NMTP Newsletter Volume 5, Number 1, January, 2001
Index HOW DO ASSUMPTIONS OF DIFFERENCE AND POWER AFFECT WHAT AND HOW WE TEACH? - Roxana Llerena-Quinn, Ph.D,
PRESIDENT’S REPORT ON THE PROGRESS OF THE ORGANIZATION - NETWORK FOR MULTICULTURAL TRAINING IN PSYCHOLOGY, INC.ANNUAL MEETING, JUNE 17, 2000As we approach the fifth anniversary of our November, 1995, founding, NMTP looks back on a year marked by continued strength and growth of our newsletter, NMTP Notes, new ventures in consultation and education, increased collaboration with the Center for Multicultural Training in Psychology, and internal organizational work designed to improve continuity and coherence of functioning. In the coming year, we look forward to changes in leadership, final approval of our status with IRS as a tax-exempt, publicly supported organization, and work with consultants to plan the next stages of our development as an organization. NMTP Notes is now mailed to 486 subscribers. It remains available to subscribers at no cost, a policy consistent with our organizational mission of broadly promoting the culturally competent practice of psychology. In addition to informing readers of the activities of the organization and its members, each issue of NMTP Notes includes a lead article on issues in culturally competent practice. The fall, 1999, issue was led by an article co-authored by Don Elligan, Ph.D. (a faculty member at the Center for Multicultural Training in Psychology), and Tracey Lewis, M.A., “Differences in the Occupational Choice Process of African American Women Attending Predominantly Black vs. Predominantly White Universities,” an empirical examination of the complex and subtle interactions of race, gender, racism, and sexism in influencing occupational behavior. The spring, 2000 issue was led by an article authored by MTP/CMTP founder Guy O. Seymour, Ph.D., “Cultural Considerations in Critical Incident Debriefing in the Afermath of a Terrorist Incident Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction,” in which readers were led through the practical challenges of addressing the effects of the park bombing during the Atlanta Olympics, when a Turkish journalist died of a heart attack en route to the incident, and offered specific guidelines for culturally competent practice in the extreme circumstances of a terrorist incident. At the request of the Newsletter Committee, the Board approved a publication schedule for the Newsletter, allowing for orderly planning and solicitation of lead articles. NMTP Notes will now be published in January, September, and April. We learned this year that we did not have a sufficient number of volunteers available to construct the infrastructure originally envisioned for a consultation and education service. Nonetheless, two projects were initiated this year, organized as entrepreneurial ventures rather than as formal offerings of a consultation and education service. Approached by the Behavioral Healthcare Network of Massachusetts (BHCN) to provide cultural competence training for their contracted home-based family stabilization services, David Trimble seized an opportunity for NMTP sponsorship. Members of the CMTP Family Therapy Training Team were recruited to prepare a curriculum for culturally competent family therapy training for the BHCN’s contracted home-based family stabilization services, to be delivered from October, 1999, through April, 2000. The training was productive and well-received by the family stabilization teams. Unfortunately, BHCN, finding themselves unsuccessful at resolving issues of funding and support for the programs, terminated their family stabilization service contracts in January, 2000, thus abbreviating the training contract between BHCN and NMTP. The contract produced revenue of $4,620, yielding $1,062 (23%) for the NMTP treasury. This initial venture produced other benefits: The Board set a standard for payment for professional services at no less than $100 per hour. NMTP entered into a business relationship with Paychex, Inc., which managed the payroll and tax accounting for the contract. The second consultation and education venture was less successful, but nonetheless instructive. Dr. Guy Seymour led an effort to offer a day of training on culturally competent responses to terrorist incidents involving weapons of mass destruction. The workshop was advertised via an enclosure in the issue of NMTP Notes led by Dr. Seymour’s article on the same topic. The workshop was canceled because of insufficient registration. We learned from this experience the need to reach well beyond the newsletter mailing list to publicize offerings to the general professional community. This year marked a transition in leadership at the Center for Multicultural Training in Psychology: Director Herbert Joseph, Ph.D., resigned to relocate in the Washington, D.C., area. Kermit Crawford, Ph.D., assumed leadership as Director Ad Interim, replacing Dr. Joseph as a regular attendant at NMTP Board meetings. The Search Committee appointed by the Division of Psychiatry at Boston Medical Center/Boston University School of Medicine ultimately recommended that Dr. Crawford be appointed as Director to succeed Dr. Joseph. The transition was complicated at the beginning of the 99-2000 internship year by the maternity leave of CMTP faculty member Mari Bennasar, Psy.D., and the prospect of departure by another faculty member, Donald Elligan, Ph.D. (who ultimately remained in the Boston area and at CMTP). Dr. Crawford called on NMTP to assist in the process of interviewing candidates for the next internship year. An appeal for volunteer support was broadcast to the membership, and several stepped forward to help fulfill this critical organizational function. This year is the schedule Site Review for re-accreditation of CMTP by the American Psychological Association. NMTP has co-sponsored a survey of CMTP alumnae/i, which constitutes an element of the self-study for the Site Review. This year, our Treasurer Catherine Wong resigned from the Board to address her extensive new duties as graduate student and director of the guidance program in the counseling and guidance department at the University of Massachusetts, Boston. Director Mabel Lam, Ph.D., was elected our new Treasurer, working in collaboration with our stalwart volunteer Bursar, Michael Dixon. With help from the wide network of CMTP/NMTP supporters, we located Ms. Karen Spiller, who volunteered to be a candidate to replace Ms. Wong as our Community member of the Board. We look forward to Ms. Spiller joining the Board at this Annual Meeting. The Membership Committee developed a set of procedures for orderly renewal of membership and maintenance of the Membership Directory. These included changes in the By-Laws, which were ratified by the membership by postal balloting. The Membership Committee sent out renewal notices to our 88 current members in May. Drs. Seymour and Llerena-Quinn took on leadership of an initiative to set up a web site for NMTP, and are currently conducting research for the purpose of preparing a plan for the Board. The email list serve continues to function, although we still have not worked out our difficulty getting access to the current subscriber list. We made progress on the details of organizational maintenance by agreeing on a regular schedule of meetings (Thursday evenings every other month through the academic year), and agreed to a resolution regarding succession of officers, as follows: Every new Director is elected with the understanding that s/he will, during his/her term, stand for election to the offices of Clerk and/or Vice President. No Director shall be elected to the office of President without first having served as Clerk. Next year, we look forward to our final tax-exempt certification by the IRS, and to some form of consultant-facilitated planning to help us move forward into our next stages of organizational development. This next year will also be critical for planning the 30th Reunion celebration of the Center for Multicultural Training in Psychology, and for launching a drive to establish a major endowment to support CMTP. HOW DO ASSUMPTIONS OF DIFFERENCE AND POWER AFFECT WHAT AND HOW WE TEACH?Roxana Llerena-Quinn, Ph.D, Children’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, November 2000 This article offers a critique of teaching stances regarding difference, with a particular reference to family therapy. The assumptions underlying six constructions of difference are examined in relation to their power effects on people’s lives and the training of culturally competent mental health professionals. For the purpose of this paper, culture is understood
as the set of implicit or explicit guidelines transmitted to individuals
from a particular society, group or subgroup, which tells them how to
view and experience the world. These
guidelines are often learned, then dropped out of awareness. The resulting “cultural lenses” that are acquired through this process
are important in determining how we see ourselves and others, what we
value and how we behave. Our
lenses also influence the structures we construct for dividing people
into social categories (rich/poor, men/women, upper class/lower class,
normal/abnormal, etc.) and the elaborate ways for moving them from one
social category into another, with or against their will (Helman, 1994).
The following assumptions of difference illustrate not only how our
lenses influence how we view and respond to the “Other”, but also how
implicitly or explicitly we teach these assumptions to others. It is
important to note at the outset that any individual or institution may
use different assumptions with respect to different categories of difference.
That is, one may be at the same time blind to assumptions about
race and highly enlightened to assumptions about gender. CONSTRUCTION 1: DIFFERENCE AS INFERIORITYBelief that dominant groups are superior and non-dominant groups are inferior is the underlying assumption of this construction of difference. The construction assumes the existence of a normal culture and family, generally reflecting the values of the dominant group in a society, which is held as an ideal. The dominant group defines value, truth, beauty, morality, and allocates social resources accordingly. Deviation from the norm is assumed to be either dysfunctional, of lesser value, or inferior. The belief in the superiority of traditional family structures provides an example: two-parent families are “normal” and “better” than single parent families or alternative family structures. The resulting loss in social status or other negative consequence to the lesser group is seen as deserved. Thus, whenever possible, difference is to be avoided at the risk of stigma, punishment or intervention. Cultural superiority can result in a range of paternalistic postures, where services are applied disproportionately (too much, too little, not at all) to the lesser groups. Power Effects: Patterns of dominance/subordination emerge based on the presumed superiority or entitlement of some groups over others. The potentially most serious power effect is the destruction of the non-dominant group, an extreme example being found in the holocaust of World War II. Intentionally or not, destructive policies and practices threaten non-dominant group’s survival (Cross, Bazron, and Isaacs, 1989). Images of the lesser group as not quite human facilitate the process. The impact of these assumptions can be felt at personal, clinical, and institutional levels. For example, the Tuskegee experiment, a government sponsored research project that withheld needed treatment from African Americans without their consent and at the expense of their lives, was conducted for the sake of science. Other examples include discriminatory lending and renting practices, treating a non English-speaking patient without a trained interpreter, the criminalization of mental illness, and punitive policies towards the poor who are seen and publicly defined as lazy. A tragic and costly corollary of this stance is that society does not fully profit from the strengths of the targeted communities because their contributions are not integrated into the fabric of society. Effect on What we Teach: Information about the real lives and strengths of non-dominant groups is pervasively absent from the curriculum. Whenever non-dominant groups are mentioned, it is to justify their inferiority. The critique focuses on individual or family outcomes without a critical analysis of the role of an oppressive social system in creating those outcomes. For example, in the genetic justification of IQ differences, minority children are seen as culturally deprived, rather than as being denied an education equivalent to the dominant group. Gay and lesbian relationships are seen as transient when laws prohibiting their marriage are ignored. The curriculum is also silent about the personal and social effects on people who are continuously told that they don’t measure up to an imposed standard. The “science” from which the curriculum is derived perpetuates the problem not only through sampling bias, but also through de-contextual definition and analysis of problems. The science of mental health thus reproduces the values and standards of the dominant group. Linear and reductionistic thinking dominate the discourse. Effect on How we Teach: Education takes place
in segregated schools. Access
to academic institutions is not equal for all students regardless of
merit. The dominant discourse tends to be taught by
and for the dominant group by an expert teacher. Students have little input into the learning.
An apparent homogenous “truth” is taught. CONSTRUCTION 2: DENIAL OR MINIMIZATION OF DIFFERENCE. “WE ARE ALL THE SAME”The assumption of sameness and the minimization of differences assume that whatever differences exist are both unimportant and insignificant. Sameness is equated to fairness. Noticing differences is not permitted because it would not be fair. The beliefs in equal opportunity and equal treatment are based on this assumption. This position disguises the fact that everyone starts at different places and with different opportunities and privilege. Dominant values continue to prevail but they are assumed to be universal. Power Effect: The main effect of this stance is “color-class-gender-privilege blindness.” Assimilation is encouraged in all spheres and practices. Access to society’s benefits requires that people must blend in and minimize their differences. Because this construction is based on the assumption that we all start at the same place with the same opportunities, only those who can assimilate benefit. Those who can’t assimilate encounter not only a lack of access but also blame for not thriving in a world of equal opportunity. Inequities resulting from “privilege-disadvantage” dynamics remain hidden and unmarked behind a façade of “fairness.” Blindness to the strengths and identities of non-dominant groups prevent society from profiting from those differences. Inaction is the main response to needs of diverse individuals. Effect on What We Teach: The theoretical “myth of sameness” dominates both the discourse and the curriculum (Hardy, 1989). This myth neglects the importance of context as a shaper of intra- and interfamilial dynamics. Conventional social science falsely teaches a universalized family, rather than pointing to “the normal family” as one of many family forms produced by hierarchical social and economic patterns of development. We teach students not to notice different or discriminatory contexts. Clinical interventions therefore tend to be one size fits all. -Regardless of need, families must fit themselves to the dominant method as taught and practiced. The lives of non-dominant groups remain invisible and the costs of assimilation remain hidden. Initiatives to include cultural competence or contextual issues into the curriculum do not exist. Effects on How We Teach: We teach in desegregated schools where opportunity is equal, but access is limited. Students are left to fend for themselves in addressing the contextual issues ignored by this world-view. Diverse faculty or diverse students’ perspectives are not incorporated into the universal curriculum. The exclusionary manner of how we teach is hidden under the guise of equity and sameness. CONSTRUCTION 3: DIFFERENCE MATTERS: IT IS SOMETHING “OTHERS” HAVEWhile difference is recognized as real, at the core of this construction lies the central assumption that difference is something that matters only to the different others. Differences are accepted, but they are believed to lie outside the centrality of the dominant group’s life. The dominant culture adopts an anthropological stance about those differences. Differences between groups are generalized and amplified. Power Effects: This assumption results in powerful stereotyping. Gross generalizations are usually made about families and individuals in one targeted dimension of difference. With altruism as a central motive, activities are undertaken to learn more about the different other through ethnic food days, ethnic festivals, and an occasional lecture. Individuals from diverse groups are hired to work with diverse populations without attention to the context in which services will be delivered. These altruistic initiatives are largely initiated at the individual level and are not central to the mission of the organization. Individuals of dominant groups, working on these initiatives, often experience confusion when non-dominant groups do not appreciate their efforts. The failure to integrate the diverse perspectives into the central mission of the organization limits the benefits and longevity of these initiatives. The voices of non-dominant groups remain unheard because they are inaccurately “spoken for” by inside or outside group informers whose voices accommodate the dominant discourse but fail to transform it (Sampson, 1993). Effects on What We Teach: The curriculum continues to teach the myth of theoretical sameness. Differences within each group are overlooked and seen as uniform while differences between groups are over-generalized (Hardy, 1989). We teach stereotypes that ignore important within-group differences, such as religious, linguistic, generational, socio-economic, racial or gender differences. Contextual variables such as poverty, neo-colonialism, racism, classism, and sexism are not addressed. Effects on How We Teach: Diversity themes are added-on to the curriculum in a patchy, unsystematic manner. A few interested individuals may develop curricular activities without much organizational support. These curricular activities may take the form of a lecture, an elective class, a reading group or an occasional receptive supervisor. Due to the “newness” of these activities, few faculty are trained and there are few faculty from non-dominant groups. Curriculum content presents stereotypical representations of diverse groups. Often, members from non-dominant groups are placed in the position of experts who are asked to speak for whole groups. For dominant groups, there is much talk about the “other” with little examination of self in relation to the other. Dominant group faculty, supervisors and students are not held accountable for developing the competencies necessary to work with diverse populations. Participation in these courses or activities is seen as elective and voluntary, separate from one’s ethical obligation to all families. CONSTRUCTION 4: DIFFERENCE IS GOOD FOR BUSINESS. THE PROFIT MOTIVEIn the current climate of managed care, the dominant group has realized that difference has profit potential in the marketplace. The ever-growing numbers of diverse patients and health system economic pressures have given birth to the “business of diversity.” Access to different population markets offers a business advantage. Difference becomes a marketing issue. The economic motive brings new levels of the organization and management to the table and initiatives to reach out to diverse communities become more formally organized. Competition brings an air of recognition to the issue. Training initiatives are seen at more levels of the organization. However, difference is still something that “other” groups have. Differences are not yet valued for their learning potential nor are they integrated into the core of the organization. Power Effect: On the positive side, there is increased access to services for diverse families. Separate units of diverse staff are established to serve diverse families. Initially, non-dominant groups welcome these opportunities at developing parallel structures that can respond to clients’ needs. On the negative side, marginality continues. The parallel structures usually function independently without integration into the mainstream. The separate program is expected to meet all the service needs of diverse populations while mainstream clients have access to a wide range of services and specialties. The separate program becomes the minority version of one- size fits all minorities’ needs. Before long, the diverse workers realize that their clients don’t have access to the same services as mainstream clients and that they themselves don’t have the power to influence the way business is done. The social conditions that give rise to “symptoms” remain largely unchanged. The risk of tokenism continues for the minority provider. Accomplishments can be short-lived due to market fluctuations, since the parallel programs are usually the last to be funded and first to be downsized with economic fluctuations. Since there is no formal accountability to the non-dominant communities served, the dominant organization never attempts to learn from these separate programs, and any unique skills and services created during the process are lost. Effect on What We Teach: Schools develop some courses that address the needs of diverse communities, but these are separate, not integrated into the general curriculum. Content is derived primarily from academic sources without community input or culturally competent research. As the curriculum begins to broaden, there are discussions about “access,” and “best practices,” but there is little discussion about the dominant individual or organization in relation to those with less power. Power issues are addressed from a mainstream perspective. Effect on How We Teach: There is an increased flux of resources into teaching diversity or courses on multiculturalism. Some states may even require these courses for licensure. The classrooms become more integrated, but not representative of the client populations. The number of minority faculty is outrageously small. Activities are seen as mandated (affirmative action, licenser requirements, and economic motive) but not as needed or desired. Unspoken conflict may divide groups on different sides of the curriculum. The curriculum aims at expanding minds, but not the hearts of the students. The knowledge acquired is seen as lying outside oneself, only needed to stay competitive in the field. CONSTRUCTION 4: DIFFERENCE AS VALUE FOR BETTER KNOWLEDGE. MULTIPLE PERSPECTIVES ENHANCE THE LEARNING OF A LARGER TRUTHDifferences are valued and needed to reach better knowledge, insight and growth. Knowledge that is constructed from multiple perspectives has greater value and relevance. Belief in the underlying vitality of difference does not confuse diversity per se with differences that stem from oppression. There is a growing awareness of the limitations of language and the lack of frameworks for explaining relationships. Efforts are made to understand what is invisible, unspoken. This is particularly important because language is an instrument of power and people have power in a society in direct proportion to their ability to participate in the various discourses that shape that society (Foucault, 1980). Power Effect: All voices are valued, invited and must be heard. Instead of ending dialogue, differences deepen the conversation and promote self-reflection and self-awareness. People feel increasingly understood in the ways they understand themselves. Difference is understood as existing in and between all of us. Effect on What We Teach: There is a strong commitment to include the voices of all families in the curriculum, the well-known and less well-known, the confident and the tentative with an active search for the forgotten. Frameworks and assumptions that inform our work and ways of being explicitly take into account how communities are shaped both by painful histories of expropriation, conquest, slavery, and discrimination and by rich legacies of culture, ancestry, and heritage (Krieger, 1966). We learn from one another as we share about our families, our communities, and ourselves. We teach that each one of us is author and authority of our experiences and perspectives, and that knowledge grows through contact with the other. Effect on How We Teach: Because of the belief
that knowledge is generated by a community of knowers who bring multiple
perspectives, the faculty is a diverse team that purposely seeks its
own diversity and full participation in the co-creation of new narratives. Students are seen as valued resources that
add voice, diversity and perspective to the teaching and learning. Community voices are considered fundamental
to the shaping of the curriculum. Knowledge
is generated by integrating written narratives of others together with
the narratives of the lived experiences of students, teachers and families.
Diversity expands the explicit and hidden curriculum.
The curriculum is both didactic and experiential, taught and
learned by all. CONSTRUCTION 6: DIFFERENCE AS AN ECOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIP, CONNECTED TO SURVIVALConsonant with current understandings of biology and global ecology, difference comes to be understood as fundamental to the survival of both ourselves and of all living systems. A successful and sustainable occupation of the biosphere depends fundamentally on our interdependence with each other, with all other life and on the vitality of our differences. We gain an appreciation of the inherent self-interest in considering the interest of others and the awareness of our collective responsibility in the face of inequity. Difference is understood to be a relationship between self and others that can expand, nurture and fulfill through connection - or that can destroy or marginalize through oppression. While differences are good and necessary for survival, they are optimal when they exist in a context of justice. Power Effect: Difference is valued and power is shared. All meanings have a transformational potential. There is a growing understanding that unacknowledged power disguises accountability. Discovery of our interdependence makes us realize that we are accountable to one another. The health of society ultimately depends on the health of all families, as the health of the biosphere depends on the health of all species. All of us are accountable for that health for all families. Each of us has the power to transform our hearts and the social structures we construct. We can think of the whole society and act in our local contexts. Effect on What We Teach: The curriculum reflects a fluid relationship between what is taught and the realities of all families and communities. It seeks both a clearer language and methods to understand how power, inequality and social justice affect all families. The clinical interventions taught are relevant to the biological, psychological, social, economic, cultural and spiritual needs of families. The health of the provider and the environment in which services are delivered are also protected. The empathy extended to families must also be extended to oneself, fellow students, and colleagues. Culture is not seen as a trait that individuals or families possess, but as a dynamic relationship between the individual and the context from which justice emerges. Competence is not a “place” where one arrives but a life-long process characterized by openness to learning. We learn how to learn from each other. Effect on How We Teach: We teach in an integrated, sustainable environment transformed by our similarities and differences as we face our common humanity. Analyses of power and privilege include the realization that we depend on each other for survival and to the extent that we disregard one aspect of our ecology, we diminish our possibility for survival in another. This understanding is contained not only in one course or lecture, but in everything we do through the curriculum. Teaching is more dialogical and experiential and less didactic but immensely insightful and respectful of diverse learning preferences that may include a variety of approaches. There is recognition that different forms of understanding/teaching may be needed in the learning of different skills throughout the learner’s development. Bibliography:Comas-Diaz L, Brinton Lykes M, Alarcon R. (1998) Ethnic conflict and psychology of liberation in Guatemala, Peru and Puerto Rico. American Psychologist 53, 778-792. Cross T, Bazron B, Dennis K, and Isaacs M. (1989). Towards a culturally competent system of care. Vol. 1 A monograph on effective services for minority children who are severely emotionally disturbed. National Technical Assistance Center for Children's Mental Health Georgetown University. Foucault M. (1980) Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977. New York: Pantheon Books. Hardy K. (1989) The theoretical myth of sameness: A critical issue in family therapy training and treatment. In GW Saba, BM Karrer, K Hardy (Eds.), Minorities and family therapy. pp.17-33. New York: The Haworth Press. Helman C. (1990) Culture, health and illness. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann: 2-6. Krieger N. (1966) Inequality, diversity and health: Thoughts on race/ethnicity and gender. JAMWA. Vol. 51, No.4: 133-136. Lewis M. (1993) The culture of inequality. Boston: University of Massachusetts Press. Sampson E. (1993) Identity politics: Challenges to psychology’s understanding. American Psychologist 48, 1219-1230 Sleek S. (1998) Psychology’s cultural competence once simplistic, now broadening. APA Monitor. Vol.29, No.12. Thomas D, Ely R. (1996) Making differences matter: A new paradigm for managing diversity. Harvard Business Review. September-October: 79-90. DR. MANUEL TERUEL AWARD
The Board has agreed to establish an annual award for the best essay by a graduate student in psychology on the topic of Cultural Competence in Psychology. The winner of the award will see her/his essay published as the lead column in an issue of NMTP Notes, and will receive as prizes a plaque and a cash award of $500. A permanent Honor Roll will be prominently displayed with the names of each year’s winner. President Guy Seymour and Director Roxana Llerena-Quinn will be working on strategies for publicizing, reviewing, and conferring this Award. MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL MEETING - NETWORK FOR MULTICULTURAL TRAINING IN PSYCHOLOGY, INC. SATURDAY JUNE 17, 2000In Attendance: President David Trimble, Vice‑President Roxana Llerena‑Quinn, Directors T. Leon Nicks and Dyanne London, Clerk Guy Seymour. Also in Attendance: CMTP Director Kermit Crawford; Consultant Carmen Rivera. Not in Attendance: Treasurer Mabel Lam, The results of the balloting on the new Community Member, Ms. Karen Spiller, was reported. Ms Spiller is ELECTED to the Board of Directors of this organization. The Membership Committee reported that the membership form was missing from the original dues renewal mailing so the Committee will send out another mailing including the form so as to notify members in arrears what they owe. Dr. Lucksted will also e‑mail the form to those members whose e‑mail addresses we have. The Committee confirmed that the actual date for member renewal is July 01 although the committee starts renewal procedures in May. Later this summer the committee will send an e‑mail to the Board containing the list of members who are at risk of being dropped from membership. The Vote to remove still‑unpaid members will be taken at the September Meeting. Dr. Trimble presented the Treasurer's report in the absence of Dr. Lam. In the recent confusion of the merger between Bank Boston and Fleet Bank, it is unclear whether NMTP's accounts are held by Fleet Bank or by Sovereign Bank. Changing the mailing address for bank statements and reprinting of monthly statements for the final report still needs to be done once this confusion is settled. Dr. Crawford reported that CMTP has been relocated to the Fuller Community Mental Health Center on the East Newton side of the Medical Center Campus. The space is larger and more comfortable and will better accommodate the increased number of Interns in the coming years. Dr. Crawford also reported that the APA Accreditation site visit has had to be postponed and a new date has not yet been set. The Board also suggested that each Intern be assigned an NMTP mentor as there has been a disconnect between the Internship year and experience and the Intern's sense of affiliation to NMTP as the network of colleagues, even with Dr. Seymour's having paid their internship year's membership dues. The Communication and Technology Committee reported that the issue of a web presence for NMTP is still unresolved. Despite conversations with several Internet service providers and the BU Listserv Master it is still unclear what the best way to proceed will be as there are evidently hidden costs in each option for internet hosting that we have explored so far. Dr. Llerena‑Quinn and Dr. Seymour are still working on a refining the possibilities although they have assured us that there will be a web site in the foreseeable future. Management Consultant Carmen Rivera joined the meeting and we engaged in a spirited discussion of what the expectations of a form of strategic planning would be for NMTP given our size as an organization and our resources. We discussed the shifts in Mission that have occurred over the last two years and the target of the 30th Anniversary Reunion as a near‑time future point of reference. Ms. Rivera proposed to the Board that, after having read the NMTP documents, she could see a process that begins with: Brainstorming, then some External Review followed by a review of the structure of Similar Organizations and then an Identification of Goals which would occur over a nine‑month period. We agreed that four areas of concern emerged from our history and the present discussion, viz.: 1. fundraising 2. increasing membership 3. developing the organizational informational source 4. staff development While Ms. Rivera noted that she does not do the grant writing or funds identification, she can certainly support the efforts of the Board to do so. The Board agreed that there was a need to focus on action steps to be taken in each of the areas of concern above and VOTED to hold a retreat to sharpen the Mission and Goals and Objectives. The Board further VOTED that Carmen Rivera be contracted to facilitate the retreat and a date for it was tentatively identified for Saturday, October 21, 2000. Dr. Llerena‑Quinn proposed that NMTP consider broadcasting a call for papers and funding an award for the best essay on cultural competency in psychology from any graduate student in a doctoral program in psychology. This would at least go towards the NMTP goal of promoting culturally competent practice. Finally the Calendar of Meeting Dates for 2000‑2001 was identified as follows: September 28, 2000 Thursday 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM November 30, 2000 Thursday 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM January 18, 2001 Thursday 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM March 29, 2001 Thursday 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM May 24, 2001 Thursday 7:00 PM - 9:00 PM June 16, 2001 Saturday 10: am - 4:00 PM ANNUAL MEETING The Annual Meeting was adjourned at 1:00 PM.
|