Yoni Sarason presents

2. College didn’t really connect me with the broader St. Louis entertainment or Jewish community.

3. Vast majority of friends left after graduation

4. No ‘Welcome (back) to St. Louis’ greeting

5. Existing organizations were YPD, SLIC, Gesher City, JGrads

6. Most either skewed older, felt exclusive, cold, or hierarchical

7. Most were based out of the county, not the city

8. Events were under umbrella of communal organizations and often staff people were gate keepers instead of facilitators

9. Long cycle time to go from participant to leader

10. Moishe House

11. Grew out of organic community building, officially started late summer, 2008.

12. Became 25-30 people a week for Shabbat, events often focused on cultural and other events in St. Louis

13. Yearly budget of $25,000, covered by local donor in St. Louis, model moving towards Federation support

14. From 7/2008-7/2009, 248 participants, almost 1,250 total attendance

15. Benefits

16. Low start-up and ongoing costs, with potential for large impact

17. Established model with national name recognition and resources

18. Freedom to experiment and adapt to local community

19. Peer led

20. Drawbacks

21. Culture and outcomes driven by the residents, with lax oversight, therefore vital to have right people, might otherwise become very cliquey

22. Relatively large programming budgets may extend culture of entitlement

23. Limited potential for leadership beyond residents

24. Potential for resident burnout and challenges sourcing new residents

25. Next Dor STL

26. Grew from success with Moishe House, officially started November, 2009

27. Model stressed peer planned events in which staff merely facilitates and provides logistical and promotional support to planners and focuses on relationships instead of membership

28. Model is also based on an open community space

29. First year operating budget of $22,000 (not including house renovation costs), supported by Synagogue3000, Kranzberg Family Foundation, JFED STL, and other individual donors

30. 11/2009-11/2010, 330 participants, almost 1,550 total attendance

31. Benefits

32. Provides opportunities for young adults to create the programs, events, and gatherings that interest them with minimal roadblocks.

33. Provides opportunities for partnerships with local agencies to connect with young adults

34. Most events cost little or nothing to produce

35. Peer led

36. Drawbacks

37. New model with young adult leadership often lacks practical organizational knowledge, clear accountability

38. Large initial start up costs (acquisition/renovation of a property)

39. Founder burnout potential

40. OJC reaction

41. Named MH and ND as two examples of organizations to support

42. Concierge roles

43. Bridging the gap between positive experiences on an Israel trip and community engagement and interaction

44. Connects young adults to programs like ND, MH and post-Israel opportunities, but also to cultural life in the city.

45. Provides individual attention and action

46. Key Take Aways

47. Build on existing networks

48. Create a warm environment in which people are greeted on arrival and introduced to others

49. Positive experiences shared by word of mouth are most powerful form of marketing, but being in the right digital spheres helps too.

50. Lower barriers to entry, remove us/them (in crowd-out crowd, membership)

51. Become an entry point into the energy of the city

52. Jewish communities have historically thrived in vibrant cities, we must recognize the interdependence of the city system (and the urban core) with the Jewish community.