# data[].attributes.body
We had two ELT calls focused on elevating problems we have within the disproportionately negative experience of staff members of color.  This week I heard Brittany say she was thinking about leaving, Fatimah sharing she doesn't "feel held" by the ELT around DEI.  The conversations this week were important, and I am worried that we are not seeing and hearing a) some of the problems we already have that BP, Latricia and Jenny O shared, and b) that we might be exacerbating with how we are thinking and talking about B & D coalition.

One final thought: I am really sitting with the MKE scenario we discussed in the breakout group. Our foundations call us to disrupt systemic racism; how seriously do we take that? For my fellow white leaders, I believe we need to put significant energy into our approach here--developing our vision of excellence, our skill and leading with discipline--for our coalition and teams to be inclusivie. --Jim C

# data[].attributes.body
Based on my read of the foundations, we believe that advancing our mission requires that our member community reflects the diversity of the broad coalition and communities most impacted by the problem (Accountability #1, member composition), is inclusive such that all members feels valued (Accountability #2, e.g. monitor and limit gaps in feeling valued/affirmed by subgroup), and is equitable such that effort/merit is predictive of success in our program and not social or cultural factors (Accountability #3, e.g. monitor who within our community is accessing opportunities/ succeeding in our program by subgroups).  We also take responsibility to develop skills/mindsets of our members necessary for systems-change leadership, including DEI related leadership domains (Accountability #4, assess member leadership development progress related to DEI via surveys, observation, impact evidence, etc.). I think defining and measuring those 4 accountabilities will enable tight enterprise accountability and require that we answer a handful of complex questions – e.g. what constitutes adequate progress in leadership development related to DEI?; what constitutes a breach of inclusion in our community and what recourse is required to repair it? Etc.

I think that pointing at the aforementioned member level outcomes, and holding ourselves and our staff accountable for delivering against them via naming them explicitly in job descriptions and performance reviews, would get the oars rowing in same direction and effectively advance our DEI work.

# data[].attributes.body
Without being clear on what we are pursuing (e.g. ratifying a DEI plan or sketching out an arc of ELT development, etc.), how will we know if we are growing our collective leadership in alignment to our aspiration? Last week ‘felt pretty good’ in terms of having some of the needed conversations but I'm not sure that I can really size it.

# data[].attributes.headline
Ben S - I'd be interested in learning about responsibilities and strong practices in DEI for white male ELT members in particular. This is following Jim Curran's good email to white male ELT members after the conference

# data[].attributes.subject
Ben S - I'd be interested in learning about responsibilities and strong practices in DEI for white male ELT members in particular. This is following Jim Curran's good email to white male ELT members after the conference

# data[].attributes.body
I'd like to play a role in bringing back affinity spaces for our senior leaders - not necessarily at the ELT, but with ELT members. I'm thankful to those who have already gotten this moving (particularly Jim for white male EDs) - and want to make sure that those spaces always result in coalition with others. I don't need support from the national team to make this happen - we can do it together.

# data[].attributes.body
In our small-group DEI discussion, I was struck by the fact that some of the words and phrases in our DEI Commitment (e.g., "interrupt systemic racism, classism and other forms of oppression") have a long, rich academic history that stems from critical theory - and that we've never really discussed in my time at TFA (it may have happened before Sept 2015, in which case I missed it and need to catch up!).

I'm starting to get the impression that at least some of what we're labeling "misalignment" is in part (a) a knowledge gap between those who are steeped in the critical theory academic literature and those who are not; and (b) a disagreement gap between those who know the academic history but may not agree about the extent to which it should be TFA's polestar for DEI.

This assessment is definitely incomplete and potentially wrong, but assuming it was intentional for us to include critical theory language in our DEI Commitment, it seems reasonable to establish a baseline of knowledge by thoroughly discussing the concepts from the academic literature so we're all speaking the same language.

From that shared baseline, we can then develop things like accountability tools and performance management (in full agreement with Athena there), but without a deeper discussion of the concepts that are the foundation of our DEI Commitment at the ELT and staff levels, I worry that the introduction of accountability tools is premature and will actually further muddle what we're trying to accomplish.

# data[].attributes.body
Believe we need a DEI audit of sorts for the ELT and the org to better frame the current state and the gaps to the future state. This would more clearly frame the long term journey and adaptive challenges to engage on with intention.

# data[].attributes.body
A) More room to build shared agreements around these courageous spaces and how we will operate. B) Supportive team audit to identify the hopes/fears/barriers present in ELT to adequately lean into these complex discussions with air for hope and possibility.
C) Move towards clarity and practice of how the ELT will collectively and individually talk about this body of work, in ways that frame the difference from the past.

# data[].attributes.body
In the aspiration to live into the importance of broad and diverse coalitions, our team is building skill in authentically building around shared values in our approach. Overall, working to build collective efficacy to adopt the adaptive skills and mindsets to lean into this challenge.

# data[].attributes.body
Examples of making meanings of the organizational history on DEI and how our system has lived or not into the aspirations named in our Foundations.

# data[].attributes.body
1) Naming performance outcomes and holding folks accountable to them and for the growth that's required. If progress does not happen, we should expect accountability in the form of improvement plans, reduced autonomy, and/or being fired.
2) Dramatically reducing the language and frameworks here and incorporating them across others. That DEI continues to have pages and pages of frameworks and evaluation measures that exist separate from others (Elevate, LDS, ED Profile, etc) makes it overly cumbersome to use, understand, and hold folks accountable to, imo.
3) To orient towards DEI as a performance metric, not just a "lens from which you view the world" discussion point.

# data[].attributes.body
1) Clarity on what we're trying to achieve and prioritize
2) Clarity on the bar for accountability - I strongly believe we have to move out of the "but everyone is a good person and is part of our network" orientation. That's true. And, good people make mistakes that have enormous consequences and part of growing and being part of an organization that supports your growth is actually being held accountable to results.
3) Strongly designed learning engagements

# data[].attributes.body
<-- same

# data[].attributes.body
I'm clear on where I and my team need to grow and do not need the support of national at this time.

# data[].attributes.body
I think whatever we end up with it needs to be communicated very clearly to all staff as right now, I don't think we would all point to a org dei accountability plan/framework that all staff would feel all other staff (including ELT members) were on the hook for. Big breaches, maybe. The gradual accumulation of experiences that when taken together challenge our aspirations? I don't think we are there yet in terms of what accountability looks like.

# data[].attributes.body
When we are in ELT spaces and on my team, there is often a shared experience around breaches/lack of transparency/confusion/conflicts that get alluded to as part of our collective story. I know in LA last year, we worked to move beyond complaints, and I'm not saying that perceptions of inequity or a lack of inclusion are just a complaint. How do we really look closely at reconciliation and what's required to collectively acknowledge two things: 1) this happened and it wasn't okay, and 2) I'm ready and able to move forward with these supports in place.

# data[].attributes.body
I'm really working on blind spots I have around both communicating with clarity and rigor and communicating with empathy and understanding, especially as it relates to my strengths/tendencies and privileges of identify and positional authority.

# data[].attributes.body
I'm still thinking about this, especially coming out of the case study I shared.

# data[].attributes.body
I think we can get to accountability by sharing more case studies as a group and engaging/interrogating those in community with one another.

# data[].attributes.body
(1) I'd love to continue to engage in case studies as an ELT. (2) I think we need to name our priorities for the year as an ELT and really focus our in-person time on those priorities. I think if it's DEI then part of our in-person time would be getting an update on where we are with the plan (which looks really good by the way) and then building our own skill.

# data[].attributes.body
I would love to go back to the DEI staff series and pull some of that content. I think some of the work we need to do is in the skill building around our DEI muscle - how we engage with one another, the lens through which we view the world, etc.  I think it'd be helpful to do that alongside some case study examples to continue to interrogate our behaviors and mindsets.

# data[].attributes.body
More time to spend with the DEI Plan. If we are the body responsible for stewarding enterprise level work, I believe we should vote to approve or ratify the plan or at least figure out ways in which we will incorporate pieces into our team plans. I appreciated the vulnerability of those who shared stories and reflections in the case study. I'd love more case studies- especially of regional interpretations of our commitment to DEI and how that plays out short and long-term in impact. (ex: analyze regions that have explicit DEI development or CRP training and those that don't and what the results look like for students/CMs/Alums)

# data[].attributes.body
as I approach a self-assessment in Elevate against the 4 pillars of the DEI Commitment, I would love a partner to have be radically candid with me about my self-analysis. What may help me overall is seeing ways in which commitment to DEI has led to impact in other organizations or companies (measurable, consensus, anecdotal evidence) & I'd love to better understand the Theory of Change as laid out in the DEI Plan!

# data[].attributes.body
I am a little confused on how to fill out this padlet. Maybe seeing others' responses will help! For now- My overall reaction is that the session left me a little confused about a very key question- is there an organizational "bar" for CMs, staff, and other constituents against our DEI Commitments? We looked at the DEI plan- would it still be helpful to give feedback to the plan? Lastly- I am excited for us to continuously explore and actively name how our DEI plan and work at each level (self-staff-ELT-org) will move us closer to One Day.