This report provides a summary of activities undertaken through OMB Watch's Nonprofits' Policy and Technology (NPT) project during 1999. It is broken into five categories: Demonstrations; Education and Planning Activities; Innovation Awards; Pilot Projects; and Other Activities. Demonstrations One element of the NPT project is to research and present a number of different potential models for a "sector-wide" communications system that would allow a wide range of non-profit organizations to disseminate information across the Internet through state-of-the-art tools. These tools would ideally help users to categorize, filter, organize and deliver that information in a timely manner. The result would be the identification and development of tools that would also allow participants in such a system to selectively receive the information based upon their own personal preferences. One of the main concerns underlying the demonstration activity is the potential for "information overload" that is a problem for many organizations. The NPT Project, therefore, has examined filtering technologies to address the timely and efficient distribution of policy information to stakeholder groups. During the course of the project, we have established design specifications, examined a number of different information systems, including commercial software products like PointCast as possible models, and conducted a preliminary test through an advisory committee of HandsNet=s WebClipper as a possible approach. During 1999, most of the energy was on exploring one product that we could test not only through the advisory committee but also through end-users. We decided to use BackWeb as the product to test. Usually used in a corporate "intranet" environment, BackWeb enables an organization to distribute small "teasers" via an Internet connection. Such teasers usually contain links back to web pages or additional information. The teasers themselves are organized into various categories (called channels) and software that runs on the recipient's PC allows one to select (or filter) content by individual interest as well as to customize how frequently new information is delivered. Users can elect to view content in the form of a scrolling "newsticker," a title bar newsfeed that runs under any open window on the user's desktop, or as a screen saver. BackWeb has been customized by a number of large corporations in very innovative ways -- Compaq, for example, uses BackWeb to automatically distribute software updates to people that purchase their home PCs. Need Content provision and information sharing in the nonprofit sector today is "democratic," in that any individual with telephone, fax, e-mail, or Internet access, can deliver messages of almost any type to anyone at any time. For recipients of those messages, there is a problem. There is not always an easy way to verify the reputation of the information source, the intentions of the sender, the quality and purpose of the actual content, and the ability to respond or take action on the content. Moreover, with regards to e-mail, there is great potential for receiving too much information, too many copies of the same information from different senders who don't coordinate their dissemination, or not receiving the information as all (given incompatibility among systems, accidentally deleting important information from an unfamiliar sender, etc.) Nonprofits are also limited in the types of content that can be easily distributed among organizations, particularly grassroots and small organizations. Many legacy e-mail systems cannot easily accommodate large file attachments, and not all nonprofits have access to the Web for all staff. An overwhelming number of nonprofits utilize dialup Internet connections, yet the quality of the connection may be erratic. For those nonprofits fortunate enough to maintain advanced information distribution systems, the internal structures are not always conducive to the urgent needs of collaborating organizations and coalition partners. In some cases, the "technology people" become the de facto "content staff," as they increasingly determine how information is distributed, formatted, arranged and gathered. Time sensitive and/or missionBcritical information, most frequently "action alerts" regarding important policy activities are currently disseminated via e-mail lists and faxes. However, given the growing ubiquity of those delivery mechanisms, recipients sometimes miss important information, because they are not always able to sort out high from low-priority information. This problem stems an ability to capture the recipient's attention in such a way that they actually encourages them to notice the information and take action on it while it holds their attention. All of these factors above limit the range of quality content, and quality information sources available electronically to nonprofits, especially the information distributed by their "opposition." In recognition of these needs, the NPT Demonstration Committee evaluated a copy of the BackWeb Technologies BackWeb Foundation 5.0. The intent was to see if the advanced "push" mechanism model could be applied to nonprofits around a given issue area. Information would be drawn from organizations actively engaged in that issue, and balanced with general nonprofit information. The Demonstration During the summer of 1999, the NPT Project at OMB Watch conducted a demonstration of BackWeb, coordinated through its Demonstration Committee. Given the sophistication of the product, and the limited administrative resources, the decision was made to incorporate the basic system installation necessary to show off the widest range of features to interested organizations, with overwhelming them with options. Because BackWeb is more commonly deployed in corporate intranet environments, we wanted to assess the tool in a context that more applicable to the public policy needs of nonprofits. The demonstration was therefore structured with the assistance of the Invest In America Campaign steering committee (http://www.ombwatch.org/ia) to focus on federal budget issues. The system was set up in consultation with BackWeb staff support, and demonstrated over a two month period. BackWeb contributed the software and technical assistance to help establish the demonstration -- a sizable contribution. The first 30 days of the demonstration were devoted to internal testing among the NPT Demonstration Committee and OMB Watch staff to learn the workings of the system. An invitation was then extended to a number of outside organizations to evaluate the BackWeb client. Approximately 15-20 testers, representing of range of organization structures, were included in the outside tester group. In some instances, multiple persons within an organization tested a client. Specifically, the NPT Project evaluated BackWeb's ability to: (1) coordinate a wide range of information types and sources (2) prioritize information for easy analysis and decision-making (3) target the appropriate information for the appropriate viewers (4) deliver an easy to use product (5) allow senders to disseminate information easily and efficiently Testers were asked to download a copy of the customized BackWeb client, set up the software and allow it to connect periodically to the Internet to retrieve content, and think about how it might be used in a public policy context. Follow-up discussions were then conducted with each tester to determine: # ability to install BackWeb Client # ease and frequency of client use # thoughts on the hierarchy of channels # opinions on the type and format of content delivered BackWeb Initial Feedback Tool It was necessary for us to experiment with a few different clients, before we determined the correct settings. Our testers were able to install the client application easily, due to the small size of the Lite Installer package. The installer program came in handy, as it could "remember" where an installation left off in the event of a system crash, and helped facilitate the upgrading of most existing clients to the version required for the demonstration. A good number of potential testers, however, were not able to participate because there were no updated Macintosh clients available for testing that were compatible with the version of the BackWeb server software we were running. Actual amount of time spent using BackWeb and the frequency with which people checked the tools varied. Most people would check first thing in the morning to see if anything new or of interest arrived, and then actively check 2-4 times a time for about 5 to 10 minutes. Most activity occurred roughly for the first four days, and then dropped off to maybe once a day, unless a "teaser" (flash) was triggered. At least half of the testers experienced a system freeze or crash, or significant drain on computer resources. This was despite adjustment in the frequency and capacity settings of downloaded information. At least two users on a dialup modem connection found that BackWeb clients consumed all available modem channels, preempting all other download/upload tasks. There was also concern that BackWeb clients preferred the use of the Internet Explorer browser (if it was installed but not active on a user's hard drive) even when Netscape was the user-selected default. Additionally, testers wanted the ability to create their own customized channels, much like a more advanced "bookmark" that could monitor selected websites for new content, and deliver that content through the BackWeb client. The system we tested required users who were running a Windows 9x/NT operating system, with approximately a 6-10 MB of free hard drive space. There were questions as to whether BackWeb would be developed as more of a Web-based tool versus a stand-alone client, or at least a stand-alone client that would ultimately require less disk space, and allow for a wider range of users. Content The content channels for the BackWeb clients were determined by the Invest in America Steering Committee, with added input from OMB Watch staff. The majority of the channels represented the most frequently updated news and information pages from selected nonprofit organizations that work on federal budget issues. We also included sites of general interest to nonprofits, and nonprofit and mainstream media pages. The first reaction from all testers was that there was a flood of potentially too much information. This was mainly due to our decision to have all clients subscribed to all channels as the default. Users could unsubscribe from the channels they did not wish to receive. Moreover, not every tester understood or took advantage of alert, filter, "show only new content," or search function that could be applied to limit the amount of delivered content. In general, users did find BackWeb to be a very useful content aggregation and synthesizing tool, especially given its ability to draw information from organizations and groups that many people might not regularly tap as resources. This could be a potentially useful way to raise the visibility and participation of organizations overlooked or left out of major policy deliberations, by drawing more attention to the quality of the content versus the name of the groups that produce the content. The quality of the content varied wildly from channel to channel. This was mainly because the content delivered was only as good as what each organization provided, and was in turn dependent upon our ability to define the most applicable capture rules used to draw content from specific web pages. Indeed, one unexpected result of our BackWeb demonstration was our discovery of BackWeb's channel creation and content validation rules regarding web pages. This provided us with a glimpse of the inconsistency among organizations regarding page design and formatting. Another issue was that not all organizations update their pages on a regular schedule, or in the same manner. We found that very few would update on a regular daily, weekly, or monthly schedule, and for those that did, there was a tendency to continue to add all new items to a page in which older items were also included. In some cases this meant that the date something was posted was not the same date that BackWeb encountered the item as "new". More accurate definition of the content capture rules would most likely alleviate this issue. Anecdotally, at least two testers noted that BackWeb delivered important content that was actually used for policy work, before they received similar information from either e-mail or the Web. Format of Content No individual delivery mechanism really stood out from the others as being better. Most people stuck to the basic client interface, the newsticker, or title bar. Most important was the ability to click directly to the specific Web page from which content was drawn. There was uncertainty regarding how useful this might be if some users checked their client later than other users and a page was removed. Testers did note that having the ability to have content organized by the source was helpful, but that there should be the ability to select among different categorization schemes. BackWeb places the burden on the content provider to make sure information is presentable and useful. As such, there is bound to be inconsistency among organizations providing information via the Web, such that users may see content without any attendant summary information. The Publishing Wizard, while somewhat slow, was a feature some testers found useful, particularly because it forces the sender to determine the value and target audience for certain content. More importantly, it forces senders to provide a title, shelf life, and summary information on the content they send, which makes it easier for recipients to determine what to do with the information they receive. The expiration date, in particular, helps to minimize that outdated information would be sent to users. For content that was published through the BackWeb system, most testers, while not sanguine about the exact visual and audio content used as "teasers," did see great potential in the ability to customize how certain groups of recipients can be targeted for certain content. Even more impressive was the ability for the system administrator to actually track not only where and how successfully content is delivered, but whether the content is read or acted upon once it is delivered. There were questions raised, however, about the accessibility of this content to persons with disabilities, especially those with visual impairments, and those with attention deficit disorder, for whom the multimedia content and alert mechanism might prove difficult. General Comments There was real interest in the features of BackWeb that might force standardization of the content that individual organizations publish on the Web, especially if there a common posting interface that would lay out the format and suggested guidelines for updating web pages. On the other hand, there was concern that this might put more of a burden on organizations. There was also skepticism concerning how many nonprofits could be convinced to publish things like action alerts and time sensitive information, organization news, or longer documents through this system as opposed to reaching people with e-mail as they do now. For those testers and organizations interested in learning more about the product, there was concern that this might be too expensive for one organization to implement and maintain. There was, however, interest in talking through the idea of implementing BackWeb as either a subscriber-based service or as a system whose cost is shared among different supporting organizations, as long as it was affordable and it were accessible to a wide range of nonprofit content. Nonprofit groups choosing to implement this and similar solutions will need to give some thought as to what makes the most sense in terms of the deployment model. Given the high-level of central administration necessary to make this run, this is a not a tool that allows easily for unmoderated posting of information. It requires careful consideration and assessment on all manner of issues, including: # a comprehensive understanding of all information flows and needs # logical groups of recipients for certain types of content # how to incorporate new and diverse information sources (either by gauging subscriber response and suggestions, or determining a top-down manner) BackWeb requires a commitment to devote significant technical and people resources to ensuring its successful deployment in a nonprofit public policy environment. More importantly, it requires a realistic understanding of what this tool can do and cannot do. It cannot generate quality information, it can only distribute the information in a manner consistent with its administration. Under the NPT project we will test one other filtering/coordination tool modeled on the newsgroup model. Unlike BackWeb, which is a powerful but expensive tool, newsgroups can be done cheaply but will not be as robust as BackWeb. The newsgroup demonstration will be done during the first quarter of 2000. Education and Planning The Education & Planning Committee provides input on developing (1) an agenda for educating the Working Group about important technology and public policy issues, (2) ideas for improving the education of nonprofits about uses of technology for public policy purposes, and (3) ways to build the technology and public policy capacity of nonprofits. A top priority for this year has been the creation of online resources that would serve as a way to inform nonprofits about the issues addressed by the NPT Project. As a first step, we established NPTalk, which is an electronic forum for professionals, experts, researchers, and advocates interested in the issues related to how nonprofit organizations utilize information technologies in their public policy activities. This is a moderated discussion list distributed in digest form once a day to an average of 750 organizations. The subscriber list to NPTalk is surprisingly stable: not many people unsubscribe. There was a quick surge to subscribe. In fact, within the first two to three weeks the subscriber base jumped to 750 organizations, demonstrating a gap that NPTalk has filled. NPTalk has enabled us to locate, generate, and disseminate information on resources and issues involving nonprofit technology usage in public policy work. NPTalk was a key first step in building an online policy resource center, which was considered a high priority for the third year of the NPT project. NPTalk provides a good monitor of the types of issues and needs that nonprofits concerned about use of technology for public policy purposes have. NPTalk has also built a base of interested individuals that can provide commentary on the development of a web site for the resource center. Online Policy Resource Center During 1999 we have sought input on the need for an online policy resource center. We heard there is a gap in providing or linking to news and information about, and access to: # Promising practices regarding use of technology and public policy. The information should be organized by type of policy participation [the NPT project has nine categories of activities http://www.ombwatch.org/npt/about/poldef.htm that it defines as public policy participation, including lobbying, organizing, and research], as well as types of information and communication tools and strategies employed, and information on the resources and organizational structures that facilitate policy involvement. This should be linked with research findings from the Strengthening Nonprofit Advocacy Project (SNAP) (see discussion below). # Linkages to and among groups to gather and disseminate information on new developments in technology and the policy issues surrounding both technology and the nonprofit sector; # Research on what works for nonprofits exploring strategic uses of technology in their public policy activities, as well as why and how nonprofits engage in public policy, and studies on the effectiveness of particular technologies. Materials developed by the Urban Institute, Aspen Institute, the Nonprofit Academic Centers, and other nonprofit research institutions will be used. We will also link closely with the SNAP research being conducted by OMB Watch and the Lincoln Filene Center at Tufts University (see http://www.ombwatch.org/npadv/snapdes.html for a description of the research effort), which will provide information on factors contributing to or inhibiting nonprofit policy participation. # Free and low cost tools and replicable strategies, and sector-specific tools that take into account sector-specific taxonomies and needs; # Newer and emerging technologies, communications strategies, information delivery models, and public policy examples; # Government information; and # Discussions about technology and public policy participation. This includes answers to frequently asked questions and tips regarding effective advocacy, as well as opportunities to debate and discuss issues about the role of nonprofits in public policy matters. In addition to these categories of information, we have heard that the online resource center should be a comprehensive, interactive web site that provides information about: federal tax laws and regulations on lobbying, including information about the substantial part test and the expenditure test, examples of what is considered lobbying and what is not, rules for nonprofits receiving a federal grant or contract, as well as state laws and regulations with regard to charity lobbying. The intent is not to re﷓invent the wheel. There is a fair amount of literature on lobbying rules, for example, but very little that is targeted to nonprofit executives and available online. (We have developed a partnership with Charity Lobbying in the Public Interest to coordinate web site development to leverage our mutual skills and expertise.) Similarly, there are sites, many operated by NPT Working Group members, which already provide very useful information. Accordingly, the plan should not be to write new materials but to make such material more accessible and useful to nonprofits. A concept paper describing the online policy resource center, along with another paper providing types of services that might be provided through the resource center, are available through http://ombwatch.org/npt/activity/resctr/index.html. These papers served as the basis for two meetings convened in November to discuss the development of the resource center. The first meeting involved roughly 40 stakeholders, representing 30 organizations, to discuss the key content elements, features and services, and operational model for the resource center. The second meeting, roughly a half-day meeting, involved the NPT Education and Planning Committee plus a few others that serve as an advisory committee in the development of the resource center. The results of these meetings are available at http://www.ombwatch.org/npt/activity/ep/stksum.html; more detailed summaries are available through our office. The conclusion of these meetings reaffirmed our notion of the importance of the resource center and strongly urged us to quickly develop a web site that can be modified and improved over time. Thus, in the third year of the NPT Project, we will devote considerable resources to the online resource center. Our plan is to develop a preliminary web site by Spring 2000 and to begin a process to obtain nonprofit input on site improvements. One method for obtaining such input will be through focus groups that OMB Watch will be doing as part of the SNAP research discussed above. Another approach will be to use the NPTalk listserv. Information we obtain will be shared with the advisory committee in order to develop recommendations on improving the web site and complementary services. Innovation and Awards The Innovation & Awards Committee identifies and disseminates information about nonprofit case examples of innovative uses of technology in public policy contexts, and oversees the process which recognizes selected case examples through monetary awards and other forms of recognition. The awards are meant to highlight existing projects, broaden the base of successful projects by giving recognition to those organizations who have been innovative, and build a network of case examples and promising practices for others to utilize. Last year, we received 30 nominations of innovative technology usage by nonprofits, seven of which ultimately were recognized. This year, we received approximately 40 nominations. The grand prize winner receives a $3,000 award, and each finalist receives a $1,000 cash award. Information about the awardees will be used in the development of case examples and promising practices for the online policy resource center (see above). This year's grand prize is awarded to Zero Population Growth (Washington, DC), a national organization addressing population and sustainability iissues, for developing Zero 24-7 an Internet radio station that educates widely dispersed, hard-to-engage target audiences. This prize is dedicated to the memory of Janel Radtke, who worked tirelessly to inspire creative and strategic technology use in nonprofits to affect change within the sector and across society. The finalists are: Democracy Network (Los Angeles, CA), a joint project of the Center for Governmental Studies and the League of Women Voters, which uses creative interactive web technology to increase voter understanding of important public policy problems and foster greater civic participation and interaction between voters and candidates. North Carolina Welfare Resource Exchange (Raleigh, NC), for distributing timely, critical information on resources and promising practices in an easily accessible format through its website and monthly e-mail newsletter. This has encouraged greater collaboration and increased effective communication and service delivery among organizations, advocates, and stakeholders. SeniorNet (San Francisco, CA), for The Solutions Forum, a web-based online discussion that engaged older adults in a collaborative process to generate ideas and solutions to real world policy issues, which were then distributed to key federal elected officials and decision makers. Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition (San Jose, CA), a diverse organization of environmental and neighborhood groups, that utilizes e-mail, listservs, and digitally-created maps to provide an online framework for collecting, evaluating, and sharing information among community actors interested in building a sustainable, non-polluting economy. West Virginia Citizen Research Group (Charleston, WV), for creating a free database of all contributions received by all candidates running for statewide offices during the 1998 campaign cycle, enabling citizen groups to analyze how special interest group dollars were influencing the efforts of their elected officials. Pilot Projects The Pilot Project Grants Program has selected six projects to receive grants ranging from $9,000 to $15,000 that employ information technology and communication strategies to develop or bolster public policy activities, with an added emphasis on projects that have found ways to involve disadvantaged populations and communities. For more information on the project, visit the NPT website at http://www.ombwatch.org/npt/activity/pr/index.htm . Information about the projects that are funded through this small grants programs will be used to provide a core database on the online policy resource center (see above). During the final year of the NPT project, more effort will be devoted to evaluating the grants that have been awarded. This year's recipients are: CCTV (Burlington, VT); Grant Amount: $9,800, to develop "Streaming Democracy," a civic participation "channel" using Internet-based streaming technologies and electronic collaboration tools to increase citizen access to gavel-to-gavel municipal and legislative coverage to households across the state. Center for Environmental Citizenship (Washington, DC); Grant Amount: $14,800, to create a national online resource for student activists interested in the environment and campus environmental organizations to help stakeholders network, take action, and connect with an expanding online community. Hawaii State Rural Health Association (Lihue, HI); Grant Amount: $12,000, to utilize Internet-based multi-point videoconferencing to connect two rural sites to the health committees of the Hawaii State Senate and House to afford rural constituents the opportunity participate in hearings and enable "distance citizenship" via public library and community college connections. International Student Activism Alliance (West Hartford, CT); Grant Amount: $9,750, to enhance its online activist resource developed by high-school students to include online polls, chat, message boards and an online policy database to effectively motivate other students to work for representation in policy deliberations that affect their rights and education experience. Rural Coalition/Coalición Rural (Washington, DC); Grant: $9,650; to improve minority and small farm worker/owner access to information on USDA programs and services, via a database of county profiles comprising census, poverty, and farm data (including number of minority farms and their participation rates in USDA programs). Texas Center for Policy Studies (Austin, TX); Grant Amount: $9,000, to provide state online users with environmental profiles of their communities, via searchable zip-code access to complex information drawn from disparate government and nonprofit resources in a manner that is understandable and usable by citizens, and allows them to contact the appropriate agencies, local environmental officials, advocacy organizations, and sources of pollution themselves. OTHER ACTIVITIES During 1999, we also engaged in a number of other activities including: # Speeches and forums. We have spoken at more than two dozen conference or events about the role of technology and nonprofit public policy participation. # Technical assistance to nonprofit groups inside and outside the U.S. We provide direct assistance to many groups as well as provide referral services. Our reach has gone beyond the U.S. borders, reaching to Europe and Africa. # Consultation on other nonprofit and technology efforts. For example, we have helped in the development of the nonprofit technology resources section of the AOL Foundation's helping.org web site, and the new Nonprofit Technology Enterprise Network (N-TEN), an initiative to bridge the gap between technology assistance providers and the nonprofits they serve in order to develop common nonprofit technology standards. # Resource for news media. We regularly provide background materials to nonprofit news media regarding policy and technology information. Our research on use of email by Congress has had us appear in major media. We have written pieces for a few journals and magazines. # Helped other groups on development of research focused on nonprofits and technology. The project has served as a reference for a number of academic, practitioner, and government inquiries on nonprofit technology trends and issues, and has advised individual research efforts on public policy activities utilizing technology.