It is now 8:13 pm Sunday, April 5, 2009. I have just listened to Prime Minister Golding deliver an approximate 11 minute national broadcast ostensibly setting the context and preparing the nation for the 2009-2010 Budget, whose estimates of expenditure are due to be laid at Parliament’s opening on Tuesday. Mr. Golding attempted to lecture us on Macro Economics 101. He was clear that it cannot be business as usual, and we should expect some expenditure cuts. He also spoke at length on the need to implement tax reforms now. I wait with baited breath hoping that huge tax increases are not sold as tax reforms!
The most interesting part of the broadcast was the Prime Minister volunteering to reduce his salary by 15% and asking all Members of Parliaments to do so. While I laud the prime Minister for giving up a portion of his salary, I must remind everyone that salary constitutes a relatively small portion of the cost to maintain the Prime Minister and his fellow Cabinet Ministers. Other costs include entire ministries, travelling etc. Instead, Mr. Golding should have announced a reduction of 15% in the number of Cabinet Ministers and consequently Ministries. There should also be a reduction in the number of State Ministers/Parliamentary Secretaries.
The Ministries would then include: 1) Office of the Prime Minister(OPM), Planning & Development; 2) Finance & Public Service; 3) Agriculture; 4) Education & Youth; 5) Labour and Social Security; 6) Health & Environment; 7) Foreign Affairs & Foreign Trade; 8) National Security; 9) Justice; 10) Industry, Commerce & Tourism; 11) Transport & Works; 12) Water & Housing; 13) Energy, Telecommunications & Mining; 14) Information, Culture, Sports & Entertainment. This would mean a reduction from 16 to 14 Ministries. Tourism is added to Industry and Commerce as the Jamaica Tourist Board is the main driver of that portfolio, not the Ministry. Energy can return to Mining & Telecommunications as these were separated to find a job for Minister Derrick Smith after returning from surgery. Only two Ministers without Portfolio are needed: 1 each for OPM and Finance. As the House Speaker is a Cabinet position, this then results in 17 members of the Cabinet, down from 20, which gives us the 15% reduction.
The reduction in Ministries and Cabinet Ministers would send a strong message through the Public Sector that it is not business as usual. Mr. Golding’s idea to take a 15% cut and hope that others will follow suit will have little impact on the overall public sector expenditure. The Prime Minister has clearly missed the mark!
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Letter to the Gleaner Editor
I write in response to the article published in your paper on March 19, 2009 entitled “Non-traditionals trump' established' schools - Top 28% of 'older' institutions”. This article is totally misleading and the Ministry of Education continues to pull a fast one over the general public.
The article claims that “Jonathan Grant, Old Harbour, Denbigh and Lewisville high schools had more than 70 per cent of their subject entries receiving passing grades”. When one examines the data and looks at success rate in Math and English Language it tells a different story. These are the only two compulsory subjects island wide and are therefore best used to compare school performance at CSEC. The success of a school cannot be measured by the pass rate of those who sat the exam; rather it must be of the pass rate of the entire Grade 11 cohort (total number of students in Grade 11 and therefore eligible to sit the exam) as is used in the Task Force Report on Education Reform. In the case of English Language the pass rate varied from 4% at Lewisville to 41% at Denbigh; while for Math it varied from 3% to 17%. Defining the pass rate based on the number of students who actually sat the exam is the Ministry's way of falsely claiming it has achieved anything.
The article claims that “Jonathan Grant, Old Harbour, Denbigh and Lewisville high schools had more than 70 per cent of their subject entries receiving passing grades”. When one examines the data and looks at success rate in Math and English Language it tells a different story. These are the only two compulsory subjects island wide and are therefore best used to compare school performance at CSEC. The success of a school cannot be measured by the pass rate of those who sat the exam; rather it must be of the pass rate of the entire Grade 11 cohort (total number of students in Grade 11 and therefore eligible to sit the exam) as is used in the Task Force Report on Education Reform. In the case of English Language the pass rate varied from 4% at Lewisville to 41% at Denbigh; while for Math it varied from 3% to 17%. Defining the pass rate based on the number of students who actually sat the exam is the Ministry's way of falsely claiming it has achieved anything.
Jamaica’s grades trending, but still not good enough
Selected data from the National Council on Education (NCE) in Jamaica as well as the Ministries of Education (MOE) in both Jamaica and Trinidad & Tobago (T&T) indicate that Jamaican students lag behind their counterparts from T&T. It is instructive to point out however that while the national results for T&T have been declining since 2001; those for Jamaica have been increasing. The significant dip in Jamaica’s performance in 2004 coincides with the very first GSAT graduates sitting the CXC exams. Attempts to get similar data for Barbados proved futile; however the World Economic Forum has ranked the Quality of Barbados’ Education System at #10 in the world compared to #88 for Jamaica and #46 for T&T.
There are many schools of thought and many methods used to compare the national student CXC performance. One is easily tempted to use the pass rate based on those who registered and sat exams, however this distorts the analysis as in many cases, particularly in Jamaica many students are deliberately not entered and are therefore eliminated from the assessment system very early. Instead, we have chosen to use the total Grade 11 cohort. Jamaica’s Grade 11 cohort was 40,690 in 2004 compared to 22,692 for T&T.
Using non-compulsory subjects such as Information Technology of Physics, again distort the results as there is a natural selection process and many students choose not to take these subjects, yet alone sit the subjects. In certain cases this makes sense as it is deemed a waste of resources entering certain students. Instead we use the results for English Language and Mathematics which are universally compulsory subjects.
While 88% of the cohort registered and sat English in T&T, only 56% did so in Jamaica. 43% of the T&T cohort was successful compared to 31% for Jamaica. While T&T’s performance has declined since 2001 (57% down to 43%); Jamaica’s performance actually increased over the same period (28% up to 31%). Jamaica’s English pass rates in Traditional, Upgraded and Technical High Schools were 64%, 14% and 23% respectively.
A similar comparison holds true for Mathematics. While 88% of the cohort registered and sat Math in T&T, only 46% did so in Jamaica. 41% of the T&T cohort was successful compared to 20% for Jamaica. While T&T’s performance has declined since 2001 (45% down to 41%); Jamaica’s performance actually increased over the same period (16% up to 20%). Breaking down Jamaica’s performance by school category, the data indicate that in both English and Math there were increases over 2001 for the Traditional and Upgraded Schools and a decline since 2001 for Technical schools. Why then are Jamaican students generally performing at a lower level than their counterparts in T&T and ostensibly even more so than those in Barbados? Let us look at Government investment in Education, national policies and other practices.
The World Economic Forum reports that Jamaica’s expenditure on education is one of its 10 best economic strengths, while the quality of its education system is among its 10 worst economic weaknesses. In fact, Jamaica’s economic spend at 5.05% of its Gross National Income (GNI) ranks #36 in the world and #4 in the Latin America region. Barbados spends 6.99% of its GNI ranking #9 in the world and #1 in the Latin American region. T&T spends a paltry 4.01% of GNI ranking #67 in the world and #13 in the Region. The fact that Jamaica’s Quality of Education ranks at #88 suggests that our return on investment leaves very much to be desired. This is quite similar to the poor return on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) as during the 1990’s and early 2000’s Jamaica led the world in FDI with little conversion to GDP growth. The poor returns on FDI and Education expenditure point to inefficiencies in our public sector. We therefore turn to the Education policies in Jamaica and in T&T.
The 2004 Task Force Report on Education Reform in Jamaica and the 2008 National Report on the Development of Education in Trinidad & Tobago indicate several commonalities between the policies of the two countries.
1. The Jamaica 2030 Vision and the T&T Vision 2020 are the respective national contexts
2. Both countries agree that the education systems must be student-centred, with full access and full stakeholder participation.
3. Jamaica stresses autonomy and authority at the school level while T&T’s Report focuses on school-based management.
4. The respective Ministry will focus on policy and Quality Management; while in Jamaica Regional Education Authorities (REA’s) are to provide support to schools.
5. Jamaica’s Task Force Report indicates a shift from funding institutions to funding students.
We were unable to gather the relevant information on how effective T&T has been in implementing its Education policy and will therefore limit the review to Jamaica.
To implement the Task Force Report, both transformational and improvement initiatives need to be addressed. Transformational activities require minimal resources along with national and political will, paradigm shifts and tough decision-taking. Improvement initiatives on the other hand require lots of resources but have very little impact on the education outcomes without any transformation.
The paradigm shift, political will and tough decision-making required to make the Jamaican Education System student-centred, to give individual schools the required authority and autonomy and to hold everyone in the system accountable for performance have not occurred. To be fair, the former and current administrations have made concerted efforts to improve stakeholder involvement and this should continue. However, while significant resources have been spent in restructuring the MOE and establishing supporting institutions such as the National Education Inspectorate, there has been little change in the management of the education delivery. The attempt by the MOE to decentralize and delegate authority to the Regional Authorities was not the intention of the Task Force Report and will not result in Education Transformation. The fact is that while changes are required at the Ministry, transformation needs to occur at the school level.
Jamaica’s poor education performance combined with the fact that Jamaica ranks high on education expenditure is an indication of an inefficient public sector supporting the education system. Secondly, the lack of political/national will, paradigm shifts and tough decision-taking by successive administrations to effectively implement the transformational initiatives outlined by the National Task Force on Education Reform in Jamaica have resulted in dismal CXC performances.
There are many schools of thought and many methods used to compare the national student CXC performance. One is easily tempted to use the pass rate based on those who registered and sat exams, however this distorts the analysis as in many cases, particularly in Jamaica many students are deliberately not entered and are therefore eliminated from the assessment system very early. Instead, we have chosen to use the total Grade 11 cohort. Jamaica’s Grade 11 cohort was 40,690 in 2004 compared to 22,692 for T&T.
Using non-compulsory subjects such as Information Technology of Physics, again distort the results as there is a natural selection process and many students choose not to take these subjects, yet alone sit the subjects. In certain cases this makes sense as it is deemed a waste of resources entering certain students. Instead we use the results for English Language and Mathematics which are universally compulsory subjects.
While 88% of the cohort registered and sat English in T&T, only 56% did so in Jamaica. 43% of the T&T cohort was successful compared to 31% for Jamaica. While T&T’s performance has declined since 2001 (57% down to 43%); Jamaica’s performance actually increased over the same period (28% up to 31%). Jamaica’s English pass rates in Traditional, Upgraded and Technical High Schools were 64%, 14% and 23% respectively.
A similar comparison holds true for Mathematics. While 88% of the cohort registered and sat Math in T&T, only 46% did so in Jamaica. 41% of the T&T cohort was successful compared to 20% for Jamaica. While T&T’s performance has declined since 2001 (45% down to 41%); Jamaica’s performance actually increased over the same period (16% up to 20%). Breaking down Jamaica’s performance by school category, the data indicate that in both English and Math there were increases over 2001 for the Traditional and Upgraded Schools and a decline since 2001 for Technical schools. Why then are Jamaican students generally performing at a lower level than their counterparts in T&T and ostensibly even more so than those in Barbados? Let us look at Government investment in Education, national policies and other practices.
The World Economic Forum reports that Jamaica’s expenditure on education is one of its 10 best economic strengths, while the quality of its education system is among its 10 worst economic weaknesses. In fact, Jamaica’s economic spend at 5.05% of its Gross National Income (GNI) ranks #36 in the world and #4 in the Latin America region. Barbados spends 6.99% of its GNI ranking #9 in the world and #1 in the Latin American region. T&T spends a paltry 4.01% of GNI ranking #67 in the world and #13 in the Region. The fact that Jamaica’s Quality of Education ranks at #88 suggests that our return on investment leaves very much to be desired. This is quite similar to the poor return on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) as during the 1990’s and early 2000’s Jamaica led the world in FDI with little conversion to GDP growth. The poor returns on FDI and Education expenditure point to inefficiencies in our public sector. We therefore turn to the Education policies in Jamaica and in T&T.
The 2004 Task Force Report on Education Reform in Jamaica and the 2008 National Report on the Development of Education in Trinidad & Tobago indicate several commonalities between the policies of the two countries.
1. The Jamaica 2030 Vision and the T&T Vision 2020 are the respective national contexts
2. Both countries agree that the education systems must be student-centred, with full access and full stakeholder participation.
3. Jamaica stresses autonomy and authority at the school level while T&T’s Report focuses on school-based management.
4. The respective Ministry will focus on policy and Quality Management; while in Jamaica Regional Education Authorities (REA’s) are to provide support to schools.
5. Jamaica’s Task Force Report indicates a shift from funding institutions to funding students.
We were unable to gather the relevant information on how effective T&T has been in implementing its Education policy and will therefore limit the review to Jamaica.
To implement the Task Force Report, both transformational and improvement initiatives need to be addressed. Transformational activities require minimal resources along with national and political will, paradigm shifts and tough decision-taking. Improvement initiatives on the other hand require lots of resources but have very little impact on the education outcomes without any transformation.
The paradigm shift, political will and tough decision-making required to make the Jamaican Education System student-centred, to give individual schools the required authority and autonomy and to hold everyone in the system accountable for performance have not occurred. To be fair, the former and current administrations have made concerted efforts to improve stakeholder involvement and this should continue. However, while significant resources have been spent in restructuring the MOE and establishing supporting institutions such as the National Education Inspectorate, there has been little change in the management of the education delivery. The attempt by the MOE to decentralize and delegate authority to the Regional Authorities was not the intention of the Task Force Report and will not result in Education Transformation. The fact is that while changes are required at the Ministry, transformation needs to occur at the school level.
Jamaica’s poor education performance combined with the fact that Jamaica ranks high on education expenditure is an indication of an inefficient public sector supporting the education system. Secondly, the lack of political/national will, paradigm shifts and tough decision-taking by successive administrations to effectively implement the transformational initiatives outlined by the National Task Force on Education Reform in Jamaica have resulted in dismal CXC performances.
Friday, March 27, 2009
Misunderstanding the Citizens Charter Concept at PIOJ
This morning I ventured into the offices of the Planning Institute of Jamaica to conduct some research for an article. I had tried getting the information, GDP figures for Jamaica in current prices for the years 2001 – 2008, from the Ministry of Finance website and on the PIOJ website but to no avail. In fact, the Ministry of Finance’s website was much more helpful than that for PIOJ as apparently one has to subscribe to the PIOJ to download anything. I therefore walked to Oxford Road, asked to go to the Documentation Centre to do my research. The Receptionist asked if I had an appointment, to which I responded no as all I need was some data from their reports and if I was shown to the Doc. Centre I would be able to get it on my own. I was then asked to speak by telephone to someone in the Document Centre who insisted I had to first make an appointment. When I told her that as a Customer I feel totally dissatisfied she said that the PIOJ Customer Charter makes it very clear that customers are to make an appointment. When I told her that making an appointment to get information was inconvenient to customer while convenient for the PIOJ she told me I was rude at which point I hung up the phone and left the building.
The PIOJ clearly does not understand what a Customer Charter is. Ministry Paper 56/02 describes the objective of Public Sector Reform in Jamaica as The creation “of an open and impartial public sector, which puts the public’s interests first, and in which valued and respected professionals deliver high quality services efficiently and effectively”. The PIOJ’s decision to make customers make appointments goes contrary to the above definition as our interests are secondary to the PIOJ’s. In developing a Citizen’s Charter, what is required is that customers must be consulted on how best to satisfy them, then to put in place systems to deliver on that satisfaction. There must then be an agreement with the citizens interest placed first. I encourage my good friend Dr. Wesley Hughes, Director General of the PIOJ to rethink this one.
The PIOJ clearly does not understand what a Customer Charter is. Ministry Paper 56/02 describes the objective of Public Sector Reform in Jamaica as The creation “of an open and impartial public sector, which puts the public’s interests first, and in which valued and respected professionals deliver high quality services efficiently and effectively”. The PIOJ’s decision to make customers make appointments goes contrary to the above definition as our interests are secondary to the PIOJ’s. In developing a Citizen’s Charter, what is required is that customers must be consulted on how best to satisfy them, then to put in place systems to deliver on that satisfaction. There must then be an agreement with the citizens interest placed first. I encourage my good friend Dr. Wesley Hughes, Director General of the PIOJ to rethink this one.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
The Value of Strategic Thinking and Decisive Action in Difficult Times
Today we are faced with a serious global economic and financial crisis that, coupled with technology making geographical boundaries virtually nonexistent, have pundits predicting that the global output will decrease for the first time since the Second World War. What exactly does this mean for individual countries, individual firms and individuals? Does this mean that every country will see output and living conditions decline? Does it mean that every firm will decline in output and profits? It was reported in the news recently that the excellent financial results posted by Supreme Ventures was an indication that many persons are turning to gambling in these difficult times and the company is taking full advantage. Sadly several countries and most companies assume that the difficult environment will automatically have a negative impact and therefore political leaders and company executives sit back and hope that the worst will not happen. It is my belief that the countries and companies that perform well despite difficulties in the environment are those who sharpen their strategy and flawlessly execute it.
Drs. Robert Kaplan and Dave Norton define strategy as an integrated set of choices that position a firm, in an industry, to earn superior returns over the long term (I might add in good and in difficult times). What is this saying? First of all, companies need to differentiate themselves from the norm in an industry to enable customers to make purchasing decisions in the companies’ favour. Secondly, companies need to be at least as efficient as other companies in delivering the differentiated value to the customers. Companies will always have choices to differentiate, however what is important is that the set of choices must be integrated and hence an organization must align itself entirely around delivering value to customers. If a supermarket decides to differentiate on selection or availability, it must excel in purchasing and inventory management to ensure that goods cover a wide spectrum and are always available. When times are difficult, the supermarket cannot cut back on its purchasing and inventory capability in order to reduce costs as it will no longer differentiate and will experience serious revenue reductions.
This strategic thinking to differentiate or to position a firm to take advantage of the opportunities created by a difficult environment is what separates a well performing company from others. However, while strategic thinking is a necessary condition for success, it certainly is not sufficient. Without taking action, strategic thinking is merely a daydream. Michael Lee Chin once said that success is 1% strategy and 99% execution. This is even more relevant in difficult times as delays in taking action can result in loss of opportunities.
In summarizing, companies, and countries, must always think strategically and act accordingly. In difficult times there is a natural tendency to throw the strategic thinking out the window and cut back indiscriminately to survive. However, in difficult times there are always opportunities and companies must strategize ways to exploit these opportunities by differentiating themselves in order to grow or maintain revenue in a declining market. Companies must be cognizant of the internal processes that drive differentiation and ensure that these processes are never compromised when deciding to cut back on expenditure. More importantly however is to act swiftly and decisively once the strategy decision has been taken.
Drs. Robert Kaplan and Dave Norton define strategy as an integrated set of choices that position a firm, in an industry, to earn superior returns over the long term (I might add in good and in difficult times). What is this saying? First of all, companies need to differentiate themselves from the norm in an industry to enable customers to make purchasing decisions in the companies’ favour. Secondly, companies need to be at least as efficient as other companies in delivering the differentiated value to the customers. Companies will always have choices to differentiate, however what is important is that the set of choices must be integrated and hence an organization must align itself entirely around delivering value to customers. If a supermarket decides to differentiate on selection or availability, it must excel in purchasing and inventory management to ensure that goods cover a wide spectrum and are always available. When times are difficult, the supermarket cannot cut back on its purchasing and inventory capability in order to reduce costs as it will no longer differentiate and will experience serious revenue reductions.
This strategic thinking to differentiate or to position a firm to take advantage of the opportunities created by a difficult environment is what separates a well performing company from others. However, while strategic thinking is a necessary condition for success, it certainly is not sufficient. Without taking action, strategic thinking is merely a daydream. Michael Lee Chin once said that success is 1% strategy and 99% execution. This is even more relevant in difficult times as delays in taking action can result in loss of opportunities.
In summarizing, companies, and countries, must always think strategically and act accordingly. In difficult times there is a natural tendency to throw the strategic thinking out the window and cut back indiscriminately to survive. However, in difficult times there are always opportunities and companies must strategize ways to exploit these opportunities by differentiating themselves in order to grow or maintain revenue in a declining market. Companies must be cognizant of the internal processes that drive differentiation and ensure that these processes are never compromised when deciding to cut back on expenditure. More importantly however is to act swiftly and decisively once the strategy decision has been taken.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Council of Presidents lack Strategic Thinking
There was great publicity recently over the “historic” meeting of the 21 Council of (Industry Association) Presidents to discuss the solutions to the global economic and financial crisis facing us. According to the newspaper reports the meeting highlighted several solutions, however there were no details on what the solutions were.
Speaking on the HOT 102 Breakfast Club programme this morning, March 10, 2009, Financial Analyst Ralston Hyman said when he spoke to the PSOJ President he was told that the main topics were Currency Board vs. Dollarization. Mr. Hyman concluded that the meeting of the Council of Presidents was a grand waste of time. He contended that the value of a country’s currency is a reflection of the strength of the economy; therefore however we decide to manage the currency (dollarization, Currency Board, Central Bank); the fact is we need to significantly increase economic performance and this is where the Council of Presidents should focus their attention. This reminded me of the debates during the Partnership for Progress a few years ago where there was no Vision, no strategy and no structure and it is déjà vu all over. My conclusion, if Mr. Hyman is correct, is that the Council of Presidents lack Strategic thinking.
If the Council of Presidents really wants to make a difference I recommend they contract Growth Facilitators to facilitate them through a strategic thinking process, which will not simply result in a cacophony of ideas, but rather a coherent, vision-driven strategy to navigate Jamaica through the difficult times.
Speaking on the HOT 102 Breakfast Club programme this morning, March 10, 2009, Financial Analyst Ralston Hyman said when he spoke to the PSOJ President he was told that the main topics were Currency Board vs. Dollarization. Mr. Hyman concluded that the meeting of the Council of Presidents was a grand waste of time. He contended that the value of a country’s currency is a reflection of the strength of the economy; therefore however we decide to manage the currency (dollarization, Currency Board, Central Bank); the fact is we need to significantly increase economic performance and this is where the Council of Presidents should focus their attention. This reminded me of the debates during the Partnership for Progress a few years ago where there was no Vision, no strategy and no structure and it is déjà vu all over. My conclusion, if Mr. Hyman is correct, is that the Council of Presidents lack Strategic thinking.
If the Council of Presidents really wants to make a difference I recommend they contract Growth Facilitators to facilitate them through a strategic thinking process, which will not simply result in a cacophony of ideas, but rather a coherent, vision-driven strategy to navigate Jamaica through the difficult times.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Giving Forward
Photo: Members of the Growth Facilitators team (Sharon, Marguerite, Robert, Ulla) with Principal of Ascot High School, the President and Vice President of SET at Ascot and Kevin Wallen, founder of SETGrowth Facilitators was recently recognised for our contribution to an amazing not-for-profit organization in Jamaica, Students Expressing Truth (SET). SET was started by a young man named Kevin Wallen, who on returning to his home country Jamaica after spending his formative years in Canada, asked himself what he could do to make a difference. He found his answer in the prison system and has worked there tirelessly and selflessly over the past 10 years.
The SET Vision is to be an instrument for transformation of those enslaved by physical walls and those enslaved without them.
The mission of S.E.T is to empower individuals and groups in prisons, schools, communities, business and government to realize and create opportunities for their own lives by facilitating self-awareness, marketability and cohesiveness in response to their needs.
SET has achieved amazing results in terms of recidivism – NO graduate of SET has returned to the prison system – as well as in the personal growth, development and transformation of its students. It is a joy to see how young men and women (mostly the former) are able to turn their lives around, and come to view their incarceration as ironically, the best thing that ever happened to them!
The Growth Facilitators team believes in our responsibility to contribute ot the betterment of our society. We are very conscious of the importance of giving back the gifts we have been blessed with. Indeed, we see it as "giving forward", as our gifts are carefully targeted to move the organizations to which we give, to greater and greater heights. We are very clear to ourselves that we give in the area of education, and we give that with which we have been abundantly blessed – our facilitation and strategic planning skills.
Growth Facilitators has supported SET over the past 4 years in a number of ways. Part proceeds from our executive conference on Cyberstrategy in 2005 built the computer lab at the Tower Street Adult Correctional Centre. Our partner, Robert, has adopted SET through his Kiwanis Club and regularly supports the inmates, or students, in practical ways. Most recently, we facilitated a one-day Vision to Action workshop with the SET team out of which emerged a 3 year Strategic Plan.
As our team members sat at the function to launch SET at the Ascot High School last week, we felt pride in knowing that the gift of our talent has been multiplied. Our interaction with students in the Correctional Services and at Ascot affirms our belief that an investment in human potential yields infinite returns.
We also felt deeply grateful for the gifts we have received through SET. We have gotten to know some amazing people. We have gained knowledge and sensitivity to the plight of inmates in the Correctional Services System, and those who will probably end up there without an intervention like SET. But most of all, we have experienced the joy of giving of ourselves. Thank you SET!
To learn more about SET, visit http://set-foundation.org/
The SET Vision is to be an instrument for transformation of those enslaved by physical walls and those enslaved without them.
The mission of S.E.T is to empower individuals and groups in prisons, schools, communities, business and government to realize and create opportunities for their own lives by facilitating self-awareness, marketability and cohesiveness in response to their needs.
SET has achieved amazing results in terms of recidivism – NO graduate of SET has returned to the prison system – as well as in the personal growth, development and transformation of its students. It is a joy to see how young men and women (mostly the former) are able to turn their lives around, and come to view their incarceration as ironically, the best thing that ever happened to them!
The Growth Facilitators team believes in our responsibility to contribute ot the betterment of our society. We are very conscious of the importance of giving back the gifts we have been blessed with. Indeed, we see it as "giving forward", as our gifts are carefully targeted to move the organizations to which we give, to greater and greater heights. We are very clear to ourselves that we give in the area of education, and we give that with which we have been abundantly blessed – our facilitation and strategic planning skills.
Growth Facilitators has supported SET over the past 4 years in a number of ways. Part proceeds from our executive conference on Cyberstrategy in 2005 built the computer lab at the Tower Street Adult Correctional Centre. Our partner, Robert, has adopted SET through his Kiwanis Club and regularly supports the inmates, or students, in practical ways. Most recently, we facilitated a one-day Vision to Action workshop with the SET team out of which emerged a 3 year Strategic Plan.
As our team members sat at the function to launch SET at the Ascot High School last week, we felt pride in knowing that the gift of our talent has been multiplied. Our interaction with students in the Correctional Services and at Ascot affirms our belief that an investment in human potential yields infinite returns.
We also felt deeply grateful for the gifts we have received through SET. We have gotten to know some amazing people. We have gained knowledge and sensitivity to the plight of inmates in the Correctional Services System, and those who will probably end up there without an intervention like SET. But most of all, we have experienced the joy of giving of ourselves. Thank you SET!
To learn more about SET, visit http://set-foundation.org/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
