The 2017-18 Ministerial Search

Final Report of the Ministerial Search Committee

June 4, 2018Unitarian Universalist Church of Las Cruces

2000 South Solano DriveLas Cruces, New Mexico

CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION 2

FORMATION OF THE MSC 2

GETTING STARTED 3

UUA CONTACTS 4

MSC RETREAT 5

FACT-FINDING AND RESEARCH 6

CONGREGATIONAL COVENANT 8

COMMUNICATION AND TRANSPARENCY 8

CONGREGATIONAL RECORD AND PACKET 9

NEGOTIATING TEAM 10

EVALUATION AND SELECTION OF PRECANDIDATES 11

REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND CHECKS 13

PRECANDIDATING WEEKENDS 14

A WORD ABOUT HOSPITALITY 15

SELECTION OF MINISTERIAL CANDIDATE 16

CANDIDATING WEEK 17

CONCLUSION 18

APPENDICES 19

1

INTRODUCTION

This report discusses the 2017–2018 ministerial search process that resulted in the selection and settlement of Rev. Xolani Kacela as minister of the UUCLC, following the planned departure of Rev. Suzanne Redfern-Campbell after a five-year Developmental Ministry.

Our year-long search effort followed the UUA’s prescribed process, which is described in the Settlement Handbook for Ministers and Congregations, published by the Transitions Office of the UUA in January, 2013. For many aspects of the search, this report provides brief discussion, lessons learned, and recommendations for a future ministerial search. We hope the information will be helpful to future search committees, whom we thank them in advance for their hard work on behalf of the church. However, we anticipate that by the time of the next search, the UUA will have adopted a revised process, reportedly in development now, so certain comments and recommendations may no longer be pertinent.

For details of the search process, please refer to the Settlement Handbook. For results of the casita meetings, the congregational survey, and the Beyond Categorical Thinking workshop, please refer to our Congregational Packet. For samples of many of the materials we generated during the search, please see the Appendices.

The Ministerial Search Committee (MSC) members were Susan Bagby (co-chair), Renée Beltran, Nora Brown, Peggy Brown, Rachel Courtney, Elisa Sanchez, and David Steele (co-chair). The Negotiating Team members were Susan Bagby, Elwin Nunn, and Charlie Scholz.

FORMATION OF THE MSC

Following the church By-laws, the church formed a committee of five members elected by the congregation and two members appointed by the Board. The Board invited the congregation to nominate people for the MSC by submitting their names to Board members over a span of several weeks. Those nominated were asked whether they would serve if elected; nine agreed, and their names were placed on a ballot. Five were elected at a congregational meeting; the Board appointed the other two.

This thoughtful process worked well. Having the nominations submitted in advance over a period of several weeks, rather than only at one short meeting, gave both the congregation and the nominees time for careful consideration of this important duty. People who might have been too shy to voice their ideas publically had a chance to be part of the process. The nominees represented many different segments of the church community, and those elected presented wide and remarkably balanced skills, interests, and concerns.

Recommendations: Make sure all nominees are fully informed and aware of the time commitment they are

making, before they agree to serve. The search process requires hundreds of hours of work for each committee member.

2

Make sure all nominees are able to represent the whole congregation well, and can commit to putting aside their own special interests. They will be working for the church as a whole, not for themselves.

Make broad participation on the MSC a possibility: o The Search budget should be adequate to cover the cost of meals and other

incidental related expenses the members might incur, including child care. o Meeting times need to be flexible to accommodate working members and parents

of young children. Aim for an MSC balanced in terms of age, gender, minority/majority groups, etc. This

helps guarantee that more perspectives are considered and fewer are overlooked. Aim for the right mix of capabilities on the MSC. The Settlement Handbook lists

recommended interests/skill sets.o It is critical to have at least two or three people with strong computer skills.o It is essential to have someone with good writing, graphic design, and computer

skills to manage the production of a professional-looking Congregational Packet. PR experience is an added bonus. Otherwise, money for design and technical services should be included in the budget.

o It is essential to have someone with statistical skills appropriate for survey development and analysis.

o It can be helpful to have someone who has been part of a prior search.

GETTING STARTED

The MSC members began by educating ourselves as to the scope of the search process and the available funding.

A close reading of the Settlement Handbook and the Resource Guide for Ministerial Search Committees, revised October 2010, published by the UUA’s Department of Ministry and Professional Leadership, gave us a calendar for the year’s work and a sense of the work ahead.

The UUA recommends that “the general rule of thumb on the amount needed to carry out a successful search is $9000 or 18–20% of the projected Salary & Housing (S&H) amount for the new minister, whichever is greater” (source Pacific Western Region information). We began with a budget of $9750, which was transferred to a separate search checking account. By mid-summer we realized this amount would not be adequate. Hosting a Transition Coach and a BCT workshop, bringing three or four applicants and their partners for precandidating weekends, and bringing the final candidate for Candidating Week are expensive undertakings. We estimated search costs of about $17,500 (anticipating four precandidates; the actual number was three). Actual costs were $12,190.82 (see Appendix 1). Moving expenses for a new minister, initially budgeted at $10,000, but estimated to exceed that figure, were not included in our budget and were a separate UUCLC budget line item.

In late summer we submitted a request to the Board for additional funding, but no action was taken. When time drew near to bring in precandidates, we and the Board were forced to make an appeal to the congregation. People responded with generous donations of $9050. We were

3

hugely gratified by this generous last-minute support, but it would have been better to have had the finances under control much earlier.

Recommendations: Get an early start. There is a lot to do. The UUA said waiting until August was

reasonable, but given the search process in effect, this committee disagrees. If a new UUA process simplifies the search, an August start might be possible.

Become thoroughly familiar with the current version of the Settlement Handbook. Have a copy available at all meetings. Refer to it often.

Become thoroughly familiar with the current UUCLC By-laws, and have a copy available at all meetings.

Study the budget early and make sure adequate funds are available. Go back to the Board immediately if the budget doesn’t support a reasonable search.

Have a separate bank account for the MSC, to maintain confidentiality when candidates must be reimbursed.

Make a permanent line item in each year’s church budget to support the next search. The UUA indicates that most ministerial tenures are from four to seven years. We suggest setting aside at least $2000 each year to make certain there is enough for a good search when the time comes.

UUA CONTACTS

Communication with these UUA representatives began early and lasted throughout the search year:

Keith Kron, director of the UUA Transitions Office, which oversees the search process. Margaret Montore is Keith’s assistant.

Rev. Sarah Gibb Millspaugh and, briefly, Rev. Sarah Schurr, Congregational Life Staff, Pacific Western Region.

Rev. Amy Rowland, Transition Coach, assigned by Rev. Sarah Schurr. Martha Ketelle, Compensation Consultant, assigned by Rev. Sarah Millspaugh Gil Guerrero, Beyond Categorical Thinking (BCT) workshop facilitator, assigned by

Keith Kron.

The church’s Fair Share contributions to the UUA paid for some but not all of the services provided by these people. Additional costs included the fee for a Transition Coach ($950) and the fee for the BCT workshop ($450).

In early May we asked the UUA to assign us a Transition Coach so we could begin our work. They seemed reluctant to get us started so quickly, but finally assigned Rev. Amy Rowland. Being ahead of the UUA’s perceived schedule was characteristic of the MSC’s activity throughout the process.

One MSC member conducted all communications with all UUA representatives, so we maintained a single point of contact.

4

Initially, the Transitions Office had inaccurate contact information for the MSC. This led to frustration, delays, and loss of information until the problem was solved. Thereafter the Office worked with us extremely well.

However, the UUA was in the process of amending the search process in 2017 and 2018. As a result, the guidelines we received and the requirements we had to meet shifted frequently and unpredictably. The very useful updates from the Transitions Office occasionally arrived a little too close to their deadlines. At times information in the updates conflicted with the Settlement Handbook. UUA salary recommendations shifted upwards by 4% just after we had posted our Congregational Record and formulated a salary package. The text of the recommended Ministerial Agreement changed during the fall and we were required to detail any differences between our Agreement and the standard, though we could not determine whether the church was required to adhere to the standard. Previous UUCLC Agreements contained many variations.

Recommendations: Make sure the Transitions Office has the correct contact information for the MSC and for

the church. Have a single point of contact for the MSC. Maintain a congenial and close relationship with all parties in the UUA, so that questions

can be answered and problems resolved quickly.

MSC RETREAT

Transition Coach Rev. Amy Rowland facilitated a 1½-day committee retreat in late May at Holy Cross Retreat Center. The retreat helped us define individual strengths, skills, interests, and concerns, and gave us a chance to assign appropriate tasks. We also developed a process for conflict resolution and made a commitment to maintaining right relations within the committee.

We were led through a “spectrum” exercise to clarify our thoughts about the UUCLC. In this exercise we were to place ourselves on a continuum defined by the following dimensions: 1) the purpose of the congregation is to transform society versus to transform the individual; 2) the congregation provides a setting for church members to pursue a spiritual journey together versus a setting in which congregants engage in individual spiritual exploration; 3) people attend the UUCLC primarily to deepen their personal convictions versus attending primarily to be in community with like-minded people; 4) UUs are responsible for acting in accordance with the Seven Principles versus being free to believe and behave however they choose; and finally 5) the congregation is a setting in which to be challenged and to take risks versus a zone of comfort and safety. We found this to be a helpful and thought-provoking exercise.

We did not enter into the retreat with enthusiasm, but we began to gel as a committee as a result.

Recommendation: Have a facilitated retreat early in the search process, even if you don’t want to. Develop a good relationship with the Coach, as you may need their help later in the

process.

5

FACT-FINDING AND RESEARCH

The MSC studied the feelings and opinions of the UUCLC congregation in three ways: through small-group casita meetings, through a Congregational Survey, and through response to the BCT workshop and follow-up. We reported the results of this fact-finding in congregational meetings. Complete results appear in the Congregational Packet.

Small-group Casita Meetings (June, July)

The MSC began with a series of 17 small-group casita meetings, scheduled at a variety of times and in a variety of locations in June and July of 2017. We provided sign-up sheets at church, and limited attendance to 12 at each meeting. We met in homes instead of at church in the hopes that would lead to freer conversation; we think it did.

Each 2-hour meeting was run by two MSC members, one a facilitator and one a note-taker. We began with introductions, and we used the “spectrum” exercise from our retreat, to focus on how participants saw the UUCLC today and how they would like to see it in the future. The questions on the exercise displeased a few people but challenged people to think and generated good discussions, which was our intent. Open conversation focusing on the qualities people wished to see in a new settled minister followed the exercise. We ended the meetings on time, which was appreciated.

The casita meetings were attended by 110 members and friends, for an average attendance of 6.5, and were very well received. People expressed deep-seated concerns and feelings about the church, and many felt “heard” in a way they hadn’t in a while. Over and over, people asked for more such meetings and thanked the MSC for organizing them. We held a congregational meeting at the conclusion of the casita meeting process to summarize the results. This meeting was well attended and contributed to the sense of transparency the MSC tried to maintain during the search process.

Congregational Survey (July–September)

In July we began developing a Congregational Survey to provide a snapshot of the demographic characteristics of the congregation; the spiritual identities and influences guiding its members; levels of and reasons for church participation; what congregants feel important in worship; attitudes toward congregational growth and diversity; the desired qualities in a settled minister; and roles they expect a minister to play in congregational life. We used several UUA questionnaire samples (in the Resource Guide, on the UUA website) as guides, modifying them according to what we were learning in the casita meetings. It helped to keep in mind that the survey’s purpose was to show the church to the candidates, not just to itself.

We purchased a short-term month-to-month Survey Monkey membership that allowed us to post and conduct the survey online and to generate appropriate analyses from the responses. After several weeks of testing, we announced the survey and gave the congregation access to it via email messages. A limitation of the software prevented more than one response from any given email address, so we issued a different kind of invitation to households in which members shared

6

an email address. This ultimately led to confusion, problems with control, and problems with the final analysis. Responses were anonymous.

For about five weeks beginning in September, the survey was available to members both online and, for congregants without computer access, on paper. During that time, we and our computers were available on Sunday mornings to aid congregants with both online and paper responses. The survey was distributed to 215 members and friends. We received responses from 166, a response rate of 77.4%, though this level of response required much encouragement, many contacts and calls, and much hand-holding. We had hoped for a greater response.

Beyond Categorical Thinking Workshop (September)

On the recommendation of the UUA, we applied to the Beyond Categorical Thinking program, designed to minimize bias during the ministerial search and settlement process. Consultant Gil Guerrero visited in early September to preach a sermon and facilitate a 3-hour BCT workshop, attended by 40 members and friends. We followed up some weeks later with an hour-long continuation of the discussion and several case studies; about 30 attended. Again, we hoped for greater participation, but the workshop was valuable and certainly provided food for thought and consideration. The Transitions Office’s Keith Kron claims that every congregation can benefit from a BCT workshop. We agree.

Other Helpful Input (September, October)

Individual meetings with all of the local UU ministers (Revs. Suzanne Redfern-Campbell, Nancy Anderson, and Judith Walker-Riggs) provided valuable perspective and insight, and were really helpful. Similarly useful were individual meetings with the RE Director, Director of Music, and Congregational Administrator. The prior search committee provided information about that search.

Recommendations: Conduct facilitated small-group meetings during a search, but also make such meetings a

regular part of church life. Limit small-group meetings to 8 attendees. Smaller groups didn’t generate enough

discussion; larger groups were easily dominated by one or two more outspoken attendees. Find better online survey software. Survey Monkey was not thoroughly satisfactory. Pay

particular attention to management features, as survey management can be difficult. Participate in the BCT program. Get as much information about the state of the church from as many different points of

view as possible.

7

CONGREGATIONAL COVENANT

The MSC entered into covenant with the congregation (see Appendix 2). We were told by Minister Emerita Rev. Judith Walker-Riggs that this was an unusual but commendable move. During the search we found the covenant helped sustain our work, and ministerial candidates were impressed by the covenant. The congregation held to the covenant very well and very patiently.

Recommendation: Enter into covenant with the congregation early in the search process. Revisit and remind the congregation of the covenant often.

COMMUNICATION AND TRANSPARENCY

The MSC members were determined to be as transparent as possible, while maintaining the confidentiality of all ministerial candidates. Consequently, we attempted to communicate with the congregation regularly in a variety of ways:

Multiple bulletin boards, updated regularly. Frequent articles in the NUUs, the Light, and on Facebook. Monthly reports to the Board. Announcements in church, often with the whole committee standing in front so people

would know who we were. Snail mail letters and announcements, though these were complicated by the lack of

accurate mailing lists and by computer issues. Email blasts. Phone calls and face-to-face contacts. Congregational meetings to report on the results of the casita meetings, survey, and BCT

workshop.

Successful communication is always a challenge. We tried, but there was always someone who didn’t get the message. We did not have very effective communications with the church office, and should have worked more closely with office staff. Staff members were not always in the office when needs arose. It was sometimes necessary to follow up closely with the Board.

Recommendation: Communicate, communicate, communicate. Then communicate some more. Consider developing a page describing the search on the church website. Send an MSC representative to all Board meetings so that questions can be asked and

answered promptly. Follow up with the Board when questions and issues are presented to them.

Work with the office staff so that support is available without disrupting office functions. Make sure the church office maintains an updated, accurate, sortable list of members and

friends to facilitate both email and snail mail.

8

CONGREGATIONAL RECORD AND PACKET

The UUA requires the completion of an extensive Congregational Record for each church in search. We were surprised at the amount of information required, including summary financial information for the past 20 years, current budget information, as well as long philosophical statements about the church, its goals, and the kind of minister it wants. This information was entered into an online form for the UUA’s Ministerial Settlement System.

We also prepared a Congregational Packet, a very full description of the church, the community, and the area. Although some churches create entire websites for this purpose, we opted to create the Packet as a large password-protected PDF file available through the church website. The password was provided in the Congregational Record; interested candidates visited the website and used the password to access a downloadable PDF file. This process worked well, was technically robust, and reduced the interference with and burden on the church website and its manager. Candidates were able to access the Packet without difficulty. We also made the Packet available to the congregation online, and created several bound copies for people to peruse in the church office.

We were fortunate to have a professional, talented, technically astute graphic artist on the MSC. The result of several months of dedicated work, the 125-page Packet she prepared was beautiful to look at, easy to browse, and full of helpful information. The ministerial candidates were unanimous in their praise of the Packet. One noted, “The packet was well-done. It clarified what you sought in a minister and lifted up honestly the personality and health of the congregation.”

The concepts, plans, and philosophies presented in the Record and the Packet must agree, so these two huge documents should be prepared in tandem. We tended to focus on the Packet, making it beautiful and appealing; however, the Record, which is in an unattractive and bulky online form, is the first thing ministerial candidates see, so it must create a good first impression.

The Record and Packet had to be reviewed by the Transition Coach, who then notified the Transitions Office that the Record was approved for “unveiling.” To keep an even playing field, all approved Congregational Records were made available for ministerial candidates at the same time, December 1. To be certain that we would meet this deadline, we set up and followed a tight review schedule with our Coach. Minister Emerita Walker-Riggs stressed to us that timeliness by congregations would be noticed by ministerial candidates, just as we noticed it in them. We were early for every deadline throughout the search.

Many in the congregation expressed concern that we would be unable to find a minister willing to come to the Southwest; our geographic location had thwarted a previous search. We decided that we would present the church and the area as honestly but as positively as possible, that we would present difficulties as opportunities, and problems as challenges. Although it often required tact, this approach drove our narrative and our candidate interactions. Our Record, our Packet, and our conversations were upbeat and optimistic, rather than defensive and apologetic. We think this approach was successful. Several applicants volunteered that they found our materials to be honest and balanced. They had the sense that we were being honest about the strengths and challenges facing our congregation.

9

Recommendations: Check and confirm all deadlines. Get started early on the Congregational Record and Packet. Don’t leave them to the last

minute, as they require a ton of work. Work closely with the Finance Committee to obtain accurate financial information. Be honest and balanced in presenting the church’s strengths, challenges, and

opportunities. Hire the services of a professional graphic designer, if there is not someone skilled in this

work on the MSC. Work with the Transition Coach to establish a review schedule. Be on time if you can’t be early.

NEGOTIATING TEAM

Both the proposed minister’s salary package and the Letter of Agreement are required parts of the Congregational Record and Packet. They were the responsibilities of the Negotiating Team. In October, the Team tailored a sample Letter of Agreement, which the Board approved. Differences between our Letter and the standard UUA Letter had to be reported to the Transitions Office.

The Team studied the UUA salary recommendations for our geographic area and congregational size. The total ministerial package is based on a Salary & Housing amount, from which the cost of benefits is calculated. A useful online salary calculator helps determine benefit amounts. The total package has many elements, most of which are variable. Understanding how the total package works is critical and requires study.

The Board approved a range of Salary & Housing amounts with a generous maximum total package of $110,000. The Team had only general ideas about what experience and qualifications were appropriate for the low, mid-point, and high salary ranges.

The Negotiating Team felt the suggested salary range put the church in a favorable and attractive position. The UUA agreed and gave our congregation a higher rating than for previous searches. However, soon after the Congregational Record was unveiled, the UUA issued increases in salary recommendations, which left our package, and those of all other congregations in search, looking a little less generous.

At the end of March, after our candidate had accepted our invitation to Candidating Week, the Negotiating Team negotiated with him via conference call to determine a Salary & Housing figure and a complete salary package that met the approval of both the Board and the candidate. The Team also negotiated some minor changes in the wording of the Letter of Agreement, as desired by the candidate. The Letter was signed and transmitted electronically to the candidate for signature. The Board sent a copy of the final signed Letter of Agreement to the Transitions Office.

10

Recommendations: Make sure all Negotiating Team members fully understand the UUA salary

recommendations and how the online Salary Calculator works. It’s a good idea for all MSC members, the Board, and the Finance Committee, to understand too, even if they are not part of the Negotiating Team.

Try to determine clear ideas of what qualifications merit low, mid, and high salaries. Pay close attention to the Letter of Agreement and what it implies for both parties after

settlement. Remember that the search is national in scope.

EVALUATION AND SELECTION OF PRECANDIDATES

The names of those ministers interested in our church were revealed by the Transitions Office on Jan. 2. Eighteen ministerial candidates (one withdrew) expressed interest in the church and presented their often lengthy Ministerial Records and websites for evaluation by the MSC.

Throughout the search, a great deal of communication occurred, generally by email, to welcome candidates into discussion, answer their questions, arrange for teleconferences and precandidating visits, and notify them of our decisions. One MSC member conducted all communications with all candidates throughout the search, so we maintained a single point of contact and spoke with a single and consistent voice.

Working out how to evaluate applicants and their various abilities and interests took much discussion and time. We developed the method described below, which seems complicated but which had the advantage of keeping important information at hand, clarifying thought precisely, and removing much of the subjectivity and emotion from the ensuing discussions.

We also held frank discussions about what would be a deal-breaker for any candidate. Having these discussions early made later discussions simpler.

Initial Evaluations (January)

Based on the results of the casita meetings and the congregational survey, the MSC members discussed at length specific criteria to use in evaluating the candidates. After several iterations we eventually settled on the list of qualities/skills (see below) to serve as a basis for initial screening. A very similar list appears in the Congregational Record and the Ministerial Record, where candidates rank their own interests and skills.

The number in parentheses following each criterion (4, 3, 2, 1) represents a weighting factor (higher to lower importance) that we used in the final evaluation of the precandidates.

11

Administration (4) Commitment to diversity (4) Community building (internal and

external) (4) Conflict management (4) Inspiration/motivation/energy (4) Leadership [skills] (4) Leadership development (4) Preaching (4) Social action/justice (4) Worship (4)

Creativity (3) Interpersonal relationships (3) Stewardship (3) Adult RE (2) Children’s RE/Youth work (2) Membership growth (2) Pastoral care (2) Spiritual guidance (2) Denominational activities (1) Scholarship (1)

After careful review of each applicant’s materials, we evaluated each one against the list using an Interview Score Sheet (see Appendix 3). We each made a simple initial judgement (Yes, No, or Maybe) of the suitability of each candidate. During this phase of screening no formal effort was made to consider the relative importance of a given criterion. Applicants who netted a preponderance of “good fit” judgments were likely to be selected by consensus for an initial hour long interview via teleconference.

We combined out individual Yay or Nay judgments on an Excel spreadsheet (see Appendix 4), which also included candidate contact information. This useful spreadsheet helped to keep candidates clear in our minds.

ZOOM Teleconferences (January)

We invited eight candidates to a teleconference conversation, via Zoom. We were fortunate to have on the committee a computer wizard who managed the equipment and technicalities of these conversations. To keep as level a playing field as possible, we developed a standard set of questions (see Appendix 5), and they were asked in the same order, by the same MSC member each time. The conferences were scheduled over an intensive 10 days. After each conversation we revisited the initial evaluations and shared our impressions of the applicant.

Choosing Precandidates (January)

After all the teleconferences and much discussion, we reached consensus on which applicants should precandidate with us. We selected four candidates for weekend visits; one withdrew. The remaining three spent 3-4 days in Las Cruces for intensive discussions with the MSC and tours of the city. The UU Fellowship of Otero County in Alamogordo served as the neutral pulpit site for all three precandidating visits.

We notified the Transitions Office of the precandidates and the dates of their visits. Prior to each visit, the Transitions Office provided an Interpretive File Summary for each precandidate, additional information that was useful in our decision.

Following each visit (see Precandidating Weekends, below), MSC members again individually evaluated the applicant and used the criteria described above as a basis for discussing strengths,

12

weaknesses, and potential concerns during a detailed debriefing of the visit on the Monday following precandidate visits. At this stage of the process, the weight assigned to each criterion was not formally recorded. We limited ourselves to assessing whether each precandidate was a likely “good fit” or “poor fit” on each criterion. We agreed to focus our discussions on each individual applicant and to avoid making comparisons with other applicants.

Note that timing was important during these final days of the search. The UUA has strict deadlines for submitting the names of precandidates and final candidates, and for making final offers.

Recommendations: Allow enough time to read candidates’ Ministerial Records and other information with

great care. This is extremely time-consuming. Act carefully but act fast to choose precandidates. Good applicants’ weekends fill up fast

with precandidating requests. Develop and agree upon a decision-making method that is as objective as possible. Stand behind group decisions. Be on time and meet all UUA deadlines.

REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND CHECKS

The MSC conducted reference checks by telephone for each precandidate, using references provided by the candidates and developed references (with the candidate’s approval) that emerged. Teams of two MSC members conducted the checks for each candidate, using a predetermined set of questions (see Appendix 6). Summaries of these interviews were provided to the whole committee.

As noted earlier, the Transitions Office also provided a short Interpretive File Summary for each precandidate in the days preceding their visit.

Following the selection of our Ministerial Candidate and with his approval, we commissioned a criminal background check through Oxford at a cost of $288. The check was accomplished in a matter of days.

Recommendations: Make sure each candidate approves contact with each reference and that any necessary

confidentiality is preserved. Check with the church office to see whether the church has a current account with

Oxford. Obtain the Ministerial Candidate’s permission for the criminal background check.

13

PRECANDIDATING WEEKENDS

Once the precandidates were selected, we contacted them all by email on the same day to offer a selection of available precandidating weekends. They quickly made their choices; there were no scheduling conflicts. Spouses/partners were invited to accompany the precandidates, and one called that “an unexpected bonus.” The precandidates made their own flight arrangements, but the MSC arranged everything else: lodging, meals, and transportation. The candidates did not have or need rental cars.

Our goal was to welcome and get to know the candidates in both formal and informal settings. Hospitality was critical and we worked hard at it (see A Word about Hospitality, below). We provided refreshment baskets in the hotel, which were appreciated and made a good impression.

We endeavored to keep a level playing field by making the weekends as similar as possible. Each time we followed approximately the same schedule (see Appendix 7) in approximately the same settings, hotels, restaurants, etc., and made sure to provide the schedule to the candidate in advance. The schedule was a busy one but also included some free time. The weekends were a lot of work and quite intense, but also interesting and enlightening.

The formal interview on Saturday morning followed the same set of questions (see Appendix 7) each time. Covering all these questions took approximately 3 hours, very tiring for all.

We sent the candidates advance information about the neutral pulpit, the Otero County UU Fellowship in Alamogordo, and helped them work with the Fellowship to develop an order of service. The willingness of the Alamogordo Fellowship to be part of our search was a gift, and we feel we established a special bond with the Fellowship during the search process.

A key element of these weekends was confidentiality. We did not reveal the identities of the precandidates and the UUCLC respected our silence. The Alamogordo Fellowship was instructed not to reveal the precandidates’ identities in any way.

Having the logistics worked out in advance was critical. Our organization showed and made a good impression. Response from one precandidate: “All of the logistics were expertly managed.” Good organization reflected not just on the committee but on the church as a whole.

Recommendations: Get organized in advance to avoid scrambling and appearing confused when the

precandidates are visiting. Provide a schedule to the precandidates ahead of time. Limit the interview to a maximum of 3 hours, less if possible. Arrange for someone to entertain a spouse/partner during the interview, and swear the

helper to secrecy. Form a good working relationship with the neutral pulpit. Make sure they understand the

need for confidentiality. Express appreciation for their help and include them in future UUCLC events when feasible.

14

A WORD ABOUT HOSPITALITY

Perhaps as a reaction to the congregation’s apprehensions that candidates would not find our area of the Southwest attractive, the MSC was determined to put the church’s and the city’s best foot forward. We worked hard to be as welcoming and positive to all candidates as possible, beginning early with careful email communications and enthusiastic and congenial ZOOM interviews, and continuing through the precandidating weekends and Candidating Week. We were committed to a practice of “extreme hospitality,” which required many hours spent on research, planning, organization, and logistics, not to mention a significant budget outlay. Candidates responded as we hoped they would, impressed by our organization and friendliness.

Hospitality was particularly important during precandidating weekends (see Appendix 7). We arranged for lodging at a B&B and at a motel; the motel was by far the more satisfactory, and we used it again during Candidating Week. We spent a lot of time working with the establishments to make sure breakfast and checkout times were reasonable for our needs, and that there were plenty of amenities to make for a comfortable stay.

We began each weekend with a Friday night dinner in an MSC member’s home. We tried to set the tone for the entire weekend with a warm and casual atmosphere that put the candidates and their partners at ease and made open and candid conversation very easy. The at-home dinners were good ice-breakers and a comfortable prelude to the formal interview the next day.

For the interviews, we were fortunate to have access to an attractive, comfortable, and private meeting room on the NMSU campus. We made coffee, tea, and refreshments always available at the interviews and we had a catered lunch brought in at the conclusion of the discussions.

We decided early on to invite candidates’ partners to join them for the weekend, at our expense, and we endeavored to learn in advance what the partners might be interested in so we could plan for their entertainment. While candidates were interviewing we made sure their partners were entertained and taken to lunch by the spouse of an MSC member, who had been taken into our confidence. Otherwise, the partners were welcome and encouraged to join the candidates in any planned activity.

We structured the city and church campus tours on Saturday afternoon around the candidates’ questions and interests, all determined in advance. Dinners on Saturday were held in a private dining room of a good restaurant. Lunches after the services on Sunday were also held in a private room at an Alamogordo restaurant. All dining charges were handled quietly by the MSC treasurer; there were no dining-out mathematics to distract us or the candidates from the important conversations at hand. The weekends often involved driving long distances, to and from El Paso and Alamogordo, and we made sure we had adequate water and snacks available in the car at all times.

We extended the extreme hospitality concept to the congregation, providing lunch for BCT workshop attendees. Also, during Candidating Week we supplied ample refreshments during both coffee hours on both Sundays and at the meet-and-greet sessions during the week.

15

Recommendations: Ask the candidates and their partners in advance about any special food requirements and

any allergies to food, pets, or pollens. Inquire about their exercise requirements and accommodate them. Help the candidates make reasonable and unrushed return airline reservations by alerting

them to the distance between the neutral pulpit and the airport, so that there is enough time for a final lunch with the MSC.

Do not skimp on lodging. Budget enough for hospitality. Being able to be generous makes a huge difference. 

SELECTION OF MINISTERIAL CANDIDATE

After all precandidating weekends, the MSC reviewed the evaluation criteria one more time in an effort to standardize understanding of their meanings and to confirm or modify the weight assigned to each one. Through these discussions the committee made a few modifications in the list, primarily by dropping items that seemed to be redundant, combining items that overlapped, and revising some of the assigned weights. At this stage we also agreed to use the following 5-point rating scale (0 through 4) rubric in assessing each precandidate on each of the criteria:

0 Not a good fit (little or no experience in domain, not seen as an interest or priority by candidate)

1 Poor fit (little experience, not a particular interest or priority of candidate but s/he evidences willingness to engage in this activity and to acquire additional knowledge/skills)

2 Potential fit (candidate has relevant experience and expresses interest in developing knowledge/skills in this domain)

3 Good fit (experienced and interested in domain; sees this domain as important part of his/her ministry)

4 Outstanding fit (candidate demonstrates considerable interest, knowledge, experience, expertise in this domain; candidate sees this domain as vital component in his/her ministry)

We set aside a week for each MSC member to complete a ranking of the candidates. Committee members agreed to review each precandidate’s ministerial record, listen again to recorded sermons, and to review any other available sources of information (see References and Background Checks, above) that might be helpful in making informed judgements about each precandidate.

We submitted our individual ratings to a committee member who tabulated the results on a Candidate Scorecard (see Appendix 9) in Excel. Scores for each criterion were summed across all MSC members and then multiplied by the weight assigned to the element. Total weighted scores for each criterion were then summed to produce an overall grand total weighted score for each of the precandidates. These scores, and the resulting ranking of precandidates, were revealed at a committee meeting scheduled for that purpose.

At this meeting each committee member was given the opportunity to voice any reservations about the outcomes produced by this process. During this discussion, the MSC agreed we could

16

all enthusiastically support the candidacy of any of the three precandidates and especially the individual receiving the highest overall ranked score.

The UUA asked us to rank the precandidates, and asked all precandidates to rank the congregations they visited. Though we could distinguish a clear first, second, and third choice, we agreed we would have been happy with any of the three precandidates. We were delighted to learn that all three “loved us,” according to the Transitions Office, and would have been happy to serve our church.

The Transitions Office performs a sort of matching service, not mandating where candidates will be settled but letting both candidates and congregations know whether they will be “happy or disappointed” on the day offers are extended. We were delighted to learn that we would be happy. We extended our offer to the chosen candidate by telephone at the appointed time and were thrilled to have it accepted at once. We learned later that our first-choice candidate also selected us as his first-choice congregation, and we consider this the mark of a search well conducted.

Once the offer was extended and accepted, the candidate gave his approval for the background check to begin (see above). The check was completed within a week. Also, the Negotiating Team held a telephone conference with the candidate to come to agreement about some requested changes to the Letter of Agreement and about a final ministerial salary package. Negotiations were congenial and successful. The salary package was agreed on, and, pursuant to the congregational vote at the end of Candidating Week, the amended Letter was signed by the President of the UUCLC and forwarded electronically for the candidate’s signature.

Recommendations: Give the selection process as much time as necessary and all the time and care it

deserves. Call the chosen candidate at the appointed time. Celebrate when the candidate says yes! Negotiate in good faith.

CANDIDATING WEEK

We settled on the dates for a Candidating Week that happily coincided with the annual church auction, which gave the candidate and his spouse an opportunity to meet the congregation in an informal and celebratory atmosphere. We worked with the candidate to develop the schedule for the week (see Appendix 10), making sure that he had the opportunity to meet with key staff, committee heads, Board, Committee on Ministry, and other church leaders. We organized four meet-and-greet sessions open to all comers; three were held at the church and one at Good Samaritan. To accommodate work and school schedules, one of sessions was scheduled on a Saturday. We also built in a lot of free time, to allow for exploration, house hunting, and relaxation. A member of the MSC accompanied the candidate to all scheduled meetings and events.

17

As with the precandidating weekends, the candidate arranged his air travel and the MSC arranged for lodging and scheduled meals. The candidate rented a car for the week. The MSC covered all expenses.

The candidate preached at the UUCLC on two successive Sundays. Following the final sermon, the Board convened a congregational meeting for the purpose of voting by secret ballot on the question of whether to call the candidate as the settled minister. Absentee ballots were allowed, as provided for by the By-laws, but the absence of an established Board procedure with regard to how the meeting and vote would take place created last-minute difficulty and confusion. The meeting was characterized by lots of excitement, but standard voting procedures were not followed, leaving several members with hard feelings.

Recommendations: Stay organized. Make sure all interested parties know the Candidating Week schedule. Make sure any Board procedural processes are in place and well publicized well in

advance of the congregational meeting. Insist that the congregational meeting follow standard procedure for congregational

votes. Take pictures for future publicity.

CONCLUSION

Serving on the MSC was hard, time-consuming work but also extremely fulfilling. We gained a deep knowledge of the UUCLC, its workings, its culture, its strengths, and its challenges. And we gained a deep appreciation of the church community to which we belong. We are grateful for the opportunity to have served the church in this way, and for the support and appreciation of the congregation throughout the search year.

18

APPENDICES

1. 2017–2018 MSC Expense Report 202. A Covenant between the MSC and the UUCLC 213. Interview Score Sheet 224. Yay or Nay Sheet 235. ZOOM Interview Questions 246. Questions for References 267. Sample Precandidating Schedule 288. Precandidating Weekend Interview Questions 299. Sample Candidate Scorecard 3210. Schedule for Candidating Week 33

19

1. 2017–2018 MSC Expense Report

UUA Transition Coach 950.00MSC retreat 333.00Bulletin boards 19.43Photography for packet 216.62Checks 11.33Conference T-shirt 26.00Beyond Categorical Thinking weekend 450.00Mailings/postage 329.24Survey Monkey subscription 140.00Notecards 64.99Background check 288.00Precandidating weekends (3) 5701.69Candidating week 3160.52Gift for neutral pulpit 500.00

Total 12190.82

Promised from UUCLC 9750.00Received from UUCLC* 8000.12Received from membership 9766.62

Total received 17766.74

Balance remaining 5575.92

*The MSC received $2050 in 2017 and $5950 in 2018. The remaining $1750 was not distributed to the MSC.

20

2. A Covenant between the MSC and the UUCLC

You, the congregation of the Unitarian Universalist Church of Las Cruces, have charged us with serving as your Ministerial Search Committee.

We accept your charge, and we make this covenant with you now:

We promise we will act in accordance with your trust, in what we think is the best interest of the church as a whole, not of any one individual or group of individuals.

We promise to listen to your opinions, needs, wants, and dreams, and to balance them as best we can.

We promise to represent the church, the wider community, and the region honestly and positively.

We promise to conduct an ethical, mindfully inclusive search, guided by right relations.We promise to share as much information with you as possible, while fully respecting the

confidentiality of the candidates.We promise to do all we can to secure the best possible ministerial match for our church,

but if no satisfactory match is available, we promise to make no choice at all.

Now we ask you to covenant with us.

As members of the congregation of the Unitarian Universalist Church of Las Cruces, we make this covenant with the ministerial Search Committee:

We promise to trust you to act in the best interest of our church.We promise to trust you to work for the good of the congregation as a whole, balancing

the needs and wishes of all segments of our church community.We promise to support your work by participating throughout the entire search process to

share our honest opinions, needs, wants, and desires.We promise to respect the need for confidentiality during the search process.We promise to trust your judgment as you search for the minister who is best suited to

lead our church forward.

21

3. Interview Score Sheet

Characteristic Score

Preaching

Leadership

Worship

Commitment to Diversity

Administration

Community Building

Leadership Development

Staff Relations

Social Action/Justice

Creativity

Facilitation

Stewardship

Membership Growth

Spiritual Guidance

Adult RE

Children’s RE/Youth Work

Committee Work

Denominational Activities

Pastoral Care

Music and Liturgical Arts

Personal Counseling

Scholarship

Candidate_____________________________Years of Experience ____________________Type of Experience ____________________Management Experience________________Fiscal Experience______________________ Application Interview Background References We Declined They Declined Why?________________________________

Did you hear what they said about ..... (notes)________________________________

________________________________

________________________________

________________________________

22

________________________________ ________________________________

4. Yay or Nay SheetCo

mm

ittee

Mem

ber 1

Com

mitt

ee M

embe

r 2

Com

mitt

ee M

embe

r 3

Com

mitt

ee M

embe

r 4

Com

mitt

ee M

embe

r 5

Com

mitt

ee M

embe

r 6

Com

mitt

ee M

embe

r 7

Zoom

Inte

rvie

w D

ate

Zoom

Inte

rvie

w T

ime

Pre

Cand

idati

ng W

eeke

nd

Web

site

Pass

wor

d

Repl

y to

Initi

al E

mai

l?

Talk

to C

urre

nt R

ev. ?

Name yes yes yes yes yes yes yes Y Y

Name yes yes yes yes yes yes yes Y Y

Name yes yes yes yes yes yes yes Y Y

Name yes yes yes yes yes yes yes Y Y

Name no no no no no no no N NName no no no no no no no N NName no no no no no no no N NName no no no no no no no N NName no no no no no no no N NName no no no no no no no N NName no no no no no no no Y YName no no no no no no no Y YName no no no no no no no Y YName no no no no no no no Y YName no no no no no no no Y YName no no no no no no no Y YName no no no no no no no Y Y

Name no? yes? yes no? yes yes yes Y Y

23

5. ZOOM Interview Questions

Welcome and Introductions of the Committee Members (Please remember that if we do conference phone interview to re-introduce yourself each time you speak to the applicant.)

General questions

1. We’re interested to know what it is about the UU Church of Las Cruces that sparked your interest in our congregation. Was there something that captured your imagination about our congregation?

2. Was there anything in our packet that you found puzzling or that you’d like clarified early on in our conversation about this opportunity?

Ministerial profession

3. What do you find most energizing about your work as a minister? What’s the most draining?4. If you could go back in time in your current calling, what would you do differently?5. What do you feel are the most important components of “good leadership”? (Follow-up: Of the

components you have just mentioned, which do you feel are among your strengths? Which are areas that feel the need to further develop?]

6. While respecting individual confidentiality, please tell us about a conflict situation you have had to deal with in your current or a past calling and how you approached that situation?

Working with the UUCLC

7. What system of governance did your previous church employ? (Follow-up: What are your views about the strengths and weakness of this system?)

8. Our governance structure is transitioning to “policy-based governance.” Are you familiar with this approach?

9. We live in an economically, ethnically and culturally diverse city and state yet we continue to be a mostly white congregation. What ideas do you have for creating a church that mirrors our city/state?

10. How would you balance the needs of an aging congregation with the need to create a church that will attract and retain younger people and younger families?

11. The concept of “community” is an important one at the UUCLC. We value the congregation as a community and we wish to engage our church community with the wider community. How would you promote the development of “community” in both senses of the concept?

12. What are sermons for? 13. What makes for good worship?

24

14. Based on the information in our congregational record, our packet, and our survey, what do you anticipate might be your 2-3 most important goals in your first 3 or so years with us?

Personal questions

15. Leading a congregation can be stressful, tiring work. What do you do to take care of yourself and to maintain balance in your personal and professional life?

16. What do you do for fun?17. What are you looking for in a city? Do you have any questions about Las Cruces based on the

materials in our packet?18. What do you think you will miss most about the city/region you will be leaving when you accept

a call?19. Have you visited or spent time in the southwestern region of the country?

Closing

20. Is there anything else that you would like us to know about you that we haven’t touched upon in this conversation?

21. Do you have questions for us about anything that would be helpful to you in considering the UUCLC as a potential opportunity?

25

6. Questions for References

Candidate: Contact:

How long have you known ?

Please summarize the nature and character of your relationship with_____________.

Please tell us what you feel are _______________’s major strengths. [Deliberately open-ended to get a broad over view of strengths, follow-up with specific questions for areas of our interests note addressed in response or to seek elaboration or clarification or examples].

What 3-4 adjectives or phrases would you use to describe ________________ approach to worship?

What do feel are areas for growth and development that would enable ____________ to be even more effective as a minister? [Gently probe for examples and clarifying details.]

How would you describe ________________’s sermons? How do you think a majority of the people in your congregation would describe ______________’s sermons?

26

How would you describe ______________ as a leader? Probe for examples of leadership skills.

How would you describe _______________’s approach to dealing with conflict situations? Probe for examples.

What else do you think we should know about ______________ as we consider her/him for our church?

What else should we know to make the best possible choice for our congregation and for __________________?

Procedure we followed: Introductions Thank you Confirm that current time is still ok and indicate anticipated length of interview. Confirm that the referee’s comments are confidential and will not be shared with applicant. Provide brief statement about what we are looking for in a new settled minister: E.g., We are

looking for a minister who has good leadership and administrative skills; who can inform, enlighten and inspire a congregation from the pulpit; and who will effectively partner with us in achieving the goal of creating a creating a climate that will enhance our diversity in terms of ethnicity, class, age, sexual orientation, and spiritual commitments.

Thank referee for candor and give permission to not answer any question s/he feels uncomfortable answering.

Ask for any questions for us before we begin. Begin questions.

27

7. Sample Precandidating Schedule

Unitarian Universalist Church of Las Cruces

Feb. xx-xx Precandidating Schedule

Friday, Feb. x Event MSC Contact12:45 p.m.

2:00 p.m.

Arrival Southwest Airlines #xxxDrive to Las Cruces, brief tour of the area Lunch at Josefina’s in Mesilla

Welcoming committee:Dave SteelePeggy Brown, Rachel Courtney

3:00 p.m. Check in to Comfort Inn1300 Ave. de Mesilla, Las Cruces(855-516-1090)

3:00–6:00 p.m. Free time6:00 p.m. Dinner at Bagby home with MSC Peggy Brown

Saturday, Feb. x Event MSC contactBreakfast at hotel

9:15– :00 p.m. Candidate: MSC interview/ lunch at NMSUPartner: Sightseeing and lunch

Renee BeltranJoel Courtney

1:00–3:00 p.m. Free time3:00–4:30 p.m. Las Cruces tour Susan Bagby, Elisa Sanchez4:30–5:45 p.m. Tour of UUCLC campus Dave Steele6:00–8:00 p.m. Dinner with MSC at Restaurant Peggy Brown

Sunday, Feb. x Event MSC contactBreakfast at hotel

8:15 a.m. Check out and depart for Alamogordo Nora Brown, Rachel Courtney, Renee Beltran

10:00 a.m. Coffee/settle in at UU Fellowship of Otero County

10:30–11:45 a.m. Worship servicenoon–1:30 p.m. Lunch with MSC at restaurant Susan Bagby, Elisa Sanchez1:30 p.m.4:35 p.m.

Depart for El PasoSouthwest Airlines #xxxx

Ministerial Search Committee: Susan Bagby (575-644-9201) Rachel Courtney (575-650-5440)Renee Beltran (575-635-6683) Elisa Sanchez (575-532-9148)Nora Brown (575-640-1591) Dave Steele (575-449-4180)Peggy Brown (575-642-3009

28

8. Precandidating Weekend Interview Questions

1. Pattern a. Why are you moving on or why desire a change?b. Why did you leave ____________(your 2nd most recent position)?c. Why are you interested in our church?

2. Visiona. After reading our packet and after the on line interview with us what are your

thoughts about what you can do for our congregation with your experience and skills?

b. What areas of the _____________(church you manage) programs do you believe you were most effective?

c. And least effective?d. Would your goals be to deepen member’s experience, or grow the membership in

size? e. In our church we have about half the congregation that wants the church to grow

and about half that think it is just right as it is and we don’t need to grow. f. How would you deal with a congregation’s diverse visions?g. How would you handle people who withhold their pledge to force the board to make

a decision they want?h. How do you envision your relationship with our congregation in one year and in five

years?i. What participation do you envision in the community? Groups? Churches?j. How much do you want to participate in the denomination?

3. Theology, religious orientation, minister's religious journey a. When you announced your decision to enter the ministry, what is your recollection

of how friends and family reacted?  Were people surprised?  Were you surprised by their reactions?

b. In your ministerial record and in our video conversation, you discussed your transition to Unitarian Universalism, I’d like to hear more about what that process was like for you.  Did you experience a sense of spiritual crisis?  Did anyone help you through that process?

c. Why do you think you would be a good theological fit for our congregation?d. What are your ideas about how our congregation should interface with the

UUA?  Tell us about your experiences with the UUA and how you hope to interface the UUA in the future.

4. Worship Services a. Please share with us your ideas about how you will involve the lay members of the

congregation in planning for and delivering worship.b. Not surprisingly, the quality of lay led services in the UUCLC can be variable.  What

ideas do you have for helping to enhance the skills of lay service leaders?c. How do you go about selecting themes for worship services?

29

d. Please tell us about things you’ve done in the past to make a worship service unique/memorable.

e. What ideas do you have for enlivening worship?  What risks with worship would you like to take and why?

f. In worship, how do you balance the needs of those who enjoy and expect more traditional worship (based on the historic protestant model that is in the DNA of Unitarianism and Universalism) and those who are looking for something “different” in the worship experience?

g. How do you see incorporating children and youth in worship?

5. Religious Educationa. How do you work with DRE to create a vibrant program?b. What programs have you initiated and sustained for both youth and adults?c. Would you see yourself as a leader of classes, workshops, or seminars? If so, what

areas of adult education/programming interest you?d. Are you comfortable with attendance at worship services by youth? Describe your

experience.e. How do you think children can be helped to feel like an important part of your

church community?

6. Pastoral Care a. What training and skills do you have in counseling? b. What kinds of counseling are you most effective at, and least effective?c. How do you feel about counseling?d. Have you had any experience with an organized caring committee?e. How do you balance pastoral care with a desire for growth?

7. Social Responsibilitya. Regarding social justice, how have you been involved in local, state, national, and

global issues? Which ones have been the most impactful?b. How involved should the minister be in social concerns?c. How involved should the members be in social concerns?d. What successes have you experienced in the area of social concerns?e. What failures or disappointments have you experienced in social concerns?f. What would you do if you had $20,000 a year to spend on social issues?g. What is the difference between social action and social justice?h. What challenges or opportunities do you see coming from living near a border?

8. Administrationa. How do you work with the Board, the staff, and the committees? Sexton, etc.?b. How do you envision the relationship between the minister and staff, and the

Board?c. What should your relationship be with the Board? d. What is the role of the minister in relation to lay leadership?e. How much time do you want to spend meeting with committees?f. Describe a typical work week.

30

g. What office hours do you prefer to keep? h. How do you feel about being the new person on staff? Managing people who have

“done it this way” for 20 years?i. How do you organize the daily functioning of the office? What is the duty of the

congregational administrator? j. What experiences have you had with the media? How have you used it to get your

message out?k. Do you have an active social media account? Are you comfortable with using

Facebook to reach out to congregants or potential congregants?l. How do you view the use of the church building by members and non-members?

Rental fees? Contracts?

9. Growth and Outreach a. Are you interested in growth?b. What successes and failures have you experienced with growth?

10. Personnel Matters a. Is there anything in our ministerial agreement that raises concerns for you? b. professional meetings time?c. sabbatical leave time?

31

9. Sample Candidate Scorecard

Characteristic

Com

mitt

ee M

embe

r 1

Com

mitt

ee M

embe

r 2

Com

mitt

ee M

embe

r 3

Com

mitt

ee M

embe

r 4

Com

mitt

ee M

embe

r 5

Com

mitt

ee M

embe

r 6

Com

mitt

ee M

embe

r 7

Sub

Tota

l

Wei

ght

Tota

l

Administration 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 4 112Commitment to Diversity 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 4 112

Community Building (Internal & External) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 4 112

Conflict Management 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 4 112Inspiration/Motivation/Energy 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 4 112

Leadership 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 4 112Leadership Development 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 4 112

Preaching 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 4 112Social Action/Justice 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 4 112

Worship 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 4 112Creativity 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 3 84

Interpersonal Relationships 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 3 84Stewardship 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 3 84

Adult RE 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 2 56Children’s RE/Youth Work 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 2 56

Membership Growth 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 2 56Pastoral Care 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 2 56

Spiritual Guidance 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 2 56Denominational Activities 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 1 28

Scholarship 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 28 1 28Total 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 560 61 1708

Score candidates on a scale of 0 to 44 - outstanding fit, 3 - good fit, 2 – potential fit, 1 - poor fit, 0 – not a good fit

32

10. Schedule for Candidating Week

Early Mornin

gMorning Noon Afternoon Evening

Friday Free Time Travel Arrive to El

Paso 1:13 p.m.

Check into hotel - Peggy

Brown has paperwork

Dinner with Committee and

Partners 6 p.m. at Bagbys’

Saturday Free Time Free Time

Plan 4/22 Service at noon

with Dave & Catherine

(Elisa) at UUCLC Sanctuary

Coffee/Tea with Rev. Sue

and Chuck Campbell at 3

p.m. at Café de Mesilla

Arrive at 5 p.m. (dinner served until 6:30 p.m.) Auction Includes Dinner at UUCLC. (Dave and

Rachel)

Sunday Free Time

Services @ 9 a.m. and 10:30 a.m. at UUCLC

(XK arrive at 8:30 a.m.)

Meet and Greet @ 11:30 a.m. UUCLC in RE Great Room

Free Time

Monday Free Time

Meet with Naoma @

10 a.m. and Susan @ 11

a.m. at UUCLC Library

Elderberries Luncheon at

noon at UUCLC Library (Susan)

Free TimeMeet with Catherine at

4:30 p.m. at UUCLC Library

Dinner with Rev. Nancy & Charlie

(they have cats) at 6 p.m. 2125 Huntingto

n Dr.

Tuesday Free Time

Meet and Greet 10:30

to 11:30 a.m. at UUCLC Library (Elisa)

MSC lunch at noon to 1:30 p.m. at Peggy

Brown's (Home has Dogs)

Committee Chair Meeting + Dinner 5:30 - 7 p.m. at UUCLC Library (Elisa

and Susan)Free Time

Wednesday

Free Time

Quilting Bee at 10 a.m.

Plan 4/29

Pastoral Partners

Meet and Greet @ 3 at

COM Meeting 7 to 8:30 p.m. in

33

to 4 p.m. UUCLC Lobby

Service

with Elisa

at 11:3

0 a.m.

at TBA

Rachel, Gayle, Chuck, Charlie entertai

n Tamara

for lunch at

TBA

Good Sam, 3025 Terrace Dr. (Nora or

Susan)

minister's office (Peggy)

Thursday Day Off

Friday Free Time

Meet and Greet 10:30

to 11:30 a.m. at UUCLC Library

(Renee and Nora)

MSC lunch at noon to 1:30

p.m. at International Delights Café, 1245 El Paseo

Rd.

Free Time

Board Dinner at 5 p.m. in UUCLC Library (Dave)

Dinner at 6:30 p.m. at Paisano Café,

1740 Calle De Mercado

Saturday Free Time

Meet and Greet @ 10

a.m. to noon at UUCLC Library

(Rachel)

Free Time

CUUPS 6 to 9 p.m. Potluck at UUCLC RE Great Room

Putting up the May Pole (Optional)

(Renee)

Sunday Free Time

Services @ 9 a.m. and 10:30 a.m. at UUCLC

(XK arrive at 8:30 a.m.)

Vote at noon (MSC will bring

results and contract to sign

to hotel)

Travel

Depart El Paso at 4:28

p.m.

34

L to r. Peggy Brown, Susan Bagby, Renée Beltran, Tamara Kacela, Rev. Dr. Xolani Kacela, Rachel Courtney, David Steele, Elisa Sanchez, Nora Brown.

35