Fcc challenge

383 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
383
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • House-keeping notes: \n* Bathrooms\n* We’ll be switching rooms \n* Coffee & Snacks\n* Lunch\n\nRoles: Note-taker? Time-keeper\n
  • \n
  • What do web-based prizes accomplish? \n1. Surfacing Innovation\n\n2. Engaging constituents\n\n3. Intelligence Gathering/Market Research/Learning 'what' people are interested in\n\n4. Increasing org Relevance (Google/Linkability)\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • As the FCC works to provide speedy Internet service to everybody, a new survey suggests it faces two big hurdles: cost and digital literacy. Among those who don't have broadband Internet—an estimated 93 million Americans—the most common reason (36%) is that it costs too much. Coming in second (22%) is that people don't think they have the skills for it or fear going online, followed by 19% who simply don't see a need for it.\n"What this means is that cutting prices alone will probably not have a major effect on broadband adoption," writes Marguerite Reardon at CNET. "But lowering prices on service, coupled with adding programs that teach people the digital skills they need to access the Net while also educating them on how the Internet can enhance their lives, could have a substantial effect."\n
  • \n
  • Summary: \n* Wildly successful for USAID\n* Small cash-prize\n* Expert judges\n\nUsers gained: \n* Valuable feedback\n* Exposure for their ideas\n* Access to new contacts\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n Project Participant Motivation\n * Number of Awards/Finalists?\n * Cash Amount of Awards and distribution to each?\n * Other PARTNER-sponsored rewards for participation: (things like publicity, further support, etc)\n * Selection process? Community or panel?\n \nSuccess Criteria \n * Number of submitted projects: 125\n * Geographic reach of submitted projects:\n * Site visitors to PARTNER Challenge page (on PARTNER site):\n * Number of commenters on submitted projects:\n * Number of links (measured by Google) to PARTNER Challenge page (on PARTNER site):\n * Number of user-generated blog posts (on NetSquared site) referring to the PARTNER Challenge or specific projects:\n * Number of user-generated blog posts (not on NetSquared site) referring to the PARTNER Challenge or specific projects\n * Other\n 3. Technology Emphasis:\n * Type: Mobile Application/ Mobile application development\n 4. Participant Criteria\n * Tax or other status of eligible participants:\n * Official location of eligible participants (for example, do they have to be incorporated or otherwise registered in a specific country or countries):\n * Budget or other required financial information:\n * Organizational size restrictions: * Grant or prize delivery restrictions (full rules and regulations/FAQ’s due to Net2 no later than 1/9/09 – tracked Son the WIKI)\n 5. Project Criteria\n * Can eligible projects be in ideation phase?\n * Can eligible projects be already completed? \n 5. Rules and Regulations\n * Voting rules\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • If we understand the interactions that will take place, we’ll gain a better understanding of ‘WHY’ we work the way we do.\nWorkshop: Networks of stakeholders involved in the work\n
  • \n
  • * Tax or other status of eligible participants:\n * Official location of eligible participants (for example, do they have to be incorporated or otherwise registered in a specific country or countries):\n * Budget or other required financial information:\n * Organizational size restrictions: * Grant or prize delivery restrictions (full rules and regulations/FAQ’s due to Net2 no later than 1/9/09 – tracked Son the WIKI)\n 5. Project Criteria\n * Can eligible projects be in ideation phase?\n * Can eligible projects be already completed? \n 5. Rules and Regulations\n * Voting rules\n
  • What makes the NetSquared technology challenge model different from other technology challenges? Unlike most other challenges, \nNetSquared challenge process leverages the NetSquared community to provide ongoing support, above and beyond the timeframe of a challenge. At its most successful, the NetSquared technology challenge model democratizes the opportunity for funding, catalyzes community-driven innovation, and is collaborative by design. While most challenges serve the few (the “winners”), NetSquared aims to serve the many—most particularly, the communities served by all the social innovations and ideas surfaced, refined, and showcased during the challenge process and beyond. \n\n Project Participant Motivation\n * Number of Awards/Finalists?\n * Cash Amount of Awards and distribution to each?\n * Other PARTNER-sponsored rewards for participation: (things like publicity, further support, etc)\n * Selection process? Community or panel?\n 2. Success Criteria \n * Number of submitted projects: 125\n * Geographic reach of submitted projects:\n * Site visitors to PARTNER Challenge page (on PARTNER site):\n * Number of commenters on submitted projects:\n * Number of links (measured by Google) to PARTNER Challenge page (on PARTNER site):\n * Number of user-generated blog posts (on NetSquared site) referring to the PARTNER Challenge or specific projects:\n * Number of user-generated blog posts (not on NetSquared site) referring to the PARTNER Challenge or specific projects\n * Other\n 3. Technology Emphasis:\n * Type: Mobile Application/ Mobile application development\n 4. Participant Criteria\n * Tax or other status of eligible participants:\n * Official location of eligible participants (for example, do they have to be incorporated or otherwise registered in a specific country or countries):\n * Budget or other required financial information:\n * Organizational size restrictions: * Grant or prize delivery restrictions (full rules and regulations/FAQ’s due to Net2 no later than 1/9/09 – tracked Son the WIKI)\n 5. Project Criteria\n * Can eligible projects be in ideation phase?\n * Can eligible projects be already completed? \n 5. Rules and Regulations\n * Voting rules\n
  • \n
  • \nWhat makes the NetSquared technology challenge model different from other technology challenges? Unlike most other challenges, \nNetSquared challenge process leverages the NetSquared community to provide ongoing support, above and beyond the timeframe of a challenge. At its most successful, the NetSquared technology challenge model democratizes the opportunity for funding, catalyzes community-driven innovation, and is collaborative by design. While most challenges serve the few (the “winners”), NetSquared aims to serve the many—most particularly, the communities served by all the social innovations and ideas surfaced, refined, and showcased during the challenge process and beyond. \n\n Project Participant Motivation\n * Number of Awards/Finalists?\n * Cash Amount of Awards and distribution to each?\n * Other PARTNER-sponsored rewards for participation: (things like publicity, further support, etc)\n * Selection process? Community or panel?\n 2. Success Criteria \n * Number of submitted projects: 125\n * Geographic reach of submitted projects:\n * Site visitors to PARTNER Challenge page (on PARTNER site):\n * Number of commenters on submitted projects:\n * Number of links (measured by Google) to PARTNER Challenge page (on PARTNER site):\n * Number of user-generated blog posts (on NetSquared site) referring to the PARTNER Challenge or specific projects:\n * Number of user-generated blog posts (not on NetSquared site) referring to the PARTNER Challenge or specific projects\n * Other\n 3. Technology Emphasis:\n * Type: Mobile Application/ Mobile application development\n 4. Participant Criteria\n * Tax or other status of eligible participants:\n * Official location of eligible participants (for example, do they have to be incorporated or otherwise registered in a specific country or countries):\n * Budget or other required financial information:\n * Organizational size restrictions: * Grant or prize delivery restrictions (full rules and regulations/FAQ’s due to Net2 no later than 1/9/09 – tracked Son the WIKI)\n 5. Project Criteria\n * Can eligible projects be in ideation phase?\n * Can eligible projects be already completed? \n 5. Rules and Regulations\n * Voting rules\n
  • LOGISTICS\n 1. Project Contacts (name, email, phone):\n * PARTNER or other project staff\n 2. Content Approver (name, email, phone):\n * Person responsible for final signoff on all published content and messaging\n 3. Press Contact (name, email, phone):\n * Person to whom all press inquiries should be referred\n 4. Reviewer Contacts (name, email, phone):\n * Sector specific experts to help review materials prior to launch\n 5. Brand Indentity\n * PARTNER logo (b/w):\n * PARTNER logo (color):\n * Usage rules for PARTNER logo:\n * About PARTNER language:\n * Biographies of any appropriate PARTNER staff:\n
  • What makes the NetSquared technology challenge model different from other technology challenges? Unlike most other challenges, \nNetSquared challenge process leverages the NetSquared community to provide ongoing support, above and beyond the timeframe of a challenge. At its most successful, the NetSquared technology challenge model democratizes the opportunity for funding, catalyzes community-driven innovation, and is collaborative by design. While most challenges serve the few (the “winners”), NetSquared aims to serve the many—most particularly, the communities served by all the social innovations and ideas surfaced, refined, and showcased during the challenge process and beyond. \n\n Project Participant Motivation\n * Number of Awards/Finalists?\n * Cash Amount of Awards and distribution to each?\n * Other PARTNER-sponsored rewards for participation: (things like publicity, further support, etc)\n * Selection process? Community or panel?\n 2. Success Criteria \n * Number of submitted projects: 125\n * Geographic reach of submitted projects:\n * Site visitors to PARTNER Challenge page (on PARTNER site):\n * Number of commenters on submitted projects:\n * Number of links (measured by Google) to PARTNER Challenge page (on PARTNER site):\n * Number of user-generated blog posts (on NetSquared site) referring to the PARTNER Challenge or specific projects:\n * Number of user-generated blog posts (not on NetSquared site) referring to the PARTNER Challenge or specific projects\n * Other\n 3. Technology Emphasis:\n * Type: Mobile Application/ Mobile application development\n 4. Participant Criteria\n * Tax or other status of eligible participants:\n * Official location of eligible participants (for example, do they have to be incorporated or otherwise registered in a specific country or countries):\n * Budget or other required financial information:\n * Organizational size restrictions: * Grant or prize delivery restrictions (full rules and regulations/FAQ’s due to Net2 no later than 1/9/09 – tracked Son the WIKI)\n 5. Project Criteria\n * Can eligible projects be in ideation phase?\n * Can eligible projects be already completed? \n 5. Rules and Regulations\n * Voting rules\n
  • \n
  • http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/mar/28/google-leaflet-internet-guide\n
  • OUTREACH\n 1. Lists:\n * Listservs appropriate for email outreach:\n * PARTNER outreach mechanisms:\n * PARTNER partners appropriate for email outreach:\n * Case Studies (Due to Net2 1/9/09)\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Fcc challenge

    1. 1. The Schedule Time Topic 8-9 Introductions, Roles, Responsibilities 9 - 9:30 Creating Context 9:30 - 10 Evaluation & Impact 10 - 10:45 Collaborative Framework 10:45 - 11 Break 11 - 12 Challenge Criteria 12 - 1 Lunch 1 - 1:30 Project Inventory 1:30 - 3 Engagement Strategy 3 - 3:15 Break 3:15 - 4:00 Easy Next StepsJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    2. 2. Setting the stage: ‣Trust. We will not cover everything related to this project today. We will have the space and time to address topics we’re unable to cover over the course of the day. ‣Parking lot. When conversations deserve further discussion, we’ll post them in the parking lot, and discuss how best to address items prior to breaks. ‣This will be iterative. We will adapt the schedule to address issues and opportunities that emerge from our conversation throughout the day.June 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    3. 3. Intro’s, Roles, Responsibilities: 60 minutes ‣Who are you? ‣How will you be contributing to this project? ‣What do you expect will change if this project is successful?June 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    4. 4. Welcome! My name is Billy Bicket. ‣ 1973: Born, Bronx How I expect to contribute: ‣ 82: World Cup, Italy ‣ 91: Graduate High School Methodology: Provide framework to help FCC/Knight ‣ 92-96: USMC meet project objectives. ‣ 96-00: University of San Francisco B.A. History ‣ 2000: Teacher, Aim High, Urban School Technology Platform: Ensuring appropriate ‣ 00: Burlingtonfreepress.com, Development technology ‣ 01: 1800flowers.com, Corporate Development is in place and working towards instantiating goals ‣ 02-04: Meetup.com, Director, Partnerships ‣ 05- present: Sr. Director, TSG Community Engagement: Oversee management of ‣ Twitter: @billyb community engagement across the NetSquared ‣ My links: http://del.icio.us/monklife network.June 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    5. 5. Creating Context: We will walk away fromthe day with a better understanding of... ‣Project objective/s. ‣How this work fits within the larger national broadband plan. ‣FCC/Knight Challenge participation and giving criteria. ‣How we will work together to accomplish the objectives.June 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    6. 6. How does this project fit with relatedactivities? increase wireless spectrum 100-Squared Initiative redirect subsidies Digital Literacy Corps increase affordability first-responder networkJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    7. 7. Evaluation & Impact: 30 minutes ‣Case study: USAID ‣Where do you see parallels? ‣What will we do differently? ‣Giving criteriaJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    8. 8. USAID: Press ReleaseJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    9. 9. Example: People Enrolling PeopleJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    10. 10. USAID Case Study: Projects encourage participationJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    11. 11. USAID Case Study: Increasing web relevance All-- I just thought you would be interested...I was doing some research tonight, and the Development 2.0 Challenge comes up #16 in a Google search for "USAID". Given that this did not exist 4 months ago, this is a remarkable accomplishment-- you cant game search engine rankings easily--success only comes from people linking to you. This means that the Development 2.0 Challenge is one of the most linked to activities in the agency, outranked by only our wikipedia entry, a handful of mission websites, the Careers section of the website, the PVO registration site and FEWSNET. EXCELLENT WORK! Please pass this along to NetSquared.... WesleyJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    12. 12. USAID: Case StudyJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    13. 13. USAID: Project Metrics‣ Number of submitted projects‣ Site visits to USAID Challenge page‣ Google ranking‣ User-generated blog postsJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    14. 14. How will we evaluate success?June 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    15. 15. Collaborative Framework: 45 minutes ‣NetSquared Challenge Interaction Model ‣FCC/NetSquared Collaboration Space ‣Revisiting roles and responsibilitiesJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    16. 16. Towards A Collaborative FrameworkJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    17. 17. http://bit.ly/dkFCnQJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    18. 18. FCC Site Social Web FCC Project Space NetSquared Local NetSquared Platform The Interaction ModelJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    19. 19. Revisiting Roles & Areas of Focus TSG Knight FCC Methodology Giving criteria Criteria & Rules Platform Guidance Content Community Eval & Impact OutreachDate An initiative of TechSoup Global
    20. 20. Challenge CriteriaJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    21. 21. Challenge Criteria: 60 minutes ‣Participant Criteria ‣Tax or other status of eligible participants ‣Does location matter? ‣Budget or other required financial information ‣Organizational size restrictions ‣IP restrictions ‣Grant or prize delivery restrictionsJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    22. 22. Challenge CriteriaJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    23. 23. Project Inventory: 30 minutesJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    24. 24. Project Inventory: (30 minutes) Design & Input & Project Project Evaluation & Strategy Launch Recruitment Selection Impact Design Convene Key Partner outreach Patriot Act Workshop Stakeholders Outreach Research Strategy Partner selection Community vote Developed Tech Interviews Judges finalized Expert vote Development Design Doc Finalize Tagging Delivered Engagement protocols Strategy TimelineJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    25. 25. Engagement Strategy: 90 minutes ‣Outreach ‣Partner Recruitment ‣Online & OfflineJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    26. 26. Engagement Strategy: June 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    27. 27. How do we envision this work fitting in tothe public dialogue?June 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    28. 28. Outreach: 30 minutesJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    29. 29. Engagement Strategy: Online & Offline EngagementJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    30. 30. June 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    31. 31. Celebrating Winners & The FieldJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    32. 32. How does Apps For Inclusion fit?June 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    33. 33. Guiding Principles: ‣1. Success correlates with alignment of organizational and stakeholder interests. ‣2. We need leadership buy-in to make smart decisions quickly ‣3. We’re asking people to engage with us. We should expect that we provide a high-level of constituent engagement. ‣4. Humility. You can stumble if you’re humble. ‣5. Transparency reduces complexity. Documentation whenever feasible for easy porting to the web.June 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global
    34. 34. Easy Next Steps: 1. Define project timelines 2. Publish challenge criteria 3. Schedule post-workshop meetingJune 16, 2010 An initiative of TechSoup Global

    ×