Feature: Improve FOLA's institutional memory

Objective

This research project aims to shed light on some of the key moments in FOLA’s trajectory since inception. The insights will be actionable, allowing the FOLA team to answer questions such as:

Where did FOLA start from? Motivations, objectives, hopes, challenges faced…
Who organized the partnerships with other organizations (LA Food Bank and others)?
Who were we in contact with at these organizations? Is that person still there, or is there someone else who we can speak with?
How has FOLA’s identity changed over the years? Are there any lasting values/aspirations/aspects that hold the project together?
How can FOLA’s current team strengthen the credibility of FOLA (through partnerships and other means), its reach (number of visitors) and impact (serving better people who are experiencing food insecurity, strengthening local communities in LA, reducing food waste, supporting alternatives to the current market-based food distribution system, undermining the stigma of poverty)?

Context

FOLA is a volunteer-run project that faces challenges in maintaining continuity and institutional memory. When a contributor leaves FOLA, their departure can result in a loss of critical knowledge and context despite best efforts of individual volunteers, PMs and team leaders to document all the work processes, decision-making, rationales, and the various considerations that led to those decisions. This gap in continuity leads to situations where future contributors, lacking clarity on historical decisions, may find themselves revisiting and discussing previously explored and discarded options, due to the reasons for their initial rejection becoming obscured or forgotten over time. The problem not only hampers the project’s efficiency, but also risks the repetition of past mistakes, hindering the overall progress and evolution.

How is it now?

FOLA volunteers are encouraged to document their work, meeting notes, and any other information that may be useful to future contributors. The results are uneven.

Discussion

Qualitative methods are particularly well-suited for these objectives. In particular, two complementary methods will be employed:

[x] Review of relevant documents (strategic documents on FOLA’s shared drive, other online articles about FOLA, FOLA’s writing/content on WayBackMachine). Results are presented in the research plan.
[ ] Semi-formal interviews with people who had contributed to FOLA in the past. Main objective of the interviews will be to learn about the interviewee’s key motivations and considerations while they worked at FOLA.

The insights may allow FOLA team to re-write the "About Us" page and have a clearer sense of the past and potential future partnerships.

References:

Research plan

hackforla / food-oasis