Discovery Center
Breakout Group Notes
DISCOVERY CENTER
What worked?
Support
East Park leadership create (third entity creation)
Independent governance
Partnerships in the community
Money – investment into the space
Fund created for sustainability
What didn’t work?
Bumps in day to day
No Memo of Understanding
Heavy amount of turnover and lack of continuity
Unforeseen financial expenses/costs
Challenges in messages
Community engagement best practices
Tours
Consistent community meetings
Established programming prior to opening/relationship building
Hiring community members
Board has community members and representation
Community engagement committee (responsive and accessibility to staff
Paid CEC members
Endowment and sustainability
RSI positions that kep DC open
CEC members outreach and engagement
Space rentals
Creating an equitable space
Equitable community support
Responsiveness and accessibility
Trust building
Addressing equity
Rental space/practice
Intentional program creation
Introductory classes that create inclusivity
Free team building days
Space is open to other organizations
Taking programs out of the DC – connecting with other spaces
Diverse hiring practices
Role of the mayor
Nutter support
Mike D support
City supported the project directly – funding etc.
Broad support of DC
Identified problem was combining parks and rec
Conflict of interests
Prioritization concerns
Discovery Center
Audubon & Outward Bound
What was most important to the success of the project?
a diverse staff – everyone looks different
a broad amt. of support w/in & around Strawberry Mansion
12 years
foundations, politicians, community members
503(c) non-profit created made it easier to get it all done
East Park Leadership & Conservation
responsible for the buildings & the grounds
board created to lead the EPLC
provides legal protection
pooling of financial resources
avoid factions – it was better to build community
maintaining partnerships
$ funding & investment was critical (10 yr. capital campaign)
What went wrong?
set up was great but follow-through was poor
large turnover 🡪 lack of continuity; the people who were there at the beginning were not there at the end
burnout
redesign 3x in response to price changes led to a loss (lost a lot of the features originally designed)
price change from 2008 (cheaper) when planning began vs. 2017 (construction was more expensive)
unpredictable financial conditions
What worked best to engage community?
Constant opportunities for people to tour & ask questions
Consistent community meetings
Established programming to engage w/ members of the community (i.e., schools in the area) between 2006-2017 so that there was an existing relationship w. the community before arrival of the Discovery Center (“we didn’t just pop up”)
Invest in community
Word-of-mouth & advertising
Change in the size of the governing board to promote equity
Office Hours w/ 15-member committee
Emphasis on community connection
Endowment – need sustained funding for continued operations (keeping the Center open)
RSI positions
Need equitable way for engagement
Space rentals enabled 100s of people to visit
The vision was that the people in/closest to the neighborhood would be the primary users of the Center
What drove community engagement/involvement?
Location: it was a space previously used by the community that became closed off 🡪 people were excited to have their “big backyard” back
Building trust
Intentional investment
Engagement w/ the community led to the community engaging in the process
How to address equity?
Inclusion
when people come to Discovery Center, we don’t focus on what we do; we think about what the visitors do/want to do
yoga
bird watching
intentional programming
observing what the children gravitate towards
we never turn people away
Workshops at other locations/dialoguing in other spaces
What role did the mayor/elected officials play?
Mayor Nutter had strong ties/support for Audubon/Outward Bound
Mike D’s role as Parks & Rec Director
Financial support from the city
lease from the city
project would not have gone forward w/o city support, regardless of community wants
Caution: have to maintain “good grace” w/ the city gov’t
Citing bad bird practices, for example, could lead to ire from the city
Other notes:
Promote value/respect for outdoor space
Leave no trace
No destruction
Parks & Rec should be parks AND rec
parks should be separate from the recreation centers
Report Out
Overall foundation for the project was tight
Service to community & community partnerships allowed them to captivate community need
Supporting community yielded community support (reciprocity)
Bridging gaps between services provided & what the community needs from the Discovery Center
City support was crucial
Turnover was a challenge