[CIMC-work] (f.y.i. -- org. stuff) Fw: [IMC-Process] funding and diverse practices -- another story to add to thecollection

[Chris Kaihatsu]

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Windmueller" <john at conflictresolver.com>
To: <imc-process at indymedia.org>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 5:26 PM
Subject: [IMC-Process] funding and diverse practices -- another story to add
to thecollection


> I'm not wearing the "moderator" or any kind of liaison hat here, I just
> thought I'd share some of the experiences of the DC IMC.
>
> 1. We are one of the groups that benefit from getting to use the UCIMC
> as our fiscal sponsor.  Having access to 501c3 status has been vital for
> the fundraising we do to keep up with our media projects and space
> needs.  For those not in the US: 501c3 status refers to an organization
> being a tax-exempt non-profit group.
>
> Prior to the UCIMC's being our fiscal sponsor we used a different group
> which, like the UCIMC, charged a very small percentage to handle the
> overhead labor incurred by being a fiscal sponsor.  The overhead is
> particularly reasonable when considering the alternative costs and time
> that go into getting 501c3/non-profit status in the first place.  Also,
> the labor involved is nothing to sneeze at.  Lots of bookkeeping, and
> the UCIMC has had more than its fair share of financial hassles by way
> of audits.
>
> I also want to dispel any misperceptions that the UCIMC has somehow been
> "greedy" or trying to go on a campaign of making money off of other
> IMC's.  The cost is minimal, the service a huge help, and the UCIMC has
> been very encouraging and helpful when we've considered being a full
> 501c3 ourselves (i.e. they're not trying to create some system of
> dependency).
>
>
> 2. On the diversity of practices front, the DC IMC is not a collective,
> we're a coop.  We had a large retreat to reflect on the history of the
> imc, to talk what worked and what needed changing at the DC IMC, and to
> identify some next steps for making changes.  We brought in not only
> current IMC'rs, but stakeholders from the communities and organizations
> we're trying to serve--readers, social justice groups, and an emphasis
> on diverse voices getting heard.  If your curious, the process
> map/agenda for that retreat is here:
> http://docs.indymedia.org/twiki/pub/Local/ImcDc/process.pdf  And a map
> of some of the issues that emerged and were discussed and prioritized is
> here: http://docs.indymedia.org/twiki/pub/Local/ImcDc/issuemap.jpg
>
> Three things that came out of that retreat shaped the decision to create
> the coop model we're using (really still implementing and getting the
> hang of).  (a) There was a recognition that we were struggling with how
> work was getting done at the IMC.  A small group of people were doing
> the huge bulk of tasks that go into just keeping the group running, and
> that caused all sorts of problems: burnout, not enough transparency, and
> no easy way to spread the skills so that others could learn to do the
> work. (b) We also agreed that having a physical space was important to
> us, and that in order to do that we needed to have some consistent and
> reliable funding (so we didn't get distracted with ad hoc financial
> crisis after financial crisis). (c)We acknowledged that consensus
> decision making was undermined if we didn't have a clear idea of group
> membership.
>
> And so... the move to the IMC co-op.  Members in the co-op are required
> to do two things (a) Pay monthly dues ($10 a month) and (b) Do a
> volunteer task.
>
> Dues: No one is refused or removed membership because they can't afford
> dues.  All a person needs to do is tell the person who is acting in the
> volunteer role of dues coordinator that they can't afford to contribute
> this month.
>
> Volunteer task:
> There is a full list of the current "beta" listing of volunteer tasks
> at:
> http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Local/VolunteerTasks
>
> The rationale and way it works is this:
> ----
> Rationale for the Volunteer Task List/Co-Op Work Wheel
> 1. This is a key component to our co-op model. We sometimes use the term
> "sweat equity" to refer to volunteer work at the co-op, but that's a bit
> of a misnomer, implying that somehow labor is a replacement for dues or
> vice versa. Membership requirements of the co-op require both dues and
> volunteer labor. Obviously, both are negotiable by special circumstance
> and need, but the requirements are light and these exceptions shouldn't
> be necessary very often.
>
> 2. The volunteer coordinator positions (2 of them) are very important.
> It's vital that they get done--they should be checking in with
> volunteers at least once a month to make sure that work is getting done
> and because it, like dues, is vital for tracking membership.
>
> 3. Some jobs are less labor intensive and time-at-the-space intensive
> than other jobs. That was intentional. We wanted to make sure that
> people, when faced with particularly hectic schedules (life happens),
> would still be able to find volunteer tasks they could commit to.
>
> 4. Why we encourage people to stay in the same position for 4 months:
> While not every jobs is equally labor intensive, all jobs are vital for
> the dc imc. Overly chaotic job shifts risks too many important things
> "falling through the cracks".
>
> 5. Why the work wheel requires people rotating positions after 4 months:
> Two of the biggest issues raised at the IMC retreat that led to the coop
> model were (a) problems around unfair work burdens, and (b) gender
> inequity being reinforced by inequity in skills and roles played by
> people in the coop. Rotating tasks in meaningful ways (e.g. you can't
> rotate from moderating one set of listservs to just moderating a
> different set of listservs) helps make sure that ultimately the labor
> that goes into running and growing the imc is fairly shared, that skill
> sharing goes on, and that we don't develop "cliques" of people always
> running a particular aspect of the coop.
>
> 6. This should probably be considered a "beta version" of the work
> wheel. The tasks and descriptions of those tasks will be fleshed out by
> volunteer coordinators and members over time. There are bound to be
> problems that need to be fixed along the way. Also, we should remember
> that implementing this shouldn't be entirely easy and will involve
> change... if we just "keep doing what we've always done", then we're not
> really accomplishing what we set out to do with the task wheel and the
> coop model in general.
> -----
>
> And on a final note: currently no one is paid for doing any DC IMC work,
> but this is something we've discussed doing and doesn't seem out of the
> question.  When it gets raised, it's usually to address either the
> problem that a given task or project needing the stability and labor of
> someone who can work at it "full-time", or it's raised because of the
> problem that no opportunity for pay alienates a group of our community
> who might want be active, but they are in such a dire financial
> situation that the only way they could feasible participate and still
> meet their basic survival needs.  Also related to this later point, when
> living in a society that has income inequities tied to racial and sexual
> discrimination, providing opportunities for people who might not
> otherwise be able to "afford" to spend the time to do IMC work, helps
> bring a more diverse group of people to the table.
>
> Whew.  Sorry for the long message, but I know I'm enjoying learning
> about how other IMC's work with these issues, and wanted to share my own
> experience with the DC IMC.
>
> John
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> imc-process mailing list
> imc-process at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-process
>