DDN Research Advisory Group Meeting
April 14, 2015
Attending: Toddi Steelman, Stuart Macmillan, Maureen Reed, Greg Poelzer, Kiri Staples
Regrets: Tim Jardine, Jennifer Fresque-Baxter, Graham Strickert
Action Items
Task
Responsible
Follow up with community coordinator applicants for resumes and
Kiri
references, draft list of questions for references (will circulate to
group), follow up with references
Send Kiri list of questions used by Parks Canada when talking to
Stu
references in the hiring process
Circulate final package of community coordinator applications
Kiri
(resumes and reference checks) to group
Next steps for Slave River Delta Project: start to work on research
Kiri
methods and ethics
Meeting Minutes
1. Review of community coordinator applicants
Job descriptions for both the PADEMP and SRDP project community coordinators were sent out
(by e-mail, posters, etc.). The SRDP deadline was extended to April 15th because it was revised
after our last meeting before being sent out. We thought we would take advantage of having
everyone in the same room to review all of the applications at the same time. If any other
applications come in for the SRDP position, they will be circulated. There are three applicants
for the PADEMP position and two for the SRDP position. Applicants were only asked for a letter
of intent in the job description.
Comment: A couple of people have sent in resumes – we should ask the rest of the applicants for
them as well, now that we have a sense of how many people are interested in the position.
Comment: We can compare what people will bring to the position with what we described in the
job description. However, it might be reasonable to ask for references as well.
Question: Do we want letters of references, or references over the phone?
Over the phone is better.
Question: Are there any key questions we want to ask of the references?
What are their strengths and weaknesses working within the community? Do they have
experience working with confidential information? (tact, discretion)
Question: How important is language?
Sarah will be working with Elders, hunters/trappers and others that are knowledgeable
about Aboriginal Base Flow.
In this case, you want someone who knows the language – should confirm language skills
with applicants and their references
Question: Has there been any additional thinking on where the person will work from?
We don’t have an office space for them, so it will likely be from home.
In that case we should ask people if they have access to a computer and e-mail.
Action item: Kiri will draft list of questions for references to send to group.
Action item: Stu will send Kiri a list of questions that they use when hiring
Action item: Once remaining resumes have been received and references have been checked,
Kiri will circulate this information to the group and we can have a conversation about how to
move forward.
2. Project Development Group – next steps
As per our discussion at the last meeting, Kiri has been following up with PADEMP and SRDP
about representation on a Project Development Group. The PADEMP members had discussed
this group with Toddi when she attended their Steering Committee meeting in February. Kiri
followed up with a number of SRDP members on the phone to talk to them about the role that we
are hoping this group will play. An invitation was then sent out to all SRDP and PADEMP
members to join the Project Development Group. We have since heard back from one person,
and will now start following up with individuals who have previously mentioned they might be
interested in taking part. The community coordinators will also be involved in this group. For the
Saskatchewan River Delta, we wanted to avoid calling people out of the blue. Evan will be going
to Cumberland House at the end of the month, and he will be mentioning the Group to people
there. Kiri will then follow up with them over the phone. One thing to keep in mind is that there
are several other projects going on in the Saskatchewan River Delta, and we want to avoid overworking people. This is something Kiri can talk about with people when she calls them, but it is
important to think about going forward as well.
Comment: Based on the names that have been suggested it looks like we have fairly diverse
representation so far.
3. Update on Slave River Delta Project
As we have talked about previously, the Slave River Delta project is focused on an evaluation of
existing knowledge mobilization activities. Kiri, Jen and Toddi have been working on putting
together a preliminary list of research questions that this project might focus on. These questions
look at establishing a baseline of existing knowledge mobilization strategies, evaluating whether
these strategies are meeting “community” needs, evaluating whether they are meeting
“researcher” needs, and then looking for whether there are gaps between these groups. It is
important to note that we broke down the questions into “community” and “researcher”
categories for the sake of simplicity at this early stage in the project, but realistically these
categories are not always so distinct. The list of research questions was circulated to the group,
along with a very rough framework of different knowledge mobilization strategies that we put
together. Our next steps will be to use a couple of case studies to see how this proposed
framework stands up to “real world” applications. A couple of suggestions have been made for
which case studies we could use – for example, the SRDP’s work with youth, or Evan’s work in
the Saskatchewan River Delta. However, we are open to more suggestions. At this point we are
looking for general feedback on the direction of this project. Are these research questions
adequate, especially in terms of fulfilling commitment to community? We might have an
opportunity to publish on using this framework for a couple of case studies – are others
interested in participating in that? Applying case studies would be used to add evidence to
support/clarify the categorizations we have proposed.
Comment: In terms of the project this summer – this will be a lot of work. There was a northern
aboriginal participation survey done that involved a lot of knowledge mobilization there. It is
outside the narrow scope of the delta, but the application might be useful if we are looking to
take a step back in the case studies.
Comment: In the category “nature of stakeholder engagement”, it would be helpful to somehow
capture the use of social media, especially among youth. It can be a really powerful tool in
northern communities, and it would be really interesting to capture this explicitly and seeing
where that’s happening.
Question: If we are thinking about community participants, are they familiar with term
“knowledge mobilization”? Is there another term we can use? This might be an important
question to think about, especially in comparing community and researchers. One of the
beginning questions could be what is the goal of knowledge mobilization? Do researchers have a
different end game in mind, as a consequence some of the strategies they employ? This would
influence how they measure success.
Question: When we were writing the grant, we knew knowledge was being created but that it
wasn’t getting into community in effective ways. I think we saw some of that at the PADMEP
Forum and SRDP open houses, in terms of the community frustrations with how they are getting
information back. We want to know if we can close that gap, but we also want to make sure we
fulfill that commitment to the community. At this point we are looking for the blessing from the
Research Advisory Group to make sure we are headed in the right direction and move forward.
Are there reservations about proceeding along these lines?
This is a good place to start.
Action item: Kiri will start to flesh out what we need for research ethics, a timeline, and what
research tools/methods we might use.
4. Trip to OCN this summer
The Opaskwayak Cree Nation is a collaborator on this project in the Saskatchewan River Delta.
However, due to funding limitations, most of our research activities so far have been based in
Cumberland House. Over the summer, we (Kiri, maybe Tim) are hoping to visit The Pas so we
can have a discussion about how they want to be involved going forward, what some of their
research needs/interests are, etc.
5. Partnership Grant
The letter of intent for a Partnership Grant is due in February of next year. This grant is from 4-7
years long, and is worth half a million to 2.5 million dollars. The application is a big process, and
requires a lot of work up front. It has to be sufficiently distinct from a Partnership Development
Grant, which (if we choose to pursue a full Partnership Grant) is something that we will have to
think about. There aren’t any other examples at the U of S of people who have gone from the
Partnership Development Grant to the Partnership Grant.
Question: How much of the funding has to be matched?
35%, which is a lot
Comment: My inclination is to wait a year to apply. By that point we have a better handle on
outputs from the current project that could be demonstrated. Further down the road we will have
a better sense of what we have accomplished.
Comment: There might be other groups outside of Canada (in the US or Europe) that could bring
interest resources to the table, something to provide the scaled-up version of the project.
We will table this idea for now, and put a premium on finishing projects and demonstrating
outputs/impact.