DOCUMENT RESUME ED 389 435 PS 023 781 AUTHOR Wynn, … · DOCUMENT RESUME. ED 389 435 PS 023 781....

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 389 435 PS 023 781

AUTHOR Wynn, Joan R.; And Others

TITLE Children, Families, and Communities: Early Lessonsfrom a New Approach to Social Services.

INSTITUTION American Youth Policy T'orum, Washington, DC.;Institute for Educational Leadership, Washington,D.C.

REPORT NO ISBN-1-887031-54-5PUB DATE Sep 95

NOTE 47p.; For the 1994 version, see ED 386 277.

AVAILABLE FROM American Youth Policy Forum, 1001 Connecticut Avenue,N.W., Suite 719, Washington, DC 20036-5541 ($5prepaid; quantity discounts).

PUB TYPE Reports Descriptive (141)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.

DESCRIPTORS Citizen Participation; Community Action; CommunityCenters; Community Development; CommunityInvolvement; Community Organizations; *CommunityRole; *Community Services; Community Support; *FamilyPrograms; Local Issues; Program Descriptions; SocialProblems; *Social Services

IDENTIFIERS Family Resource and Support Programs; Family Support;*Illinois (Chicago)

ABSTRACTThis paper reports on the progress of eight

Chicago-based community initiatives designed to redefine socialservices and broaden social responsibility for the development ofchildren and families. The paper has three sections describing: (1)

general background on the children, youth, and families initiative;(2) early lessons from an initiative in progress; and (3) acrosscommunities: the roles of the sponsor, the evaluator, and learning.Specific topics covered in these sections include: (1) the purposes

and possibilities of an infrastructure and creating a governanceentity and process; (2) specific aspects of governance, developingand linking services, and access to services; and (3) therelationships and roles of sponsors within foundations, definingoutcomes, balancing objectivity and engagement, pro-cess versusoutcome evaluation, and the value of the learning process. The paperalso includes information on related research from the University ofChicago's Chapin Hail Center for Children and on Chapin Hall'sComprehensive Strategies Forum on Handsnet. (JW)

*Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made

from the original document.**************************************************************u********

Ilk

BE

U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice ci Ednicadonal flesdarcr and dnprdienienr

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERICI

lcr This document has been reproduced as...received from the person or orgrini7ato

originating It

0 Minor changes have been rn3de .0improve reprOduclion qualay

Points ol view or opinions stated in thisdocument do not necessarily representofficial OERI position or policy

PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

d 0,FO,r

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)

2

This publication is not copyrighted and may be freely quoted without prior permission,

provided the source is identifieu as: Children, Families and Communities: Early Lessons

from a New Approach to Social Services. Washington, DC: American Youth Policy Forum

et al., 1995. No commercial use may be made of this publication or its component parts,

except by express written permission of the authors.

ISBN 1-887031-54-5 $5

Additional copies may be ordered from:American Youth Policy Forum1001 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 719Washington, DC 20036-5541

$5.00 each, including shipping. Prepaid orders only, please.Quantity prices are available.

CHILDREN,FAMILIES,AND CO MUNITIES:Early Lessons fromA New Approach to Social Services

Joan R. Wynn, Sheila M. Merry, and Patricia G. Berg

American Youth Policy Forum of the Institute for Educational Leadership

Education and Human Services Consortium

This paper is published with the support of the Education and Human Services Consortium, aloosely-knit coalition of national organizations concerned with community tnd agency efforts to

rebuild a system of comprehensive services and supports for children, youth and their families.

Participating organizations include:

American Psychological AssociationCenter for the Study of Social PolicyCouncil of the Great City-SchoolsCouncil of Chief State School OfficersInstitute for Educational LeadershipNational Assembly of National Voluntary Health and Social Welfare OrganizationsNational Association of Child AdvocatesNational Association of Social WorkersNational Education AssociationNational Governors' AssociationNational League of CitiesNational Mental Health AssociationNational Youth Employment CoalitionUnited States Conference of Mayors

For more information about the consortium please contact:

Martin J. BlankFacilitatorEducation and hluman Services Consortiumc/o Institute for Educational Leadership1001 Connecticut Ave. N.W., Suite 310Washington, D.C. 20036Telephone: 202-822-8405Fax: 202-872-4050

5

cONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 1

PART 1: THE CHILDREN, YOUTH, AND FAMILIES INITIATIVE

The Framework 3

The Purposes ana Possibilities of an Infrastructure 4

On The Ground 4

The Initiative Communities 4

Early Actions of the Sponsor and the Communities 5

Creating a Governance Entity and Process 6

PART 2: EARLY LESSONS FROM AN INITIATIVE IN PROGRESS

Governance 9

What is the Community Council's Authority? 9

Who is Represented by the Community Council? 11

Should All Groups be Represented? 13

How Can Participation be Broadened and Sustained? 14

How Are Effective Working Groups Built? 15

How Do Community Councils Work? 16

Hiring Staff 17

Collaborative Decisionmaking 17

Exercising Authority and Being Accountable 18

Creating a Shared Vision and Framework for Infrastructure Development 19

Developing and Linking Services 19

Enhancing and Linking Primary Services through Collaboration 19

The Complexities of Collaboration 19

Involving Grassroots Organizations 21

Linking Primary and Specialized Services 22Risks and Benefits of Collaboration 23

Access to Services 23

Information and Helping 23Barriers to Access 25

Providing Services in Diverse Communities 25

Children with Special Needs 26

Training for Staff and Volunteers 27

PART 3: ACROSS COMM' 'NITIES:THE ROLES OF THE SPONSOR, THE EVALUATOR AND LEARNING

The Sponsor's Role 28

Within Foundations 28

Between Foundation and Community 28

Relations Among Foundations 29

Government Involvement in Initiatives 29

The Role of Evaluation and Evaluators 30

Defining Outcomes and Indicators of Progress 30

Balancing Objectivity and Engagement 30

Process or Outcome Evaluation? 31

The Value of Learning from Progress, Obstacles, and Each Other 31

Understanding and Openness 31

Methods and Means 32

A POSTSCRPT 33

RELATED CHAPIN HALL RESEARCH 34

COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIES FORUM ON HANDSNET 36

AZKNOWLEDGMENTS

This paper presents observations and earlylessons from a community initiative now in itsfourth year in eight Chicago-area communities:the Children, Youth, and Families Initiative of theChicago Community Trust. The Initiative isbased on a conceptual framework designed toredefine services and broaden social responsibil-ity for the development of children and families.The framework was developed by researchersfrom the Chapin Hall Center for Children at theUniversity of Chicago. Chapin Hall remainsinvolved in the Initiative, documenting its imple-mentation in an ongoing process evaluation.

In writing about this experience we want first toacknowledge the investment and leadership of thecommunity residents and other stakeholdersparticipating in the Initiative. Enormous numbersof hours have been spent working to make Initia-tive communities better places for children andfamilies. The results of this process have beenincreased cooperation and involvement amongstakeholders in communities, a greater sense ofopportunity, and the development of new ser-vices. From what we have observed, Initiativecommunities have made substantial progresswhile encountering inevitable challenges. It hasbeen an enriching, exciting, and at times exasper-ating, process, and one in which we are pleasedto have had a part. We could not have done ourdocumentation work to learn from the communi-ties and to share what we are learning -- if theparticipants in the Initiative had not generouslyallowed us into their communities and spent timetalking with us about the evolution of the Initiative.

We also want to express our gratitude to theChicago Community Trust, its Board, the Chil-dren, Youth, and Families Advisory Committee,and the Initiative staff. Without their courageand dedication, the ideas that form the basis forthe Initiative would not have been brought tolife, nor would such rich possibilities exist for afundamental reform in services to children andfamilies in Chicago. Particular appreciationgoes to the Trust Initiati\ e staff, led by MarvinCohen, for their commitment, their keen obser-vations, and their willingness to struggle, share,and learn about the changes that communitywork requires.

I

This paper would not have been possiblewithout the Chapin Hall documentation staff, whowillingly contributed what they are learning fromhours of community meetings, interviews, reading.discussion, and debate about the Initiative and itsevolution. These staff members include SteveBaker, Sunil Garg, Kathleen Hall, Renae Ogletree,Layla Suleiman, Sudhir Venkatesh, and AlfordYoung. Three coreagues made special contribu-tions to this paper: Earl Durham and JoanCostello helped make our observations moreaccurate and astute, and Prue Brown enhancedour understanding of the role of Initiative spon-sors. Susan Campbell and Molly Bartlett, ofChapin Hall's communications staff, have workedwith us through several iterations of this paper andhave helped to make it immeasurably more lucid.

Our greatest thanks go to Harold Richman forhis leadership in articulating and continuing todevelop the ideas underlying the Initiative; toSamuel Halperin and Jennifer Cusack of theAmerican Youth Policy Forum for constructivecriticism and for offering us the opportunity to writethis paper: and to the foundations supporting ourformulation of the framework for this Initiative andour efforts to learn as it evolves -- in particular, theChicago Community Trust, the Lilly Endowment,the Ford Foundation, and an anonymous donor.

J.R.W, S.M.M., P.G.B.

The Chapin Hall Center for Childrenat the University of Chicago1155 E. 60th StreetChicago, IL 60637Phone: (312) 753-5952FAX: (312) 753-5940

INTRODUCTION

Initiatives to improve the lives of children andfamilies and empower communities are underwayacross the country. Sponsored primarily byprivate foundations and increasingly by govern-ments, most focus on the multiple and urgentneeds of people in inner-city communities. Someof these initiatives have a primary focus on re-forming social services for children and families,others on economic development or physicalrebuilding, still others on working across sectors.All recognize the limits of top-down, fragmentedapproaches..

Overall, these initiatives promote a compre-hensive approach to supporting children, families,and communities. This approach is marked by abelief in attending to individuals in the context offamily, culture and community, a recognition of therole of neighborhood organizations and informalnetworks in furthering the development of peopleand the places in which they live, and collabora-tion across organizations and systems. Mostemphasize local capacity-building, leadershipdevelopment, and agendas that are community-driven. However, many are attempting to developcommunity-directed change within reform frame-works proposed by outside policy researchers andfunders.

Many of the community-focused reformsunderway nationwide are guided by a set ofcompelling, common-sense ideas about whatmore supportive communities might look like andwhat broad changes from current practice wouldhe.ip create them. Because there are no blueprintsfx implementing these visions, participants aretxploring what it takes to rebuild communities asioitiatives evolve. The goal -- improving the lives ofchildren, families, and communities -- is important,and the resources being invested, both humanand financial, are substantial. By pooling perspec-tives and knowledge to refine ideas, identifyopportunities, and address challenges, we canmaximize the chance that these initiatives willsucceed.

This paper looks at some of the challengesfacing comprehensive community-based initiativesand the early lessons to be drawn from themthrough the lens of an initiative in Chicago. This

lens, the Children, Youth, and Families Initiativesponsored by the Chicago Community Trust, is aten-year, $30 million effort to enhance the devel-opment of children, families, and communitiesthrough the creation of community-directed infra-structures of services and supports.

This Initiative shares many characteristics withother comprehensive community-based initiatives,but it has some distinctive features. Chief amongthese is its focus on the power of neighborhoodresources afterschool programs, youth groups,sports teams, parent support and educationprograms, and the resources of parks, libraries,museums, community centers, and settlementhouses. In developing the framework for theInitiative, Chapin Hall researchers chose to callthese resources primary services to indicate theirpotential to serve children and families and a needto redefine social services to include them in apivotal role.

The Initiative proposes to enhance primaryservices and to join them as full partners with thetraditional specialized services--including childwelfare, mental health, and juvenile justice--toform a community-governed infrastructure ofservices. The idea is to reframe and reform socialservices so that they better serve children andfamilies and so that they are better partners withother settings and sectors critical to enhancingoutcomes for children, families, and communities-- including schools, health care, housing, andbusiness.

With colleagues at Chapin Hall, we developedthe framework for the Children, Youth, and Fami-lies Initiative, launched by the Chicago CommunityTrust in 1991. During the past four years, wehave been documenting the Initiative as it evolvesand chronicling the progress of communities indeveloping community councils, services, mecha-nisms for access to services, and training.

In the pages that follow, we present someobservations from the first four years of the Initia-tive, focusing on early lessons learned. We de-scribe progress that communities have made asthey grapple with the concepts of the Initiative.We share questions raised by the implementation

1

of the Initiative thus far, and offer observationsabout what we are learning. We highlight chal-lenges that communities, service providers,funders, and documenters have encountered, andwe note strategies being used to address thesechallenges.

Though the Initiative and our documentation ofit are still very much in progress, we hope tocontribute to the growing debate and accumulat-ing experience of the increasing number of corn-

munity initiatives underway and contemplated. Inaddition, we would very much like to deepen whatwe are learning by hearing from others aboutways in which the experiences we have reportedmatch or are at odds with what they are seeing intheir own efforts. In sum we would like to useexperience on the ground -- ours and others -- torefine our understanding of what responsivecommunities for children and families should looklike and what it takes to get there.

pART 1: THE CHILDREN, YOUTH, AND FAMILIES INITIATIVE

The Children, Youth, and Families Initiative isa grantmaking program of the Chicago Commu-nity Trust now active in eight Chicago-area com-munities. This section describes the conceptualframework for the Initiative, the communitiesinvolved, and the action on the ground.

THE FRAMEWORK

The vision of a community-directed infrastruc-ture of services that inspired the Children, Youth,and Families Initiative is premised on a fundamen-tal shift in policy. The proposed shift is from anexclusive focus on curing or preventing problemsfor some children and families to one that is alsoconcerned with promoting the development of allchildren and the functioning of families.

This shift in policy is critical, given challengesfacing children and families. All children todayface the challenge of mastering the knowledgeand skills required to live successfully in an in-creasingly complex world. Too many childrenface additional challenges poverty, schoolfailure, family disruption, drugs, social isolation,and violence. The coming-of-age of the baby-boom generation means that children are now,and for the foreseeable future will be, a smallerproportion of the population. At the same time,more children will be poor and minority. Thismeans that today's children will bear a largershare of the responsibility for our society's future,and that many of them will face severe challengesin doing so because of the obstacles often con-fronting the poor and members of minority groups.Another demographic trend -- the greater percent-ages of families headed by single parents or twoparents who both work outside the home -- sug-gests that the human and material resourcesfamilies have to invest in their children arestretched thin.

Against these challenges facing children andfamilies, what is the nature of the services oursociety provides? Existing social services offerlargely fragmented, categorical responses toindividual problems. These specialized services.focusing on aspects of dysfunction and difficulty,are usually available only when problems havebecome chronic or severe. They require that

children and families either acknowledge a prob-lem or be identified as having a problem beforereceiving services. In addition, these specializedservices draw their authority from separate bu-reaucracies -- locating the planning, financing, andcontrol of services outside the community andaway from the influence of citizens and serviceconsumers.

Primary services offer children and families anumber of benefits not available in specializedservices. People turn easily to primary services.Because they are voluntary and do not requirethat people present a problem or prove eligibility,primary services offer participants a sense ofchoice and control over the interaction with provid-ers. Through their roots in communities andinformal ways of relating to children and parents,primary services are a natural, often enjoyable,resource. Primary services can enhance childdevelopment and family life and can provide helpin ways that are neither categorical nor stigmatiz-ing. Moreover, primary services can increase thebenefit of specialized services that children andparents are.using.

We believe that primary services should play acentral role in a larger, more purposefully orga-nized system of child and family services. Theseservices should function as part of a coherentinfrastructure for children and families in commu-nities, uniting primary services that enhancefunctioning and development as full partners withspecialized services that respond to child andfamily problems.

Communities are central to creating an infra-structure of services for several reasons. Mostfamilies turn first to their communities for sourcesof enrichment, support, and problem solving.Connections among providers and the people theyserve can be created and sustained most easily atthe community level. Communities are the mostpromising jurisdiction for the planning and deliveryof services allowing for a state role in standardsetting, monitoring, and equity concerns be-cause services planned and provided locally canbe responsive to cultural preferences and values,and can draw most effectively on existing re-sources.

I I 3

THE PURPOSES AND POSSIBILITIESOF AN INFRASTRUCTURE

A central aim of the Children, Youth, andFamilies Initiative is to broaden an active sense ofsocial responsibility for the healthy development ofchildren and the functioning of families. This goal,with others, is to be accomplished through thecreation of a community-defined infrastructure ofservices for children and families that will:

Create a planning and governance group tobuild on local priorities and resources.Members of this broadly representativ::communit\ council -- including adult andyouth residents, leaders of communityorganizations and institutions, and serviceproviders -- should be selected for theirdemonstrated concern for the community

Strengthen and expand primary services andcreate links between primary and specializedservices, so that they work together in theinterest of children and families

Enhance access to all services for childrenand families

Provide training for staff and volunteers, sothat they can work effectively in thisinfrastructure

Realizing this vision requires that the commu-nity counc:lidentify the community's priorities forchildren and families and that it create and sustainan infrastructure of services that reflects thesepriorities. It also requires that this group advanceto a position of stature within the community andwith institutions outside the community sufficientto effectively influence policy, enlist financialsupport, and secure the involvement of public andprivate agencies. Finally, it requires that special-ized services be reformed so that they can bemore responsive and can more effectively connectwith primary services and each other.'

ON THE GROUND

THE INITIATIVE COMMUNITIES

Each of the eight Initiative communities isdistinct, having its own blend of geographic,economic, and raciat or ethnic characteristics.Overall, the population in the Initiative communi-ties ranges from 40,000 in the smallest to over167,000 in the largest. Seven of the eight ccm-munities are located in the city, and almost all ofthese are combatting problems typical of inner-cityneighborhoods, including poverty, high rates ofun- and underemployment, substandard housing,and crime. (The boxes on pages 5-12 describeeach community and its Initiative activities.)

Three communities are almost exclusivelyAfrican American. Two of these have largeconcentrations of high-rise public housing devel-opments, and one of them is home to the largestconcentration of public housing in the UnitedStates. In this community. over 60 percent of thepopulation lives below the poverty level; themedian income is less than $7,000.

Two additional communities are predominantlyLatino, the residents primarily of Mexican descentin one and Mexican and Puerto Rican in the other.A third of the population in one of these communi-ties and a quarter in the other live below thepoverty level. These communities are "ports ofentry" for many Latino families. Both communitiesare home to strong, longstanding communityorganizations. Recent gentrification has intro-.duced increased economic diversity and somedegree of economic distrust in both.

The populations of another two communitiesare extremely diverse. The first of these commu-nities, once considered a white enclave, today hasa population in which less than half of the resi-dents are white. Residents now include AfricanAmericans, whites, Lctinos, and Arab Americans.The population of the second community is amongthe most diverse in Chicago, including African

Chapin Hall has developed an approach to the reform of specialized services that would facilitate a complementaryrelationship between the primary and specialized service sectors This approach. focusing initially on child welfare applies toall human services affecting children See Rethinking Child W ;fare Services in Illinois, listed at the end of this paper under"Related Chapin Hall Retlearch

4

Americans, whites, Latinos, Asian Americans,and Native Americans, among others. One-thirdto one-half of the residents in these communitiesare young, age 24 and under (U.S. Bureau of theCensus, 1990).

Finally cne community is located outside thecity. The suburban village includes about 33,000people who are generally affluent. Unincorpo-rated areas adjacent to the village are home toanother several thousand low- to moderate-income people who use village schools and otherservices and are included in the Initiative.

Like many suburban communities, the villageis beginning to experience the urbanization of thesuburbs and to face some of the problems thatexist in urban communitiesincluding tensionsamong people of different racial, ethnic, andincome groups, problems in the schools, andvandalism. Like city communities, suburbancommunities may experience a mismatch be-tween services offered and services needed bychildren and families.

Access to services can be an important issuein suburbs as well as cities, because of thedistances to be covered and the limited availabil-ity of public transportation. The suburban com-munity provides an understanding of how theideas that inform the Initiative work in a commu-

Great DiversityThis is one of the

most diverse communi-ties in the United States.Its nearly 125,000residents represent over60 separate cultures andspeak over 50 lan-guages. the diversity isnot only between butwithin racial and ethnicgroups. The communityhas a larre elderlypopulation and thehighest concentration offormer mental hospitalpatients in Illinois. Over80 percent of arearesidents live in rentalhousing, and nearly 75

nity where a range of primary and specializedservices already exists. Appropriately, Initiativefunding in this community is confined to supportfor planning and not for additional services.

EARLY ACTIONS OF THE SPONSORAND THE COMMUNITIESLAUNCHING THE INITIATIVE

The Children, Youth, and Families Initiativewas launched in July 1991, when the ChicagoCommunity Trust issued an announcementdescribing the Initiative, including the servicereform framework developed by Chapin Hall, thekinds of efforts the Trust would fund, and theprocess for initiating discussion with the Trustabout possible support. The Trust also held 13community forums to which a broad range oforganizations and individuals with an interest in childrenand families and a stake in the community were invited.

The criteha for selecting Initiative communitiesincluded geographical diversity, and, either within oracross communities, racial and ethnic diversity. Most ofthe communities were to be low-income. The selectionprocess also favored communities with some evidenceof past cooperation among community leaders andorganizations. Finally, on the assumption that commu-nity revitalization will aiso depend on building thephysical and economic infrastructure, the Initiativeresources were to be focused on communities in

percent of the area'schildren live in low-incomefamilies.

THE INITIATIVEPlanning and Gover-

nance. Begun by acommunity-based um-brella organization with amembership of about 60community organizations,churches, business andcivic groups, ethnicassociations, schools andservice providers, theInitiative planning processincluded participation byover 230 people. Asubcommittee of thisgroup took the lead inInitiative planning. Energy

is now turning to develop-ment of a governancemechanism for the

e. This attention togovernance was moti-vated by pressure fromthe sponsor and by theneed to reach beyond theorganization's ownmembership in represent-ing the community.

Services. A numberof programs identified inthe strategic planningprocess have beenfunded: a joint effort by alocal city college and twoalternative educationcenters to provide educa-tional support, entrepre-

neurial opportunities, andcareer planning andplacement for communityyouth; a network of smallafterschool programsdesigned to increase theirnumber and qualitythrough joint recruitmentand training, sharedresources, and unifiedadvocacy; a teen centerdesigned to attract youthof diverse backgroundsthrough activitier:, such asarts, recreation, tutoring,cultural events to cel-ebrate ethnic diversity,and projects to encourageparticipants to work inintegrated groups towarda common goal

1 3

6

which planning for housing and economic develop-ment was either underway or contemplated.

As communities came forward, the Trust,applying these criteria, selected the eight commu-nities now active in the Initiative. To date, theTrust has made over $10 million in grants fordeveloping and supporting community councilsand for creating new services ranging from teencenters to transportation services. In most com-munities, the effort began with the creation of acommunity council to plan and oversee develop-ment of a service infrastructure. Generally, pro-posals for services are reviewed and endorsed bythis community council before they are submittedto the foundation. Although the Trust's involve-ment in the communities' proposal developmentprocess has varied from grant to grant, Trust staffare interested in being involved in the earlieststages, before substantial efforts to expressprogram concepts in a written request. Truststaff see the grant review and negotiationprocess as central to moving community grant-ees toward the Initiative's framework for reform.Trust staff often negotiate with prospectivegrantees about reshaping their proposals,addressing budget and management concerns

Poverty Amid AffluenceThis community is

located on prime realestate, a few minutesfrom Lake Michigan aswell as from the Loopand is surrounded byaffluent neighborhoodsMost of the community'spopulation almostentirely African A: nen-can -- lives in povertyand in a large publichousing development.Nearly all residents ofthe development receivepublic aid, and many ofthe children are born tosingle r. 'Nthers Gangactivities, killings, anddrug abuse have beenrampant, amid therelative safety of thesurrounding area

as well as the proposal's incorporation of keyelements of the Initiative.

After the Trust staff review, the proposal andaccompanying staff recommendations are pre-sented to the Children, Youth, and FamiliesAdvisory Committee, a group of business, civic,community, and professional leaders recruited tohelp the Trust deepen its knowledge of socialservices and assist with establishing policies forthe Initiative. From the advisory committee,proposals with staff and committee recommenda-tions go to the Trust board of directors for deci-sions on funding at quarterly meetings.

CREATING A GOVERNANCE ENTITYAND PROCESS

The first challenge for many communities hasbeen to develop processes and structures forcommunity planning and governance. A number ofcommunity characteristics have been significant inshaping the start of the Initiative in each commu-nity -- the community's economic viability, thestrength and scope of local leadership, the exist-ing network of service providers and their historyof cooperation, and the presence of other organiz-


nance. Almost five yearsago, a group of residents,community agencies, andchurches formed a coalitionto plan for redevelopment ofthe area. This group tackleda variety of problemsincluding housing, economicdevelopment and jobs, andthe concern of publichousing residents thatgentrification alreadyunderway would force themfrom the area. The group ofsome 60 organizations andindividuals spawned severalcommittees to focus oncommunity problems

Partidpation in theInitiative provides a vehiclethrough which they may be

able to advance some of thecommunity's prionties theyhad targeted. The coalition'sSocial Service Committeereviews proposals fromcommunity organizationstargeting service priontiesestablished in the coalition'sstrategic plan. Once theSocial Services Committeereviews and approves theInitiative proposals, they gotc the full Governing Boardof 81 members for approval.and are then submitted tothe sponsor

Services. The commu-nity has developed a year-round sports league,supported by volunteercoaches, that is committedto involving youth who areboth physically and emotion-ally challenged through

training and referralsprovided by a large localrehabilitation center andlocal mental healthcenters; a week-longcamping program for localchildren and youthcombined with a "hands-on" training program forworkers from local youth-serving agencies; twoprograms that targetesteem-building andleadership developmentamong local youth.focusing on conflictresolution, coping skillsand communication skillsand a collaboration withlocal professional perform-ing arts and visual artsstudios to involve 400youth in a wide variety ofopportunities for artisticexpression

14

.00AM.t..K.M..,..W.,4,9=L.4.,'.% oc+. nks

ing efforts. In some communities, an existingcoalition assumed oversight of the planning andgovernance process. The Initiative's first phasewas accelerated in these communities in partbecause potential members of a communitycouncil were more readily identified and had oftendeveloped ways of working together.

The directors of ten establishedneighborhood organizations in onecommunity had been meeting together forabout two years to share experiences andfind ways of supporting each other. Inresponse to the Initiative, the groupdeveloped a plan to link the services of theirten agencies, both expanding their servicesand improving access to them.

In another community, an existing umbrellaorganization has spearheaded Initiativeplanning. Established in the 1970s, itsmembers include representatives ofchurches, business and civic groups, ethnicassociations, schools, and serviceagencies. The preexisting structure of theumbrella organization has been used forplanning and oversight of the Initiative.

Port of Entry

* The Initiative planning group in thesuburban community, which includesrepresentatives of all organizations thatserve children and families, was establishedover two-and-a-half years ago in responseto a wave of youth vandalism and anincrease in problems in the schools. Thisgroup's involvement with the Initiative was away to enhance the process they hadalready begun.

In other commun:ties, the Initiative faced earlyand formidable challenges in getting key individu-als, groups, and coalitions to talk to each other.Issues of representation, procedure, trust andcontrol took enormous time and energy, and theycontinue to influence deliberations.

Both of these approaches -- creating newcollaborative groups or starting with existingcoalitions have advantages and limitations. Onthe one hand, the process of developing serviceshas taken longer and proceeded more unevenly inthe communities building a newly formed collabo-rative group to oversee the Initiative. On the otherhand, several of the communities in which plan-

This community ishome to Latinos, primarilyof Mexican descent, andto low-income whites.Many of the Latinos havelived in the city for years;others have moved morerecently from Mexico. Astestimony to its prioreconomic affluence, thearea has many large,spacious homes andapartment buildings thathave been converted tcapartments and roominghouses. Over 60 percent ofthe community receivespublic aid. Gang and drugproblems are endemic.

THE INITIATIVEPlanning and

Governance. Thedirectors of ten estab-

lished agencies, includingsettlement houses, daycare and family supportprograms, health care anddental services, had beenmeeting together for twoyears prior to respondingto the Initiative announce-ment. The group felt thatparticipation in the Initia-tive could support theirefforts to develop acommon vision for thearea, one that would linkthe services of their tenagencies, expand ser-vices, and improve accessto them. The ten agencydirectors meet monthly asa Steering Committee andhave designated a boardchair and co-chair. Thereare three standing com-mittees: program, devel-opment, and evaluation.Smaller work groups are

created on an as-neededbasis. The larger group iscreating three advisorycommittees, one of youth,one of parents. and one oforganizations, residents,and community leadersThe Steering Committeewill incorporate newmembers from theseadvisory groups.

Services. Throughthe Initiative, this group iscreating a collaborativeteen program providing awide variety of primaryand specialized servicesin ten-plus sites through-out the community. Thesesites are linked through abus system designed totransport youth acrossgang boundaries, provid-ing access to the fullrange of available oppor-

tunities Primary servicesinclude cooking, urbandiscovery, boxing,basketball, karate, art,dancing, drama, tutoringand other educationalsupport, and a youthentrepreneurship pro-Tam. These services areenhanced by specializedstaff who provide healthscreening and education,dental services, group,family, and individualcounseling, and cornmu-nity resource expertise.The participating agen-cies are unified throughshared staff training,monthly staff meetingsand newsletters, sharedrecruitment and intake,and jointly sponsoredcommunity forums onissues of interest toparents.

15 7

8

ning began through existing coalitions, and theplanning and delivery of services moved morequickly, now face substantial challenges in broad-ening participation beyond the original group.

Overall, the Initiative community councils havegathered a diverse array of participants to definecommunity priorities. Most communities havecreated community councils made up of commit-ted members. These groups range in size from

Mixed Latino PopulationThis is a largely

working class Latinocommunity, but one thatreflects ethnic andeconomic diversity inseveral forms: there aretensions between thetwo major Latino groups

Mexican and PuertoRican; the populationalso includes moderate-income whites and, atthe economic extremes,both a significant num-ber of public aid recipi-ents on the one handand pockets of affluenceon the other. Overall, thecommunity has a strongsense of identity and ahistory of successfulcommunity organizingand institutional coop-eration, though issues

nine to one hundred participants and most meetmonthly. The creation of these groups, the pro-cesses for operating they have developed, andthe services being provided through their effortsrepresent a significant set of achievements. Thecommunity councils are bringing together individu-als and organizations -- many for the first time,often overcoming rivalries and resentments -- toaddress issues central to improving the lives ofchildren and families.

such as gentrification canhave a divisive effect.


nance. This community'sefforts to organize aroundthe Initiative were initiallychallenged by false startsand tensions both amongcommunity groups andbetween community groupsand the sponsor. Thesetensions included the relativerole of churches and socialservice providers in theplanning and governanceprocess and the selection ofa local organization, accept-able to both the communityand the sponsor, as thesource of administrativesupport for the developmentof collaborative program

proposals However, a groupof 12 organizations includingchurches and serviceproviders successfullyformed an Initiative collabo-rative. The collaborative'sAdvisory Board meetsmonthly and three standingcommittees meet asneeded. This collaborative isin the process of becoming aspecial project of a larger,previously existing neighbor-hood association. Indepen-dent of the Initiative, the

association developed aholistic plan for communitybuilding. As part of thisplan, the Initiative collabo-rative will have specialresponsibility for organizinga community youth councilof all organizations servingyouth and facilitating thedevelopment of relation-ships among them

Services. Thiscommunity has estab-lished a collaborationamong local churches andprimary and specializedservice providers, as wellas a local public school, toprovide a network ofafterschool programs.Primary services includebasketball, volleyball,swimming, tutoring, arts,and other recreationprograms. Specializedproviders offer servicesin gang intervention,parent education, andmental health. Staff fromcollaborating agenciesare involved in jointtraining, service plan-ning, and staff andfacilities sharing. Acommonly owned vanprovides transportation tothe various program sites.

16

F,'ART 2: EARLY LESSONS FROM AN INITIATIVE IN PROGRESS

In the four years since the Children, Youth,and Families Initiative was launched, participantsin the eight communities have dealt with chal-lenges, raised questions, and experiencedprogress. The following sections, derived fromour Initiative documentation, draw preliminarylessons in the hope that these lessons will beuseful to others now engaged or interested incomprehensive community-based initiatives.Governance is a primary topic because it isfundamental to an initiative that is to be commu-nity-directed. Moreover, at the current stage ofthis initiative, governance has occupied the lion'sshare of most communities' time and attention.The remainder of Part 2 covers developing andlinking primary and specialized services, access toservices, and training for staff and volunteers.

GOVERNANCE

The Children, Youth, and Families Initiativewas designed to be a catalyst for community-directed change within a framework proposed by

Long DisinvestmentAfrican Americans

began to move into thiscommunity in the 1960s,at which time it wasvirtually abandoned byits earlier European-American residents Itspopulation is now 96percent African Ameri-can. The area has ahistory of racial conflictdating from the period oftransition. Blocks ofabandoned buildingsstand as testimony tourban decay. One ofChicago's poorestneighborhoods, it isstruggling to find a way toparticipate in the prosper..ity that some areas of thecity have enjoyed overthe past few decades.

Initiative sponsors. This Initiative, like someothers, gives a central role in achieving commu-nity-directed change to the development of acommunity-based governance entity and process.At present there is no single community entity orprocess responsible for planning and overseeingthe delivery of social services. Services forchildren and families have grown up piecemeal,and it is no simple challenge to create mecha-nisms that enable them to work together effec-tively. It is not clear whether or how a governinggroup can exert influence over all child and familyservices, both those funded directly through itsefforts and those that are not. This is one of anumber of issues being explored through theInitiative.

WHAT IS THE COMMUNITYCOUNCIL'S AUTHORITY?

The Initiative's intent is that the communitycouncil develop the authority needed to createand sustain an infrastructure of services. Initially,


nance. The council in thiscommunity survived astormy beginning, pnncipallyinvoMng competition for theInitiative between twoexisting coalitions one ofhuman service providers,one of churches and thesponsoes relationship witheach. In the end, a core of22 participants includingrepresentatives of bothgroups developed a strategicplan reflecting Initiative aims.The process involved mostof the major organizations inthe community as well asmany residents, the latterthrough focus groupsdesigned to collect informa-tion on the interests of youthand families.

This board has elected

officers, hired a full-timeproject director, and createdfive board committees(Finance, Program, PublicRelations, Personnel, andBy-Laws). These commit-tees are made up ofcommunity volunteers andinclude both service provid-ers and others representingcommunity organizationsand religious institutions. Thegroup, which has a member-ship of over 200 agencies,meets quarterly to electofficers as well as vote ondirections for the Initiative. ASteering Committee of 11members, most of whom areservice providers, has keptthis collaboration movingforward.

Services. This commu-nity has consciously chosento focus its energies onsystem planning rather than

program development Asa result, while the leader-ship core has begun tosolicit additional programproposals from thecommunity, only oneprogram. a community-wide arts/culturai partner-ship. has been funded todate. This project involvesa partnership betweenlocal artists and bothprimary and specializedservice providers to makethe arts accessible toyoung people of all abilitiesCourses to be offered in 16sites through the commu-nity include theater, dance.choir, African rhythms,clothing design, photogra-phy, and video. Specificefforts are being made toreach out to youth withspecial needs and at leastone course is being taughtby a disabled artist

17 9

10

the authority of the community council is conferredon it in part by the community's regard for theindividuals and organizations in the council. Thecommunity council's designation as the vehicle forInitiative planning and decisionmaking and itsaccess to Initiative funds give it some furthermeasure of legitimacy, and the value of theservices expanded or created through councilefforts can add to the group's stature in the shortterm. As it is playing out, community councils arestruggling with how to define and reinforce theircurrent authority and how to think about what theirauthority can and should be long term. Theirefforts reflect a number of evolving strategies.

The first of these strategies is fundamental tothe Initiative. It is based on the premise that,under the aegis of community councils, primaryand specialized service providers who worktogether as parts of an infrastructure can do moreto meet the interests and needs of children andfamilies than they could working separately. Oneof the purpose of the Initiative is to explore theextent to which this principle the benefits of

Concentrated Public HousingLong seen as a

white, working-classbastion, this area is anincreasingly diversecommunity includingLatino. white, Arab, andAfrican Americanresidents of low tomoderate income.Racial tensions havebeen sigh in this area,but there is growingmomentum towardstabilizing the commu-nity through economicredevelopment andefforts to addressissues of racial andethnic diversity.


Governance. Creationof the Initiative collabo-rative in this communitywas spearheaded by

three organizations withlong ties to the community-- a community congress,a coalition of localchurches in a single faith,and a YMCA. The plan-ning process includedsystematic informationgathering about youthservices, both public andprivate, as well as as-sessments of needs froma cross section of serviceproviders, educators,religious andothercommunity leaders, andlocal residents. Planningincluded approximately 20focus groups attended byhundreds of peoplerepresenting the majororganizations and institu-tions in the community.From analysis of thesedata, the communitycouncil developed a five-

joining forces--can overcome the distrust andcompeting interests that exist among providerorganizations, enabling them to offer better andmore accessible services.

A second strategy for establishino authority isto have the community council become broadlyrepresentative of the community with the capacityto recognize and advocate for the diversity of the ,

community's children and families. Deliberationstaking into account the range of communityinterests and achieving consensus or compromiseshould reinforce the group's authority.

Sustaining an infrastructure of services for thelong term will have to involve access to publicsector money, which now funds a substantialproportion of child and family services. A thirdstrategy, therefore, is to secure more flexibleallocation of the public sector funds spent forchildren and families in the community. In effect,the community council would reinforce its authoritythrough the control of resources, and through itscapacity to make allocation decisions about the

year strategic plan toguide subsequent activi-ties

A leadership corereflecting the ethnic-racialcomposition of thecommunity was formal-ized into a 23-membergoverning board withrepresentation of youthand adults from each areaof the community as wellas key racial and ethnicgroups. They are involvedin board developmenttraining, including work tocreate a meaningful role foryouth on the board; a part-time staff position wasexpanded to full-time forthis task. The group hassecured 501(c)(3) status.

Services. Thecollaborative targeted thedevelopment of teencenters as a key commu-nity need. Three have

been established invarious parts of thecommunity, throughcollaborative efforts onthe part of both smallgrassroots organizationsand larger, establishedprimary service agen-cies. These centers offerprogramming thatincludes sports andrecreation, tutoring,scouting, and counsel-ing. Through a partner-ship with local busi-nesses and the teencenters, the collaborativealso developed a youthtraining and employmentprogram. A juvenilediversion project, de-signed to keep first-timeoffenders out of thecorrections system byfinding them appropriateresources and support';in the community, wasalso launched.

18

use of funds for child welfare or juvenile justice,for example -- in ways that meet communitypriorities while addressing legally mandated publicgoals. This longer-term resource reallocation rolehas thus far taken a back seat to other complexand more immediate concerns communitycouncil membership, policies.for proposal review,a ..d mechanisms for accountability for servicescreated through the planning process.

These are the strategies dealing with commu-nity council authority that have been consideredby the councils to date. An important part oflearning from the Initiative will be the identificationof additional strategies and assessments of theireffectiveness.

WHO IS REPRESENTED BYTHE COMMUNITY COUNCIL?

This Initiative aims to create an infrastructurethat is more than a network of existing services.The infrastructure is meant to encompass existingor enhanced services as well as new services, all

New DiversityThis community is

home to the largestconcentration of publichousing in the country.The area leads the cityin homicides, and is thehome base for many ofChicago's street gangs.Ninety-nine percent ofthe area's residents areAfrican American, and63 percent live below thepoverty level. Becauseof the concentration ofprofound problems, thecommunity has attractedthe attention of numer-ous other initiativesponsors. Many resi-dents are pleased aboutthe activity in the com-munity, hoping it will notonly bring tangiblebenefits but also ener-gize residents; othersare skeptical, however,

of these responsive to the diverse interests ofchildren and families. Moreover, these servicesare intended to evolve in response to changes inthe community and its priorities over time. Thismakes it especially important that communitycouncil members have legitimacy derived fromdemonstrated stewardship of the community.Broad community representation may be critical insecuring access to funds, particularly the majorpublic sector resources, and in making allocationdecisions about the use of funds that accuratelyreflect community priorities. While it is important toengage service providers in generating an infra-structure, their disciplinary orientations and orga-nizational interests should be filtered through adecisionmaking process in which communityinterests predominate.

Creating a representative governing groupgives rise to challenging questions. What diversityof membership is needed to establish the commu-nity council's legitimacy in representing a commu-nity? And who are members expected to repre-sent in any case? If representatives of organiza-

seeing the multipleprograms largely asefforts to coordinate andstreamline, rather thanexpand, resources andservices.


Governance. The Initia-tive in this area wasbegun by several well-established communityagencies, and hasexpanded to include over140 organizations,churches, and businessinterests. The resultingconsortium acts as agroup of the whole. Thereare no officers; instead,there is a person whoacts as a convener. Twocommittees programand finance -- have beenestablished. The consor-tium meets monthly andcommittees meet as

needed The consortiumissues RFP's to commu-nity agencies defining itsservice priorities. Theprogram committeereviews submitted pro-posals for new or ex-panded services andmakes recommendationsabout support to thegroup as a whole

Services. Thisconsortium has created acomprehensive strategyfor addressing the needsof youth. Two programshave been funded throughthe Initiative. The first,afterschool programmingfor residents of a localhousing project, wasdeveloped collaborativelyby service providers andother local institutions,including a church and apublic school. The secondprogram seeks to in-

crease youth participationin organized sportsthrough training cf localresidents and staff ascoaches and refereeswho will coordinateregular tournaments inthe community. Theprogram also seeks toexpose young people todiverse opportunities inChicago through UrbanCamps, enabling youngpeople to visit culturaland educational institu-tions, explore ethnicneighborhoods, and learnabout business opportu-nities. This program isthe result of a collabora-tion among eighteencommunity organizationsincluding service provid-ers, small communitygroups, a city park, localchurches, and healthcare providers

19 11

12

tions, such as churches or schools, are members,to what extent do they participate as individualsand to what extent as officials able to speak forand commit the resources of their organizations?

When the project in the suburban communitybegan, its conveners invited the participationof community leaders who were heads ofpublic entities police, schools, library, parkdistrict, and village and townshipgovernments as well as officers of PTA's,homeowners groups, churches, voluntaryassociations, and a few social agencies. Asthe project created an ongoing council, thegroup decided that, although membersparticipated as individuals, they were in aposition to represent their institutions, and tomake decisions on behalf of theirorganizations or to seek approval from theirboards. This dual role has worked well forthe community, in part because of anestablished practice in the village of cross-sector meetings in which people clarify whenthey are speaking personally and when in role.

Suburban VillageThis "older' suburb

has been home to many ofthe Chicago area'swealthier white families forgenerations. The commu-nity involved in the Initiativeincludes the incorporatedVillage and the surroundingunincorporated areas Inthese areas, housing builtin the "960s and 1970s forsingles, young couples,and retirees now provideshomes for newly residentfamilies with severalchildren. The recent influxof families includes many ofmodest education andincome in which parentsone or both work one ormore jobs in the serviceindustries in the area.


Governance. Thecommunity council

Representation is an equally significantissue for members who participate as com-munity residents. What interests are resi-dents expected to represent--those of theorganizations they belong to or work for;those of the racial, ethnic, religious, or othergroups with which they are affiliated; or thelarger interests of the "community" as theysee them? Groups are also struggling withthe representation and roles of social serviceproviders as compared to those of residents,clergy, members of civic associations, andother community leaders. How should acommunity council balance the knowledge ofproviders experienced in serving children andfamilies with the knowledge of residents andcommunity leaders concerning local needsand preferences, as well as their authority--whether arising from their position as citizensof the community or conferred by their rolesin the Initiative?

began two-and-a-halfyears ago in response toa wave of youth vandal-ism. Initial invitations weresent to all organizationsserving children andfamilies. Included wereexecutive-level represen-tatives from public andprivate services, includingthe schools, the library,the police and fire depart-ments, social agencies,churches, PTA's, serviceclubs, homeownergroups, and village andtownship government.When the group formal-ized, it limited member-ship on the council toexecutives of organiza-tions, listing categoriesthat should always berepresented. Severalseats were left for mem-bers-at-large, typicallycitizens who have worked

for child and familyinterests

The council operatesby consensus It acts as aforum through whichagencies can collaborateto expand or createprograms according to a'community plan devel-oped by the council Co-chairs run the meetings,one from a public organi-zation, one from theprivate sector A fewstanding and ad hoccommittees considerspecific concerns, suchas transportation, 11-to-15year-old socially marginalyouth, media effects onfamilies, and a communityresource guide.

A steering committee,which includes officersand those most willing toattend an additionalmeeting each month,works on details ofmatters that arise in the

council, recommendsagenda items, anddevelops strategies toexpand membership. withan emphasis on diversity

Services. Thiscommunity, which has afuller range of servicescurrently in place thanmany of the otherInitiative communities. iscreating the position ofcoordinator of servicesfor children and familiesThis individual will helplink youth and families toprimary and specializedservices, refer residentsto agencies able toaddress their diverseneeds, advocate toensure that such ser-vices are provided andprovide communityeducation and network-ing among serviceproviders to identify andmeet community needs

20

In one Initiative community, the communitycouncil is composed of residents andrepresentatives of organizations other thansocial seivice providers, including a schoolprincipal, a librarian, and several peoplewho own or work for local businesses. Aquestion they confront is how they shouldreach out to and engage those experiencedin providing services, including specialized

services, in their deliberations.

fa In another community, the communitycouncil was initially formed by the executivedirectors of ten community organizations,many of them old-line settlement houses.Many of these directors have lived andworked in the community for years, but findthat their identity as residents andcommunity leaders is being discounted infavor of their identities as providers.Moreover, as they move to includeresidents and representatives oforganizations inexperienced in servingchildren, they are struggling to find ways toshare decision making authority.

In Initiative communities that are racially andethnically diverse, the issue of representationbecomes even more complex.

According to Census data, the populationof one Initiative community includesindividuals of Asian, Hispanic, AfricanAmerican, white, and Native Americandescent. But these categories maskdiversity within each of these groups. TheAsian population, for example, includespeople of Cambodian, Vietnamese.Hmong, Chinese, Korean, Thai, andLaotian descent. Similarly, the Hispanicpopulation includes residents of PuertoRican, Mexican, and Cuban origin. TheAfrican Americans include West Indiansfrom Haiti and Jamaica, and recent Africanimmigrants from Nigeria and Ethiopia.

The diversity of viewpoints and needs amongsubgroups can be as great as or greater than thedifferences between the major racial and ethnic groupsdefined by the Census. These differences can arisefrom factors such as gender, language, age, class,religion, and other social or political differences,

including, for immigrants, differences in reasons forleaving their country of origin. These differences havepowerful implications for planning and priority setting.

Ensuring broad representation is even morechallenging in communities made up of socialgroups that are segregated and have little experi-ence with or knowledge of each other. One commu-nity has created highly prescriptive guidelinesregarding council membership to bridge this segre-gation and ensure broad representation.

There are community council positions, basedon population, to represent each of five neighbor-hoods within one Initiative community, at-largepositions for a youth and an adult representingspecial needs youth, and at-large positions for ayouth and an adult representing each of thecommunity's five ethnic and racial groups.Beyond this formal assurance of some diversityon the community council, the group is workingto deve/op ways to interact with and obtain inputfrom the larger community.

SHOULD ALL GROUPSBE REPRESENTED?

Community councils are confronting the issue ofwhether all segments of a community should berepresented, particularly controversial ones such asgangs or groups committed to strong political goals.The community council in one community confrontedthis question for the first time in a somewhat surprisingway. Now, residents of a large public housing complex,large and small agencies, church-affiliated and secularagencies, and gang members as well as mothersopposed to gangs are all represented on the commu-nity council. But it was not always so.

The area has a history of adverse relationshipsamong agencies, community groups, andresidents. These groups had met together for ayear and a half as the Initiative communitycouncil. Outside formal meetings, many mem-bers had raised the issue of whether gangmembers should be allowed to particOate in theplanning process. Many were surprised when alongstanding member of the community councilasked those present if they had "any problemwith 'us' being at the table." By "us" he meantgangs, and thereby revealed for the first timethat he was not only a member but a key officerin a gang. All present were asked their reactionto having gang members at the table. and mostindicated that it was not a problem.

4, 1 13

This was an important step for the group. Theissue of gang participation was in the open andcould be discussed. This interaction and recog-nizing gang members as part of the planningprocess -- opened channels of communicationand possibilities for problem solving.

Gang involvement in Initiative communitycouncils remains a matter of contention in somecommunities. In others there is opposition toincluding representatives of groups stronglycommitted to a single political goal for example,statehood for Puerto Rico -- for fear the Initiativewill be used to champion particular causes. Therehas also been concern about including represen-tatives of churches -- in some cases because oftheir fundamentalist beliefs, which may limit therange of issues councils can addresF and theoptions open to them. In some precbminantly poorcommunities, councils have been al)prehensiveabout including newly arrived "yuppies," who bringwith them the threat of gentrification and.thesubsequent displacement of poorer residents.

Whatever the composition of a communitycouncil, it will need to reach out to the largercommunity to augment the diversity of viewsrepresented. The community council will need tocreate ways to get community input on the inter-ests and needs of children and families, on priori-ties for the allocation of resources and on its owndecisions and actions. Community outreach willalso be needed to find youth and adult residentsand local leaders to serve on the communitycouncil. Initiative communities have begun todevelop ways of reaching the larger community.These include holding a youth day at a sportsstadium, conducting a series of community forumsto talk about issues of interest to parents, andpublishing a newsletter describing communitycouncil actions, upcoming local Initiative events,and available services.

HOW CAN PARTICIPATION BEBROADENED AND SUSTAINED?

There is a powerful tension between, on theone hand, making collaborative planning, decisionmaking, and action efficient and, on the otherhand, maintaining or expanding participation in thecommunity council. Staff members of large organi-zations can usually commit the time necessary to

remain involved in Initiative planning, but the timecommitment required can discourage the contin-ued participation of residents and staff fromsmaller organizations. Residents drift away formany reasons, including the demands of pressinglife concerns, a sense that they lack a role orvoice comparable to those of service providers orother professionals, impatience with extended andoften highly inefficient meetings, or dissatisfactionwith results.

As one community council member, a localresident, has said: "The meetings tend todrag on and on, and then, most of the time,the meeting's over and we sort of feel -- didwe even accomplish anything tonight? I'mnot sure we're moving anywhere. It a// takesso much discussion...It gets to a pointwhere there's so much discussion, andsomebody finally says let's do this andeverybody sort of agrees."

Members representing small grassrootsorganizations and churches can find prolongedmeetings taxing because their programs are runthrough the efforts of very few people, oftenvolunteers, and they tend to see planning as timetorn from their primary mission -- serving people.Service providers whose proposals are not fundedmay drift away for a number of reasons: the timeinvested in the long but fruitless proposal writingand review process, the ambiguity of what comesnext (more meetings, leading to more proposalrevisions, leading to...), or the press of otherbusiness.

At a council meeting in one community, thecouncil leader announced that decisions onproposals submitted for the funder's Junemeeting would be deferred until the nextquarterly meeting in the fall because theproposals needed further development. Asthe meeting ended, a minister commentedwith a combination of anguish and fury: "Doyou koow what it took to write that proposal?If my kids and parents were here now they'dkill me. We had to turn away thirty kids. I

had to take my youth worker and put him toproposal writing Kids weren't served thisspring in the hopes of serving more thissummer and now that won't happen either."

Youth members in particular can feel dis-counted and ineffective unless efforts are made toprovide a place and process for their contributions.

One community has taken a number ofsteps to engage young people: invitingthem to sit as full members at communitycouncil meetings, holding separate daytimemeetings for youth members to defineissues of concern to them, and featuring ayouth panel presentation and discussionsof youth community concerns at the group'sannual community meeting -- in short,making a sustained investment in a role foryouth.

Similar accommodations of adult residentsand the leaders of grassroots organizations --providing staff attention, choosing convenientmeeting times and places -- may be needed tosecure access to their leadership and sustainedparticipation.

Many of the community councils recognizethat it is crucial to include residents, grassrootsorganizations, and youth because they bringinformation, connections, and credibility. Inseeking ways to reach out to residents as well asgrassroots organizations, many councils viewcommunity organizing as increasingly important.It is a resourc often overlooked in community-focused initiatives. Experienced community orga-nizers can identify local leaders among residentsand in smaller grassroots organizations and engagethem in the planning process. They can also helpparticipants address longstanding conflicts orfundamental differences in viewpoints. Unfortu-nately, community organizing is a skill for whichtraining and funding are now largely unavailable.

Leadership and board development trainingcan aid in creating a community council thatunderstands the dimensions of board responsibil-ity and possesses fundamental skills, such asrunning an effective meeting. Board structure canalso make art important difference. Staggeredterms for board members can provide continuity.Committees created to tackle specific problemscan include a broad range of new participantswhile allowing members to contribute in areas ofparticular interest and limit the amount of time anyone member must give to the effort as a whole.

HOW ARE EFFECTIVEWORKING GROUPS BUILT?

Building an effective planning and governancegroup, or community council, depends on creatingsound relationships among members. Reluctanceto undermine relationships can sometimes slowprogress.

In several communities, the communitycouncils have been reluctant to seek fund-ing for new programs from the Initiativesponsor. They are concerned that theprocess of endorsing some proposals butnot others would derail the broad coalitionbuilding necessary to plan and overseedevelopment of an infrastructure of services.

Tensions from competition for funds within thecommunity council and the community might belessened somewhat by seeking funds from mul-tiple sources, rather than from a single initiativesponsor, from the start. Moreover, communitieswill have to experience benefits other than fundingif initiatives, and community-building efforts morebroadly, are to be sustained over time. In Initia-tive communities, there are beginning to bebenefits of this kind.

Students attending the high school in anInitiative community include youth fromeight public housing developments. Giventhe turf war between gangs, having studentsfrom many developments can pose seriousproblems. Some students were afraid towalk to school for fear of being harassed orworse. Under the leadership of the Initiativecommunity council, a group of over 25community members, includingrepresentatives from the high school, theChicago Housing Authority, and the policedepartment, as well as parents and aperson with close relations with the gangs,have begun meeting to develop "safepassage" routes for youth to get to school.In addition, they are desic..iing a phone-treeto efficiently convey informa`bn. For ex-ample, if there is gang violence, the phone-tree will be used to mobilize adults to be outon assigned blocks along "safe passage"streets.

15

Building coalitions is crucial to the develop-ment of the Initiative in all communities. Whileshared goals and a willingness to work togetherare a basis for community council functioning, thedynamics of conflict as well as cooperation areinevitable. Tensions occur on E;everal levels:between the community councils and the commu-nity coalitions and providers not involved in theInitiative planning process, about representationand decisions made; between the council and itsfunders; around issues of direction setting, fundingdecisions, and assessment of progress; andamong members of the community council, aboutissues such as rights to leadership, directionsetting, and decisionmaking.

A dynamic that can trigger cohesivenesswithin a community council is rallying against acommon "enemy."

One community council defined Initiativecommunity boundaries to include an AfricanAmerican neighborhood, several EuropeanAmerican neighborhoods, andneighborhoods in which EuropeanAmericans, Hispanics, African Americans,and Arab Americans live together. Sites forcommunity council meetings are rotatedamong these neighborhoods. Initially,community council members were reluctantto go to neighborhoods other than theirown. However, when the foundation spon-sor threatened to decline future funding fora teen center in the African Americanneighborhood, the community council ralliedin support of the center and its director. Thisfostered relationships among communitycouncil members that outlasted theresolution of the funding crisis.

A variation on this kind of alliance against anenemy can occur with an internal "enemy," whenthe majority of community council members uniteto contend with a member who is seen as control-ling, politically ambitious, or unwilling to followthrough on commitments.

Creating and sustaining a cohesive groupcannot, of course, be accomplished solely or eve',largely by common cause against an adversary.Making decisions and resolving conflicts, whileavoiding win-lose outcomes, require a strong

16

commitment to negotiation and compromise.Time is also an important ingredient in creatingworking coalitions--time to get to know the variousparticipants in a community council, to understandtheir perspectives and concerns and to developrelationships that can survive disagreement in theprocess of forging cooperative efforts and com-mon goals.

HOW DO COMMUNITY COUNCILS WORK?

To bring more stability and continuity to theiroperations, planning bodies in many communi-ties have adopted traditional features of boardoperations such as officers, committees, andby-laws. One group has incorporated as a501(c)(3), and others plan to take this action sothat they can receive and manage their ownfunds, eliminating use of another organizationas a fiscal agent. A number of communitycouncils have developed mechanisms forproposal review and monitoring, as well asprocesses to assist smaller grassroots organi-zations in proposal development and account-ing to foundations for funded projects.

While a better defined -,tructure and clearoperating procedures are necessary for effec-tive group operations and are generally seen asa sign of progress, some groups feel suchbureaucratization can threaten coalition build-ing.

In one Initiative community committed tocoalition building, the community council ofover 140 members functions as a commit-tee of the whole. They are concerned thatdesignating leadership positions wouldcreate groups of insiders and outsiders,weakening the coalition-building process.The group is led by the director of a localorganization who acts as "convener." Sub-committees of volunteers are created asneeded.

Progress in comprehensive communityinitiatives is not -- and should not be expectedto be --linear. For example, several Initiativecommunities that had developed solid commu-nity councils have reshaped the membership orstructure of their groups in order to becomemore broadly representative or to function more

2 Li

effectively. Such changes can take substantialtime, require a catch-up period for new members,and interrupt progress on other fronts.

In one community, an elected governingboard replaced an interim board, requiringthat the new group get to know each other,learn about the substance of the Initiativeand its history to date, and developprocesses for working together as a board.

The community council in anothercommunity initially had two geographicallydefined clusters with two separate leadagencies and two staff directors, causingproblems in communication and action.After months of difficult operations, mem-bers approached the politically delicateissue of altering the group's structure. Afterdelay in addressing the issue, they reachedresolution fairly quickly there is now onelead agency and one staff director, and aboard chair and officers have been elected.

Balancing community input on the one handwith effective structures and efficient processesfor decisionmaking on the other is a tension thatcommunity councils continue to face.

HIRING STAFF

In virtually all communities staff functions havebeen created to support Initiative development.These positions have been filled by employees,consultants, or both. This action has streamlinedthe management and furthered the progress ofthe community councils, but it has raised a num-ber of important questions. For example, what isan appropriate staff role in a process designed toempower the community? In particular, how doessomeone in a staff position avoid becoming thegatekeeper for information or the center of power?Because staff directors work full time on theInitiative and community council officers andmembers do not, funders, technical assistanceproviders, and evaluators may be inclined to dealwith the primary staff person, who becomes a defacto executive director. This inclination is worthtempering in favor of keeping the center of gravity-- of learning and decision making -- with thecommunity council or at least with its executivecommittee. A further concern in giving primary

direction-setting responsibilities to staff membersis that, ;.f mey leave, much of the communitycouncil's momentum and know-how go with them.

COLLArORATIVE DECISIONMAKING

The new and complex ways in which commu-nity councils are trying to work raise challengingissues: What is meant by collaborativedecisionmaking? How do tough issues get raised,decisions reached, or conflicts resolved in thecontext of a collaborative planning anddecisionmaking process?

Standard meeting-management practices canbe used to facilitate sound discussions anddecisionmaking. But Initiative community councilsoften do not use such mechanisms as rotating therole of the chair and voting. In some communities,particularly those with newly created communitycouncils, members have sought training in leader-ship and board development. Some communities,however, may require more than training. Mem-bers may need to sufficiently get to know oneanother's concerns and positions to feel comfort-able taking the public stands that voting requires.Early, inconclusive discussions may be an impor-tant part of coalition-building in some groups:taking care not to seek funds for some and notother providers, or to elect officers prematurely,may be others.

For over a year, one community council,consisting of sophisticated social serviceprofessionals, avoided establishing anyformal structure for either leadingdiscussions or decisionmaking. Thisarrangement seemed to be an unspokenbut conscious decision by the group toacknowledge members' status as peersand to reinforce their nascent alliance. Intime, trust grew, as did frustration about thelength and lack of clarity in meetings. Thesetwo developments led to election of officers.creation of committees, preparation ofmeeting agendas and minutes, and formalvoting. The year it took to get this levei oforganization was perceived by members asimportant in the coalition-building piocess.

"t)

EXERCISING AUTHORITYAND BEING ACCOUNTABLE

Making decisions and being accountable forthose decisions are two of the major challenges incollaborative efforts. This has been true in theInitiative, in both the planning and program areas.Having to make complicated or controversialdecisions can put newly formed coalitions inpositions they are not yet prepared to deal with.

In one community, organizations that were .

not involved in the Initiative planning pro-cess approached the funder with indepen-dent proposals. They were told that theirproposals had to come through the planningbody and be approved as consistent withthe community plan, prior to being reviewedby the funder. Though the planning bodyhad developed a process for incorporatinguninvolved parties in their efforts, they werepolitically unprepared to "welcome" newparticipants by making a decision on theiralready-prepared program proposals.Initially, the community council balked at thefunder's suggestion that they assume thisresponsibility.

Some community councils have resisted theproposal review function. The umbrellaorganization that is spearheading planningin one community has passed the proposalreview function on to the funder, beingunwilling, at least initially, to formally passjudgment on the adequacy of members'proposals.

Accountability, though closely related toauthority, has its own set of issues and questions.Chief among them: to whom is the communitycouncil accountable -- its members, the consum-ers of services planned through its efforts, itsfunders, or the larger community? In fact, thecommunity council is likely to be accountable toeach of these stakeholders, and has to determinehow to account for its decisions and actions toeach. (The relationship and accountability of thecommunity council to the funder is discussedseparately in a section that follows.)

I lure are two examples of how issues of author-ity and accountability have surfaced in the Initiative.

18

An Initiative community has planned, andwith Initiative funds has created, three teencenters in three distinct neighborhoods.Center directors meet jointly for planningand training, and participants come togetherfor shared activities. The issue of alativeauthority was raised when the board of oneteen center authorized a substantial salaryincrease for its center director and theInitiative community council objected,wanting the authority to create comparabilityamong center director salaries. As a result,the community council has establishedpolicy guidelines concerning the relationshipbetween the council and services fundedthrough council endorsement or assistance.

The need for greater accountability haspushed some community councils to createstructures and processes to meet these responsi-bilities.

In one community, members have devel-oped mechanisms for proposal review andmonitoring of funded programs. In monthlycollaborators meetings, each agency re-ports quantifiable progress on programobjectives and participates actively in aforum on problems in the service collabora-tions. Quarterly, the chair of this groupreports to the governing board. Members ofthe governing board (over 60 in number)then take the opportunity to question pro-gram directors about service responsive-ness and related issues.

Community councils are beginning to developwritten standards for prospective programs.These standards clarify the responsibility ofprograms funded through council efforts to reportto the council on such matters as program ser-vices, staffing, and financial status, and to engagein cross-project staff meetings and joint youthactivities. Beyond this, some councils are begin-ning to grapple with such fundamental and com-plex questions as whether they should supportprograms that reflect the views of a particularreligion, and whether there are ways to ensurethat young people of diverse backgrounds arewelcome at programs endorsed by the counul.

2 I )

CREATING A SHARED VISION ANDFRAMEWORK FOR INFRASTRUCTUREDEVELOPMENT

The challenges involved in developing acommunity-directed service infrastructure areintensified by the fact that the Initiative is in astate of evolution. Each community, as well aseach participant in each community, learns aboutthe Initiative as they join the process, and istherefore subject to a somewhat different view ofthe Initiative's aims. This has made knowledge ofthe Initiative's reform agenda uneven and leftmuch to individual and group interpretation. Thelack of opportunity for developing a shared under-standing has left many feeling that the vision isnot "theirs," but rather belongs to the sponsor.

Many Initiative participants struggle with themeaning of the vision. What does collaborationreally mean? What is included in enhancingaccess to services? What are the boundaries ofthe Initiative -- does it include educational reform,reform of the juvenile courts, or economic orphysical redevelopment? For some, the problemof clarity has been exacerbated by concernsabout fundamental principles of the Initiative. Forexample, primary services seem unimportant tosome in the face of critical problems faced bychildren and families, such as poverty, violence,drug abuse, hunger, and homelessness. Commu-nity councils have not had sufficient opportunity todevelop a coherent understanding of the Initiativeservice reform agenda, its parts and how theyrelate to each other, and how the Initiative's visionfor social services relates to economic and physi-cal development, or other pressing communityneeds.

Even if the full vision is incompletely "owned,"some community councils have made progresstoward a more comprehensive view of the Initia-tive by developing strategic plans. These groupsare now developing both program proposals andproposal review mechanisms that fit with theirstrategic plans. In some communities, the Initia-tive has helped move the development of childrenand the functioning of families to a more promi-nent place on the communities' agendas, alcng-side such issues as economic development,neighborhood revitalization, or housing. Thisupward shift in prominence for the Initiative's

central concerns has the potential to link theInitiative with the broader range of reform strate-gies necessary to build supportive communities.

In virtually all communities, the cycle of plan-ning, funding, and implementing new services hasincreasingly focused the attention of communitycouncil members on day-to-day operations,leaving them little time and energy to focus on thelong-term agenda. This may be part of an inevi-table cycle. Recognizing this, and making the tirrieto revisit the larger agenda at intervals, is a crucialpart of managing this cycle and the implementa-tion of the Initiative overall.

DEVELOPING AND LINKING SERVICES

ENHANCING AND LINKING PRIMARYSERVICES THROUGH COLLABORATION

The Children, Youth, and Families Initiativecalls for enhancing primary services by severalmeans--creating new services, improving existingservices, linking new and existing services, andimproving training for primary services workers.Collaborating toward these ends is remarkablycomplex for a va.riety of historical and administra-tive reasons. Many of the challenges faced indeveloping and linking services mirror thoseencountered in the governance process, dis-cussed in the previous section of th:s paper.

THE COMPLEXITIES OF COLLABORATION

Scarce resources have caused intense com-petition between social service agencies vying forthe same dollars. Organizations work hard todistinguish themselves from one another, carveout their "turf," and convince funders (as well asthemselves) that the services they provide areunique and better than those provided by others.What will it take for organizations to relinquish thisorientation and work cooperatively toward someperceived common good? Even if organizationscan be convinced that working together is in theirbest interest, they face a new set of challenges inattempting to link services. While "linking" primaryservices could mean something as minimal asopportunities for staff from different organizationsto meet one another and learn about each other'sprograms, the Initiative, like many other currentreform initiatives, has defined "linking" as "collabo-

o19

I_,-,..,lesrv.c.,,,,,,,,,-.10,2.1., ,,,,, ,c,..,,,,,,,,,... ne,,,--n....s.,----,,..- ,......e.-gon....

ration," suggesting a more intense and formalrelationship. Most definitions of collaborationsuggest that individual agendas have to be alteredin favor of a shared objective. Programs fundedthrough the Initiative are attempting to achievethis ideal, and their experiences are illuminating.

Differences among organizations -- in programphilosophies, goals, and practices, in size andsophistication -- can enrich and increase thescope of collaborations, but they can also makeeffective collaboration difficult.

In one of the Initiative communities, thepartner organizations developed a bus routeenaullng youth to cross gang boundaries toparticipate in programs. Then, they werefaced with the problem of what happenswhen youth allowed to wear gang caps andcolors at their home organization show upfor participation at an agency where theseinsignia are strictly forbidden -- a differencethat reflects strongly held views about howto engage and serve young people.Differences in philosophy, approach, andpractice have to be ironed out while the busis running

Other philosophical and practice issueshave been brought to light by collaborativeefforts involving religious and secular organiza-tions. Secular organizations can be reluctant tosend their participants to church-based primaryservice programs, which may have religiouscontent or overtones, and churches can bereluctant to have staff from secular organiza-tions work at their sites for fear that their atti-tudes will not be consistent with church beliefsand practices.

Disparity in size and experience amongcollaborating organizations introduces a host ofproblems. How do organizations of radicallydifferent size and experience come togetherwithout domination on the part of the larger,more established agencies? The experience oforganizations involved in the Initiative suggeststhat this can be a difficult marriage. There is atendency for large established agencies tooverwhelm smaller organizations.

20

In one community, a group of small ethnicassociations were paired in setting up ayouth center with a YMCA, whosemotivations as a "power player" theymistrusted. This fear was confirmed whenthe Y was made the fiscal agent andallocated money for staff positions. Theethnic associations had to volunteer theiralready overburdened staff to do outreachto involve their youth in the program.

To move forward, the associations and theY had to overcome this mistrust. By meet-ing regularly for over a year, they learned torecognize and respect the culturalorientations, managerial styles,perspectives, and priorities that each groupbrought to the effort. In addition, the Ylearned to view the collaboration from theperspective of the ethnic organizations.What the Y initially saw as gains for theethnic associations use of the Y's facili-ties and staff training -- the associationssaw as possible threats to their authorityand as a further drain on their staff hours.The Y Program Director has made specialefforts to visit the ethnic associations on aregular and informal basis, allowing rela-tionships to develop. The sponsor, too,learned from its involvement in this project,and has provided funds to the ethnic asso-ciations for additional staff.

The ethnic associations faced a problemcommon fo; small, understaffedorganizations creating new programs:balancing staff involvement in thecollaborative project for youth with theirother services. The Initiative's exclusivefunding for children and families frag-mented the associations' programming andfundraising efforts. In addition, theassociations worry that an outsideperception of abundant funding through theInitiative may hurt their chances of attract-ing funding for other programs.

When the larger organization is thecollaborative's fiscal agent, the relationship ismuddied, even more so when the smaller organi-zation has day-to-day supervisory responsibilityfor staff.

A small teen center operated with its owncenter director but with a larger organiza-tion as fiscal agent for initiative funding.The center director was dissatisfied withthe work of a staff member and, consider-ing himself fully authorized to make hiringand firing decisions, fired him. The firedstaffer, believing that his rights had beenviolated, sued the larger organization -- thesource of his paycheck and the organiza-tion with the "deeper pockets."

The issues of hiring, supervision, and firing arehighly complex in collaborative efforts, regardlessof the relative size of collaborating partners.

In one community, a program director washired to lead a collaboration among fourorganizations. Three of these organizationshad a shared view about her jobresponsibilities. When the program directordisagreed, she went to the executive direc-tor of the fourth organization -- who wroteher paycheck and who agreed with her --undermining a collaborative decisionmakingprocess.

The role of staff in holding partners account-able for their commitments to the collat. -ration issimilarly complex.

In one community a group of collaboratingorganizations hired a program coordinatorwho reports to the group. One of thepartners had committed to finding volun-teers for an afterschool tutoring program,but was not following through. The programcoordinator felt constrained in trying to holdthis organization accountable because theorganization's representative to thecollaborative is, in effect, also thecoordinator's employer.

Frequently these collaborations are fragilealliances that initially rely on the good will of thermembers. When members fail to meet theirobligations, or when they disagree about how asituation should be handled, there is a tendencyfor group members to avoid directly addressingthe situation. Experience has shown, however,that over time, as people come to know eachother, groups can find solutions to problems

without threatening the alliances they have beenworking to establish -- for example, by developingwritten agreements to define members' programand reporting responsibilities, and then usingcollaborators' meetings or other mechanisms tomonitor performance against these agreements.

INVOLVING GRASSROOTSORGANIZATIONS

Bringing grassroots organizations into aninfrastructure of services is essential, but espe-cially challenging. Many grassroots programshave been built on the vision of a single leader,the energy of a small group of residents workingto address a common need, or the expansion ofan organization's scope beyond its original pur-pose. These programs offer a range of resourcesand services: tutoring programs, youth marchingbands and softball or basketball leagues, day carearranged by mothers and provided by localwomen, cooperative ways to do laundry or buyfood, emergency loans, neighborhood securityservices, GED classes, and more.

These resources are often the first stop foryoung people and families in seeking help. Increating a service infrastructure, communitycouncils have to know what grassroots offeringsexist, understand if there are ways to facilitatetheir functioning, and plan ways to include them inplanning, funding, and service delivery. Commu-nity councils must ask, for example, whether it isreasonable, or even desirable, to expect theseprograms to create boards of directors, or developthe management capacity to track program partici-pants or report regularly to funders, and if so,what time and investment of resources should bedirected to these ends.

Neighborhood.organizations attempting tocreate new programs with little program develop-ment expertise have experienced problems ofseveral kinds.

One organization that had little experiencewith recruitment tried to fill thirty-five slots ,'nan afterschool program by distributing fiftyflyers in the neighborhood -- and weresurprised and disappointed when only a fewparents responded.

2321

An organization with limited budgetexperience failed to include taxes andbenefits in staff salaries when preparingtheir budget. They hired staff and madesalary promises, then found they couldafford to pay only about 75 percent of whatwas promised.

Many small grassroots organizations areunprepared for the expectations of large founda-tions concerning funding and project monitoring.Almost all of these organizations operate onshoestring budgets, if there is any budget at all,and depend on the investment of their own effortsand the generosity of local contributors.

One organization, relying heavily onvolunteers, had worked with gang- and drug-involved youth for many years. Its overallbudget never exceeded $25,000 and camealmost entirely from one contributor whobelieved in what the organization was doing.The organization's proposal asked forfunding of close to $125,000 to radicallyexpand its services. After an arduousnegotiating process, including a rewrite oftheir proposal, the organization receivedfunding of $50,000 with a requirement forquarterly reporting to the foundation. Thegroup found the experience demoralizing.Group members were insulted by anapparent lack of faith in their integrity andinfuriated because they felt deceived anddisrespected. They thought seriously of notaccepting the money at all in protest of theirtreatment.

The organization eventually accepted themoney and cut back on its planned program.The reduced program was extremelysuccessful, providing Afrocentric leadershiptraining, participation opportunities for manyyoung people, and an unplanned spin-off. aneighteen-week education program for itsgraduates at the local community college.The organization has struggled to provide aquality program and be accountable to thefunder, Fyid has in fact surpassed mostgo.:1 is. With its strained relationship mended,ihe organization has applied for a secondyear grant, this time for $50,000, which thefoundation has approved with a requirementfor annual, not quarterly, reports.

In many such circumstances, community coun-cils find that they have to play an intermediary role,both preparing organizations for the expectations offoundations and helping foundations to understandthe vital role and capacities of these smaller, lesssophisticated organizations. Creating an infrastruc-ture of services means supporting grassrootsprograms -- in some cases finding ways to work thatdon't require them to behave like established main-stream organizations, and in others helping them todevelop expertise in proposal preparation, programdevelopment, administration, and reporting.

One of the potential benefits of collaborationamong small grassroots organizations and moreestablished agencies is that, when they work, theyprovide avenues for foundations to invest substantiallymore funds in working with grassroots organizationsthan might otherwise be possible, without asking lessformal groups to take on the trappings of mainstreamorganizations, trappings that may undermine thepurposes and effectiveness of these groups.

LINKING PRIMARYAND SPECIALIZED SERVICES

Collaborations between primary and specializedproviders are an essential component of the Initiative,but there have been limited collaborations of this kind todate. Moreover, there are very few models of primary-specialized collaborations to draw on. Effective collabo-rations between primary and specialized providersrequire developing a shared language and accommo-dating differences in training and approaches to provid-ing services. Effectively linking primary and specializedservices may require mental health services, forexample, to be provided in a very different manner thanthe traditional office visit.

In one Initiative program, mental healthspecialists, in addition to providing individual andfamily counseling and staff training, teach poetryclasses and play basketball with youth in thenetwork of open gyms the collaborative hascreated. These a livities enable the mentalhealth specialists to get to know young peopleand be available to them in ordinary settings and,because of their more complete understanding ofyoung people's lives and environments, toincrease their effectiveness in working with bothchildren and families and in consulting withprimary services staff But these positions tend tobe difficult to fill because they arc ot consistentwith the job expectations of many mental healthprofessionals.

In another collaboration, a mental healthprovider is helping to staff a tutoringprogram in a local library and is linking withteen centers by running youth groups at thecenters and providing referral and casemanagement assistance to teen centerparticipants.

In a third Initiative program, staff of arehabilitation center and mental healthprofessionals are working with a sportsleague to offer on-site training for coaches.Training addresses the developmentalstages of adolescence, recognizes theeffects of sustained stress on youth andaddresses ways to support them, and offersways to include special needs youth inleague teams.

Supervision of specialized service staff in aprimary service setting can be problematic. Withlimited specialized expertise available in manyprimary service programs, some organizations maylook for supervision from outside the collaboration.However, it is important that a clinical supervisorunderstand and support the purposes of the special-ized/primary collaborations.

RISKS AND BENEFITS OF COLLABORATION

Comprehensive community initiatives often man-date collaboration in service provision, and there a.5trong inclination among service providers to promisecommunity councils and funders what they say theywant. These factors led to frustration in the collabora-tion of the ethnic associations and the YMCA describedabove.

In their original proposal, the ethnic associationseach wanted to hire a youth worker to outreachto each group's isolated youth. Instead thesponsor encouraged them to develop a joint teencenter to help youth of diverse backgroundsunderstand one another, and the ethnicassociations acquiesced. When the centeropened, it was used first by African Americanyouth. Center staff found that young peopleparticularly those new to this country were notwilling to cross cultural boundaries until they haddeveloped some security in their own culturalgroup. Ultimately, the Trust, the ethnicassociations, and the Y acknowledged the needto strengthen the programming of the individualethnic associations while working to bring theiryouth together through the teen center'sprograms.

Given the complexities of collaboration, whatare the benefits, what keeps participants andorganizations involved? Some benefits are obvi-ous, others are not. Collaborating organizationscan communicate with each other more openlyand over time more honestly, reducing the isola-tion many agency directors and staff feel whencompetition for recognition and funding is stiff.

"It requires shedding your ego and havingthe ability to understand and empathize withyour partner, like being married to sevenpeople," stated a staff member of onecommunity council. In another community.an agency director and member of acommunity council stated that a sensedevelops that "...we are all in this togetherand must depend upon each other for oursuccess. The results are stronger becauseyou have a lot of time and effort invested inthe project and you have worked withpeople and care about them more becauseof the process. You sense the whole com-munity, what it means to be a community ina process like that. You're not just servingthem, you are all helping each other."

The shared communication and commit-ment of collaboration can create collectiveownership, energy, and support for solvingproblems or generating new ideas for ser-vices. Collaboration also has the potential forcutting down on duplication, facilitating cost-effective joint training, and better utilizing anagency's expertise. And the appeal of col-laboration for funders makes it more likelythat organizations will secure the resourcesto pursue joint goals.

ACCESS TO SERVICES

INFORMATION AND HELPING

Making a social services infrastructurefunction effectively requires that children andfamilies know of and have access to services.The largest group of Initiative efforts to in-crease access to existing services involvesinformation -- trying to ensure that residentsand providers know about new and existingservices.

3 23

24

One community council in a predominantlyHispanic area produced a colorful and fairlycomprehensive community resource guide inboth Spanish and English. While this guidewas extremely impressive to social serviceproviders and other literate adults, the grouplearned that young people did not use it.The group is now distributing much lessformal flyers to tell youth about activities.

Another community has established anautomated system with information aboutavailable services that is accessible throughthe public libraries as well as throughpersonal computers equipped with modems.This community planned to develop abilingual kiosk-based computer system foraccessing service information, but this planwas abandoned when development of theprototype proved too costly.

Though not successful with youth, directorieshave been very useful to providers. They haveoffered, among other benefits, enhanced linking ofgrassroots organizations with one another and withlarger, more formal organizations.

In response to the need to take information topeople, some communities have made communityeducation and outreach a part of their Initiativeprogramming.

The staff in a local collaborative makes regularvisits to public schools to discuss availableservices and recruit interested youth. Using thenames and addresses of interested youngpeople, they follow up with parents aboutregistering their children in the pmgram. Ifparents don't come in to register children, staffmay go to their homes to explain the programand seek parental permission for children toparticipate. Fmquently, staff are able to allayparents' fears and involve young people whowould otherwise be missed by organized primaryservices.

One Initiative community organized a day-longyouth conference at a baseball stadium. Theconference created an opportunity for youngpeople to talk with adults about their needs andto learn about programs and activities in thecommunity at information booths staffed byprimary and specialized providers. Anothercommunity offers occasional forums to addressissues of interest to parents and provideinformation about available services.

Other communities have used increasingcontact and information exchange among agen-cies as a way to improve access to services, inpart by supporting an increase in the frequencyand appropriateness of referrals.

One collaborative program has placed astrong emphasis on interagencycommunications. Their efforts include jointmonthly staff meetings, a monthlyinteragency newsletter informing staff aboutwhat is happening in participatingorganizations, and regular "staff exchangedays," in which staff from one agencyspend the day working in another agency tolearn "hands on" about that organizationand its services. Over time staff will rotatethrough all collaborating agencies.

The council in one community has puttogether a "Blue Book," a directory of areaproviders that community council membersdescribe as a valuable resource for areaservice providers. Having met people atcommunity council meetings and having athand a name and phone number hashelped staff find assistance for youth, andhas led to voluntary efforts among someproviders, without funds from the Initiative.to share resources such as space, equipment, and activities.

The framework on which the Initiative is basedincludes the concept of special "helping functions,"designed to make the full range of services acces-sible to individual children and parents. Theframework envisions a graduated series of func-tions, ranging from information provision throughcase management, to match various levels ofneed for assistance among children and parents.The helping functions should include both informa-tion about existing services and assistance increating strategies for effeetNe seryice use. Bothof these are essential toratiking sure that aservice infrastructure can be used as a coherentservice system by individual children and parents.

Communities have begun to develop a varietyof mechanisms for making information aboutservices more widely available, including directo-ries and events. One community has gone be-yond this to staff the information function.

One community has created a Coordinatorof Services to Families and Children. Thisperson serves three functions: providinginformation to youth and parents aboutcommunity resources; providing guidance inhow to handle problems and help inaccessing the services of the schools,service agencies, the park district, andother organizations,' and providingassistance to service personnel, forexample, youth officers, public aid workers,or school social workers, in coordinating theservices of other agencies.

BARRIERS TO ACCESS

Other efforts to increase access to serviceshave confronted the wide variety of barriers thatmay limit residents using services even when theyare aware of them. Many parents, particularly ininner-city communities, are unwilling to allow theirchildren to participate in community activitiesbecause of threats to their children's safety.

A community council for a community thatincludes a large public housing develop-ment has struggled with how to addresssafety. A part of their solution has been toinclude local gang members at the planningtable, giving them a voice in what and howservices are provided and soliciting theirsupport in ensuring program safety. Theyare also exploring the idea of a safety patrolthat would escort children to and fromInitiative programs.

Another community struggling with :ssuesof safety has attempted two different butcomplementary approaches. First,community council members worked toexpand the number of program sites -- forexample, bringing services intounderutilized facilities like local churchesin an attempt to minimize the distanceanyone has to travel to access basic ser-vices. Second, they created a bus systemthat covers the collaborating organizationsas well as the library and public parks.When the bus was introduced few youngpeople used it. Several explanations wereoffered for this -- reluctance to use anythingother than their "home" organization's

programs, problems with coordinating thetiminci of programs and the bus schedule,or the stigma for adolescents of riding on abig yellow school bus. The collaborativetried a number of things to make the trans-portation plan more flexible and acceptableto young peop/e, including the use of twomini-buses rather than a single large bus.In addition, staff began taking youth to visitpartner organizations, introducing them tothe programs and people, after which bothbus ridership and use of programs acrosssites increased.

The location of programs and logistics oftransportation can also be issues in suburbancommunities, with children unable to reachprograms because of the distances involvedand limited public transportation. The subur-ban Initiative community is also experiment-ing with a youth bus.

Program fees are another potential barrierto access that have been the subject ofconsiderable community council discussion.Should, program fees be reduced or elimi-nated? Or do fees reinforce the value ofservices? Virtually all programs with feesoffer sliding scales and the possibility ofscholarships, but attitudes toward theseoptions vary in community councils. Somecommunity council members believe that it isdemeaning to require parents to plead povertyto gain access for their children to the programsand services they need or want; other membersquestion why parents who can afford to payshould not do so, since their payments allowproviders to subsidize families who cannot pay.

PROVIDING SERVICES INDIVERSE COMMUNITIES

Racial, ethnic and class differences can, evenunintentionally, pose another barrier to access.Programs in two Initiative communities havemade concerted efforts to attract youth of diverseracial and ethnic backgrounds, in both cases to acentral teen center. Both programs have found itextremely difficult to create an environment thatyouth from different racial, ethnic and classbackgrounds' fttqd equally inviting.

33 25

In one program in an ethnically mixedcommunity, an outreach worker attemptingto attract a diverse set of young people tothe teen center's programs has encounteredbarriers resulting from the area's long historyof racial and ethnic segregation. A result ofthis history is that organizations in specificneighborhoods have become identified withthe racial or ethnic groups seen as"belonging" in that area. To get past thisbarrier, and ensure the safety and comfort ofAfrican American youth coming to the teencenter in a predominantly EuropeanAmerican community, youth workers havehad to provide round-trip transportationbetween the center and the homes of theseyoung people.

Cultural and religious differences also play amajor role in whether particular groups will chooseto use available primary or specialized services.

A collaborative teen center established inanother ethnically mixed Initiative commu-nity chose to hold its program at two sites, aLutheran and a Catholic church. Theprogram staff discovered that the use ofone or the other site affects the compositionof the group attending. Catholic youth preferto participate in the programs at their churchand tend not to come to the LutheranChurch. Moreover, Palestinian youth in theneighborhood, many of whom are fromMuslim families, will not attend any programthat is held in a church. The program is nowalso using more neutral sites such as thelocal park fieldhouse.

In one community, a large, well-equippedlocal church offered an afterschool program.When recruitment took place through theneighborhood school, many childrenexpressed an interest in participating.However, after permission slips were senthome, very few children applied. Stafflearned that parents were reluctant to havetheir children participate in programminglocated in a church, even when they hadbeen assured that the program would notbe religious in nature. To address thisconcern, the program was offered insteadas an extended-day program within theschool.

26

Cultural groups can vary greatly in attitudesabout how their children should be socialized, inwhat contexts, and by whom. Cultural norms thatprescribe the separation of boys and girls afterpuberty in certain Arab and South Asian culturesmay lead parents from these communities to bewary of or reject programs that provide opportuni-ties for teens to mix. Families recently arrived inthe United States often have very high expecta-tions for their children's academic success; theymay not give high priority to primary services thatemphasize the value of leisure activities, viewingthese as potentially distracting.

Planning the content of programs can becomplex in diverse communities. Youth fromdifferent backgrounds often have different inter-ests and needs.

A program director for a teen centerestablished to bridge the divide betweenrecently arrived Southeast Asian immi-grants and low-income African Americanshas struggled to design activities suitablefor both groups. A question he raises iswhether the goal of bridging racial divisionsshould have priority over the goal of assist-ing these separate groups with their distinc-tive needs -- the need of new immigrants tolearn English, and the need for role modelsfor African American youth resisting ganglife. The program is struggling to addressthese immediate put very different needsunder the roof of one low-budget andunderstaffed teen center, and grapplingwith the question of what should takepriority in providing services for these teenagers.

These challenges underscore the importanceof governing groups that are representative oftheir communities and knowledgeable about thelocal history of divisions between people and thevaried beliefs and practices of racial, ethnic, andreligious groups in the area.

CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS

The Initiative's commitment to linking primaryand specialized services is based in large part ontwo beliefs. that primary services should be aresource for as broad a group of children andyouth as possible, and that the special needs of

some young people should not be addressedsolely by separate programming in specializedsettings. Specialized providers can play a vitalrole in helping primary service staff learn to serveyoung people with emotional and physical chal-lenges.

The youth sports league in one communityis recruiting young people with emotionaland physical challenges. The league'scoaches have received training and supportfrom the Chicago Department of MentalHealth and the Rehabilitation Institute ofChicago to incorporate these young peoplein the league's sports, recreation, andsocialization activities.

TRAINING FOR STAFF AND VOLUNTEERS

Training of all involved in efforts like theInitiative -- community council members, programstaff, and volunteers -- is key to reforms thatrequire new ways of thinking and acting on thepart of all stakeholders. Staff training has been acomponent of program proposals in a number ofcommunities.

One program combines a campingexperience for inner-city youth with anintensive "hands-on" training component forcommunity youth workers. Through acombination of classroom and experientialtraining, the program is committed toimproving local youth workers' capacities towork with young people who present avariety of challenges and abilities.

Another program has developed a supportnetwork for small, community-basedafterschool programs, offering joint trainingto program volunteers and staff. Thisprogram is completing a survey andconducting visits to identify and meet thetraining needs of programs operating withtoo few staff to release any for training off-site.

Collaborative programs have begun to findthat in addition to increasing staff skills, trainingallows staff from partner organizations to developa shared agenda for their work together, and thattraining for line staff can help collaborative ser-

vices take hold beyond the initial commitments ofagency executives. At the same time, collabo-rating organizations have been frustrated in tryingto find training resources sufficiently knowledge-able about Initiative principles to provide relevanttraining.

Enhancing primary services so that they canplay a larger, more central role in an infrastructureof services means increasing staff knowledge ofchild and youth development, improving theirability to recognize child and family problems andto respond with natural helping approaches, andenlarging primary and specialized providers'understanding of each other's purposes andpractices so that they can better work together.

An approach to training that meets these goalsand objectives will have to tackle a number ofpotentially problematic realities. Focusing on theprimary services area, where training has receivedless attention, there is the fact that primary ser-vices are quite diverse, and their staffing patternsare equally diverse. Moreover, many are smalloperations staffed by one or a few persons who,whether paid or volunteer, have had little or noformal training. And few organizations have theresources to mount their own training programs.

These facts, coupled with the Initiative'sservice reform agenda, argue for a community-based, cooperative approach to training. Even inthe absence of organizational constraints, how-ever, there would be value in a cooperative ap-proach--to build consensus about the knowledgeand skills that should shape child and youthdevelopment work, and to establish commontraining programs to convey this consensus.Basing this training in communities, and bringingtogether the staffs of primary and specializedproviders, can foster a sense of common causeamong the staff, and pave the way for enrichedprogramming in individual organizations and forcollaboration among them.

3o

PART 3: ACROSS COMMUNITIES: THE ROLES OFTHE SPONSOR, THE EVALUATOR AND LEARNING

Part 2 offered evidence of the need for com-munity residents, service providers, and othercommunity stakeholders to examine traditionalroles and behavior in light of the goals of creatinga community-directed infrastructure of services forchildren and families. The need to examine--andchallenge--roles and behavior is as important asthe need for periodic review of the substance ofInitiative visions, accomplishments, and chal-lenges. Reflecting on and redefining roles is alsoimportant for stakeholders whose involvementcrosses communities. In the three sections thatfollow, we examine the sponsor's role, theevaluator's role, and finally the role of all stake-holders in learning from each other.

THE SPONSOR'S ROLE

Foundations and governments are increas-ingly sponsoring initiatives to address problemsfaced by children, families, and communities. Asnoted at the outset, these initiatives recognize thelimits of top-down approaches and thereforeemphasize local capacity-building, leadershipdevelopment, and agendas that are community-driven.

There is, however, an obvious and inherenttension in the notion of community-directedchange toward a vision of reform when the visionis defined and brought to a community by anoutside sponsor. On one hand there is the positionthat ideas and pressure must be brought to bearfrom outside the community; on the other there isthe view that sustainable change must come froman agenda defined and owned by the community.The answer may be either, or a combination, ofthese approaches.

Most initiatives are struggling to achieve thebenefits of a combined approach, joining theintellectual development effort and human andfinancial resources brought to the table by exter-nal sponsors with the community's leadership,organizational base, and experience. Sponsorscan offer frameworks for reform, knowledge aboutthe world of funders as well as funds of their own,

28

and access to technical assistance. However,even when foundations are willing and able todevote these resources, including substantialinvestment of their own funds over a sustainedperiod, the foundation and its funds are likely toserve principally as a catalyst for long-termchange. A combined approach suggests thatsustainable change requires the insights andenergy of community leaders and residents andtheir commitment to reform goals.

The previous section's examples of oneinitiative in operation illustrate the tensions in aproject involving an external sponsor and commu-nity participants. Here, we describe underlyingissues -- organizational mission and practices,issues of control and accountability -- that giverise to some of the pressures encountered inpractice.

WITHIN FOUNDATIONS

The challenge of balancing the interests ofsponsor and community, in taking a vision asconceived into the realities of implementation, canmanifest itself powerfully inside a sponsoringfoundation. Foundation program officers can betorn between their foundation's standard practicesand an initiative's commitment to community-generated decisions and action. They may findthemselves having to advocate funding forgrassroots organizations with less program devel-opment experience and significantly less manage-ment infrastructure than traditional grantees.They may also have to make the case with col-leagues and foundation leadership for fundingcommitments over the extended timeline neededto effect reform. These claims, especially whenmade during a time of lean foundation budgets,can engender tensions among foundation col-leagues, especially if they perceive preferentialtreatment of initiative funds.

BETWEEN FOUNDATION AND COMMUNITY

When foundations and communities enter intopartnerships aimed at changing circumstances in

30

communities, some of the challenges they faceare embedded in the past experiences and currentaspirations of the sponsor and the communityparticipants. For example, the two may differ ininterpreting concepts at the heart of an initiative --like the meaning of "community-based" or "com-munity-directed" -- and these differences maysurface only after sponsors and participants haveinvested substantial energy and time acting ontheir differing premises.

Most initiatives are guided by general prin-ciples rather than detailed blueprints for action.This means that the initiative sponsor and partici-pants are faced with refining these general prin-ciples and, in the process, clarifying both initiativeaims and appropriate strategies for reachingthem. Questions of relative authority can surfaceat many points in the process. Whose interpreta-tion of long-term goals holds sway? What roledoes each party have in decisions about the useof the funds sponsors are investing? Who deter-mines when and how to use technical assistanceand from what sources? Who participates inselecting evaluators and to whom do they report?Who decides what constitutes success, and howlong it should take.to get there? Issues of race/ethnicity, class, and gender, which may be em-bedded in sponsor-community relations, canpowerfully influence interactions on these andother matters.

Such questions are inevitable, and so arediffering perspectives in response to them. Espe-cially in the face of uncertainty or disagreement,funders and participants interested in securingaccess to foundation funds are likely to fall backon dominant-subordinate grantor-grantee roles,undermining the initiative's intended notion ofcommunity-directed change. Success in forgingforthright and equitable working relationships oftendepends on the expectations and conduct mod-eled by the funders, on the capacity to negotiateon both sides, and on the leadership styles offoundation and community participants.

RELATIONS AMONG FOUNDATIONS

The growing presence of comprehensivecommunity initiatives has made it increasinglycommon to find a single community that is hometo more than one initiative. Cooperation among

sponsors has the potential both to avoid pitfallsand to enhance the power of the investments andthe intervention strategies.

When sponsors fail to cooperate, community-rebuilding strategies may be fragmented andleaders overloaded by the need to create separatecommunity councils, to meet the demands ofseparate reporting processes, and to deal withseparate evaluations for multiple initiative spon-sors, each with its own "logo" effort.

Alternatively, if sponsors find ways of workingtogether, they may increase the likelihood thatbroad-based approaches to poverty alleviationand community building can be developed, andthat resources will be used more effectivelytoward these ends.

GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT IN INITIATIVES

This discussion has been framed largely interms of foundation sponsorship both because thelens for this analysis is a foundation-sponsoredinitiative and because foundation sponsorship hasbeen dominant to date. However, governments atall levels are increasingly sponsoring communityinitiatives -- for example, through empowermentzones and federal legislation like Youth FairChance, and through community-based ap-proaches to family preservation and support.Governments are also increasingly involved asparticipants in foundation-sp( nsored initiatives, atrend that is likely to continue as the long-termsuccess of these initiatives, and of community-building more broadly, will depend on access toboth the policymaking process and to public funds.

Government sponsors, and even governmentparticipants, are likely to confront many of thesame challenges as foundation sponsors -- forexample, in attempting to stimulate community-driven change from a position outside the commu-nity, in dealing with the potential for conflict invision between community and sponsor, and inallowing the time necessary for community-directed change in the face of pressure for results.In fact, because government brings added powerto the equation, it can also exacerbate the ten-sions between top-down and bottom-up ap-proaches to change. Government sponsors andparticipants may face additional challenges as

3

well, such as the increased public scrutiny thatcomes with expenditure of public funds. Govern-ments also have additional opportunities to enhancecommunity change, of course, including control ofmacroeconomic policies, such as those related tojob creation, that can be critical to successful com-munity building.

Given the growing likelihood that foundation andgovernment sponsors will be working in the samecommunities, cooperation between sponsors acrossthe public and private sectors is increasingly important.

THE ROLE OFEVALUATION AND EVALUATORS

The current wave of comprehensive commu-nity-building initiatives also prompts questionsabout the traditional roles of evaluation andevaluators because of the broad and complexpurposes of these initiatives, and the fact that theirgoals and the associated interventions are evolv-ing in practice.

Chapin Hall is currently involved in proposing,advising, or evaluating a number of comprehensivecommunity initiatives, and Chapin Hall staff workingon these initiatives have come to see a need toadjust the traditional methods and roles of evalua-tors to better fit the complex and evolving purposesof community-building initiatives. Center staff areparticipating in the Roundtable on ComprehensiveCommunity Initiatives for Children and Families andits steering committee on evaluation, which isworking to develop evaluation methods that fit thepurposes and processes of these initiatives.

There are a number of complex issues in theevaluation of community-building initiatives. Whatis the optimal evaluation method? How are thedesired outcomes and indicators of progress to bedefined? What is the appropriate posture forevaluators, balancing objectivity with usefulinteraction? How can evaluators further the capac-ity-building aims of these reforms?

DEFINING OUTCOMESAND INDICATORS OF PROGRESS

In many comprehensive, community-focusedreforms, defining reform outcomes is a challengefacing participants and evaluators alike. For

30

example, outcomes of the Trust Initiative can beseen variously as improving the delivery of ser-vices, s enhancing child development and familyfunctioning, as mobilizing citizen investment andleadership, or as improving the quality of life incommunities. An equally important issue isdeveloping indicators that reflect progress towardmeeting these outcomes -- for example, indicatorsthat reflect the development of local leadership orthe evolution of a collaborative decisionmakingcapacity.

Each of the key stakeholders in community-focused initiatives needs to be able to account forthe progress being made. For example, somecommunity council members have been discour-aged by apparently slow progress, often withoutbeing clear or comfortable about the standards towhich they should be holding themselves or theprograms funded through their planning efforts.Foundation Initiative staff monitor grantees' progressand face the challenge of defining and accountingfor that progress to the Initiative Advisory Commit-tee, and to the Trust's staff and Board. Asdocumenters of the Initiative, Chapin Hall research-ers struggle with understanding accomplishmentsmade by Initiative communities in light of the originalideas on which the Initiative is based.

We have convened a group representing thestakeholders in the Trust Initiative to develop Initia-tive-wide benchmarks of progress and reasonableexpectations for the time it will take to reach them.The group includes members of the Initiative'spolicymaking and resource-approval group (theAdvisory Committee), members of the Trust staff,two representatives from nach of the InitiativeCommunity Councils, and members of the ChapinHall documentation staff. This group is working toclarify and refine Initiative goals as well as developthe indicators of progress -- what might be seen,heard, or counted to indicate progress. This openand continuing discussion among participants, andthe indicators once developed, will serve both toguide Initiative planning and to provide a sharedframework for monitoring progress.

BALANCING OBJECTIVITYAND ENGAGEMENT

In observing and interviewing in communities,Chapin Hall's documentation staff have become

3(5

aware that Initiative participants frequently raiseimportant questions about Initiative ideas andalternative ways of implementing them. Webelieve that our attempt to protect our objectivityas documenters by maintaining silence on such;ssues is both artificial and unproductive. Webelieve that it is desirable for evaluation staff to beavailable to engage in interactive discussion withcc.imunity participants about the ideas thatinform the Initiative and the challenges of itsimplementation. Therefore, we have designatedcile member of what are usually two-personevaluation teams in each community to respond toquestions and raise issues about Initiative goalsand strategies, while the other maintains the moretraditional observer role. This more interactivestance gives participants an opportunity to clarifyInitiative premises and discuss possible strategieswith people who were involved in developing thepremises but who are not involved in the proposalreview and grant negotiation process. Even withthe separation of idea development from proposalreview, concerns about funding often influence thedialogue.

Others evaluating community initiatives arealso seeking effective ways to provide ongoingfeedback about the course of an initiative tocommunities and sponsors, and to be moreengaged in discussing what the documentationsuggests about the initiative's possible evolution.The Aspen Roundtable on Comprehensive Com-munity-Based Initiatives focuses on this matterthrough a subgroup on evaluation. (A paper onevaluation prepared for the Roundtable is listed in"Related Chapin Hall Research" at the end of thispaper.)

PROCESS OR OUTCOME EVALUATION?

While efforts to develop optimal evaluationstrategies are in progress, we and others havehad to make operational decisions about how bestto understand and assess initiatives underway.Because the initiative in action will almost certainlydiffer from the proposed initiative on paper, it iscritical to document what happens in relation towhat was proposed. This process evaluationapproach seems right for these initiatives, where,as noted, purposes are broad, complex, andevolving. Process evaluation is an effective tool

for monitoring the development of ideas and theirmodification in practice. It can identify both oppor-tunities and obstacles in implementation andprovide feedback to stakeholders useful in inform-ing the ongoing conduct of initiatives.

A complex issue facing the evaluation ofcommunity-focused initiatives is the question ofwhen to undertake an outcome evaluation. Out-come evaluations are expensive in time andmoney and often impose interaction with an addedgroup of outsiders on community participants.Seeking an outcome evaluation while an interven-tion is still being defined is likely to produce bothdisappointing and misleading results. An outcomeevaluation that occurs too early will reveal whatthe investment to date has produced, not whetherthe fully accomplished infrastructure building canresult in intended outcomes.

THE VALUE OF LEARNING FROMPROGRESS, OBSTACLES,AND EACH OTHER

One of the early overarching lessons we arelearning is how important it is that the stakehold-ers in community-building initiatives find ways tocontribute their diverse perspectives to the job ofrefining the initiative's goals and of using accom-plishments and obstacles encountered to clarifystrategies for reaching these goals. The need tolearn from each other may seem obvious, but thishappens too little, in part because there are toughissues involved in creating sufficiently open andongoing opportunities for learning among commu-nity participants, sponsors, evaluators, and others.

UNDERSTANDING AND OPENNESS

To begin, there ar differing perspectives onwhat learning is needed and what constitutes truthamong the various stakeholders. Understandingthe different orientations and agendas of thevarious actors, and how they fit together and whenthey fail to, is an essential first task. Better under-standing what the stakeholders' organizationalperspectives and mandates are can increase thechance that the strategies developed will incorporatethe interests of the greatest number of involvedparties, decreasing acrimony, increasing engage-ment, and enhancing the likelihood of success.

35 31

The act of learning in community-buildingefforts such as the Children, Youth, and FamiliesInitiative has to be collaborative in its own right.However, there are real disincentives to honesty,especially given that access to significant financialresources is involved. Those who have the mostto lose if they talk openly about purposes, agen-das, or obstacles are those who have applied foror received funding. Applicants and grantees havebeen conditioned to focus on and report aboutsuccess. It is often the case, however, that thebest learning comes from an examination ofdifficulties: what is the trouble, why are we havingit, how can it be solved? The opportunity andburden of creating a climate for mutual learning islikely to fall principally to the sponsors becausethey tend to have the greatest resources andauthority. Sponsors are in a critical position to setboth a tone and expectations that are conduciveto learning.

METHODS AND MEANS

A number of routes to learning are possible,for single- or multi-site initiatives, as well asacross initiatives -- meetings, work groups, topic-focused workshops, seminars, and site visits.Ideally, these events should involve the perspec-tives of all key stakeholders community partici-pants, providers, sponsors, technical assistanceproviders, and evaluators -- on an equal footing.

In addition to these widely representativemeetings, communication among those in thesame position -- community residents with eachother and funders with funders, for example isalso important, to allow discussion of problems,issues, and lessons from a particular perspectiveand structural position in an initiative.

A real commitment to communication andlearning requires that such events occur with

32

some frequency. Infrequent opportunites to com-municate make it likely that participants will offeronly the party line and the good news. Repeatedopportunities for a serious exchange of concernscan lead to truth-telling.

There are ways to supplement and sustainlearning in addition to in-person exchanges. Oneway is to hire someone to collect informationabout what sites are doing, to identify currentissues, key concerns, and promising approaches,and to disseminate that information to all stake-holders. The information superhighway, from thetelephone to Hands Net to Internet, provides otheroptions. In addition, evaluation, if used well, canfurther interactive learning.

Several factors add urgency to the need tolearn from efforts in progress. There is, as thispaper has frequently suggested, a broad andgrowing focus on community-based reforms in thiscountry. Beyond that, there is a trend towardbasing the delivery of, and to a lesser degree thedecisionmaking for, services of all kinds in com-munities. This trend comes from impulses towardboth economy and local control. In this time oftightened resoumes and changes in the landscapeof social programs, the investments made incommunity-based initiatives and the results theyachieve are especially critical, and likely to beclosely scrutinized.

These investments in community-building arehigh-stakes endeavors for both communities andsponsors, and ultimately for all of us. We have anopportunity to use efforts underway to refine ourthinking about what communities that support thedevelopment of children and the functioning offamilies look like and our understanding of how togenerate and sustain the changes needed tocreate them.

A POSTSCRIPT

We took on the task of describing what we arelearning from an initiative very much in progress,and in its early stages at that. Through the Ameri-can Youth Policy Forum, we saw an opportunity tofoster communication about these initiatives in anew and broader public policy arena. This iscertainly in keeping with our advocacy for opencommunication within and across initiatives, in theinterests of learning and progress.

Having laid out this vision of an infrastructureof services in communities -- its creation andcharacter to date we end by asking your help infurther examination. Does an infrastructure of thekind we envision make sense? Are there objec-tions or obstacles to the basic infrastructure ideasor the learning strategy that we envision? Howmight such obstacles be overcome?

We would be pleased to know your responsesto this report, as well as observations drawn fromyour own experiences. Chapin Hall is a memberof the Hands Net national computer network, andmanages an information forum devoted to dis-cussing and supporting comprehensive initiativesfor children, families, and communities. In addi-tion to writing or calling, we encourage you totake advantage of this technology to share yourthoughts with us and others in the field. If you area Hands Net member already, please email eitherRebecca Stone (Forum Manager, HN3025) orJoan Wynn (HN3573) with comments or ques-tions. For more information about Hands Net's andChapin Hall's Comprehensive Strategies Forum,please see the note at the end of this paper.

J.R.W, S.M.M., P.G.B.

The Chapin Hall Center for Childrenat the University of Chicago

1313 E. 60th StreetChicago, IL 60637Phone: (312) 753-5952FAX: (312) 753-5940

4 i

33

RELATED CHAPIN HALL RESEARCH

Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago is an independent research and devel-opment center dedicated to the study of issues affecting children. Chapin Hall focuses its efforts onmonitoring the condition of children, facilitating the improved delivery of services to children in need,and seeking ways to foster the development of all children. The contexts in which children are sup-ported -- primarily their families and communities -- are an area of particular interest.

All items listed are available from Chapin Hall.

The Availability and Use of Community Resources for Young Adolescents in an Inner-city and aSuburban Community by Julia Littell and Joan Wynn, 1989. Examines the resources available toyouth in two different socioeconomic communities. The study identifies many differences in the rangeand types of community resources for youth and begins to explore the implications of these disparities.The benefits that may accrue to youth from the use of community resources are also explored.

Children, Families and Communities: A New Approach to Social Services by Joan Wynn, JoanCostello, Robert Halpern, and Harold A. Richman, 1993. Proposes building an infrastructure to supportcommunity-focused primary and specialized services for children and families.

The Children, Youth, and Families Initiative: An Eighteen-Month Review by Joan Wynn and HaroldRichman, October 1992. The first major written report to the Chicago Community Trust from ChapinHall on its documentation of the Initiative.

The Children, Youth, and Families Initiative: Annual Report by the Initiative documentai ion staff,May 1994. The second major report to the Chicago Community Trust on the progress of the Initiative,prepared and submitted approximately eighteen months after the first. However, with this document thereporting plan shifts to an annual basis, so this is also the first in a planned series of annual reports.

Comprehensive Community-Building Strategies: Issues and Opportunities for Learning byRebecca Stone, May 1994. Prepared for the Rockefeller Foundation. Reflects an ongoing investigationof comprehensive, community-building strategies that informs the development of a computer-baseddiscussion forum -- Hands Net's Comprehensive Strategies Forum (see note on Hands Net and theForum at the end of this paper).

Creating a Consortium for the Education and Training of Children's Services Workers: The Needand Possible Approaches by Joan Costello and Renae Ogletree. Prepared at the Request of theChicago Community Trust in Furtherance of Its Work under the Children, Youth, and Families Initiative.An exploration of the issues in training for child and youth workers, especially as these relate to theconceptual framework of the Children, Youth, and Families Initiative.

The Ford Foundation's Neighborhood and Family Initiative: Toward a Model of Comprehensive,Neighborhood-Based Development by Robert J. Chaskin, 1992. Discusses an initiative underway infour U.S. cities that employs community development strategies that recognize the interrelationship ofsocial, physical, and economic development.

The Ford Foundation's Neighborhood and Family Initiative: Building Cellaboration -- An InterimReport by Robert J. Chaskin and Renae Ogletree, 1993. Reviews the first two years of the initiative,examining how the principles elaborated in the first report have been interpreted and acted on withinthe four communities, and analyzes the impact of the NFI governing structure on the way the initiativehas unfolded.

The Issue of Governance in Neighborhood-Based Initiatives by Robert J. Chaskin and Sunil Garg,1994. Focuses on three issues relevant to the formation of local governance structures -- the relation-ship between neighborhood governance structures and local government; the nature of representation,and matters of legitimacy and connection; and long-term viability -- and reviews five comprehensiveneighborhood-based initiatives in action in an effort to stimulate and inform debate about neighborhooddevelopment and local government.

Rethinking Child Welfare Services in Illinois: A Summary of Findings from The Children's PolicyProject by Matthew W. Stagner, 1993. Presents a comprehensive study of the Illinois Department ofChildren and Family Services and proposes a new approach to child welfare that would create a com-prehensive, community-based system of services available on a voluntary basis to all families in corn-munities.

The Role of After-School Programs in the Lives of Inner-City Children by Robert Halpern, 1991.Through an analysis of a major Chicago youth agency, explores the purposes and content of after-school programs and their impact on the lives of inner-city youth.

"The Role of the Evaluator in Comprehensive Community Initiatives" by Prudence Brown. In NewApproaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives, edited by James P. Connell, Anne C. Kubisch, LisbethB. Schorr, and Carol H. Weiss (pp. 201-225). Washington DC: The Aspen Institute, Roundtable onComprehensive Community Initiatives for Children and Families, 1995. Explores how comprehensivecommunity initiatives are challenging the traditional definition and role of the evaluator; it describes thewide and complex array of roles now available to evaluators, and analyzes how the evaluators' rolesare being defined in practice, and with what consequences for learning and the success of theseinitiatives.

Sports and Recreation for Chicago Youth: Existing Services, Opportunities for Improvement byDiana Mendley Rauner, Laurence Stanton, and Joan Wynn, 1994. Focusing on the Chicago PublicSchools and the Chicago Park District, documents the inadequacy of existing resources in sports andrecreation for young people in Chicago, and attempts to identify ways to improve the quality and acces-sibility of these resources.

The Trust Quarterly, Spring 1991. In this issue of its quarterly publication, The Chicago CommunityTrust announced the commitment of $30 million to the Children, Youth, and Family Initiative, an ambi-tious effort to improve the lives of children and families.

4 335

36

COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIES FORUM ON HANDSNET

PART OF THE CHILDREN, YOUTH, AND FAMILIES INITIATIVE

What are comprehensive community strategies, and where are they being tried? How do communi-ties change? How do we know if human services reforms are working? What does community devel-

opment have to do with children and families? Why is collaboration difficult? What are we learning fromcomprehensive community initiatives? Who provides funding in this area? How do we evaluate long-term change strategies? Who else is working in this area? How can I talk with them?

The Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago manages the ComprehensiveStrategies Forum on Hands Net. Hands Net is a computer-based information network designed to

encourage and enhance information-sharing, communication, and collaboration among community-level practitioners, researchers, and policymakers concerned with issues of social welfare and policy

reform.

The Comprehensive Strategies Forum is part of Hands Net's new area focus on Children, Youthand Families. The Forum provides a broad, in-depth look at innovative efforts to improve the lives ofchildren and families through human services reform, community collaboration, economic development,and physical revitalization of communities. By including documents, data, and other information on thetheoretical as well as the practical aspects of comprehensive reform efforts, Zhe Forum provides both

an opportunity and an impetus to integrate what's being learned from program implementation and

research activities that have been quite isolated historically.

The Comprehensive Strategies Forum includes information on current initiatives around the coun-try, on collaboration, on how comprehensive initiatives are evaluated, the role of data and informationsystems in program development and cross-system efforts, private and public sources of funding forcomprehensive strategies, current research on community-focused, comprehensive approaches forsupporting children and families, and more. We welcome advice about what would make the Forum

most useful to you and your organization or initiative.

In addition, the Comprehensive Strategies Forum engages a wide variety of individuals and organi-zations in pursuing larger questions about the nature of comprehensive endeavors, the need to explorediverse perspectives on comprehensiveness and community-based reform, and the usefulness of theconcepts and lessons for social welfare policy. We hope you will want to be a part of this forum andcontribute your own perspective, thoughts, experience, research, and writing to this rapidly expanding

and dynamic field of inquiry and endeavor.

To learn more about the Comprehensive Strategies Forum or Hands Net, please contact Rebecca

Stone at:

The Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago1313 E. 60th StreetChicago, IL 60637Phone: (312) 753-5952FAX: (312) 753-5940Hands Net: HN3025Internet: [email protected]

4

Announcing Important Resources From...AMERICAN YOUTH POLICY FORUM

Opening Career Paths for Youth: What Can Be Done? Who Can Do h? 16 pages. SI prepaid.

by Stephen F. and Mary Agnes HamiltonThe directors of Cornell University's Youth Apprenticeship Demonstration Project share lessons learned in implementingessential components of school-to-career programs.

School-to-Work: A Larger Vision 24 pages. S2 prepaid.

by Samuel HalperinLively discussion of the federal school-to-career legislation, what school-to-work is not, and k hat it could he w hen viewed as asystemic, comprehensive, community-wide effort for all young people.

Prevention or Pork? A Hard-Headed Look at Youth-Oriented Anti-Crime Programs 48 pages. S5 prepaid.

by Richard A. MendelA survey of what is known about the effectiveness of youth crime prevention programs. What w orks and what does not? Readableand helpful in preparing for crime prevention funding. (Co-published with National Crime Prevention Council and others)

Making Sense of Federal Job Training Policy for Youth and Adults -- Volume II: 64 pages. S5 prepaid.Expert Recommendations to Create A Comprehensive and Unified System

Kristina M. Moore, Alan Zuckerman, Samuel Halperin, editorsA collection of brief essays by leading practitioners and policy experts concerning thoughtful reform of our emplo ment trainingsystem. (Co-published with the National Youth Employ ment Coalition)

Building a System to Connect School and Employment 90 pages. S5 prepaid.Wisdom and practical guidance on s\ stem-building from educators, practitioners, researchers, policy makers, labor leaders,business organizations and federal and state government officials. (('o-published with the Council olChief State School Officers)

Improving the Transition from School to Work in the United States 40 pages. S5 prepaid.

by Richard Kazis, with a memorandum on the Youth Transh,on by Paul BartonA detailed analysis of the transition of American youth from school to employment. Offers strategies for improving careerpreparation and recommendations for federal policy. (Co-published with Jobs for the Future)

Youth .4pprenticeship in America: Guidelines for Building an Effective System 90 pages. S8 prepaid.A discussion of educational theory and practical application by six experts at the forefront of research and on the front lines inimplementing youth apprenticeship. Outlines specific approaches and lessons learned from experience in the U.S. and abroad.

The Amerkan School-to-Career Ahwentent: A Background Paper for Polkymakers 28 pages. 55 prepaid.

by Richard A. MendelInterviews and analysis of current efforts to link schooling and the w orld of employment: essential tasks to he addressed.

1,7sions of Service: The Future of National and Cwnmunity Service 68 pages. S5 prepaid.Shirley Sagawa and Samuel Halperin, editors38 essays by leading practitioners and strategic thinkers in the national service field address the past, present and future ofN ationalService -- where we are now, where we are headed, and how we can best achieve the goal of service by al! Americans. (Co-published with the National Women's I .aw ('enter)

Contract With America's Youth: Toward a National Youth Development Agenda 64 pages. S5 prepaid.Twenty-live authors ask v%.-tat must be done to promo .e healthy youth development, build supportive communities and reformand link youth services. (Co-published with Center for Youth Development and the National Assembly.)

PREP,4ID ORDERS ONLY, PLEASE. Send all orders to AMERICAN YOUTH POLICY FORUM1001 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 719, Washington, DC 20036-5541. (Federal ID 13-162-4021).Call (202)775-9731 for rates on hulk orders.Call 202 775-9731 or rates on bulk orders.

The Education and Human Services Consortium Series on Collaboration:Children, Families and Communities: 48 pages. S5 prepaid.Early Lessons From A New Approach To Social Services

by Joan Wynn, Sheila M. Merry., and Patricia C. BergOffers both a big-picture analysis of comprehensive. community-based initiatives and a more focused look through the lens ofone such initiative in Chicno.

What It Takes: Structuring Interagency Partnerships to Connect Children 56 pages. S3 prepaid.and Families with Comprehensive Services

by Atelia Melaville with Martin BlankGuidance tbr schools, social welfare agencies and CBOs on how to combine fbrces to achance the well-heing of children andfamilies.

Thinking Collaboratively: Questions and Answers to Help Policy Makers 32 pages. S3 prepaid.Improve Children's Services

by Charles BrunerTen questions and answers range from understanding what problems collaboration can solve, to knowinu when it's workinu.Includes checklists to help policy makers increase the likelihood that local col laboratives will sen, e as catalysts for reform.

Serving Children and Families Effectively: How the Past Can Help Chart the Future 24 pages. S3 prepaid..by Peter B. Edelman and Beryl A. RadinOver the past 30 years, thinking about how to structure and improve human services has been clouded by myth and rhetoric. 'lheauthors explore this inheritance and revisit numerous service and access models ofthe '60s and '70s to develop a new perspectivefor the '90s.

New Partnerships: Education's Stake in the his:41y Support Act 32 pages. S3 prepaid.An overview of the landmark Act and the opportunities it offers tbr the education and welfare communities to address commonconcerns. Includes resource lists tbr further reading.

NameORDER FORM (cut Out or Photocopy)

Address

City State Zip

Q6AN.T.ITY .pRICE

Contract With America's Youth S5.00

Opening Career Paths for Youth 51.00

School-to-Work: A Larger Vision S2.00

Presention or Pork? Youth-Oriented Anti-Crime Programs 55.00

Making Sense of Federal Job Training Policy S5.00

Building a System to Connect School and Emplosment 55.00

Improving the Transition from School to Work S5.00

Youth Apprenticeship in America 58.00

Visions of tiers ice 55.00

Children, Families, Communities 55.00

What It Takes: Structuring Interagencs Partnerships 53.00

Thinking Collaborativels: Questions and Ansviers 53.00

Set-sing Children and Families Effectisels 53.00

Ness Partnerships: Family Support Act 53.00

The American School-to-Career Mos ement 55.00

AMOUNT'

4PREPAID ORDERS ONLY, PLEASE. Send all orders to: AMERICAN YOUTH POLICY FORUM11101 Connecticut Avenue NIVuite 719, Washington, DC 20036-5541 (Federal ID 13-162-4024

1

/17 IGI3N i 897o3i-s4-5-

Date post:	02-Oct-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times

DOCUMENT RESUME ED 389 435 PS 023 781 AUTHOR Wynn, … · DOCUMENT RESUME. ED 389 435 PS 023 781....

Documents