/or having successful projects under their belts. Again, "initiative," not "project" or "program" for this reason.

1 hour ago, cixelsyd said:

1.  Its opening is essentially a mission statement.  Bluecoats have a different mission statement, posted on their website.  I suppose they can try to run a non-profit with two missions, but it would be more likely to succeed with one.

I disagree but see your point. I don't see the first statement under the executive summary as a separate mission statement. It reads to me like a goal for the diversity and inclusion initiative, or possibly the D&I committee. What would've helped is clarifying this and directly stating the purpose of the report. Such as "The purpose of this report is...." and "The purpose of this initiative is..." The latter may be posted somewhere (or should be) on the website, but I couldn't find it easily. Even under the BOD tab, they have a short description of the D&I committee... and it is different than the aforementioned "goal" in the executive summary. They're fumbling a bit on the organizational synchrony. It's normal, again, this early into an equity initiative.

They don't need a separate nonprofit with a separate mission. This initiative wholly serves the mission of the org. That said, their mission statement is just about as bland and unfocused as VMAPA's so they've fallen into the same mission creep problem as VMAPA and many many many other nonprofits out there. "We want to enrich the lives of young people through the performing arts." Okay, great. Which young lives? (ALL of them? That's mission creep... no NPO can accomplish that because the goal is too big.) Which performing arts? (ALL of them? That's also mission creep... focus on just a few of the arts like drum corps, music, and dance.) ...to list a few questions I have. Answering these questions in the mission/vision/values statements lends focus to all supporting programs and initiatives. AND TO POTENTIAL DONOR$... but remember, you're not serving donors, you're serving whoever you state in the mission.

It should go something like this:

Clear mission/vision/values statements >>> Clear D&I committee goals >>> Clear D&I initiative goals >>> clear D&I report goals

Therefore, creep in the mission will lead to creep in subsequent portions of that chain.

1 hour ago, cixelsyd said:

2.  The summary, like the report itself, wanders off to address data from only one program, then bounces over to initiatives largely focused on other programs.  Does the mission apply only to the sum of the organizational parts, or to each of its programs individually?  And where is the data for the other programs?

Again again, I'll chalk this up to the creep happening in the goal of the initiative and overall NPO mission/vision/values. (I'm using "goal" here instead of "mission" intentionally, because an initiative has goals and NPOs have missions.) Your first question is a good one for sure, but is unclear again because of the creep I described. To your second question, even if they don't have data yet from the other programs (very possible) it's a simple as saying so, and setting a goal to gather data from those programs as part of their goals/strategy moving forward.

1 hour ago, cixelsyd said:

3.  How is success defined?  They could proceed without this, but if there are going to be any judgmental assessments of status (and clearly there are, on pages 28-29), then there has to be a corresponding definition of success.  What is equity?  When is diversity diverse enough?  What is the context for evaluation?

All excellent questions. Crucial, in fact, for the sustainability of the initiative. Without answering those internally and publicly, the initiative could easily crumble like so many others under the weight of external and internal criticism from those who don't value such work. This kind of work shouldn't need justification, but those calling for the business case for such initiatives need it... as they're usually tied to funding and internal support. Still, I much prefer the fairness case, which is all encompassing. I believe that's what Bloo is going for, intentionally or not.

Not answering such questions internally and publicly could also make the initiative look like window dressing. Those are tough questions, but answering them could point the way to greater organizational synchrony... and, in turn, a more thorough embodiment of safe spaces for those members, staff, and board who need it most.

Edited March 12 by scheherazadesghost

[cixelsyd]

Lots of good feedback in your most recent post.

23 hours ago, scheherazadesghost said:

They don't need a separate nonprofit with a separate mission. This initiative wholly serves the mission of the org. That said, their mission statement is just about as bland and unfocused as VMAPA's so they've fallen into the same mission creep problem as VMAPA and many many many other nonprofits out there. "We want to enrich the lives of young people through the performing arts." Okay, great. Which young lives? (ALL of them? That's mission creep... no NPO can accomplish that because the goal is too big.) Which performing arts? (ALL of them? That's also mission creep... focus on just a few of the arts like drum corps, music, and dance.) ...to list a few questions I have. Answering these questions in the mission/vision/values statements lends focus to all supporting programs and initiatives. AND TO POTENTIAL DONOR$... but remember, you're not serving donors, you're serving whoever you state in the mission.

This part of your post needed more than just a like or a trophy.

Quote

All excellent questions. Crucial, in fact, for the sustainability of the initiative. Without answering those internally and publicly, the initiative could easily crumble like so many others under the weight of external and internal criticism from those who don't value such work. This kind of work shouldn't need justification, but those calling for the business case for such initiatives need it... as they're usually tied to funding and internal support. Still, I much prefer the fairness case, which is all encompassing. I believe that's what Bloo is going for, intentionally or not.

Not answering such questions internally and publicly could also make the initiative look like window dressing. 

I have a similar concern, but I am not sure how to articulate it.

What feeds into my concern is that the extent to which the report casts self-judgment seems inexplicably negative.  The middle of page 28 exemplifies this.  Meanwhile, the data suggests that Bluecoats are extremely successful at offering an inclusive place for gender non-binary/non-conforming, but they take no credit for that there.  Program descriptions suggest that many typically underserved are being served by (and possibly, much capital is being invested in) EN-RICH-MENT and the Bluecoats School of the Arts, but they take no credit for that there.

[scheherazadesghost]

8 hours ago, cixelsyd said:

This part of your post needed more than just a like or a trophy.

Gracias. If I'm not welcome on the inside, I'll just be here on the outside, hoping it helps someone somewhere...

8 hours ago, cixelsyd said:

I have a similar concern, but I am not sure how to articulate it.

What feeds into my concern is that the extent to which the report casts self-judgment seems inexplicably negative.  The middle of page 28 exemplifies this.  Meanwhile, the data suggests that Bluecoats are extremely successful at offering an inclusive place for gender non-binary/non-conforming, but they take no credit for that there.  Program descriptions suggest that many typically underserved are being served by (and possibly, much capital is being invested in) EN-RICH-MENT and the Bluecoats School of the Arts, but they take no credit for that there.

I'll re read pg 28 later for more clarity and edit this comment.

Suffice to say again, if the report's goal isn't clearly established, then sticking to, and meeting that goal is not possible. Giving themselves credit for accomplishments should def be part of the goals, firmly stated or otherwise. Doing so would have a greater influence on all stakeholders.

But still, I give them credit for wandering the dark woods of this work, building a fire, and starting the work of drawing out a map. No one else is... and everyone else stands to benefit from it.

Edited March 14 by scheherazadesghost

[Mello Dude]

Interesting.  IMHO making drum corps affordable would make a lot of this moot.  I'm happy they have a 25k scholarship fund.  At current rates that what 4 people or so?  I'm glad they did this report, I just wish that the reality would be addressed.  It's a money and affordability issue for the most part.  I mean it's not only being able to afford corps but some kids need to work during the summer to have money for more important things like school and living.  Unless corps (and DCI as a whole) start getting real about making drum corps "attainable" for more people it's not going to be anything more than kids that were already going to do well in life doing even better.  Perhaps, a less quality product would be preferable if it improved the lives of more people that actually NEED something like drum corps?  I wish I had all the answers but if you can't see the forest through the trees your DEI means nothing if people can't really benefit from it.

[Terri Schehr]

1 minute ago, Mello Dude said:

Interesting.  IMHO making drum corps affordable would make a lot of this moot.  I'm happy they have a 25k scholarship fund.  At current rates that what 4 people or so?  I'm glad they did this report, I just wish that the reality would be addressed.  It's a money and affordability issue for the most part.  I mean it's not only being able to afford corps but some kids need to work during the summer to have money for more important things like school and living.  Unless corps (and DCI as a whole) start getting real about making drum corps "attainable" for more people it's not going to be anything more than kids that were already going to do well in life doing even better.  Perhaps, a less quality product would be preferable if it improved the lives of more people that actually NEED something like drum corps?  I wish I had all the answers but if you can't see the forest through the trees your DEI means nothing if people can't really benefit from it.

I keep saying that.  It really wears on my mind. I had people tell me when I was in RA that Sie Lurye and Mr. Warren(I’m sure you heard the same stories I did) put them on the straight and narrow and if not for them and drum corps, they’d have ended up in jail. Even the guys I marched with in Norwood told me they would probably have ended up in bad situations. Drum corps was for young people who couldn’t afford to purchase a band instrument or participate in school band.  Or they didn’t have a band program at school. It was noble work. It didn’t help when DCM was gone and corps like Joliet Kingsmen were left with no performance opportunities and were gone.  I loved those kids. 

I’m not suggesting that the activity should go back to that because that’s not going to happen.  But giving these young people a hand up is also noble work and I think that’s what Bloo is trying to do.  I hope they succeed. 

[scheherazadesghost]

Affordability is a huge component and definitely needs to be addressed head on.

That said, access upon member recruitment is only one component of this work. Let's say magically it was addressed tomorrow and anyone who wanted to march does. If staff and leadership equity has not been addressed as well, then corps still won't be able to ensure they have safe spaces to support greater diversity.

When leadership and staff don't reflect member diversity, all of these efforts are still window dressing because members aren't represented as well, their voices are heard less, and ultimately they are less safe.

The report itself discusses this as an issue to tackle.

Edited March 14 by scheherazadesghost

[JimF-LowBari]

On 3/11/2024 at 6:25 PM, denverjohn said:

D.E.I. is political in nature. Doesn't this topic violate DCP guidelines?

How the hades is diversity political? Does that mean I’m being political for thinking it’s nice when my street finally had a minority on it. (And a nice lady)

Guess I’m wrong for seeing it as a human being issue. 

Edited March 14 by JimF-LowBari