At the end of 2024, alumni participated in an election to determine the future structures and steps for the network. The need for this election was realized after the Alumni Council worked on various projects to solidify our community's needs and envision the future of our network. The goal of their work and this election was to define next steps in our network's transition as our funding from the Doris Duke Foundation begins to sunset. You can read more about DDF's decision here. As shown in the illustrated timeline above, this year will be spent trialing new structures for the network and reevaluating our needs. You can read more about what lead us to this transition vote here and here.
Below is a summary of the results and decisions for moving forward, compiled by our alumni consultants, Tonyisha Harris and Storm Lewis.
The following results indicate the Doris Duke Conservation Scholars Alumni Network transition preferences. 196 alum voted (out of roughly 600 total- over 30% participation!) indicating their preferences for organization structure and capacity for engagement via a Rank Choice Voting system.
The results show overwhelming support for locating a fiscal sponsor (check out "voting options" to learn more about what a fiscal sponsor is) as an immediate next step in the transition process. The option to find a new fiscal sponsor received the highest volume of votes across participants’ first and second-choice selections. Identifying a fiscal sponsor not only ranked above every other option, but it also received the majority of discrete sections, totaling 81 votes. This number more than doubled the votes allotted for any other option.
While some of the choices are mutually exclusive as a first step (i.e. advisory council vs. steering committee, fiscal sponsorship vs. 501(c)3 status, etc.) other highly ranked choices complement each other. For example, electing a voluntary Steering Committee (check out "voting options" to learn more about what a steering committee is) ranked the third highest as a first-choice option. Establishing a Steering Committee as a next step would build a critical governance structure while supporting the search for a fiscal sponsor.
Regarding capacity, 60.2% of the voters (118 individuals) indicated that they could contribute 1-5 hours a month to sustain the network. Additionally, 19.4% can contribute 5-10 hours per month. Cumulatively, almost 80% of the network is willing to contribute 1-10 hours of work a month, showing a high interest rate in continued engagement. The following table and information highlight the overall votes across first, second, and third-choice rankings.
Forming a volunteer alumni Steering Committee and identifying a new fiscal sponsor and new funding opportunities are critical next steps reflected in the election results. These next steps also reflect the capacity of alumni to contribute to their success.