Earlier today, we posted (see below) on Caitlin Sullivan’s essay encouraging Princeton grads to consider public service in lieu of shrinking opportunities on Wall Street and in the private sector.
Here’s another angle to consider. The financial meltdown and lack of budget dollars will tempt many to argue that federal funding for service programs needs to be trimmed. But Chuck Slocum, President of The Williston Group, a management consulting firm in Minnesota, makes the opposite–and correct–argument: that during the tough economic times which America is just beginning to endure, the safety net provided by service programs will be more important than ever. Here’s the point Williston made in a post to MinnPost.com, following a day on Capitol Hill organized by Voices For National Service:
Whatever the final outcome of the federal plans to shore up ailing financial markets, the volunteer advocates told members and staffs of the U.S. House and Senate on Sept. 25 that, in the coming months and years, more and more fellow citizens would need the social “safety net” fortified by the national service movement.
Williston then went on to detail how service programs in Minnesota (including one of our ServiceNation coalition partners, Admission Possible), are making a real difference in improving literacy, delivering return on investment, and leveraging private dollars:
The reading corps currently in the field in Minnesota is helping in the effort to close the so-called “achievement gap” with a two-year initiative that is reaching 15,000 youngsters with necessary literacy skill development. Minnesotans offered the 10-member Congressional delegation information about the kids selected, the sites served in each of the state’s eight districts, the public-private $15 million funding streams, the one-on-one methodology applied to each child and the 80 percent success rate.
In AmeriCorps programs funded in Minnesota through its oversight group, ServeMinnesota, some $10 million was leveraged last year, the fourth-highest in the national competition, involving 800 in the field and trained AmeriCorps members working on a dozen projects including Admission Possible, the Minnesota Math Corps and the Community Technology Empowerment Project. By emphasizing “innovation, investment and alignment,” the organization has directed money and people power to programs that serve as community catalysts for positive social change.
These are the sorts of arguments we all need to be making forcefully, clearly, and with good data. Nice work, Chuck!
