|
Steps
Toward a Credible and Inclusive Public Policy Process
Women in Public Policy Project - June 2000
Contents
Introduction
Purpose
of the Guidelines
Steps
Toward a Credible and Inclusive Public Policy Process: Summary
- Identify
common understandings and ground rules for working together
- Laying
the groundwork
- Identify
and access information and resource needs
- Build
strategies and work plans
- Put
strategies and processes into action
- Evaluate
joint process and outcomes
- Action
Planning Worksheet
Appendix
A: Tools for Designing Action Strategies
Appendix
B: Profile of Feminists for Just and Equitable Public Policy (FemJEPP)
and Womens Centres CONNECT!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introduction
These Steps have been developed by combining the Women in Public
Policy (WIPP) research project results ("Never Give Up: Women
Making Policy Change") and the Sharing Our Strengths workshop
outcomes. Both activities were coordinated by Feminists for Just
and Equitable Public Policy and by Womens Centres CONNECT!
and held in Nova Scotia in 1999. The research project involved 126
women associated with diverse groups from around the province. The
workshop involved 113 women from three sectors: community-based
equality seeking groups, government employees and politicians, and
researchers involved in public policy, all from across the country.
The workshop was part of the Made to Measure Symposium sponsored
by the Maritime Centre of Excellence for Womens Health.
This tool is
a compilation of the many ideas, recommendations and experiences
of those who participated in the WIPP research project and/or workshop.
The Steps have been prepared by Anne Webb (research coordinator),
Peggy Mahon (workshop facilitator), Stephanie Hunter (project co-chair)
and Georgia MacNeil (project co-chair). Input was also received
from members of the WIPP National Ad hoc Advisory Committee.
The WIPP project
was supported by Status of Women Canada and the Maritime Centre
of Excellence for Womens Health. Additional funding was received
from the Womens Program, Status of Women Canada (Ottawa office
and Nova Scotia office), Human Resources Development Canada (Nova
Scotia Region) and Canadian Heritage to ensure that diverse women
from across the country were able to participate in the Made to
Measure Symposium (which included the WIPP workshop). The views
contained in this document are those of the compilers and project
participants, and do not necessarily represent the views of the
funders.
For more information
on the WIPP project, and for copies of this document, please contact:
Anne Webb
Tel: (902) 475-3633
Email: webjacob@web.ca
Georgia MacNeil
Tel: (902) 868-1165
Email: Georgia2@netcom.ca
Other publications
of the WIPP research project:
"Never Give Up" Women Making Policy Change
(September 1999)
"Ne
cédez jamais" Les femmes aux prises de la modification
des politiques gouvernementales (September 1999)
This guide is
not a finished document, but rather something to build on and to
adapt to the issues you are working on. If you have suggestions
you would like to pass on please let us know by contacting Anne
Webb or Georgia MacNeil (contact information above).
Ce document
est disponible en Françias. This document is also available
in Braille. An electronic copy of these Steps is available at the
following web site: www.medicine.dal.ca/mcewh/wipp.htm
Please feel
free to photocopy and use these Steps. Please acknowledge the WIPP
project.
top
Purpose of the
Guidelines
These Steps are an assessment tool intended to help identify the
elements that need to be in place or be recognized for community-based
equality seeking groups, researchers and governments to work together
on public policy development, implementation and reform.
They are intended
to:
- assist community-based
groups to be involved in public policy initiatives from their
inception,
- provide
a set of steps that ensure the public policy process becomes more
public and transparent, and
- provide
researchers and government policy makers with an overview of what
women involved with community-based equality seeking groups are
looking for when they speak of community involvement in public
policy development, implementation and reform.
In the research
project and the workshop the primary focus was on information provided
by, and the experiences of, women involved with community-based
groups and government policy makers. It seems that the role of a
researcher in this process is closely tied to the requirements of
the particular group she or he is working with. These Steps will
assist researchers to identify their role and what they should be
looking for in developing joint research projects that have policy
implications.
Suggested
Uses of the Guidelines
The following are some suggested uses for these Steps. This is not
a definitive list. You may think of many others.
- You are
about to embark on a policy process (including proposal writing)
that involves community groups, researchers and government.
These Steps can help you to decide what needs to be considered
to begin the discussion and develop a process.
| When
writing a proposal these Steps and the points listed can help
your group to plan a process that will recognize and integrate
your priorities and issues into the structure of the project
or activity. |
- You may
be in the middle of a policy process and be experiencing some
difficulties or conflict.
Using this guide may help the group to identify where some of
the problems or issues are occurring. Together you can identify
actions that should be taken to improve the situation.
- You may
have just finished a policy process and wish to assess how well
you have done.
By going through the Steps, group members can reflect on the action
taken and identify what they could do differently next time to
improve their working relationships and participation in, and
impact on, the policy process.
How
to Use the Steps
The Steps are in a table format for easy reference. They can be
used as a checklist to record what actions are needed or if actions
have been taken on any of the steps. The Steps are organized into
six sections to capture the relationship building, resource allocation,
action planning, implementation and evaluation necessary to have
a credible and inclusive public policy process.
Each step is
divided into sub-sections that deal with specific elements of the
process. At the end of each section there is a space for recording
notes on the actions taken or planned, agreements made and so forth.
At the end of the document there is a sample Action Planning Worksheet.
This is designed to assist groups with planning actions to ensure
their inclusive and effective involvement in the public policy process.
top
Steps Toward a
Credible and Inclusive Public Policy Process: Summary
1.
Identify common understandings and ground rules for working together
It
is important that all parties members of community-based
equality seeking groups, government policy makers and researchers
discuss and agree to work together on the basis of a set
of shared understandings. This includes: agreeing upon an open,
clear and inclusive policy process; recognizing the value of community-based
and academic research; agreeing to ensure all activities, materials
and forms of communication are accessible; and ensuring accountability
mechanisims are established and put in place.
2.
Laying the groundwork
When the three parties start to work together, each needs to clarify
and outline its roles and responsibilities; adopt accessibility
guidelines; and discuss and find ways to address power imbalances.
3.
Identify and access information and resource needs
There are key resources that need to be recognized and available
for all three parties to effectively work on public policies.
4.
Build strategies and work plans
For effective involvement in the public policy process, all parties,
particularly communities new to the process, should plan their approach
in advance. Standard processes should also be set to inform each
group of what to expect, and of what is expected of them in terms
of input into the process.
5.
Put strategies and processes into action
When working together it is important that the three parties adhere
to the agreed upon standard processes and forms of input.
6.
Evaluate joint process and outcomes
The evaluation process designed in Step 3 is to be carried out and
the progress monitored to assess the success of the public policy
process and agreements made.
top
Step
1:
Identify common understandings and ground rules
for working together
(community-based
equality seeking groups, government policy-makers
[municipal, provincial, band council, federal] and researchers)
| Ensure
the following: |
In
place |
Requires
action |
Action
taken |
| 1.
The policy process is open, clear and inclusive |
|
|
|
a. An
open and clear purpose and process are agreed upon by all
participants
|
|
|
|
b. The
three parties listen, are honest, do not personalize attacks:
hard on problems, easy on the people
|
|
|
|
c. The
three parties recognize and acknowledge that participants
hold different perspectives
|
|
|
|
d. The
three parties recognize that direct community involvement
gives an initiative more public credibility and makes for
more effective policy
|
|
|
|
e. The
three parties are committed to working inclusively with
members of the public, of government and community-based
groups to develop, implement and reform public policy
|
|
|
|
f. Communities
are to be involved/included early on in government initiated
policy development or reform, or in proposed cuts to programs
|
|
|
|
g. Public
policy processes are to be grounded in women’s grass roots
experience
|
|
|
|
h. Broader/global
issues and forces are taken into account when identifying
policy issues and strategies
|
|
|
|
|
All parties endeavour to integrate a gender-based analysis
(GBA),
anti-racism and the rejection of all forms of discrimination
into their public policy initiatives
|
i. Participants
are educated on and are sensitive to issues of discrimination
|
|
|
|
j. Diverse
groups are to be represented and heard
|
|
|
|
k. Diverse
communities have members on government boards and committees
|
|
|
|
l. The
three parties recognize and acknowledge that some participants/groups
fear consequences or reprisals for taking part in discussions
with government members
|
|
|
|
m. It
is established that all parties have input into the agenda
for working together on a public policy
|
|
|
|
n. Realistic
timelines are established from the outset and throughout
policy discussions
|
|
|
|
o. All
parties agree to meet at regular intervals
|
|
|
|
p. Jurisdiction
is respected
|
|
|
|
q. All
parties work across departments and sectors (horizontally)
|
|
|
|
r. Different
organizational cultures are recognized and acknowledged
|
|
|
|
s. In-person
contact is recognized as helping all parties realize that
they are working with real people
|
|
|
|
t. Process
is recognized as ongoing and/or cyclical
|
|
|
|
u. Informal
meetings are recognized as very beneficial
|
|
|
|
v. The
need for compromise is recognized
|
|
|
|
w. Flexibility
is required by all parties
|
|
|
|
|
The public policy process
is a public process
|
| 1.2
Recognition of research |
|
|
|
a. Community-based
knowledge and research, community needs, and the work of
community groups are respected and recognized as having
equal value to academic research and government contributions
|
|
|
|
b. University
departments involved value community efforts and community-academic
research partnerships
|
|
|
|
c. It
is recognized that research clarifies issues and reduces
fragmentation between and among groups
|
|
|
|
| |
| 1.3
Accessibility of all activities, materials and forms of communication |
|
|
|
a. Accessible
and non-discriminatory language, formats (bilingual resources/communications,
plain language, agreement on definitions and terminology)
and communication forms are used
|
|
|
|
b. Meetings/workshops
are held in accessible locations (including rural vs. urban,
physically accessible, non-intimidating)
|
|
|
|
c. The
timing, schedule and process of meetings are accessible
to all participants (community, researchers, government)
|
|
|
|
d. A
clear, inclusive and accessible process is adopted by the
three parties that respects cultures, acknowledges differing
abilities, difference and diversity
|
|
|
|
Notes
on actions and work planned, agreements made, etc.
|
top
Step
2:
Laying the groundwork
| Ensure
the following: |
In
place |
Requires
action |
Action
taken |
| 2.1
Roles and responsibilities |
|
|
|
a. Participating
groups/parties clarify why they are involved in the policy
issue
|
|
|
|
b. Outline
what each participating group brings (skills, needs, wants,
values) to the process
|
|
|
|
c. Clarify
what resources people bring, for example: time, funds, commitment,
knowledge, experience
|
|
|
|
d. All
are clear about each party's bottom line: be honest about
what is up for discussion and what is not
|
|
|
|
e. Outline
the assumptions held by each participating group (see Naming
the Moment in the Resources list for a naming assumptions
process)
|
|
|
|
f. Government
department members have examined their accessibility to
community groups and to the public
|
|
|
|
g. Community
groups have examined their own accessibility to the public
and to government
|
|
|
|
|
Skill Building Recommendations Policy makers take training
to ensure they
are aware of issues impacting diverse women's communities
Workshops on
how government policy-making happens in practice and how to
influence public
policy are provided at a community level Access is provided
to training and
support in negotiation, conflict resolution and problem solving
Workshops to assist
groups from all parties to use these Steps are made available
Workshops to assist
community groups on how to access the media are organized.
|
h. Government
is upfront about what it wants from the public
|
|
|
|
i. Community
groups are clear about who they are and what is their agenda
|
|
|
|
j. Parties
jointly agree upon realistic expectations
|
|
|
|
k. Parties
jointly agree to work on clear, focused and manageable issues/points
|
|
|
|
l. Parties
jointly clarify and agree to a common purpose and priorities
|
|
|
|
m. Parties
jointly determine who should be at the table and at what
points in the policy process
|
|
|
|
n. It
needs to be established as to which institutions are supportive
of their representatives at the policy table
|
|
|
|
o. Roles
and responsibilities of government, community and researchers
in the public policy process are discussed, clarified and
agreed to
|
|
|
|
p. Terms
of reference outlining roles and responsiblities are developed
|
|
|
|
q. Parties
share information and educate each other on their issues
|
|
|
|
r. Parties
jointly design an evaluation process and identify what will
indicate a successful collaborative process
|
|
|
|
|
| 2.2
Address power imbalances |
|
|
|
a. A
process must is in place to demonstrate the accountability
of public policy makers to the community
|
|
|
|
b. A
process is in place for negotiating the power asymmetries
(for example: money, technology, power differences within
community groups and government/academic departments and
between community, government and researchers)
|
|
|
|
c. All
parties identify and recognize who has power and on what
bases
|
|
|
|
| |
| 1.3
Accessibility of all activities, materials and forms of communication |
|
|
|
a. Accessible
and non-discriminatory language, formats (bilingual resources/communications,
plain language, agreement on definitions and terminology)
and communication forms are used
|
|
|
|
b. Meetings/workshops
are held in accessible locations (including rural vs. urban,
physically accessible, non-intimidating)
|
|
|
|
c. The
timing, schedule and process of meetings are accessible
to all participants (community, researchers, government)
|
|
|
|
d. A
clear, inclusive and accessible process is adopted by the
three parties that respects cultures, acknowledges differing
abilities, difference and diversity
|
|
|
|
Notes
on actions and work planned, agreements made, etc.
|
top
Step
3:
Identify and access information and resource needs
| Ensure
the following: |
In
place |
Requires
action |
Action
taken |
| 3.1
Appropriate resources are in place for full participation by
all parties |
|
|
|
a. Appropriate
resources to do the policy work are equally available to
the three parties (for example at the community level: funding,
support and time required for community development, community
involvement/participation, alliance building, networking
and skill development)
|
|
|
|
b. Supports
and back-up are in place to enable people to participate
in the public policy process (for example: child care, transportation,
access to technology, accessible communications and meeting
locations)
|
|
|
|
c. Core
funding is available for women’s equality work
|
|
|
|
d. Statistics
are recorded and made available that recognize the specific
conditions of minority groups
|
|
|
|
e. Educational
resources are made available on how to increase participation
of community and researchers in the public policy process
|
|
|
|
|
| 3.2
When preparing one’s own department, community or research group: |
|
|
|
| Researchers |
|
|
|
a. Funding
is available for community-based research (volunteers cannot
do it all and community-based research needs to be respected)
|
|
|
|
b. Communities
are informed of the knowledge and resources produced by
researchers
|
|
|
|
c. Both
qualitative and quantitative, community-based and academic
research are recognized as valid
|
|
|
|
| Community |
|
|
|
| |
| 1.3
Accessibility of all activities, materials and forms of communication |
|
|
|
a. Accessible
and non-discriminatory language, formats (bilingual resources/communications,
plain language, agreement on definitions and terminology)
and communication forms are used
|
|
|
|
b. Meetings/workshops
are held in accessible locations (including rural vs. urban,
physically accessible, non-intimidating)
|
|
|
|
c. The
timing, schedule and process of meetings are accessible
to all participants (community, researchers, government)
|
|
|
|
d. A
clear, inclusive and accessible process is adopted by the
three parties that respects cultures, acknowledges differing
abilities, difference and diversity
|
|
|
|
Notes
on actions and work planned, agreements made, etc.
|
top
Step
4:
Build strategies and work plans
| Ensure
the following: |
In
place |
Requires
action |
Action
taken |
| 4.1
General standards |
|
|
|
a. The
same people are consistently at the table when working on
a specific issue
|
|
|
|
b. Each
party considers how specific initiatives fit with their
long-term goals
|
|
|
|
c. Community
representatives are a majority of those at the table to
ensure that community members are heard and to moderate
power imbalances
|
|
|
|
d. A
committee or some other mechanism could be formed to coordinate
when, how and which sectors within the three parties need
to come together
|
|
|
|
|
| 4.2
Community standards |
|
|
|
a. Women’s
community groups may choose to develop provincial (or national)
organizations that can gain recognition from specific government
departments and be the community contact on policy issues
(such as Nova Scotia’s Feminists for Just and Equitable
Public Policy)
|
|
|
|
b. Community
groups may choose to meet independently of government to
establish their issues and approach (to be strategic about
issues they focus on) and to determine when they are prepared
to meet with government
|
|
|
|
c. Community
groups consider the possibilities and constraints that community
input will likely face and establish problem solving processes
for when strategies meet resistance and are not successful
|
|
|
|
d. Community
groups consider several approaches and use them simultaneously
to influence policy (lobbying, research, protests, petitions,
policy briefs, etc.)
|
|
|
|
e. Community
groups are prepared to fight each others’ fights/support
each others’ issues, understand differences
|
|
|
|
f. Community
groups develop a clear overall strategy when entering the
public policy process
|
|
|
|
g. Community
groups identify allies; build a broad base of support within
own community and with other groups: professional, government,
political parties, band council, academics
|
|
|
|
h. Community
groups are well informed on the issue they are bringing
forward
|
|
|
|
i. Community
groups consider what past strategies and actions worked
well
|
|
|
|
j. Community
groups identify what types of information and formats can
be easily used by policy makers
|
|
|
|
k. Community
groups have considered inviting senior bureaucrats, politicians
(all parties) and/or band councilors to meet with them when
the community group is ready
|
|
|
|
Notes
on actions and work planned, agreements made, etc.
|
top
Step
5:
Put strategies and processes into action
| Ensure
the following: |
In
place |
Requires
action |
Action
taken |
| 5.1
General standards |
|
|
|
a. Several
arguments to back up a position on a policy are developed
and documents (research and records) are made available
to each party
|
|
|
|
b. An
independent facilitator mediates and documents the process
|
|
|
|
c. All
parties negotiate a working relationship and re-negotiate
at different points
|
|
|
|
d. Alliances
are built between and within sectors/parties that have shared
concerns and perspectives (this increases capacity)
|
|
|
|
e. A
system of shared decision making is agreed upon
|
|
|
|
f. Trust
is built among all players
|
|
|
|
g. All
parties frame and develop the questions that need to be
answered
|
|
|
|
h. All
parties agree that community input into the policy process
is as valid as that of government and researchers’ and needs
to be acted upon
|
|
|
|
i. Sub-committees
work on specific aspects of a policy issue
|
|
|
|
j. Possible
solutions are offered and introduced
|
|
|
|
k. All
parties acknowledge small success stories/achievements,
even small changes
|
|
|
|
|
| 5.2
Community Standards |
|
|
|
a. Community
groups inform and empower their community on policy issues
|
|
|
|
b. Community
groups identify where and when the openings are for community
interventions to be the most effective and act on chosen
approaches (see 4.2d)
|
|
|
|
c. Community
groups identify the best point of contact (employee or politician)
within government policy-making
|
|
|
|
d. Community
groups lobby and monitor actions agreed to by all parties
to ensure that decisions are acted upon
|
|
|
|
|
| 5.3
Communication and network strategies for keeping community groups,
government and researchers well informed |
|
|
|
a. Ongoing
communications occur between community, researchers and
government (bureaucrats and politicians)
|
|
|
|
b. Information
and resources are shared (listservs, policy directory, news
bulletins, etc.)
|
|
|
|
c. External
communication strategies are identified for speaking out
publicly on issues
|
|
|
|
d. Media
is kept informed
|
|
|
|
e. Records
of decisions are kept, distributed by an unaffiliated report
writer, and follow-up to decisions is ensured (this demonstrates
that input was integrated into decision making)
|
|
|
|
Notes
on actions and work planned, agreements made, etc.
|
Step
6:
Evaluate joint processes and outcomes
| Ensure
the following: |
In
place |
Requires
action |
Action
taken |
| 6.1
A jointly-designed evaluation is conducted |
|
|
|
a. Evaluation
is to be undertaken of what has been working and what needs
to change in the public policy development, implementation
and reform process
|
|
|
|
b. Process
and policy agreements made by all parties and resulting
actions are monitored and evaluated
|
|
|
|
c. Those
effected by a public policy are part of the evaluation process
|
|
|
|
d. Community
groups’ objectives and action strategies to influence public
policy are monitored and evaluated for their impact and
the degree of effort required to achieve change
|
|
|
|
e. A
mechanism for follow-up and monitoring is established such
as a women’s national policy advisory network
|
|
|
|
f. Evaluation
results are shared with the WIPP National Advisory Committee
(via email addresses on page 2) or similar women’s national
policy advisory network to enter into a feedback bank
|
|
|
|
Long-Term
Goals Half of band council members should be women More
women form part of the legislature A newsletter or listserv
is established that identifies and disseminates actual policy
related initiatives, results and problems that affect women
|
Notes
on actions and work planned, agreements made, etc.
|
top
Action Planning Worksheet
Action Objective: _____________________________________________________
|
Tasks
|
Responsibility
(Who)
|
Resources
(With what)
|
Timeline
(When)
|
|
|
|
|
|
top
Appendix
A
Tools for Designing Action Strategies
Barndt, Deborah.
1989. Naming the Moment: Political Analysis for Action. Toronto:
Jesuit Centre for Social Faith and Justice.
Barnsley, Jan
and Diana Ellis. 1992. Research for Change: Participatory Action
Research for Community Groups. Vancouver: Women’s Research Centre.
Barnsley, Jan,
Diana Ellis and Helga Jacobson. 1986. An Evaluation Guide for
Women’s Groups. Vancouver: Women’s Research Centre.
Beer, Jennifer
with Eileen Stief. 1996. The Mediator’s Handbook. Gabriola
Island, BC: New Society Publishers.
Czerny, Michael,
Jamie Swift and Robert Clarke. 1994. Getting Started on Social
Analysis. Toronto: Between the Lines.
Hope, Anne and
Sally Timmel. 1988. Training for Transformation: A Handbook for
Community Workers. Harare, Zimbabwe: Mambo Press.
Kaner, Sam,
with Lenny Lind, Duane Berger, Catherine Toldi and Sarah Fisk. 1998.
The Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory Decision Making.
Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.
Lewis, Debre
with Jan Barnsley. 1992. Strategies for Change: from Women’s
experience to a plan for action. Vancouver: Women’s Research
Centre.
Milne, Glen.
1999. Making Policy: A Guide to the Federal Government’s Policy
Process. Ottawa: Glen Milne. Copies available from author at
78 George Street, Suite 201, Ottawa, Ontario K1N 5W1. Tel: (613)
562-4333 Fax: (613) 562-4063 E-mail: ggdm@istar.ca
Shields, Katrina.
1991. In the Tiger’s Mouth: An Empowerment Guide for Social Action.
Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.
Webb, Anne.
2000. "Directory: Community-Based Equality Seeking Groups Currently
Involved in Public Policy Initiatives that Affect Women. Nova Scotia."
Halifax: Atlantic Regional Office of Health Promotions and Projects
Branch of Health Canada. Available on MCEWH web site, http://www.medicine.dal.ca/mcewh
and from HPPB, 1505 Barrington St. Suite 1802, Halifax NS B3J 3Y6.
Tel: (902)426-2700; Fax: (902) 426-9689; E-mail: margie_macdonald@hc-sc.gc.ca
Webb, Anne.
1999. "Never Give Up: Women Making Policy Change." Halifax: Women
in Public Policy Project. Report available from Feminists for Just
and Equitable Public Policy, Tel: (902) 423-8025 E-Mail: hunter.group@ns.sympatico.ca
top
Appendix B
Profile of FemJEPP and Womens Centres CONNECT!
Feminists
for Just and Equitable Public Policy (FemJEPP)
Feminists
for Just and Equitable Public Policy is a provincial alliance of
autonomous, equality seeking, community-based women’s organizations
working in the public policy arena for the betterment of women and
their families. The alliance has developed over the past five years
and has worked to incorporate the work from various initiatives
around collaborative relationship building and the establishment
of meaningful, ongoing consultation. The overall purpose of FemJEPP
is to insure the development of equitable and just public policy
for all Nova Scotia women in our differing realities. Our long term
goal is to establish a model/process for inclusive, ongoing, meaningful
consultation in the formulating, developing and implementing of
public policy that utilizes a gender and equity analysis as a founding
principle.
Women’s Centres
CONNECT!
Officially formed in 1988, Women’s Centres CONNECT! is the collective
voice of women’s centres in Nova Scotia. CONNECT! works both on
a provincial and a national level. It provides coordination and
information to women’s centres and articulates their activities,
needs and concerns.
CONNECT!
- facilitates
networking and communication among women’s centres;
- acts as the
channel through which women’s centres access provincial funding;
- acts as a
clearing house for information;
- works in
cooperation with like-minded organizations on particular issues;
- provides
guidance to groups that wish to explore the possibility of forming
a women’s centre in their community.
Contact Info
Women in
Public Policy Initiative
c/o Atlantic Centre of Excellence for Women's Health
PO Box 3070
Halifax, NS B3J 3G9
Tel: (902) 4707805,
Fax: (902) 470-6752
Anne Webb
WIPP Coordinator
Webjacob@web.ca
Go To Top
Back
to DAWN Ontario homepage
This
page was created on February 12, 2002
Last
updated Novembe 30, 2002
|