Report Archives

Report

New Report: How funders can support diversity, equity, and inclusion in journalism

Lea Trusty

October 16, 2019

Journalism has long fallen short of reflecting the diversity of the communities it purports to serve—something that is fundamental for supporting a healthy democracy. Last year, we released research from Dot Connector Studio that explored philanthropic support for increasing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in journalism from 2009-2015. We commissioned this research to learn how funders are investing—or not investing—in field-strengthening organizations working to make journalism more diverse and representative. What we found—unsurprisingly—was a significantly under-resourced field.

Now, we are turning to solutions. Our latest report, Advancing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Journalism: What Funders Can Do, also produced by Dot Connector Studio, digs deeper into the vibrant field of organizations working to build DEI in journalism, and proposes concrete ways that funders can increase their support for this work.

Efforts to build DEI in journalism are led by both news outlets that specifically serve diverse populations and by field-strengthening organizations that provide support to these outlets, and to journalists from diverse backgrounds. These organizations are doing amazing work—often with limited resources—to create more representative journalism. But, as this research reveals, they need more support.

Our report found that:

DEI-focused organizations receive a very small slice of journalism funding. This research confirms what we’ve long suspected: no matter how you slice the data, DEI within journalism is not a high priority for funders. Of the $1.1 billion that went into journalism more generally in the United States from 2013-2017, only 8.1 percent went to DEI-focused efforts.

Funders are focused on big players. This research also reveals that funders are focused on bigger players, not a diverse pool of smaller grantees. The data show multiple funders supporting the same, better-resourced organizations. And while some organizations receive funds from multiple foundations, foundations are less likely to support many different organizations across the field at the same time.

Foundations are the lifeline for DEI-focused organizations. This research shows that 74 percent of revenue for DEI-focused field-building organizations comes from grants and contributions. While many organizations are experimenting with new revenue streams, echoing trends in the broader nonprofit news space, organizations continue to be reliant on foundations to provide the bulk of funding.

What can funders do to improve the situation?

Funders need to work together with urgency and intentionality to avoid grantmaking that reinforces the inequalities this research highlights. Our report proposes two actions that funders can take right now:

1. Funders can join a new collaborative effort: the Racial Equity in Journalism Fund (REJF). This fund is a collaborative that includes Craig Newmark Philanthropies, Democracy Fund, the Ford Foundation, the Google News Initiative, and the News Integrity Initiative at the Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism at CUNY. REJF is committed to investing in news organizations led by and serving communities of color; supporting news projects that provide information to communities that face the greatest barriers in access to news; and strengthening the organizations that are developing creative and innovative ways to reach communities with relevant news.

“Media organizations led by people of color have long been a vanguard of our democracy, holding the powerful accountable for the ways it treats its most vulnerable citizens in ways mainstream media has often failed to do. It was organizations such as the black press that campaigned most vigorously to abolish slavery, to pass federal legislation against lynching, and to end Jim Crow, when mainstream media either ignored these stories altogether or sided with the powerful” —Nikole Hannah-Jones, journalist at the New York Times Magazine and co-founder of the Ida B. Wells Society of Investigative Reporting.

2. Funders can start sharing more resources across a diverse pool of grantees. Democracy Fund’s Journalism DEI Tracker is a tool that helps funders identify prospective grantees and find useful resources to share with current grantees. The tool includes over 70 organizations and outlets in the field; professional development and training opportunities for journalists from diverse backgrounds; a list of HBCUs, Hispanic-Serving Institutions, and Tribal Colleges with journalism and communications programs to include in recruitment efforts to ensure a more diverse pipeline; and resources for journalism organizations to promote respectful and inclusive coverage. We will continue to update this living document on an ongoing basis.

We hope this report will inspire more funders to action. But it’s just the start: Democracy Fund itself has more work to do to put equity at the heart of how it does its grantmaking in media and journalism. We are still learning and listening and remaining open and accountable.

Back to Ideas

Report

Stewards of Democracy: The Views of American Local Election Officials

Natalie Adona, Paul Gronke, Paul Manson, and Sarah Cole

June 26, 2019

Local elections officials (LEOs) are the stewards of our democracy, but oftentimes they are left out of important conversations about the future of our elections nationwide. The LEOs from our survey are the chief elections officers in their local jurisdictions. Not to be confused with poll workers, the LEOs surveyed in our new report oversee local election processes and are responsible for ensuring the voting process is fair, free, and secure. Among their many responsibilities, LEOs execute the election laws in their state, make decisions that define the voter experience, and train the permanent and temporary employees that interact with the electorate.

It might be hard to imagine but (depending on how you count) between 7,000-10,000 local election officials manage the front line of elections in the United States. Despite their recognition as the people who run elections, LEOs are often left out of national conversations about reform and may not have a seat at the table when important policy decisions are made at the local, state, or federal levels—decisions that they alone will ultimately implement.

Stewards of Democracy: The Views of American Local Election Officials details the findings of the Democracy Fund-Reed College 2018 Survey of Local Election Officials (2018 LEO Survey), and is part of our effort to create a space for these stewards of democracy to be heard. The survey is designed to capture the collective experience of officials across the country, and to help us learn more about their perspectives on election administration, access, integrity, and reform. The results should be interpreted as a snapshot of opinion taken in the midst of a competitive midterm election.

More than 1,000 LEOs from across the country responded to our survey. Our survey respondents serve over 81 million registered voters. They manage offices with staffs of one or two in the smallest jurisdictions to over 1,000 employees in the largest (not including poll workers). Our hope is that this report will be the start of an ongoing attempt to elevate LEO’s voices in efforts to modernize and secure American elections.

The report breaks down the findings of the survey into four sections:

Meet Your Local Election Official – This section provides data on the professional and demographic profile of the typical LEO including LEO workload, years in service, pay, professional training and other demographic information.
Running the 2018 Election – This section covers findings on 2018 election preparedness including information on resources, staff, meeting the challenges of cybersecurity, and confidence in voter registration list security.
Voter-Centric Elections: Education and Outreach – This section discusses LEO attitudes regarding accessibility, including voter education and outreach.
Improving Elections Using New and Old Tools – This section focuses on the adoption of modernization and of technology, such as online voter registration and automatic voter registration systems to improve elections. It also covers our analysis of LEO opinions, in their own words, on how they think elections can be improved, including legislative and policy changes involving voting.

The bottom line is that all the LEOs we surveyed care deeply about their ability to administer elections in an accessible, efficient, and secure fashion. We were particularly moved by how our survey demonstrated LEOs’ dedication to a positive voter experience and to nonpartisan election administration. Respondents in our survey made it clear that they have and will continue to be good stewards of democracy—but resources, staffing, and coordination between state and local officials are areas of concern.

We plan to solicit LEO opinions again, at different times, using different lenses. We hope that our efforts encourage conversations and collaboration with LEOs and lead to reforms that best serve the American electorate—providing policymakers with invaluable insight into the makeup of the election administration field and its evolving needs as it hopefully becomes more diverse in the coming years.

Democracy Fund’s Elections Program supports, among other things, nonprofit organizations that improve elections processes and provide assistance to election officials themselves. As we work with grantees and partners, we are reminded time and again of the important role of the LEOs ensuring that our voices are heard.

Back to Ideas

Report

Hispanic Media Today

Jessica Retis

May 13, 2019

Today we’re releasing Hispanic Media Today: Serving Bilingual and Bicultural Audiences in the Digital Age, a new report that explores the origins of Hispanic* media in the United States, its growth in recent decades, the complex nature of Latino media and its diverse audiences. The report is an exploration into the challenges and opportunities to sustain Hispanic media in the future.

As with other media sectors, Hispanic media is facing significant financial hurdles due to the virtual disappearance of traditional advertising. Following rapid growth in the 1990s and 2000s, Hispanic daily newspapers have seen more than a 10 percent decline in circulation over the past five years, consistent with other media sectors. On top of financial shortfalls, traditional Hispanic media has also grappled with adapting to the digital transformation and meeting the demands of an increasingly digital audience.

A survey by the National Association of Hispanic Journalists have found that 42 percent of Latinx journalists reported downsizing or cutbacks in staff hours at work, and more than 75 percent say they have been asked to do more with less resources. And 40 percent are concerned about job security.

In addition to financial challenges, Latino media also must take into account the complex diversity of the Hispanic population, which means that local audiences can differ from the shared history and culture of the Spanish-speaking outlet which serves that region. In spite of these struggles, Hispanic media has weathered the downturn better than many mainstream media because of its deep connection to community. And in the past decade, amidst a digital divide across language, age, and immigrant status, a number of bilingual and English-language digital media for younger Latinx audiences have emerged.

Spanish-language media in the U.S. has varied greatly in its more than 200 years of existence, and has served many roles. Publications have ranged from politically conservative to liberal, with varied readerships composed of exile, immigrant, or native Latinx communities. While disseminating local, regional, national and international news according to audience interests and needs, Hispanic media has also highlighted cultural and patriotic activities and served as a forum for public expression.

Hispanic media has also shaped and promoted social and political activism advocating for civil rights and defending Latinx communities against abuse from authorities. For example, Spanish-language radio programs in the early 1920s provided not only entertainment but also information and political advocacy. Spanish-language T.V. programming has also grown over the last 50 years, and provides information on issues of interest to Latinx communities, such as immigration, politics, health, education, and culture, as well as imported Latin American entertainment.

The story of Hispanic media in America is not a simple linear story and there are enormous opportunities to invest in this space and elevate the work of these journalists.

Philanthropic funders and investors should continue to provide critical operating resources to Spanish-language media and invest in helping them develop and design new revenue models. In addition to solidifying revenue, several recommendations to help grow Latino media became apparent during our research. For example, funders should also engage in initiatives to help the next generation of bilingual and bicultural journalism students when they enter the job market, as they make grants to keep Hispanic media afloat. An infusion of youth and fresh ideas into Hispanic media companies would help organizations become more sustainable.

Diversity of newsroom stories, staff, opinion, revenue and ownership is a crucial part of making sure the news reflects the communities it serves. We must do our part to uplift and better serve Hispanic media, to ensure that Americans have access to accurate, diverse sources of information that foster the full participation of every individual in our democracy.

It is our hope that the recommendations outlined in this report further support Hispanic media today, so that diverse, bicultural, bilingual stories can be told tomorrow.

*Hispanic and Latino are used interchangeably in this post by request of the author, as both pan-ethnic labels tend to be used throughout the United States.

Jessica Retis is an Associate Professor of Journalism at California State University Northridge, a current Democracy Fund grantee, and co-editor of the recently released book, The Handbook of Diasporas, Media, and Culture. To learn more about Jessica’s work, visit http://csun.academia.edu/JessicaRetis or follow @jretis.

Back to Ideas

Report

African American Media Today

Angela Ford, Kevin McFall, Bob Dabney

February 28, 2019

Today, as we close Black History Month, we’re releasing African American Media Today: Building the Future from the Past, a look at the origins of the Black press in the United States and its future, offering recommendations for better practices moving forward.

Black newspapers were essential in providing information to freed slaves and sharecroppers who sought better lives than those offered on plantations. The safe passage, potential opportunities, marriages and deaths of the new, evolving culture of a recently freed people were realized and reported on through Black legacy newspapers.The Black press has played a crucial role in the Fourth Estate since its inception in the early 19th century. In the early days, the Black press reported mainly on issues affecting the newly-formed African American community and identity. African American news organizations highlighted the challenges and triumphs of the Black community, while providing a more nuanced portrait of the lives of Black Americans when mainstream media would report predominately negative or otherwise bigoted stories of Black Americans.

Today, the Black press struggles to remain in operation. While the virtual disappearance of traditional advertising has challenged the news industry as a whole, it has been particularly damaging to the Black newspaper industry. Shrinking staffs have left many operations without tech savvy or the manpower to quickly pivot to new revenue building operations. And while some mainstream news institutions establish paywalls for their digital media platforms, many in the African American community understand that readers are unlikely to accept news through the paywall model.

We know that diversity within journalism—in stories, in staff, and media ownership—is a vital part of ensuring the news reflects the communities which it serves. Therefore, we must do our part in supporting independent Black media outlets to make sure the multitude of stories existing in the Black community continues to have a platform.

The National Newspapers Publishers Association (NNPA), a 70+-year-old trade association comprised of African American publishers, reports its current readership at 20.1 million per week. And its demographic is 99 percent African American. Furthermore, the Black digital audience has strong numbers among Millennials and Generation Z. Some legacy outlets and NNPA members are shifting business models to appeal to an online audience, while several young entrepreneurs have launched digital-only platforms. No matter the approach or solution, Black Americans agree – almost unanimously – we must maintain independent Black media outlets. Mainstream media does not always capture news and information that is actually relevant in as much as it does write about Black Americans. And even then, these outlets are often one-note in their depictions of the Black community.

In response to the challenges facing the Black press, the Obsidian Collection is developing four potential revenue models for Black Legacy Press and digital media platforms targeting African American audiences. As our organization grows, we are attracting new media members to this movement. We will embrace emergent technologies and innovative practices to ensure the independent lack voice remains an integral part of the American conversation and news landscape, and we hope you’ll join us.

Angela Ford is the Founder and Executive Director of The Obsidian Collection Archives, a Democracy Fund grantee. This report was written by Angela with her colleagues Kevin McFall and Bob Dabney. To learn more about their work, visit www.theobsidiancollection.org or follow @ObsidianCollec1.

Back to Ideas

Report

American Indian Media Today

Jodi Rave

November 20, 2018

Once a year, during American Indian Heritage Month in November, American citizens pause to recognize the Indigenous peoples of lands now known as the United States. But what happens to Native people during the other 11 months of the year? Answer: They’re often rendered invisible. That invisibility is complicated by a shrinking Native American news that faces a range of unique challenges today.

My new report, American Indian Media Today: Tribes Maintain Majority Media Ownership as Independent Journalists Seek Growth, gives an overview of the state of Native American media and the challenges we face in telling our own stories. The report is one in a series commissioned by the Democracy Fund to shine a spotlight on the important role of media by and for diverse communities in the United States.

In so much of mainstream media American Indians are invisible as contemporary people or romanticized as relics of a bygone era. The invisibility affects how policymakers make decisions about Native people whose lives are often struck by high rates of poverty, suicide, poor health care, and missing and murdered Indigenous women.

This has made Native media a critical source not only to inform and engage our communities but also to lift up our stories in the broader culture. Yet, for several reasons, we face a lack of news in our own backyards. Media in Indian Country are grappling with many of the same challenges around sustainability that face the rest of the journalism industry, but it is exacerbated by low levels of philanthropic support.

Tribal governments can also be obstacles to independent reporting in Indian Country. An estimated 72% of all print and radio outlets in Indian Country are owned and controlled by tribal governments or tribe-owned entities, and according to a preliminary survey from the Native American Journalists Association’s RED Press Initiative, 83% of tribal journalists face intimidation and harassment when covering tribal affairs. This means modern-day tribal citizens receive news that is mostly censored and controlled by tribal governments. Freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and a free flow of information remain hampered without specific legal provisions rooted in tribal constitutions.

However, a small, but devoted cadre of independent media practitioners are working to create new alternatives and share their stories, free of Native government influence. I profile many of them in this new report and describe the important contributions they are making their communities. These local journalists deserve more attention and need more support. There is much to be learned from how they build and serve communities across often rural and expansive tribal lands.

Jodi’s organization, the Indigenous Media Freedom Alliance, is one of 155 newsrooms participating in the 2018 NewsMatch campaign. Right now every donation will be doubled by NewsMatch through the end of the year.

Back to Ideas

Report

What Comes Next? Lessons For The Recovery Of Liberal Democracy

Rachel Kleinfeld and David Solimini

October 31, 2018

Democracy in America suffers from a decades-long pattern of institutional decline. The candidacy and election of President Donald Trump is a symptom as well as an accelerant of this institutional degradation, catalyzing reactions from other institutions, parties, and voters. On the positive side, President Trump’s brazen disregard for the longstanding norms of American governance has drawn attention to long-running problems, creating new interest in what the United States might learn from the experience of other countries in similar situations.

What can we learn from other democracies that have faced executive degradation1 of preweakened democratic institutions, particularly countries with polarized populations? Based on the trajectories of other nations, what damage might we expect to see by the end of the Trump administration? Are there lessons for renewal that can be applied the day this administration exits the scene?

Few countries are directly comparable to the United States. As the world’s oldest continual democracy, the United States has far more established institutions than most other states. And yet the laws protecting the checks and balances of our government are older and thinner than those of most modern democracies, creating the impression of a strong state that has in practice relied more on norms than law to maintain its institutions. America’s implementation of federalism is deeper than in most other countries and is a significant buffer against executive overreach. On the other hand, its population is deeply — and often evenly — polarized by identity-driven divisions that do not lend themselves to compromise. For both sides, every political fight is an identity battle and each battle is potentially winnable. The temptation to engage in undemocratic behavior is significant.

In declining order of direct comparison, we looked at cases of democratic decline and subsequent renewal in Italy under Silvio Berlusconi, Colombia under President Álvaro Uribe, Louisiana during the Huey Long period, Argentina during the populist regimes of Carlos Menem and the Kirchners, South Korea’s President Park Geun-hye, Peru during the reign of Alberto Fujimori, and India under Indira and Rajiv Gandhi. We also looked at the similarities and differences between these states and countries that faced executive degradation and have not yet recovered, particularly Hungary, Poland, Turkey, and Venezuela.

Back to Ideas

Report

Understanding The Voter Experience: The Public’s View Of Election Administration And Reform

Natalie Adona and Paul Gronke

October 16, 2018

This report provides insights into the state of public opinion about election administration and reform. The findings are primarily drawn from the 2008–2016 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), a survey conducted each federal election year since 2006. i We hope that the findings contained in this report, and suggestions for future research, will help election officials, lawmakers, advocates, and others understand attitudes of the American people toward one of their most-cherished rights.

The takeaways in this report include:

Deciding to Vote

A significant number of nonvoters choose not to participate because they do not like the candidates, and some may be generally unenthusiastic about participating.
Lack of information may keep people from voting in certain contests, especially down-ballot races.

Navigating Voter Registration

Many people know that they are responsible for registering and updating registration. Most know where to register and that a move requires them to update their information. Most people are likely to rely on internet searches for registration information.
Many people could benefit from ongoing education about how the voter registration process works in their states, especially states that have recently implemented modernization reforms.
The majority of people support online voter registration but might not know whether it is available in their state. Some continue to prefer to use the paper registration form. The public does not currently express strong support or opposition to automatic voter registration.

The Voter Experience

There is not one most-preferred method of voting. Many like the convenience of early in-person and absentee or vote-by-mail voting. Absentee or vote-by-mail voters are more likely than early in-person voters to say that they distrust certain aspects of the voting process. Not surprisingly, voters provide compelling reasons to continue to vote in the way they have done before.
People express a higher tolerance for waiting in line when they are told that the wait is 15 minutes. Tolerance decreases as the anticipated wait time increases. i More about the CCES is offered in the Survey Methodology section of this report and on the project’s website at: https://cces.gov.harvard.edu.
Significant numbers of people are confused or unfamiliar with their state voter identification requirements. Many appear to learn about these requirements during election cycles, suggesting the need for ongoing education.
Overwhelming majorities of people provide good or excellent job performance ratings for their poll workers. Most people like that poll workers are polite and knowledgeable and demonstrate other signs of excellent customer service.

Trust and Confidence Measures

Election administrators enjoy higher levels of public trust when compared to officials in other public institutions. State and local election officials should continue to enjoy high public approval if they are viewed as nonpartisan experts.
Levels of voter confidence are influenced by the voter’s polling place experience, partisanship, and support for the winner (sometimes referred to as the “winner’s effect”). Most are confident that their own votes and votes across the country are counted as intended, though there is a noticeable gap between individual and national level confidence. There was a dramatic up-tick in voter confidence levels among Republicans and Trump supporters in 2016.
Perceptions of voter fraud, electoral integrity, and electoral fairness are deeply intertwined and powerful indicators of a healthy democracy. Most people believe that our elections are run with integrity and that outcomes are fair, but perceptions about the prevalence of voter fraud raise concerns.

We hope that readers find this informative report as interesting as we do. Thank you for reading!

Back to Ideas

Report

Supporting Diversity, Equity, And Inclusion In Journalism

Katie Donnelly And Jessica Clark

June 19, 2018

Efforts in journalism to support diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) over the past decade have been ineffective in creating dynamic change in the stories, sources, and staff of news outlets in the United States.

Clearly, the dramatic financial downturn in newspaper advertising revenue has placed strain on all legacy journalism organizations. However, those dynamics alone do not explain the persistent gap in employment opportunities between minorities and their white counterparts seeking jobs in journalism following college graduation. Or excuse the historic leadership failure of large and profitable outlets to fulfill their promise to diversify their ranks, which has an outsized impact on communities of color given the dearth of opportunity at smaller newsrooms.

The purpose of this report is to begin to understand philanthropic interventions supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion in journalism from 2009 – 2015. As a foundation new to DEI funding in journalism, which has not made any grants in this area during the period under consideration, we plan to use this report to identify major funders and recipients of institutional grants.

This report represents our first attempt to get at this information using data from Foundation Maps for Media Funding, created by the Foundation Center for Media Impact Funders. We are aware of the many limits of this data set due to self-reporting and challenges in categorization. Even with those challenges we are proud of the work that Katie Donnelly and Jessica Clark at Dot Connector Studio have done so far to illuminate larger trends and we plan to use this report as a launchpad into further analysis of the organizations supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion in journalism.

We are already getting started. We are partnering with funders including the Knight Foundation and Open Society Foundations to support data training from the Ida B. Wells Society; News Integrity Initiative and Gates Foundation in leadership training from the Maynard Institute; Ford Foundation to support the National Association of Black Journalists; Google News Initiative with the revamp of the ASNE Diversity survey led by Dr. Meredith Clark; Nathan Cummings in support of DEI initiatives at CUNY; MacArthur and McCormick Foundations with new approaches in Chicago like City Bureau and the Obsidian Collection; and Heising-Simons Foundation in paid internship with the Emma Bowen Foundation.

At Democracy Fund, our approach to journalism is focused on building trust and engagement. We break our Engaged Journalism Strategy into three tracks focused on (I) Audience-Driven Storytelling, (II) Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, and (III) promoting Transparency.

Through our Audience-Driven Storytelling work we invest in innovations and projects that support journalists in reorienting their work towards a focus on the concerns of their audience. This involves building inclusion into newsroom practices, supporting universities as teaching hospitals for innovation, creating communities of practice around engagement, and developing new practices, people, and products hard-wired for engagement.

Our Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion work focuses on improving the diversity of sources, stories, and staff in news outlets. This work involves creating an inclusive environment at news outlets; recruiting, retaining, and promoting diverse staff, including leadership; and working to develop and sustain minority ownership of media properties.

In our Transparency work, we seek to help news outlets and the public better understand one another. We are committed to supporting innovations in engaged journalism through grantmaking, partnerships, and collaboration to strengthen the Fourth Estate and the democratic principles on which our nation is founded. This report is part of that commitment. We will continue to seek opportunities to collaborate with news outlets, journalism support organizations, and partner funders to achieve this goal.

Back to Ideas

Report

Effective Place-Based Philanthropy

Prudence Brown

October 17, 2017

Democracy Fund believes that strong local news and a vibrant public square are critical to a healthy democracy. Today, local news is struggling in communities across America. Newsrooms, facing dwindling advertising revenue and diminishing trust, have been forced to shrink, or in many places, disappear altogether. While there are bold experiments to rebuild newsroom capacity in some regions, these experiments are unevenly distributed and precarious. The Democracy Fund local news strategy is focused on creating a more connected, collaborative, and sustainable future for public-interest journalism.

Because local news must be responsive to and reflective of the local communities it serves, we have designed our local news strategy around deep partnerships with local funders, journalists, and communities. We want Democracy Fund to be a catalyst for expanding local efforts to create robust news ecosystems. We recognize that in pursuing place-based philanthropy to strengthen local news, we are guests in other’s communities. We can’t do this work alone.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the roles and practices of national foundations undertaking place-based work. Democracy Fund commissioned Prudence Brown, a respected leader in place-based philanthropy, to provide her insights as we design a new program to support and strengthen local journalism and civic engagement.

Drawing significantly from recent literature and Brown’s own experience and observations, this paper is organized around key questions that national funders can consider as they develop new place-based partnerships. After each question, Brown provides a brief discussion and concrete suggestions for decision-making and action.

Many of the themes and considerations in this paper are applicable to funders in other sectors. As such, we are sharing this work with the broader field. We think this is important both for the sake of transparency and accountability, and because we hope others can learn alongside us. This paper is just the start of our learning journey. We welcome any comments about lessons learned from other national-local partnerships.

Back to Ideas

Report

State of the Congress: Staff Perspectives on Institutional Capacity in the House and Senate

Kathy Goldschmidt

August 8, 2017

“State of the Congress: Staff Perspectives on Institutional Capacity in the House and Senate” reveals that senior congressional staff have deep concerns about important aspects of congressional operations and performance.