These examples reflect work led by members of our team across prior roles, partner organizations, and collaborative engagements. Many of us worked together as part of AmericaSpeaks (a pioneering nonpartisan nonprofit active from 1995-2014 that brought hundreds of thousands of people together for large-scale citizen deliberation) and other civic engagement initiatives. Each case demonstrates the power of well-designed processes to build trust, surface collective wisdom, and deliver actionable results.

Challenge/Goal

AmericaSpeaks convened over 1,000 people in 15 cities across the country to help a coalition of advocacy groups prioritize strategies for addressing policy issues to better serve the needs of adults living with Autism. The goal was to improve the lives of American adults living with autism, with a focus on housing, employment, and community life.

Process & Methods

Families of and adults living with autism, service providers, advocates, elected officials and other concerned community members in 15 cities convened in person and virtually to discuss, rate, and prioritize strategies to address policy issues. Approximately 950 participants in 16 cities and 50 participating online simultaneously engaged in a linked, facilitated, deliberative process aimed at identifying priorities for a congressional briefing and future action.

Outcomes & Impact

  • A national consortium and policy agenda grew out of this multi-stage deliberative engagement process
  • Connected allies to work together on shared goals
  • On July 15th, 2010, AFAA hosted a Congressional briefing in Washington, DC to discuss priorities for action in the public and private sectors

Challenge/Goal

As part of its Racial Equity Initiative, the California State Water Resources Control Boards sought to gain employee input on their perspectives of racial equity from a cross-section of its thousands of statewide staff. Ferdman Consulting's team of five consultants, led by Dr. Bernardo Ferdman, designed and facilitated a series of 12 listening sessions with over 370 employees to discuss racial equity, both in terms of their own internal experiences as employees, as well as their approach to serving the residents of California.

Process & Methods

The sessions were held via Zoom, and participants were engaged via:

  • Chat functionality for real-time input
  • Polling software (Slido) for gathering perspectives
  • Facilitated breakout groups for in-depth discussion

The process created safe spaces for employees to share their experiences and perspectives on racial equity both internally within the organization and in their service to California residents.

Outcomes & Impact

  • Provided a comprehensive 99-page report describing, analyzing, and interpreting findings
  • Informed the Water Boards as it developed and adopted a racial equity resolution
  • Subsequently created a racial equity action plan
  • The State Water Board's Resolution No. 2021-0050, "Condemning Racism, Xenophobia, Bigotry, and Racial Injustice and Strengthening Commitment to Racial Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, Access, and Anti-Racism" referenced the work done by Ferdman Consulting

Challenge/Goal

The City of Culver City, California partnered with the National Institute for Civil Discourse (NICD) to meaningfully engage Fox Hills, a historically underrepresented, diverse, and densely-populated neighborhood facing development pressure. As part of NICD's Revive Civility and Respect Cities initiative, the goal was to enhance engagement between citizens and elected officials, rebuild trust with Fox Hills residents, and use structured civil discourse to address concerns about future development while preserving the neighborhood's unique character.

Process & Methods

Two three-hour Community Conversations engaged 80 residents and stakeholders in structured dialogue about the future of Fox Hills. The process included:

  • Small group facilitated dialogue (6-8 participants per table)
  • Civil discourse training and practice
  • Real-time digital capture of participant input
  • Rapid synthesis by facilitators to identify emerging themes
  • Mobile voting to prioritize community concerns
  • Advisory Board of 14 community stakeholders guiding outreach and discussion topics

Outcomes & Impact

  • Built a network of 100+ residents and stakeholders invested in planning for Fox Hills' future
  • Identified shared values and priorities: Walkability, balanced retail development, affordability, and preserving small-town character
  • Articulated a 15-year vision focusing on better communication, public transit improvements, and transparency between community, city, and developers
  • Directly informed policy: Community input fed into the City's General Plan Update for Fox Hills
  • Established foundation for ongoing civic engagement using civil discourse principles

Challenge/Goal

This was a listening session convened by the Executive Director and Board Chair of an LGBTQ+ organization embroiled in controversy because they did not fire someone over a harassment claim. The organization was facing significant community tension and needed a structured way to hear from stakeholders.

Process & Methods

  • Polling to allocate point-of-view time on mic: Ensured balanced representation of different perspectives
  • Attempted to use AI for theming: Initially explored AI-assisted theme identification but was met with objections from participants, and efforts were abandoned in response to community concerns
  • Balanced facilitation: Structured approach to managing a highly charged environment

Outcomes & Impact

  • Positive effect in negative environment: Allocating mic time by view seemed to have a positive effect in a meeting with a lot of negative energy
  • Continued engagement: The protesting group did engage the Executive Director outside the meeting after they "stormed out" two-thirds of the way through, suggesting the process created some opening for continued dialogue despite the volatility
  • Maintained structure: Process prevented complete breakdown despite extreme tension

Situation

Starting in 1999, DC Mayor Anthony Williams made a commitment to move beyond traditional budget hearings to genuinely engage thousands of residents in shaping municipal priorities and budget allocations.

Our Approach

Large-scale citizen summits brought together 2,000-3,000 residents, community leaders, and government officials in structured dialogue about city vision and budget priorities. The day-long process included:

  • The mayor presenting a draft strategic plan
  • Facilitated small-table discussions (10-12 people)
  • Real-time polling to identify shared priorities
  • Synthesis of recommendations into actionable themes
  • Direct integration into city policy and budget decisions

Outcomes & Impact

  • Massive Participation: 2,000-3,000 residents engaged in meaningful budget dialogue
  • Direct Policy Influence: Citizen input shaped $5+ billion annual budget
  • Democratic Innovation: Model replicated in cities worldwide
  • Trust Building: Demonstrated government commitment to genuine engagement
  • Inclusive Representation: Reached residents across all eight wards and demographics

Challenge

West Palm Beach faced the challenge of meaningfully engaging its diverse community to identify racial and ethnic inequalities and develop actionable policy recommendations. The city needed a structured, inclusive process that would generate legitimate community input while avoiding the disruption and grandstanding common in traditional public meetings.

Process & Methods

Our team partnered with Justice and Sustainability Associates to design and facilitate two large-scale Action Summits using our Collaborative Community Conversation technology:

Summit 1 (December 2020) - Issue Identification

  • Virtual Format: Zoom platform with facilitated breakout rooms
  • Structured Dialogue: Small group discussions across five key areas (Criminal Justice, Health, Real Estate & Housing, Finance Banking & Business, Education and Workforce Development)
  • Real-time Synthesis: Theme Team distilled key insights from all breakout sessions
  • Community Prioritization: Participants collectively prioritized next steps and recommendations

Summit 2 (June 2021) - Feedback & Validation

  • Hybrid Format: 350+ participants across online and six satellite locations
  • Transparent Review: Community feedback on Task Force draft recommendations
  • Inclusive Input: Accessible, transparent space for learning and knowledge sharing
  • Final Prioritization: Community identification of additional priority areas

Tools & Approaches Used:

  • Facilitated Small Group Breakouts
  • Real-time Thematic Analysis
  • Democratic Prioritization
  • Hybrid Participation
  • Structured Dialogue Process

Outcomes & Impact

  • Zero Disruption: "At no time was there any disruption, grandstanding or confusion that is common at many community meetings"
  • High Participation: 350+ engaged participants across diverse demographics
  • Policy Integration: Community priorities directly integrated into Task Force's final policy recommendations
  • Community Trust: Participants described the process as "100% effective and respected"
  • Transparent Governance: Created accessible, inclusive space for civic engagement
  • Actionable Results: Clear, prioritized recommendations ready for implementation

Participant Feedback

"This type of open communication with the government is 100% effective and respected by residents within the community. Great summit truly appreciated."

"These topics are a clear indication that the right conversations are being had during your collaborative meetings. As a native of West Palm Beach, I appreciate these types of forums and look forward to doing my part to support the development of my city."

Want to Create Similar Impact in Your Community?

Let's explore how our proven approaches can address your unique challenges.