Great. Well, I will go ahead and get started. Uh Hi, everyone. Thank you for joining today. I'm super excited to be here virtually uh Women tech. Uh for some really quick background on me, my name is Jen. I use she, her pronouns.I've been at Google for about 13 years now. Uh And I'm the global head of technology at google.org. And I also lead the company's uh pro bono work. Um For those of you who are just joining us, please feel free to introduce yourselves in the chat. Uh I've personally already attended a number of uh super interesting and relevant sessions that I learned a lot from and would love to sort of continue to build this community of, of folks interested in, in doing tech for good. So please feel free to share a little bit about yourselves in the chat or uh connect with me on, on Twitter or linkedin so we can continue the conversation. Great. Uh So why are we here? Um I think this topic is really relevant at any time, but especially now, it has never been more clear that we need business and nonprofit and government and science and tech communities to really work together to solve this public health crisis as they can't do it alone. Um For two super quick examples, as you can see here, um As many folks in the US are familiar the pandemic overwhelmed many state unemployment insurance websites.

So we need to do more first, just to keep those types of sites online and second to make it easier and more user friendly for folks to actually access those services and benefits. Um Another quick example, you know, we still don't really know who the Coronavirus victims were.

So we need to do more to track and map the spread of the disease, particularly by race and ethnicity and gender and socio-economic status. And really all of the other political and social determinants of health to better understand the root causes of why communities of color have been so disproportionately harmed and to really help inform more equitable government response efforts. Um So again, those are just two examples uh from, from the headlines, but there's certainly no shortage of problems that could benefit from these types of cross sector collaborations. Um And there's also been an influx of folks who want to help but don't necessarily know how best to jump in because doing pro bono work uh or perhaps more accurate doing pro bono work well, is, is hard. Um many nonprofits as well as state and local governments who we've worked with have shared with us. Um Some of the frankly, not so great experiences that they've had when receiving pro bono support in the past. Um For example, a common complaint was that tech experts were coming in and maybe developing solutions that were great, but leaving without a clear maintenance plan in place. So at google.org, we've been doing this work for a little while now.

And so the goal for today is really just to share a bit more about how we structure our volunteering efforts and perhaps more importantly why we structure them in that way um to avoid some of the common pitfalls and, and really to deliver lasting impact. So, um I'm, we're gonna discuss some of the mistakes that we've made and the lessons that we've learned and hopefully leave folks with some ideas about how to maximize your impact when lending tech expertise. Um And then I'll also try to leave some time at the end if there are any questions. So feel free to drop those in the chat in the meantime, or again at the end, can, can also leave some time before I dive in. Uh I just want to provide some really quick background on google.org. So google.org is Google's philanthropy. We bring the best of Google to innovative nonprofits who are tackling the world's selfish challenges. Um And we do that in a few ways, but the first is by providing our grant dollars. So 1% of Google's profits go to support nonprofits around the world. The second is by providing our products and technology. So for example, installing Wi fi during crises, and then finally, we do that by providing what we think is our most valuable resource, which is our people. So how do we actually do that?

Um It's looked a little bit different over time, but essentially, we took all of our learnings from both the various pro bono programs that we've had. But then also those that we've seen out in the world and we really use them to create a new program. The Google A fellowship which provides teams of Googlers with the opportunity to complete up to six months of full time pro bono work to accelerate the social impact of nonprofit its and civic entities. Um This past year, we engaged over 100 Googler who use their skills in engineering and product management and user experience and more um to complete over 100,000 hours of full time pro bono work with nonprofits and civic entities who are working in areas like education and economic opportunity, uh criminal justice and, and of course, crisis response.

Um So at its core, the fellowship really just helps create um some added structure around our pro bono engagements in order to address and avoid some of those common challenges that we've heard from nonprofits and civic entities around, for example, projects not being sustainable or maintainable.

And so I'll share some of the structure through the lens of the fellowship. But really there are lessons that I think apply to any pro bono engagement. So, um, to kick this off, we find it's really helpful to break down our pro bono engagements into stages. They're not necessarily uh messy, you know, mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive. But, um, there's sort of a few of the steps that we think about when developing a new project. So we've had a lot of lessons learned throughout each of them. But today, just in the interest of time, I'm going to try to focus on maybe just one highlight from each as we go through. But again, I'm always happy to uh connect offline to share more and to learn from others experiences as well. So first uh is project selection. So whether you're selecting a project for yourself or you're creating one on behalf of your organization, um It can be really helpful to just establish a set of criteria upfront to ensure you're dedicating time to those projects where you can have the highest differential impact.

Um This is certainly a common theme. It's not uh by any means unique to google.org, but it's really all about the implementation. And so we've continued to really push ourselves on this one. sort of continuously refining our criteria as we've found that when you get it right, your potential impact truly increases exponentially. Um And so this is a very simplified uh view of the rubric that we use internally. But um here, you can see a few of the core criteria that we use to evaluate all of our potential projects. And uh great question, I can definitely share these slides out. Uh I will do that after, after the presentation. Um So I'm not gonna read through these all individually but um can share an example from maybe a past fellowship so that you can see what this looks like in, in practice. So for example, uh back in 2019, um we were considering a potential fellowship with give direct me, the project was about mapping disaster data in this case from storm damage alongside uh socio-economic indicators to help them sort of more efficiently and effectively target aid in times of crisis to those who needed it the most.

Um And so the first thing we were thinking about per our criteria was the potential impact. So we knew we could create a tool that would sort of meet their particular need. Um But we knew we could do so in a way that was flexible and extensible and fully open source so that it could be used not just after hurricanes, but after any crisis and not just by give directly but also by the sector at large. Um We also thought we could use this as a case study to really evolve the way that the sector uh responds in times of crisis. So google.org has always been a big believer in the power of direct cash. We're one of the initial funders of give directly. And I've also supported a number of other organizations like the Family Independence Initiative that I'll talk about a bit later as well as the National Domestic Workers Alliance that are also sort of all about providing access to capital. Um And then we also knew that RCTS randomized control trials that we funded in the past on direct cash transfers had shown really positive outcomes versus in kind donations, for example. And yet cash giving continued to make up a relatively small share of of disaster response spending.

And so again, this is all still just about impact. We felt this project had potential because it could help shift the way that the sector responds in addition to helping give directly. And this tool was initially designed to, to help make the case for cash relief after a traditional disaster like a hurricane. But of course, it's been really exciting to see cash take center stage in the discourse around COVID-19 relief as well. Um So again, those were just a few of the things we were thinking about in terms of impact. And as you can see, it extends sort of well beyond the impact on the ORG itself in a couple of different ways. First, because the tool itself uh could be useful for others in the space. But then also because the approach giving cash could help really shift the way that the sector responds. Um next up, as you can see here is feasibility. So we certainly look at whether a given project is technically feasible and scope to enable uh self-contained progress within the given time frame. Um But uh especially with A I, perhaps more importantly is the the flip side of that question, which is it necessary to, to use A I? So A I is not always the right answer.

And we see a lot of projects that could benefit significantly from more basic data analytics. And so we always look at whether it's possible to use A I or given technology to solve a problem. But I think perhaps more importantly, we also look at whether it's necessary to do so tech projects can come with a lot of overhead. And so simplifying is always better and we want to make sure orgs are um taking really a user and a problem centered approach versus a tech solution centered approach. So, um in other words, the question should never be, how can I apply tech or A I in my work, it should always really start from a problem statement, a challenge that the org is facing that they haven't been able to with other solutions. Um So just to summarize in terms of feasibility, we we get most excited about projects where um the tech component is not just feasible but also absolutely necessary. And ideally where other solutions have been tried first, um I won't go into uh this level of detail on each of these, but hopefully gives a sense of sort of the type of impact you can have when you really push yourself to find a clear set of criteria that makes sense for you.

And, and you, you get into the weeds about what those criteria really mean for you or your organization in practice. Um And we really do this because as mentioned, there's no shortage of problems that could benefit from tech. And so we really want to focus where we think we can uniquely add value. And that goes for us as an organization. But that also goes for myself as an individual when I'm um you know, doing pro bono work. Great. Uh So that was a lot on sort of selecting the project and the organization. But next up is, is um again, one learning around how we think about scoping the work. So our fellowships typically uh employ teams of anywhere from 5 to 15 Googler for six months, full time, which is a lot compared to maybe a single volunteer contributing in a 20% capacity over the course of a quarter. But it's still a fixed and um you know, relatively short amount of time in the grand scheme of things. And so careful scoping is really key. It's also incredibly important because while we provide a large influx of resources, it's temporary, the fellows are going to go back to their day jobs eventually leaving a smaller group at the organization that's responsible for maintaining or taking the work forward.

And so we also try to scope in a way that ensures there's plenty of time for the fellows to dedicate to those tasks that lead to more maintainable code, like creating unit tests uh as a basic example, which hopefully uh you should be doing anyway, but, but just as an example, um so our goal is to scope projects that really have clear deliverables that drive impact.

But also we really try to reduce scope creep as um you know, as much as possible because um it, it's certainly a tendency in in pro bono projects like this. And uh we often find that running a design sprint um that encourages sort of divergent and then convergent thinking at each stage can be an extremely helpful way to achieve that objective. Again, just to share an example of what that looks like in practice. Um We did a fellowship with the very Institute of Justice and the goal was around bringing transparency to local jail data nationwide. Um But there was a lot that we could sort of potentially focus on there. And so before it even started, we held a design sprint um with both folks from Google and folks from Vera, as well as outside folks including policy advocates and researchers and journalists and many other. Um and as with most design sprints, we sort of started by just exploring the space through lightning talks from experts. You know, the fellows are coming in with uh the tech expertise but not necessarily a ton of subject matter expertise while the nonprofit or government partner is likely coming in with the subject matter expertise, but maybe not uh a great understanding of what's possible through tech or A I.

And so this really just helps to create a shared knowledge across all participants. And then we used again, typical design sprint processes like a uh discussion and voting process to sort of define our target user groups. I think we started with something like 19 potential user groups that we could focus on and then narrow those down to just a couple advocates and inside champions who we thought should be the focus of this project. And, you know, again, from there continued through a typical design sprint process. So I won't go into uh all of the details, but just to reiterate, we found design sprints can be really helpful in terms of narrowing the scope and making sure everyone's aligned on what the the truly highest priorities are. Um And they can also be really helpful to ensure you're not uh creating data for data's sake, which can be another sort of common challenge in pro bono tech projects. Um So, you know, they really force you to think through who your core users are and what their journeys are. You have to talk to them. Understand their needs and actually test out prototypes with them. So they can be really helpful for that.

And then finally, design sprints can be super helpful for getting early buy in for the solutions. Um and not just from the end users but also from other stakeholders that really all levels of the organization since they're often, you know, interested in are able to uh participate.

So that's just a little bit about uh scoping moving uh right along. Um You know, I, I think I mentioned a couple of times, there are a large number of projects that could still occupy our attention even given all of those constraints. And so um we really try to focus on those where we think Google or Googler can uniquely add value. And so for us, that's often around making the world's information accessible and useful or using A I for social good. Um Maybe projects in which us center design is especially critical or those involving mapping as just a few examples. Um But really all around sort of employee skill sets to ensure you're uniquely adding value versus spending time on volunteer engagements that anyone could tackle.

Um We also recommend focusing in areas where there's just a lot of employee interest and engagement, which also helps with, with recruitment if you're scoping a project for, for someone else or for your organization. So again, just to see this in practice, one of our largest fellowships to date was with the Trevor project in terms of interest and skill sets. There's a lot of interest internally around mental health in general and the impacts of COVID specifically, which had a disproportionate impact on LGBT Q plus youth. Um Trevor published a white paper shortly after the start of COVID that I think did a great job capturing some of those reasons. I can also link to that. But um in the interest of time, I will skip over that for now. But uh basically just really emphasize the, the strong need here and um go agreed. And so we ended up uh getting a ton of interest from, from Googlers. Um It's also a really interesting and challenging N LP problem that appealed to a lot of folks and we were able to engage our, our er GS, our employee resource groups.

And so, um again, just was able to get an overwhelming amount of interest and, and really good candidates for this for this project. But in the interest of time, I will uh uh move along. But I think just really important to try to align with sort of skill sets and interests if you're scoping a project for someone else. But of course, equally important if you're thinking about a project for yourself, great. And then finally, after uh recruitment gets into the execution phase, um there is a ton uh here and could do an entirely different talk about how we actually go about building these products for good. But again, just since the focus of this conversation is specifically about how nonprofits and technologists can partner. I think one of the most interesting learnings here that's not unique to pro bono collaborations, but is especially relevant for them is that it's not just about hiring the best people, it's about creating the strongest team. There's a ton of external research on team effectiveness and uh it continues to find that what really matters is less about who's on the team and more about how the team worked together. So, psychological safety was and is the number one factor that correlates highly with team effectiveness.

And uh equally importantly, things you might think correlate like the colo location of teammates, um which again, especially relevant with COVID or the individual performance of team members of seniority or tenure of folks. All of those things were not actually significantly correlated.

So, um we put a high premium on fostering psychological safety uh amongst our fellows and with their nonprofit partners. Um And we actually partner with a group internally that uh is part of Google's people operations team. And, and they developed a curriculum to sort of help us uh develop and foster these strong team team dynamics. Um And, you know, we really encourage the nonprofits that we work with to treat our fellows like new employees ramping them up in the problem area, including them in org wide meetings, doing, you know, random coffee chats or whatever else is it is that they typically do to ramp up uh someone new on their team.

Um because that, you know, more than anything actually uh leads to, you know, effective outcomes. Great. I am going to skip over uh this example since I see I am running up on time. Um, and I will skip right to just the, the last stage, the off boarding process. So I think I mentioned this at the beginning. But, um you know, this is a particular pain point for a lot of nonprofits and governments that we work with where, you know, a technologist comes in and maybe develops this amazing solution, but uh doesn't really have a clear plan for who's going to maintain that work going forward.

And in that unfortunately, all too common scenario off boarding is sort of considered as an afterthought just as the pro bono engagement nears its end. Um And so what I really want to highlight here is that for a pro bono uh project to be successful, the plan for off boarding should really be in place before the project even starts and it should be kept in mind during each stage after that. So in the selection phase, it's baked into our initial project selection. You know, sustainability is one of the core things that we consider upfront and, and we think about how best to do that. So we often complement fellowships with grant funding specifically to maybe hire someone who can take the work forward. Or alternatively, we often do, uh, upskilling so that we can, uh, the organization then has someone in house who can, who can sort of take that work forward.

So, um, I won't go again through each of these, but, uh, at each stage we really think it's sort of critical to, um, think about off boarding before you start and, and every step of the way, uh to make sure that this project will actually have a sustained and, and lasting impact.

Um So I will leave it there. And, um, I think that is pretty much it for me. I realize we're, we're coming up on time, but I am happy to take maybe a question now if there's time or I can also, again, I'm, I'm happy to connect on linkedin and I saw at least one person who shared their information there. So more than happy to connect with folks on linkedin or Twitter to, to continue the conversation. And uh thank you so much for, for joining.