Gathering Overview

The Dual Power Gathering 2022 (DGP22) was an in-person event held at the Indiana Dunes National Park over the weekend of July 29-31. Pre-Gathering planning took place on the Discord chat service and later expanded to the encrypted messaging app Signal. The Gathering itself was structured as an unconference, where any participant could suggest, plan, or facilitate sessions on a topic of their choosing and where a number of these sessions occurred concurrently.

This document is organized in a couple of sections:

  • Overview of the event, its intensions, and its organizers
  • Participant feedback
  • Pre-planning retrospective from volunteers
  • Appendix of potentially useful links

We are trying to be comprehensive with it, but could be missing things. If you notice something missing please let us know on Discord or via e-mailing us.

Role of volunteer organizers leading up to the event

The organizing of the conference was undertaken by a handful of volunteers. Hereafter Organizers, volunteers who were especially commited to the planning of the gathering (especially those who had been involved in planning the gathering from the early days of the project) were given expanded responsibilities in managing the Discord and the gathering itself. These organizers communicated in both public and private channels on Discord. At certain points some working groups switched over to organizing on Signal, though there were no planning groups on there that were not publicly advertised. Within private channels, tasks that were not getting done by existing working-groups or deemed too sensitive (issues involving social media passwords or interpersonal conflict, for example) were dealt with. Of these organizers, most had affinity with one-another from other organizing experiences, while others volunteered to take-on a larger quantity of organizing tasks and so were invited into the aforementioned exclusive channels. This group of organizers was primarily responsible for the planning of the gathering, determination of the goals and format of the gathering, the onboarding of volunteers and participants in the implementation of the gathering, and most other high-level decisions. Some raised concerns around transparency of this process and encouraged ways of formalizing those structures, introducing things like recallability of organizers.

The purpose of DPG22

DPG22 was organized to serve a number of goals: provide a place to form connections between militants across North America, share ideas and reflections, and build skills.

Target Audience

The ideal participant for DPG22 was a source of tension between organizers and others planning the event, and changed during the course of planning and the event itself. Most sessions planned at the gathering itself were introductory-level and more than half of respondents to a post-gathering survey, when asked of their familiarity with Dual Power (as a concept) before the gathering assessed themselves as “New to the Conversation” or “Somewhat Familiar”, the two lowest levels of familiarity of four possiblities (the other two options, in ascending order of familiarity, are “Familiar but always looking to learn more” and “I dual power in my sleep”). While these survey categories are ambigiously ranked, estimations by participants both during and after the gathering point to significant proportions of participants utilizing the gathering to learn about dual power for the first time. Similar estimates point to roughly half of participants being unaffiliated with any existing dual power project. Those organizers and participants who desired deeper or more complex discussions were unable to faciliate sessions of that sort, due to norms about inclusivity, time constraints, and security concerns. Still, time between sessions served as a location for such conversations to occur, though potentially without the broader insights that a larger conversation with more experienced participants could have.

The racial composition of DPG22 was also a source of tension. The proportions of participants who were white far exceeded that of the United States, and participants of color formed an independent group (the “POC Caucus”) to organize internally and form relationships outside of a predominantly white gathering. This make-up reflects outstanding critiques of white anarchists unaware of and disconnected from anarchists of color, as well as the means through which participants for the gathering were sought (listenerships for podcasts where the gathering were promoted). Attempts by organizers to solicit participants of color prior to the event had mixed results, and members of the aforementioned POC Caucus discussed organizing a Dual Power Gathering without white participants. The flexible format of the gathering did easily allow participants of color to self-organize discussions, feedback, and planning sessions without the involvement of white participants. Feedback from indigenuous participants and participants of color to organizers was that they were incredibly happy to have attended the event and hope to see more events like it in the future.

As an introductory event, DPG22 succeeded in bringing a large number of geographically distinct militants with low levels of existing engagement with dual power practices. The racial composition of participants was skewed far whiter than that of the United States, and those who desired the gathering as a site for nuanced conversation and connection-building between a variety of geographically disperesed projects were unable to realize that goal. Overwhelmingly though, most participants responded positively to the event, found it meaningful, and are hoping for more events like it in the future.

Participant Feedback

Alongside understanding how the DPG22 came to be (and for what purpose), it is worth assessing the event from the perspective of participants. A survey (found in appendix of this report) was distributed and a number of feedback sessions were held to garner input from participants. The survey goal is to understand participants feelings on the following questions:

How did the event change their thoughts on dual power? Why did participants attend the event? What purpose did attending fulfill for them? How were the overall logistics executed? How did attendance impact participants networks? Did attendance facilitate initiation of new projects? How did attendance impact self-understanding of capacity? Did participants feel able to contribute to the planning of the event?

The results for these questions are summarized in their respective subheadings.

1. How did the event change their thoughts on dual power?

Responses to the survey question “How did your participation in the Gathering influence your familiarity with Dual Power?” were generally positive, greater positivity was found with attendants whom had lower self-described pre-existing knowledge of Dual Power. Some mentioned that the gathering showcased dual power projects happening in real time. Many of the reviews emphasized the importance of meeting other radicals at the event rather than learning about dual power in general. Some noted positively the influence of learning how other participants’ projects are structured. Others surveys indicated complications with the format of the gathering which limited their capacity to learn. Examples being the unconference format, a desire to run through workshops on how to build dual power, and a suggestion to run through reports back at the end of the event. Some pointed out that while there might have been a lack of concrete conversation around dual power, they might have gained more from the experiences of building trust with other organizers.

Additional thoughts:

  • At the start of the event and each session ask “how does this build dual power.”
  • There is still a lot of unlearning that attendees have to do, but it was a good temperature check of where the movement is right now.

2. Why participants attended the event and what purpose it fulfilled for them?

When asked; “Did you feel fulfilled having attended the Gathering? Do you consider the Gathering a valuable use of your time and resources?” all surveyed responded positively. Some indicated they wished the gathering to run longer, and others made clear they wished to attend future gatherings on this topic. Common responses emphasized how the event positivly impacted the attendants political hope. Many attended because they lived in the area and were hoping to meet people in person to build networks. Many commented this was a success for them.

3. How were the overall logistics executed?

To assess logistical matters at the DPG22, survey respondents were asked to rank; their opinions of food options and quantity, their discussions, other participants, the gathering structure, the gathering location, the gathering length, the gathering timing, travel between sites within the gathering spaces, and other misc logistical concerns. For the most part, participants rated these logistical matters well.

Some respondents indicated that food could run out for those at the end of the line, and alluded to long wait times in the food service line. Further, concerns about allergy-safe food being unavailable and invisible disabilities being ignored lowered opinions of food service at the gathering. Overall respondents were appreciative of the kitchen work and food.

While most participants responded favorably to the location, the summer heat made participation for a respondent more difficult.

While overwhelminly respondents felt favorably towards the assemblies and unconference models, some respondents raised concerns with the assembly and unconference format as long, complex, and functionally less accessible. Others pointed out that they felt the process for creating the agenda was genuinely collaborative and that they liked the structure. Another respondent indicated that a lack of onboarding beforehand made participation difficult, while still another indicated a desire to help with logistics but was unable to determine what was needed. There were concerns around scheduling for anti-racist and anti-patriarchy work. Generally, suggestions were that this focused work should have happed earlier in the Gathering.

A couple of respondents pointed out the complexities around unstructured night time activities at a site not near the campsite.

Some specific suggestions were:

  • Having more whiteboards for task sign-ups
  • Clarifying rules around the campsite use (Quiet hours at federal campsites are 10p-6a; the state park closes at 11pm which cut the movie night short etc..)
  • Better onboarding and more 1-1s before the event
  • More diverse outreach
  • Giving space and time ahead of scheduling for people of color to lead decolonization and patriachy events
  • Clearer maps of the site and where events were happening
  • Up front conversations about micro-aggressions
  • More explicit spaces for sober participants
  • A bit more structure around art and kitchen spaces
  • When prioritizing marginalized groups, not assuming marginalization based on whether it is visible
  • Alternatives to camping in terms of accessibility
  • More child care options
  • More down/fun/play/party time
  • Aspects of the first large assembly could have occurred remotely, with procedural considerations disseminated before the Gathering.
  • More insight into how high-stakes the facilitating breakouts and sessions would have been.

4. How did attendance impact participants networks? Did attendance initiate new projects?

Attendants were asked; “Do you feel like the event impacted your knowledge of who to reach out to for advice and solidarity?” Respondents, in nearly all cases, stated that the DPG22 improved their social networks. A few respondents indicated their own social difficulties as impeding their social network expansion. Most, when asked “Before the Gathering, why were you planning on attending the Gathering?”, responded that they wished to expand their social networks.

5. How did attendance impact self-understanding of capacity?

Part of the previous question also asked; “How did the event impact your sense of your own capacity and potentials to plan and implement radical action?” Though few mentioned any direct impact on their capacities, those who did indicated they feel more confident and capable in their militancy.

6. Did participants feel able to contribute to the planning of the event?

Responses varied to the questions; “Were you as involved / engaged with the event as you would have liked? What, if anything, would have helped you get more engaged?” A chunk of participants indicated they were as involved as they wanted or had the capacity to be. Many indicated a desire to be further involved in the planning and running of the Gathering, and some of those listed concerns that it was difficult to find some place to get involved before or at the Gathering. Some bottom lining camp things wished they had been able to participate more with planning discussions. Of those with concerns, some listed solutions:

  • placing needs for the event on a white board
  • identifying systemic barriers to involvement (disability, systemic biases against PoC, cisheteropatriarchy)
  • the Discord social media site was an overwhelming space to do Pre-Gathering planning. Specific technical tools were used in which Organizers could have facilitated how-tos and skillshares
  • more 1-1s to bring people on into the Pre-Gathering planning

Pre-Gathering planning retrospective

Admin / Check-ins

We had weekly check-ins to catch up on work and report back. These felt critical for making sure that things were still happening and moving along and accountability. But it became clear that these were not necessarily the most accessible. So in the four months leading up to the event we had public community calls with presentations and time for Q&A. This is when we saw more engagement and buy-in picking up.

It would have been great to have people dedicated specifically to onboarding new organizers and having one on one conversations with them to help them get plugged in. We started doing this towards the end but doing it earlier would have been better to spread out the work load.

Initial conversations around the event started a year before it. We made sure that we picked a location where we had a solid crew of 2-3 committed people on the ground to make it happen. Figuring out the format of the event and coalescing around those things started around 6 months before the event. The majority of the organizing of small detail logistics happened in the 2-3 months leading up to the event.

Pre-event logistics

Prior to the event we put together a Google Form with a series of logistical questions (questions in the appendix). We used that form to gather information around people’s level of prepardness and availabality during the event itself for logistical work. We also used this form to gauge how many people would be camping and to know when to close the camping sign up. We should have done this earlier in the planning, using camping and non-camping tickets, and checking in with every person and bringing them on board, probably in a short one on one conversation.

We also put out a task list on a google spreadsheet for people to sign up to. This was mainly useful for us to map out what needed to happen beforehand, but the event itself was much more fluid. People who did sign up did show up to help out, but we ended up needing many more tasks during the event itself.

Format (Unconference)

During the planning a format that allowed for autonomous and flexible planning of the gathering was presented and used. The unconference is a way to collectively decide sessions and format for the event on the day itself. We reached out to past organizers of unconferences, got training on how to run them (encouraging all participants to attend this as well as recording and sharing it for the future), and brought in facilitators that had experience with them for the event itself. On the first day of the gathering we also decided to have a “how to facilitate a conversation” presentation and workshop.

Prior to the event the “content working group” solicited ideas for topics from participants, encouraging them to submit ideas and ask for help articulating what they want to talk about. This didn’t get as many submissions as we had hoped but might have been partially due to the lack of familiarity with the unconference model.

During the event itself we had a morning assembly on Saturday and Sunday to determine the schedule of the event. The Saturday assembly was long (too long?) and some felt that parts of the Sunday assembly were redundant. However, the assemblies allowed us an amount of flexibility during the event that most people reported as a great fit.


Review of the site location

Building dual power involves making sure all can be a part. Having affordable transportation options that do not require an automobile was important:

  • ADA accessibiblity.
    • ADA accessible campsite, bathrooms, and showers
    • Federal campsite like Dunewood may not be ideal for anarchists but being a federal campsite does mean ADA is a priority you won’t find at many other places.
  • Accessible by public transit with adequate span of service (evenings, weekends etc) and frequency (runs often)
    • South Shore Line runs within a quarter mile to Beverly Shores Station
      • 4 mile (7 minute drive) to ADA accssible Dune Park station.
  • Affordability for people coming from all over
    • Accessible by 2 major airports
    • National Amtrak hub
    • Adequate intercity bus service

With the above in mind, it made a lot of sense to have the event in Chicago. It’s central local location instead of the coasts made it affforable and a reasonable travel time for most and the Dunewood campgroup had transit & ADA accessiblity that many other campgrounds do not.

Note: It was confusing with some campsites starting Thursday night, some mistakenly ended Sunday instead of Monday. Campsites book out 6 months in advance. Suggest 3 people book the entire Mather loop Thursday-Monday if using Dunewood again. Booking on Thursday should make it easier to get the whole loop for the entire time.

Also the South Shore Line runs through the south side of Chicago. Connecting with more diverse organizing efforts on the south side may encourage more diversity at the event. Maybe a missed opportunty not to reach out to neighbors of the rail stations on the south side and provide free transit passes to the event.

The downside to Dunewood was it has no additional parking and no large public shelters. The state park a few miles down the road does have parking and reservable shelters, so the initial plan was to camp at Dunewood and have coffee and a car shuttle to the state park each morning. It became clear logistics weren’t planned to get food stored and prepared at the state park. Even though the state park is a 10 minute drive, there is only one road into the state park and a lot of traffic. The shelters are also surrounded by public picnic tables that are used at all times. Although you could walk to the beach/Lake Michigan from the shelters, stay protected from weather and not worry about a lack of parking, the decision was made the day of to do the entire event at Dunewood campground. It worked out because we had good weather and there were not too many cars to overwhelm the parking (33 campsites, 2 cars per site = 66 cars for 150-200 people). If the site is used again need to be vocal to take transit to avoid lack of parking and also prepare for rain with canopy shelters ready to set up at multiple camp sites to continue to event.

Hotels were booked for some guests, but we would recommend not doing this in the future.

We looked for a site that would accomodate 200 people. We based our ticketing on this. We should have split our ticketing into camping and non-camping earlier, to bring clarity to how many people were coming and if they needed a campsite or not.

It’s important to note that choosing a National Park made us subject to closer surveilance from National Park Law Enforcement, and they would patrol the site at evening “quiet hours” as part of their normal operations. There were several times during the event where this caused tension between law enforcers (park hosts and NPS law enforcement) and attendees, as well as between attendees. Though park maintenance staff (the people who cleaned the bathrooms) claimed we were some of the best and courteous visitors they had encountered in such a large group. We still think the site was the right choice especially considering accessibility and availability of resources in the area, but want to caution future organizers to take this into consideration when booking spaces.

Kitchen Logistics

We spent a lot of time going back and forth on whether we needed catering at the event. This proved stressful and contentious during the decision making process. It also required someone taking a large upfront payment on their credit card for re-imbursement later. This was also a major burden for fundraising. Ultimately kitchen volunteers were grateful this decision was made. We opted for a vegan restaurant, should have clarified that we also wanted gluten free options.

Estimating how much food we needed to serve people was probably the hardest thing to gauge right before the event.

We mainly paid for breakfast and lunch by shopping trips to Costco and nearby supermarkets, but also received very large donations from Food not Bombs in Chicago, as well as from folks who brought stuff with them (a lot of corn, thank you midwest).

The kitchen equipment was pulled together largely from Food not Bombs Rogers Park as well as individuals who had setups for these specific situations. We ended up with three turkey burners, enough gas, five large foldable tables, tent cover, hand washing stations, five large coolers, and a lot of totes for storing things in over night, all through lending or donations.

During the event a small group of people facilitated most of the kitchen work. Volunteers signed up, but most of the work ended up being done by a small group. This was by choice from that group, and there was some tension around this. Others felt that the group should make space if they wanted newcomers to step in and volunteer. But largely the group was happy to do the labor of maintaining the kitchen, and enough volunteers did step in to help with food prep and washing the dishes. While there were high stress moments in this setup, and some conflict, it was mainly between different visions around how the work should happen, rather than around the work not getting done.

It turns out there’s a group that makes sure that food happens for these kind of events, which we didn’t know, and now we know.

Transit Logistics

ADA transit directions were prepared for all modes of travel below.

Signal group was used to coordinate between drivers and when trains arrived at Dune Park Station (there were shuttle buses one stop to the closer Beverly Shores station with less service than the typical train provided due to construction).

Taking the train closest to start time was encouraged and made it easy to prevent a lot of shuttle trips since everyone getting to the station at the same time.

Train riders were encouraged to read the transit directions and join the signal group (linked in the directions) and request a ride be dispatched. Since it’s less than 10 minute drive made this easy. Downside is not everyone may be tech friendly or have signal but most people coming the same train anyway..

It may work better with assigned shifts of 2-3 drivers for each morning and evening so the work is spread out.

It was super helpful to have a Dual Power participant that had a ADA lift in their car to help with ADA travel.

It helps that all the airports, Amtrak, Greyhound are all accessible by transit connecting to the South Shore line.

ADA transit directions:

Outreach Done

Pre-existing networks

The idea of the gathering was first initiated by a dispersed group that knew each other through a couple of national networks, several of them at some point having passed through both the Symbiosis Federation and the DSA’s Libertarian Socialist Caucus.

Symbiosis (a federation of local co-ops focused on dual power and a build and fight strategy): Endorsement from Symbiosis and connections built through Symbiosis Summer were instrumental in getting buy-in from some better established and well known groups within the libertarian socialist (especially social ecologist) left. However, after the initial endorsement, collaboration between the two groups withered a bit, and through some mis-communication it turned out that the ISE and Symbiosis also hosted an event the first week of August in Vermont, splitting some attendance.

DSA’s Libertarian Socialist Caucus: the association with the DSA and relationship with the Libertarian Socialist Caucus was arguably one of the most contentious aspects of organizing leading up to gathering. The connection to the DSA created skepticism among long-time POC movement organizers. As such the link to the LSC was de-emphasized as organizing towards the gathering proceeded. At the gathering itself some attendees reported that if they had been more aware of this connection they might not have come (though they also said they were glad they did come).

Supportive Media

It Could Happen Here: Two volunteer organizers interviewed for this podcast and it was arguably one of the major drivers of attendees to the gathering. However, there was vocal opposition from earlier interested attendees to going on a podcast hosted primarily by Robert Evans (even though Evans wasn’t interviewing the organizers) or inviting the podcast to the gathering. From non-scientific polls during the event, this is probably the number one way people found out about the event.

Truthout: Truthout published an article about Mutual Aid organizing which mentioned Dual Power Gathering. The publication of this article drove a second wave of registrations.

Varn Vlog: Two volunteer orgnaizers interviewed for this YouTube channel.

It’s Going Down: Volunteers did an interview with It’s Going Down but due to recording audio quality it never broadcast. However, they posted us in their regular upcoming events posts as well as supporting us on Social Media.

Strange Matters: DPG received an endorsement from Strange Matters magazine.

Tools used


Why: We needed a way to track attendees to the event and get an estimate of how many people were committing to coming.


  • Everything in one place, email sending to attendees, survey around attendee requests, keeping track of groups and quantity for each attendee, etc.
  • Was good for managing sign-ups and preventing too many people from signing up. When we closed camping it wasn’t clear though that people could still come without camping, or we fielded a lot of questions around this.


  • We should have set up two tiers of tickets–camping and non-camping–from the start to make it easier to track who would be camping. This caused a lot of extra work because free tickets can’t be transferred between tiers.
  • Long emails get cut off, but this might have been an issue with gmail on the receiving end.
  • Might have been overkill. Not flexible around how attendees attend data.

Fundraising / Open Collective

Why: We needed a way to raise money. Open Collective was chosen because it allowed transparent fundraising and expense re-imbursement. However, Open Collective Foundation doesn’t host one-off events, so we were hosted as a project within the Tenants United South Chicago collective.


  • Transparent
  • We had people very well acquinted with Open Collective helping us out


  • Open Collective required people to largely have funds up front to be able to get reimbursed later. Considering our target audience this isn’t always the case. We needed this for bookings like catering, hotels, and the campsite.
  • Being admin on a project hosted within a collective requires that you are admin for the entire collective. This was a process of building trust.
  • Re-imbursements require paypal or bank accounts, which considering our target audience could have been hard
  • Reimbursing gas required cash reimbursement and couldn’t be handled via Open Collective
  • The more you rely on people bringing things, and less on paying things, the less of a headache this will be.


Why: many of the people who helped kick-start the project were already communicating with each other via Discord. Discord gets used by many left-leaning projects as their community space.


  • Already popular
  • Free


  • Many people interested in helping organize reported being overwhelmed by the amount of updates on Discord. Roles were used to try and fix this but it didn’t seem to help much.


Why: Some people expressed security concerns around discord and as the event got closer Signal started getting used for people more involved in directly planning the event and logistics.


  • Sense of security through encryption
  • Worked really well as a way of announcing things during the gathering itself


  • Much less transparent than Discord, and harder for people to find out what channels exist and are being used.

Ride Sharing App

Why: Organizers wanted a way for people to offer each other rides to and from the gathering. Someone volunteered to put together a webapp that facilitated this.


  • This wasn’t fully developed but would have been a great way to reduce travel cost for participants


  • It got done slightly too late to be particularly useful as most people had already made travel plans.


We used a very simple static website, hosted by GitLab, using the Jekyll static website generator. Domain name was purchased as a donation by a volunteer.

Why: Free of cost, cheap to maintain, quick to set up


  • Free of cost,
  • cheap to maintain,
  • quick to set up


  • Bottleneck of one of only one volunteer organizer being able to maintain site because it relied on server and basic html / css know-how. They were fine with this as it wasn’t a heavy task but it wouldn’t scale well.


Why: Cryptpad provides an alternative to Google Drive for collaboration. We used it for mailing list sign-up as well as drafting many documents.


  • Not a major corporation
  • Open source & encrypted storage
  • Mostly works


  • Unfamiliar to many people
  • People reported issues loading documents in some browsers.
  • There were also issues with version control for spreadsheets (someone could delete everything in a shared doc and we couldn’t get it back)
  • Less functionality than Google products.

Google Drive

Google Drive was used on instances where Cryptpad met its limitations, or people set up the document on their own initiative.


  • Well known, understood, and works well


  • Owned by a major corporation

Social Media

Twitter and Instagram were our primary means of outside communication.

We ended up using Twitter to make announcements, as well as some last minute announcements, telling people to check their emails. We used both pretty sparsely leading up to the event. Instagram was more neutral and agit-prop. Listserv

Why: we wanted a way to keep interested volunteers looped in without them feeling the need to check in on discord all the time.

We didn’t end up using this.


We used TinyLetter as our mailing list provider. It’s free and very straightforward.


  • Free
  • Limited Tracking


  • None really


Why: we used gmail as our mailing email address.


  • Delegate access
  • Works pretty well
  • Loops into Google Drive


  • Google

Appendix: Materials You Might Find Useful

One Big Cryptpad Doc with a long list of links of decisions and meeting notes.

Dual Power 2022 Zine contains tips and resources on: community norms, participating in an unconference, meeting facilitation, and more! A lot of effort was put into putting together and printing this zine, and some attendees commented on it, but it wasn’t clear that it was very used during the gathering itself.

Nitty Gritty Logistics Form

Questions included in the form were:

  • What meals will you be at the gathering for?
  • Will you bring your own food to the event?
  • Are you interested in helping with food errands during the event?
  • How many people are in your camping group? For how many people are you filling in this form?
  • What’s your comfort with camping?
  • Do you have any extra camping gear available?
  • Do you want a camping buddy?
  • Are you comfortable sharing a tent with others? (most people said no)
  • Are you able to give a ride to and from the gathering? How many seats do you have available?
  • Are you able to give rides during the gathering? How many seats do you have for that?
  • Where are you traveling from?
  • Anything else we should know?

Task Signup Spreadsheet

Location Day Task What Driver Helper Backup
Off-site Thursday Pick up from Chicagoland Food Solidarity everything they set aside for us      
  Friday Pick up from Rogers Park FNB whatever supplies they can’t fit in their car      
    Friday ice & supply run pick up ice and misc goods.      
    Pick up food Friday - time tbd - about 2 hours round trip drive to food, get food to dinner set-up crew      
  Saturday Saturday ice & supply run pick up ice and misc goods      
    Pick up food Saturday time tbd about 2 hours round trip drive to food, get food to dinner set-up crew      
  Sunday Sunday ice & supply run pick up ice and misc goods      
On-site Friday Dinner set-up set up catering      
    Dinner clean up clean up and prepare for breakfast      
  Saturday COffee (at camp, ready by 8am)        
    Breakfast prep make oatmeal, fill handwash stations      
    Breakfast clean up clean up, refill hand wash stations      
    Lunch prep Organize deli lunch and prepare sides      
    Lunch clean up clean up, refill hand wash stations      
    Dinner prep set up for catering      
    Dinner clean up clean up and prepare for breakfast      
  Sunday COffee (at camp, ready by 8am)        
    Breakfast prep make oatmeal, fill handwash stations      
    Breakfast clean up clean up, refill hand wash stations      
    Lunch prep Organize deli lunch and prepare sides      
    Lunch clean up clean up, refill hand wash stations      
    Dinner prep set up for catering      
    Dinner clean up clean up and prepare for breakfast      
  Sunday night / monday Bring stuff back to food not bombs chicago return our borrowed items to fnb