The Millennium Trust Advisory Committee is seeking concept letters that, in keeping with the legacy of the Millennium Trust, support the concept of building a sense of community. Proposed projects could be county wide in scope, or be focused on a much smaller community. Applicants may wish to consider the term "community" as more than just a geographic term.

Nonprofit, governmental or other public groups interested in applying for grants from the Millennium Trust are invited to submit a concept letter describing the proposed project. The Millennium Trust Advisory Committee will review the concept letters and choose a number of finalists to submit a full application. Applicants should submit ten copies of the following:

1. A concept letter, which should be no longer than two typed pages and should include:
   • Who will be involved in the project;
   • What the project will accomplish and how it will be accomplished;
   • Why the project is important for participants and other residents of Boulder County;
   • The time frame for accomplishing the project;
   • How much money is requested.
2. A separate budget page listing expenses and brief descriptions of how each expense supports the proposal should accompany the concept letter.
3. Proof of your tax-exempt status - only one copy is necessary.

• Projects must strive to build positive relationships among individuals, neighborhoods, and/or towns.
• Applicants can be any nonprofit organization with an IRS §501(c)(3) designation or any governmental or public entities. (Groups or organizations that do not have IRS §501(c)(3) designation may apply only in partnership with one of the designated groups listed above.)
• The group or organizations must provide services or conduct the proposed activities within Boulder County for the benefit of Boulder County residents.
• All applicants must have a non-discrimination statement, policy, or plan with regard to their services or activities.
• Projects may not further a particular religious or political doctrine.

The Millennium Trust will award $50,000 in grants in 2000. The Millennium Trust Advisory Committee expects to consider proposals within a range of $500 to $25,000. Grant requests ranging from $500 to $15,000 are preferred. Proposals for multi-year funding may be considered.

• Proposals from youth that engage and involve youth in community building activities and service programs are encouraged.
• Neighborhood groups proposing ways to build community involvement, especially across neighborhood boundaries or between cross town neighbors of another culture.
• A project that creates more of a community spirit by engaging more participation.
• Proposals that address the need to build inter-generational relationships and civic responsibility.
• Projects that encourage innovation, collaboration, philanthropy, and investment in the community.

Concept letters are due by 5:00 p.m Friday, July 14th in the office of The Community Foundation Serving Boulder County. You may mail or hand-deliver ten copies to:

Faxed and e-mail proposals WILL NOT be accepted.

The Community Foundation held a community meeting on April 13, 2000 at the NIST Auditorium. The meeting was held to hear from the Millennium Trust investors. About 150 people attended, and several took the opportunity to express their views on the most important challenges and opportunities facing the county this year.

Also at the meeting, names were selected for the first Advisory Committee to the trust:

Advisory Committee
Fred Schulerud, Boulder Bob D'Alessandro, Boulder Jody Shulins, Louisville Phipps Family Trust, Boulder Karen Ripley, Boulder Mary Ann Ganey, Boulder Joni Beall, Nederland Karyn Sparks, Boulder Leonard Boonin, Boulder Michael Reynolds, Boulder Joellen Raderstorf, Boulder Jane Dalrymple-Hollo, Boulder Andrew Cookler, Nederland	Richard Butler, Boulder Doris Hass, Boulder Karen Kochanski, Boulder Laura Koch, Louisville Travis Clark, Boulder Henry Mueller, Boulder David Cook, Boulder Sharon Pollard, Niwot Anna Sussman, Boulder John Slater, Boulder

The committee will be responsible for reviewing these proposals and for making funding recommendations to the Board of Trustees of The Community Foundation. Decisions will be made in the fall, with the first Millennium Trust dollars awarded as grants in December.

Thanks to all of you who contributed. The tally in mid-February was:

• 6,152 people
• Donated $825,000
• Wild Oats Challenge will add an additional $1 million.

Report on The Second Millennium Trust Advisory Group Meeting Submitted by Jane Dalrymple-Hollo

The second meeting of the Millennium Trust Advisory Group was held at The Community Foundation, 1123 Spruce Street, Boulder, CO, on Monday, May 22.

Members present:
Joni Beall, Len Boonin, Andy Cookler, Mary Ann Ganey, Jane Dalrymple-Hollo, Stacey Stern, Joellen Raderstorf, Michael Reynolds, Karen Ripley, Jody Schulins, Karyn Sparks, Doris Hass, Travis Clark, Richard Butler

It began at 6:00PM and adjourned at 9:00PM. Of the fourteen members of the Advisory Group present, eleven were members and three were alternates. (Nine members and seven alternates present at the May 9 meeting.) The meeting was facilitated by Bruce Swinehart of the Boulder County Healthy Community Initiative. Josie Heath, president of The Community Foundation serving Boulder County, acted as advisor with Wendy Edwards, Kevin Kelley and Conrad Lattes of the Community Foundation also participating. The meeting began with informal introductions and a summary of the previous meeting. After a brief meal of pizza and soft drinks, participants crowded around a large table and began serious and animated discussions of items on the agenda.

Discussion of Structure of Committee:
A. Leadership --
The need for leadership chosen from the group was discussed. This person would act as liaison to the Community Foundation, to check agenda for accuracy, etc. Rotating leadership an option. The general consensus was that Bruce Swinehart was particularly good at facilitating but the decision was deferred until later in the meeting. When the question was revisited, Karen Ripley, Mary Ann Ganey and Stacy Stern volunteered to act as liaisons and Bruce agreed to continue as facilitator, at least for the present. It was noted that having a facilitator who is outside the decision making process appears to provide a useful structure.
B. Membership --
Discussion began with extent to which alternates will participate in decision making and whether or not alternates should become full participants. Pros and cons of larger versus smaller groups discussed -- e.g., thirty can be an unwieldy group for decision making, but a larger group could make tasks such as proposal review less demanding. A suggestion was raised that each member become a partner with an alternate but, after consideration, was rejected as too cumbersome. The idea of dropping "Alternate" designation was discussed, but no definite decision was reached.

Consensus was reached that:
1) Invitations will be issued to members and alternates and decisions will be made at meetings by whoever shows up.
2) Decisions reached at earlier meetings will not be reopened.
3) Josie will send a letter to all alternates clearly inviting them to participate fully in the Advisory Group and giving them the chance to definitively accept or decline by a June 2.

Josie Heath pointed out that the advisory committee decisions are recommendations as under Treasury guidelines and all grant recommendations must be approved by The Community Foundation's Board of Trustees. The Trustees have final decision authority but want to rely heavily on the advisory committee's recommendations.

Discussion of Issue of Conflict of Interest --
Members and alternates were asked to sign the Conflict of Interest Policy. Josie discussed the policy in terms of its "spirit and letter." Discussion revolved around "full disclosure," e.g., if a member thinks they may have a conflict of interest, they should err on the side of caution and discuss it with the group. Bruce pointed out that for group members to personally solicit proposals tends to create an automatic vested interest or, at least, an awkwardness. He recommended against it.

Consensus was reached that --
Any member should recuse himself or herself from consideration of any proposal with which he or she has a personal connection, and that the group as a whole will hold itself responsible for questioning extreme enthusiasm of any of its members for a particular project.

Discussion of Open Meetings --
Josie recommended that meetings be open, as are meetings of the Community Foundation. It was noted that the present meeting room can hardly contain those attending this meeting. In favor of open meetings, it was pointed out that many children contributed their allowances to the Millennium Trust and others made genuine sacrifices to participate. As representatives of those people, the Advisory Group should be as open as possible. However, we need guidelines for community members who attend meetings.

Consensus was reached that --
minutes will be approved at the following meeting and then posted on the web. Dates of meetings will also be posted on the web. Guests will not be invited to enter discussion unless the Advisory Group specifically asks for public comment.

C. Communication
Communication falls into two categories: 1) communication with other Advisory Group members and The Community Foundation and 2) communication with the public, media, etc. Josie stated that a press release should go out from the Advisory Group at some point in the near future.

Discussion of Results Members of the Advisory Group (as representatives of donors to the Millennium Trust) want to see from Millennium Trust grants --
Bruce posed the hypothetical question, "what would be the greatest outcome you can imagine of a Millennium Trust Grant?" "What would we see as results of Millennium Trust grants if they were the best possible?" He solicited opinions from every member and alternate present, which sparked a lively and animated conversation.

Some ideas for positive results:
-- organization will still be in business, i.e., project that gets funded is ongoing and sustainable
--"down payment" on a good idea, get something started, inc. bricks & mortar
--"noticeable" in some way by the community (not staff or general operating expenses)
--marks of success depend on size of grant
--smaller grants to "plant seeds," generate new partnerships
--nurtures philanthropy
--integrates with ongoing programs
--money coming back, e.g. loan to be repaid, recycled
--fosters "engaged citizenship," encourages participation in creation of future community
--long range sustainability (follow-up could be solicited in proposal, since it forces an organization to engage in long range planning)
--meets a need that is not currently being met
--fosters cross-generational involvement and mentoring
--helps those most in need
--focuses on people not traditionally involved
--encourages formal/informal philanthropy
--keeps spirit of diversity alive (think about how to be inclusive)
--grants are for the whole County (Nederland, Longmont, Louisville, Erie, etc.)

A suggestion was made to set aside $5,000. (or 10% of the total) for youth requests. This would get youth involved and help develop new partnerships. One criterion for success of smaller grants would be to bring young people into philanthropy.

It was pointed out that smaller grants ($2000-$5000) are vastly different in terms of "criteria for success" than larger grants ($25,000).

The hypothetical question was raised, "is there a way we could fund a program that would completely eliminate a problem?"

Keeping the possibilities for kinds of grants broad allows people to stretch their minds and think in ways they haven't thought before, which feels consistent with the legacy of the Millennium Trust.

"One challenge is not to make it sound too political," someone said. " 'Citizenship may be a loaded word. 'Civic' may be better." There was general enthusiasm around the idea of making civic participation a cornerstone of the Millennium Trust grants.

A great deal of discussion was devoted to the size of grants that will be given and whether or not to actively solicit multi-year grants. (All funding for multi-year grants would come out of Millennium Trust grant moneys designated for the current year). Two sides of the issue were, 1) multi-year grants are difficult to administer, however 2) multi-year grants are notoriously difficult for nonprofit groups to obtain, and some projects may justify them. (Josie had already pointed out that "nonprofit" may be interpreted loosely.) The group discussed considering multi-year proposals, but not actively soliciting them. The consensus seemed to be that "multi-year proposals will be considered, but they have to be sensational." When the topic was revisited later in the meeting, someone pointed out that it can sometimes take several years for an idea to "take," and multi-year grants should, therefore, be considered. There was general agreement around this point, but note was taken that we must be very explicit about what a multi-year grant means (for example, $1,000. this year, $1,000. next year, etc., subject to annual review.) The Community Foundation will hold funds from this year's disbursement and distribute them in the following years.

The idea was discussed of focusing on the "spirit" of the Millennium Trust (which is a magnificently simple concept that captured the imagination of a great many people). No idea for a grant can be too simple. Community "pot-lucks" and neighborhood newsletters may be encouraged.

By the time everyone in the Advisory Group had stated their ideas for the best possible outcome and these were discussed, it was clear that it was time to narrow and prioritize our list.

Bruce presented a timeline, which was negotiated slightly with this result:

Timeline for Year 2000 Millennium Trust Grants

June 1 -- Requests for Concept Papers distributed to committee (1 pg. narrative w/budget)

July 14 -- Concept Papers due

Sept. 1 -- Finalists will be notified and Invited to submit Full Proposals

Oct. 9 -- Full Proposals due

Nov. 16 -- Final recommendations due from Millennium Trust Advisory Group to The Community Foundation Board

(Nov. 17 -- The Community Foundation Board Meeting)

Dec. 15 -- Grants will be Announced

Discussion of Process

The decision to narrow the focus was followed by more productive but open-ended discussion

-- Theme of grants: Spirit of the Millennium Trust may be centered around building community relationships
-- Make sure to get everything translated into Spanish (also other languages ?)
--Description of the "Gramma (or Grampa) Test." When Hewlett Packard puts out a new product, they want to make sure that "Gramma" or "Grampa" can make sense of it.
-- Do we want to specify an amount? Upper or lower limit?
--Emphasize simplicity. "Simplicity will be rewarded," could be stated in Request for Proposals. Re: concept papers, it comes down to, "tell us how much money you want, what you plan to do, and how much time you want to use it."

The idea of multi-year grants was revisited and, again, discussed extensively. Points are summarized (all together) above.

Consensus Reached:

To avoid the agony of "writing by committee," Richard Butler will draft the Request for Proposals (RFP) using his own notes along with those provided by Joellen Raderstorf and Jane Dalrymple-Hollo. Jody Schulins will then review the RFP before it is submitted to The Community Foundation for final review.

Multi-year grants will be considered, but Request for Proposals (RFP) must be explicit about what a multi-year grant means.

RFP should stress outreach at every level.

Proposals must be received by July 14.

Jane Dalrymple-Hollo, Jody Schulins, and Travis Clark volunteered to assist on the Millennium Time Capsule Committee.

The meeting was adjourned, on schedule, shortly after 9:00PM.