• Nov-Dec: To apply lessons/best practices to scenario-based thinking about RR in Needham → Goals: Align around risks, benefits, tools, and rationales in various situations.

• Dec-Jan: To draft, get feedback, and vote on template resources for future use: a) communications/statement templates for several different scenarios and b) an event protocol for community response.

• Jan-Feb: To discuss, revise, vote on and erect a Steering Committee that will instigate, help implement, and provide resources for community response. 

1. Discrimination at a Local Business
2. School Hate Incident
3. Neighborhood Hate Crime 

• Who are the stakeholders and actors involved? Who else could become involved?

• What narratives does this event feed into? Are these narratives deeply ingrained? 

• How do the people targeted by the event or narrative interpret its significance? If you don't know, how can you find out?

• What is the risk of escalation?

• What would likely happen if we did/said nothing? (risks, potential benefits)

• Who would be aware of this event if we did/said nothing?

• Are there ways doing something could inadvertently make the situation worse? (risks, benefits)

•  Take 2-3 minutes to create a draft message or action/event idea.

•  Which speakers/messengers are most credible for the message?

•  Which mediums are most effective for this message?

• Does your message avoid the most common communication risks (see Do’s/Don’ts)?

• Life is different from the script; it’s complex and multifaceted.

• There’s a lot to think about - so many factors when considering response.

• In these discussions, we continue to return to the idea of community. 

• Focus on accuracy - how do we know what really happened?

• Many questions and not enough answers.

• One challenge is working through whether or not to respond - what if the individual or group does not want to see this play out, yet we feel compelled to take action - what does that look like?

• Who’s going to be the group that takes this on? Is it us? 

• Learning how layered things are, even when looking at an intentionality.

• Coming to the table to listen to and understand the affected group - it is hard as we are also trying to take the burden off of a marginalized or injured group. 

• We need to be careful of our own desire to fix something. 

• Even if we don’t have all the information and even if we are not taking action on a particular scenario, we might be inspired to take action in another place.

• This conversation was special in that people were collaborating to come up with a solution that would work best for everyone - those targeted and the greater community (how to do realistically and collaboratively). 

• How do we prevent our own personal biases from spilling over? 

• It’s important in any organization to have a protocol for how to respond.

• Personal examples of constructive dialogue and speaking open a world of possibilities.

• Trying to understand motivation for challenging acts.

• This is a great example of proactivity versus reactivity.

•  It becomes important to understand what the culture and values of a school (or setting) are and utilize to craft that response - whatever positive norms we want to speak to should fit the norms of the organization.

• It’s important to listen to understand - we’re looking for people who will reshape culture. 

• Transcending the negativity to elevate and celebrate the targeted group.

• This is a reminder that when an incident happens there are many ripples and layers of people affected.

• There isn’t always one side to a story. 

• Outstanding conversation - it’s a microcosm of what we’re trying to do in the community - looking at an issue and workshopping helps us to bring back to various spheres of leadership.