Members bring with them the insights and concerns from their respective circles, fostering a holistic view of the organization's functioning. In addition, the Coordinating Circle will:

1. Function as the “eyes and ears” and the “early warning system” of issues that it can either provide guidance about or else proactively alert the Board to.
2. Serve as the heartbeat or the “central nervous system” of CNVC that has tentacles reaching into every corner of the organization and is attuned to what is emerging, waning, or longing to be seen.
3. Promote the flow of information throughout the organization so that different circles are aware of what the others are doing, which enables us to work together or at least be aware of how our decisions might impact others.
4. Relieve pressure on the Board of Directors from tracking the needs and interests that are flowing through the organization from multiple places. 
5. Distribute leadership and decision making by engaging volunteers, and developing future leaders in the organization for its governing bodies.

Two main areas:

1. Information Flow: Promote the flow of information by uniting the various groups within CNVC, providing visibility within bodies and to our members  into what each circle is doing. This helps to avoid overlap and working at cross purposes, and helps circles remain aligned with CNVC’s vision and mission.
2. Conflict Engagement: Oversee the implementation and maintenance of CNVC’s Conflict Engagement System (CES; still under development) once the Board approves the plan. Since the Board has already indicated that once approved, the CES will be almost entirely managed by Operations, it’s a natural fit for Coordinating Circle because operations will need guidance and support along the way. The Coordinating Circle is also a logical group to hold the CES because they will have more awareness of conflicts that are emerging and/or impacting the organization than any other individual body will on their own, including the Board.

While the Board of Directors maintains ultimate legal, financial, and strategic authority for the organization, they are delegating power to the Coordinating Circle as part of a decentralized decision-making system.

There will be two members from each of the following groups (8 total):

1. Board of Directors: They select their two representatives.
2. Assessors Coordinating Circle: They select their two representatives.
3. Programs Resource Circle: They select their two representatives.
4. Staff: Executive Director and Operations Director.

 Criteria for Members: We will recommend that the groups select people who:

• Have experience creating policies and functioning at the systemic level.
• Can hold multiple perspectives -- not only the perspective of the group that they come from, but the entire organization's well being. 
• During Coordinating Circle meetings, members focus on the purpose of the Coordinating Circle with their other circle in mind. 
• During meetings with their own Circles, members focus on the purpose of their circle with the Coordinating Circle’s wellbeing in mind.

The Coordinating Circle will meet an estimated 5 times per year.

The Executive Director will convene this group to provide continuity -- most members will probably turn over more frequently, plus the E.D. is attuned to overall organizational goals as a result of the role. Also, since most of the other members are already volunteering their time, this allows a paid person to do the heavy lifting (with the support of the Operations Director) which reduces the workload on volunteers. 

In addition, the E.D. will provide leadership by recommending priorities, framing proposals, and providing insight into the strategic plan; however, their decision making power is equal to all of the other circle members.

Use the same consent process currently used by the Board -- members vote on proposals by giving a number 0 through 5 to indicate how much they support the proposal:

• 5 = maximum support
• 1 = minimum support, but consent is given
• 0 = paramount objection -- consent is not achieved and the decision is not made

The decision is made if each member gives their consent (1 through 5) and the average score is 3 or higher. If one or more members are not in attendance at a meeting, the final decision is not known because absent members have 48 hours to enter their vote asynchronously.