This presentation was designed for people who were in attendance at the talk. The slides are not self-explanatory.

1. BEYOND GIVING & VOLUNTEERING
How individuals are using
technology and data to support
vulnerable populations
Trina Isakson
@telleni

2. THIS IS NOT ABOUT…
• How vulnerable populations are/are not using
data and technology
• How nonprofit organizations and
governments are using data and technology
for social good

3. COMMON LANGUAGE
• Crowdsourced
• Crowfunding
• Hackathon
• Application
• Open data

4. Consumerism
Technology
and data
Investments
Business
owner
practices

5. Consumerism
Technology
and data
Investments
Business
owner
practices

6. Technology
and data

7. Technology
and data
• Hackathons and
collective initiatives
• Mobile and web
applications
• Open and
crowdsourced data
• Digital advocacy

8. Technology
and data
• Hackathons and
collective initiatives
• Mobile and web
applications
• Open and
crowdsourced data
• Digital advocacy
Consumerism
Investments
Technology that helps people
make different investment choices
(i.e. crowdfunding)
Technology that helps people
make different consumption
choices

9. WHY STUDY
THIS?
Canadian context: bitly.com/beyondgandv

10. HOW ARE INDIVIDUALS
USING TECHNOLOGY
AND DATA TO
SUPPORT
VULNERABLE
POPULATIONS?

11. HOW ARE INDIVIDUALS
USING TECHNOLOGY
AND DATA TO
SUPPORT
VULNERABLE
POPULATIONS?GENERALLY, THEY’RE NOT

12. The database is constantly growing but
contains the following base layers:
Reserve Name, coordinates, population, etc.
ICT coverage (broadband, internet, cellular,
and telephone)
Water Treatment Information (coverage,
population serviced, quality, type of treatment,
etc.)
Wastewater Treatment Information (coverage,
population serviced, quality, type of treatment,
etc.
Boil Water Advisory Information (historic and
current, risks, and population affected)
Census Data
Montréal Accessible

13. HACKATHONS
OFTEN SUFFER
BECAUSE
There is little focus; reliance
on general ‘ideas’
Data often is good for action,
less for policy and social
change
Participants are usually not
social scientists, do not have
lived experience, or are not
the intended user
Little to no ongoing support
after event

14. HACKATHONS
OFTEN SUFFER
BECAUSE
There is little focus; reliance
on general ‘ideas’
Data often is good for action,
less for policy and social
change
Participants are usually not
social scientists, do not have
lived experience, or are not
the intended user
Little to no ongoing support
after event
HACKATHONS
COULD BE
BETTER IF
The challenge is made
specific and arises from lived
experience
The data is good and deep
Design encourages more
diverse participation
There is a plan for ongoing
support for implementation
and future changes

15. There are over 40
Canadian
crowdfunding sites in
various stages of
development.

16. CLICKTIVISM

17. DRIVERS
Interest in
all things
‘local’
Increased
belief in
responsibility of
business to
play a role in
social good
Young people
taking action
In addition to /
correlated with
giving and
volunteering

18. CHALLENGES
Lack of awareness
among individuals
Uncertainty and fear
among potential
supporters
Lack of capacity and
interest among
charitable sector
The activities that
draw interest are not
necessarily the ones
that have impact

19. TAKEAWAYS
①Nonprofit and tech folk: get to
know each other
②Try a non-tech hackathon
③Don’t operate in an ‘echo
chamber’

20. MINI-HACK
• Start with a question or challenge that, if answered, would move
your mission forward.
1. Can we clarify the question? Is it specific enough?
2. Who would we need in the room for a hackathon?
3. What good data or other resources could help us?
4. Is it possible for participants to have transformational, experiential
learning regarding the challenges that are being addressed?
5. How can we ensure the results of the hackathon live on?
• Rely on the nonprofit person or person with lived experience as a
key source of information.

21. CONTACT
• Trina Isakson
• @telleni
• trina@27shift.com
• Links and slides: 27shift.com/nettuesday