Meeting for Sufferings: Vibrancy in Meetings project reviewed
Friends at Meeting for Sufferings heard about the evaluation of the Vibrancy in Meetings programme
In the afternoon session representatives looked at potential next steps for the Vibrancy in Meetings programme. Along with a summary project review from the National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) Charities Evaluation Services, Friends were given a report on future options being considered by Woodbrooke and Britain Yearly Meeting (BYM) trustees.
Caroline Nursey, clerk of BYM trustees, asked Sufferings to consider the context of the work, noting that the median number of members per Meeting has dropped from twenty-four to eighteen in the last ten years. ‘Quakerism really really matters.’ she said, and it was important to find ways of making sure it still mattered in the twenty-first century. ‘We need to hear from you about what you think will work.’
Michael Hutchison, clerk of Woodbrooke trustees, said that there had initially been some suspicion about the project at the study centre. But it had been great to work with BYM trustees as the project developed, and it was clear that the ‘exciting and energising’ work was producing results.
Martin Ford, from the Vibrancy in Meetings steering group, referred to the results of the NCVO evaluation, pointing out that surveyed Friends were overwhelmingly satisfied with the work. Role-holders were more confident, he said, showing a video of Friends in Vibrancy areas who spoke of the valuable contributions made by local development workers (LDWs) who were ‘outside of us’ but could ‘act as a bridge’ to ‘get us talking to one another’.
Suzanne Ismail, BYM’s head of networking and engagement, explained that the project could move forward in different ways, with a phased roll-out, or by pursuing ‘decentralised’ opportunities whereby some functions and services would be delivered from locations other than London and Birmingham.
Representatives ministered warmly about the report and the LDWs in their areas. ‘We need the project to continue’, one Friend from a Vibrancy area said. ‘Don’t pull the plug.’
Other Friends referred to the advantages of decentralisation. A Friend from Scotland compared the situation to how the Scottish parliamentary engagement officer had motivated Friends there.
Even those outside the Vibrancy areas had benefitted, said a Friend from an area without a LDW, who felt that things being learned in Vibrancy areas were being picked up in Meetings like his.
One Friend cautioned against those elements of the programme that meant Friends were ‘holding on to what we’ve got’ rather than reaching out in the manner suggested by the diversity and inclusion discussion. Another representative with experience of working with a LDW added that Friends would also need to make sure that Vibrancy workers were themselves supported.
Ultimately, pointed out Paul Parker, recording clerk of BYM, ‘we’ll know when we’ve been successful when Vibrancy stops being talked about as separate, and just becomes part of what support looks like for Quakers in Britain.’
BYM trustees will reflect further on the programme in June.
