| Overall Rating | Bronze - expired |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 43.88 |
| Liaison | Matt Wolsfeld |
| Submission Date | Jan. 30, 2015 |
| Executive Letter | Download |
University of Saskatchewan
EN-13: Community Stakeholder Engagement
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
2.00 / 2.00 |
Margret
Asmuss Sustainability coordinator The office of sustainability |
Has the institution adopted a framework for community stakeholder engagement in governance, strategy and operations?:
A brief description of the policies and procedures that ensure community stakeholder engagement is applied systematically and regularly across the institution’s activities:
Principles for Engaged Partnerships
From: http://www.usask.ca/engagement/documents/EWEP-Report.pdf
1. Engaged partnerships are mutually beneficial and are marked by reciprocity. The capacity of all partners is enhanced by the partnership and partners learn from one another. Both the university and its partners agree upon goals and strategies at the earliest stages of the partnership and take ownership of ensuring that the goals and needs of its partners are met in context of the understood parameters of the partnership. Engaged partnerships will facilitate external access to the university and vice versa.
2. Partners must work to build and maintain respect and trust throughout a partnership. All projects will maintain the highest standards of ethics, integrity and sensitivity, including openness and transparency. Partners will be forthright about their expectations and promise only what they can deliver. Partners are responsible for taking precautions to ensure no partners are negatively affected by their involvement in the partnership. In an engaged partnership the university does not think of itself as the superior partner, but genuinely recognizes the equally valuable skills and capacities of its partners and acknowledges their contribution to the project.
3. Collaboration is critical to effective partnerships and all those engaged in a partnership share power. It is not expected that all partners will contribute equally at all stages of the partnership, but all partners should have the opportunity to influence a project’s directions, including its design, implementation, evaluation and dissemination. All partners should also be part of the analysis and interpretation of data; engaged partnerships do not expect consensus and differences of opinion, when they arise, are acknowledged.
4. Communication must be clear and regular, and should flow in multiple directions with partners reporting regularly on all activities and developments relating to the partnership. The quality of a partnership will, in large part, be a product of efficient and effective communication. Communication must be clear, regular and timely. Partners will report regularly on all activities and developments relating to the partnership. Evaluation and impact of work will assess the progress and impact of the work and will critically appraise the partnership in order to target and enhance strengths, rectify weaknesses, and anticipate and identify threats.
5. Partnerships must be innovative in ways that recognize that each partnership is unique and dynamic. Partners must recognize that each partnership is context-specific, that the needs, expectations or resources of one or more partners may change over time, and that tensions may arise. Engaged partnerships keep partners informed of changes, embrace this dynamism and develop innovative responses to these challenges.
6. Engaged partnerships will, by definition, contribute to a culture of engagement at the University of Saskatchewan. Research results from partnerships will be of a high quality and will contribute to the positive perception of engaged scholarship and the leverage new partnerships from existing ones.
A brief description of how the institution identifies and engages community stakeholders, including any vulnerable or underrepresented groups:
Guidelines for Engaged Partnerships
From: http://www.usask.ca/engagement/documents/EWEP-Report.pdf
1. Maximize partnerships. Those persons and units involved in creating and maintaining partnerships should strive to leverage them in multiple directions. Partnerships should be encouraged to incorporate scholarship and research, teaching and learning, and service goals into partnership objectives; they should seek to break free of silo’s by being interdisciplinary and not dependent upon the vision of a single individual for sustainability; and the outcomes of partnerships should be relevant on multiple scales (i.e. geographic; sectoral; economic) and to multiple interests (i.e. students, faculty, institutional, community).
2. Establish a common ground. Partnerships most likely to last clearly identify objectives, both unique and shared, from the outset. Benefits are explained to partners, and agreement is reached regarding who will contribute what resources, what product will result, and how such product will be disseminated. Once these issues are agreed upon, all partners become responsible for ensuring every partner has their needs addressed. This acknowledgement of shared responsibility is designed to avoid situations where one partner gets what they want out of the partnership and then neglects it thereafter.
3. Define milestones. Partnerships are more likely to result in satisfaction, and be sustained, if milestones are outlined from the beginning. These milestones should include both short and long-term goals, and when each milestone is reached they should be celebrated. The fulfillment of “signature projects”-specific, short-term action plans with clear and achievable goals-have been shown to boost partner morale, improve involvement and demonstrate to external partners that the university is capable of providing results within a shorter time-span. It is much easier to cultivate commitment with a short-term project than a massive effort that takes years to yield results, the latter of which tend to “fizzle” part way through.
4. Report and reassess regularly. All partners should regularly engage in a critical self-assessment of progress, preliminary findings, difficulties and barriers, while identifying the partnership’s strengths, weaknesses and threats, and evaluating the economic situation (if working from a joint fund) and then jointly revising the partnership plans as necessary. If students are involved in the partnership, they should take part in this process (as part of course criteria, for example) as well. Partners should assume that plans will change and difficulties will arise throughout the lifespan of the partnership, and confront these as soon as possible-leaving problems to deal with later will only compound them.
5. View partnerships as dynamic. Linearity rarely unfolds in partnership plans. Instead, strategies should be regarded as dynamic and continually renewing. As the environment evolves, tactics and priorities should adapt accordingly for both long and short-term goals. Partners need to recognize that different groups are better able to work within different structures (i.e. timelines, budgets); a respect for the diversity of these, rather than seeking to fit them into one structure, will allow for a richer, more productive partnership.
6. Enhance opportunities for colleagues. Whether engaging as individuals or collectives, members of academic or administrative units are all part of a broader university community. Partnerships and engagement should enhance the institutional reputation and ideally open up possibilities for others to benefit and collaborate.
7. Ensure all partners have agency. Partnerships must strive to recognize the value of all partners. External partners appreciate and would like to see more meetings taking place off campus with university partners making the effort to come to them rather than vice versa. Doing so helps to resolve the issues of intimidation and power imbalances and creates greater trust and openness. This will also assist in promoting the U of S beyond the campus and may leverage more partnerships and enhance existing ones. In those cases where the partnership is based largely on campus, the university partner(s) can still make an effort to provide the broader community with knowledge of, and benefits from, the partnership depending upon the parameters of the partnership agreement
List of identified community stakeholders:
Community stakeholders include (but are not limited to):
Saskatoon Westside Community Clinic
Schools: Saskatoon inner-city community schools, northern and remote schools, Physics 20 classes
Station 20 West
Habitat Restore
Northern and remote communities with limited dental and medical services
City of Saskatoon
Saskatchewan Youth in Care and Custody
Village of Ile a la Crosse, Saskatchewan
A brief description of successful community stakeholder engagement outcomes from the previous three years:
Recent examples of successful stakeholder engagement outcomes can be found under “Feature Stories” at the website referenced below.
The website URL where information about the institution’s community stakeholder engagement framework and activities is available:
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.