During the past six months, we’ve been thinking hard about the future – about the complex challenges facing Maine island communities, about the Institute’s various island service programs and about the financial uncertainties we have all experienced during the past few years.

Three months ago, as part of a long range planning effort, we hired a consulting group, Market Decisions of South Portland, to conduct a series of confidential interviews with islanders to assess the Institute’s goals, image and effectiveness. They interviewed 50 year-round island residents from a list of over 100 islanders who have had direct contact with our programs during the last several years. The objective of the interviews is to understand better how our work is perceived by our most important constituency.

The list encompassed islanders from all 15 year-round communities, representing a diverse cross section of islanders, resulting in 15 respondents from Casco Bay and 28 from Penobscot Bay and nine from Downeast islands. Of these 52 respondents interviews included people with diverse livelihoods such as fishermen, teachers, community planners, administrators, librarians, homemakers and selectmen. While it should be clear that the Institute selected the people participating in this study, please understand that the Institute took special care to include islanders that held a wide range of opinions about the Institute, both good and bad.

Here’s some of what we learned:

A central message is that Institute leaders including myself need to redouble efforts to “spend more time on the islands,” just listening. “The Institute needs to saturate themselves in the community.”

“If they want to help with nitty-gritty island problems, spend time here quietly.”

“They’re too disconnected…”

“Just get out and visit.”

“It’s a mystery what they choose to work on. Make this visible and apparent.” In addition, year round islanders urged the Institute to “get more involved in Island organizations” to “find out what people want and make goals after that.”

We also got lots of positive feedback. Without a doubt, the two best-known and positively viewed programs offered by the Institute are the Fellows Program and this newspaper, The Working Waterfront. The Fellows program responds to requests of communities that request the support of new college graduates for one or two years. In the words of community members, the Fellows Program “is singularly effective because it is driven by the self-identified needs of the island communities,” and connects well with islanders: “Island fellows have a good reputation with the average Joe.” This program is new in the last three years and is intended to speak to some of the skepticism felt by community members who have experienced “a lack of follow up” and focus during past institute initiatives.

The Institute recognizes that the Fellows Program is a success because it is guided by island communities. It is now applying this approach to supporting islanders in its Marine Resource, Community Development and Education programs. For instance, the voices of year-round island community members led to the convening of the Affordable Coast forum in October, and increased efforts to grow the traditional and non-traditional scholarships programs offered by the education program at the Institute. Some of these changes are beginning to have an impact.

“They are broadening what they are doing.”

“They are becoming more visible in the community as a whole.”

“They are rising to the challenge (and) are more productive.”

“They are more professional in their approach.”

Mixed responses surfaced regarding the reputation of the Institute with various groups of people. Community members felt that “some fishermen don’t like the Institute, they say they are too pushy” and that there are “trust issues among lobstermen.” But others praised recent lobster collaborations, “They have done some tremendous job on sustainability in lobstering,” and they “are doing a good job with lobster fishermen … putting fishermen and scientists on the same side of the fence.”

The general image of the Institute is also a subject of scrutiny and concern. “It bothers me, the ties with rich folks.” “They do the bidding of rich benefactors,” and “Stick with the people with dirty hands.” But others mention they appreciate the fund raising capabilities of the Institute, praising “the money they got and gave to community efforts” and “the ability of the Institute to connect islanders with the right resources.”

These messages are being taken to heart and will be addressed in the coming months as I visit islands to listen to islanders and to observe the work of the island fellows and programs managers. “It’s important to have that personal contact and not get … information through a flier or pamphlet.” As the Institute matures it is becoming more and more clear that the future of the Institute lies in part with the younger generation of students and community members who live on and care about island communities. I intend to guide and support the work of these people as they struggle to learn the feeling of accomplishment that accompanies a successful program effort. I can only hope that these feelings, in combination with those of you who felt that programs at the Institute are improving, point to a transformation. We are learning from past mistakes and with every successful program we get better at listening to what people need and how to go about supporting them.

Philip W. Conkling is president of the Island Institute.