Tuesday, July 28, 2020

OFF THE RAILS

I have complained on these pages about the lack of focus of some, too many of our most important organizations -- I leave it to those with influence (as in -- MONEY -- for instance) to effect change if they believe change will result in focus. Yet, some organizations put on their blinders and stagger on -- no focus, no priorities (other than the "priorities" on which their leaders obsess). These are the "Shiny Object Organizations."

As Henny Youngman (I know, I know, my age...) would have said: Take JCPA...Please.

Yes, JCPA...here is how JCPA itself has set forth its "priorities" in a recent email solicitation:

  • JCPA is at the forefront of the Civil Rights movement.
  • JCPA mobilizes the Jewish community to affect (sic) change.
  • JCPA is a leading voice in ending systemic racism and criminal justice reform.
  • JCPA leads national advocacy on ending racism in policing.
      Be part of the solution.
      It's time.


The fund raising mailing begins with the admonition (I'm not making this up):       It's Time. Stop Doing Nothing.

Then, but a couple of days later, JCPA promoted other of its "organizational goals" in a further solicitation:


          JCPA mobilizes the Jewish community to affect change. 
         JCPA is a leading voice in ending systemic racism and in criminal justice reform.
JCPA leads national advocacy on ending racism in policing
 I have serious doubts as to whether any of these claims is true. You? Examples, please.

As our communities and donors confront the most catastrophic and devastating financial circumstances in our history, I see an organization that proceeds as if it has an entitlement to your dollars for whatever purposes it may determine. 

Now, we know that JCPA is a "partner" in the Israel Action Network (especially if one uses a very, very loose definition of "partner") at one time providing some "expertise" and staffing. This "partnership" was a device, really, to pump some federation cash into the JCPA Budget. No offense, but here is how JCPA defines itself:
"JCPA is the national hub of the community relations network made up of 125 community relations councils and 17 national Jewish agencies.  Its mission is to inspire, support, coordinate, convene, build consensus and mobilize the network while serving as the national representative of the network’s public policy platform."
And, where is JCPA today? Everywhere and...nowhere, perhaps?

I must admit that back when I Chaired the Chicago JCRC, our mission and work were more narrowly focused (make that "actually focused") -- on matters relevant to our community and the broader community. I know that my mentor on community relations and my then professional partner, the pioneering community relations professional, Peggy Norton, z'l, would have read this JCPA solicitation, rolled her eyes, puffed on her ever-present cigarette, muttered an appropriate expletive and dialed up the JCPA CEO and suggested, as only Peggy could, that "if this is what JCPA is about, resign." Peggy probably would have been more direct.

Over the years JCPA had a succession of great, strong lay Chairs: women and men like my dear friends Shoshana Cardin, z'l, and Maynard Wishner, z'l, and Arden Shenker, Marie Abrams, Michael Newmark, Jackie Levine and Andrea Weinstein, Lynn Liss  and so many more distinguished leaders on a through line to Cheryl Fishbein and the current Chair. But it is apparent that those in leadership today are willing to abide the organization they helped to build focused on nothing.

So how does one identify where JCPA lost its focus? And, where should it go from here?

Hmmm.



Rwexler



8 comments:

  1. Oh where oh where do we go now?
    Where is the leadership? Professional? Volunteer?
    Where are the important voices of vision? Mission? Reason? Rationale?
    The old UJA moniker, We Are One, has been destroyed and trashed.
    The reality today is that We Are Many like a modern day version of the Tower of Babel.
    The babel emanating from the institutional mouths of our national Jewish organizations is just that...babel. Meaningless dribble.
    Who are we? What do we stand for?
    So many who express commitment to Jewish values fail to acknowledge, understand and embrace Hillel’s admonition.
    Oh where oh where do we go now?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Richard, it would be very interesting to know whether or not the local JCRC's have also drunken the Kool-Aid. I remember from my professional days in federations that JCRC's viewed themselves as the local voice of the Jewish community especially on issues that would be deemed more political. They would take positions based on a consensus of the local Jewish organizations that sent reps to the JCRC. Have they also changed their methods and procedures and swung more to the direction of JCPA? If you have any sense of this I'm sure your readers would like to hear. If you don't have a broad sense outside of a few cities maybe readers would share some thoughts about their local community. I now live in a small to intermediate size southern Jewish community. Our federation has a JCRC "committee". I'm not sure it ever meets or if it does it is infrequent. It does "lobbying" at the state level has a focus on Holocaust education in the public schools but when it takes a position it seems it is always reproducing whatever comes from national either JCPA or JFNA.

    ReplyDelete
  3. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mission%20creep

    ReplyDelete
  4. Richard, I have no argument with the critique of JCPA. As a former CRC director, I always felt that JCPA spent too much time debating too many resolutions on too many topics with too little interest and/or consensus in the Jewish community.

    On the other hand, "affect (sic)" is in fact the correct word, since "affect" is a verb, while "effect" is a noun. Let's at least give them credit for that.

    ReplyDelete
  5. In most contexts, affect is a verb, while effect is a noun, so it’s easy to see why many writers default to affect in this verb phrase. Still, effect can be used as a verb, where it means to bring about something (like change). Affect can also be used as a noun, like in the phrase positive affect, which is basically technical shorthand for a good mood in social science research.

    As you can see from the chart below, which charts affect change vs. effect change over time, effect change is the much more commonly used version of this phrase.

    affect change versus effect change

    Of course, this makes sense, since effect change is the correct spelling of the phrase. Affect change still appears, although it’s not clear in what contexts writers are using this phrase.

    ReplyDelete
  6. To Anon 9:00am

    Did you ever wonder why you had no friends in grade school?

    ReplyDelete
  7. To Anon 9:44

    There is nothing wrong with crediting Richard for being grammatically correct.

    You demean him and his blog by having uneducated people troll the site and cast aspersions on others, which was not done by Anon 9 AM

    You sound like the people that supported JFNA leadership unequivocally for these many lost years.

    One might suggest you look not at others situation in grade school, but on your own.

    ReplyDelete
  8. JCPA's eager embrace of the Sharpton March on Washington without regard for where the Jewish community may be on the leadership of (not the purposes) of the BLM Movement is a reflection of the wasted investment the Jewish communities continue to make in the CRC effort. It is time for local CRCs to let their umbrella body to, as you have suggested, focus. If not, funding should stop.

    ReplyDelete