In addition to existing programs, MMT historically offered a number of targeted programs that no longer operate.
Higher Education in an Information Society
1984-86 10 grants for $2,148,327
What: To facilitate the integration of new technologies in post secondary institutions
How: By integrating new technologies into curriculum and instruction,
developing mechanisms for faculty and staff to integrate technology
into their roles, to utilize information delivery systems that
transcend traditional time and place constraints and to promote
collaboration between higher education institutions and business and
industry in technology research, continuing education and technology
transfer.
Outcomes: From Charles Rooks memo to trustees in January 1996:
"The Trust's first effort at focused grantmaking, the Higher Education
in an Information Society program, was terminated after one round of
grants and that was a wise decision. The Trust was having severe
internal difficulties, the program was not well designed, and it was
not the right time to try to change the program into a better model.
Somewhat to my surprise, however, when I recently review the eight
major grants under that program, they appeared to be good projects that
compare quite favorably with a random selection of general purpose
grants."
Aging & Independence
1984-89 67 grants for $8,484,726
What: To prevent unnecessary institutionalization of older persons and to improve their quality of life.
How: By promoting access of seniors to community services, developing and testing new methods of service delivery, exploring how new technologies can help seniors overcome limitations brought on by aging and by helping maintain the right to make decisions.
Outcomes: From Charles Rooks essay in 1988:
"By
the end of 1987 we had approved 57 grants amounting to over $7 million
in this undertaking and it was time to review our efforts. We had a
number of questions. How successful were the individual projects? What
kind of overall impact was the program having? Should we continue it?
What improvements could we make? We engaged a team of consultants to
help us find answers.
"When we initiated the program, we
deliberately announced broad guidelines, which resulted in a variety of
grant projects. This approach allowed our new foundation to learn a
great dal about he possibilities and limitations of a focused regional
grantmaking approach. We made grants mainly to improve access to
existing services or to develop new ways to deliver services to the
elderly in their communities. We also financed projects to improve
conditions within institutions. We hoped not only to fund good
individual projects, but through these projects to have an influence on
the general system of services for seniors in Pacific Northwest states.
"Most
of the grants were two to four years in length, and 43 of them were not
complete at the time of our assessment. This was a serious problem,
because the results of some projects cannot be measured until the end
of the grant, or much later. Nevertheless, we learned a great deal that
was valuable." Read more link
From Charles Rooks memo to trustees in January 1996:
"The
Aging and Independence program was in my opinion a rather successful
venture. It had numerous impacts on practice and policy, and many
activities piloted under this program have been replicated in many
other places. While the general mission of the program was clear
(promoting greater independence of elders), the operational focus of
the program was too broad. It would probably have had greater impact if
the grants had been targeted within a more narrow range of activities.
Among the reasons the program was a successful as it was the the
following: the external circumstances were ripe (there was a lot of
interest in the topic and many groups wanted to test innovative ideas),
government budgets had not yet experienced the cutbacks that came in
later years, the Trust staff had widespread contacts with key leaders
in the field, and the trustees supported the strong proposals that
resulted from this set of conditions."
Library & Information Resources for the Northwest
1984-88 39 grants for $3,450,888
What: To assist in building and sharing information among libraries and information centers in the Pacific Northwest.
How: By supporting assessments of existing library collections, creating a regional database to analyze and display regional holdings, to develop resource sharing among networks of libraries and to demonstrate cost-effective systems of rapid delivery of information among public, academic, corporate and other special libraries.
Outcomes: More
than 200 libraries contributed information about their collections to a
newly created computer database and indexed their holdings in the
database. Indexed more than 600 special collections. Information atlas
that describes system in the region for transmitting or physically
delivering information. Library telefacsimile "phone book" that enables
rapid communication with more than 500 other machines in North America.
90 rural libraries in network sharing resources.
From Charles Rooks memo to trustees January 1996:
"...The
Library and Information Resources for the Northwest (LIRN) program as
an example of establishing some relatively well identified goals and
pursuing these with active strategies. In execution the LIRN program
was not always the best example of such an approach, but it did
represent a serious attempt at focuses grantmaking. I think it is
difficult to evaluate the LIRN program. It was ahead of its time in the
sense that most of the constituencies it was trying to affect (i.e.,
librarians and college administrators) were not yet completely
receptive to what the program was trying to accomplish. Today, however,
many of the goals of the LIRN program are accepted by those parties as
obvious and necessary. One of LIRN's accomplishments, I believe, was
that it helped create some fo the present attitudes, and in this and
other ways it helped this region move ahead more quickly in recognizing
the necessity of cooperation. Another lesson from LIRN is that programs
with such ambitious goals require long periods of commitment. For
understandable reasons, the Trust terminated LIRN when it did, but it
is possible that the program would have had a much greater impact if
circumstances had been different and the program, with appropriate
modifications, had remained in operation a few more years." READ MORE
Preserving the Future: Support for Children at Risk
1986-1997 176 grants for $22,502,958
What:
To reduce the influences that hinder the development of young children
and to enhance factors that equip children to lead better lives.
How: By supporting parent education for families with babies and young children, enhancing early childhood development and improving early educational opportunities, and demonstrating new and more effective ways to intervene with youth who are at high risk of serious problems. Grants to organizations in Oregon, Washington, Alaska, Idaho and Montana.
Outcomes: From 1996 memo by Charles Rooks:
"The
Support for Children at Risk program is directed at some of the most
critical problems in our society, and it has supported many very
valuable projects. For a variety of reasons, however, this program is
not as successful as the Aging program. Its focus is too broad, and
there has not ben a sustained concentration of support in any area or
on any particular issue. Government cutbacks have placed many
organizations in a hunkered-down survival mode that excludes innovative
thinking. Declination of some strong proposals has discouraged some
organizations from further developing projects to submit to the Trust.
Despite these shortcomings, the grants list under this p;rogram would
certainly compare well with most of our other grantmaking, and it has
provided a way to give support to a wider geographic area. This program
is an example of a grantmaking approach that is somewhere between a
purely general purpose approach and a highly focused strategic
approach. By announcing interest in a particular field and issuing some
general guidelines, the Trust has been able, in a manageable fashion,
to invite proposals from a large region. By grouping these proposals
around two deadlines a year, there has been a better frame of reference
for judging their comparative merits. As presently constituted, the
program is worthwhile, but it cannot achieve the kind of significance
one would hope for in a focuses program. Since the program addresses
such important issues, it is certainly worth considering whether it can
be improved and continued."
Support for Teacher Initiatives
1994-2008 978 grants for $3,957,162
What: To recognize and support the initiative and imagination that teachers employ to engage students in learning.
How: By
providing grants to individual teachers and teams of teachers in
elementary and secondary schools for projects intended to stimulate
more effective classroom learning.
Outcomes: From Charles S. Rooks memo to trustees in January 1996:
"The
Support for Teacher Initiatives has operated for less than two years,
which makes it difficult to offer confident assessments. The feedback I
have received indicates that these grants can have a substantial impact
in particular classrooms and that the program has encouraged many
teachers in their efforts to find better techniques to educate our
children... However, the program's merits must be weighted against the
costs of operating it in the Trust's traditional manner. [with staff
assigned task of analyzing and writing reports on each proposal]"
By
the program's end, it had affected more than 125,000 students and more
than 3,000 teachers. When FSG conducted an assessment of MMTs
grantmaking as part of strategic planning during 2007, it reported that
the Support for Teacher Initiatives program was seen as having limited
effectiveness. FSG found that because the amount of money was so small
and only teachers (and not schools or districts) could apply, there was
little perceived impact beyond individual classrooms.
As a
result, MMT decided to terminate the STI program and consolidate its
resources in education funding to reform efforts under OSSI and
Chalkboard Project. From the report that was issued: "We think our
funds can be better utilized ... [in] teacher mentoring, the CLASS
Project (Creative Learning And Student Success) and other programs in
OSSI and Chalkboard that support professional improvement.
