Native Hawaiian Education Council Annual Report

Transcrição

Native Hawaiian Education Council
Annual Report
S362B050001: October 2005 – September 2006
735 Bishop Street, Suite 218 Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96813
Phone: 808-523-6432
Fax: 808-523-6464
2005-2006
Annual Report
ANNUAL REPORT FOR FY 2005-2006
Introduction and Overview.
The FY 2005-2006 marked a time of defining expectations, assessing the potential
fit, and building relationships where necessary between the NHEC and existing and
potential NHEA grantees, between the NHEC and its Island and State Council
members, between the NHEC and Native Hawaiian communities, between the
NHEC and its key strategic partners, and between the NHEC and state and federal
officials.
The activities of the 2005-2006 FY culminated in the crystallization of a planning
process in the beginning of the 2006 fiscal year to change the manner in which the
NHEC relates to all of the previously mentioned stakeholders and the methodology
by which it accomplishes its mission of ‘assessing, evaluating, coordinating,
reporting and making recommendations’ on the state of Native Hawaiian
education, the way it measures the impact of existing programs and efforts to
improve the education attainment of the native Hawaiian population, and the way
it assesses and defines the education needs of the Native Hawaiian community and
sets future priorities for funding, both for individual native Hawaiian communities
and for Native Hawaiians as a whole.
Kukui Mälamalama. (November 2005)
The NHEC planned and organized Kukui Mälamalama (‘the light of knowledge’) on
November 4, 2005. The primary purpose of the event was to enable grantees to
share information about their programs with one another and with our NHEC
Island and State Councils as well as the ways in which all of us can better work
together to improve the effectiveness of the Native Hawaiian Education Act grant
program. The secondary purpose of the event was to begin to collect and marshal
grantee data and information as a first and necessary step in understanding the
impact these programs have had individually as well as in the aggregate, what
works and what doesn’t, and better ways to organize information from individual
grantees so that all can benefit from the work of one another.
Kukui Mälamalama was a success due to the pre-event planning and assistance of
the Kupuna Council, the Executive Committee of the NHEC, and the work of the
NHEC staff. The staff requested reports from individual grantees about each of their
programs as well as completion of a form staff created requesting information from
all grantees several weeks prior to the this event. The response to both requests for
information was less than desired, though the information disclosed was helpful. It
is not known whether the information submitted to the NHEC by those grantees
who responded was consistent or inconsistent with the reports, assessments, and
evaluations conducted by the U.S. Department of Education (USDOEd) in its
administration of these individual NHEA grants. The NHEC continues to request
1
these reports, assessments, and summary evaluations from the U.S. Department of
Education (USDOEd) so as to be better able to understand what works, what
doesn’t, and what we have learned individually as well as in the aggregate from the
grants awarded through each of the annual grant competitions run annually by the
USDOEd under the Native Hawaiian Education Act.
Two questions were posed to all attendees and become the focus of the day’s
events:
• What are we doing to light the way?
• What can we do to perpetuate the light?
These questions were discussed by five work groups representing all grantees.
Those work groups are:
• Early Education and Family Based Centers
• Curriculum Development and Teacher Training
• Gifted and Talented and Hawaiian Language Programs
• Math, Science, Reading, Special Needs, At Risk Youth Programs, and
Facility Support
• Higher Education Support and Higher Education Institutional
Development.
119 representatives from over 42 organizations attended. These 42 organizations
have received 89 grant awards under the Native Hawaiian Education Act. 20 Island
Council Members and guests also attended.
A copy of the agenda, the grantee information sheet and instructions, the notes
from each of the five clusters, and a summary of the grantee evaluations for this
event are included in the ‘Event Details’ section of this report.
Ulukau Curriculum Pilot Project. (November 2005)
The NHEC’s Native Hawaiian Education Act Grantee Summit of November 4, 2005
(Kukui Mälamalama) yielded suggestions from the Curriculum Development
and Teacher Training Group to create a means for those involved in developing
Native Hawaiian curriculum to be able to share and access these newly-developed
curricula on line. This capacity does not now presently exist even though such
platforms exist in other venues.
After the Grantee Summit, NHEC staff began immediately working with Doug
Knight, Alu Like Technical Initiatives Manager, and Bob Stauffer, Alu Like
Hawaiian Language Legacy Program Manager and creator of Ulukau.org, to design
a pilot project to establish an online platform, search engine, and protocols to
enable curriculum developed under the NHEA and other funding sources to be
shared through electronic means.
2
Ulukau.com has a stellar reputation in the internet field, is presently averaging over
fifteen thousand (15,000) user hits a day and is reputed to be the most popular
indigenous website in the United States and the Pacific region.
The Council approved the project in December of 2005 and the project was
completed on time in March of 2006.
As a result of this demonstration project protocols were established to enable
developers of Hawaiian instructional materials to disseminate their materials
through selected electronic means at a greatly reduced cost, sharing and refinement
of Hawaiian curricula on line was increased, 'best practices' most effective in
reaching Native Hawaiian students were more easily identified, and increased
sharing of new Native Hawaiian curricula was accomplished. Placing this
curriculum on line was a substantial step in increasing the access and use of these
materials- - - and in leveraging the impact of federal NHEA dollars awarded to
create and develop these curricula.
Now that these protocols and processes for electronic display have been created
through this demonstration project, Alu Like and Ulukau have sought third party
grant funding from sources other than the NHEC to place all Native Hawaiian
curriculum volunteered for that purpose on line. (Substantial funding was
eventually achieved for this purpose from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs in FY
2006-2007.)
Attendance of the NHEC at the WIPCE Conference. (November 2005 - December
2005)
The NHEC administration received permission of Francisco Ramirez, program
officer of the USDOEd for the NHEA program, to have two of its members attend
the World Indigenous People’s Conference (WIPCE) in Aotearoa, New Zealand
November 27 through December 1, 2005.
As a condition of program officer Ramirez’s approval for two of our NHEC
members to travel to Aotearoa to attend this conference, the NHEC was required to
provide him with a . . . “plan highlighting how the knowledge gained would be
used to further the purposes of the program, [and to] build. . . capacity to assess,
evaluate, and critique educational systems in a rigorous and competitive
environment, with the ultimate goal of making them better equipped to suggest and
coordinate improvements to the existing educational systems presently serving
Native Hawaiians.”
The plan and work product generated as a result of NHEC’s attendance at this
event have been previously submitted to program officer Ramirez and are attached
to this annual report. It should be noted that the information gleaned from
3
attendance at this conference resulted not only in the draft assessment instrument
but also tangibly increased the knowledge and understanding of the NHEC as
regards the creation of Native Hawaiian focused pedagogy, curriculum, and
measurement instruments; increased the knowledge and understanding of the
NHEC of the various strategies available to increase Native Hawaiian student
performance; and increased the knowledge and understanding of the NHEC to
gauge whether existing and proposed education programs, institutions, schools,
and curriculum are aligned with the seminal work created by the NHEC - - -Nä
Honua Mauli Ola. A copy of this report is included in the ‘Event Details’ section.
Nä Lau Lama Initiative and Conferences. (January 2006 & March 2006)
The NHEC was one of the primary movers in organizing the “Nä Lau Lama
Initiative on Best Practices in Hawaiian Education”. Nä Lau Lama means ‘many
torches of light or knowledge’ in the Hawaiian language. It was intended to
improve educational outcomes for Native Hawaiian students in Hawai‘i public
schools by convening principals, teachers, administrators, and community
members representing over 64 organizations including but not limited to the Office
of Hawaiian Affairs, the Kamehameha Schools, the State of Hawai‘i Department of
Education, Nä Pua No‘eau, and the Native Hawaiian Education Association to
accomplish the following:
• Gather input on effective teaching practices in educating Hawaiian
children;
• Identify core approaches to serve as guidelines for schools and
classrooms throughout the public school system;
• Develop collaborative partnerships between Hawaiian educational
community and State of Hawai‘i DOE schools;
• Help schools develop plans to implement approaches and strategies.
The first public event, after months of meeting and planning, occurred over two
days in January of 2006. The Nä Lau Lama planning team invited over 300
individuals involved or engaged in educating Native Hawaiian students and 238
people, representing 64 organizations, participated in the event. This is the first
time a group of people from such a diverse background were assembled to discuss
better ways of educating Native Hawaiian children in the public schools.
The conference discovered a number of practices, strategies, and criteria that fell
readily into five major groupings- - -and which led to the creation of five working
groups that agreed to meet and flesh out their ideas into the future. These working
groups agreed that their primary purpose was to structure, facilitate, and support
the implementation of practices that improve education outcomes for Native
Hawaiian children in Hawai‘i’s public schools. These five working groups are:
• Culture based education, which includes various indigenous, place
based, hands on, collaborative, multidisciplinary and small learning
4
•
•
•
•
group strategies to meaningfully engage Native Hawaiian children in
education. Two foci were identified: curriculum and curricular
approaches (content); teaching methodologies and classroom delivery
(context).
Indigenous assessment and culturally authentic evidence to gauge
progress.
Professional development of teachers and staff.
Family and community strengthening to increase participation and to
support local community governance.
Advocacy, policy development, and funding to secure public resources
and government support for Native Hawaiian education.
A second public event was planned and accomplished in FY 2005-2006 at the
Native Hawaiian Education Association Annual Convention on March 28th and 29th
at the Leeward Community College on Oahu. The intent of the meeting was to
educate administrators, teachers, and community members about the Nä Lau Lama
initiative and to encourage their participation and involvement in working with one
or more of the five working groups. A plenary session was followed by individual
breakout sessions for each of the five working groups to define and discuss the
work to be accomplished. The work of the planning committee and five working
groups continued after the event and two more Nä Lau Lama events were
conducted in FY 2006-2007. Copies of the event reports from this fiscal year can
be found in the ‘Event Details’ section.
Grant Workshops and Technical Training Conducted by the USDOEd and
Facilitated by the NHEC. (February 2006 & April 2006)
The NHEC set up and facilitated grant workshops and technical training by the
USDOEd in several communities on various islands February 12th through the 18th.
The grant workshops were intended to inform the community about the availability
of NHEA grant funds and to build their capacity and ability to apply for these funds.
The technical training was intended to review best practices of complying with the
administrative requirements of those receiving grant funds from the USDOEd under
the NHEA. Francisco Ramirez and Beth Fine accompanied Executive Director
Colin Kippen to these meetings and provided training and information and
answered questions of those in attendance. A summary report of those meetings
has been previously provided to Francisco Ramirez and is included in the ‘Event
Details’ section of this report.
A second set of technical training was set up by the NHEC on April 11th for new
NHEA grantees at the University of Hawai‘i Mänoa Campus to be conducted by
Francisco Ramirez and Beth Fine over the phone. The meeting took place in the
morning and was intended to assist first year NHEA grant awardees in filling out
5
various forms and answering their questions. Notes from that meeting have been
previously sent to Mr. Ramirez and are included in the ‘Event Details’ section.
NHEC Office is Relocated to a Central Downtown Location. (May 2006)
The NHEC office was relocated on May 1st from a small one bedroom apartment in
a residential building out of the mainstream to a central downtown office with
parking and meeting facilities available. The location is accessible to many
downtown strategic partners and businesses, the State Legislature, the State library,
the State Governor’s office, various State, Federal, and County government offices
and the State Department of Education central offices to name a few.
The NHEC Executive Director Assisted in the Planning and Facilitation of the
Association of Hawaiian Civic Club’s (AHCC) First Education Summit. (June 2006)
The NHEC assisted in the planning, implementation, and facilitation of the AHCC
first Hawaiian Education summit- - -Nänä Ma Mua I Loko No‘ono‘o Käkou, ‘to see
the future in our reflection’ on June 16 and June 17. The reason the NHEC assisted
in this effort is because the civic clubs are comprised primarily of grassroots
Hawaiians who often are left out of discussions having to do with educating and
improving their lives and this event was targeted to hear from them.
The AHCC was formed in 1918 by Prince Kuhio and is comprised of 51 civic clubs
from around the nation. It is one of the oldest grass roots Native Hawaiian
organization whose mission is to take an active interest in civic, economic, health,
social welfare, and economic development issues and to support programs of
benefit to Native Hawaiians as well as to provide a forum for discussion of matters
of public interest. The AHCC has taken a very active interest in education over the
years- - -both funding and seeking ways in which the education of Native
Hawaiians can be improved and the number of educated Native Hawaiians
increased.
The NHEC Executive Director helped plan and facilitate the actual conference
which was approved at the AHCC’s annual convention in November of 2005. The
summit brought together 113 Hawaiians from across the country and from all walks
of life. The purpose of the gathering was to create a future system of education and
leadership for Native Hawaiians. It is the first of a four phase plan to be
accomplished over the next several years.
The Summit created a two day process wherein attendees participated in large
group gatherings and smaller facilitated break out sessions. In the break out
sessions, attendees had the opportunity to provide input and discuss various
questions relating to future Native Hawaiian education and leadership.
6
Here are the highlights from the breakout sessions.
What are the most important values for our children?
• Pa‘ahana- a sense of work and feeling good about working.
• Ho‘oponopono- forgiveness, conflict resolution.
• Aloha- treating others the way you want to be treated.
What role should schools play in teaching these values?
• Connections and networks.
• Integrate the past and the present- both traditional and new.
• Value the native language and understand the culture.
What role should families play in modeling these values?
• Find the values we all live by and model these values for our children.
• Ke Akua- importance of prayer and spirituality.
• Reinforce what the children learn in schools. The ‘ohana must place a
value on education. Develop a passion for learning.
What behaviors will our children have because of these values?
• Envisioning, creative expression, imagination, and self discovery.
• Enthusiasm, eagerness to learn, valuing education, seeking meaningful
challenges in life.
• Respect for others, self, and the natural environment.
How will these behaviors help out children as individuals?
• Prepare to become a ‘big person’.
• Keiki will develop into contributing and pono members of society.
• They will meet higher standards.
How will these behaviors help our children as members of society?
• Better values.
• Better people.
• Better decision makers.
What will schools need to look like to fulfill their role?
• Kupuna in the schools at all levels.
• More communication among elementary, secondary and higher
education. College and preschools will be available and accessible.
Where is the Native Hawaiian university? Life long education will exist,
including adult learning programs.
• Have the best of both worlds. Be the best in their Hawaiian and Western
self.
7
What will teachers need to be like to play their part?
• Address the needs of individual children.
• Teachers need to have a good relationship with the makua.
• Key for teachers is that they take ownership for the children and become
family to them.
What responsibilities will our children need to accept?
• Children need to want to study and accept their kuleana.
• Students need to learn to do hard work.
• Respect diversity.
This event was the first of four events scheduled by the Association of Hawaiian
Civic Clubs over the next several years. It is anticipated that the NHEC will not be
as heavily involved in future phases of this project as it was in this first phase. A
copy of the summary of the report generated by this conference is included in the
‘Event Details’ section.
Attendance at the Education Commission on the States (ECS) Training and
Conference. (June 2006 & July 2007)
The Executive Director of the NHEC was invited as a guest to attend an ECS School
Community Council Technical Assistance training June 27 and June 28 in Hilo,
Hawai‘i sponsored by the ECS. The purpose of the event was to assist the training
of State of Hawai‘i teachers, administrators, and community members in creating
effective ‘Community School Councils’ as mandated in 2004 by Act 51 of the
Hawai‘i State Legislature. Act 51 mandated the creation of Community Councils
and vested them with the authority to review and evaluate the school’s academic
and financial plan and recommend revisions as needed, ensure the school’s
academic and financial plan is aligned with the education accountability section,
participate in the selection and evaluation of the school’s principal, consult with
and provide input into school governance, review the principal’s school repair and
maintenance needs and recommend revisions as needed, request waivers of rules,
procedures, and provisions of collective bargaining units when such waivers would
lead to increased student achievement within a school and are recommended by
that school’s principal.
The training provided an overview of how these Community Councils have
functioned in other parts of the country and gave some examples of best practices.
The training lacked specific information about some of the legal and structural
problems with implementing such Community Councils in the State of Hawai‘i
Department of Education, how to overcome these problems, or how these Councils
have fared across the DOE in the State of Hawai‘i since this bill became law.
8
The Executive Director of the NHEC was also invited as a guest to plan and speak
at ECS national conference July 11th through the 14th being hosted by the ECS on
the issue of educating Native American, Alaskan, and Hawaiian Students and the
role of state policy in providing quality education for native students.
Representative Roy Takumi of the Hawai‘i State Legislature, and Chair of the House
of Representatives Committee on Education was selected as the moderator for the
panel. Also present was Senator Norman Sakamoto of the Hawai‘i State Legislature
and Chair of the Senate Committee on Education. Panelists included David
Beaulieu, Editor, Journal of American Indian Education, Arizona State University;
Robin Butterfield, Senior Liaison, Minority Community Outreach, National
Education Association; Norbert S. Hill, Executive Director, American Indian
Graduate Center, New Mexico; and the Executive Director of the NHEC. Also
present at the national conference was Representative Lyla Berg of the Hawai‘i
State Legislature and the Vice Chair of the House Committee on Education.
The National conference was valuable for the NHEC because of the national and
state education issues discussed, the contacts made at these meetings, and the time
that the Executive Director spent with legislators and policy makers responsible for
authorizing and funding education programs for natives, including programs for
Native Hawaiians. It is not anticipated that the NHEC will participate in ECS forums
located outside Hawai‘i in the foreseeable future.
9
2005-2006
Event Details
KUKUI MäLAMALAMa:
GRANTEE SUMMIT
Native Hawaiian Education Act
Grantee Summit Agenda
Dole Ballrooms
Friday, November 4, 2005
8:30 - 9:00am
Registration
9:00 - 9:30am
Opening Ceremony, Native Hawaiian Education Kupuna Council.
9:30am
Welcoming Address, Ms. Maggie Hanohano, Chairperson, Native Hawaiian
Education Council.
9:35am
Opening address, Ms. Manu Ka‘iama, Director of the Native Hawaiian Leadership
Project and Treasurer of the Native Hawaiian Education Council.
Presentation of background information and an overview of the day’s activities. Colin
Kippen, Executive Director, Native Hawaiian Education Council.
10:00am
“What Are We Doing To Light The Way?”
1st Breakout Session in the Following Groupings:
I. Early Education and Family Based Learning Centers
II. Curriculum Development and Teacher Training in all sectors
III. Gifted and Talented and Hawaiian Language Programs
IV. Math, Science, Reading, Special Needs, At Risk Youth Programs and Facility
Support
V. Higher Education Support and Higher Education Institutional Development
11:00am
Report by individual groups on “What We Are Doing To Light The Way.”
12:00pm
Lunch and Guest Speaker. Ms. Jennifer Sabas, Chief of Staff for United States Senator
Daniel Inouye
1:00pm
“What Can We Do To Perpetuate The Light?”
2nd Breakout Session in the Original Groupings:
I. Early Education and Family Based Learning Centers
II. Curriculum Development and Teacher Training in all sectors
III. Gifted and Talented and Hawaiian Language Programs
IV. Math, Science, Reading, Special Needs, At Risk Youth Programs and Facility
Support
V. Higher Education Support and Higher Education Institutional Development
2:00
Report by Individual Groups on “What We Can Do To Perpetuate The Light.”
3:00
Next Steps and Concluding Remarks, Colin Kippen, Executive Director, NHEC.
3:15
Closing Ceremony by the Native Hawaiian Education Kupuna Council
GRANTEE INFORMATION – Instruction Sheet
Part I – Contact Information
- Complete as fields indicate
Part II – Program Data
- Program Description:
Brief description of your program
-
Years Funded:
From the year of first award to expected end (i.e. 2002 –
2009)
-
Geographic Area Served:
Cities by Island
Part III - Population Served
- Direct Beneficiaries:
-
In-Direct Beneficiaries:
Part IV – Outcomes
- Expected:
Total # of those receiving direct service
Total # of those affected by your program (i.e. family /
community / school entities, if you are involved in
curriculum development)
What are the indicators or outcome you intend to affect
or change? These should be the items you are
collecting data about and measuring.
-
Realized:
What are the results of your measurements?
-
Unmet Needs:
What are the needs that you believe are remaining and
need to be addressed? What remains to be done?
-
Comments / Success Stories / Inspirational Moments:
Any additional program information that could be of
benefit to us as we attempt to make a case for
reauthorizing this Act and increasing the funding
available under it.
3075 Kalihi Street, #4 Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96819
Phone: 808-845-9883
Fax: 808-845-9984
CONTACT INFORAMTION
LAST NAME
FIRST NAME
TITLE
ORGANIZATION / PROGRAM
STREET ADDRESS
namefdsfd
PHONE
CITY / STATE / ZIP
FAX
EMAIL ADDRESS
PROGRAM DATA
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
YEARS FUNDED
POPULATION SERVED (#)
GEOGRAPHIC AREA SERVED
DIRECT BENEFICIARIES
IN-DIRECT BENEFICIARIES
OUTCOMES
EXPECTED
UNMET NEEDS REMAINING
COMMENTS / SUCCESS STORIES / INSPIRATIONAL MOMENTS
REALIZED
Notes from NHEA Grantee Summit
II.
Dole Ballrooms
Native Hawaiian Curriculum Development and Teacher Training
Bob Kahihikolo-Pacific American Foundation
Mili Kawaa-Keiki O Ka Aina
Noelani Goodyear-Ka‘öpua-Hälau Kü Mana PCS
Doug Knight-Alu Like, Inc. Volcanoes Alive Project
Morris Lai-UHM, Pihana Nä Mamo
Noelle Kahanu-Bishop Museum, Hawai‘i ALIVE
Jenny Wooton-Bishop Museum, Hawai‘i ALIVE
Alice Taum-Ho‘omana Hou High School
Hugh Dunn-UHM, Pihana Nä Mamo
Gloria Kishi-UHM, Pihana Nä Mamo
Sara Banks-UHM, Center on Disability Studies-Kükulu Na Uapu Ka Upena
Ben Guerrero-UH Maui, Halau A‘o
Ellen Schroeder-Olomana School
August Suehiro-Olomana School
Collin Young-Olomana School
Vernon Masuda-Olomana School
Lisa Galloway-UHM, Center on Disability Studies, Ha‘awina Ho‘opapau Project
Marge Ma‘aka-UHM, COE
Kalehua Krug-UHM, COE
Myron Brumaghim, Nanaikapono, Nänä O Ka Pulapula
‘Iwalani Hodges-Nanaikapono, Nänä O Ka Pulapula
Pohai Kukea Shultz-Nanaikapono, Nänä O Ka Pulapula
What are we doing to light the way?
• Review of Existing Programs for participants in this cluster.
o Olomana School- - -for at risk students Statewide (Is this solely for students that are
incarcerated at the Juvenile detention Center?)
Culturally appropriate learning center for student population
Features parent engagement, too
Provides teachers and learning materials for students
Provides curriculum and programs at summer school
o Nanaikapono- - -Nanakuli ( 3 years) (?)
Professional development (?)
Improvement (?)
Best Practices/culturally based (?)
Parent connections (?)
Community experts (?)
o Pihano Na Mamo- - -Statewide
Makua Hanai- - -parent (?)
Kakoo- - -student support for Secondary students (?)
Heluhelu-Literacy (9,000 students) (?)
Evaluations (?)
Curriculum Development
o Center of Disability Studies- - - Oahu and Hawaii (?)
At risk behavior (?)
1
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Teachers (?)
Creating Futures- - -Ho’opa’a (?) Expect to serve 3,000 students
Supplemental program for personal/professional skills
Service these schools- - -Halau Ku Mana- - - Manoa, Ka Waihona- -Nanakuli- AYP met
After School Programs/ Place Based
Halau Ku Mana- - -Papakolea, Manoa, etc.
Core Academic Integration (?)
Disseminate to NLN (?)
Develop Ahupua’a’ Curriculum (?)
Place based
Teacher Training (?)
Math (Challenge) (?)
Kupuna Leo Cohort
Hawaiian Immersion Teacher Training
Resources Community Experts
Kula Ni’ihau ‘O Kekaha Ni’ihau Students
Education tools to educate students/families preschool
Teaching Hawaiian Language
Reading Curriculum Specialist (K-3)
Pre-school Assessment
Professional Development
Transition Plan ( first year graduates)
Center of Disability Studies Hawaii
Hawaiian Teaching Values, culture, academics
Writing curriculum, science based (6th grade)
Videos
Plus On line Course (k-6) “Sense of Place”
Culturally responsive Teacher Development
Bishop Museum Hawaii Alive ( 2 years- - -New)
Place based learning
Mo’olelo, maps, lessons, archives
Pilot project with Halau Lokahi
Student and School Directed
Expert Community Resources
Partnered with Juni Roa Film Productions and IAIA- Santa Fe
Keiki O Ka Aina 3 Year Grant Oahu and Maui
Path Program, Hippie Program, Pre School Program, Incarceration Program
Curriculum Development
Parent Participation
Free Programs.
Halau A’o- - -Maui County
CSAP Alternative Learning Center
Computer, Technology, Internet Based
Cultural Classes
Video, Aquaculture, etc
E- Portfolio
Alu Like Volcanoes Alive
Middle School Earth Science Curriculum
Teachers Manual
2
Translated into Hawaiian DC
Math , Science, Social Science, Technology, Ar
PDERI
Materials, Supplies
o Ho’omana Hou- - -Molokai (3 years)
Curriculum/Professional Development
Science, Place Based
What can we do to perpetuate the light?
• Created a Database for the NHEC. Want information on Programs, numbers and contact
information, locations at which services are being delivered.
• Feeder programs and transitions (?)
• Availability of services (?)
• Want more Partnerships and information about partnerships.
• Website-curriculum, search engine (?)
• Online coursers (general education)
• Ahupua’a website connections (?)
• Improved access for information available
• Storehouse/resource/storage/repository (?)
• Relationship building/support
• Cultural relevance (?)
• Available curriculum(?)
• Ho’olako, etc. websites (?)
• Assessment and evaluation- - -cultural based
• Resources- curriculum, experts, etc. (?)
• Holistic- - -child, family, community, school (?)
• Support lobbying efforts
• Grant “watchdog” (entity to ease duplication) (?)
• “Gaps” in grant subjects for availability (?)
• Centralization of grants (office, etc. ) (?)
• Point Contact (PR info to public) (?)
• More Networking
• More grant training ( council sponsored)
• More Technical Assistance
• Reestablish Priorities (locally) (?)
• Cultural competence (director, staff, etc)
• Sustainability/leadership (?)
• Knowledgeable administrators, staff, etc.
• NCLB, credentials, certified, accountable (?)
• Principal/Admin Professional Development (?)
• Entrepreneurial ventures (?)
• Enlist private foundations
• Kokua/volunteers
• Cultural publishing company (sustainability) (?)
• Diversification (?)
• Policies made clear on grant spending and availability (?)
3
III.
Dole Ballrooms
Native Hawaiian Gifted & Talented, Hawaiian Language Programs
Puanani Wilhelm-HIDOE-Paku‘i Onaehana
Peter Hanohano-Education 1st
David Sing-UHH,Nä Pua No‘eau
‘Änela Gueco-Keiki o Ka ‘Äina
Jenna Umiamaka- Keiki o Ka ‘Äina
Kamalu Poepoe-Kula Kaiapuni ‘O Kualapu‘u
Nämaka Rawlins-‘Aha Pünana Leo
Chad Kalepa Baybaya-‘Aha Pünana Leo
Jack Keppeler-PID Foundation, Baibala Hemolele
Paula De Morales-Kü Ha‘aheo
o 19 Jack Keppler- - -Baibala Hemolele and Ka Honua No’eau, Partners in
Development.
Digital reproduction of Hawaiian Bibles and oral recitation and reading of
Hawaiian Baibala
On internet
Is electronic application
Over next 3 years 120 workshops planned to teach people to use our site.
o 20 Ka Hana No’eau- - -Kohala Community.( Jack Keppeler’s group)
Purpose is to provide a Kohala intergenerational center to provide cultural skills
and lifestyle to youth.
Program delivered by the Kohala Kupuna in areas related to fishing, mochi
making, car repair
o 7- Chad Kalepa Baybayan
Use assets to teach skills
Using mala and canoe
Stress use of Hawaiian language
Voyaging works with adults
Teach parents
o 6- Namaka Rawlins
Curriculum in Hawaiian language at preschool level. Also created the Family
Literacy Project also created. The Video Project on animation and reading in
the Hawaiian language is an offshoot of this project.
o 17-Kamalu Poepoe- - -Kualapu’u
Public conversion charter school in restructuring
Olelo project- provide resources for Kaiapuni students to meet No Child Left
Behind Standards.
Translation, professional development, tutoring, enrichment
o 8, 10,14- - -Jen Umiamaka- - -Keiki O Ka ‘Aina
3 of 8 preschools are bilingual
Hawaiian is taught to Keiki and English is taught to Makua (?)
16 sites on Oahu, including Waimanalo
Kahului (QL School) (?)
1
o 2 and 12- - - Dr. David Sing from Na Pua Noeau
funded by OHA and the NHEA
2- - -Pathways- - -Increasing Hawaiians in Conservation (?)
12- - -Ho’omau- - -work with 600 NPN (?) students in UH system
• all islands will have positions
• strong environmental curricula
• 1000 students per year from the years K-12
o 7 and 8 Peter Hanohano of Ed First
The program is written for Ko’olauloa
Focus on strengths
Athletics and Culture
Game plan and Scholars Program
• Study hall and support for athletes
Academic support for athletes
After school mentoring/tutoring programs
7 habits of effective teens- - -made cultural with Hawaiian values for grades 712
Serves at least ½ of the school with each program (?)
o Puanani Wilhelm
Technological support to middle school immersion teachers to support student’s
work.
Student mentors trained other students to do research and to produce materials
Train kupuna to use technology and document oral histories, etc.
Hawaiian cultural best practices conference to get practices into schools in
order to systematize cultural teaching within the DOE.
Know where we want to go and the strategies to get there.
• Get to students through parents, sports, cultural and language training,
electronic technology, intergenerational leadership, engaging them in
stimulating activities which foster critical thinking, maintaining good
relationships, create passion for learning to achieve goals
• Hawaiian language and culture is the destination and the path, part of
the family and community, and unending generational support.
• Using NHMO, ensure that programs are complying with the guidelines and helping to
improve academic achievement in NH children. These programs can then be used and
available to all islands and communities.
• Develop/sustain/support the PASSION for NH education
• Become the System- - -or part of the system (HIDOE, Higher Ed, teacher training) or establish
another P-20 parallel system
o Discussed forming another parallel education system
o Those schools that adopt a model program, get parallel funding, etc.
o Magnet school
• Support educational choice. Families and communities decide system, curriculum, etc.
Local control.
• Family oriented, community based, culturally driven education from pre natal throughout the
rest of one’s life- - - intent is to create another parallel system of education.
• Develop partnerships, collaborations, and relationships to accomplish the above.
2
•
•
•
•
•
•
Establish ‘learning ‘ohanas’ by involving community and seeking community support.
Empower families, empowers communities.
Community support is crucial to make programs sustainable, because if they are supported
and needed by the community the likelihood that they will grow and flourish will be
increased.
Develop infrastructure to support ‘the system”
o Influence existing and future law, policy, rules, regulations etc.
o Influence political and societal support
o Individual kuleana
Market existing NHEA programs so that communities have a choice to use in place of DOE
NHEC should facilitate communication campaign for the NHEA grantees. For the purpose of
making schools and communities aware so that schools can use it as a reform model rather
than using mainland vendors.
Do a better job of publicizing the stories of what NH educators are doing and the
accomplishments they are achieving.
3
IV.
Dole Ballrooms
Native Hawaiian Math, Science, Reading, Special Needs, At-Risk
Youth Programs & Facility Support
Keola Nakanishi-Hälau Kü Mäna, Mana Maoli
Makana Lewis-‘Aha Pünana Leo
‘Iwalani Kualii-Kaho‘ohanohano-‘Aha Pünana Leo
Puamamo Wa‘a-Boys and Girls Club of Hawai‘i, Wai‘anae & Nänakuli
Michael Kahikina- Boys and Girls Club of Hawai‘i, Admin.
Ginger Fuata-Wai‘anae Alumni and Community Foundation
Ric Gresia-Searider Productions, Wai‘anae High School
Junior Ekau-QLCC
Karen Holt-Ho‘omaka Hou, Moloka‘i Community Service Council
Tamar deFries-UHM and UHH, Nä Pua No‘eau
Christina Paleka-Kualapu‘u School, Project OLELO
Kahi Brooks-NNEF
Nani Na‘ope-NNEF
Janice Espiritu-Kaunakakai School, KEA Project
Jennifer Wada-Kaunakakai School, KEA Project
Mildred Higashi-Kaunakakai School, KEA Project
Shannon Hirose-Wong-UHM, Hui Mälama O Ke Kai
Michael Kahue-Mälama ‘ÄINA Foundation
Gabriel Ishida-HIDOE, Hawai‘i 3Rs
Doreen Yamashiro-HIDOE, Pihana Nä Mamo
Maggie Hanohano-HIDOE, Pihana Nä Mamo
Gloria Kishi-HIDOE, Pihana Nä Mamo
Jo Ann Ka‘akua-HIDOE, Pihana Nä Mamo
V. Leimomi Malina-Wright-Ke Kula Kaiapuni O Anuenue
o Mike Kahikina- - -Boys and girls club in Waianae
Teen centers NHIS (?) alternative center
40- 41 grads
Job Workshop- - -70% participation
100 hour community service participation
50% will be employed.
o Palama Kawaa- - -Family Nights
o Iwalani Kualii - - - -Punana Leo
o Tamar DeFries- - - -Napua Noeau
Pathways 3 cohorts 8th grade on campus
Ahupua’a
o Junior Ekau- - -QLCC Waianae Coast Digital Media Video Halau
New grantee
Located at Waianae High
Practice oral history
Summer media (create ohana journal)
Standardize equipment (video) on the Waianae and Nanakuli Coast
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Create an incentive program
Create mentors for the students
Build on the Waianae coast one child at a time.
Malama Aina- - -grant is in the second year.
Makahana Ka Ike
Write curriculum for K Bay
Science, math- - -statistics and data analysis
Project based learning- - -fish count and water quality counted and measured.
Approached 6 charter schools on Hawaii Island. (for what purpose?)
Kaunakakai School
Jennifer Wada - - - teacher in the 4th grade
Janice Espiritu- - - principal.
Dr. Mille Jogasjo – Eva;iatpr
Increase academic student achievement
FACT, FELT, EA, IMI and Partnering Ohana brochures
Native Nations Programs
Native Hawaiian Math, Science Curriculum
Community Learning
Halau Lokahi
GED Classes
Halau Ku Mana Charter School
Cultural based
Community
Ho‘omau Project, UHH
1st year at college
11th graders
90 student / 30 per cohort
Portfolio to attend college
Finding: need sense of “place”
Ho‘omaka Hou, Moloka‘i
9th & 10th grade
Math and Science Curriculum
Teacher Training
Pihana Nä Mamo, HIDOE
Heluhelu – reading improvement for struggling readers
Makua Hanoai – working with families
Kako‘o-mentoring for high school students
Hawai‘i 3r’s, HIDOE
Repair
Remodel
Restore
Facilities support, goal bringing pride to schools.
Even match of monies brought in by community
Students getting involved in improving school environment
Hui Malama O Ke Kai, Waimanalo
After-school tutoring
Ocean-based curriculum
Wholistic approach
Funding from Drug-Free schools
Work on Physical health, nutrition, Hawaiian Culture
Focus on families
7 years of prior grant funding
o Kualapu‘u, Moloka‘i
Immersion school, charter school
On-going language enrichment
Translating math, science and language arts curriculum materials into Hawaiian
Professional development opportunities for Kupuna and Kumu
376 students, K-6
Goal: meet AYP
o Keiki O Ka Aina
At Risk
Children of incarcerated parents
Focus on preschool age children
• Learn about other programs
• Communicate common goals
• Online database
• Geographic meetings
o Collaborate
o Share resources
• Standard Measures
o Identify needs
o Comparable statistics by geography
o Standard collection of data
• Collecting Data
o FAQ
o Template for data
o What reports are needed?
• Orientation packet for new Grantees
• Statewide surveys
o Survey needs of target population
o Available resources
o “Customer Satisfaction”
o Best Practices
o Culturally responsive programs
• What is the role of NHEC in regards to grantee projects?
o Monitor finances?
o Assist 1st year grantees?
o Collect data?
o Coordinating body?
o Share program progress and / or results?
o Identify “pukas” in services?
o Help to develop / design measurement tool?
o Maintain data repository?
Aggregate data
Generate reports
• What happens after the project ends?
o Geographic meetings vs. Statewide?

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Island Councils can be more directly connected to local projects
More affordable for travel
Proposals
o Need assistance for applicants to know:
Criteria
Extension
Clarification of funds
What can or cannot be purchased
Parameters
Priorities
How do we disseminate project information?
What are the challenges and pitfalls that projects encountered? How were they overcomed?
Share strategies for sustainability
Work session
o Technical assistance
o On track?
o Adjustments needed?
o Financial management?
o Is what you are doing actually aligning with your written proposal?
o Ongoing evaluation needed
o Temperature checks
o How do you start?
o What are the procurement rules?
o How do you issue contracts?
o How do you get contract services?
o Networks to connect transition of students
o What kinds of data do the feds want? What do they consider “successful”?
o Need to establish communication among grantees
o Need to clarify the milestones
o Geographic sustainability
o How are agencies able to successfully continue receiving grant funding?
Additional meetings
o Bring together researchers, teachers, administrators and grant writers, etc.
How can we help Grantees
o More Resources
o More Partnerships / Developing More
o Technology
o Communication – Email List
o Resource Directory
o Professional Development
o Place to Collaborate
o Submit 5 bullet
How do you know where to perpetuate the light?
o Where does the info go? NHEC?
o Website for questions
o Early format / template what data needed?
o Standardize measurement
o Recording protocol
o Timeline – schedule
•
•
o Effective tools and techniques
o Resources – sources
Use own data
Information from schools
Use best practices
Collective responses
What is in community / What does the community think they need?
Data repository on Native Hawaiian families, students, communities
Coordinate data
What happens with info on successful education projects?
o Repository for best practices
o List of programs in dissemination stages so schools can review
o Culturally based online programs
o Organizations / programs need to share
o Share website and email with NHEC and link to NHEC as a clearing house
o More activity at leg. To support coordinated efforts
How to sustain
o Need support for longer period of time
o Partnership to sustain program long enough to show improvement
o How do we sustain successful models for long term
o Assist with benchmark planning
o Workshop
o Developing new model for how to do contracts
o How to get data?
o Action research measurement for success for next transitions
o Different breakout rooms
o Test scores (what measure of success?)
o Look for partners to continue to support successful programs
o Clarify goals / milestones
o Geographic needs and map of services, long term tracking of successes using certain
programs
o Panel of people sharing by area of expertise
V.
Dole Ballrooms
Native Hawaiian Higher Education Programs
Manu Kaiama-UHM, Native Hawaiian Leadership Project
Neil Scott-Archemedes Hawai‘i Project
Kelli Ching-UHM, College of Engineering
Joshua Kaakua-UHM-College of Engineering
Kanoe Näone-Keiki O Ka ‘Äina Family Learning Centers
Melody MacKenzie-UHM, Center for Excellence in Native Hawaiian Law
Judith Inazu-UHM, Social Science Research Institute
Claire Pruet-Chaminade University
Lui Hokoana-UH Maui, Liko A‘e
Winona Whitmore-Alu Like, Inc.
Bob Worthington-Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs
Kekoa Hakman
Barbara Holthus-UHM, Social Science Research Institute
Asai Gilman-Education 1st, BYU Hawai‘i
Kinohi Gomes-Nä Pua No‘eau
Lia Keawe-UHM, Ku‘i Ka Lono
Pi‘ilani Ka‘aloa-UHM, Ku‘I Ka Lono
Shane Cobb-Adams-Ho‘ola Lahui
Pauline Chinn-UHM (Partners in Development)
• Native Hawaiian S & E Mentorship (Intergeneration Learning) = Kako‘o
• Native Hawaiian in S & E
• Center Excellence in Law & Rights
• Liko A‘e Native Hawaiian scholarships – Native Hawaiian approach
• Lamakü – ‘Imi Na‘auao ‘ohana, ‘Ölelo Hawai‘i, Hawaiian identity in education, individual
and group sessions
• Education 1st: 7 Characteristics of a successful student
• UH Center of Excellence: Science curriculum development
• UH Hawaiian Language
• UH Community College: Community-Based
• Students taking science classes
• Usefulness of science in daily lives
• Infuse sense of kuleana; community, bonding
• Intrusive counseling
• Ho‘iho‘i to the Lähui
• Collaboration
• Meet once a month
• Bring the many home
• Lend each other support
• Be one voice for advocacy
1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
SHARING IS CARING
Help sustain all the programs
Focus on the ‘Ohana
Assist parents with children in Pünana Leo / Kula Kaiapuni
Use Technology and its applications to pass it on
People who know share what they know with the kids
Mentoring
Accountability, functionality
Template of information of recipients to be collected.
Compile Higher Ed data
Need base retention base geographic distribution
Compile the data
Programs where Hawaiians are under represented
Different Values to promote higher ed
OHANA
Passion, drive, enthusiasm
Consortium
Collect data
Summary:
• Higher Ed Consortium: Networking, sharing across programs, age groups
• Collect Data (Mandated)
• Identified Funding
• Mentoring / Legacy
2
Native Hawaiian Education Act
Grantee Summit Survey
Dole Ballrooms
Overall, I enjoyed the Grantee Summit.
Strongly Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Neutral
3
Agree
4
Strongly Agree
5
The Summit increased my understanding of the need for collaboration and cooperation amongst grantees
and with the Native Hawaiian Education Council.
Strongly Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Neutral
3
Agree
4
Strongly Agree
5
The Summit increased my understanding of the need for data to be collected and shared highlighting the
successes of programs funded under the Native Hawaiian Education Act with both the Native Hawaiian
Education Council as well as with key government decision-makers.
Strongly Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Neutral
3
Agree
4
Strongly Agree
5
I believe this grant program changes lives and is of great value to the Native Hawaiian community.
Strongly Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Neutral
3
Agree
4
Strongly Agree
5
I think all Native Hawaiian Education Act grantees should be willing to share their successes with the
Native Hawaiian Education Council so that they can inform key governmental officials about the value of
this program.
Strongly Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Neutral
3
Agree
4
Strongly Agree
5
What was the single most important thing that you learned as a result of your participation in this Summit?
What was the best part of your experience at the Summit?
What did you find most disappointing about the Summit?
Additional Comments?
54
45%
GRANTEE SUMMIT SURVEY
surveys collected
1) Overall, I enjoyed the Grantee Summit.
31 / 54
57% Stongly Agree
23 / 54
43% Agree
0 /54
0%
Neutral
0 / 54
0%
Disagree
0 / 54
0%
Strongly Disagree
2) The Summit increased my understanding of the need for collaboration and
cooperation amongst grantees and with the NHEC.
37 / 54
15 / 54
2 /54
0 / 54
0 / 54
57%
28%
4%
0%
0%
Stongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
3) The Summit increased my understanding of the need for data to be collected and
shared highlighting the successes of programs funded under the Native Hawaiian
Education Act with both the Native Hawaiian Education Council as well as with
key government decision-makers.
39 / 54
72% Stongly Agree
15 / 54
28% Agree
0 /54
0%
Neutral
0 / 54
0%
Disagree
0 / 54
0%
Strongly Disagree
4) I believe this grant program changes lives and is of great value to the Native
Hawaiian community.
44 / 54
81% Stongly Agree
10 / 54
19% Agree
0 /54
0%
Neutral
0 / 54
0%
Disagree
0 / 54
0%
Strongly Disagree
5) I think all Native Hawaiian Education Act grantees should be willing to share their
successes with the NHEC so that they can inform key governmental officials about
the value of this program.
46 / 54
85% Stongly Agree
8 / 54
15% Agree
0 /54
0%
Neutral
0 / 54
0%
Disagree
0 / 54
0%
Strongly Disagree
6) What was the single most important thing that you learned as a result of your
participation in this Summit?
- Native Hawaiian education is a Kakou thing.
- Statewide coordinated program essential.
- There are many programs somwhat similar to my program.
- What others are doing.
- The end of the NHEA is near and the vital need for data from grantees.
- We are all in the same waà; confused, passionate and holoimua!
- Other service providers and what they do.
- Relationship of NHEA, NHEC and grants.
- NHEC can be a significant / effective force if they can provide assistance to
- What other grantees are producing.
- Building realtionships come first, teaching / learning second
- We need to join forces and be willing to share best practices and gather quality
- I realized that my program was in the same situation as many others - that I
- Learned about some of the new programs.
- That we can be unified as Hawaiians.
- We need to become self sustaining.
- There needs to be a centralized website for grantees to share information so that
- Learned about other programs.
- Keep the light burning! Imua Na Poè o Hawai‘i.
- We are able to develop a common purpose.
- Learned that there is hope for Native Hawaiians.
- How much we can and will share.
- The latest political realities.
- Establishing relationships and new friendships.
- The summit was maikaì.
- Sharing with others.
- Everyone needs help with their grant. Need temperature check along the way.
- Making good contacts for future collaborations.
- This is a kakou thing.
- Eleu mechanized further.
- The need to share info and to bring the grant money home.
- Potential resources and collaboration opportunities.
- The willingness and desire of grantees to work together and share information.
- The importance of collaboration andmoving in the same direction.
- We (all grantees) are committed to sharing and helping in any way that we can to
- The sharing of resources.
- What others are doing - the networking has been incredible.
- We are moving forward.
- Hearing different experiences.
- For those who came, left with strong commitment to work together.
- How important it is to inform our families we serve and communities on the
- Others value our Native Hawai‘i keiki as much as I do.
- Unity.
- Eleu exists and is getting stronger.
7) What was the best part of your experience at the Summit?
- Hearing the Chief of Staff from Senator Inouye's Office perspective! Very
- Networking with other programs.
- Hoòlauna / Networking.
- Sharing programs.
- Networking with others.
- Learning about the different projects.
- Learning from those who have paved the way.
- The comraderie among grantees being expanded.
- Connections.
- Paying tribute to my teachers / counselors.
- We were able to share our concerns and programs.
- Meeting other grantees.
- Meeting some wonderful people - getting advice about pedagogy and how to
- Met several new people who will be wonderful resources to my project.
- Our breakout sessions.
- Learning about the successes as well as challenges.
- Meeting and reconnecting with others. Learning more about role of NHEC with
- Meeting and learning frome each individual.
- Meeting the new grantees, enjoying the enthusiasm of one and all.
- Meeting others that do the same thing.
- This is a good opportunity to share what works.
- Learning about other programs.
- Listening to others share.
- Jennifer Sabas talk was most unifying and informative.
- Seeing everyone work together.
- Lunch!
- Learning about programs.
- Networking and learning about other programs.
- Everything was wonderful, sharing manaò was helpful.
- Meeting and talking with everyone.
- The sharing of resources.
- Learning from others - reconnecting people.
- Meeting new people.
- Being able to work together at other organizations on common goals. Moving
- Meeting of others with the same goal and same direction.
- Feeling of one group working for a common purpose.
- Meeting new people (passionate).
8) What did you find most disappointing about the Summit?
- Nothing. (x12)
- Wished we could have met with other groups but understand it was a matter of
- Need to have break out rooms. Hard to hear discussions. (x5)
- Morning breakout not focused on result.
- Not enough information about NHEC and what they do, services, etc.
- That the granting program is not as far along as it should be in organization,
- Meeting room was not good for breakout - difficult to hear because noise.
- Breakout groups too large.
- Need more time. (x4)
- Need more time to hear about the new projects.
- Many left after lunch.
- I didn't know some have been possessive or guarded about their projects.
- Lack of conpedium of grants, contacts, and descriptions.
- Not long enough.
- Not all grantees came.
- Missing people.
9) Additional Comments
- Should have more breaks to talk to everybody.
- Mahalo nui loa for the opportunity to come together! (x10)
- Continue the meeting of the minds.
- It was all great!
- Let's do this every year.
- This should be done annually.
- Keep it up.
- I strongly believe that NHEC should conduct NHEA grant writing workshops so
- In regards to data, NHEC must identify what kinds of specific data they need,
WORLD INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
CONFERENCE on EDUCATION
Conference Report:
Date:
November 27 – December 1, 2005
Conference:
World Indigenous Peoples Conference (WIPCE)
Conference Theme:
Completing the Circle of Knowledge
NHEC Attendees:
VerlieAnn Malina-Wright, State Council Member
Paula De Morales, State Council Member
Report Submitted On:
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
A. Introduction.
The Native Hawaiian Education Council, whose purpose under the Native
Hawaiian Education Act is to ‘assess, evaluate, report and make
recommendations’ on education policy as it pertains to Native Hawaiian
education achievement, and to ‘coordinate’ all activities and efforts in that
regard, sought and received permission from U.S. Department of Education
program officer Francisco Ramirez for two of its members to travel ‘out of
country’ to attend the World Indigenous Peoples Conference (WIPCE) on
Education November 27 through December 1, 2005, in Aotearoa, New Zealand.
As a condition of program officer Ramirez’s approval for two of our NHEC
members to travel to Aotearoa to attend this conference, the Native Hawaiian
Education Council was required to provide him with the following information.
“Establish a plan highlighting how the knowledge gained [through attending this
WIPCE conference in Aotearoa] would be used to further the purposes of the
program, and, as outlined in the request, build. . . capacity to assess, evaluate,
and critique educational systems in a rigorous and competitive environment,
with the ultimate goal of making them better equipped to suggest and
Phone: 808-523-6432
Fax: 808-523-6464
coordinate improvements to the existing educational systems presently serving
Native Hawaiians.”
A summary of the information requested by program officer Ramirez as well as
the work product created as a result of NHEC attendance at this WIPCE
conference follows.
B. Report.
1.Objective: To establish a plan highlighting how the knowledge gained through
attending this WIPCE conference in Aotearoa will be used to further the
purposes of the program and build capacity to assess, evaluate, and critique
educational systems in a rigorous and competitive environment, with the
ultimate goal of making them better equipped to suggest and coordinate
improvements to the existing educational systems presently serving Native
Hawaiians.
A. Background Information on the Relationship Between the Maori of
Aotearoa and Native Hawaiians- - - and a History of the Creation of ‘ Na Honua
Mauli Ola’.
The Maori of Aotearoa (New Zealand) and the Native Hawaiians of Hawaii are
tied together through their common history, migration stories, Polynesian
background and similar languages, culture, family structures, and history at the
hands of colonizing forces from outside Polynesia.
One migration story speaks of Maori travels from South Point, Hawaii to Aotearoa
and refers to Native Hawaiians as the tuakana or older siblings of the Maori
people. Although both Maori and Native Hawaiian societies suffered the loss of
wellness, wellbeing, culture, language, and sovereignty that continues from
initial contact to the present, the Maori experience has provided a model for
Native Hawaiians since the early 1980’s. The Maori belief in reo (indigenous
Maori language), tikanga (indigenous Maori custom, culture, and values) and
toi (indigenous Maori knowledge) are the underpinnings of Maori epistemologies
and has informed developing Native Hawaiian epistemologies as well. Maori
beliefs concerning their connection to the whena (earth), hapu (traditional
tribes), whanau (family), and iwi (ancestral bones) have informed Native
Hawaiian beliefs and have demonstrated the importance of these relationships
to establishing and nurturing a strong sense of Maori and Native Hawaiian
identity.
Native Hawaiian educators have been inspired by Maori education, Maori
cultural initiatives, and Maori pedagogy since they first visited Aotearoa in the
early 1980’s to observe Maori immersion language nests and survival schools.
These language nests and survival schools (Kohanga Reo, Kura Kaupapa Maori)
became the model for the ‘Aha Punana Leo Native Hawaiian Language
Immersion schools in Hawaii, which have fostered the rebirth and revival of the
Native Hawaiian language, and the graduation of seven classes of Native
Hawaiian speakers who have been educated in the Native Hawaiian language
from Kindergarten through the twelfth grade. This rebirth of Native Hawaiian
Language through the Hawaiian language immersion schools has created
many Native Hawaiian speakers and a greater use and appreciation of the
Native Hawaiian language.
Native Hawaiian educators also visited Aotearoa in 1996 to learn about the
development by the Maori of Te Aho Matua- - -a philosophical doctrine
established by the Maori to align national education practice and policy with
indigenous Maori goals and objectives. These national practices and policies
were adopted and enacted as part of New Zealand aw and have since
become the standard by which national education policies and practices
affecting the indigenous Maori people are measured and evaluated.
The principles and approaches set forth in Te Aho Matua inspired the College of
Hawaiian Language at the University of Hawaii at Hilo and the ‘Aha Punana Leo
Schools to create Ke Kumu Honua Mauli Ola in 1998. Ke Kumu Honua Mauli Ola
is a seminal piece of work that sets forth a Native Hawaiian philosophy as a
foundation for enhancing the academic performance, cultural and social well
being of Native Hawaiians.
These efforts were followed by the creation of Na Honua Mauli Ola Hawai‘i
Guidelines for Culturally Healthy and Responsive Learning Environment in 2002 as
a result of a collaboration between the Native Hawaiian Education Council and
the College of Hawaiian Language at the University of Hawaii at Hilo. The
document was finalized through community meetings statewide and endorsed
by forty Native Hawaiian organizations.
Na Honua Mauli Ola consists of native guidelines to create or enhance culturally
healthy and responsive learning environments for learners in school, family and
community settings. It is intended to provide schools, families and communities a
way to examine and attend to the educational and cultural well being of their
members. This document has served as the basis for many of the policies
surrounding the development and creation of Native Hawaiian curriculum from
preschool through higher education, Native Hawaiian assessment and
evaluation methodologies, and Native Hawaiian cultural curriculum. The Na
Honua Mauli Ola guidelines were modeled after the Alaskan Native cultural
guidelines developed by the Alaska Native Knowledge Network and were
formulated with the input and support of members from the Alaska Native
Education community as well as other educators first met at earlier World
Indigenous People’s Conferences.
B. As a result of the past association, collaboration, and interaction with
the Maori, and after reviewing the course offerings of the World Indigenous
People’s Conference, the NHEC determined it was necessary to attend this World
Indigenous Peoples Conference on Education in Aotearoa for the following
reasons:
-to gain new insights and ways to address the sense of cultural loss through the
revitalization of indigenous knowledge, practice and traditions by observing the
indigenous education models of indigenous education systems;
-to network with other indigenous peoples facing problems similar to those
faced by Native Hawaiians not doing well in the mainstream system of western
education and to learn from them about their successes and challenges in
improving indigenous student achievement;
-to attend presentations dealing with assessment, data collection, and
evaluation from an indigenous perspective and to gain insight into what is most
and least effective;
-to use the cultural models of other indigenous people, particularly the Maori,
whose traditional and customary ways are more similar to those of Native
Hawaiians, as a lens through which to examine and make improvements to
existing educational structures, policies, frameworks and models that would
better serve the needs of Hawaiians.
C. The NHEC attendees established the following plan to utilize the
information presented at the WIPCE conference in Aotearoa to meet their
Council responsibilities under the Native Hawaiian Education Act:
-to establish, create, and field test a measurement tool to evaluate whether
existing and proposed educational programs, institutions, schools, and
curriculum in Hawaii are aligned or inconsistent with the core standards
contained in Na Honua Mauli Ola as regards ‘Student Ethnic Identity’ (Lawena
identity), ‘Content Knowledge’(‘Ike Ku’una Identity), ‘Relationship Identity’ (Pili
‘Uhane identity), and ‘School Linguistic Identity’ (‘Olelo Identity).
-to use proposed and existing indigenous measurement tools to survey the five
Hawaiian learning communities articulated in Na Honua Mauli Ola to determine
existing strengths, weaknesses, and gaps;
-to compare the barriers to success that other indigenous educational systems
encountered and how those barriers were overcome:
-to refine our data gathering instruments;
-to conduct training on data gathering and evaluation from an indigenous
perspective.
D. The NHEC attendees at the WIPCE conference in Aotearoa were
successful in accomplishing the following planned activities as a result of
attending the WIPCE conference:
- established and created a measurement tool to evaluate whether existing and
proposed educational programs, institutions, schools, and curriculum in Hawaii
are aligned or inconsistent with the core standards contained in Na Honua
Mauli Ola as regards ‘Student Ethnic Identity’ (Lawena identity), ‘Content
Knowledge’(‘Ike Ku’una Identity), ‘Relationship Identity’ (Pili ‘Uhane identity),
and ‘School Linguistic Identity’ (‘Olelo Identity).
- increased the knowledge and understanding by Native Hawaiian educators of
indigenously-focused pedagogy, assessment and evaluation methods and used
these insights to create and develop the attached measurement tool;
- increased the knowledge and understanding of Native Hawaiian educators of
the ways in which other indigenous educators have created indigenous systems
of learning and used these insights to create and develop the attached
measurement tool;
- increased the collaborative and cooperative relationships amongst indigenous
educators throughout the world and Native Hawaiian educators such that these
other indigenous educators are now more likely to assist Native Hawaiian
educators in improving and refining their curriculum, assessment tools, and
evaluation methodologies;
- increased the knowledge and understanding of Native Hawaiian educators of
the various strategies available to increase indigenous student performance.
E. Summary:
The Native Hawaiian Education Council views part of its mission under the Native
Hawaiian Education Act as assessing and coordinating the efforts of educators
and institutions of learning in improving Native Hawaiian achievement from a
Native Hawaiian indigenous perspective. A seminal document created by the
Council with the assistance of other indigenous educators from the Pacific Rim
has been Na Honua Mauli Ola, a document which sets standards for culturally
healthy and responsive Native Hawaiian learning environments. The basic
assumption is that there is a direct and strong correlation between a culturally
healthy and responsive learning environment and the increased and sustained
achievement of Native Hawaiian students.
While NHMO creates a set of standards and guidelines to create culturally
healthy and responsive Native Hawaiian learning environments, additional work
was felt necessary to convert these concepts into a measurement tool which
could be used to better understand the breadth and scope of all education
programs now being used to teach Native Hawaiian children- - -as well as to
understand the differences between these discrete programs, curricula, and
educational institutions. The overarching goal was to understand what
differentiates these programs, curricula, and educational institutions from one
another with a view towards acquiring more information on what works and the
ways in which Native Hawaiian student achievement may be increased.
Two members of the Native Hawaiian Education Council, along with a very
large contingent of Native Hawaiians, traveled to Aotearoa to attend WIPCE.
While there, the NHEC, along with other Native Hawaiians in attendance,
collected information from other indigenous educators about the challenges
they faced, the decisions they made, and the things they learned in creating or
maintaining their own systems of indigenous education. These discussions and
exchanges, both in Aotearoa and amongst Native Hawaiian educators in
Hawaii after the conference ended, provided the information and knowledge
from which the attached draft assessment tool was developed.
The draft assessment tool is a work in progress and has yet to be field tested,
though plans are in the works to vet it at upcoming educational events in the
Native Hawaiian community. It is hoped that this assessment tool will help the
Council, the Native Hawaiian community, Native Hawaiian educators, and
others concerned about Native Hawaiian education to better understand the
breadth and scope of Native Hawaiian education and the strategies which are
most effective in increasing Native Hawaiian educational advancement.
1
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY
HAWAIIAN CULTURALLY BASED EDUCATION MATRIX
Which programming models (or combination) best prepare our Native Hawaiian students for the local and global world ahead?
A School for Hawaiians
A Hawaii an School
NATIVE HAWAIIAN (NH) PROGRAMMING MODELS
Popu lation Ba sed
Student
Ethnic
Identity
❑ 1. Students of NH ancestry are a significant
part of the school’s population.
❑ 2. Curriculum is mainstream driven and
culturally sensitive through global and
multicultural (rather than NH specific)
understandings.
❑ 3. Teachers not necessarily culturally
accommodating or versed in NH home or
traditional culture.
❑ 4. Cultural identity is developed through
ethnic–multicultural processes applicable
for the general public.
❑ 5. Students may or may not live primarily
in NH communities or have strong NH
ethnic backgrounds.
Content- Skill s Focu sed
❑ 1. NH specific content courses integrated
into the curriculum.
❑ 2. Students develop an appreciation for the
NH culture.
Content
Knowledg e
Example:
- Advanced Application: require separate courses at
every grade level, e.g. Hawaiian language required
at all grade levels.
- Beginning Application: courses optional or at a
minimal schedule with little advancement per
year–an appreciation or basic understanding of
Hawaiian culture.(e.g. Kupuna program)
Fami ly-C ulture Ba sed
❑ 1. Assumes NH students have aspects of NH
ethnic identity and the school experiences aim to
strengthen and further develop this identity
❑ 2. Cultural compatibility of teaching and
curriculum seen as a tool to reach academic goals
and not necessarily a means to preserve ethnic
identity.
❑ 3. Teachers are accustomed to NH ethnic
behavior styles.
❑ 4. Community and cultural identity are equally
important in developing sense of self/community
of the student.
❑ 5. NH students live primarily in communities
identified as NH.
Expe riential Focu sed
❑ 1. Hawaiian land-based, hands-on experience,
applied cultural practices integrated into the
curriculum and centered around stewardship and
sustainability issues.
❑ 2. Focus is on providing students a first hand
experiential understanding of traditional NH
culture and its relationship to the natural
environment.
Example:
- Advanced Application: weekly to daily on site
application (e.g. community fish pond project, cultural
garden)
- Beginning Application: occasional field trips.
Identity Disti nctive Ba sed
❑ 1. Assumes NH students have dominant NH ethnic identity verses
NH ancestry without a strong NH ethnic identity.
❑ 2. Traditional NH behavior styles, concepts, issues and
content are the core foundation from which curriculum is
developed.
❑ 3. Teachers are models of appropriate formal and informal NH
values and ethnic behavior styles.
❑ 4. Building a sense of self, place, family and community
through a NH values are an integral part of developing
cultural identity, responsibility and self-worth.
❑ 5. Students are prepared to spread NH culture into new contexts
and communities.
Cultural Len s F ocu sed
❑ 1. Traditional NH paradigms are the underpinnings of the
curriculum and learning environment (e.g. Mauli ola
education, Hawaiian culture-based charter and Hawaiian
language immersion schools)
❑ 2. Connections made to place/community, genealogy, history,
values and tradition form the basis from which dynamic
learning is experienced in meaningful and personal ways.
Example:
- Advanced Application: teachers use strong personal as well as
academic backgrounds in NH culture in a highly integrative manner
that extends throughout the school and personal lives of students,
teachers, and staff.
- Beginning Application; teachers use primarily academic backgrounds
in NH culture in a superficial manner that is confined primarily to the
classroom.
Developed by Keiki Kawa‘ae‘a in consultation with William H. Wilson
Draft Copy 4.1 8/29/06
First review committee: Pua Case, Lehua Veincent, Kanani Aton
Indivi dual Cente red
Relationship
Identity
❑ 1. Learning is skills/test-driven; focus is
on student academic gains as reflected by
test results on a student-by-student basis.
❑ 2. Academics drive the learning instruction
and reflect the individualistic values of the
mainstream culture.
❑ 3. Learning is defined in specific outcomes
that students may or may see relevance in a
broader practical/meaningful application.
❑ 4. Student achievement is assessed
primarily by vendor/state prepared tools
that are nationally driven.
❑ 5. Safety issues are managed and enforced
by the principal as set in school handbook.
Eng lish La nguage Mediu m
School
Linguistic
Identity
❑ 1. Standard English is the medium of
instruction across the curriculum and
expected or assumed language of student
use in and out of class.
❑ 2. Standard English is taught although
students may study Hawaiian parallel to
foreign languages for enrichment.
❑ 3. All graduates are expected to be fluent
in Standard English, with no other fluent
language use expectations.
❑ 4. Range: most NH students assumed to
already be fluent speakers Standard
English with some in process of
transitioning from normal peer group use of
Hawai‘i Creole English (Pidgin) or
Hawaiian to normal group use of Standard
English.
Local C om m unity Ce ntered
❑ 1. Learning is student/community-centered;
focus is on student growth as part of a localized
NH group/community.
❑ 2. Learning is culturally compatible with
students home-community experiences, and
builds upon those experiences to make
connections to new learning and other students
in the group/community.
❑ 3. Learning is a process that helps students to
bridge the world of academics with possible life
application to participate in the local region.
❑ 4. Student achievement is evaluated by state
prepared vehicles and local/community
developed tools.
❑ 5. School safeguards around safety procedures
guided by adult concern for the welfare of the
student within a particular community.
Mixed Lang uage Med iu m
❑ 1. Focus is on quality of communication and
expression. Hawai‘i Creole English not
discouraged and used for expressive purposes in
and out of class. (Hawaiian vocabulary and
influence in Hawai‘i Creole English (Pidgin)
seen as positive communicative feature that is
encouraged.
❑ 2. Standard English taught as a second dialect
although students may study Hawaiian either as
a requirement or elective parallel to foreign
languages for enrichment.
❑ 3. All graduates expected to be fluent in
Standard English and Hawai‘i Creole English
(Pidgin), but there are no other fluent language
use expectations of graduates.
❑ 4. Range: most NH students enter school as a
native speakers of Hawai‘i Creole English
(Pidgin) with some entering school already
knowing Standard English or Hawaiian.
Example:
- Advanced Application: Students give opportunities to
read and write literature in Hawai‘i Creole English
(Pidgin) as well as Standard English.
- Beginning Application: Student use of Hawai‘i’s Creole
English (Pidgin) simply tolerated rather than artistically
developed.
2
Native Gl obal Cente red
❑ 1. Learning is group/indigenous centered; focus is on cultivating
self-directed behavior that support each person to flourish as a
member of a collective NH whole—that has a unique place in an
international world.
❑ 2. Learning is a holistic process; and applied to real and
purposeful situations that prepare them to contribute to their
families and broader community—culturally tied together as a
distinctive group in the world.
❑ 3. Learning focuses on thinking about and critically acting upon
issues that contribute to the well-being and sustainability of the
people, places, natural elements, space and time in respectful
ways—on an equal manner with other peoples and places around
the globe.
❑ 4. Student achievement is evaluated by multiple means including
traditional forms and state required exams.
❑ 5. Safety is addressed within a larger structure that protects the
well-being of its students, teachers, staff and families as an
Extended family within a pu‘uhonua.
Hawaiian Lan guage Me diu m
❑ 1. Hawaiian language is the medium of instruction across the
curriculum and the expected student language of use outside of
the class at the school.
❑ 2. Hawaiian taught as the primary language with Standard
English taught from the perspective of an auxiliary language.
Writing Creole English (Pidgin) following Hawaiian language
conversations occurs naturally in lower grades and Hawai‘i
Creole English is treated as an inter-language between Hawaiian
and Standard English which students are expected to know and
use. Students may study other languages either as a requirement or
elective for enrichment. Range from partial to full immersion—
native to second language speaker.
❑ 3. All graduates expected to be fluent in Hawaiian, Hawai‘i
Creole English (Pidgin) and Standard English, but there are no
other fluent language use expectations.
❑ 4. Range: many NH students enter school with two years of
preschool experience in Hawaiian although most use Hawai‘i
Creole English (Pidgin) at home or with significant numbers of
relatives. Most families also use some Hawaiian with a few using
only Hawaiian.
Example:
- Advanced Application: full immersion/Hawaiian medium with Hawaiian the
language of instruction in all classes, which may even include English
language arts class. Hawaiian used by the principal and support staff.
Foreign languages taught with Hawaiian as the basis for comparison.
- Beginning Application: partial immersion, with the socially dominant
language (English) used in early elementary and/or only some courses taught
through Hawaiian. English is the language used by the principal and other
authority figures as well as support staff. Hawaiian treated as a foreign
language.
Write a preface statement: An invitation to find your place not a tool to define programming models.
3
Notes: First review committee
• What is the purpose/intent?
• Who can use it and how? (administration, teachers community)
• Identifying where are you and where are you going?
• How to use it?
• How does the community support?
• Tool is couched in NHMO
• Tool is a Hawaiian culturally based education matrix
• Encourages cultural responsibility (address the dissonance between school and home)
• Charge community to provide guidance
Guide voice: tone down the mainstream voice; raise the community voice
Express the importance of school-buy in from the school leadership
What's the Landscape and Soundscape of Your School/Program
Zero to
Native Hawaiian (NH) Programing Models
Minimal
Presence
Moderate
Strong
Presence Presence
%
Intend
to
Increase
%
Comments
Student Ethnic Identity
1. Population Based
2. Family-Culture Based
3. Identity Distinctive Based
Content Knowledge
1. Content-Skills Focused
2. Experiential Focused
3. Cultural Lens Focused
Relationship Identity
1. Individual Centered
2. Local Community Centered
3. Native Global Centered
School Linguistic Identity
1. English Language Medium
2. Mixed Language Medium
3. Hawaiian Language Medium
Planning Questions
1. Which programing model(s) are implemented in your school/program? How would you rank yourselves?
2. What are the strengths and opportunities of your school/program?
3. What are the effective practices, strategies and processes used in your school/program?
How do you know? How could they be improved?
4. How could you better utilize your strengths, talents and opportunities to impact student success?
5. What are the weaknesses and barriers of your school/program?
6. In what ways can you improve your practices and overcome the barriers that limit your ability to best prepare students for the world ahead?
Nä LAU LAMA:
BEST PRACTICES ON EDUCATION
R
E
M
E
M
B
E
R
K
E
O
L
A
Nä Lau Lama:
Conference on Best Practices in Hawaiian Education
The Nä Lau Lama conference begins an 18-month project, led in partnership by the Hawai‘i Department
of Education (DOE) and the Hawaiian community, to improve the educational outcomes for Native
Hawaiians. “Remember Keola,” a conference theme, reminds us that plans and discussions are
ultimately about helping individual keiki reach their full potential.
Table1. Logistics
Date of conference
January 12-13, 2006
Location
Japanese Cultural Center, Honolulu
Conference coordinator
Puanani Wilhelm (with OHA, KS, NHEC, NPN)
Participants
Registered: 238; Attended: 187 (Day 1), 133 (Day 2)
DOE staff attendees
46
Overall rating from conference evaluation
3.1 (scale of 1–4)
Speakers/panelists
2 speakers/12 panelists
Number of schools/organizations represented
~64 (see Appendix 1 for complete listing)
Time frame (from concept to completion)
Six months
Budgeted amount
$30,000
Money spent (funded by OHA & DOE)
$28,196
Table 2. Conference objectives and outcomes
Objective of conference
Did we succeed?
Establish a community-based process to
identify practices used in Hawaiian education.
Yes. In fact, we involved so many community members
that some thought the DOE was underrepresented.
Discuss and agree on areas of “best practices”
in education and relevant strategies.
Yes. We achieved more discussion than agreement;
still, we agreed on five main areas of focus (see below).
Create working groups of volunteers with
expertise in each area to identify plans,
methods, and resources needed to support the
use of these practices to reach children in
public schools.
Yes. Five working groups were created:
1. Professional development
2. Culture-based education (content/context and
method/in-class implementation)
3. Family and community strengthening
4. Advocacy
5. Indigenous assessment
Figure 1. Critical mass: Organizations represented at the conference (%)
41.7
5.9
OHA
Àha Pünana Leo
10.9
DOE
19.3
Kamehameha Schools
UH
Other
DOE-Administrative
18.0
2.5
6.7
11.8
2.5
DOE-Hawaiian charters
DOE-Immersion
R
E
M
E
M
B
E
R
K
E
O
L
A
1. Purpose: What are we trying to accomplish?
The overall purpose of this project is to improve educational outcomes for Native
Hawaiian learners, many of whom are struggling in our public schools. The
ultimate goal is to identify and support effective practices and strategies in
Hawai‘i’s schools and classrooms. Our child-centered focus reminds us to keep
moving forward so that we reach children in ways that concretely benefit their
learning and their educational prospects. This initial gathering of educators and
active community partners represents a first step toward collaboratively identifying
ways to improve the educational successes of Native Hawaiian learners. Overall,
the broad goals of the project are to:

Gather input on what is working with Hawaiian children.
Identify core approaches to serve as guidelines for schools/classrooms
throughout the public school system.
Develop collaborative partnerships between Hawaiian educational community
and DOE schools.
Help schools develop plans to implement approaches and strategies (e.g.,
professional development, curriculum, etc.).
2. Background: Why are we doing this?
This project reflects shared public and private concern that too many Native
Hawaiian children are lagging behind their classmates in public schools, evidenced
by data trends over the past twenty years. Hope has emerged among the many
individual schools and teachers who are reaching out to Hawaiian children in
innovative and effective ways, but federal mandates threaten to stifle some of the
most promising fronts in Hawaiian education. To address the problem, this
collaborative effort was initiated by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) and its
community organizations in partnership with the Hawai‘i Department of Education
(DOE). In a letter dated May 19, 2005, from OHA Trustee Dante Carpenter to DOE
Superintendent Patricia Hamamoto, OHA proposed a cooperative partnership with
the DOE to assist the Hawaiian student population affected by the Federal No
Child Left Behind Act.
In a community meeting at OHA on June 28, 2005, Superintendent Hamamoto
committed the DOE to working collaboratively with OHA and partners in the
education community to produce a “best practices” conference toward this end.
Puanani Wilhelm of the Hawaiian Studies Department was asked to lead the effort
on behalf of the DOE. At this same meeting, several of OHA’s education
community partners committed themselves to the planning and development of this
conference and a broader collaboration between the Hawaiian community and the
DOE. This meeting launched the beginning of the planning process for a long-term
FEB. 2006—NÄ LAU LAMA CONFERENCE REPORT
PAGE 2
R
E
M
E
M
B
E
R
K
E
O
L
A
project intended ultimately to improve educational outcomes for Hawaiian
children.
3. Planning Process: How are we doing this?
Partnership Strategy
This project is built on a foundation of partnership and collaboration. The planning
committee reflected a wide range of Hawaiian education community
organizations. Gradually a core working group emerged that included
representatives from OHA, DOE, Nä Pua Noÿeau, Native Hawaiian Education
Council (NHEC), Native Hawaiian Education Association (NHEA), Kua‘ana Student
Services (UH–Mänoa), and Kamehameha Schools. Our key strategy has been to
utilize the diverse perspectives within the Hawaiian community and the
educational system.
Educators from a wide range of diverse perspectives were invited to the conference
to ensure that the results reflected voices and mana‘o from all segments of the
community. In all, more than sixty community partner organizations were
represented by conference attendees, including early childhood professionals, DOE
principals and teachers, Hawaiian educational organizations, and UH faculty and
students (see Appendix 1: “List of Participating Organizations”).
Overview of Long-range Plan
At the September 29, 2005 meeting, Puanani Wilhelm presented a summary of the
discussions from previous meetings in a set of long-range goals and phases required
to implement a collaborative project between the DOE and the Hawaiian
educational community (see section 6 of this document). At a high level, the plan’s
goals include:
•
•
•
•
Gather input from diverse group of Hawaiian community organizations on the
multiple ways programs and educators are reaching out to Hawaiian children,
and develop community consensus through focused discussions about what
types of programs and strategies are working.
Identify core approaches that can serve as guidelines for schools/classrooms
throughout the public school system and develop materials and resources
needed to introduce and support these practices in schools and classrooms.
Develop collaborative partnerships between the Hawaiian educational
community and DOE schools.
Help schools to implement appropriate programs, strategies, approaches, ,
specifically
o Support the ongoing implementation of these practices in public schools
and classrooms.
o Organize and share the information with other educators working with
Hawaiian children.
PAGE 3
R
E
M
E
M
B
E
R
K
E
O
L
A
Logistics and Funding
The conference planning committee met about four times between initializing its
work in August 2005 and the conference in January 2006. The conference was
launched with an invitation to “Nä Lau Lama: Conference on Best Practices for
Hawaiian Education” by letter in December 2005. Invitees included approximately
300 Native Hawaiian educational community members currently engaged in
implementing programs, providing direct support to teachers or students, or
developing curriculum, materials or programs for use in the classroom or with
public school students outside of formal classroom settings. The invitations
emphasized that the conference is a first step in a long-range project to define,
develop and support the implementation of Hawaiian “best practices” in education
for all of Hawaiÿi’s keiki.
OHA and DOE were the major financial cosponsors of the conference. Each
covered an equal portion of the conference costs, while NHEC and NHEA made
commitments to contribute smaller amounts. Kamehameha Schools and NHEC
provided data and reference materials relevant to Hawaiian education, including
the executive summary of Ka Huakaÿi: 2005 Native Hawaiian Educational
Assessment and a synopsis of the curriculum guide, Nä Honua Mauli Ola.
To encourage input from the full range of community groups and voices,
participants’ costs such as airfare (outer island), airport shuttle, ground
transportation, conference materials, and meals were fully covered by the
conference cosponsors. There was no cost for registration.
4. Summary of conference events: What happened?
Day One: Casting the Net Wide. The day began with a keynote speech by Nälani
Sing, former principal at Keaÿau Elementary School. She discussed Hawaiian
teaching and learning practices from a traditional perspective. From there, the 187
participants moved into various groupings by education topic area ranging from
early childhood to post-high (see Appendix 2: “Conference Agenda”). Groups were
tasked with sharing and discussing practices and strategies that individuals and
organizations have identified as key to their work in successfully educating
Hawaiian learners. A variety of discussions ensued, ranging from strongly
cautioning to quietly determined. In the afternoon, a variety of panelists discussed
issues from the public school and community education perspectives and from
several prevailing philosophies in Hawaiian education (e.g., Nä Honua Mauli Ola,
Pedagogy of Aloha, etc.). For the most part, sentiments expressed in evaluations
that day were optimistic and hopeful about the opportunity to make a difference.
PAGE 4
R
E
M
E
M
B
E
R
K
E
O
L
A
Day Two: Honing in on What Works. The day began with a keynote speech by
Kinohi Gomes, a director of Nä Pua Noeÿau, who shared his personal journey from
a child who went through school in a ”blue group” (i.e., not a top performer in the
classroom) to an educator working to enhance opportunities for Hawaiian children.
After this inspirational talk, participants received notes from the prior day’s
discussions and then grouped themselves by island to identify, from the previous
day’s discussions, those practices that had collectively emerged as critical
components of best strategies for Hawaiian learners.
The work progressed through lunch as the conference planning committee posted
the outcomes of the morning’s group sessions and each participant was asked to
prioritize the four practices, strategies or target areas they felt were most important
for the long-term project of implementing systemic change in public education for
Hawaiians. Following vigorous discussion among all the participants, consensus
arose identifying prioritized five areas needing focused concentration and further
development. Participants were asked to sign up for one of the working groups
related to these five areas and to commit their time and effort toward achieving the
long-range purpose of the project.
Key findings revealed practices, strategies, and criteria that could be grouped into
five major categories:
1) Culture-based education, which includes, for example, various indigenous,
place-based, hands-on, collaborative, multidisciplinary and small learning
group strategies to meaningfully engage Hawaiian children in education.
This group has two linked foci:
¾ Curriculum (content) and curricular approaches
¾ Teaching methodologies and classroom delivery (context)
2) Indigenous assessment and culturally authentic evidence to gauge progress
3) Professional development of teachers and staff
4) Family and Community strengthening to increase participation and support
local community governance
5) Advocacy, Policy and Funding to secure public resources and government
support for Hawaiian education
These overlapping categories formed the five working groups that emerged from
the two days of active discussion. Participants agreed that the primary purpose of
these working groups is to structure, facilitate, and support the implementation of
practices that improve outcomes for Native Hawaiian children in public schools.
PAGE 5
R
E
M
E
M
B
E
R
K
E
O
L
A
5. Summary of participant evaluations: What did participants think?
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
%
n
%
n
%
n
%
n
D1-Q1: The opening and Keynote session helped to clarify
the purpose and desired
outcomes of this conference.
18
11
5
3
27
17
50
31
62
D1-Q2: The group discussion
was guided so that we were
able to develop a list of
components, ideas, and
considerations to use to
determine a “best practice” for
Native Hawaiian education.
6
4
4
3
46
32
44
31
70
D1-Q2: The panel groups
provided different perspectives
regarding Native Hawaiian
children and the challenges and
successes in educating them.
6
4
3
2
45
31
46
32
69
Agree
Strongly
agree
N
Mean score for Day One: 3.2
D2-Q1: The Discussion in the
breakout group was able to help
us identify up to 10 best
practices.
14
4
14
4
18
5
54
15
28
D2-Q2: The random group was
able to develop criteria to
identify top priority “best
practices.”
15
4
19
5
23
6
43
11
26
D2-Q3: The large mixed group
work focused and achieved the
desired outcomes of the
conference.
11
3
21
6
32
9
36
10
28
Mean score for Day Two: 3.0
PAGE 7
R
E
M
E
M
B
E
R
K
E
O
L
A
6. Long-range goals and time frames: What is the overall plan?
The conference is the first step toward achieving the long-rang goal of improving
the educational successes of Native Hawaiian learners. The phase of work and time
frames are outlined below.
Note: Phases I and II are partially complete.
Status
Description
Complete Phase I: Native Hawaiian “Best Practices”
Conference
Include Hawaiian organizations/institutions that
have developed/implemented Hawaiian
curriculum, programs, methodologies,
strategies, etc.
• Step 1: Identify best practices in education
(and produce commonalities and
guidelines, etc.).
• Step 2: Prioritize and focus on the top 5
strategies, practices, needs, based on
community’s mana‘o.
Phase II: Five Working Task Groups
• Step 1: Identify and organize group
members based on commitment to one of
the 5 prioritized areas of focus.
• Step 2: Groups meet and create work plans
to:
a) Identify resources required for long-term
support.
b) Identify potential pilot
schools/communities for phased
implementation of programs, strategies.
c) Interview staff, families and community
stakeholders from proposed pilot schools;
gather information.
• Step 3: Present first report during NHEA
convention in late March 2006.
• Step 4: Groups continue work to:
a) Develop specific implementation plans.
b) Identify or develop materials necessary
for implementation (specific curriculum,
teaching guides, lesson plans, etc.).
Estimated timeline
• January 2006:
Conference for NH
educational
organizations
• January - August
06: Working
Committees
• March 06: 1st
report during
NHEA convention
• October 2006:
2nd Practitioner
Conference re:
planning for
Phase 3
PAGE 8
R
E
M
E
M
B
E
R
K
E
O
L
A
c) Develop plans for securing necessary
resources for implementation.
Phase III: Implementation (roll-out)
• Step 1: Native Hawaiian Best-Practices
Conference for Schools
a) Present “Best Practices”
strategies/programs to DOE schools, along
with plans for supporting those schools
who choose to pilot them.
b) Committees who worked on particular
prioritized areas meet with pilot schools
and plan for implementation.
Step 2: Implementation at the school level with
NH practitioner support
Step 3: Evaluation of implementation including
professional development, curriculum and
support provided by Native Hawaiian
educational organizations or work committees
Phase IV: Ongoing support and system wide
implementation
• Step 1: Based on successful pilot, support
provided to additional schools to implement
best practices
• Step 2: Evaluate implementation rollout and
outcomes
• January 07: NH
Best Practices
Conference for
Schools
• January 07:
Identify “pilot”
schools and get
their commitments
for partnerships
• February 07-July
2007: NH
organizations
(based on working
committees) work
with “pilot”
schools
• February 07:
Identify evaluator
to work with
project schools
and provide
feedback
• School year 07-08:
Implementation of
“best practices” in
pilot schools and
ongoing
evaluation
• School year 08-09:
Implementation at
other schools
• Ongoing support
for schools to
implement “best
practices” for
Native Hawaiian
students
PAGE 9
R
E
M
E
M
B
E
R
K
E
O
L
A
7. Next steps: What will happen next?
Tactical plans (details and action)
Future conferences – This project builds on the momentum of several conferences,
beginning with the World Indigenous Peoples Conference in Education (WIPCE) in
Nov./Dec. 2005, which a large number of Nä Lau Lama participants had attended.
In addition, follow-up meetings are planned for the Native Hawaiian Education
Association (NHEA) Convention and the student-focused Charter School
Conference on Indigenous Education, both occurring in March, 2006. Also, the
Hawaiian Civic Club Convention convenes in early June, 2006, and will include a
focus on Education, building from the work begun at Nä Lau Lama. Finally, the KS
Strategic Planning & Implementation group has committed the Kamehameha
Schools Research Conference in October to support the work of this project. The
thread linking all six events, including Na Lau Lama, is their unified focus on
improving educational well-being for Native Hawaiian children.
Planning groups – OHA and Kamehameha Schools have committed funds to
immediately hire a coordinator whose primary function will be to organize those
community members who have agreed to serve on the five working task groups.
The planning committee also is asking DOE to hire a Department coordinator to
work with the Hawaiian community coordinator as primary liaison for the DOE.
The central objectives of the five task groups during Phase II of the project are to:
1. Gather information – conduct interviews with teachers, principals, and
parents; hold community meetings
2. Identify resources needed to carry out working groups (people, $$)
3. Report back at the NHEA convention, March 2006
Working groups – Based on the specific plans identified by the task groups, longterm working groups will be formed to accomplish the following activities:
1. Develop/refine specific strategies
2. Determine scale and scope of implementation
3. Identify resources available and secure agreements, including:
• Organizations or individuals that will form consortia to develop inservice training programs and/or curriculum material for use in public
schools.
• Committed resources and processes to implement long-term
professional development and curricular support to schools that will
use “best practices” that benefit Native Hawaiian students.
• Continued assessment of curriculum and training for “best practices”
and long-term support to schools for implementation.
4. Report back in October 2006
PAGE 10
R
E
M
E
M
B
E
R
K
E
O
L
A
Communications – Communication planning for this project
Raise awareness:
Establish regular (monthly?) e-announcement with news, status,
schedule, and mana’o about the group’s efforts and progress.
Brand all communications with Nä Lau Lama words and/or graphic.
(Note: This does not have to be elaborate—just consistent.)
Identify/designate point of contact for each community organization.
Figure out where online materials will reside (OHA, DOE, etc.).
Initiate contact with local media.
Communicate with working groups:
Request that one individual from each of the five working groups serve
as a communications liaison.
Maintain electronic distribution list of all participants.
Start communications EARLY for Jan. 2007 implementation.
Communicate with DOE:
Work with DOE communications department to develop a strategy for
roll-out.
Keep Pat Hamamoto (and her core leadership group) in the loop.
Make sure information is reaching classroom-level folks.
Communicate with parents and students:
Explore the idea of including student government leaders from schools.
Determine interest levels among parents.
Consider attending PTSA meetings (or the equivalent) to promote
awareness and enlist help.
PAGE 11
R
E
M
E
M
B
E
R
K
E
O
L
A
Appendix 1: List of participating organizations
Total Registered:
238
Attended Day 1:
187
Attended Day 2:
133
Participating organizations
Organization
DOE
Department of Education-Hawaiian Studies
and Language Programs
Nänäikapono Elementary
Ke Kula o Kamakau
Department of Education-District
Kualapu‘u High School
Nawahiokalani‘opu‘u
Olomana School
Pu‘ohala Elementary
Waimea Middle School
Board of Education
Charter Schools Administrative Office
Hawaiian Language Immersion P-20
Hawaiian Studies Honolulu District
Kanu I ka Pono Charter School
Kanu o ka ‘Äina PCS
Kawaihona Na‘auao PCS
Ke Kula Ni‘ihau o Kekaha PCS
Kea‘au High School
Kula Alupuni Ni‘ihau A Kahelelani AlohaPCS
Kula Kaiapuni ‘o Anuenue (Hawaiian
Immersion)
Kula Kaiapuni o Waiau (Hawaiian
Immersion)
Na Lei Na‘auao-Charter School
Waiakea High School
Total
Number of
participants
8
5
4
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
46
PAGE 12
R
E
M
E
M
B
E
R
K
E
O
L
University of Hawai‘i-Mänoa
Center on Disability Studies
Ka Haka‘Ula O Ke‘elikolani
CRDG
UH Hilo
Center for Hawaiian Studies
Native Hawaiian Science and Engineering
Mentoring Program
Dept. of Native Hawaiian Health
Kaua‘i Community College
Maui Community College
Papa Ola Lokahi
Total
19
6
5
3
2
2
2
KS
Kamehameha Schools
28
Aha Pünana Leo
‘Aha Pünana Leo
Pünana Leo o Honolulu
Pünana Leo o Kawaiaha‘o
Pünana Leo o Kona
Pünana Leo o Ko‘olauloa
Pünana Leo Maui
Pünana Leo Moloka‘i
Pünana Leo Wai‘anae
Pünana Leo Waimea
Total
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
16
OHA
Office of Hawaiian Affairs
6
Other
Organizations
Alu Like
Ka Lei Papahi o Kakuhihewa
Partners in Development
Pihana Nä Mamo
Chaminade University
Nä Pua No‘eau
Ho‘ola Lähui Hawai‘i, NHEP
Ka‘ala Farm
Kupu Na Leo
Kuali‘i Council
Mälama ‘Äina Foundation
Pacific American Foundation
20
20
12
6
4
4
4
3
3
3
2
2
2
UH
A
1
1
1
1
43
PAGE 13
R
E
M
E
Total number of
organizations = 64
M
B
E
R
Aha Ho‘okumu
College Connections
Harold K. L. Castle Foundation
Ho‘okako‘o Corporation
Ho‘owaiwai Nä Kamali‘i
INPEACE
Keiki o ka ‘Äina
Ku Ha‘aheo
Ku I ka Mana‘ai
Marimed Foundation
Moloka‘i Community Service Council
Native Nations
Project Popoho Na Pe‘a
Volcanoes Alive Project
Total
TOTAL PARTICIPANTS
K
E
O
L
A
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
95
238
PAGE 14
R
E
M
E
M
B
E
R
K
E
O
L
A
Appendix 2: Conference Agenda
Nä Lau Lama, “Best Practices” for Native Hawaiian Education Conference
January 12 & 13, 2006
Japanese Cultural Center, Mänoa Ballroom (2454 South Beretania Street)
Agenda
Desired Outcomes:
• Identification and prioritization of Native Hawaiian best practices for implementation at
schools.
• The development of and commitment to a long-range plan for implementing best
practices in all schools.
• Formation of work groups who will potentially support schools in implementing these
best practices.
January 12, 2006 8:30 a.m. – 6:00 p.m.
8:00-8:30
Registration
8:30-9:30
Opening
Key-note:
9:30-11:00
Nälani Sing
Break-out sessions (organized by themes)
Guide Question: What makes a “best practice” for Native
Hawaiian education?
• Aÿo Hawaiÿi (Culture-based curriculum and instruction)
• Mälama Honua (Environmental Stewardship)
• Pülama Kamaliÿi (Early Childhood Education)
• Kü Kanaka (Character Education/Family Support)
• Ola Pono (Wellness/Health Education)
• Pilina ÿIke (Cultural/Western academic connections and
Teacher Training)
• Hoÿonui ÿIke (Athletics, Arts, Enrichment)
Task: Groups to develop a list of components, ideas,
considerations to use when deciding whether or not
something is a “best practice” for Native Hawaiian
education.
11:00-12:00
12:00-1:00
Groups report back
Lunch: Reporting
1:00-3:30
Panels / Breakouts
PAGE 15
R
E
M
E
M
B
E
R
K
E
O
L
A
Guide Question: What are your dreams for Native Hawaiian
children and what are the challenges and successes?
• DOE teachers (veteran, immersion, from re-structured
schools, first-year teachers)
• Community Educational Organizations (variety)
• Philosophy of Learning and Assessment
3:30-4:00
Debrief and next days activities
4:00-6:00
Reception and Kukäkukä
Day 2
8:30-9:30
Keynote 2: Kinohi Gomes
9:30-12:00
Breakout #2 (By island groups)
Task: Identify 10 “best practices” for Native Hawaiian
education (use criteria, documents and experiences from
yesterday)
• Hawai‘i
• O‘ahu
• Maui Nui (Maui, Läna‘i, Moloka‘i)
• Kaua‘i and Ni‘ihau
• Statewide
Breakout #3 (Random by color dots)
Task: Develop and use criteria to identify top 3 priority “best
practices”
12:00-1:00
Lunch: Prioritize practices
1:00-2:30
Large Mixed Group (by tables)
Tasks:
• Give feedback regarding the proposed Long-Range
plan for systemization of “best practices”
• Prioritize and categorize identified “best practices”
• Divide “best practices” into categories and commit to
work and commitment to working groups
• Begin working as work groups form
2:30-3:00
Next steps and closing
PAGE 16
R
E
M
E
M
B
E
R
K
E
O
L
A
What helped the conference succeed? The conference was a success on multiple
levels due to a number of factors, including:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Diversity of voices represented in both the planning phase and conference
participation;
Expressed intention of DOE and the Department’s willingness to follow through
on implementation;
Willingness of the Hawaiian educational community to keep the focus on the
work – to “stay the course”;
Committed organizers who tracked the pulse of the conference and adjusted
accordingly;
Drive toward action/implementation (particularly the voices of several vocal
küpuna who urged the diverse group to keep moving forward toward actionable
results);
Flexibility of conference schedule: shifting time and altering group activities
when the momentum pushed us beyond the printed agenda;
Beginning Day 2 with immediate feedback from Day 1 to mobilize discussions.
What hindered the efficiency of the conference?
• Challenging venue for multiple group breakouts—the planning committee
discussed convening in a more suitable location next time;
• Delayed dissemination of the invitations—the planning committee recognized
the need to move more quickly to improve the next conference;
• Suspicion of the process and project, and unwillingness to engage in
partnerships the DOE, by a relatively small but sometimes vocal minority of
participants.
PAGE 6
NHEC & Usdoed:
GRANT workshops
February 6, 2006
For Immediate Release
For further information contact:
Colin Kippen, Executive Director
845-9883
[email protected]
USDOE Announces Workshops on How to Apply for $9.5 Million in Competitive Grants
“United States Department of Education employees Francisco Ramirez and Beth Fine will be traveling
from Washington D.C. to Hawaii the week of February 13th through 18th to provide information to
interested parties about how to apply for approximately $9.5 million in funds available under the
Native Hawaiian Education Act,” said Colin Kippen, executive director of the Native Hawaiian
Education Council, the local agency responsible for ‘assessing, evaluating, and coordinating’ activities
under that Act. “They will be accompanied by Kamuela Chun of the Native Hawaiian Education
Council as well as myself,” said Kippen.
“These federal grants created under the Native Hawaiian Education Act are designed to support
innovative projects that increase the education of Native Hawaiian students,” said Kippen, “and we
encourage as many organizations as possible to apply.”
“Competitive preferences will be awarded for grant applications addressing beginning reading literacy
of Native Hawaiian students in kindergarten through third grade, the needs of at-risk Native Hawaiian
children and youth, the needs of Native Hawaiians in fields or disciplines in which they are
underemployed, and the use of Hawaiian language in instruction,” said Kippen.
The awards are expected to be from $375,000 to $1,100,000 in size, approximately 20 in number,
and cover a period of up to 36 months. The deadline for applying for these funds is March 24, 2006.
Phone: 808-845-9883
Fax: 808-845-9984
Workshops for those interested in learning more about how to apply for these grants will be held at
the following locations and on the following dates:
■ West Oahu
Monday, February 13, 2006
9:30 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.
Ma‘ili Elementary, Library
87-360 Kula‘aupuni St.
■ Central O‘ahu
Monday, February 13, 2006
3:30 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
JCCH, Manoa Grand Ballroom
2454 S. Beretania St.
■ East O‘ahu
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
9:30 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.
Kahuku High & Intermediate School
56-490 Kamehameha Hwy.
■ Windward O‘ahu
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
2:30 p.m. - 4:00 p.m.
Waimanalo Elementary & Intermediate School, Library
41-1330 Kalanianaole Hwy.
■ Maui & Läna‘i
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
11:00 a.m – 12:30 p.m.
- This workshop can be attended via polycom (two-way teleconferencing network between Kahului
and Läna‘i)
UH – Maui Community College, Ka‘a‘ike 103
310 W. Ka‘ahumanu Ave.
UH – MCC, Läna‘i Education Center
329 7th St.
■ Moloka‘i
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
6:30 p.m. - 8:00 p.m.
Kualapu‘u Elementary School, Cafeteria
260 Farrington Hwy.
2
■ Waimea, Kaua‘i
Thursday, February 16, 2006
10:30 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
West Kaua‘i Technology & Visitor Center
9565 Kaumuali‘i Hwy.
■ Lihue, Kaua‘i
Thursday, February 16, 2006
4:30 p.m. - 6:00 p.m.
Queen Lili‘uokalani Children's Center, Kaua‘i Unit
4530 Kali Rd.
■ Waimea, Hawai‘i
Friday, February 17, 2006
10 a.m. - 11:30 a.m.
Kahilu Town Hall / YMCA
Waimea
■ Hilo, Hawai‘i
4:30 p.m. - 6:00 p.m.
UH – Hawai‘i Community College, Bldg. 379, Rm. 1
200 W. Kawili St.
For further information about the federal Native Hawaiian Education Program, including the FY 2006
awards process, please contact Beth Fine, or Francisco Ramirez, U.S. Department of Education, at:
(202) 260-1091 or (202) 260-1541. E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]. Further
information and application materials can also be obtained at:
http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/announcements/2006-1/012306c.html
The application may be viewed and downloaded through grants.gov and on the Native Hawaiian
Education Program website http://www.ed.gov/programs/nathawaiian/applicant.htmlFor local information contact Heather Kina at (808)845-9883 or E-mail: [email protected]
#########
3
MISCELLANEOUS COUNTS
28 Presentation packets were emailed or mailed to people who were unable to
attend any of the workshops. NHEC will continue to distribute these until the 3/24
application deadline.
12-Feb Grantee Technical Assistance Q & A Session with F. Ramirez & B. Fine
Attendees:
55 Total
14-Feb Higher Education Meeting with Key Higher Education Agenies & Advocates
Attendees:
1 Esbin Borsting, KSBE - Post High
2 Kamuela Chun, UH Comm. Colleges
3 Resh DuPuis - OHA
4 Kuumeaaloha Gomes - UH (Grantee)
5 Henry Gomes - Chaminade
6 Peter Hanohano - Tribal College
7 Lui Hokoana - UH, MCC - Liko Ae (Grantee
8 Josh Kaakua - UH - Engineering (Grantee)
9 Manu Kaiama - UH, Hawaiian Leadership (Grantee)
10 Joy Kono - KSBE
11 Judy Oliviera - HCF
12 Louis Perez - PAF
13 Claire Pruet - Chaminade
14 Mavis Shiraishi-Nagao - KSBE
15 Georgette Sakamoto - UH
16 Kalei Stern - HCF
17 Bob Worthington - Chaminade
18 Colin Kippen
19 Francisco Ramirez
PRE-APPLICATION WORKSHOP EVALUATION FORM: STATEWIDE SUMMARY DATA
190
60%
318
Surveys Collected
Total Attendance
1) Were the materials provided as part of this workshop helful and / or easy to use?
95 / 190
50%
Absolutely
72 / 190
38%
Agree
10 / 190
5%
Neutral
0
/ 190
0%
Disagree
1
/ 190
1%
Not at All
12 / 190
6%
No Response
Comments:
- Excellent.
- I dont think I qualify for a grant at this time. I did find the program interesting and
informative.
- Too much material at one time. 3 hr. workshop with break in middle would be helpful.
- The packet is very comprehensive. There is a lot of information to read and digest.
- Information overload but we can take it back to digest.
- Haven't had a chance to read through all the materials. It appears helpful and
comprehensive.
- Great deal of reading but wonderful to have.
- May want to ask how many people present have applied for grants before...
- Gave me additional info on how to appy for a grant with each step already defined.
- Materials provided were not helpful or easy to use.
- Yes, because we need this info to start on our organization.
- Yes definitely
- Small group setting was conducive to intimate conversations.
- It gives only an idea.
- Thank you
- Handouts & presenter made them helpful/useful.
- Registration checklist and info especially helpful.
- Straightforward
- New to me so too soon to judge.
- Materials could be put in folders/binders.
- Very clear to understand.
- Clear and appropriate.
- First time learning about grants. It was very easy to follow.
- Yes, will be of good use.
- Informative speaker
- Lots of info to sift through at home.
- Instructions very clear on how to proceed with application.
- Useful, practical and necessary information/materials provided.
- Good synopsis for new applicants - emphasized important points.
- Should be helpful, but I will not know until I read it.
- Seems helpful. I need to review what was distributed.
- Lots of useful info.
STATEWIDE - Page 1
2) How would you rate the presenter(s) at this workshop?
98 / 190
52%
Wonderful
72 / 190
38%
Above Average
7
/ 190
4%
Average
1
/ 190
1%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 190
0%
Unacceptable
13 / 190
7%
No Response
Comments:
- Friendly, easy to understand, very helpful.
- Presenter and partner answered all questions promptly. Additional information
regarding application process that a few attendees were not aware of was also
- Mr. Ramirez is articulate and clear in his explaniations; questions were handled really
well, refreshing that he kept government-speak to an acceptable minimum.
- Very responsive to questions, polite and thorough.
- Knowledgeable.
- Handled problems not his kuleana ok, glad Colin stepped inbecause others wanted
to get info.
- Hard to hear.
- Very helpful and informative.
- The presenters were excellent.
- Good presenter because he know's what he's talking about.
- It helped me understand.
- Knowledgable.
- Thank you
- Very knowledgeable about the grant and the law.
- Easy to understand. Understood and answered questions.
- Straightforward
- Really clear, concise, easy to understand. Responsive to questions.
- He answered questions very clearly.
- Clearly presented.
- Francisco did just fine.
- Good info.
- Francisco is always very sincere and helpful.
- Mr. Ramirez definitely knows his information and very easily answered all questions
well. He did have help in identifying already funded projects.
- Great info to begin with.
- Did a good job.
- Well-organized, clear, articulate & personable - addressed audience's questions
directly & completely. Strong presenter.
- Mahalo!
- Some of the questions could benefit from some examples and more descriptions,
especially because of new requirements this year - more for current applicants.
- A lot to cover - did it well
- Great post-talk follow-up.
- A microphone would have helped. I have some hearing problems. To hard to hear
Beth Fine - she spoke too soft.
- Very knowledgeable, but had to go over the information quickly.
- Helpful and clean.
- Compared to last year, I thought Francisco's info. flowed, and easy to follow.
- Ramirez was clearer in his presentation this year than last.
- Power point inoperable.
STATEWIDE - Page 2
3) How would you rate the workshop's content?
91 / 190
48%
Wonderful
76 / 190
40%
Above Average
11 / 190
6%
Average
0
/ 190
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 190
0%
Unacceptable
12 / 190
6%
No Response
Comments:
- Long too much information.
- Mr. Ramirez covered essential information. For this time of the day on a Friday and
with this size of an audience, anything more would be an information-overload and
my brain would crash.
- Looking forward to applying.
- Printed material has a lot of infomation. Perhaps it could have been scheduled
earlier to allow more time for application process.
- Too short
- It is good.
- Would like specific examples.
- Thank you
- Extremely helpful. Clarified concerns & answered our questions.
- I'm ready to start - mahalo!
- Good
- Very appropriate!
- Great handouts, good info.
- Informational - handouts very helpful.
- Great start.
- Pretty solid - has all the info one needs to submit a great application.
- Well-organized, clear, articulate & personable - addressed audience's questions
directly & completely. Strong presenter.
- This is the first of this type I've attended and it was a bit overwhelming.
- Q & A Guide looks excellent!
- Overview - good; need it earlier - beg. Feb.
- Good
- Seems good! I came out of curiosity.
- Lots of info. to digest!!!
- Very helpful for smaller non-profits/agencies/orgs who have not previously
attempted to enter grant application comptetion.
- Very clear.
STATEWIDE - Page 3
4) Is there any way that this Pre-Application workshop could have been more successful
in providing you with information regarding the Native Hawaiian Education Act and its
competitive grant process?
- Microphone might have been helpful.
- Good to know that we can contact Mr. Ramirez directly with questions.
- Very informative - thank you.
- Pre-application workshop was very well presented. Knowing the problems that
could occur during the grant process would be helpful.
- Presented earlier in the year.
- Need bigger facility.
- We would have liked a list of programs already awarded to give ideas of what or
who has been funded.
- Separate out grants.gov info.
- Thank you for coming. It was very useful.
- Very informative.
- Mahalo (x2)
- Examples of specific use of grants needed.
- (+) and (-) of process.
- Thank you. Great presentation.
- Good workshop for all the ideas, questions were answered.
- On-island notification lacking. Most of the individuals were probably notified by
emails or are organizations serving Native Hawaiians.
- Great presentation & very helpful!
- Copy of a completed application with the applicants (mission statement, purpose,
obj, activities) and identify deliverables and accountability process.
- Information given earlier and clarify time changes.
- EARLIER!
- More information on budgets, human subjects research eval, reporting requirements.
- Some pre-workshop info to review would have been helpful.
- The room was very uncomfortable, cramped. Poor set-up.
- Bigger room space.
- Time published should be the same as the time of the workshop. Maui News said
workshop - 11:00 am-12:30 pm
- Larger room with A/C
- Larger room.
- Come earlier.
- Following the presenter's overview - if time slots could be made available for brief
individual consultation.
- To have a workshop to literally walk through the steps on a small scale and not a
large scale.
- No suggestions or recommendations, keep up good work.
- Maika'I, good job. It is a good idea to have local advisement on the application
process and technical assistance.
- The rule coming to a Hawaiian community have an evening session, providing
refreshments.
- Start the process a little earlier.
- Present case studies.
- One comment: start workshop sooner, 2 months in advance would be best.
- The handouts were very clean and easy to follow.
STATEWIDE - Page 4
- Workshops for DOE teachers at highly populated Native Hawaiian schools.
- Very good
- More lead time perhaps documents in advance to generate questions/familiarity.
- Good intro, but more expansion on the topic would be helpful.
- Perhaps little earlier. Overall, very good workshop.
- Would have been great if we actually had an overhead or had the frames up on
the board so we could all follow the order. It was good. Mahalo.
- Start on time. Prior to workshop spend some time sharing success stories (those who
were awarded) so we are not so intimidated by the process, especially first timers.
- The presenter did very well doing exactly that, he also answered the questions very
good.
STATEWIDE - Page 5
PRE-APPLICATION WORKSHOP EVALUATION FORM: WEST OAHU (Maili Elementary)
27
64%
42
Surveys Collected
Attendance
1) Were the materials provided as part of this workshop helpful and / or easy to use?
16 / 27
59%
Absolutely
7
/ 27
26%
Agree
2
/ 27
7%
Neutral
0
/ 27
0%
Disagree
0
/ 27
0%
Not at All
2
/ 27
7%
No Response
Comments:
- Should be helpful, but I will not know until I read it.
- Seems helpful. I need to review what was distributed.
- Lots of useful info.
11 / 27
41%
Wonderful
11 / 27
41%
Above Average
2
/ 27
7%
Average
0
/ 27
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 27
0%
Unacceptable
3
/ 27
11%
No Response
Comments:
- A microphone would have helped. I have some hearing problems. To hard to hear Beth Fine she spoke too soft.
- Very knowledgeable, but had to go over the information quickly.
- Helpful and clean.
- Compared to last year, I thought Francisco's info. flowed, and easy to follow.
- Ramirez was clearer in his presentation this year than last.
- Power point inoperable.
13 / 27
48%
Wonderful
10 / 27
37%
Above Average
2
/ 27
7%
Average
0
/ 27
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 27
0%
Unacceptable
2
/ 27
7%
No Response
Comments:
- Good
- Seems good! I came out of curiosity.
- Lots of info. to digest!!!
- Very helpful for smaller non-profits/agencies/orgs who have not previously attempted to enter
grant application comptetion.
- Very clear.
West Oahu - Page 1
- This process is fine
- Maybe allow a little more time.
- Provide example of successful application.
- More advertising in the media.
- Possibly some copies of grant that were successful.
- Thank you for coming to Waianae!
- I thought the breakdown of info in the power point was very helpful. Easy to follow highlighting the main points! Mahalo!
- That it be held in the evening so more can apply.
- Yes, may want to meet at Nanakuli High & Inter Multi-Purpose Room. It can
accommodate more people. You may want to use television media to help advertise
- No
- 'A'ole - mahalo for bringing good information directly to the communities.
West Oahu - Page 2
PRE-APPLICATION WORKSHOP EVALUATION FORM: CENTRAL OAHU (JCCH)
34
47%
72
Surveys Collected
Attendance
18 / 34
53%
Absolutely
14 / 34
41%
Agree
1
/ 34
3%
Neutral
0
/ 34
0%
Disagree
0
/ 34
0%
Not at All
1
/ 34
3%
No Response
Comments:
- Instructions very clear on how to proceed with application.
- Useful, practical and necessary information/materials provided.
- Good synopsis for new applicants - emphasized important points.
15 / 34
44%
Wonderful
15 / 34
44%
Above Average
3
/ 34
9%
Average
0
/ 34
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 34
0%
Unacceptable
1
/ 34
3%
No Response
Comments:
- Did a good job.
- Well-organized, clear, articulate & personable - addressed audience's questions directly &
completely. Strong presenter.
- Mahalo!
- Some of the questions could benefit from some examples and more descriptions, especially
because of new requirements this year - more for current applicants.
- A lot to cover - did it well
- Great post-talk follow-up.
12 / 34
35%
Wonderful
15 / 34
44%
Above Average
6
/ 34
18%
Average
0
/ 34
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 34
0%
Unacceptable
1
/ 34
3%
No Response
Comments:
- Pretty solid - has all the info one needs to submit a great application.
- Well-organized, clear, articulate & personable - addressed audience's questions directly &
completely. Strong presenter.
- This is the first of this type I've attended and it was a bit overwhelming.
- Q & A Guide looks excellent!
- Overview - good; need it earlier - beg. Feb.
Central Oahu - Page 1
- I don't think I got full info about both workshop options - still not clear what I missed
earlier.
- It was great to have the federal representatives in Hawaii to answer questions.
- Would be helpful to have presenters actually go to the grants gov. website just to
familiarize potential applicants with it.
- Advise participants to prepare by referring to website if they not familiar with the
grant's priorities and target audience.
- Time permitting, roundtable questions and answer regarding "specific" grant ideas,
etc.
- No. Good job. Mahalo!
- Outstanding
- An earlier heads-up regarding RFP would have been helpful.
- Yes, more time.
- Thank you for making this information widely available and useful.
- More detail in current issues/concerns - what readers might be looking for.
- Smaller group to kick around example projects.
- It was very thorough.
- After process, 1) do a terms & budget workshop; 2) EDGAR & OMB in Hawaii.
- Yes. If I had been informed earlier, it would have helped tremendously.
Central Oahu - Page 2
PRE-APPLICATION WORKSHOP EVALUATION FORM: EAST OAHU (Kahuku High)
78%
18
23
Surveys Collected
Attendance
10 / 18
56%
Absolutely
3
/ 18
17%
Agree
1
/ 18
6%
Neutral
0
/ 18
0%
Disagree
0
/ 18
0%
Not at All
4
/ 18
22%
No Response
Comments:
- Informative speaker
- Lots of info to sift through at home.
9
/ 18
50%
Wonderful
5
/ 18
28%
Above Average
0
/ 18
0%
Average
0
/ 18
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 18
0%
Unacceptable
4
/ 18
22%
No Response
Comments:
- Francisco is always very sincere and helpful.
- Mr. Ramirez definitely knows his information and very easily answered all questions well. He did
have help in identifying already funded projects.
- Great info to begin with.
9
/ 18
50%
Wonderful
5
/ 18
28%
Above Average
0
/ 18
0%
Average
0
/ 18
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 18
0%
Unacceptable
4
/ 18
22%
No Response
Comments:
- Informational - handouts very helpful.
- Great start.
- Would have been great if we actually had an overhead or had the frames up on
the board so we could all follow the order. It was good. Mahalo.
- Start on time. Prior to workshop spend some time sharing success stories (those who
were awarded) so we are not so intimidated by the process, especially first timers.
- The presenter did very well doing exactly that, he also answered the questions very
good.
East Oahu - Page 1
PRE-APPLICATION WORKSHOP EVALUATION FORM: WINDWARD OAHU (Waimanalo Intermediate)
65%
24
37
Surveys Collected
Attendance
9
/ 24
38%
Absolutely
14 / 24
58%
Agree
1
/ 24
4%
Neutral
0
/ 24
0%
Disagree
0
/ 24
0%
Not at All
0
/ 24
0%
No Response
Comments:
- Clear and appropriate.
- First time learning about grants. It was very easy to follow.
- Yes, will be of good use.
11 / 24
46%
Wonderful
13 / 24
54%
Above Average
0
/ 24
0%
Average
0
/ 24
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 24
0%
Unacceptable
0
/ 24
0%
No Response
Comments:
- Clearly presented.
- Francisco did just fine.
- Good info.
11 / 24
46%
Wonderful
13 / 24
54%
Above Average
0
/ 24
0%
Average
0
/ 24
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 24
0%
Unacceptable
0
/ 24
0%
No Response
Comments:
- Very appropriate!
- Great handouts, good info.
Windward Oahu - Page 1
- No suggestions or recommendations, keep up good work.
- Maika'I, good job. It is a good idea to have local advisement on the application
process and technical assistance.
- The rule coming to a Hawaiian community have an evening session, providing refreshments.
- Start the process a little earlier.
- Present case studies.
- One comment: start workshop sooner, 2 months in advance would be best.
- The handouts were very clean and easy to follow.
- Workshops for DOE teachers at highly populated Native Hawaiian schools.
- Very good
- More lead time perhaps documents in advance to generate questions/familiarity.
- Good intro, but more expansion on the topic would be helpful.
- Perhaps little earlier. Overall, very good workshop.
Windward Oahu - Page 2
PRE-APPLICATION WORKSHOP EVALUATION
MauiFORM: MAUI (MAUI COMM. COLLEGE)
19
54%
35
Surveys Collected
Attendance
8
/ 19
42%
Absolutely
10 / 19
53%
Agree
1
/ 19
5%
Neutral
0
/ 19
0%
Disagree
0
/ 19
0%
Not at All
0
/ 19
0%
No Response
Comments:
- New to me so too soon to judge.
- Materials could be put in folders/binders.
- Very clear to understand.
11 / 19
58%
Wonderful
8
/ 19
42%
Above Average
0
/ 19
0%
Average
0
/ 19
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 19
0%
Unacceptable
0
/ 19
0%
No Response
Comments:
- Really clear, concise, easy to understand. Responsive to questions.
- He answered questions very clearly.
8
/ 19
42%
Wonderful
11 / 19
58%
Above Average
0
/ 19
0%
Average
0
/ 19
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 19
0%
Unacceptable
0
/ 19
0%
No Response
Comments:
-
Maui - Page 1
4) Is there any way that this Pre-Application workshop
Maui could have been more successful
- Copy of a completed application with the applicants (mission statement, purpose,
obj, activities) and identify deliverables and accountability process.
- Information given earlier and clarify time changes.
- EARLIER!
- More information on budgets, human subjects research eval, reporting requirements.
- Some pre-workshop info to review would have been helpful.
- The room was very uncomfortable, cramped. Poor set-up.
- Bigger room space.
- Time published should be the same as the time of the workshop. Maui News said
workshop - 11:00 am-12:30 pm
- Larger room with A/C
- Larger room.
- Come earlier.
- Following the presenter's overview - if time slots could be made available for brief
individual consultation.
- To have a workshop to literally walk through the steps on a small scale and not a
large scale.
Maui - Page 2
PRE-APPLICATION WORKSHOP EVALUATION FORM:
Lanai LANAI EDUCATION CENTER (via polycom)
0%
0
2
Surveys Collected
Attendance
Note: Since this meeting took place via polycom, surveys must be collected by mail and have not been received
as of Wednesday, 2/21.
/
0
#DIV/0! Absolutely
/
0
#DIV/0! Agree
/
0
#DIV/0! Neutral
/
0
#DIV/0! Disagree
/
0
#DIV/0! Not at All
/
0
#DIV/0! No Response
Comments:
/
0
#DIV/0! Wonderful
/
0
#DIV/0! Above Average
/
0
#DIV/0! Average
/
0
#DIV/0! Somewhat Acceptable
/
0
#DIV/0! Unacceptable
/
0
#DIV/0! No Response
Comments:
/
0
/
0
/
0
/
0
/
0
/
0
Comments:
-
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
Wonderful
Above Average
Average
Somewhat Acceptable
Unacceptable
No Response
-
Lanai - Page 1
PRE-APPLICATION WORKSHOP EVALUATION FORM: MOLOKAI EDUCATION CENTER (via polycom)
0
0%
3
Surveys Collected
Attendance
Note: Since this meeting took place via polycom, surveys must be collected by mail and have not been received
as of Wednesday, 2/21.
/
0
#DIV/0! Absolutely
/
0
#DIV/0! Agree
/
0
#DIV/0! Neutral
/
0
#DIV/0! Disagree
/
0
#DIV/0! Not at All
/
0
#DIV/0! No Response
Comments:
/
0
#DIV/0! Wonderful
/
0
/
0
#DIV/0! Average
/
0
/
0
/
0
#DIV/0! No Response
Comments:
-
/
0
#DIV/0! Wonderful
/
0
/
0
#DIV/0! Average
/
0
/
0
/
0
#DIV/0! No Response
Comments:
-
Molokai Ed Ctr - Page 1
PRE-APPLICATION WORKSHOP EVALUATION FORM: KUALAPUU, MOLOKAI (KUALAPUU ELEM.)
73%
8
11
Surveys Collected
Attendance
5
/
8
63%
Absolutely
3
/
8
38%
Agree
0
/
8
0%
Neutral
0
/
8
0%
Disagree
0
/
8
0%
Not at All
0
/
8
0%
No Response
Comments:
- Thank you
- Handouts & presenter made them helpful/useful.
- Registration checklist and info especially helpful.
- Straightforward
3
/
8
38%
Wonderful
5
/
8
63%
Above Average
0
/
8
0%
Average
0
/
8
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/
8
0%
Unacceptable
0
/
8
0%
No Response
Comments:
- Thank you
- Very knowledgeable about the grant and the law.
- Easy to understand. Understood and answered questions.
- Straightforward
4
/
8
50%
Wonderful
4
/
8
50%
Above Average
0
/
8
0%
Average
0
/
8
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/
8
0%
Unacceptable
0
/
8
0%
No Response
Comments:
- Thank you
- Extremely helpful. Clarified concerns & answered our questions.
- I'm ready to start - mahalo!
- Good
- Thank you. Great presentation.
- Good workshop for all the ideas, questions were answered.
- On-island notification lacking. Most of the individuals were probably notified by
emails or are organizations serving Native Hawaiians.
- Great presentation & very helpful!
Kualapuu Molokai - Page 1
PRE-APPLICATION WORKSHOP EVALUATION FORM: WAIMEA, KAUAI (WAIMEA TECH. CTR.)
8
100%
8
Surveys Collected
Attendance
3
/
8
38%
Absolutely
4
/
8
50%
Agree
1
/
8
13%
Neutral
0
/
8
0%
Disagree
0
/
8
0%
Not at All
0
/
8
0%
No Response
Comments:
- Yes, because we need this info to start on our organization.
- Yes definitely
- Small group setting was conducive to intimate conversations.
- It gives only an idea.
3
/
8
38%
Wonderful
5
/
8
63%
Above Average
0
/
8
0%
Average
0
/
8
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/
8
0%
Unacceptable
0
/
8
0%
No Response
Comments:
- The presenters were excellent.
- Good presenter because he know's what he's talking about.
- It helped me understand.
- Knowledgable.
4
/
8
50%
Wonderful
4
/
8
50%
Above Average
0
/
8
0%
Average
0
/
8
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/
8
0%
Unacceptable
0
/
8
0%
No Response
Comments:
- It is good.
- Would like specific examples.
-
Waimea Kauai - Page 1
PRE-APPLICATION WORKSHOP EVALUATION FORM: LIHUE, KAUAI (QLCC)
12
80%
15
Surveys Collected
Attendance
6
/ 12
50%
Absolutely
4
/ 12
33%
Agree
0
/ 12
0%
Neutral
0
/ 12
0%
Disagree
1
/ 12
8%
Not at All
1
/ 12
8%
No Response
Comments:
- Gave me additional info on how to appy for a grant with each step already defined.
- Materials provided were not helpful or easy to use.
10 / 12
83%
Wonderful
1
/ 12
8%
Above Average
0
/ 12
0%
Average
0
/ 12
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 12
0%
Unacceptable
1
/ 12
8%
No Response
Comments:
-
9
/ 12
75%
Wonderful
2
/ 12
17%
Above Average
0
/ 12
0%
Average
0
/ 12
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 12
0%
Unacceptable
1
/ 12
8%
No Response
Comments:
- Too short
- Mahalo (x2)
- Examples of specific use of grants needed.
- (+) and (-) of process.
Lihue Kauai - Page 1
PRE-APPLICATION WORKSHOP EVALUATION FORM: WAIMEA, HAWAII (KAHILU TOWN HALL)
15
71%
21
Surveys Collected
Attendance
7
/ 15
47%
Absolutely
4
/ 15
27%
Agree
2
/ 15
13%
Neutral
0
/ 15
0%
Disagree
0
/ 15
0%
Not at All
2
/ 15
13%
No Response
Comments:
- May want to ask how many people present have applied for grants before...
7
/ 15
47%
Wonderful
4
/ 15
27%
Above Average
2
/ 15
13%
Average
0
/ 15
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 15
0%
Unacceptable
2
/ 15
13%
No Response
Comments:
- Handled problems not his kuleana ok, glad Colin stepped inbecause others wanted to get info.
- Hard to hear.
- Very helpful and informative.
7
/ 15
47%
Wonderful
4
/ 15
27%
Above Average
2
/ 15
13%
Average
0
/ 15
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 15
0%
Unacceptable
2
/ 15
13%
No Response
Comments:
- Printed material has a lot of infomation. Perhaps it could have been scheduled earlier to allow
more time for application process.
- We would have liked a list of programs already awarded to give ideas of what or
who has been funded.
- Separate out grants.gov info.
- Thank you for coming. It was very useful.
- Very informative.
Waimea Hawaii - Page 1
PRE-APPLICATION WORKSHOP EVALUATION FORM: HILO, HAWAII (HAWAII COMM. COLLEGE)
51%
25
49
Surveys Collected
Attendance
13 / 25
52%
Absolutely
9
/ 25
36%
Agree
1
/ 25
4%
Neutral
0
/ 25
0%
Disagree
0
/ 25
0%
Not at All
2
/ 25
8%
No Response
Comments:
- Excellent.
- I dont think I qualify for a grant at this time. I did find the program interesting and informative.
- The packet is very comprehensive. There is a lot of information to read and digest.
- Information overload but we can take it back to digest.
- Haven't had a chance to read through all the materials. It appears helpful and
comprehensive.
- Great deal of reading but wonderful to have.
18 / 25
72%
Wonderful
5
/ 25
20%
Above Average
0
/ 25
0%
Average
1
/ 25
4%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 25
0%
Unacceptable
2
/ 25
8%
No Response
Comments:
- Friendly, easy to understand, very helpful.
- Presenter and partner answered all questions promptly. Additional information regarding
application process that a few attendees were not aware of was also stated.
- Mr. Ramirez is articulate and clear in his explaniations; questions were handled really well,
refreshing that he kept government-speak to an acceptable minimum.
- Very responsive to questions, polite and thorough.
- Knowledgeable.
14 / 25
56%
Wonderful
8
/ 25
32%
Above Average
1
/ 25
4%
Average
0
/ 25
0%
Somewhat Acceptable
0
/ 25
0%
Unacceptable
2
/ 25
8%
No Response
Comments:
- Mr. Ramirez covered essential information. For this time of the day on a Friday and with this size
of an audience, anything more would be an information-overload and my brain would crash.
- Looking forward to applying.
Hilo Hawaii - Page 1
- Microphone might have been helpful.
- Good to know that we can contact Mr. Ramirez directly with questions.
- Very informative - thank you.
- Pre-application workshop was very well presented. Knowing the problems that could occur
during the grant process would be helpful.
- Presented earlier in the year.
- Need bigger facility.
Hilo Hawaii - Page 2
NHEC & USDOED:
Grantee Technical training
4/11/2006 (9-11am) AUDIO CONFERENCE - USDOE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE: FEDERAL ANNUAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR '05 GRANTEES
Grant #
S362A050054
S362A050054
S362A050054
S362A050072
S362A050034
vsmg & email
vsmg & email
vsmg & email
gave #
gave #
1
2
3
4
5
MOLOKAI CALL IN
Lydia Trinidad, Principal
Christina Paleka, Business Manager
Kamalu Poepoe, HLIP Curriculum Coordinator
Karen Holt
Mildred Higashi
Organization
Kualapuu School - Project Olelo
Molokai Community Svc Council-Hoomana Hou School
Kaunakakai Elementary - FACT
Email
Lydia_Trinidad/Kualapuu/[email protected]
Christina_Paleka/Kualapuu/[email protected]
Karen_Poepoe/Kualapuu/[email protected]
[email protected]
Mildred_Higashi/SCLB/[email protected]
S362A050032 gave #
OAHU CALL IN
1 Candy Suiso
Waianae HS-Waianae Coast Digital Media
candy_suiso/waianaehi/[email protected]
S362A050048 gave #
KAUAI CALL IN
1 Kanoe Ahuna
Hoola Lahui Hawaii
[email protected]
INPEACE - Keiki Steps
Aha Punana Leo-Lamaku
Kanu o ka Aina Learning Ohana
Partners in Development-Ka Hana Noeau
Ke Kula O Nawahiokalaniopuu
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
UH Manoa - Sch of Medicine
Bishop Museum-Hawaii ALIVE
Halau Ku Mana
UH Manoa - Sch of Eng
UH Manoa - Sch of Eng
KOKA
KOKA
Pihana Na Mamo-Na Lama Heluhelu
Pihana Na Mamo-Kakoo Piha
Partners in Development-Baibala
Partners in Development-Tutu & Me
Nanaikapono-Nana I Ka Pulapula
Nanaikapono-Nana I Ka Pulapula
AluLike, Inc.
Boys & Girls Club of Hawaii
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
iwalani_hodges/nanaikap/[email protected]
myron_brumaghim/nanaikap/[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected] / [email protected]
27 Norma Jean Stodden
UH Manoa - Ctr. on Disabilities
[email protected]
28 Kuumealoha Gomes
28 TOTAL OAHU ATTENDEES
UH Manoa-Kahuewai Ola
[email protected]
Na Pua Noeau
[email protected]
UH Manoa-Hawaiian & Indo Pac Languages
[email protected]
S362A050009
S362A050003
S362A050058
S362A050078
S362A050034
gave #
gave #
gave #
gave #
gave #
S362A050022
S362A050074
S362A050074
S362A050074
S362A050015
S362A050076
S362A050076
S362A050028
S362A050086
S362A050024
S362A050044
S362A050060
S362A050060
S362A050027
S362A050078
S362A050078
S362A050075
S362A050075
S362A050051
S362A050065
S362A050057
S362A050056
S362A050050
S362A050070
S362A050011
S362A050083
29 TOTAL GRANTS
1
2
3
4
5
12
HILO CALL IN
Geoli Ng, INPEACE
Namaka Rawlins
Ekela Kahuanui
David Fuertes
Aumoana Semana
TOTAL CALL IN
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
OAHU
Colin
Kamu
Heather
Kathy Morris
Noelle Kahanu
Nohea Torres
Elizabeth Tatar
Malama Souza
Josh Kaakua
Kelli Ching
Jack Randall
Momi Durand
Hugh Dunn
Lillian Kido
Laura Dang
Jack Keppler
Gail Omoto
Billy Richards
Sue Sowder
Iwalani Hodges
Myron Brumaghim
David Kamiyama
Mike Kahikina/Kauai Kahikina
Unable to Attend
1 David Sing
No Response
1 Noeau Warner
2 TOTAL NOT ATTENDING
The following are notes of Colin Kippen summarizing the discussions held with
Francisco Ramirez and Beth Fine of the Department of Education and first year grantees
under the Native Hawaiian Education Act on April 11th, 2006. These notes are merely
rough approximations of what was discussed, and are intended for use only as
background information to assist in providing context to the forms and other information
referred to by the parties to this discussion. For specific answers to questions relating to
the filling out of these forms or reporting information to the US ed, the appropriate forms
and narrative instructions attached to this e mail should be consulted- - -and the
appropriate monitor at the US ed should be contacted by the NHEA grantee. Future
consultations and technical assistance workshops between the US ed and the NHEA
grantees will be scheduled as needed by the Native Hawaiian Education Council.
In these notes, US ed refers to the U.S. Department of Education.
1. Main Theme of Technical Assistance Provided by Francisco Ramirez and Beth Fine:
a. Each of the NHEA Grantees Should Give the US ed a Clear Picture of How
They Are Meeting (or Not Meeting) Their Project Goals and Objectives.
b. The Methodology to Successfully Accomplish This Reporting Process is to
i. ‘Communicate’ with US ed
ii. ‘Disclose’ information to US ed
iii. ‘Explain’ information provided to US ed
iv. And ‘Accommodate Special or Changed Circumstances’ as They
Arise (Accommodating changed circumstances is an essential step of
managing these funds provided by the US ed to the NHEA grantee.)
c. And then (for each accommodation made) to
i. ‘Communicate’ with US ed
ii. ‘Disclose’ information to US ed
iii. ‘Explain’ why that Particular Accommodation was Necessary and
How This Accommodation Serves The Overarching Purpose of the
NHEA Project Funded by the US ed.
2. Francisco and Beth marched through the forms that were provided to the grantees
using the US ed “Grant Performance Report Cover Sheet” (ED 524B) and the
Narrative Form “Instructions For Grant Performance Report (ED 524B)”. The
Modus Operandi was to go to the line on the ED 524B form and to refer to the
narrative instructions for an explanation on how to fill out the form.
3. “Reporting Period” was discussed. See Item 7 on the form and page 2 of the
narrative instructions. The reporting period for the grantees assembled is October
1
1,2005 through April 30, 2006. This is only 7 months of a 12 month calendar year.
Francisco said that the report should focus on what has been accomplished thus far,
and to supplement this report at the end of the 12 month period.
a. It appears that the US ed is omniscient in the sense that their money
management system reports on how much is being requested for spending and
when it is drawn down by each grantee. Here is a hypothetical example. If, for
example, 7/12ths of the year has passed, and 100% of the funds are already
expended OR, if, for example, 7/12ths of the year has passed, and only 1/12th of
the funds have been expended, RED FLAGS may be triggered at the USed and
the grantee should expect to generate a report which explains what happened
and why the spending of funds is out of sync with the plan originally established
as a predicate to this grant being selected for funding and the grant being
received by the grantee.
b. Francisco suggested that such spending patterns would require a discussion in
the summary and narrative about the fact that a problem exists, how this
problem came into existence, and what the grantee’s plan is to accommodate
this special situation. Communication, disclosure, and explanation by the
grantee to the US ed is required.
4. Section 9 ‘Indirect Costs’ was discussed. See page 3 of ‘Instructions for Grant
Performance Report.’
a. Many questions were asked about ‘Indirect costs.’ Several of the questions
were about the meaning of the following terms. What is an ‘indirect rate’? What
is a ‘restricted indirect rate’? What are ‘administrative costs’ as set forth in the
Native Hawaiian Education Act? What are ‘modified total direct costs’?
b. Questions were asked about whether the Native Hawaiian Education Act is a
‘restricted indirect rate’ program. (Francisco said that it was.) If this is a
‘restricted indirect’ program, then grantees under this program may only charge
a maximum of 8% of their indirect costs. Several grantees suggested this
interpretation was problematic because they have already negotiated an indirect
rate which is greater than the 8% ‘restricted indirect rate’. Some asked why a
‘restricted indirect cost rate’ is necessary. Questions were raised about the US
ed’s authority to characterize this program as one subject to a ‘restricted indirect
cost rate’- - -and when this characterization by the US ed was made.
c. Francisco emphasized that questions 9a, 9b, 9c, and 9d track the negotiations
that the grantee may have already had with the US ed about the reimbursement
of indirect costs. These existing agreements figure into the amount of money
that the grantee may have reimbursed by the federal government to cover
overhead and other administrative expenses.
2
d. Questions were asked by at least 5 of our grantees for clarification of this
‘indirect cost rate’ issue.
5. Item Number 11. ‘Performance Measures Status and Certification’ (page 4)
a. Are all of the ‘performance measures’ being provided in this report now? If not,
give notice to the US ed when all of that data will be reported. For purposes of
this report period, the grantee should report the data they presently have
available. The grantee should report to the US ed of the timeline it will be
following to report all of their data to the grantor-US ed.
b. If not all of the data is complete at the time this report is due, then the grantee
must file a ‘supplemental report’ at a later date.
6. Instructions for the Executive Summary (page 5)
a. The grantee should answer the following questions:
i. Where are we in meeting our goals, outcomes and performance
measures of this project?
a. If we were unable to meet our goals, outcomes or
performance measures:
i. Which goal, outcome or performance measure
was not met?
ii. Why was that goal, outcome or performance
measure not met?
iii. When will that goal, outcome or performance
measure be met?
2. Grantee should also state which goals, outcomes or
performance measures were met. Include facts which
demonstrate how goals, outcomes, and performance measures
were, in fact, met.
3. Francisco and Beth stress ‘full disclosure’ of the
circumstances, challenges, successes, and delays encountered
in implementing the grant from the grantee to the US ed.
7. Grantee must provide target data on the form and in the space provided.
a. Example: grantee may have to report how many students were expected to
served as well as how many students were actually served. This quantitative
data should be reported.
b. If there is no set target number, and the grantee was going to use project funding
to establish a target, then ‘999’ should be inserted in the form.
c. Role of GPRA measures. In the event GPRA indicators are relevant, then the
grantee should report on these measures in the appropriate form.
i. There was a discussion by the grantees that most of the GPRA
measures did not apply to the grants made by the US ed to NHEA
grantees under this NHEA program.
3
8. For ‘final performance reports’ the rules require. . . “complete data on performance
measures for the final budget period must be submitted with the final performance
report.” A question was raised as to when the “final performance report” is due.
Francisco answered that the “final performance report” due date depends upon the
actual situation applicable to the timing of the grantees performance.
9. Section pertaining to Section B- - -Budget Information.
a. Beth Fine intimated that the US ed is omniscient regarding a grantee’s spending
patterns because they have access to all computer information regarding when
the grantee draws funds down, etc.
b. Beth Fine stressed letting the US ed know whether difficulties or problems are
encountered in following the spending plan set forth in their grant. Beth stressed
that grantees ‘disclose’, ‘communicate’, and ‘explain’ why they are not able to
meet their previously agreed upon spending plan.
c. ‘Red flags’ such as high amounts of unexpended funds from one year to the
next should be explained in the Budget Report and Narrative.
i. Grantee should ‘explain the special circumstances causing there to
be a high carryover amount’.
ii. Grantee should ‘establish a plan to accommodate these unforeseen
and special circumstances’ and
iii. Grantee should ‘communicate what that plan is and why it is
necessary under the circumstances’.
d. Discussion ensued over the situations within which a ‘carryover’ or an
‘extension’ should be granted. Francisco raised the issue that reports that are
being provided by the grantee are being measured from the perspective of
whether or not the grantee is making substantial progress towards
accomplishing the goals and objectives of their project. A failure to make
substantial progress is a problem and could put future funding for subsequent
grant years in jeopardy.
e. Question was raised about what a grantee should do in the event he or she wants
to carry over funds from one year to the next.
i. Grantee must fill in the budget portions of the form showing the
funds that have/have not been spent.
ii. Grantee must indicate the reason the carry over is being requested in
the narrative portion of the report.
iii. Grantee must establish a plan to accommodate the change in
circumstances leading to the request to carry over funds.
10. Future workshops with the US ed department and the NHEA grantees will be
scheduled ‘as needed’. NHEA grantees were encouraged to contact Beth Fine and
Francisco Ramirez for assistance in filling out the necessary forms and completing
the necessary reports required as part of this NHEA grant process.
End of Document
###
4
U.S. Department of Education
Grant Performance Report Cover Sheet (ED 524B)
Check only one box per Program Office instruction.
[ ] Annual Performance Report [ ] Final Performance Report
OMB No. 1890-0004
OMB Approved
General Information
1. PR/ Number #: __________
2. NCES ID#: __________
(Block 5 of the Grant Award Notification - 11 Characters.)
(See Instructions - Up to 12 Characters.)
3 Project Title: _________
(Enter the same title as on the approved application.)
4. Grantee Name (Block 1 of the Grant Award Notification): ________
5. Grantee Address (See Instructions.)
6. Project Director Name: __________
Ph #: (
) ____ - _____ Ext: (
Title: __________
)
Fax # : (
) _____ - _____
Email Address: __________
Reporting Period Information (See Instructions.)
7. Reporting Period:
From: ___/___/___
To: ___/___/___
(mm/dd/yyyy)
Budget Expenditures (To be completed by your Business Office. See instructions. Also see Section B.)
8. Budget Expenditures
Federal Grant Funds
Non-Federal Funds (Match/Cost Share)
a. Previous Budget Period
b. Current Budget Period
c. Entire Project Period
(For Final Performance Reports only)
Indirect Cost Information (To be completed by your Business Office. See instructions.)
9. Indirect Costs
a. Are you claiming indirect costs under this grant? ___Yes ___No
b. If yes, do you have an Indirect Cost Rate Agreement approved by the Federal Government? ___Yes ___No
c. If yes, provide the following information:
Period Covered by the Indirect Cost Rate Agreement: From: ___/ ___/___
To: ___/___/___ (mm/dd/yyyy)
Approving Federal agency: ___ED ___Other (Please specify): __________
Type of Rate (For Final Performance Reports Only): ___ Provisional ___ Final ___ Other (Please specify) ____
d. For Restricted Rate Programs (check one) -- Are you using a restricted indirect cost rate that:
___ Is included in your approved Indirect Cost Rate Agreement?
___ Complies with 34 CFR 76.564(c)(2)?
Human Subjects (See Instructions.)
10. Annual Certification of Institutional Review Board (IRB) Approval? ___Yes ___No ___N/A
Performance Measures Status and Certification (See Instructions.)
11. Performance Measures Status
a. Are complete data on performance measures for the current budget period included in the Project Status Chart? ___Yes ___No
b. If no, when will the data be available and submitted to the Department? ___/___/____ (mm/dd/yyyy)
12. To the best of my knowledge and belief, all data in this performance report are true and correct and the report fully discloses all
known weaknesses concerning the accuracy, reliability, and completeness of the data.
_____________________________
Name of Authorized Representative:
Title: _____________
_____________________________________________________
Signature:
Date: ___/___/____
ED 524B
Page 1 of 5
Grant Performance Report (ED 524B)
Executive Summary
OMB No. 1890-0004
OMB Approved
PR/ Number # (11 characters)_______
(See Instructions)
ED 524B
Page 2 of 5
OMB No. 1890-0004
OMB Approved
Project Status Chart
PR/Award # (11 characters): ________
SECTION A - Performance Objectives Information and Related Performance Measures Data (See Instructions. Use as many pages as necessary.)
1. Project Objective
1.a. Performance Measure
[ ] Check if this is a status update for the previous budget period.
Measure Type
Quantitative Data
Target
Raw
Number
Ratio
%
Actual Performance Data
Raw
Number
Ratio
%
/
1.b. Performance Measure
/
Quantitative Data
Measure Type
Target
Raw
Number
Ratio
/
%
Raw
Number
Ratio
%
/
Explanation of Progress (Include Qualitative Data and Data Collection Information)
ED 524B
Page 3 of 5
OMB No. 1890-0004
OMB Approved
SECTION A - Performance Objectives Information and Related Performance Measures Data (See Instructions. Use as many pages as necessary.)
2. Project Objective
2.a. Performance Measure
[ ] Check if this is a status update for the previous budget period.
Measure Type
Quantitative Data
Target
Raw
Number
Ratio
%
Raw
Number
Ratio
%
/
2.b. Performance Measure
/
Quantitative Data
Measure Type
Target
Raw
Number
Ratio
/
%
Raw
Number
Ratio
%
/
Explanation of Progress (Include Qualitative Data and Data Collection Information)
ED 524B
Page 4 of 5
OMB No. 1890-0004
OMB Approved
SECTION B - Budget Information (See Instructions. Use as many pages as necessary.)
SECTION C - Additional Information (See Instructions. Use as many pages as necessary.)
ED 524B
Page 5 of 5
INSTRUCTIONS FOR GRANT PERFORMANCE REPORT (ED 524B)
PURPOSE
Recipients of multi-year discretionary grants must submit an annual performance report for each year funding has
been approved in order to receive a continuation award. The annual performance report should demonstrate whether
substantial progress has been made toward meeting the project objectives and the program performance measures.
The information described in these instructions will provide the U.S. Department of Education (ED) with the
information needed to determine whether recipients have demonstrated substantial progress. ED program offices
may also require recipients of “forward funded” grants that are awarded funds for their entire multi-year project upfront in a single grant award to submit the Grant Performance Report (ED 524B) on an annual basis. In addition,
ED program offices may also require recipients to use the ED 524B to submit their final performance reports.
Performance reporting requirements are found in 34 CFR 74.51, 75.118, 75.253, 75.590 and 80.40 of the Education
Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR).
GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
•
Please read the attached “Dear Colleague Letter” from your program office carefully. It contains specific
instructions for completing the ED 524B for your program.
•
You must submit the ED 524B Cover Sheet, Executive Summary, and Project Status Chart. You may
reference sections and page numbers of your approved application rather than repeating information.
•
Please follow the appropriate instructions depending on whether you are submitting an annual performance
report or a final performance report.
•
If you are submitting a paper copy of the ED 524B, please submit one original and one copy. ED program
offices will notify grant recipients of the due date for submission of annual performance reports; however,
general guidelines are provided below in the instructions for ED 524B Cover Sheet, item 7. Reporting
Period. Final performance reports are due 90 days after the expiration of the grant’s project period
(performance period).
Note: For the purposes of this report, the term “project period” is used interchangeably with the term
“performance period,” which is found on the Grant Award Notification (GAN).
•
Many programs provide grantees with the option of completing and submitting the ED 524B online through
e-Reports. Please follow instructions from your program office regarding the use of e-Reports for
submitting your ED 524B.
•
For those programs that operate under statutes or regulations that require additional or different reporting
for performance or monitoring purposes, ED program offices will inform you when this additional or
different reporting should be made.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE ED 524B COVER SHEET
Complete the ED 524B Cover Sheet with the appropriate information. Instructions for items 1, 3, 4 and 6 are
included on the ED 524B Cover Sheet. Instructions for items 2 and 5 and items 7 through 12 are included in this
instruction sheet.
2. Grantee NCES ID Number
-- Annual and Final Performance Reports:
1
Please enter the current National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) ID number of the grantee. Grantees
that are State Educational Agencies (SEA) should enter their state's FIPS (Federal Information Processing
Standards) code in item 2. Item 2 only applies to grantees that are Institutions of Higher Education (IHE),
SEAs, Local Educational Agencies (LEA), public libraries, and public, charter, and private elementary or
secondary schools. Leave blank, if this item is not applicable.
Please go to the applicable website listed below to obtain the grantee’s NCES ID number or FIPS code.
Depending on your organization type, this number will range from 2 to 12 numeric digits.
•
•
•
IHEs (IPEDS ID); Public Libraries (Library ID); and Public, Charter and Private Schools (NCES School
ID): http://nces.ed.gov/globallocator
LEAs (NCES District ID): http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/
SEAs (FIPS code): To obtain your state's FIPS code, please search on any public school district in your
state at: http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/. The FIPS code is the first two digits of the NCES
District ID number for any public school district in a state.
Note: Newly established organizations that do not have an NCES ID number yet should leave item 2 blank.
However, once the organization's NCES ID number has been established, it must be entered on all future
submissions of the ED 524B.
5. Grantee Address
Instructions for Submitting Address Changes
If the address that is listed in Block 1 of your GAN has changed and you are submitting a paper copy of the
ED 524B, either submit the new address in Section C (Additional Information) of the Project Status Chart or
submit the change through e-Administration (annual performance reports only), the administrative action
function of e-Grants.
If you are submitting the ED 524B electronically through e-Reports, you may update your address in e-Reports.
7. Reporting Period
-- Annual Performance Reports:
Due Date: Annual performance reports are typically due seven to ten months after the start of the grant’s
current budget period. Please follow instructions from your program office regarding the specific due date of
the annual performance report for your grant.
The reporting period for the annual performance report is from the start of the current budget period through 30
days before the due date of the report. The start date for your current budget period may be found in Block 6 of
the GAN. Please note, however, that complete data on performance measures for the current budget period
must be submitted to ED, either with this report or as soon as they are available, but no later than the final due
date specified by your ED program office. Please see instructions for items 11a. and 11b. of the ED 524B
Cover Sheet and Section A (Project Objectives Information and Related Performance Measures Data) of the
Project Status Chart for specific reporting requirements for performance measures data.
-- Final Performance Reports:
Due Date: Final performance reports are due 90 days after the expiration of the grant’s project period. If you
receive a no-cost time extension from ED for this grant, the final performance report is due 90 days after the
revised project period end date. Program offices may also request an annual performance report that covers the
original final budget period from grantees that receive no-cost time extensions.
2
Please enter the start and end date for the final budget period of your grant from Block 6 of the GAN. The
reporting period for your final performance report covers the entire final budget period of the project, except for
the information in the Executive Summary and Section C (Additional Information) of the Project Status Chart,
which covers the entire project period (performance period) of the project.
8. Budget Expenditures [Also See Section B (Budget Information) of the Project Status Chart]
The budget expenditure information requested in items 8a. – 8c. must be completed by your Business
Office.
Note: For the purposes of this report, the term budget expenditures means allowable grant obligations
incurred during the periods specified below. (See EDGAR, 34 CFR 74.2; 75.703; 75.707; and 80.3, as
applicable.)
For budget expenditures made with Federal grant funds, you must provide an explanation in Section B
(Budget Information) of the Project Status Chart, if you have not drawn down funds from the Grant
Administration and Payment System (GAPS) to pay for these budget expenditures.
--Annual Performance Reports:
•
Report your actual budget expenditures for the entire previous budget period in item 8a. Please separate
expenditures into Federal grant funds and non-Federal funds (match/cost-share) expended for the project
during the entire previous budget period.
Note: If you are reporting on the first budget period of the project, leave item 8a. blank.
•
Report your actual budget expenditures for the current budget period to date (i.e., through 30 days before
the due date of this report) in item 8b. Please separate expenditures into Federal grant funds and nonFederal funds (match/cost-share) expended for the project during the current budget period to date.
--Final Performance Reports:
9.
•
Report your actual budget expenditures for the entire previous budget period in item 8a. Please separate
during the entire previous budget period.
•
Report your actual budget expenditures for the entire final budget period in item 8b. Please separate
during the entire final budget period.
•
Report your actual budget expenditures for the entire project period (performance period) in item 8c.
Please separate expenditures into Federal grant funds and non-Federal funds (match/cost-share) expended
for the project during the entire project period. Your project period (performance period) start and end
dates are found in Block 6 of the GAN.
Indirect Costs
The indirect cost information requested in Items 9a. – 9d. must be completed by your Business Office.
--Annual and Final Performance Reports:
•
•
•
Item 9a -- Please check “yes” or “no” in item 9a. to indicate whether or not you are claiming indirect costs
under this grant.
Item 9b. -- If you checked “yes” in item 9a., please indicate in item 9b. whether or not your organization
has an Indirect Cost Rate Agreement that was approved by the Federal government.
Item 9c. -- If you checked “yes” in item 9b., please indicate in item 9c. the beginning and ending dates
covered by the Indirect Cost Rate Agreement. In addition, please indicate whether ED or another Federal
3
•
agency (Other) issued the approved agreement. If you check “Other,” please specify the name of the
Federal agency that issued the approved agreement. For final performance reports only, check the
appropriate box to indicate the type of indirect cost rate that you have – Provisional, Final, or Other. If you
check “Other,” please specify the type of indirect cost rate.
Item 9d. – For grants under Restricted Rate Programs (EDGAR, 34 CFR 75.563), please indicate whether
you are using a restricted indirect cost rate that is included on your approved Indirect Cost Rate Agreement
or whether you are using a restricted indirect cost rate that complies with 34 CFR 76.564(c)(2). Note:
State or Local government agencies may not use the provision for a restricted indirect cost rate specified in
EDGAR, 34 CFR 76.564(c)(2). Check only one response. Leave blank, if this item is not applicable.
10. Annual Institutional Review Board (IRB) Certification
--Annual Performance Reports Only:
Annual certification is required if Attachment HS1, Continuing IRB Reviews, was attached to the GAN.
Attach the IRB certification to the ED 524B as instructed in Attachment HS1.
11. Performance Measures Status
--Annual Performance Reports:
Please check “yes” or “no” in item 11a. to indicate whether complete data on performance measures for the
current budget period are included in this report in Section A of the Project Status Chart. If no, please indicate
in item 11b. the date when the information will be available and submitted to ED. Complete data must be
submitted for any performance measures established by ED for the grant program (included in the attached
“Dear Colleague Letter”) and for any project specific performance measures that were included in your
approved application.
If complete data on performance measures for the entire current budget period have not been obtained when
you submit the ED 524B, please submit available data for the budget period to date with this report, unless
instructed otherwise by your program office. Complete performance measures data for the current budget
period should be submitted by the date you indicated in item 11b.
Note: Your program office will inform you of the final date by which performance measures data must be
submitted to the Department for this program.
-- Final Performance Reports:
You must check “yes” in item 11a. Complete data on performance measures for the final budget period must be
submitted with the final performance report in Section A of the Project Status Chart. Leave item 11b. blank.
Complete data must be submitted for any performance measures established by ED for the grant program
(included in the attached “Dear Colleague Letter”) and for any project-specific performance measures that were
included in your approved grant application.
12. Certification
The grantee’s authorized representative must sign the certification for the ED 524B. If the grantee has any
known internal control weaknesses concerning data quality (as disclosed through audits or other reviews), this
information must be disclosed under Section C (Additional Information) of the Project Status Chart as well as
the remedies taken to ensure the accuracy, reliability, and completeness of the data.
4
INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Provide a one to two page Executive Summary for annual performance reports and a two to three page Executive
Summary for final performance reports. Provide highlights of the project's goals, the extent to which the expected
outcomes and performance measures were achieved, and what contributions the project has made to research,
knowledge, practice, and/or policy. Include the population served, if appropriate.
Note: The Executive Summary for final performance reports covers the entire project period.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PROJECT STATUS CHART
General Instructions for Section A -- Project Objectives Information and Related
Performance Measures Data
In your approved grant application, you established project objectives stating what you hope to achieve with your
funded grant project. Generally, one or more performance measures were also established for each project objective
that serve to demonstrate whether you have met or are making progress towards meeting each project objective. In
addition to project-specific performance measures that you may have established in your approved grant application,
performance measures may have been established by ED for the grant program [included in the attached “Dear
Colleague Letter”] that you are required to report on.
In Section A of the Project Status Chart, you will report on the results to date of your project evaluation as required
under EDGAR, 34 CFR 75.590. According to the instructions below, for each project objective included in your
approved grant application, provide quantitative and/or qualitative data for each associated performance measure
and a description of preliminary findings or outcomes that demonstrate that you have met or are making progress
towards meeting the performance measure. You will also explain how your data on your performance measures
demonstrate that you have met or are making progress towards meeting each project objective.
Note: Complete data must be submitted for any performance measures established by ED for the grant program
(included in the attached “Dear Colleague Letter”) and for any project-specific performance measures that were
included in your approved grant application
For Annual Performance Reports: If complete data on performance measures for the entire current budget period
have not been obtained when you submit the ED 524B, please submit available data for the budget period to date
with this report, unless instructed otherwise by your program office. Complete performance measures data for the
current budget period should be submitted by the date you indicated in item 11b on the ED 524B Cover Sheet.
Your program office will inform you of the final date by which performance measures data must be submitted to the
Department for this program.
For Final Performance Reports: Complete data on performance measures for the final budget period must be
submitted with the final performance report.
For final performance reports, the information in Section A of the Project Status Chart covers the final budget
period of the grant. Additional questions for final performance reports covering the entire project period are found
in the instructions for Section C of the Project Status Chart.
5
Instructions for Section A
•
Project Objective:
Enter each project objective that is included in your approved grant application. Only one project objective should
be entered per row. Project objectives should be numbered sequentially, i.e., 1., 2., 3., etc.
Update Box
If instructed by your program office in the attached “Dear Colleague Letter,” please provide an update on the status
of your project objectives for any period of time that you did not report on in your previous annual performance
report.
Check the “Update Box” next to each project objective for which you are providing an update. Do not check the
“Update Box” if you are reporting on a project objective for the current reporting period. If you are providing a
status update on your project objectives for the previous budget period and reporting on those same objectives for
the current reporting period, please use separate pages (Section A) to separate previous and current information.
Do not combine information for the previous budget period and for the current reporting period on the same page.
Example: Last year’s annual performance report covered 8 months of the previous budget period. The program
office requests that you report on the status of your project objectives for the last 4 months of the previous budget
period in this annual performance report.
•
Performance Measure:
For each project objective, enter each associated performance measure. There may be multiple performance
measures associated with each project objective. Enter only one performance measure per row. Each performance
measure that is associated with a particular project objective should be labeled using an alpha indicator. Example:
The first performance measure associated with project objective “1” should be labeled “1.a.,” the second
performance measure for project objective “1” should be labeled “1.b.,” etc.
•
Measure Type:
For each performance measure you are reporting on, enter the type of performance measure. Enter one (1) of the
following measure types: GPRA; PROGRAM; or PROJECT.
The specific measures established by ED for the grant program that you are required to report on are included in the
attached “Dear Colleague Letter.” The measure type is also specified.
There are two types of measures that ED may have established for the grant program:
1. GPRA: Measures established for reporting to Congress under the Government Performance and Results
Act; and
2. PROGRAM: Measures established by the program office for the particular grant competition.
In addition, report on any project-specific performance measures (PROJECT) that you, the grantee, established in
your approved grant application to meet your project objectives.
•
Quantitative Data:
Target and Actual Performance Data
Provide the target you established for meeting each performance measure and provide actual performance data
demonstrating progress towards meeting or exceeding this target. Only quantitative (numeric) data should be
entered in the Target and Actual Performance Data boxes.
The Target and Actual Performance Data boxes are each divided into three columns: Raw Number; Ratio; and
Percentage (%).
For performance measures that are stated in terms of a single number (e.g., the number of workshops that will be
conducted or the number of students that will be served), the target and actual performance data should be reported
as a single number under the Raw Number column (e.g., 10 workshops or 80 students). Please leave the Ratio and
Percentage (%) columns blank.
6
For performance measures that are stated in terms of a percentage (e.g., percentage of students that attain
proficiency), complete both the Ratio column and the Percentage (%) column. Please leave the Raw Number
column blank.
In the Ratio column (e.g., 80/100), the numerator represents the numerical target (e.g., the number of students that
are expected to attain proficiency) or actual performance data (e.g., the number of students that attained
proficiency), and the denominator represents the universe (e.g., all students served). Please enter the corresponding
percentage (e.g., 80%) in the Percentage (%) column.
If the collection of quantitative data is not appropriate for a particular performance measure, please leave the Target
and Actual Performance Data boxes blank and provide an explanation and any relevant qualitative data for the
performance measure in the block entitled, Explanation of Progress.
Note: If you are using weighted data, please indicate how the data are weighted in the block entitled, Explanation
of Progress.
Special instructions for grants in their first budget period: If baseline data for a performance measure were not
included in your approved application and targets were not set for the first budget period, then enter either the
number 999 under the Raw Number column or the ratio 999/999 under the Ratio column of the Target box,
depending on how your data will be reported in the future. The 999 or 999/999 indicates that baseline data are being
collected on the measure during the first budget period and targets have not yet been set. Unless otherwise
instructed by your program office in the attached “Dear Colleague Letter,” report baseline data collected during the
first budget period under either the Raw Number column or the Ratio and Percentage (%) columns of the Actual
Performance Data box, as appropriate. After baseline data have been collected during the first budget period,
grantees are expected to set targets for the second and any subsequent budget periods and report actual performance
data in their annual performance reports.
•
Explanation of Progress (Includes Qualitative Data and Data Collection Information):
1.
For each project objective and associated performance measures, indicate what data (quantitative and/or
qualitative) were collected and when they were collected, the evaluation methods that were used, and
how the data were analyzed. Clearly identify and explain any deviations from your approved evaluation
plan, including changes in design or methodology, or the individual or organization conducting the
evaluation.
2.
Based on your data, provide a description of preliminary findings or outcomes, including information to
show whether you are making progress towards meeting each performance measure. Further, indicate
how your performance measures data show that you have met or are making progress towards meeting
the stated project objective. In your discussion, provide a brief description of your activities and
accomplishments for the reporting period that are related to each project objective.
3.
If expected data were not attained, expected progress was not made toward meeting a performance
measure or project objective, or a planned activity was not conducted as scheduled, provide an
explanation. Include a description of the steps and schedules for addressing the problem(s) or issue(s).
4.
Indicate how you used your data and information from your evaluation to monitor the progress of your
grant, and if needed, to make improvements to your original project plan (e.g., project activities and
milestones) which are consistent with your approved objectives and scope of work.
7
Instructions for Section B – Budget Information
•
Report budget expenditure data in items 8a. – 8c. of the ED 524B Cover Sheet, as applicable. Please follow the
instructions for completing items 8a. – 8c. included in this instruction sheet.
•
For budget expenditures made with Federal grant funds, you must provide an explanation if funds have not been
drawn down from GAPS to pay for the budget expenditure amounts reported in items 8a. – 8c of the ED 524B
Cover Sheet.
•
Provide an explanation if you did not expend funds at the expected rate during the reporting period.
•
Describe any significant changes to your budget resulting from modification of project activities.
•
Describe any changes to your budget that affected your ability to achieve your approved project activities and/or
project objectives.
-- Annual Performance Reports Only:
•
Do you expect to have any unexpended funds at the end of the current budget period? If you do, explain why,
provide an estimate, and indicate how you plan to use the unexpended funds (carryover) in the next budget
period.
•
Describe any anticipated changes in your budget for the next budget period that require prior approval from the
Department (see EDGAR, 34 CFR 74.25 and 80.30, as applicable).
Instructions for Section C – Additional Information
-- Annual Performance Reports Only:
•
If applicable, please provide a list of current partners on your grant and indicate if any partners changed during
the reporting period. Please indicate if you anticipate any change in partners during the next budget period. If
any of your partners changed during the reporting period, please describe whether this impacted your ability to
achieve your approved project objectives and/or project activities.
•
If instructed by your program office, please report on any statutory reporting requirements for this grant
program.
•
Describe any changes that you wish to make in the grant’s activities for the next budget period that are
consistent with the scope and objectives of your approved application.
•
If you are requesting changes to the approved key personnel listed in Block 4 of your GAN for the next budget
period, please indicate the name, title and percentage of time of the requested key personnel. Additionally,
please attach a resume or curriculum vitae for the proposed key personnel when you submit your performance
report.
Note: Do not report on any key personnel changes made during the current or previous budget period(s).
Departmental approval must be requested and received prior to making key personnel changes.
•
Provide any other appropriate information about the status of your project including any unanticipated
outcomes or benefits from your project.
8
-- Final Performance Reports Only:
(This information covers the entire project period.)
Note: All grantees submitting a final performance report must answer question 1. The attached “Dear
Colleague Letter” specifies any additional questions that you must answer from the list below, if any.
1.
Utilizing your evaluation results, draw conclusions about the success of the project and its impact. Describe
any unanticipated outcomes or benefits from your project and any barriers that you may have encountered.
2.
What would you recommend as advice to other educators that are interested in your project? How did your
original ideas change as a result of conducting the project?
3.
If applicable, describe your plans for continuing the project (sustainability; capacity building) and/or
disseminating the project results.
4.
Report on any statutory reporting requirements for this grant program.
Paperwork Burden Statement
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of
information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this
information collection is 1890 –0004. The time required to complete this information collection is estimated to
average 22 hours per response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data resources, gather the
data needed, and complete and review the information collection. If you have any comments concerning the
accuracy of the time estimate (s) or suggestions for improving this form, please write to: U. S. Department of
Education, Washington, D.C. 2020-4651. If you have comments or concerns regarding the status of your individual
submission of this form, write directly to (insert program office), U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland
Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20202.
9
ASSN. oF HAWAIIAN CIVIC CLUBS
EDUCATION Summit
2005-2006
Meeting Minutes
State Council Meeting
November 3, 2005
Plaza Hotel
MINUTES
Meeting called to order at 10:20 am
Pule was conducted by the Küpuna, and First Corinthians 13 was shared.
State Council
DuPuis, Reshela
Evans, Jean
Evans, Martha
For Hamamoto, Patricia
- Puanani Wilhelm
Akana, Joshua
For Arce, Anita
- Kim, Moke
Chun, Kamuela
De Morales, Paula
Hawai‘i:
Akana, Janice
Jones, Luana
Pahio, Kaÿiulani
Romero, Don
Maui:
Läna‘i:
Hanohano, Maggie
Jenkins, Betty
Kahalekomo, Janet
Kaÿiama, Manu
Kanaÿiaupuni, Shawn
Island Councils
Moloka‘i:
O‘ahu:
Cathcart, Edna
Kim, Moke
Malina-Wright, VerlieAnn
Kaua‘i:
Anakalea, Pumehana
Koerte, Mike
Ni‘ihau:
Staff
Kippen, Colin
Excused: Due to the death of family members, the Niÿihau NHEIC officers asked to be excused.
1) Aunty Betty then began by having the group share what they were grateful for. Members were thankful for
their spouses, parents, children, ÿohana, health, relationship with akua, perseverance, grace, family contacts
and information, thankful for their island, kuleana, family friends and co-workers, purpose for life, spirituality
in the world, opportunity to sit on the council, challenges and opportunities in life, chance to do something
for others, chance to do something in life that has meaning, part of the paÿina, relationship with each other,
sense of responsibility, responsibility placed on our shoulders, and the opportunity to do things in life that
will effect the future generations.
2) Treasurer’s and other fiscal reports, and minutes for 7/22/2005 minutes were tabled.
3) Executive Director’s Report:
The group proceeded to finalizing the plan for the Grantee Summit led by Colin Kippen.
Outcomes for the conference:
• Build a community to break down the barriers.
• Need for data collection for reauthorization.
Phone: 808-845-9883
Fax: 808-845-9984
State Council Minutes –11/1/2005
Page 2
•
•
•
•
•
Understanding of the role of NHEC
Greater familiarity with grants funded
Developing sustainability by forming partnerships and collaboration.
Understanding of non-academic priorities and reasons for developing programs to support Native
Hawaiian children and families.
Suggested future targets.
Journey of connecting relationships with kükui nut leis.
Who are we? Nä pahu hopu
What kinds of data are we collecting from grantees? Refer to form sent to grantees. Accomplishments of the
grantees and/or intended outcomes.
How do we move forward and continue to increase the dialog? Stress assessment and prediction of success.
Nä Upena Laula (unstated outcomes)
Working together, how do we sustain the flame?
How can NHEC foster/facilitate partnerships and collaboration?
How can NHEC be of service to communities and grantees?
How can we make NHEC accountable? What can NHEC become?
• Advocate for Hawaiian children and families.
• Develop policy
• Assess and coordinate
• Advocate policy change
Roles and responsibilities for küpuna:
• Set the tone and move the group along
• Provide wisdom and guidance through the Hoÿolauna
Facilitators and recorders:
Group 1: Early Childhood – Jean Evans and Wendy Mow-Taira
Group 2: Charter Schools and Language Immersion – Paula De Morales and Kamuela Chun
Group 3: Personnel Prep and Professional Development – Martha Evans and Pam Alconcel
Group 4: Science, Math, Reading and At-Risk and other special needs populations – Verlie Ann MalinaWright, Shawn Kanaÿiaupuni and Maggie Hanohano
Group 5: Higher Ed - Manu Kaÿiama and Lui Hokoana
Manu Kaÿiama to be the keynote speaker. Mahalo to Manu for setting the tone of the conference.
Next steps after the conference:
• Summarize notes from groups.
• Plan for cluster meetings.
Reauthorization activities by Colin:
• Assisting the civic club groups with writing the resolution for support for reauthorization. Support voted
on by all civic club members at the convention. Mahalo to the Prince Kühio Civic Club and the Oÿahu
Civic Club for the support.
Page 3
•
At the CNHA Conference, the group supported reauthorization which includes bringing the funds home
to be distributed and developing partnerships. Mainland Hawaiians want to be included.
Other interest items:
• Civic club members want to be included in NHEC.
• Grantors want to know who are being served and additional needs.
• Resolution presented on recognizing Verlie Ann Molina-Wright and the president elect for NIEA, and she
will be the president when the convention comes to Hawaii in 2007.
Motion by Josh Akana and seconded by Don Romero: A grant be issued by NHEC to CNHA for the
completed Strategic Plan for 2004-2005. Payment is to be given upon receipt of the amended Strategic Plan.
Discussion:
• Have we received a final copy of the report?
• Explanation was given on this type of contract not requiring 3 bids.
Motion passed.
4) Chair’s Report:
Attendance by Colin and Maggie at the PASE Conference. Keynote speaker was excellent for island councils.
Binder will be available at the NHEC office is members would like to see the information.
Erika Rosa is 1 FTE now to provide assistance with the Grantee Summit and the follow-up activities that need
to be completed for grantees.
5) Announcements:
• Hawaiÿi: assisting with the registration of the scholarship fair and will be collecting surveys.
• Kauaÿi: provided the greenery for the council meeting which made the room a welcoming place to be.
So many complements to the council on behalf of the hotel guests and staff. Mahalo to Aunty Janet and
Pumehana.
• Länaÿi: sponsored a career fair and collected data.
• Molokaÿi: Moke reported that the island is ready for Makahiki on Dec. 2. Jan. 24-25 will be the Makahiki
Games. Kualapuÿu had a facilitative leadership training for the Charter Immersion School.
• Shawn Kanaÿiaupuni shared information on the PASE Hawaiian Wellness Conference.
• Jean Evans shared the success of Kumukahi, the Early Childhood Conference sponsored by INPEACE,
Hoÿowaiwai, Kamehameha and Alu Like.
6) NIEA Conference:
• Information on NCLB in Indian Country with data collection and curriculum.
Language Immersion P-20.
• OHA sponsored information on the Akaka Bill and request for support. Hälau from Denver presented
and did a special dedication to Kaulana Kasparavitch.
• David Sing will chair the NHEA when NIEA is in Hawaiÿi.
• Elders and families were not given registrations fees to attend NIEA and other conferences.
• Maoris want to be partners with Hawaiÿi when Hawaiÿi hosts NIEA.
Meeting was adjourned at 2:57 pm
Respectfully submitted,
Maggie Hanohano
Honolulu Airport Hotel
MINUTES
Meeting called to order at 9:23 a.m.
Pule and manaÿo was conducted by the Kupuna.
DuPuis, Reshela
Evans, Martha
For Evans, Martha
- Paoa, C. Pua
Hanohano, Maggie
Akana, Joshua
For Arce, Anita
- Cathcart, Edna
Chun, Kamuela
De Morales, Paula
Hawaiÿi:
Akana, Janice
Ikeda, Mike
Jones, Luana
Romero, Don
Maui:
Länaÿi:
State Council
Hokoana, Lui
Jenkins, Betty
Kahalekomo, Janet
Kaÿiama, Manu
For Kanahele, N. Ulu
- Beniamina, Ilei
Island Council
Molokaÿi:
Oÿahu:
Dudoit, Marion
Mow-Taira, Wendy
Johnston, Earline
Negrillo, Kanani
Keala, David
Malina-Wright, V. Leimomi
Panoke, W. Kahoÿonei
Kauaÿi:
Niÿihau:
Henion, Lehua
Staff
Kina, Heather
Kippen, Colin
Rosa, Erika
I. Chair’s Report
A. Kukui Mälamalama – November 4, 2005
Maggie Hanohano reported back regarding the success of the Grantee Summit held on November 4, 2005. This
summit was held in order that NHEA grantees could share information about their programs and implement a way
for NHEC to gather data. During the summit, five clusters amongst the grantees: Early Education and Family Based
Centers, Curriculum Development and Teacher Training, Gifted and Talented/Hawaiian Language Programs, Math,
Science, Reading, Special Needs, At Risk Youth Programs, and Facility Support, and Higher Education Support and
Higher Education Institutional Development. Please review submitted report.
B. Ulukau/NHEA Curriculum Pilot Project- December 19, 2005.
Discussion centered around the State Council’s decision to grant $22,000 .00 to this project. Ulukau is a project
spearheaded by Doug Knight and Bob Stauffer that may be used to assist grantees to share developed curriculum
through electronic means. The question whether this activity was actually a “direct” service ensued. It was agreed
that this was indeed aligned with the Council’s overall goal to “assess and evaluate” and “coordinate” services and
programs available that have been supported through the NHEA and therefore is NOT a direct service.
A question was raised regarding “direct service”, comparing the service for the Ulukau Project with ground
transportation costs for educational fairs. Ground trans to fairs were deemed a “direct service” and therefore not in
line with our mission. Island Councils were reminded and encouraged to spend energies on ways to connect
services to needs, not actually provide those services. If each Island Council would identify service providers and
Phone: 808-523-6432
Fax: 808-523-6464
2/3/06, State Council Meeting
Page 2
specifically what they provide in their areas, the State Council could then proceed with making a directory with such
information.
C. HIDOE Best Practices Conference – January 12 & 3, 2006
The Nä Lau Lama Conference was the first step in an 18-month partnership designed to improve educational
outcomes for Native Hawaiians learners in the DOE system. The conference was a success and individual groups
plan to continue to meet. The Chair submitted a copy of the work plan for review.
II. Executive Director’s Report
A. Present Activities
1. Strategic Planning and Technical Assistance (Retreat)
Plans are underway to conduct a strategic planning curriculum, including tools and guidelines to
facilitate input by the NHEC and Island Councils to create a strategic planning document. Shawn reminded
the Council that this should be more tactical like timelines, and not the process we already endured.
Estimated budget: $10,000.00
2. Educational and Related Services Resource Directory and Map
Through contract, NHEC plans to develop a database utilizing resource identification forms, and train
Island Council to implement use of forms and data input systems. The contractor will also assist in research,
compilation and production of resource directory and map.
Estimated budget is $23,000.
3. Comprehensive Communications Strategy
To create and implement a communications plan to increase community awareness of the NHEC and its
educational and related services available to Native Hawaiians.
Estimated budget $18,000.00
4. Website
To establish the NHEC website as the premier online resource for information Native Hawaiian
education.
Estimated budget $10,000.00
Kahoÿonei moved in principal to support the “present activities” listed above so as to enable the staff to move
forward on them. Further, a final cost should be reported back to the members and any large deviations from
projected budgets listed above should be communicated in a timely manner. It was second by Louie. The motion
carried.
It was also discussed that where contractors are equal in every way, NHEC have a preference that services to be
provided by Native Hawaiians and/or Native Hawaiian owned and operated businesses. It was agreed by all.
Pay raises were suggested for the staff on hand, to be reviewed at the Executive Council.
Reminder that the next NHEA Convention will be held on March 28 & 29, 2006 at Leeward Community College.
B. Coming Events
1. Native Hawaiian Education Act Grant Workshops
A rough draft schedule was passed out to all members to review where and when US Federal Officers
Beth Fine and Francisco Ramirez would be traveling to during their visit on February 13-17, 2006. Colin
will be shadowing Ramirez everyday, and it was suggested that Beth Fine also be shadowed.
Colin has agreed to get a flyer out announcing their visits to the communities. It was suggested that
Francisco be informed of how difficult the application process is for those communities they claim to want
to reach; computer submission, initial registration with “grants.gov” etc. It was further suggested that Colin
send these issues ahead of time to Francisco, so that he is prepared to answer them when here. Everyone
should email Colin these talking points. Kupuna graciously reminded us to be hospitable first, work second.
Page 3
2. NIEA Legislative Summit – Feb 13-17, 2006
The Registration was passed out among members. When the summit comes to Hawaiÿi in 2007,
VerlieAnn will be NIEA president. She is focusing on developing advocacy of education for Native
children. She feels we need to hold on to what we have in Washington and be sure to articulate the
problems encountered with “No Child Left Behind” policy. We acknowledged David Sing and his
tremendous efforts and leadership in this area.
Talking point for VerlieAnn – NIEA should not be supporting the Akaka Bill, but rather support us to get
control over our own grants.
Native Hawaiian Education Act should be supported for reauthorization.
The ÿohana aspect (parent participation) needs to be recognized as a crucial component when funding
education here.
Assessments in Title 7 and across the board should have cultural components, which will in turn create a
window for performance indicators.
We were reminded of the travel policy which is 2 people to one conference, for example only two people
from the council can get funding to attend WIPCIE. Also, any travel outside the U.S. is foreign travel and
requires grantor approval.
Talking point for Colin – Limitations on travel are unfair to Hawaiÿi, especially since the Hawaiÿi delegation
should have a big presence in Alaska. A discussion of finding outside sources ensued. This remains
complicated since NHEC is not a 501c3 organization. It was suggested that a collaboration occur between
NHEC and NHEA for advertising in Alaska for the Hawaiÿi conference. Molokaÿi defends travel by requiring
a community meeting to share information learned while at the conference.
C. Establish Indicators
An indicator is a broad based outcome or concept which is aligned with the goals and objectives for a given
programs’ purpose. Colin has been discussing this with several members and people and has come up with seven
broad indicators for NHEC: 1.Native Hawaiian Knowledge and Practice; 2.Cultural Identity and Belonging;
3.Community Involvement and Generosity; 4.School Readiness; 5.Literacy; 6.Graduation and Promotion; and
7.Proficiency/Growth. We recognize the need to have our own Native Hawaiian measuring sticks to set the base
line in which to measure our successes and lack thereof. The Hawaiian way measures a keiki’s physical readiness
along with his/hers mental readiness and these philosophies should be a part of our measurement system.
Paula moved to adopt the seven indicators, including executing in a pono, Hawaiian way. Aunty Betty second.
Motion carried.
III. Secretary’s Report
Previous minutes distributed and passed as amended.
IV. Treasurer’s Report
A. Fiscal reports were reviewed. A question was asked on the status of an audit from last year. The audit was
started, but was never finished since it was discovered that it was unnecessary for our organization to have an A133
audit. The auditor did the work that he was paid for, however. It was moved by Kahoÿonei to do an internal audit
for the past 18 months. It was seconded by VerlieAnn. The motion carried (1 opposed). Manu to do.
It was noted that the fiscal manual needs to be reviewed and brought into line with the shorter policy manual. Manu
is to do this.
Manu to meet with Aunty Betty to work out a Kupuna budget.
Page 4
B. 2005 – 2006 Island Council Budget Proposals
Discussion on whether these budgets were scrutinized by the Executive Council. Heather asked for changes
from Island Councils and, where they did not implement any, she went forward and made changes. It was suggested
by Kaho`onei to approve all budgets with one action, but that sentiment did not have the support of the majority of
the council. Lui made a new motion to approve individually, Seconded by Ilei. Motion carried.
Lui moved to approve the Hawaiÿi Island Council budget. Jean second, it passed.
Lui moved to approve the Maui Island Council budget. Kahoÿonei second, it passed. (1 opposed)
Lui moved to approve the Länaÿi Island Council budget. Kahoÿonei second, it passed. (2 opposed)
Ilei moved to approve the Molokaÿi Island Council budget. Kahoÿonei second, it passed. It was discussed how the
EC deducted $4500.00 and $4990.00 for honorarium and operating expenses respectfully, since it did not appear to
align with our strategic mission.
Lui moved to approve the Niÿihau Island Council budget. Manu second, it passed.
Lui moved to approve the Kauaÿi Island Council budget. Ilei second, it passed.
A discussion ensued regarding the Oÿahu Island Council budget, and it was decided that Oÿahu should work further
with the EC on their budget and narrative to ensure it is aligned with NHEC’s strategic mission. The general council
also gave the EC authority to approve this budget when pau. Ilei second motion, it passed.
It was noted that next year’s budget process should begin as soon as possible to avoid any delays, as has happened
in the past.
Meeting was adjourned at 2:10 p.m.
Manu Kaÿiama
Executive Council Meeting
Friday, April 14, 2006
Honolulu Airport Hotel
MINUTES
Call To Order: The meeting was called to order at 10:50 a.m. by Chairperson Maggie Hanohano.
Pule: A pule was given by Paula DeMorales.
Attendance: In attendance were the following Executive Committee members and staff:
Maggie Hanohano, Chairman
Paula DeMorales, Vice Chairman
Sherlyn Franklin Goo, Secretary
VerlieAnn Malina-Wright, Past Chairperson
Heather Kina, Office Manager
Erika Rosa, Fiscal Officer
I. Review of all activities by ED Colin Kippen: some are just to report, some need action.
A. Leasing of space: made offer and are in final negotiations. Desire one year lease. Coldwell
Banker would not agree to cancellation clause based upon receipt of grants, but rather desires
NHEC to sign year to year leases. This is actually what we desire too. The cost is $1.50 per
square foot
B. Contract for Website: Proposal was approved and staff will proceed. EC thanks the
committee for its review and recommendation. Heather took minutes of the committee meeting
and distributed to EC
C. Ulukau Grant: EC has received preliminary report of this effort to put curricula developed
through NHEA grants on-line through the Ulukau (ALU LIKE, Inc.) Website. Doug Knight is
contact person at ALI. Need to solicit more contributors of curriculum. In that effort, Colin is
going to Hawaiÿi with Doug Knight. Going to meet with Edith Kanakaÿole Foundation and Kü
Kahakalau. Paula made recommendation that we put some basic standards/criteria for
Phone: 808-523-6432
Fax: 808-523-6464
4/14/06, Executive Council Meeting
placement on the Ulukau Website. It was reported also that Keiki Kawaiÿaeÿa also had this
concern. Want curriculum that is in alignment with DOE standards as well as culturally
appropriate. Sherlyn suggested an email to ‘Eleu for submissions.
D. Niÿihau – continued issues re: old bills: EC received email indicating issues regarding Lu
Koerte not being well received by ÿIlei. Sherlyn moved, VAM seconded for ED to work directly
w/ B. Robinson re monies due to him. Motion carried unanimously. Clarification re: payment
of bills from two fiscal years and all in excess of the budgets of the total of the two years. Will
have to go into unexpended state funds to pay entire bill of about $11.5K. Verlie suggests for
future, that Kauai handle their fiscal affairs. This will be considered after EC deals with
Robinson. Colin will email ÿIlei that she cannot make any further expenditures. Verlie moved
and Maggie seconded to freeze any further expenditures and that any authority related to
budget and finances is rescinded. Passed. Erika suggested we take current bill out of this year’s
budget, other bills from previous year come from their previous unexpended funds and what is
still in deficit comes out of this year. There will still be some funds, approx $5k. Sherlyn
moved, Paula seconded a motion to this regard. Carried unanimously.
E. Report on Verlie and CP working with Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs on its Annual
Convention to be held at Chaminade, DATE? There will be a session to dream about what a
NH Ed Sys should look like – what are values? what is it they want to have? OHA and
Chaminade assisting.
F. Nä Lau Lama – going very well. AHCC and NLL are related. AHCC – dream. NLL – what is
working and how do we take that info and share. NHEC involved particularly because of
reauthorization coming up and these efforts help us with what we need to request of Congress.
Paula looking for list of who to distribute Kamehameha rubric and PowerPoint re: Survey.
G. Colin collecting information re: problems, issues with grants/grantees. Working hard to
have NHEC be the funnel of info to ED. We can’t allow USDOEd to have a divide and conquer
methodology. Kamuela Chun facilitated one discussion on HI. David Sing recommends
grantee sessions at NHEA. See if USDOEd can delay HI deadline until April so that NHEA
happens and input can be provided to them.
H. WINHEC Decision needed: Travel and participation in WINHEC.SFG moved, Maggie
seconded to table until financials are reviewed later in the agenda. Motion carried.
I. Keiki Kawaiÿaeÿa desires to reinstitute an NHMO working group. SPARK is willing to pilot
NHMO and other efforts related to Na Lau Lama in their target communities of Waiÿanae and
Hilo. RE: For NHMO the Hilo vs. Mänoa issues were discussed. It was agreed that
modifications, e.g., for ECE are made, they can be modified as appropriate. The seven
pathways and the mini paths within the 7 can cater to the specific needs/values of the different
constituencies. Working towards finding agreement at the top of the tree – the big view. Worry
about the branches later. Verlie to email MWS PowerPoint.
J. USDOEd – CK striving for effective communication with Francisco. Promoting united front,
again. Colin is good guy sometimes, bad guy also. Pushing towards Francisco always coming
through NHEC as well as grantees using NHEC as conduit. Suggest carefully written memo to
all grantees re: subtleties of our effort and how they can rely upon CK/NHEC to facilitate
problems/issues with USDOEd.
II. Next Meetings: EC: May 4, State: May 12, 10a – 3p both days
III. Budget (see visual) – the “wheel”: NHEC servicing all groups in the “wheel”. Island Councils need
technical assistance. Beginnings of NHEC annual report. For purposes of reauthorization, need info
from grantees. Need to bring them together
IV. Sherl – Secy – got lost with the following discussion and so she punted to Heather to fill in later. So
what is below is just what I had written to the point of the “punt”
–
–
see Island Advisors 05-06. Have some dysfunctional Island Councils. Oÿahu an example.
Perhaps can use HNK Oÿahu moku as the basic but w commitment to increasing from P-k
to P-20? Need rudimentary assessment
See Grantee Advisors – need info that will be obtained by contracts re: indicators, etc.
Contract for facilitation for above.
Point is – keep infrastructure small, except assistance to Heather. Contract for specific services –
all denoted on documents provided behind the “wheel”
Note that Francisco is strongly pushing all to expend unexpended funds – will be holding all of
us grantees to that.
Side discussion on Conversion Charter vs. start up charter
Page 3
•
At the CNHA Conference, the group supported reauthorization which includes bringing the funds home
to be distributed and developing partnerships. Mainland Hawaiians want to be included.
Other interest items:
• Civic club members want to be included in NHEC.
• Grantors want to know who are being served and additional needs.
• Resolution presented on recognizing Verlie Ann Molina-Wright and the president elect for NIEA, and she
will be the president when the convention comes to Hawaii in 2007.
Motion by Josh Akana and seconded by Don Romero: A grant be issued by NHEC to CNHA for the
completed Strategic Plan for 2004-2005. Payment is to be given upon receipt of the amended Strategic Plan.
Discussion:
• Have we received a final copy of the report?
• Explanation was given on this type of contract not requiring 3 bids.
Motion passed.
4) Chair’s Report:
Attendance by Colin and Maggie at the PASE Conference. Keynote speaker was excellent for island councils.
Binder will be available at the NHEC office is members would like to see the information.
Erika Rosa is 1 FTE now to provide assistance with the Grantee Summit and the follow-up activities that need
to be completed for grantees.
5) Announcements:
• Hawaiÿi: assisting with the registration of the scholarship fair and will be collecting surveys.
• Kauaÿi: provided the greenery for the council meeting which made the room a welcoming place to be.
So many complements to the council on behalf of the hotel guests and staff. Mahalo to Aunty Janet and
Pumehana.
• Länaÿi: sponsored a career fair and collected data.
• Molokaÿi: Moke reported that the island is ready for Makahiki on Dec. 2. Jan. 24-25 will be the Makahiki
Games. Kualapuÿu had a facilitative leadership training for the Charter Immersion School.
• Shawn Kanaÿiaupuni shared information on the PASE Hawaiian Wellness Conference.
• Jean Evans shared the success of Kumukahi, the Early Childhood Conference sponsored by INPEACE,
Hoÿowaiwai, Kamehameha and Alu Like.
6) NIEA Conference:
• Information on NCLB in Indian Country with data collection and curriculum.
Language Immersion P-20.
• OHA sponsored information on the Akaka Bill and request for support. Hälau from Denver presented
and did a special dedication to Kaulana Kasparavitch.
• David Sing will chair the NHEA when NIEA is in Hawaiÿi.
• Elders and families were not given registrations fees to attend NIEA and other conferences.
• Maoris want to be partners with Hawaiÿi when Hawaiÿi hosts NIEA.
Meeting was adjourned at 2:57 pm
Maggie Hanohano
-
see Island Advisors 06-07
Pau “punt” point
V. Issue of Granting/Government Relations: NHEC still not in driver's seat with grants. Need to
strengthen government relations.
A. Paula noted that 2 years ago, we were accused of having “no track record”.
B. Sherlyn said that last year we were told we need data. At that time we provided them w/ our
strategic plan and priorities. But that did not have any effect upon the RFP or granting
mechanism.
C. NHEC needs to provide coordination, info on gaps etc. to
VI. Organization Chart concept: Keep flexibility through minimum employee base, maximum
contracting as appropriate to needs. Again, need to put HK in charge of the tasks appropriate to her
skills, and so on.
VII. Tabled WINHEC Conference Travel: Paula moved and Maggie seconded – 2 WINHEC, 2 ECE.
Deliverables must be documented. Motion carried.
VIII. Salaries (see Handout, for Heather’s raise options): Paula moved, Verlie seconded to go with
Option 1. Carried. Future – Heather should not prepare spreadsheets for her own raises. Title change?
Not yet. Prof Dev Plan? Colin to follow up. Benchmarking future raises.
IX. Website concerns by Keiki. Colin did answer her concerns that were emailed to all NHEC members.
Colin will send NHEC his response to her concerns as well as her positive vote on the Website Proposal
thereafter.
Sherlyn Franklin Goo
Thursday, May 4, 2006
NHEC Office
MINUTES
Call To Order: The meeting was called to order at 9:55 a.m. by Chairperson Maggie Hanohano.
Pule: Pule given by Kupuna Kahalekomo. Mahalo to Auntie Janet for coming to represent the Kūpuna
Council for Auntie Betty who is away in Alaska.
Attendance: In attendance were the following Executive Committee members and staff:
VerlieAnn Malina-Wright, Past Chairperson
Janet Kahalekomo, Kupuna Council
I.
II.
Past Minutes of EC Meeting on 4.14.06 were reviewed and amended to read under section VI,
Bullet 4: “Point is – keep infrastructure small. Paula moved, Sherlyn seconded minutes to be
approved as amended. Carried.
Activity Updates
a. Grantees:
i. Issue of carry-over funds being highly scrutinized by USDOEd – Francisco Ramirez.
Compared to past years, monies are often kept by USDOEd. Lui Hokoano reports his
carry-over being threatened.
ii. Math Curriculum folks met.
iii. Negotiation of indirect costs also an issue.
iv. DOE facilitation of certain gatherings may be helpful.
b. Island Advisory Councils
i. Hawaiÿi – hired/contracted Kanani Aton as island facilitator. Issue 1 - is Aton
contract/employee? If so, Colin has not been involved in RFP from NHEC or
interviewing for employment. All contractors or employees are managed through the
Council and not Island Advisories. Issue 2 - Aton is working on Website. Is this in
alignment with NHEC website contract just negotiated?. Motion by Sherlyn, second
Phone: 808-523-6432
Fax: 808-523-6464
by Paula for Colin to communicate with chair of HI IC, explaining federal procedures
on contracts and employment and getting clarification regarding conflict of interest
with KA being a member of Hawaiÿi IC and also working for the IC.
ii. Maui – bill from Lui for 12.28.05 meeting with $55 a head for dinner mtg. Is to get
back to Colin with documentation to justify. Issue of new policy by Francisco re: no
food at meetings. For NHEC meetings, start after next meeting and send message to all
island councils.
iii. Lanaÿi – no news
iv. Molokaÿi – Aotearoa visitor expenses were billed to NHEC by Moke Kim. Colin
informed him NHEC will not pay. Colin to send written communication that NHEC
will not pay.
v. Niÿihau –
1. Issue not yet resolved with regard to overdue bill from Robinsons for
helicopter travel. Erika is going to call the Robinsons to obtain information.
Much discussion regarding appropriateness of the procedures. NHEC staff
following up – EC confirmed ED’s decisions to have Erica following up
ensuring the NHEC and federal procedures are being followed.
2. Complex Area Superintendent – Daniel Hamada says they are now ready for
the Ho‘okako‘o conversion charter. Verlie recommend that Colin facilitate.
Colin not ready to do this until Ni‘ihau is ready and asks. COLIN will put
Lynn Fallin and Daniel together, however.
vi. Kūpuna Council –
1. Aunty Janet thanked EC for allowing her to substitute.
2. Aunty Janet asked EC what is desired for next week’s conference. Not
necessary to bring Kupuna in a day in advance for the meeting especially
since funds are tight and we have a nice office to meet in. They will, in the
future, have their council meeting in the am through BYOB lunch and state
council will BYOB lunch and meet in afternoon. Next week, we will have
council meeting in conference room and then come to the office to bless it.
Küpuna will each bring blessings from each island. No official Kahu needed.
Küpuna will assist in helping to provide some hoÿokupu for office.
3. This will be a continuation as a “new beginning” for the küpuna as we have
been having new beginnings with all of our work in EC, in full council and in
island councils. As part of their new beginning, Küpuna can “mihi” problems,
sometimes “oki” – conduct practices that are culturally appropriate to solve
problems. Get to issues before they get too complicated – don’t wait. EC
agreed – this is excellent role for the Küpuna Council.
c. Education Entities
i. Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs - Colin in charge of getting 20 people (8
facilitators, 8 recorders, 4 backup) to facilitate AOHCC Education Conference on June
16-17 at Chaminade University. There will be 8 breakout groups because of the size
of the conference. AHCC is doing a plan for what Native Hawaiian education should
look like. Vision, Values, etc. – if we had the best of everything, money – what would
we like to see. Week before, Colin will have a training of facilitators.
ii. Native Hawaiian Hospitality Association – Colin getting active in this organization.
iii. Just4Kids Website is up. Good data base for all, but a few problems - Native
Hawaiians are not segregated, no cultural factors. But will work towards solving these
issues.
iv. Waimea Valley – Rona is in charge and NHEC will hook up with them
v. ÿAnuenue School – report for info by Verlie. They are planning for restructuring per
NCLB where AYP not being met due to Hawaiian language proficiency and not
English proficiency is the focus there. AYP measured in English. DOE supplanting of
Hawaiian Language by English is issue. All funds being taken away. AOHCC asking
OHA to intervene. Chair of AOHCC, board members of OHA (D. Carpenter and O.
Stender) will be meeting with CAS, Verlie, VP and Colin. Opportunity via Act 133.
Need to rethink immersion.
d. Reports and Recommendations
i. Colin has set up USDOEd meetings with assistance by local person there – Colin
going to DC June 6-12. Trying to get meeting with Spelling, USDOEd Secy in order to
improve relationship w/ Francisco Ramirez. Colin has done many things to do this
locally, is now working on nationally. Colin would like suggestions of people to be in
touch with, e.g., Ed Parisian.
ii. Akaka bill/Civil Rights decision in yesterday’s news a threat to our legislation because
of the “race-based” issue. Verlie suggested that Colin request that letter to USDOEd
Secy from Hawaiÿi Congressional Delegation re: Native Hawaiian language be sent.
e. Operations – Canoe in the center of the “wheel”
i. Move was a challenge but we are here! (Dillingham Transportation Building, Room
218). Meeting rooms are $100.
ii. Budget Proposal – Heather provided a budget that fully reflects the “wheel” or sun
diagram. Kukuna O Ka Lä - the flower of the mangrove can be our symbol. – Kaonohi
O Ka Lä - Center of the Sun is the NHEC. The “rays” of the sun show allocations of
funds from the Center.
1. Still be giving funds to Island Councils but only to accomplish specific
functions, i.e., training for “assessing, evaluating, etc. See Island Advisors green rectangle - on handout, Education Workshop Series: Demographics,
Service Directory/Resource Management, etc.
2. Objective is to drive Island Councils to ensure they implement projects that
meet NHEC goals and objectives.
3. Sherlyn moved, Verlie seconded to approve budget as presented. Carried.
4. Presentation of budget very clear as to how every expenditure relates to the
specific requirements of the law, for both the state and the island council.
Commend staff for this presentation.
iii. Fiscal Report – same as last time as end of month just occurred since last report.
iv. Wheel needs to be amended to add other entities/categories as appropriate. Manu
Kaÿiama, Treasurer, needs to be caught up as she has missed several meetings. Colin,
Sherlyn will meet with MK in Kailua, perhaps Sherlyn home.
v. New Office Phone 523-NHEC. Toll Free 877.523-NHEC.
Friday, May 12, 2006
Pacific Guardian Center
MINUTES
Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 9:45a by President Maggie Hanohano.
She welcomed Wendy Mow-Taira to the NHEC, who now represents ALU LIKE, Inc. that formerly was represented by
Jean Evans. Jean has left ALU LIKE, Inc., and is now working for the American Lung Association.
Kūpuna Na‘auao - led by Kūpuna Janet Kahalekomo, the kūpuna from all councils except for Ni‘ihau shared their mana‘o
and gave pule for the meeting and its participants.
Akana, Joshua
For Arce, Anita
- Kim, Moke
Chun, T. Kamuela
Hawaiÿi
Akana, Janice
Aton, Kanani
Romero, Don
State Council
Hanohano, Maggie
Evans, Martha
Kahalekomo, Janet
Goo, Sherlyn Franklin
Mow-Taira, Wendy
- Wilhelm, Puanani
Kauaÿi
Anakalea, Pumehana
Island Council
Länaÿi
Maui
Paoa, Pua
Molokaÿi
Panoke, W. Kahoÿonei
Niÿihau
Oÿahu
Staff
Kippen, Colin
Kina, Heather
Rosa, Erika
I.
Mana‘o from Colin Kippen, ED: on the new NHEC Working Plan” Kukuna O Ka Lā (Rays of the Sun)
A. The Move – Now fairly settled in this new facility that is centrally located near many agencies with whom
we need to do business.
B. NHEC is now stepping out of the shadow and into the Sun – metaphor of Kukuna O Ka Lā. Centralization is
now our theme.
1.
(See second page of handout) When Colin came to NHEC, the relationship between NHEC
members, island councils, the executive committee, the ED could be graphically described as this
handout – many, many boxes and centers all unrelated.
2.
(See third handout) Kukuna O Ka La – Ka Onohi O Ka La - In this diagram, all are related. That is
what NHEC is striving to look like.
3.
(See fourth handout) Kukuna O Ka La – Shows further breakouts – e.g., ‘Eleu, the early childhood
group. Other examples:
a. Higher Ed – Chaminade
Phone: 808-523-6432
Fax: 808-523-6464
4.
5.
II.
b. Curriculum Development – ‘Ulukau
c. NIEA
(See fifth handout) Same Template to report and budget activities.
a. Will report to NHEC regarding activities in all four squares.
b. Colin will now, given office is downtown, be involved in the legislature.
(See Goals in rectangular boxes on handout 4) These are directly from our Strategic Plan.
a. Colin committed to work on these goals.
b. Concern of Civil Right Commission’s Report - this and other pressures by those opposed to
Native Hawaiian entitlements reinforce the need to show that programs funded under
NHEA are making progress. Colin needs info from the Grantees in order to better represent
NHEC and the programs of the NHEAct.
2005 – 2006 Activities (See handout with four large pastel rectangles)
A. Grantees - the following are areas that Colin is working on
1.
Nā Lei Na‘auao (hui of Native Hawaiian charter schools - assisting with facilities issues.
2.
‘Ulukau (ALU LIKE, Inc.'s web-based information site) - facilitating the collection of more curricula
to be entered on the site.
3.
Tech training for grantees with U.S. Education Department (USEd) staff – concern re: "new" policies
on carry overs, extensions, indirect costs. Colin researching and policy is unclear. Shawn suggests
that along with going to D.C. to research further, NHEC should have a recommendation. Colin will
research and find information regarding where policy has changed. Prior to going to DC, Colin will
write recommendation letter to USED and attempt to obtain Hawaii Congressional support. This
letter will address indirect costs, carry-overs and no cost extensions. Letter would also state that we
do not agree that programs that have already negotiated an indirect rate should be able to keep that
rate until the end of their contract
4.
STEM meeting
B. Island Advisories – Colin working to ensure that all Island Advisory Groups follow federal procurement
procedures that State level adheres to. State Council has responsibility to ensure that these procurement
procedures are followed at the Island levels.
1.
Expenditures need to be pre-approved by Colin prior to spending the funds.
2.
Food not an allowable expense from now on-per Francisco. No Protocol expenses if it includes
food.
3.
Travel – all must go through Heather. Must come to NHEC meeting if NHEC to pay for travel.
C. Educational Entities
1.
Nā Lau Lama (Best Practices Conference follow-on) – important to NHEC efforts that the best
practices of the DOE are shared.
2.
Tourism – Native Hawn Hospitality Assn. Colin attended the recent conference.
3.
Ke Kula Kaiapuni O ‘Anuenue in restructure – issue for NHEC re: Hawaiian Language being
endangered with NHLB.
4.
Just4Kids – important for all who desire to find comparable schools/districts to learn from, share
with. Shawn shared that the issue of separating NH was raised at the Just4Kids meeting and will
now be taken care of.
5.
Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs Conference on Education. – Colin doing training for facilitators
of this conf. Theme: What are values that will drive any system that will be created for Hawaiian
Learners.
a. Shawn recommends that Colin let DOE (Pat Hamamoto) know what this is all about.
AOHCC wants visioning, not complaining about status quo. Important for awareness for
this group of individuals. Four or five main themes coming out of this meeting would be
excellent and could mesh with Nā Lau Lama and other efforts.
b. Kahoÿonei concerned about follow through afterwards.
c. Kamuela – not Colin’s kuleana to ensure follow up.
d. Sherlyn – have agencies at the table that are now aware of this AOHCC effort and can, as
appropriate, take action.
e. Kanani – Na Lau Lama has advocacy group to cull info, mesh, etc. NLL is platform for
synthesis.
f. Pua – Confirms that DOE and others can use AOHCC as part of platform.
Kahoÿonei - be careful to ensure that all above does happen.
Shawn – can drive resolutions, complementary. Nā Lau Lama has multiple supports, small
and large: KS, DOE, OHA along with other agencies
National Forum on Educational Policy: Education Commission of the States – has a Native
American, Native Hawaiian, Alaskan Native strand that works with grass roots for empowerment
training in policy and advocacy. Colin wants to go and bring back tech training for Island
Advisories. Colin can harvest info and see how it can blend with existing “live” community plans.
Island Councils can decide if this is within their group’s priorities and can participate using their
budgets.
WINHEC – Higher Ed, K-12, 0-8. August 2006. The executive council recommends NHEC pay for
one representative.
a. Kahoÿonei made motion, Martha seconded to send three at expense not to exceed $7,500.
Discussion regarding priorities and budgeted expenses. One issue is to provide enough for
Colin to work on reauthorization. Other is to ensure that we spend all our money because
of the concern that carry overs, extensions are being threatened. Verli-Ann concerned
about HI and her commitment to WINHEC. Colin reminds everyone that cannot put limit
on dollar amount per federal law – bonfire representation.
b. Amendment to delete money cap by Kahoÿonei, second by Martha to take off cap.
Carried. Vote on amended motion tied and therefore not carried (5-5).
c. Some intense discussions followed.
d. Suggestion that Kūpuna Council recess to discuss resolution. Accepted. Five minute break
at 11:54 am. Kūpuna exit.
e. Meeting resumed at 12:14 pm. Kūpuna: Mahalo to Council for asking their mana‘o.
Kukui still shining. Recommend that two go.
f. Kahoÿonei motion, Martha second that two go. Discussion re divisiveness between
grantees. Sherlyn suggests that if Kupuna have spoken and NHEC go with Kupuna advice.
Martha agree. Kahoÿonei sees different way – cannot go piece by piece. If we go with
Robert’s Rules, go all the way with Robert’s Rules. If we go with consensus, then all the
way with consensus. Kanani – need to move forward with Kupuna advice. Have time
constraints. Go forward. Kamuela questions last NHEC minutes that call for two people to
conferences. Why did executive council recommend one? Maggie explains why – Fed
constraints, Reauthorization and need for Colin to travel. Kupuna wisdom accepted.
g.
h.
6.
7.
D. Reports and Recommendations
E. Operations
1.
State Council Minutes – 2/3/06
2.
Fiscal Report
III. 2006 – 2007 Activities & Budget Proposal
A. Acceptance of new concept regarding NHEC, grantees, island advisories, educational entities and reporting:
Kahoÿonei move, Janet seconded acceptance of new concept of Kukuna O Ka Lā presentation, structure, and
detail. Discussion:
1.
Shawn suggest we have way to see how progress is being made as we proceed.
2.
Kanani – comment regarding Ka Onohi O Ka Lā, for HI Island, they can name their priorities and link it
to the center ring. Recommend that this articulation be put into the diagram. Green is progress, red is
stalemate.
3.
Pua – grantees need to know that NHEC is the one to come to for provision of information to give to
Feds.
4.
Call for the Question to include suggestions in motion. Motion Carried.
5.
Budget – Colin notes that budget attempts to break down where resources are going vis-à-vis
structure/goals/objectives. Capacity building, technical assistance, assessment, alignment of ICs with
School Community Councils, development of educational plans on each island etc., all need to be
done. Need connection between feds and ICs. Bring Native Hawaiian serving institutions together.
Trips to DC. Assistance to Heather
a. Kamuela – those w/in each system know what each other is doing – need is to get this info out the
public and NHEC.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
Kamuela and Kahoÿonei have concerns with new structure of budget that affects autonomy of ICs.
Colin centralization key to affecting policy. Technical assistance, training and facilitation necessary
from Ka Onohi O Ka Lä.
Concern is what would happen if leadership changes.
Felt that with such a momentous change, need time to take it out to Island Councils for feedback
and discussion.
Uncle Josh asked what would happen if an Island Council would choose not to participate in one of
the knowledge-based NHEC forums? They would lose out on the knowledge.
Centralization of the island council activities is a vast change to the present structure. Building
Community capacity is something that Molokai has been working on.
After much decision, the proposed budget was carried with one vote against, two abstentions.
IV. Next State Council Meetings – no time for this discussion.
The meeting was adjourned in Conference Room A-B at 1:35 pm.
A brief blessing of the offices was conducted by the Kūpuna Council with NHEC members who could stay participating.
The blessing was a excellent start to NHEC's new beginning.
Monday, July 31, 2006
NHEC Office – Dillingham Transportation Building
MINUTES
Call To Order: The meeting was called to order at 12:55 p.m. by President Maggie Hanohano
Pule: A pule was given by Paula De Morales.
Attendance: In attendance were the following Executive Committee Members and Staff:
Manu Kaiama, Treasurer
I.
II.
Activity Updates
A. See Activities Report distributed
B. Grantees Advisors – Colin will provide more specifics
C. Report and Recommend
1. Francisco Ramirez coming re priorities
2. Paula to work on WIPCE report
3. Inspector General visit – meet and greet but need to take seriously
(temporarily paused due to arrival of Linda Colburn who will assist EC in addressing the request that we establish
our priorities for USED)
Linda Colburn
A. Need to address many issues that surround the establishment of the priorities and don’t want to make our full
council do the same thing over and over again. Likely to be a problematic process.
1. Important to get consensus
2. Establish a working, credible process
3. Distribute the vulnerability all the way around the table
B. Big Tent Metaphor
1. ID old players
2. High Altitude/New Voices
a. Futurists
b. Politicos
i. USED
ii. Congress
iii. State DOE
iv. State Leg
c. Philanthropy
i. Kamehameha Schools
ii. QLCC
iii. Castle
iv. Business
3. Audience Visibililty – Oahu, high profile event
Phone: 808-523-6432
Fax: 808-523-6464
a.
C.
III.
Participants
i. Stakeholders
ii. Consumers
iii. Other experts
iv. Local stakeholders
Little Tent
1. Half Day
a. Participants
i. Delegates from Big Tent
ii. Local luminaries
iii. Island Councils
iv. Local
b. Hear big tent stuff
2. Lunch
3. Half Day
a. Participants
i. Smaller group
ii. Main players
b. 1st half – Talk about Priorities
c. 2nd half – Call to action
d. Develop Instrument for Data Gathering
e. Preliminary Synthesis
f. Compare to EC Priorities
g. Final
D. Getting to the Big Picture Priorities
1. Many stakeholders
a. Statewide
b. Sector specific, e.g., early ed, hied
c. Island specific
2. Can look to others to facilitate
3. Many are Ready for Structure – NHEC can facilitate
a. Need to think through very carefully before we proceed
b. If we have the Clarity and political will – then Linda Colburn would support and work
with us.
c. 100% commitment
d. Can lead or have part
Follow Up – Where to go next for NHEC?
A. Linda’s Model gets us to exactly what NHEC is supposed to do
1. Similar to Na Honua Mauli Ola Process
2. How to build the process for us
B. Our Process – thoughts
1. Past work
a. AHCC
b. Nä Lau Lama
c. P-20
d. Kamehameha Schools
e. CTE
2. Politicoes/Futurists
a. What is the future?
b. How does what we are doing fit.
3. Paula – probably same priorities for many
4. Manu – all players – now they know our voice, our agenda
5. Next Steps
a. Colin to email to get names from us, folks who have held meetings like AHCC etc.
b. When to do – fast
c. Partners
d. Colin to come up w/ preliminary agenda, numbers, locations
e. Paula Moved – call for the Big Tent Meeting 1st wk in October. Manu second, come
dream with us. Carried.
Wednesday, August 23, 2006
Pacific Guardian Center
MINUTES
Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 9:20a by President Maggie Hanohano.
Colin Kippen introduced Andrew Aoki, guest, who assists other groups in moving through forward, e.g., Healthy Start. He is
with 3 Point Consulting and is assisting at no cost. Colin received the go ahead on items we have discussed with the USED
and needs Andrew to help us.
State Council
Hanohano, Maggie
Evans, Martha
Hokoana, Lui
Goo, Sherlyn Franklin
Kahalekomo, Janet
Kaÿiama, Manu
- Inciong, Keoni
Akana, Joshua
For Arce, Anita
- Kim, Moke
DeMorales, Paula
Hawaiÿi
Akana, Janice
Romero, Don
Kauaÿi
Staff
Kippen, Colin
Kina, Heather
Rosa, Erika
Guest
Aoki, Andrew
Länaÿi
Island Council
Maui
Molokaÿi
Keala, Flo
Reyes, Eliza
For Kawaiÿaeÿa, Keiki
- Ishimura, Carole
Keala, David
Niÿihau
Oÿahu
I.
Kupuna Naÿauao
A. Auntie Janet Kahalekomo began a pule, continued by Auntie Janice Akana and completed by Auntie Janet.
B. Naÿauao by Auntie Janet to ask us all to care for ourselves in order to do best for our keiki.
II.
Report from Executive Director – Activities Report
A. Grantees Advisors
1.
The Ulukau NHEA Curriculum Project has now been taken over by OHA
2.
Science Technology Engineering and Math – Colin participated in a meeting on July 13 w/ DOE.
Programs that have been developed by NHEA grants now can request for approval by DOE. The
curriculum, if approved, can be used by the schools. Curriculum is culture based, will be put on
Ulukau. Principals are able to alert their teachers about the curriculum. It was noted that it is important
that there is knowledge about the success of the curricula – follow up evaluation is needed. (paused for
introductions)
B. Island Advisors – nothing at this point
C. Educational Entities
1.
Association of Hawaiiann Civic Clubs Summit – Colin facilitated this meeting at Chaminade. Plan to
roll out educational program for the Hawaiian Nations with OHA funds.
Phone: 808-523-6432
Fax: 808-523-6464
Nä Lau Lama – effort to establish and define best ways of reaching Hawaiian Students. Colin – purpose
to build bridge with DOE and its principals and complex superintendents to better serve Native
Hawaiians.
3.
Educational Commission of the States (ECS) School Community Councils Workshops, June 27-28 –
assisting in empowering community to make a difference in the education of their own children. Very
relevant to our Island Councils and how they can have maximum involvement – we can learn from this
effort.
4.
ECS National Forum, July 9 -14 – Colin participated and was benefited from it, especially in terms of
liaising with state and national leaders in education.
5.
WINHEC, August 4-10 – Verlie Ann Malina-Wright and Sherlyn Franklin Goo attended. Verlie lead
and Sherlyn assisted in the Accreditation Working Group. Two groups up for accreditation – Sami from
Norway and Seven Nations from Canada. Chaminade University will be hosting WINHEC next year.
Sherlyn is working on EC. Verlie is K-12.
6.
CHNA Convention, September 25-29 – Although we used it as a meeting opportunity for NHEC last
year, we will not do so this year.
7.
NIEA Convention in Anchorage, Alaska, October 18-22 – Conference hotel is sold out.
8.
KS PASE Research Conference, November 15-16 – NHEC can benefit from this – the papers and
research.
D. Report & Recommend
1.
Executive Director’s vist to Washington, D.C., June 6-12
a. Colin met with J. Conaty, B. Fine and F. Ramirez
b. Congressional visits with key staff – the outcome…..as Colin is planning to follow up on their go
ahead to enable NHEC to have more power – our key objective.
i. NHEC is to have funding decision making as long as no conflict of interest, systematic and
well thought out.
ii. Colin – F. Ramirez coming 1st week in October – NHEC needs to pull Native Hawaiian
Community together with business community, KS and others to develop visions and
begin to establish priorities. October 4-5. Vision to be set through meetings in five
program clusters, e.g., early ed. Then Island Councils can react as to how they can
facilitate on their islands. NHEC will then establish priorities.
iii. Lots of concerns about Colin’s plan from Manu, Verlie, Sherlyn, and Keoni, particularly in
terms of it being top down and from non-Hawaiian speakers.
iv. Andrew Aoki attempted to redescribe what he thought he and Colin worked on. Real
goal is to gather people together in a forum with a perspective of what is going on around
us and how we can shape our own destinies.
v. Concerns were voiced about letting communities decide for themselves what is needed.
The word “visionaries” might have been misused for the people that were mentioned as
keynote speakers, e.g., DeeJay Mailer, Mitch D’Olier, Robbie Alm, David McClain.
2.
III. Paused for report from Senator Inouye’s office
A. Jennifer Sabas – what is going on in D.C. Political Climate
1.
Senator Inouye tasked staff to focus on Native Hawaiian Programs. Assure efficient admin of programs.
Get a plan for sustainability. Get on that track. Lots of governance issues on the table. Even if it is
hard, can be hurtful. Have White House and both houses of Congress that are not on our side. Clearly
demonstrated by failure of Akaka bill. DHHL bill also. All are being held. Same as Native Hawaiian
Health. Need to track our own path. Cannot do business as usual. Example – Alaska Native
Corporations. GAO reports show that goal of White House is to take ANCs out of business. Every
opportunity to take us out is being done. Don’t know if NHEA is going to pass next year.
a.
Colin done good job of getting attn of USEDept. He has gotten their attn re: NHEA importance.
Need to have NHEA is no longer outside the ballpark. We need to demonstrate that we CAN
assess, evaluate and report.
i. If you are a grantee, get off the board. Governance issues must be addressed.
ii. Be sure you spend funds appropriately, do audit standup – take responsibility.
b. For Senator Inouye, NHEC IS the granting authority, sets policy, and allocates the dollars. Then
you work on sustainability – get foundations, KS and others at the table. Need capacity.
B. Kawekiu Mossman confirmed – best assessments, evaluation etc. needed.
1.
Questions
Native American Languages Act status? Kawekiu – going to mark up soon.
What is likelihood of NHEC getting the power? Need to demonstrate all of above.
Comment by Colin – Sense of NHEC was desire to have that power. But need to do things to make
it there.
d. Verlie shared her experiences in DC with the NALA bill that revealed the exclusion of Native
Hawaiians from entitlements relating to all indigenous groups.
e. Colin summarized what Feds have agreed to have NHEC do: set the priorities, align GEPRA as
standards beyond the act, subcontract to collect data on the impact of the funding to projects
C. Jennifer: DKI Staff and Office open and available to assist NHEC to be able to do what it has to do.
D. Kawekiu: Responding to question about NCLB, open to any input from us. Sabas – need input particularly
about NHEA. Need input right away. Shorten bill info is needed.
a.
b.
c.
II. D. (cont.) Back to Report and Recommends
c. Lots of discussion about proposed agenda for “big tent” meeting
i.
Carol – suggests a panel of folks who have been through the trenches and have discovered
some ways that work
ii.
Colin disagrees – too much complaining about what does not work
iii.
Don – what is goal, Colin?
iv.
Maggie – need structure that we all agree with.
v.
Sherl – doesn’t Carol’s suggestion work with that?
vi.
Maggie – concerned about non agreement with what will be outcome for our keiki.
vii.
Keoni – there is really no structure. In DOE, they get no input in terms of impact of any
grants they give.
viii.
Martha – David Sing may have some of that data. We are not getting info from the
students on what they are getting out of their education and what they need to do in order
to make change for the future of Hawaii.
ix.
Don – can get data. KS and DOE have data. Get info from programs. Perhaps this
conference can connect all.
x.
Colin – will be having many pre-meetings to force this re: data.
xi.
Andrew Aoki – prior to big meeting, need to get clear what NHEC is or should be. How
do all the programs come together? How can NHEC gather all together. Get system
unified, NH educ system is important – get common ground. NHEC – not sure what role
is. Figure that out before jumping into this meeting. Get people to say “I like this NHEC.”
“It can help us.”
xii.
Colin – I am not getting the data that our programs are making any difference. I put calls
out and don’t get info.
xiii.
Sherl – sometimes you can’t get data, e.g, ECE no money to do longitudinal studies.
xiv.
More and more discussion….
d. Where do we go from here
i.
See Handout: “State Council Meeting 8/23/06 TASK DETAILS – PRIORITY SETTING
MEETINGS. Many conversations going on with Colin. Need to move!
ii.
Need to have the right process.
1. Keoni – DOE gets the negative all the time. Standards are Non-culture biased,
one way or the other. Ohana need to be involved.
2. Other discussion followed
3. Colin wants a group to be involved. Include Kupuna.
4. Maggie solicited volunteers: Keoni, Manu, Verlie, Carol/Keiki??
5. Paula moved that Colin be allowed to put out RFPs for consultants, as needed, to
help accomplish the big tent meeting, with stipulation that Colin provide a
budget for the EC to review and approve. Manu second. Motion carried
e. See Detailed TASKS REPORT – Indicators & Measures/GPRA
i. (this is where Sabas’ report was supposed to be.)
ii. Under Grantees Advisors – note that F. Ramirez will be meeting w/ new grantees when he
comes in 10/4-5 etc. There will also be a new calendar so that grant rfps will be out
earlier next year, that is why there is a rush for our “big tent” meeting
E. Operations
1.
Minutes – approved as distributed
2.
Fiscal Report – Manu reported. See Consolidated Budget Report, October 1, 2005 – September 30,
2006. Lui Hokoana – suggests training/education for Island Councils on procurement post haste. Past
practice has been that there is a one-year carry over as well as carry overs have been put back into the
State budget. Need to work on that also.
IV. Tasks Report
A. Board Development/Evaluation – Maggie discussed the need to revamp our board, particular due to
commentary by Sabas. Need to stick to attendance requirements. Yet perhaps we need to look at new way of
organizing ourselves.
1.
Questions
a. Grant readers and conflict of interest - example UH staff as reader when another program within
the system is proposing.
b. Don – ask if board be made of NHEC and advise the other groups in other quadrants of the
Activities Report diagram.
c. Maggie – has been discussed the one grantee be the spokesperson to others.
2.
Current Board
a. Service Providers
i. Namaka Rawlins – not active last 1.5 yrs.
ii. Sherlyn Franklin-Goo– INPEACE
iii. Keiki Kawaiÿaeÿa – Kahuawaiola
iv. Maggie Hanohano
v. Pat Hamamoto – DOE
vi. Lilette Subedi –
vii. Verlie Ann Malina-Wright – ÿAnuenue
viii. Lui Hokoana
ix. Shawn Kanaÿiaupuni – KS
x. Kamuela Chun
xi. Manu Kaÿiama
xii. Wendy Mow-Taira
b. Consumers - Island Councils
i. Josh Akana – Hawaiÿi
ii. Janet Kahalekomo – Kauaÿi
iii. Martha Evans – Länaÿi
iv. David Keala – Maui
v. Anita Arce – Molokaÿi
vi. Ulu Kanahele – Niÿihau
vii. Wayne Panoke – Oÿahu
c. OHA – Reshela DuPuis
d. Kupuna – Aunty Betty Jenkins
e. Opio
f. Makua- Makua
3.
Lui to chair ad-hoc group to revise membership/devise transition plan.
4.
Molokai – Moke Kim - announced that Flame Dart-Makahanaloa is new Molokaÿi IC Chair. Moke will
provide Secretary with names of new officers.
5.
Elections – after much discussion, it was determined by the Chair that elections will be held off until the
next meeting that will be held on October 4 after the “big tent” meeting.
Meeting was adjourned at 2:16 pm with a pule by Aunty Janet.
Wednesday, September 6, 2006
NHEC Office – Dillingham Transportation Building
MINUTES
Call To Order: The meeting was called to order at 10:15 a.m. by President Maggie Hanohano
Attendance: In attendance were the following Executive Committee Members and Staff:
Priority Setting Events
•
Draft Agendas for the events were made
•
Facilitator and Consultant availability/bids/resumes were reviewed
•
Island Councils should be contacted on dates for their event
•
Invites went out to all past/present/new grantees. Need to invite Na Lau Lama heads and Assn. of Hawaiian Civic Club
heads.
WIPCE Report
• Final draft almost done but want to include Keiki’s Kauhale Matrix. Called her to get approval for public use, etc. Will
need electronic version and her written approval for use.
• Keiki approved use of Matrix and will email file.
Hawaiian School vs A School for Hawaiians: Kauhale Matrix
•
Discussed various uses
NIEA Convention
•
Requesting Attendees
o State Council – Betty Jenkins(?), Keiki Kawaiaea, Paula DeMorales, Maggie Hanohano
o Hawai‘i Island – Kaiulani Pahio, Mike Ikeda, Cathy Arnold
o Läna‘i Island – Pam Alconcel
o Kaua‘i Island – Pumehana Anakalea
o O‘ahu Island – 0
o Maui Island – 0
o Ni‘ihau Island – 0
o Moloka‘i Island – 0
•
Next Steps
o Set conference call meeting
o Kauhale Matrix feed back as an NHEC task / report back requirement
Data Contract
•
Using our existing data, contract data people to review, consolidate, research – common measurements, check
accuracy and record updates, etc.
Website Miner
Phone: 808-523-6432
Fax: 808-523-6464
•
•
•
Job description reviewed
Goal: To engage our website audience on a pathway to finding information on NH education. To increase awareness
of NHEC’s usefulness.
Suggestion: Hire temp. part timer, offer $16 an hour
Membership / Elections
• Assessment of Membership: Call / send a letter to ask for participation to those members who are not in compliance
with our ByLaws
• Officer responsibilities and qualifications
• Current Membership Structure doesn’t work, doesn’t fit. We should be looking at what it is we want to become and
where we want to go.
o Suggestion: A consultant to restructure our membership
o Committee was formulated
Upcoming Meetings:
•
Castle Foundation / Center on the Family – Program Evaluations
DRAFT AGENDA
Priority Setting Events
Pre-event Meetings: 9/18(Marina), 9/21(Marina / DD), 9/22(Marina / DD)
Introductions: Who we are, what we do as NHEC. Who they are, what they do.
Topic: Indicators
Each Cluster chooses 5 of the 7 NHEC indicators. Are these indicators something that you use or can live with? Talk about it.
Additions will be secondary.
Topic: Data. Introduce accountability. Outputs are collected, not outcomes.
Topic: October 4th & 5th event and needs. Each Cluster needs to select own facilitator and recorder among the group.
‘Contracted’ Facilitator will keep clusters on track. ‘Contracted’ Facilitator will do a conference call with cluster facilitators and
recorders in preparation of the 4th.
(Needs: ‘Contracted’ Facilitator & Recorder for each cluster meeting. Conference Call date and time for each cluster of the (5)
clusters)
October 4th(Marina):
Protocol: Kupuna
Opening: Paula DeMorales
Panel of Futurist: DJ Mailer, Pat Hamamoto (video), David McClain (video), Robert Witt, Carl Takamura, Mitch D’Olier, Kaipo
Lum
Breakout Groups:
Agree or disagree with the picture?
How do your programs, as a cluster, meet the futurists’ picture for Hawaiians? What do you presently do, what do you want to
do?
Plot brand new Priorities? Plot sub-priorities using existing priorities?
(Needs: Pre-selected Cluster Facilitator and Recorder for each breakout group with ‘Contracted’ Facilitator to keep breakout
groups on track.)
October 5th(Marina):
Presentation: Jennifer Sabas – Accountablity and measurement
??Presentation Follow up: Shawn Kanaiaupuni - measurement
Panel: Reflections on Priorities
Discussion: Priorities
Islands: 10/13, 10/16, 10/17, 10/18, 10/19, 10/20

Native Hawaiian Education Council Annual Report

Transcrição

Documentos relacionados

Tavares / Stratocaster - Mauinews.com | News, Sports, Jobs, Visitor`s

he wahi mo`olelo no läna`i

2010-05-27-CNET - Ostara Nutrient Recovery Technologies

1.8 MB PDF - Saturday Briefing

Molokai Advertiser-News