DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 358 177 UD 029 181

TITLE Building Strong Communities: Strategies for UrbanChange. Conference Proceedings (Cleveland, Ohio, May13-15, 1992).

INSTITUTION Annie E. Casey Foundation, Greenwich, CT.SPONS AGENCY Ford Foundation, New York, N.Y.; Rockefeller

Foundation, New York, N.Y.PUB DATE May 92NOTE 87p.PUB TYPE Collected Works Conference Proceedings (021)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC04 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Community Change; *Community Development; Community

Leaders; Community Problems; Community Role;Community Services; *Economically Disadvantaged;Elementary Secondary Education; *Inner City;*Leadership; Philanthropic Foundations; RacialRelations; School Community Relationship; *UrbanImprovement; Urban Problems; Urban Schools

ABSTRACTThis publication presents the proceedings of a

conference that brought together local leaders who are working forchange in distressed communities in 16 cities. An overview discussesthe background for the conference and describes common themes thatemerged during its proceedings. The next section contains the keynoteaddress, "Race, Class, and Poverty in Urban America: ComparativePerspective" (William J. Wilson). Another section offers summaries ofsix conference sessions on the following topics: (1) neighborhoods asentry points for change; (2) the implications of an asset orientationfor urban change strategies; (3) structuring effective communityservices; (4) dealing with race and ethnicity in urban changestrategies; (5) moving toward community-responsive schools; and (6) adialogue with the sponsoring foundations. A final section containsthe following five conference papers, which were the basis for thesessions: (1) "Neighborhoods as an Entry Point for Change" (RonaldShiffman); (2) "The Implications of an Asset Orientation for UrbanChange Strategies" (Blandina C. Ramirez); (3) "Structuring EffectiveCommunity Services" (Audrey Rowe); (4) "Dealing with Race andEthnicity in Urban Change Strategies" (Peter B. Edelman); and (5)"Toward Community-Responsive Schools" (Ralph R. Smith and MichelleFine). Includes a listing of conference participants and theiraffiliations. (JB)

***********************************************************************

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.

***********************************************************************

a

Building Strong Communities

Strategies for Urban Change

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Mc or Ethic/Axonal Researchand improvement

EDUCATIONALCENTER (RESOURCEICS

)

INFORMATIONER

KhtS document has Peenreproduced as

erceived from the person Or organization

originating itO Minor changes have

teen made to improve

reproduction ouatity

Points of view Of Opi1110113 MOM) thsS dOCu.menu

do not necessarily represent official

OERI position or policy

'PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

GU.

TO THE EDUCATIONALRESOURCES

INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC).-

Sp nsored by

thc'. Annie ',a,,eN Ford,

and Rockefeller Foundations

BEST COPY AVAILABLF

Conference Report

Building Strong Communities

Strategies for Urban Change

May 13-15, 1992

Cleveland, Ohio

Sponsored by

the Annie E. Casey, Ford,

and Rockefeller Foundations

AcknowledgementsThe conference was jointly planned by a committee representing the Neighborhood FamilyInitiative, the Ncw Futures Initiative, the Casey Child Welfare Reform Initiative, and theCommunity Planning and Action Project, and their sponsoring foundations, the Ford,Rockefeller, and Annie E. Casey Foundations: Angela Glover Blackwell, Executive Director,Urban Strategies Council Don Crary, Executive Director, New Futures for Little Rock

Youth Otis Johnson, Executive Director, Chatham-Savannah Youth Futures AuthorityRalph Knighton, Executive Director, North Hartford Development Corporation Susan

Motley, Director, Neighborhood and Family Initiative, Center for Community ChangeArthur J. Naparstek, Director, Cleveland Foundation Commission on Poverty Ron

Register, Project Director, Community Foundation of Greater Memphis Prue Brown,

Deputy Director, Urban Poverty Program, The Ford Foundation Cheryl Casciani,

Planning Associate, The Annie E. Casey Foundation James 0. Gibson, Director, EqualOpportunity Program, The Rockefeller Foundation Aida Rodriguez, Associate Director,

Equal Opportunity Program, The Rockefeller Foundation.Ann Rosewater brokered the discussion among the philwahropic actors and facilitated

the planning process. Sheri Dunn Berry and Gloria Kennard of the Urban StrategiesCouncil

provided logistical support. Sheri Dunn Berry and Robin Broder of the American WritingCorporation provided summaries of the conference sessions. The American Writing Corpo-ration produced the conference proceedings. Gloria Kennard provided conferencephotos.

The cover photo and cover page photos are by Nita Winter.

For more information abc :t the initiatives, call Sheri Dunn Berry, Secretariat for theCommunity Planning an? Action Projects, (510)893-2404; Susan Motley, Director, Neigh-

borhood and Family Initi..tive enter for Community Change, (202)342-0567 or (203 )585-

8727; and Bill Rust, Director of Communications, Annie E. Casey Foundation, (203)661-

2773.

Contents

Overview

Keynote address

Race, class, and poverty in urban America:A comparative perspectiveWilliam Julius Wilson

1

6

Sessions

Neighborhoods as an entry point for change 16

The implications of an asset orientation for urban changestrategies 20

Structuring effective community services 23

Dealing with rac,: and ethnicity in urban change strategies 26

Toward community-responsive schools 30

A dialogue with the foundations 34

Papers

Neighborhoods as an entry point for changeRonald Shiffman 40

The implications of an asset orientation for urban changestrategiesBlandina Cardenas Ramirez 49

Structuring effective community servicesAudrey Rowe 56

Dealing with race and ethnicity in urban change strategiesPeter B. Edelman 60

Toward community-responsive schoolsRalph R. Smith andMichelle Fine 67

Conference participants 76

JAT' erview

I

44,a

Overview

Ann Rosewater, Facilitator

For many years a host of quiet pioneers havebeen formulating strategies and working forreal change in distressed communities acrossAmerica. Many of their efforts have runcounter to prevailing policy and practice, buttheircontinuing commitment puts them in thevanguard of a new dedication to confrontpoverty. Seeded by national philanthropyThe Ford, Annie E. Casey, and RockefellerFoundationslocal leaders have come to-gether in many cities to examine local needsand resources, identify opportunities forchange, and pursue specific strategies to stimu-late and secure vital and productive commu-nities. Their efforts have been intense hut, forthe most part, out of the spotlight. Heretoforehidden are the powerful collaborative effortsto transform urban communities and enrichthe lives of their poorest citizens.

Unique collaboration amongcommunities and foundations

In May 1992 an unusual conferenceBuild-ing Strong Communities: Strategies for UrbanChangebrought together these diverse ini-tiatives. Recognizing common goals and dif-ferences in short-term objectives and means,the planning team of community and founda-tion representatives viewed the gathering asan exp,:triment in learning across sites, collabo-

ration, and network building. Delegations from

more than 16 cities included advocates andplanners, neighborhood leaders, mayors andcity managers, university researchers, serviceproviders and educators, bankers and lawyersand foundation officials. They gathered to teststrategies, challenge assumptions, reflect onwhat they have learned, expand the arsenal ofapproaches, and fortify the ranks in the cam-paign to improve the quality of life in urbancommunities.

Three initiatives provided the primaryparticipants: Community Planning and ActionProjects, Neighborhood and Family Initiative,

OVERVIEW

and New Futures. They vary significantly intheir genesis, life span, organizational struc-ture, and original targets. A fourth, the CaseyChild Welfare Reform Initiative, varies as wellin its connection to state government (seesidebars). They nevertheless share several char-acteristics:

They were created to foster r)ositive changein the lives of poor people and distressedurban neighborhoods and communities.

They focus sustained attention on poorchildren and adults in targeted neighborhoodsor entire communities.

They are community-based.They depend on developing collabora-

tions among different agencies and organiza-tionsor among a broad range of individualsand organizations that have a stake in a neigh-borhood or community

They deal with many issues, crossing pro-fessional disciplines, community agencies, andpolicy dimensions.

An urgent need for action

The conference had a special urgency forseveral reasons. Conditions have worsenedsubstantially in the past decade or so. Years ofdeepening urban poverty affecting millions ofcitizens, and children disproportionately, werecompounded by a widespread recession. Morethan a decade of inattention to cities by na-tional policymakers had taken its toll in dete-riorating housing and commercial structures,diminishing employment opportunities, weak-ened community-based and supportive ser-vice organizations, disorganized and isolatedfamily circumstances, and the tragedies ofviolence, drugs, and homelessness.

The flight of more affluent families fromthe inner city, many of them minorities, hasremoved a stable, employment-connectedgroup of residents, making the links to theformal labor market, let alone to mentors androle models, even more fragile for those left

Ihe Neighborhood and Lando,

Initiative, developed by the

Ford Foundation in 1990,

applies the interdependent

strategies of physical, economic,

and social development toward

the alleviation of poverty. In

Detroit, fiarthrd, Memphis,

and Milwaukee, each project

in the initiative has developed a

broad-based collaborative of

neighborhood residents and

other critical public- and

private-sector stakeholders to

identify and marshal

investment and action to

address key concerns of a

vecifi'c neighborhood. By

vesting leadership and staff

support in the local community

foundation, the initiative has

sought to both build the

capacity of a significant

community institution to

engage in effective

neighborhood development and

draw upon the resources that

institution has, or can leverage,

for change.

The Annie E. Casey

Foundation's New Futures

program is operating in five

cities.: Bridgeport, Dayton,

Little Rock, Pittsburgh, and

Savannah. The foundation and

its community grantees targeted

reduction of teen

unemployment, teen dropouts,

and teen pregnancy as the key

outcomes of their five-year

effort. Through "oversight

collahoratives" composed of

responsible elected and

appointed officials, business

leaders, parents, and providers,

each New Futures project

serves as a focal point for local

dm:sionntaking about at-risk

youth and as a mechanism for

improving the performance of

youth-serving institutions. The

projects use a combination of

strategies targeting primarily

middle schools such as case

management, additional

services, supports, and program

opportunities 'Or students,

management information

systems, and new approaches to

financing systems of services--

to achieve systemic change and

improve the outcomes for low-

income teenagers.

behind. And an increasing number of inner-city households are headed by women. "As weapproach the end of the twentieth century, theproblems of poverty, joblessness, and socialisolation in the inner-city ghetto remain amongthe most serious challenges facing municipaland national policymakers," declared University

of Chicago sociologist William Julius Wilson.Voices for change have been fragmented

and barely audible. The dire circumstancesfacing millions of low-income and minorityAmericans and the pervasive sense of hope-lessness have not received a commensurateresponse from either the government or theAmerican public.

Just a few weeks before the conference,the nation was shaken by the eruption of themultiethnic poor and working-class commu-nity of South Central Los Angeles in responseto the acquittal of white policemen in thebeating of Rodney King, a black man. Whilethe timing of the conference was coincidental,the events highlighted the need to redoubleefforts to get the fruits of private initiativesinto the public arena.

Some of the conference dialogue recalledthe activity and urgency of 25 years ago, whenthe "War on Poverty" was conceived, but alsonoted marked differences. I Ieightening theurgency are shifts in global and national econo-

mies and in labor market structures, shifts thathave reduced job opportunities and wagerates in inner cities. State and federal coffersare nearly empty, further inhibiting govern-mental commitment to the social welfareagenda. Public trust in elected officials toaddress the common good is at an all-time low,

stirred by a decade-long negative political tide.As poverty persists in affecting millions of

Americansdeepening with more poor peoplehaving even fewer resources, and escalating,particularly among childrenthe conse-quences require responses different not onlyin extent but also in kind.

Yet local practitioners and policymakersalike have been operating in a context wheregovernment is essentially absent.Government's commitment, to the extent itwas ever there, has proved evanescent. And

whatever the reasons for government's aban-donment of cities and the poor, the effects areserious and have been deleterious over thelong term.

Further, racial inequality and other issuesof discriminationwhich could earlier be rem-edied by law or appeals to a sense of justice andmoralitycan no longer be addressed solelyby legal remedies. Questions of class andeconomics have complicated both the prob-lems and the search for potential solutions.

Finally, there is greater appreciation ofpoverty's tenacious hold on people, includingmany who work full time, and for the assetsthat poor people and neighborhoods can bringto changing their circumstances. There is anew realism: poverty is not something that canbe wisly:d away. And there is a new under-standing: in much more sophisticated waysthan before, we have to rely on and support theefforts of people and communities to buildtheir own paths out of poverty.

Thus, there is a heightened need for ac-tion, but action needs to be seasoned bycareful thought and testing. Action for its ownsake is not enough; it is imperative to knowwhat action will he effective.

All these realities temper the unbridledidealism that has carried so many into thearena to fight for social justice and providedthe public support for social change. Theyhave also shaped the context for emergentprivate initiatives and affect the lessons to bedrawn from their experience.

Common themes

Comprehensive investments inneighborhoods

An area recognized by its inhabitants as aneighborhood or community can be the targetof many kinds of investments and activities.Confronted with the complexity of regenerat-ing distressed neighborhoods, Ron Shiffman,director of the Pratt Institute's Center onEnvironmental and Community Develop-ment, emphasized the value of "symbioticallyin tegrat [ing] " this neighborhood developmen tactivity, knitting more closely together jobcreatiu.-, child care services, housing and com-mercial development, health, education, andsocial support programs. Such notions of co-ordination and comprehensiveness alsoundergird alternative models for deliveringhuman services and some efforts at schoolreform, according to Connecticut's Commis-

2OVERVIEW

sioner of Income Maintenance Audrey Roweand University of Pennsylvania law professorand former education administrator RalphSmith. These notions apply as well to neigh-borhood economic development, where pro-ducing a stable housing inventory and aneducated and trained work force may be es-sential elements of generating capit 11 forma-tion or attracting new financial investment.And they suggest an approach for enhancingcommunity development corporationswhich may have been generally successful overthe years at developing commercial or residen-tial infrastructure but without developing ad-equate training and support for residents tobenefit from the jobs that were created or tosustain ownership of the homes they built orrehabilitated.

Integrative planning and organizing

Three ingredients are basic to such holisticapproaches. First, "integrative planning andorganizing" sets the stage for understandingthe community's vision and setting out thesteps to reach it. This requires investing in andnurturing community-based organizations ordevelopment corporations. Such investmentsshould ensure their capacity for continuity, aswell as their organizational ability to involvecommunity members in program develop-ment, planning, and operations.

Good strategic planning depends heavilyon getting the facts about local conditions. Butit is no longer enough to base the planning andorganizing for urban change on traditionalassessments of need or perceptions of defi-ciencies. The assumptions underlying tradi-tional assessments have too often resulted incritical decisions affecting a low-income com-munity being made elsewhere. They have alsoreinforced a perception that the residents andinstitutions that give the neighborhood itsvitality have little to offer in appraising thefactors contributing to its distress, controllingthe resources affecting its renewal, or articu-lating its goals and aspirations. They haveoverlooked opportunities to deploy tangiblethingspeople, land, buildings, and localgroups and institutions, such as churchesinentrepreneurial approaches to the broadestvision of community and human develop-ment. And they have signaled the rejection of

many intangible things: language, culture, his-tory, rituals, pride. "If we could learn to see theassets," asserted longtime educator and mem-ber of the U.S. Commission for Civil Rights,Blandina Cardenas Ramirez, "we could onceagain begin to trust that the solutions to ourinner-city problems must be fashioned not forthose communities, but with, of, and by thosecommunities."

Building coalitions for change

A second ingredient entails engaging the stake-

holders inside and outside the targeted area.Many are the same actors who have beeninvo'.ved in change efforts over the years, buttheir engagement needs to be intensified andthe array of participants has to he broadened.In today's context, the old relationshipsbetween service provider and client or be-tween educator and studentare not provingvery successful. Rowe pointed out that engag-ing families and others who are affected in thedesign, implementation, and evaluation ofbasic health, welfare, education, and socialservices is critical for individual empower-ment and for improved effectiveness. "In com-munities suffering the loss of cohesion andinfrastructure, building a core of leaders canbe as vital a goal as the more immediate needto get basic services to families in need." Smithcalls further for a "renegotiation of the school-community compact," for the empowermentnot only of individuals but also of the commu-nity. It is also important to identify and address

the interests of the broader publiccitizens inother parts of the city, or voluntary and publicagencies whose base is outside the area, orresidents of nearby suburbs, or major busi-nesses and employers. This is essential forbuilding broader coalitions for change andseeking support beyond the inner city.

Facing persistent dirciimination

Third, strategists seeking expanded alliancesto revitalize urban communities must facepersistent concerns about how to deal withrace and ethnicity in an increasingly pluralisticsociety. Wilson and Peter Edelman, professorof law at the Georgetown University LawCenter, each emphasized the complex inter-play among race, discrimination, attitudes,

child Welfare RclOrm

initiatives at the state level, also

conceived by the Annie E.

Casey Foundation, have given

rise to community-based

governing entities that focus

attention on improving

outcomes JOr vulnerable

children, especially those in

substitute care or at risk of

removal from their Ja

While oriented more toward

the child welfare .system than

New Futures' focus on

education, this initiative makes

similar efforts to ,generate new

governing sinectures and

finanang mechanisms to

steppod shifting/be kais of

practitioners and the public

toward families. The initiative

annpleling its fourth year in

two states, Maryland and

North Dakota.

OVERVIEW 3

Community Planning and

Action Projects (CPAPs) in six

cities urn' seeded by the

Rockefeller Foundation in

1987-88 to address the needs

of the persistently poor. Boston,

Cleveland, Denver, Oakland,

San Antonio, and Washington,

D.C., each established a

mechanism that would generate

data and analysis of the data

and then construct strategies in

response to that ink rmation.

The CPAPs vary considerably

in structure-- Clffeland

established the Commission on

Poverty and a supporting,

university-based research

institute, DenVer and Boston

based their efforts in local

finindations, Oakland and San

Antonio Creedal freestanding

nonprofit organizations, and

Washington linked a "sinnegies

committee" to a 'medal local

research center

Whether through

compnhensive planning

processes or entrepreneurial

program development, CPAPs

SC17}e as catalysts for

collabmatit'e activity and

intensified local focres on lote-

income COMMUMfieS.

and actions, According to Edelman, we nee, 1

to confront the fact that "ugly, operative,effective" racism continues to harm signifi-cant numbers of people and, at the same time,

demonstrate that we differentiate betweenracism and usin :?; race as an excuse for "limita-

tions or failures to take responsibility on thepart of some individuals."

Discrimination persists, though often insubtle forms, and the facts proving it need tohe exposed. But many race-neutral factorsalso limit opportunity. Wilsonwhose 1987book, The Tidy Disadvantaged, helped reopen

national debate about poverty and racenowsuggests that racial stereotyping, particularlyof black males, contributes to employers' re-

luctance to hire them and deepens their nega-

tive self-perception, dampening their interestin trying to seek jobs in the marketplace. And

in some communities where higher-payingmanu facturing jobs have disappeared and been

replaced by the low-wage service sector, black

men's dissatisfaction with their jobs aggra-vates their ability to get and hold employment.

EApandthg opportunities and choice

Is the only choice to improve the inner city orhelp people move out -t No, not in the view of

many participants. A goal that resoundedthroughout the conference is to enable indi-viduals to exercise choices not only aboutwhere they live, but also about how they live.Expanding on this notion, Edelman arguedthat "to give people the wherewithal to get out

of the inner city, you have to take the samesteps and pursue the same policies as to theinner city itself that you would take if you were

going to try to create a viable communitythere." Good schools, decent health care,accessible employment, good housing, effec-

tive law enforcement, renewed developmentstrategies, and improved services for families

are necessary either way. For youths, mentors

and role models can help them envision path-

ways to a fuller life.

Working with all levels of government

Another recurring theme of the conference is

the need to address state and national policywhile working in communities. Federal re-

trenchment has placed enormous decision-making authority at the state level for pro-grams and resource allocation directly affect-ing the well-being of poor families and therenewability of inner-city communities. Andthe federal government, despite its fiscalabandonment of the cities, retains responsi-bility for ensuring equity and social justice. Itis thus critical to hold policymakers account-able at all levels of government and to applythe lessons of local strategies and experience to

public policy.

Conclusion

Private investment and nonprofit activitieswill not cure poverty, but they can generatenew ideas and renewed commitment, develop

and enhance leadership opportunities, andfacilitate the diffusion of knowledge gainedfrom local experience. Each initiative has f.c)s-

tered innovative ways to think about the politi-

cal, economic, social, and cultural dynamics of

neighborhoods and communities and aboutways of developing their opportunity and sup-

port structures. Each has been a catalyst fornew community-based priority-setting mecha-

nisms and innovative approaches to usingpul arc and private resources more effectively.

Each is giving voice to the needs, perceptions,

and energies of neighborhood residents. Andthrough collaborations and new coalitions,each has mobilized new allies for change and

deepened the dedication of many who havelabored to improve the quality of life of people

in poverty.

This cadre of local leaders has both endur-

ance and experience. And through exposureto each other and to other cities' initiatives at

this conference, they gained support from one

another and strengthened the voice for change.

in the face of poverty's continuing assault onfamilies and communities and the increasing

deterioration of neighborhoods, that alone isworth celebrating. Even more valuable, how-ever, are the opportunities to build on theirknowledge and to hone the lessons from their

experience to advance a national agenda forchange. Above all, the conference was anaffirmation that community-based strategiesare essential for remedying long standing prob-

lems of poverty in America's cities.

4 OVERVIEW

Ersonotei dress

Industrial restructuringseverely curtailed theoccupationaladvai...ement of themore disadvantagedurban minoritymembers

KEYNOTE ADDRESS

Race, class, and poverty in urbanAmerica: A comparative perspectiveWilliam Julius Wilson

My remarks this evening-----on the differences

among blacks, whites, and Mexican Ameri-cans will be based mainly on research that I

and members of my research team have been

conducting in Chicago since 1986. Our re-

search project is called the Chicago UrbanPoverty and Family Life Study. It includesthree surveys. One is of 2,495 African Ameri-

can, Hispanic, arid white households inChicago's poor neighborhoods, conducted in

1987 and 1988. A second is of a subsample of

175 respondents from the larger survey whowere reinterviewed with open-ended ques-tions solely on their perceptions of the oppor-tunity structure and life chances. The third isa stratified random sample conducted in 1988

of 185 employers, designed to reflect thedistribution of employment across industryand firm size in the Chicago metropolitanarea. The project also includes comprehensive

ethnographic research, including participant-observation research and life-history inter-views conducted by ten of my research assis-

tants in 1987 and 1988 in a sample of theinner-city neighborhoods.

inner-city blacks versus immigrantethnic groups

A familiar and convenient argument is ofteninvoked to explain the different labor-market

success of recent immigrants and inner-cityblacks: because immigrants have higher rates

of employment despite less formal education,the high and growing jobless rate amonginner-city blacks is voluntary. The counter-argument is that the current ;obless rateamong inner-city blacks is an indication ofincreased racism. But the issues are far more

complex than those implied in these assump-tions. Some fundamental differences between

blacks and, say, immigrant Mexicans have tobe taken into account, including neighbor-hood differences. I explore some of thesedifferences by focusing first on variations in

ethnic group experiences with a changingnational economy.

Economic restructuring and inner-city employment

In 1974, 47 percent of employed black malesaged 20-24 held blue-collar, semiskilled ma-

chine and skilled craft positions that typically

earned wages adequate to support a family. By

1986 that figure had plummeted to 25 per-cent. Industrial restnicti firing severe) curtailed

the occupational advancement of the moredisadvantaged urban minority members. John

Kasarda's research shows-that "the bottom fell

out in urban indtistrial demand for poorlyeducated blacks" (1989, p. 35), particularly in

the goods-producing industries, in northeast-ern and midwestern cities.

Data from our large survey show thatindustrial restructuring has hampered effortsby out-of-school inner-city black men to ob-tain blue-collar jobs in the industries thatemployed their fathers. 'Mc most commonoccupation reported by the cohort of respon-dents at ages 19 -28 changed from operative

and assembler jobs among the oldest cohorts

to service jobs (waiters and janitors) amongthe youngest cohort" (Testa and Krogh 1989).

Occupational shifts in Chicago reflect these

changes. More than 10,000 manufacturingestablishments operated within the city limitsin 1954, employing a total of 616,000, includ-ing nearly half a million blue-collar or produc-

tion workers. By 1982 the number of plantshad been cut by half, providing a mere 277,000

jobs and fewer than 162,000 blue - collar jobs-

a loss of 63 percent. Substantial cuts in trade

employment accompanied the decline of thecity's industrial base. Retail and wholesale lost

more than 120,000 jobs from 1963 to 1982.The mild growth in service employment fell far

short of crwlpensating for the collapse ofChicago's low-skilled employment pool. Theeconomic recovery from 1983 to 1987 was not

6 RACE, CLASS, AND POVERTY IN URBAN AMERICA: A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE

sufficient to offset the devastating employ-ment losses during the recession-prone yearsof the 1970s (Wacquant and Wilson 1989).

In our Chicago study, both black men andblack women said that more of their friendshave lost jobs because of plant closings thandid Mexican Americans and the other ethnicgroups. Moreover, almost half ofblack fathers

and 40 percent of black mothers stated thatthey were at high risk of losing their jobsbecause of plant shutdowns. Only a third ofthe Mexican American parents, a quarter orwhite fathers, and 20 percent of white mothers

felt this way.The combination of industrial restructur-

ing and periodic recessions has thus had amuch more devastating impact on black males,particularly young black males, than on other

groups. Whereas blacks *re pushed out ofmanufacturing into personal service jobs, la-boring jobs, and joblessness, Mexican Ameri-cans held onto their manufacturing jobs more

often and for longer periods of time. Whites,by contrast, were also forced out of manufac-turing but were more successful than blacks infinding other sources of employment, such asskilled trades and nonlaboring jobs.

The spatial mismatch between central-city residence and the location of employmenthas aggravated the employment problems ofinner-city blacks. Studies based on data col-lected before 1970 did not show consistent orconvincing effects on black employment fromthis spatial mismatch (see, for example,Ellwood 1986). But the employment of inner-city blacks relative to suburban ones has clearlydeteriorated since then (Holzer 1990). Re-cent research by urban and labor economistsshows that the decentralization of employ-ment is continuing. Employment in manufac-

turing, most of which is already suburbanized,has decreased in central cities, particularly inthe Northeast and Midwest. Blacks living incentral cities have less access to employmentas measured by the ratio of jobs to people andthe average travel time to and from workthan do central-city whites. Unlike most other

groups of workers, less-educated central-cityblacks receive lower wages than less-educatedsuburban blacks. The decline in earnings ofcentral-city blacks is positively associated with

the extent of metropolitan job decentraliza-tion (I lolzer 1990).

Blacks clearly see a spatial mismatch ofjobs. Both black men and women saw greaterjob prospects outside the city. For example,only one-third of black fathers from ghettopoverty areas (areas with poverty rates of at least

30 percent) reported that their lx-st opportunities

for employment were in the city. More than 60percent of whites and 54 percent of MexicanAmericans in similar neighborhoods felt this way.

An economic structural argument helps:xplain the loss of black and white jobs inmanufacturing and the changes in employ.nent op. artunities, including spatialchanges.

ut it does not account for the success ofMexican Americans in holdingonto manufac-turing jobs or in finding employment morequickly even though they have considerablyless formal education than either blacks orwhites. It also does not explain why inner-citywhites who have also lost manufacturing jobsare more successful than blacks in findingother employment. There are other socialstructural variables that pertain to neighbor-hoods, social networks, and households, andthese have yet to be considered.

The relevance of neighborhoods,social networks, and households

The neighborhoods, households, and socialnetworks of blacks and Mexican immigrantsdiffer in ways that distinctly affect employ-ment and labor force participation.' "Both

male and female Mexican immigrants living inpoverty areas are employed at higher ratesthan similar blacks" (Van I laitsma, p. 6).Although Mexican Americans and blacks "face

the same industrial mix and broad labor mar-ket conditions, the immediate social environ-ments in which the two groups cluster are not

the same" (Van I Iaitsma, p. 2).Blacks tend to live in neighborhoods with

much higher concentrations of poverty thaneither Mexican Americans or whites. As timehas passed, these neighborhoods have experi-enced increasing social disorganization. Con-sider, for a moment, the changes in the com-munity of Woodlawn, on the South Side ofChicago. In 1950 it had more than 800 com-

%lost of the Mexican Anwricans in our study were inunigrants.Our sample was restricted to poverty areas areas with poverty

rates of at least 20 percent. In I hicago. Mexican immigiants arccomentrated more heavily in poverty areas than in nonpovertv

areas.

RACE, CLASS, AND POVERTY IN URBAN AMERICA: A COMPARNME pERspcnvEr

Blacks clearly see aspatial mismatch of jobs

7

The neighborhoods,households, and socialnetworks of blacks andMexican immigrantsdiffer in ways thatdistinctly affectemployment and laborforce participation

8

inercial and industrial establishments. Todayonly about a 100 arc left, many of them "tinycatering places, barber shops, and thrift storeswith no more than one or two employees"(Wacquant, p. 17).Wacquant continues: "Theonce-lively streetsresidents remember atime, not so long ago, when crowds were sodense at rush hour that one had to elbow one'sway to the stationnow have the appearanceof an empty, bombed-out war zone. The com-mercial strip has been reduced to a long tunnelof charred stores, vacant lots littered withbroken glass and garbage, and dilapidatedbuildings left to rot in the shadow of theelevated train line. At the corner of 63rd Stn.

and Cottage Grove Avenue, the handful ofremaining establishments that struggle to sur-vive are huddled behind wrought-ironbars....The only enterprises that seem to bethriving are liquor stores and currency ex-changes, these 'banks of the poor' where onecan cash checks, pay bills and buy moneyorders for a fee" (pp. 17-18).

Like many other inner-city neighborhoodsof Chicago, Woodlawn first experienced alarge outmigration of whites. A substantialexodus of black working-class and middle-class families followed. These changes signifi-cantly altered the class structure of the neigh-borhood. I have advanced the theoretical ar-gument that the outmigration of higher-in-come families increased the social isolation ofinner-city neighborhoods (Wilson 1987). So-cial isolation deprives residents of certain in-ner-city neighborhoods not only of resourcesand conventional role modelswhose formerpresence buffered the effects of neighbor-hood joblessnessbut also of cultural learn-ing from mainstream social networks thatfacilitates social and economic advancementin modern industrial society.

Black neighborhoods have a greater effecton their residents because they are so heavilyimpoverished. Unlike blacks in Chicago, Mexi-

can Americans seldom reside in neighbor-hoods with poverty rates that exceed 40 per-cent. Blacks are not only disproportionatelyconcentrated in these extreme-poverty neigh-borhoods, they are also disproportionatelyconcentrated in neighborhoods with rates ofpoverty that exceed 30 percent.

Our data suggest that the concept of socialisolation is most usefully conceived as "sus-

taining poverty in three dimensions" (Pedder,p. 37). First, social isolation operates in theblack neighborhood through the lack of ac-cess to resources provided by stable workingresidents. Such resources include informal jobnetworks and stable neighborhood institu-tions. In the Chicago black ghetto neighbor-hoods that we studied, social contacts were farmore successful in helping residents gain in-formal work to help make ends meet than inobtaining steady employment; networks ex-isted but generally lacked the capacity to el-evate residents into the formal labor market.For example, black men and women in oursample are less likely to report that they re-ceived help from a friend in obtaining theircurrent job. Also, both black males and blackfemales use the public transit system moreoften than Mexican Americans, who rely moreheavily on carpooling. "Both carpooling andhaving obtained a job with the help of a friendare indications that Mexican American work-ers often work with friends" (Van Haitsma, p.17).

The second dimension of social isolationemerges in the concentration of nonworkbehavior in response to the limited socialresources that created the first dimension. Inenvironments with high concentrations ofnonwork behavior, there are more hurdles inthe path that leads to the formal labor market,and pressures increase to pursue alternativemodes of subsistence, including welfare, in-formal activity, drug dealing, and other illegalactivities.

The third dimension of social isolationoperates through geographical isolation, ex-pressed in feelings of confinement to theghetto neighborhood and exclusion from otherneighborhoods. This geographical isolation inblack ghetto neighborhoods produces realsocial isolationin the segregation of resi-dents from new job opportunities in the sub-urbsand psychological social isolationinfeeling cut off from the rest of the city.

Just as there are differences between theneighborhoods and social networks of blacksand the other ethnic groups, so too are theredifferences in household. Black women facefar greater challenges in the household.Whereas 44 percent of black women livingwith their children have no other adults in thehousehold, only 6.5 percent of comparable

RACE, CLASS, AND POVERTY IN URBAN AMERICA: A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE

Mexican American women have no otheradults in the household. Moreover, blackwomen whose coresident children are un-der 12 years of age are eight times morelikely than comparable Mexican women tolive in a single-adult household. "Networkdifferences translate into childcare differ-ences. Mexican women with young childrenare significantly more likely than their blackcounterparts to have regular childcare pro-vided by a relative or friend" (Van I laitsma,p. 16).

The high percentage of black motherswho live with young children in single-adulthouseholds is associated with problems oflabor force attachment. Our research revealedthat if a single mother lives in a coresidentialhousehold and receives informal child sup-port, she significantly improves her chances ofentering the labor force. Among the mothersnot receiving AFDC, those who lived in acoresidential household and received infor-mal child care had a 90 percent probability oflabor force activity. By contrast, those wholived in single households and did not receiveinformal child care had only a 60 percentprobability of working. And, of the women onAFDC who candidly reported that they workedat least part time, probably in the informaleconomy, those who lived in a coresidentialhousehold and received informal child carewere more than five times more likely to workas those who lived in single households anddid not receive informal child care.

I previously noted that recent structuraleconomic changes have clearly had an adverse

effect on the employment experiences of in-ner-city blacks, but that a purely structuraleconomic explanation for black economic woes

is not sufficient. "Were pure market forcesresponsible for the observed differences inemployment statuses," Tienda and Steir (1991)

argue, "Latinos should experience the highestlevels of labor market hardship in Chicago,and particularly those of Mexican origin who,in addition to (having] very low levels ofeducation, often lack adequate language skillsowing to the recency of their migration to theUnited States."

The issues I have just explored take usbeyond a discussion of pure market forces.They show that inner-city blacks reside inneighborhoods and arc embedded in social

networks and households that arc less condu-cive to employment than are the neighbor-hoods, networks, and households of the otherethnic groups, especially the immigrant Mexi-cans. What has not been addressed is howmainstream interpretations of these ethnicdifferences influence decisions about employ-mentdecisions that can reinforce orstrengthen the weak labor force attachment ofinner-city blacks and how other factors con-tribute to this as well. This brings us to themeaning and significance of race.

The meaning and significance of race

Years ago, when black males sought jobs,employers checked mainly their strength andstamina. Industries that involved strenuouswork readily employed black men. Our datashow that 51 percent of Chicago's employedinner-city black males born between 1941 and1955 worked in manufacturing industries in1969. By 1987 that figure had plummeted to29 percent. Of those horn between 1956 and1968, 46 percent worked in manufacturingindustries as late as 1974. By 1987 that figurehad declined to 25 percent.

These employment changes accompaniedthe loss of traditional manufacturing and otherblue-collar jobs in Chicago. As a result, youngblack males turned increasingly to low-wagelaborer and service sector jobs for employ-mentor went jobless. But, as stated previ-ously, the economic structural argument doesnot account for the greater success of the otherethnic groups in holding onto these jobs asthey declined or in finding other employmentwhen their industries shut down. I have partlyaddressed this problem in our research on theinfluence of different racial and ethnic neigh-borhoods, social networks, and households.Let us now consider the significance of race.

As one inner-city manufacturer from ourstudy put it, "when we hear other employerstalk, they'll go after primarily the I lispanic andOriental first, those two, and, I'll qualify thateven further, the Mexican I Iispanic, and anyOriental, and after that, that's pretty much it,that's pretty much where they I;ke to draw theline, right there" (oral interview). Interviews ofa representative sample of Chicago-area em-ployers by our research team show that manyconsider inner-city blacksespecially young

The high percentage ofblack mothers who livewith young children insingle-adult householdsis associated withproblems of labor forceattachment

RACE, CLASS, AND POVERTY IN URBAN AMERICA: A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVI 9

These strong negativeviews of black menhave only recentlyemerged

black malesto be uneducated, unstable,uncooperative, and dishonest. For example, asuburban drugstore manager said: "It's unfor-tunate but, in my business 1 think overall[black men] tend to be known to he dishonest.I think that's too had but that's the image theyhave. [interviewer: "So you think it's an imageproblem?"] "Yeah, a dishonestan imageproblem of being dishonest men and lazy.They're known to he lazy. They are [laughs]. Ihate to tell you, but it's all an image though.Whether they are or not, I don't know, but it'san image that is perceived." [Interviewer: "Isee. How do you think that image was devel-oped?"] "Go look in the jails [laughs]" (oralinterview).

The employer-survey data reveal that ra-cial stereotyping is greater among those Chi-cago employers with lower proportions ofblacks in their workforce, especially the blue-collar employers who tend to sr rcss the impor-tance of unobservable qualities such as workattitudes. As one respondent states: "The blackwork ethic. There's no work ethic. At least atthe unskilled [level]. I'm sure with the skilledas you go up, it's a lot different" (Neckerrnanand Kirschenman 1990).

Given such attitudes, the lack of blackaccess to informal job networks is a particularproblem for black males, as revealed in thefollowing comments by an employer: "All of asudden, they take a look at a guy, and unlesshe's got an in, the reason why I hired this blackkid the last time is cause my neighbor said tome, yeah I used him for a few [days], he'sgood, and I said, you know what, I'm going totake a chance. But it was a recommendation.But other than that, I've got a walk-in and whoknows? And I think that for the most part, aguy sees a black man, he's a bit hesitant,because I don't know" (oral interview).

I low and why have such attitudes devel-oped? The success that black men had inobtaining manufacturing and other blue-col-lar jobs in previous years suggests that thesestrong negative views have only recentlyemerged. Our data show that of the employedmen in the 1941-55 age cohort from poorChicago neighborhoods, the proportion ofblacks in manufacturing and construction wasonly slightly below that of whites and higherthan that of I lispanics in 1974. In addition, theproportion from the 1956-69 birth cohort was

considerably above that of Puerto Ricans andwhites and only slightly below that of MexicanAmericans in 1974.

Regardless of the timing, many inner-cityblack residents share the employers' percep-tion of black men. Responses from our smallersurvey of open-ended questions (Social Op-portunity Survey) and from our ethnographicfield interviews reveal a consistent pattern ofnegative views on inner-city black males, espe-

cially young black males.The residents are aware of the problems of

male joblessness in their neighborhoods. Forexample, more than half the black respon-dents from neighborhoods with poverty ratesof at least 40 percent feel that very few or noneof the men in their neighborhood are workingsteadily. More than a third of the respondentsfrom neighborhoods with poverty rates of at least

30 oercent expressed that view. Forty percent of

the black respondents in all neighborhoodsfeel that the number of men who are workingsteadily had decreased over the past ten years.

Some provide explanations that acknowl-edge the constraints black men face. An em-ployed 25-year-old unmarried father of onechild from North Lawndale states: "I know alot of guys that's my age, that don't work andI know some that works temporary, but wannawork, they just can't get jobs. You know, theygot a high school diploma and that... but thething is, these jobs always say: 'Not enoughexperience.' I Iow can you get experience ifyou never had a chance to get any experi-ence?" (oral interview).

Others, however, express views that echothose of the employers. For example, a 30-year -old married father of three children wholives in North Lawndale and works the nightshift in a factory states: "I say about 65 percentof black males, I say, don't wanna work, andwhen I say 'don't wanna work' I say don'twanna work hardthey want a real easy job,making big bucksSee? And, when you starttalking about hard labor and earning yourmoney with sweat or just once in a while yougotta put out a little hit you know, that extraeffort, I don't, I don't think the guys reallywanna do that. And sometimes it comes from,really, not having a, a steady job or, really, notbeing out in the work field and just been sittin'hack, being comfortable all the time and hang-

ing out" (oral interview).

Io RACE, CLASS, AND POVERTY IN URBAN AMERICA. A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE

;71

A 35-year-old welfare mother of eightchildren from the neighborhood of Englewoodstates: "Well, I mean sec you got all thesedudes around here, they don't even work, theydon't even try, they don't wanna work. Youknow what I mean, I wanna work, but I can'twork. Then you got people here that, in thisneighborhood, can get up and do somethin',they just don't w,anna do nothin'they reallydon't" (oral interview).

The deterioration of the socioeconomicstatus of black men may he associated withincreases in these negative perceptions. Arethese perceptions merely st'yeotypical, or dothey have some basis in fact? Data from ourlarge survey show that social context variables(neighborhoods, social networks, and house-holds) account for substantially more of theemployment gap between black and MexicanAmerican men than the attitude variables.Moreover, data from the survey reveal thatblack men have a lower "reservation wage"than men of the other ethnic groups. Whereaswhite fathers expected over $9.00 per hour asa condition for working, black men were will-ing to work for considerably less than $6.(X). The

reservation wage of Mexican American jobless

fathers was $6.20.But surveys are not the best way to get at

underlying attitudes and values. So, to gain abetter grasp of values and attitudes, our projectincluded ethnographic research that involvedestablishing long-term contacts and interviews

with residents from several neighborhoods.Analysis of the ethnographic data reveals iden-tifiable and consistent patterns of ethnic groupbeliefs. Black men arc more hostile than theMexican American men almt the low pavingjobs they hold, less willing to he flexible intaking assignments or tasks not consideredpart of their job, and less willing to work ashard for the same low wages. These contrastsare sharp because many of the Mexican Ameri-

cans interviewed were recent immigrants.There are "several important reasons why

immigrants, particularly third world immi-grants, will tolerate harsher conditions, lowerpay, few upward trajectories, and other job-related characteristics that deter native work-ers, and thereby exhibit a better `work ethic'than others" (Aponte, p. 41). Two of thesereasons were uncovered in our ethnographicdata. Immigrants are harder workers because

they "come from areas of intense poverty, andeven boring, hard, dead-end jobs (in the UnitedStates 1 look, by cont rast, good to them" (Taub,

p. 14 ). They also fear being deported if they do

not find employment.The inner-city black men strongly feel that

they are victims of discrimination. They com-plained that they get assigned the heaviest ordirtiest work on the job, are overworked, andare paid less than nonblacks. The immigrantMexicans also report that they feel exploited,but they tend to express the view that this is tobe expected because of the nature of the job.Richard Taub, a researcher on our project,argues that the inner-city black men have agreater sense of "honor" and often see thework, pay, and treatment from bosses as in-sulting and degrading. Accordingly, a height-ened sensitivity to exploitation increases angerand a tendency to "just walk off the job."

One cannot understand these attitudes,and how they developed, without consideringthe growing exclusion of black men fromhigher-paying blue-collar jobs in manufactur-ing and other industries and the increasingconfinement to low-paying service jobs. Manylow-paying jobs have predictably low reten-tion rates. There was a respondent in ouremployer survey who reported turnover ratesthat exceeded 50 percent in his firm. Whenasked if he had considered doing anythingabout this problem, the employer acknowl-edged making a rational decision to tolerate ahigh turnover rather than to increase the start-ing salary and improve working conditions toattract higher-caliber workers. I le stated: "Ourpractice has been that we'll keep hiring and,hopefully, one or two of them are going towind up being good" (Neckerman, p. 7).

"This employer, and others like him, canafford such high turnover because the work issimple and can he taught in a couple of days.On average, jobs paying under $5.00 or $6.00an hour were characterized by high quit rates.In higher-paying jobs, by contrast, the propor-tion of employees resigning fell to less than 20percent per year" (Neckerman, p. 8). Yet ourdata show that the number of inner-city blackmales in the higher-paying positions has sharply

declined. As black males are increasingly dis-placed from manufacturing industries, theiroptions are becoming confined to low-payingservice work. Turnover rates of 50 to 100

The inner-city blackmen strongly feel thatthey are victims ofdiscrimination

ItACE, CLASS, AND POVERTY IN (JOAN AMERICA: A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTI \'E I I

Residence in highlyconcentrated povertyneighborhoodsaggravates the weaklabor force attachr?,mtof black males

percent are common in low-skilled servicejobs in Chicago.

The attitudes that many inner-city blackmales express about their jobs and job pros-pects thus reflect their plummeting position ina changing labor market. The more they com-plain and manifest their dissatisfaction, the lessdesirable they seem to employers. They there-fore experience greater discrimination whenthey seek employment and clash more oftenwith supervisors when they find it. For all these

reasons, it is important to link attitudinal andother cultural traits with structural realities.

Residence in highly concentrated povertyneighborhoods aggravates the weak labor forceattachment of black males. The absence ofeffective informal job networks and the preva-lence of many illegal activities increasenon mainstream behavior such as hustling.The restructuring of the economy will con-tinue to compound the negative effects of theperceptions of inner-city black males. Becauseof the increasing shift to service industries,employers have a greater need for workerswho can effectively serve the customer. Be-cause employers perceive black men to hethreatening and dangerous, it is reasonable toassume that they would prefer black women insituations that "involve presentation of thefirm to the public" (Kirschenman, p. 17).

But the restructuring of the urban economycould also have long-term consequences forinner-city women. A change in work cultureshas accompanied the transformation of theeconomy, resulting in a mismatch between theold and new ways of succeeding in the labormarket. In other words, there is a growingdifference between the practices of blue-col-lar and service employers and those of white-collar employers. This mismatch is importantfor understanding the labor market success(or failure) of inner-city workers.

Low-skilled individuals from the inner-city tend to be the children of blue-collarworkers or service workers, and they havework experience confined to blue-collar orservice jobs. The question is, "what happenswhen employees socialized to approach jobsand careers in a way that make sense in a blue-collar or service context enter the white-collarworld?" (Neckerman, p. 18). The employerinterviews suggest that workers from blue-collar or service settings seek positions that

carry entry-level salaries, that pr, 'ide all thenecessary training on the job, ana that grantprivileges and promotion by both seniorityand performance. But when they move to awhite-collar setting, inner-city workers faceentry-level positions that require more andcontinuous training, employers who are look-ing for energetic, intelligent individuals withgood language skills, and promotions thatseldom depend on seniority or occur at regularintervals. Accordingly, the occupational suc-cess of inner-city employees may depend on"subtle standards of evaluation, and on behav-ior that is irrelevant or even negatively sanc-tioned in the blue-collar and lworki servicesettings" (Neckerman, pp. 27-28).

Interviews with disadvantaged workersrevealed that most recognize the changing natu re

of the labor market and that a greater premium is

placed on education and training for success,but many "did indeed espouse blue-collarwaysof getting ahead" (Neckerman, p. 27 ).

The challenge for policymakers

In summary, the issue of race and employmentcannot be simply reduced to discrimination.Although our data suggest that blacks, espe-cially black males, have experienced increaseddiscrimination since the mid 1970s, the rea-sons include a complex web of interrelatedfactors, including some that are race-neutral.

The loss of traditional manufacturing andother blue-collar jobs in Chicago resulted inincreased joblessness among inner-city blackmales and a concentration in low-wage, high-turnover laborer and service-sector jobs. Em-bedded in ghetto neighborhoods, aetworks,and households that are not conducive toemployment, inner-city black males fall fur-ther behind their white and their I Espanicmale counterparts, especially when the labormarket is slack. "Mexicans and Puerto Ricanscontinue to funnel into manufacturing be-cause e:, iployers prefer I iispanics over blacks,and they like to hire by referrals from currentemployees, which Hispanics can readily fur-nish, being already embedded in migrationnetworks" (Krogh, p. 12). Inner-city blackmen grow bitter about and resent their em-ployment prospects and often manifest thesefeelings in their harsh, often dehumanizing,low-wage work settings.

12 RACE, CLASS, AND POVERTY IN URBAN AMERICA: A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE

't

Their attitudes and actionscombinedwith erratic work histories in high-turnoverjobscreate the widely shared perceptionthat they are undesirable workers. The per-ception then becomes the basis for employerdiscrimination that sharply increases when theeconomy is weak. This discrimination gradu-ally grows over the long termnot only be-cause employers are turning more to the ex-panding immigrant and female labor force,but also because the number of jobs thatrequire contact with the public continues toclimb.

The position of inner-city black women inthe labor market is also problematic. Theirhigh degree of social isolation in impoverished

neighborhoods, as reflected in social networks,reduces their employment prospects. AlthoughChicago employers consider them more desirable as workers than they do inner-city blackmen, the women's social isolation is likely toheighten involvement in a work culture that isnot conducive to white-collar employment. Inaddition, impoverished neighborhoods, weaknetworks, and weak household supports de-crease their ability to develop language andother job-related skills necessary in an economy

that rewards employees who can work andcommunicate effectively with the public.

Segregation in urban ghettos created theneighborhoods, households, and networks thathandicap inner-city blacks. Neither MexicanAmericans nor whites are as concentrated asblacks in high-poverty and extreme-povertyneighborhoods. The significance of segrega-tion for inner-city blacks has in,..reasecl follow-

ing the outmigration of higher-income work-ing and middle-class families from the mostimpoverished neighborhoods.

As we approach the end of the twentiethcentury, the problems of poverty, joblessness,and social isolation in the inner-city ghettoremain among the most serious challengesfacing municipal and national policymakcrs inthe United States. A successful public policyinitiative to address these problems requires aclose look at the declining labor-market op-portunities for the truly disadvantaged. It alsorequires a close look at the declining socialorganization of inner-city neighborhoods thatreinforces the economic marginality of theirresidents.

William Julius Wilson is the Lucy Flower Uni-vercity Professor of Sociology and Public Polity

at the University of Chicago.

Papers from the Chicago Urban Povertyand Family Life Conference (October 10-12, 1991, Chicago, Illinois) cited in thispresentation:

Aponte, Robert. "Ethnicity and Male Em-ployment: A Test of Two Theories."

Fernandez, Roberto M., and David I larris."Social Isolation and the Underclass."

Hick-Bartlett, Sharon. "A Suburb in NameOnly: The Case of Meadow View."

Kirschenman, Joleen. "Gender Within Racein the Labor Market."

Krogh, Marilyn. "A Description of the WorkI listories of Fathers in the Inner City ofChicago."

Laseter, Robert L. "Black Men: Work andFamily Life."

Lundgren-Gaveras, Lena. "Informal NetworkSupport, Public Welfare Support, and theLabor Force Activity of Urban Low-In-come Single Mothers."

Neckerman, Kathryn M. "What GettingAheadMeans to Employers and DisadvantagedWorkers."

Pedder, Sophie. "Social Isolation and theLabour Market: Black Americans in Chi-cago."

Sosin, Michael. "Concentration of Povertyand Social Isolation of the Inner-CityPoor."

Taub, Richard. "Differing Conceptions ofHonor and Orientation Toward Workand Marriage Among Low-Income Afri-can Americans and Mexican Americans."

Tienda, Marta, and I Iaya Stier. "Making aLivin': Color and Opportunity in the InnerCity."

Van I laitsma, Martha. "Attitudes, Social Con-text, and Labor Force Attachment: Blacksand Immigrant Mexican Americans in Chi-

cago Poverty Areas."Wacquant, Loic J. D. "The Specificity of

Ghetto Poverty: A Comparative Analysisof Race, Class, and Urban Exclusion inChicago's Black Belt and the Parisian RedBelt."

The issue of race andemployment cannot hesimply reduced todiscrimination

RACE, CLASS, AND POVERTY' IN URBAN AMERICA: A COMPARATIVE PERSPECITVE 13

14

References

Ellwood, David T. 1986. "The Spatial Mis-match hypothesis: Arc There TeenageJobs Missing in the Ghetto?" In The BlackYouth. Employment Crisis, ed. Richard B.Freeman and tinny J. I lolzer, pp. 147148. Chicago: Universityof Chicago Piess.

I Iannerz, Ulf. 1969. Soulside: Inquiries intoGhetto Culture and Community. New York:

Columbia University Press.lolzer, I Iarry.J. 1990. "The Spatial Mismatch

I lypothesis: What I las The EvidenceShown?" Paper presented at a conferenceon The Truly Dicaclvantaged, Northwest.cm University, October.

Jaynes, Gerald David, and Robin Williams Jr.,eds. 1989. A Common Destiny: Blacks andAmerican Society. Washington, D.C.: Na-tional Academy Press.

Kasarda, John D. 1989. "Urban IndustrialTransition and the Underclass."Annals ofthe American Academy of Political and So-

cial Schwa' 501 (January): 26-47.Kirschenman, Joleen, and Kathryn

Neckerman. 1991. " `We'd Love to I lireThem, But...': The Meaning of Race for

Employers." In The Urban Underclass, ed.Christopher Jencks and Paul Peterson.Washington, D.C.: Brookings InstitutionPress.

Neckerman, Kathryn M., and JolcenKirschenman. 1990. "Statistical Dis-crimination and Inner-city Workers: AnInvestigation of Employers' I firing Deci-sions." Paper presented at the AnnualMeeting of the American SociologicalAssociation, Washington, D.C., August11-15.

Testa, Mark, and Marilyn Krogh. 1989. "TheEffect of Employment on Marriage AmongBlack Males in Inner-City Chicago." Un-published manuscript, University of Chi-cago, Chicago, lllinois.

Wacquant, Loic J.D., and William Julius Wil-son. 1989. "Poverty, Joblessness, and theSocial Transformation of the Inner City."In Welfare Policy kr the 1990's, ed. DavidEllwood and Phoebe Cottingham, pp. 70-102. Cambridge: I Iarvard University Press.

Wilson, William Julius. 1987. TheThclyDirad-vantaged: The Inner City, The [Wert-lass,and Public Policy. Chicago: University ofChicago Press.

RACE, CLASS, AND P()VERTY IN URBAN AMERICA: A COMPARATIVE PERSPEC1WE

"Changeimprovingthe quality of life for allour citizens --can besustained only if weorganize from theneighborhood level upto bring about thestructural social andeconomic changes andto create a moreequitable and caringsocietv.''

Ronald Shijfinan

SESSION 1

Neighborhoods as an entry pointfor changePresente Ronald Shiffinan, Executive Director, Pratt Institute, Center for Community and Environ-

mental Development, Brooklyn

Moderator; Arthur J. Naparstek, Director, Cleveland Commission on Poverty

Panelists; Tom Cox, President, Neighbwooel Progrez, Inc., Cleveland, Tom Dalton, City Manager,Little Rock; David Glover, Executive Director, Oakland Citizens Committee for I Irban Reneunal;Ralph Knighton, Executive Director, North Hartford Development Corporation

"Policies should flow from community needs.And reforms must flow from decisions madeand priorities set at the local level." ArtNaparstek opened the first session by statingthat this is what the Ford, Casey, and Rock-efeller projects arc all about--local strategiesfor social change that have national implica-tions.

The Ford, Casey, and Rockefeller projectsfocus on local communities and neighbor-hoods because they are the arena where indi-viduals and families live and where largerforces and policiesfor investment, develop-ment, education, service delivery, socializa-tion--are played out. Ronald Shiffman arguesthat it is critical for neighborhoods to developthe organizational and political capacity -individually and collectively---to make local,regional, and national governments respon-sive and accountable to the needs of localresidents and their communities. For him, theneed to organize locally is predicated on em-powering people and their communities tobuild two structures: "the internal social, po-litical, and organizational base to address prob-

lems on the ground, and the political basethrough which substantive social, political,and economic change can be achieved at alllevels of government, particularly at the fed-eral level."

Shiffman suggested that when we talk ofself-sufficiency, self-reliance, and empower-ment, we must be clear that these conceptsdepend on government responsibility to ad-dress fundamental social, political, and eco-nomic inequities in our society. Empoweringneighborhoods, and the poor and other disen-franchised populations, means enabling them

to make informed choices among viable alter-natives and to have the political and economicability to realize those choices.

Tom Cox differed in the emphasis givento addressing the economic needs of a neigh-borhood as opposed to advocating politicalchange. I le concluded that since city, state,and federal governments keep changing therules, neighborhoods have to figure out howto survive no matter what set of public policiesis in place. Neighborhoods should organizetheir activities around transactionssavingschools, developing businesses, building hous-ing. Shaman and David Glover do not be-lieve that it is a contradiction to try to changepublic policy while engaging in day-to-daytransactions in the neighborhood. Shillmannoted that community organizing in Chicagogave birth to the antiredlining movement across

the country, which led to the I lome MortgageDisclosure Act and the Community Reinvest-ment Act. Organizing at the neighborhoodlevel created a national framework for encour-aging banks to invest in neighborhoods. Thesefederal acts made available the financial re-sources we use today to rebuild neighbor-hoods.

Community development andintegrated neighborhood planning

A traditional area of community activity sincethe 1960s, explained Shill-man, has been com-munity development corporations. Despitethe withdrawal of government support, manylocal development organizations were able tocarry out successful development-related ef-forts. But they were often responses to exter-

IBORI 1001)S AS AN ENTRY POINT FOR CI IANGE

nally defined standards of need, accountabil-

ity, and productivity rather than activities thatemerged from plans developed to meet locally

determined needs and priorities. The resultwas greater emphasis on development as an

end-product.Shiffman suggested that sustainable com-

munity development requires comprehensive

and holistic interventions that recognize arange of community needs --social, economic,

physical, cultural, spiritual, politicalas wellas opportunities for personal, group, and com-

munity growth. Its success is measured inbenefits accruing to the community as a whole

rather than to any individual, set of individu-als, or sector. This underlying philosophy and

the resultant integrative approach are oftennot consciously unde"stood by planners, do-

nors, grants officers, and government officials

who view things programmatically and cat-egorically. But it is embraced by neighbor-hood residents.

Art Naparstek asked the panel, "What are

the keys to getting residents involved in some-

times tedious long-range planning necessary

for sustainable change?" Ralph Knighton re-sponded that you can start with somethingsmall, such as neighborhood clean-up, andbuild up to something big, such as a commu-

nity development corporation. Ile empha-sized that it is important to start with an action-

oriented event to get people interested andthen use that opportunity to talk to themabout their experiences and problems.Knighton reinforced Shiffman's point that"the empowerment of neighborhood residents

means that people can make informed choices

and develop the political and economic will to

realize change. This empowerment comesabout by exposing people to the systems and

activities that will allow them to make those

decisions."Glover emphasized that it is critical to

meet residents where they liveno matterhow they define their neighborhood. Anotherimportant element in getting residents in-volved in long-range planning is to make plan-

ning a proactive and meaningful exercise by

involving them in gathering information andassessing needs. Residents should also be in-

volved in sharing this information with othercommunities and with people they do notregularly interact withto form multiethnic,multicultural collaborations.

Shiffman suggested that a "visioning" pro-

cess could be used to develop comprehensive

plans to address the myriad problems facingcommunities. Often structured to jump intothe future to disarm those who come to thetable with their own agenda, this process uses

dialogue groups to talk out vital issues ofconcern to the community. Once a vision for

the future is agreed to, discussion can shiftback to the present without risking domina-tion of the dialogue by narrow interests--possible because people have learned to trust

each other and because consensus has been

reached on long-term goals.Tom Dalton explained that in Little Rock

they use a bwom-up planning process thatinvolves the entire community. A steeringcommittee and a number of task forces maxi-

mize the number of people involved. Thought

of as strategic planning for a public corpora-tion, the process can he long, but it bringspeople to the table who have never been there

before. Knighton explained that in I lartfordthe private sector is taking the lead in a vision-

ing process that involves all sectors of thecommunity in developing a plan for I iartford

Prerequisites to progressive social change

Obtain a political mandate to undertakean aggressive planning process with an agree-ment to respect that process.

Agree on a set of goals and a commonvision of what is to be accomplished.

Establish a community-based planning anddevelopment entity that is accountable to itsconstituency and is recognized by a varietyof the area's stakeholders.

Select and engage in a planning process

that is inclusive and participatory.Select a mode of intervention that is com-

mensurate with the community's organiza-tional capacity and its ability to influencedecisions.

Commit to a continuity of effort overtime and demand from public and privatesources the resources needed to carry outthat commitment.

It is important to startWith an action-orientedevent to get peopleinterested and then usethat opportunity to talkto them about theirexperiences andproblems

NEIGI MORI 100l)S AS AN ENTRY POINT FOR CI FANG': 17

If you can getpartnerships aroundcommon services., youcan move to the conceptof a shared revenuesource

and the regionthus giving all residents asense of ownership in the future of their city.

Mustafa Abdul-Salaam from New I lawnasked: "I low do you get prolessioi ails to buyinto a long-range planning process? I low doyou get professionals to realize the impor-tance of building relationships and trust withneighborhood residents and to respect whatthey bring to the table?" Because profession-

alseven community organizerscan be-come removed from the communities theyrepresent, Glover urged that professionals be

taken out of their environment and to meetresidents where they live. Such a hands-onapproach builds trust. But, as Shit lman noted,

there arc no training programs for community

organizing, and its importance in buildingstrong vehicles for change has not been recog-

nized.

Issues of choice and unintendedoutcomes

The maximization of individual and collectivechoice, one major objective of progressivechange, t ranslates the neighborhood level into

two interrelated goals. The first is to enhance

people's ability to choose by providing theopportunity structures to enable them to stay

or leave. The second is to enhance people'sability to choose by eliminating obstaclescrime, poor schools, dirty streets, lack of de-cent and affordable housingthat deterpeople from moving into the area or upwardly

mobile residents from remaining. These twogoals can be achieved by closely linking eco-

nomic and social investment strategies.Little Rock's history of trying to balance

economic and social development is some-

what different from that in other cities, ex-plained Tom Dalton. Through aggressive an-

nexation, the city has captured much of thesuburban growth to protect its municipal taxbase---and many of those who usually leavethe city as they become economically mobile.

Dalton believes, however, that some neigh-borhood strategies seem to go against thenatural trends of mobility. In Little Rock, theissue is how to offer the same mobility tominorities who want to move into newer areas

and how to stop the decline in older neighbor-

hoods. All sectors of the city are learning that

they are in this together and that they need to

find solutions together. 'lire goal is to diversifythe entire population base. One way to de-velop a common ground that will get inner-city

residents and residents of outlying areas tocooperate and begin to work together is through

specific functions that they sharetransport,utilities, planning. If you can get partnershipsaround common services, you can move to the

concept of a shared revenue source.

I Ienry Moore noted that Savannah isdoing similar things but still losing populat ion.

l le asked, "What can we do about the nega-tive perceptions of city neighborhoods?"Dalton said that there is an amazing lack oftrust between blacks and whites, betweenlower- and upper-income people, and among

established public agency representatives and

neighborhood leaders. They all share the prob-

lems of drugs, crime, housing, and jobs, butthe impact in low-income neighborhoods isdevastating. I le argued that you have to bring

issues of race and racism to the planning table.

As part of the visioning process, they pulledtogether data on gains and losses in the Little

Rock region. The public found out that there

Participatory planning processes should focus on theneed:

To undertake community planning.To organize internally and externally to

bring about change.To identify internal and external strengths

and weaknesses.To coordinate existing activities when-

ever and wherever possible, recognizingthat there will be differences among manyof the organizations and a need by some toretain their autonomy.

To integrate strategies and program ini-tiatives to maximize potential outcomes.

To establish systems of evaluation andfeedback, particularly those that reinforcepositive outcomes and relationships, and torethink those activities that do not work.

To understand the interdependence be-tween local initiatives and the macro-politi-cal environment and to try to engage onboth the micro and macro level.

NEIGI IBORI LOOM AS AN ENTRY POINT FOR CI LANGE

was decline in live of the eight planning sec-tors--black and whiteand that Little Rockis as racially segregated as it was in I 980. This

information led to public awareness that ev-eryone is connected with everyone else andthat the solutions must include them all,

Shiffrnan agreed on the need for greaterrecognition of the interrelationships of thecentral city and the surrounding suburbs, and

Little Rock shows that much of this recogni-tion means overcoming ignorance and atti-tucks. If low-income communities are notseen as second-rate communities, you can get

rid of exclusionary zoning, link downtowndevelopment with affordable housing devel-opment, allow for a diversity of incomes, and

build cultural and commercial centers in theneighborhoods.

Community change througheconomic development

One way to make communities desirable isthrough community economic development,

and one important element of communityeconomic development as a neighborhoodstrategy is money, according to Tom Cox. ifyou look at the history of cities, ethnic enclaves

often mobilized capital through instrumentsof various kindsshowing how economicdevelopment must begin with a capital mobi-lization strategy that fits the community, Asecond important element of community eco-

nomic development is knowledge and tech-nology. Economic development cannot bejust setting up storefront businesses or devel-

oping products that are not linked to growingindustries. Neighborhoods must figure out away to link their development to the globaleconomy.

Knighton emphasized that economic de-velopment must be comprehensive, coopera-

tive, and sequential, with a host of factorsaddressed simultaneously. Commercial revi-talization must start with the private sector but

have the support of the city and the public.The housing stock has to be stabilized, andpeople have to be ready to take new jobs and

support the economic development efforts.Clover believes that expanded commu-

nity education is required to meet this chal-lenge. Neighborhoods must he involved inlocal and state pol icy decisions that give incen-

tives for development in the local communi-ties. Municipalities must be committed tolinking emerging jobs in the area to the neigh-

borhoods, and employment training must helinked to emerging job markets. For this tohappen, mutual support and understandingbetween public officials and neighborhoodsmust be nurtured and sustained. Neighbor-hoods are more powerful than they realize and

can hold public officials accountable.

Dalton warned, however, that economicdevelopment ventures cannot be too site-specific. I le believes disinvestment will con-

tinue in cities unless there is an urban strategy

for the entire city, which would require afundamental rethinking of federal policiesthat have led to categorical programs. Com-munity economic development will not workuntil you get mote money into the hands ofpeople in poor communities.

Elements of a nationalurban policy to meet thechallenges of a globaleconomy

Invest in public school systemsfrompreschool to retraining workers.

Invest in infrastructure to create jobs,rebuild roads, build housing, build and ex-pand public transit, address environmentalpollution and environmental racism.

Invest in health care.Invest in the cultural identity of our coun-

try.Build cities with global or regional spheres

of influence.

There needs to begreater recognition ofthe interrelationships ofthe central city and thesurrounding suburbs

NEIGI IBORHOODS AS AN ENTRY POINT FOR CHANGE 19

-E

"There exists in poor andinner-city communitiesthe same spectrum ofintelligence, talents,

character; wisdom, andstamina as existsanywhere in the oursociety. What is missing is

the opportunity, theexposure, the support, thewherewithal, the models,the expectation ofpossibilities. "

Namibia CardenasRamirez

SESSION 2

The implications of an asset orientationfor urban change strategiesPresentm i3landbla Cardmas Ramirez, DiraiorCouthuvst Center JOr Values, Achicimmt, andCommunity in Education, Couthtvest 7ims State University, ,San Marcos, Taws

Moderator: Susan Motley, Director, Neighborhood and Family Initiative, Center for Community

Change, Washington, D.C.

PanebSts: Sarah Ann Ford, Project Coordinato, Milwaukee Foundation; Grant Jones, Co-Director,The Piton Fmindation Poverty Project, amyl.; Stan I !viand, Chair of Anthropology Department,Memphis State Ilniversity Janis Parks, Executive Director, Baltimore City Family Pre.vervatamInitiative

"For the past twenty years, most of us havebeen involved in defining, measuring, research-

ing, and in other ways characterizing dysfunc-tion, disorganization; and distress. ...A seriousand critical examination of assets and oppor-tunities is needed to identify potential, toharness that potential. and to direct its actual-ization." 'Ills, according to Susan Motley, wasthe challenge that the panelists addressed inthis session and that Blandina Cardenas Ramirez

took up in her presentation. Ramirez asked,"I low do we identify -and make visible forpurposes of urban change systemsthe oftenintangible assets in a community? I low does acontext that recognizes both assets and needscause us to rethink both our prop.= strategiesand our advocacy? I low do we evaluate theeffectiveness of what we do in this new context?"

An asset orientation

The concept of an asset orientation drawsheavily on John McKnight's work that focuseson a neighborhood's assetsrather than itsdeficitsas a basis for development and re-newal. it also draws heavily on the familyresource

movement's principles of universality and fam-

ily strengths. Although McKnight's emphasisis on a community's quantifiable assets, Ramirez

focused on an analysis of the often intangiblehuman assetsin Jividual, family, and com-munitythat exist in every community.

Ramirez sdoke about recent innovationsin education as an example of the shift from adeficit orientation to an asset orientation. Thenation's education system has operated on the

assumption that "ability equals achievement."The response has been a massive investmentin efforts to remedy deficits in the studentrather than deficits in the approach to educa-tion. Recent successes in the education ofdisadvantaged and minority youth show thathigh expectations, strong preparation, andsupport systems sensitive to the cultural, familial,

at id socioeconomiccircumstancesof the popu-lation are prerequisites to success. These prin-ciples are valid not only for education. Theyapply to any human development activity fordisadvantaged and minority populations.

An asset orientation for urban changestrategies is not new, according to Ramirez.For vears, most human development entre-preneurs have spoken of "strengths" as well as"needs." The problem has been that there wasan incentive to paint the bleakest picturepossible to justify a response. Jonesagreed, saying that the more oe works inneighborhoods, the more he believes thatthere are no new ideas, only ideas for the righttime, place, and people. People from theneighborhoods understand and embrace anassets approach. The challenge for profession-als is figuring out how to use an assets approach

to fashion policy and program responses.Angela Blackwell of Oakland stated that

the asset approach may not be new but it feelsrevolutionary. The I lealthy Start Initiative, inOakland, adopted an asset approach, and thecommunity is coalescing around this issue inways they never have because "they feel goodabout talking about what is good about them."Blackwell and Jones agreed that it is critically

20 TI IE IMPLICATION'S OF AN ASSET ORIENTATION FOR URBAN CI IANGE STRATEGIES

important to hear the voices of the people inthe neighborhoods and that an asset approachallows those voices to be heard.

Defining an asset

An asset approach begins with the acquisitionof information about the context. Stan I Iy landnoted, as did Ramirez, that one of the mostdifficult assets to define and inventory is thecultural context for other assets. They believethat one of the weaknesses of McKnight'sasset inventory (or capacity mapping) is itsemphasis on assets that are easily quantified.n the Orange Mound neighborhood of Mem-

phis, Hyland explained, the first things thecommunity defined were the neighborhood'shistory and its pride in that history. They didnot begin with an inventory of businesses.

Ramirez's experience also suggests that inmulticultural urban communities asset invento-ries must be approached in a culturallycongruent

manner. To do this, it may be useful to inven-tory assets and frame responses from threeperspectives: individual, family, and the im-mediate community. One of the most importantassets of a community is institutionalized cul-tural affirmationpublic events and ritualsthat validate a community and its strengths.According to Ramirez, "The presence of cul-turally appropriate mirrors of a communityensures that children understand they are part

Mapping community capacity

Primary Building BlocksIndividual Assets

Skills, talents, and experiencesCitizens associationsIndividual businessesHome-based enterprisesPersonal incomeGifts of labeled people

Organizational AssetsAssociations of businessesCitizens associationsCultural organizationsCommunications organizationsReligious organizations

Secondary Building BlocksPrivate and Nonprofit Organizations

Higher-education institutions

of a historical continuum. This gives them asense of hope and trust in their own initiative."

Maria Carrion of Boston suggested thatyou have to look at both the assets of acommunity and at the cultural assets of agroup. Groups are at different stages of his-tGrical development, and there is uneven de-velopment of institutional assets in culturalcommunities. Some of them are fairly welldeveloped with sophisticated leaders and in-stitutions, while others are not. Carrion explained

that you need to look not only at the unevendevelopment, but you should also ask whycertain things developed and not others. Anexample is the Latino media. It is so well devel-oped in the United States not because theLatino community is well developed but be-cause companies could not sell anything ad-vertised in English to the Latino community.

Implications for programs

In Denver, according to Jones, the emphasishas been on breaking down the insulation ofneighborhood residents that prevents themfrom being heard. Instead of talking to serviceproviders as if they were the spokespersons forthe neighborhoods, the Piton Foundation hasset up two neighborhood leadership develop-ment institutes to develop the voices of neigh-borhood residents. The institutes address twovital assetsrelationships and trustby in-

HospitalsSocial service agencies

Public Institutions and ServicesPublic schoolsPoliceLibrariesFire departmentsParks

Physical Resources

Vacant land, commercial andindustrial structures, housing

Energy and waste resources

Potential Building BlocksWelfare expendituresPublic capital improvement

expendituresPublic information

Source: John L. McKnight ant, john P. Kretzmann, Mapping Community Capacity, (Evanston. III.: Center for Urban Affairs

and Policy Research, Northwestern University, 1990).

The asset approach maynot he new but it feelsrevolutionary

IE IMPLICNI'IONS 01 t AN ASSET ORIENTATION FOR URBAN CI IANGE S'wkATEo 1Es 21

Some people in thesystem are not excitedabout an asset approachbecause it will changethe way money comesinto the neighborhoods

creasing citizen participation and strengthen-ing the ability of people in neighborhoods tosolve problems and work together. Jones ar-gued that as program operators, public offi-cials, and foundation grant officers, we oftenask that neighborhood residents trust that wewill act in their best interest. Often, however,we need to show more reciprocity of thattrust--that we trust residents to participate inthe decisionmaking for their communities.

Jones believes that one way to organizearound assets is to ask what the residentsvalue. Just because a business or church is inthe neighborhood doesn't mean it is an asset.Sarah Ford explained that their initiative inMilwaukee is organized so that every stake-holderwhether the residents control theasset or notsits at the table and the groupcomes up with joint solutions.

Janis Parks explained that the BaltimoreCity Family Presmation Initiative began withan inherent belief in the strengths of familiesand the community. Its goals are to makedecisions on an interagency basis and to movedecisionmaking to the local level, to serve families

in a noncategorical way by having a caseworker address the total needs of the family,and to invest not in crisis management but inprevention. In Milwaukee, Ford has foundthat you can get human service agencies to thetable, but that this type of human servicesystem reform is difficult to sell. She believessome people in the system are not excited aboutan asset approach because it will change theway money comes into the neighborhoods. Inthe current system, the money goes to theagency rather than the consumer. Ford ex-plained that they want to bring the resources to

the people in Milwaukee's neighborhoods, whocould then shop around I the best service.Mustafa Abdul-Salaam of New I laven agreedthat the human services do not see residents asconsumersrather they dictate what residentsneed and do not cater to their interests.

I lyland noted that an asset approach alsohas implications for program evaluation. Al-though asset analysis has been around for along time, an academic industry is predicatedon deficiency analysis. So, not only does theacademic community want to protect jobs butalso agencies want to control information."I'm defining the problems, hence you as neigh-borhood people arc dependent on me," I lylandcontinued. Agencies want nice, clean baselinedata to show program effectiveness. Culture isnot baseline data. Culture is stories, culture isheroes, culture is a set of orientationsthisdoes not lend itself to helping someone getahead in an agency or get reelected. Theadvocates of assets analysis will be the neigh-borhood residents. The question becomes,I low do we institutionalize an asset approach?

Another question is, I low do you sell anasset approach? Ramirez suggested that cre-ative packaging is crucial. In San Antonio,Partnership for I lope's profile of the commu-nity was titled "Pride and Poverty." This titlejuxtaposed the asset with the need, changingthe character of the discussion. The challengeis to develop language that is asset-focused,not to romanticize problems. Another chal-lenge is to avoid "creaming" because it is easyto work with people and organizations thathave obvious and apparent assets. An assetapproach has to look deeper, and this is why it

is difficult to describe and sell.

Denver neighborhood leadership development institutes

Mission statement and objectives developedby the residents who were part of planningthe Institutes:

The concept of the West Side Neighbor-hood Leadership Program is built on thenotion that indigenous leadership is a keyelement in the future of our community. Theproject is designed by and is focused to servethe residents of the West Side neighborhood.The program is built on the assumption thatpeople are our neighborhood's most impor-tant resource. The purpose of the leadershipprogram is to do five things:

To strengthen the neighborhood by devel-oping individual and group problem-solvingskills.

To expand the level of participation by neigh-borhood residents in the issues of the commu-nity.

To develop skills that will help people in theneighborhoods to speak for themselves.

To encourage coordination, linkage, andnetworking among neighborhood residents ininitiatives that influence their environment.

To build a spirit of community and unity.

'111E IMPLICATIONS OF AN ASSET ORIENTATION FOR URBAN (:I IANGE STRATEGIES

SESSION 3

Structuring effective communityservicesPresenter: Audrey Rowe, Commiirioner, Connecticut Department of Income Maintenance

Moderator: Otis S. Johnson, Executive Director, Chatham-Savannah Youth Futures Authority

Panelists: Angela Glover Blackwell, Executive Director, Urban Strategies Council, Oakland; DonCrag, Executive Director, Nev Futures for Little Rock Youth; Donna Stark, Stale Director, Childrenand Family Services Initiative, Malyland; Carrie Thornhill, President and Project Director, TheCommittee on Strategies to Reduce Chronic Poverty, Washington, D.C.

Otis Johnson opened this session by stating:"Families are the building blocks of societyand its greatest asset.... It is in the best interestof a society to invest in families." AudreyRowe's presentation looked at this issue ofinvesting in families in the context of recentshifts of responsibility from the federal gov-ernment to the states and the search for alter-native funding and structures for services.Rowe asserted that the recent attention givento urban communities presents us with an"opportunity to infuse some new ideas intostate and local governments as they framestrategies and responses." The question be-comes how to frame the appropriate response.

Building on family and communitystrengths

In Connecticut and other states, successfulprograms build on the strengths of familiesand communities, empowering them as anintegral aspect of program activity. Rowe isworking to develop community-based sys-tems that govern the development and deliv-ery of services and that provide and nurtureaccess to them. Rowe has found that this kindof system needs to be flexible, available, andaccountable to the population it hopes toserve, and it must base its work on the needsof its clientele. Such a system requires mecha-nisms whereby the resident can contribute tothe development, planning, and delivery ofnecessary services.

Rowe has also found that by involving andshowing fundamental respect for children,families, and community members, successful

programs have had a demonstrable impact onthe willingness of the hardest-to-reach fami-lies to seek services independently. Programswith community involvement also build a cadreof community leaders capable of bringingabout change. In communities suffering a lossof cohesion and infrastructure, building a coregroup of leaders can be as vital a goal as themore immediate need to get basic services tofamilies in need. Indeed, Rowe believes thatusing service delivery to build communityleadership may be a basic condition for suc-cessful service delivery.

Johnson explained that one fundamentalproblem is that we do not have family-cen-tered policies at any level of government.Policies that meet the needs of families wouldencompass social services, education, hous-ing, recreation, economic development, andso onall rolled into a family-centered policy.Such a policy would acknowledge that strongfamilies build strong communities and indi-vidualsand that strong communities pro-vide supports for families.

The policy challenge, concurred ArtNaparstek, is to develop a policy frameworkthat strengthens communities. Naparstekurged the conference participants to think ofthe policy implications of strengthening com-munities. Strengthening communities requiresa holistic view of how policy issues are inter-connectedfamily development, health, edu-cation, transportation, economic development,and so on. Naparstek believes that the chal-lenge is to see communities as the context forthese issues. If we do not, Naparstek fears thatother policies, such as vouchers and choice,

STRUCTURING EFFECI1VE COMMUN11Y SERVICES 23

"The thing we have toremember is that theloss of cohesion andinfrastructure in ourcommunities did nothappen yesterday. Andwe can not resolve theproblem before electionday. It is going torequire rolling up oursleeves and beingprepared for a muchlonger involvement anda much more intensiveinvolvement torestructure communityservices."

Audrey Rowe

Collaboration, far morethan coordination,offers the possibility ofreal and systemicmovement toward thecreation of integrated,community-basedservices

will weaken our cities and further isolate poor

neighborhoods.

Structuring an appropriate response

"Collaboration, coordination, and integrated

services at the local level for poor familiesappears to he the new rallying cry of profes-

sionals working in human services," Rowenoted. "Interest in this approach is also found

within city halls, statehouses, and governors'

offices."An example of a state-sponsored collabo-

rative initiative is the Coordinated Education

and Training Opportunities (CETO) grant,being implemented by the State Departmentof Education in Connecticut. The result of ayear of cooperative planning at the state and

local level, CETO has a funding structure and

planning process to promote local decision-making in the delivery of education and train-

ing services to disadvantaged populations. Itsframework promotes a comprehensive plan-ning model for the delivery of services through

a regional, client-centered system operatedthrough an area collaborative.

The success of the CETO initiative raisesquestions about the need to move beyondcooperation in devising effective, comprehen-

sive service delivery strategies. Cooperativeventures engage in networking and informa-

tion sharing to try to match needs with re-sources. Collaborations, by contrast, establish

common goals and mutual agreements forresource allocationand then plan, imple-ment, and evaluate the joint effort. The advan-

tage of collaborative initiatives is the possibil-

ity for restructuring resource allocation, pro-gram design, and service delivery. Rowe con-cluded that collaboration, far more than coor-

dination, offers the possibility of real andsystemic movement toward the creation ofintegrated, community-based services.

Another rallying cry of human service pro-

lessionals has been decategorization of funds

getting rid of the multiple funding streams for

programs that serve families. Donna Starkexplained that Maryland has passed legisla-tion that decategorizes all of the home place-

ment dollars for keeping families togetherto develop a system of family workers whobelong to a community. With flexible dollars,these family workers will have the capacity to

respond to the spectrum of needs of thefamilynot just to one person .vithin a family.

In responding to a question about one-stop shopping centers for family services, Stark

argued that the key is developing the technol-ogy to provide seamless delivery of services at

the community levelnot just having dis-jointed programs lumped together in one lo-cation. Esther Bush offered the Urban League

of I Iart ford's GED program as an example of

one-stop shopping. The program deals withthe total needs of a family--helping a spouseget a job, providing day care, offering emer-gency grants, and so on. Its success would he

even greater if it did not have to deal withmultiple funding streams.

Carrie Thornhill also noted that you needto look at the motives behind support for one-

stop shopping centers. In D.C., while theobjective to provide integrated and compre-hensive services is a major concern, the driving

force behind one-stop shopping centers is the

need to reduce space leased around the city by

the D.C. government.Sid Gardener challenged the panel by

asking if they were really in favor of decate-gorized funding where communities are ac-countable for outcomes. 1 Ic believes that many

people delivering community services havetheir lifeline tied to categorical funding andthat they may he troubled by havinc4 theirfunding based on outcomes. Stark explainedthat in Maryland it has become a matter ofredefining good outcomes: "I think you areabsolutely right that in state governments out-

comes have been based on dollars spent, not

on impact on families and communities." Thiskind of redefinition of outcomes is a difficultstrategic change for state governments andmeets with a lot of resistance and caution. Anew definition of outcomes has to he built on

trust that a family really can change, that acommunity can define its own needs, that alocal government structure can support acommunity's interest in change, and that the

state government has the responsibility tosupport all of this.

Don Crary is more in favor ofdecategorized

thinkingbyservice providers hut he believeswe are a long way away from that right now. "I

have real concern that if we get at the funding

first and we still have categorical thinking and

problem identification as a way of working

24 STRUCNURING EFFECTIVE COMN1UNrr1' simIcEs

with people in communities, I don't think wewill get anywhere. I think there is a process weneed to go through to give workers the skills to

do family assessments with the family, torespect the family, and to empower the familyto help shape what they want to do with theirlives and determine how the money gets used."

As a first step, states could dccategorize fundsfor programs that take a holistic approach inserving families, such as the GED program inHartford.

Johnson believes that through true col-laboration, we can reach agreement ondecategorized funding. When the various par-ties of a community come together to build acollective vision, they realize th-- 'ne agency,

group, or individual cf:t tnere alone. Agree-

ments can be made to pool resources to reachthe vision. And according to Angela Blackwellthis process does not have to happen slowly.When a critical mass of people and knowledgecomes together at the right time, agreementscan be made about problems and answers.

Naparstek offered a caution: there couldbe two traps in this new notion of multiservice.

One is that there are governors and otherswho will make "political hay over spending anickel or two on these new services while theycut welfare payments and other programs."The second is the "magic bullet" trap that thisnewly constructed vision of family services will

solve everything. The danger, he believes, isthat people in poor urban communities lackfundamental things, such as jobs and safety,that human services agencies may not ad-equately address.

Johnson and Blackwell agreed withNaparstek that we have to keep our eye on thewhole picturefamily services, education,jobs, safety, and so on. Blackwell quoting thedirector of Oakland's health department said,"It wasn't services that got them into poverty,and it won't be services that gets them out ofpoverty." Rowe noted that state economicdevelopment strategies are focused on busi-ness development and on job cr..!ation for

those already in the labor market--they donot see the welfare population and those onother types of assistance as their responsibility.

Stark agreed that state agencies lack a sense ofjoint responsibility for the situations our fami-lies are in. Johnson thought that this stemmedfrom a program focus on individuals instead offamilies or communitiesprograms do not ad-dress the interconnections in people's lives.

Engaging the stakeholder

Rowe often thinks that the most difficult taskin collaborative initiatives is identifying thestakeholders and the real neighborhood lead-ers who should be at the tableand getting aconsensus once you get them to the table."Potential participants must come to regardthe benefits of community-based initiatives asoutweighing the perceived advantages of con-tinued autonomy and independence. This shiftin perception is crucial to the long-term viabil-ity of community-based initiatives," accordingto Rowe. Collaboration and consensus meanthat everyone at the table has to give upsomething. The real needs of the communitycan often get lost when the stakeholders fightto stay autonomous.

Another dilemma, pointed out by Rev.Thompson of Bridgeport, is that there has tobe a balance among the stakeholders, espe-cially when there are not enough funds tosupport the level of services a communityneeds. When an initiative such as New Fu-tures comes into a community with a budgetmuch higher than the city's human servicesbudget, there is a perceived imbalance ofpower. Rev. Thompson asserted that in suchcases the community may want to have moresay in how the initiative's money is spent. Stark

also thought it important to ask about upset-ting the balance of power in decisionmaking.The program in Maryland is trying for systemic

change that puts all the resources into one pot,with all the stakeholders then deciding to-gether what the spending priorities should be.

The most difficult taskin collaborativeinitiatives is identifyingthe stakeholders and thereal neighborhoodleaders who should beat the table

; jSTRUCTURING EFFECTIVE COMMUNITY SERVICES 25

"Our vision should beof a single, unified,diverse society in whichdiversity is a value to berespected andencouraged."

Peter Edelman

SESSION 4

Dealing with race and ethnicity inurban change strategies

Presenter. Peter B. Edelman, Professor, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, D.C.

Moderator: James 0. Gibson, Director of Equal Opportunity Program, The Rockekller Foundation

Panelists: Esther Bush, President and Chiefaecutive Officer, Urban League of Greater liar/kid, Inc.;Rose Dwight, C017111111114 Educator, Planned Parenthood, Dayton; Frieda Garcia, ExecutiveDirector, United South End Settlements, Boston; Choco Gonzalez: Meza, Executive Director,Partnership for Hope, San Antonio

"Our willingness now to directly address racialissues is a healthy departure from the past.Understanding and respecting race andethnicity are absolutely critical in all of thework that we do." So established Jim Gibsonas he opened the fourth session of the confer-ence. Peter Edelman highlighted severalthemes from his paper underscoring thatintegration and celebration of ethnic and ra-cial history should coexist, operative racismhas not been legislated out of existence, rac-ism must once again become part of publicdiscourse, and coalitions for communitychange should be cross-disciplinary andmultiethnic.

Reframing the discussion on poverty

Edelman's paper emphasized the need to domore about telling the American people thefacts about race, poverty, and racism. Heargued that we need to frame the discussionon poverty and urban change strategies in thebroadest possible terms. At the same time, weneed to put the discussion of racism back intoour public debate.

Rose Dwight commented on the percep-tion that the poor tend to live in the inner cityand that they disproportionately tend to hepeople of color. She noted that through herown experience as an Appalachian growing upin West Virginia and moving to a midwesterncity, she has seen poverty conditions experi-enced by many white urban Appalachians, agroup little known to the American public.Dwight stated that the majority of the approxi-

mately 5 million Appalachians that migratedto urban areas between 1940 and 1970 haveachieved economic success. But about 30percent of the Appalachians in midwesterncities like Cincinnati and Chicago are lan-guishing.

Ronald Mincy of the Urban Institute ech-oed Dwight's concern that the discussion ofpoverty is too frequently framed as a minorityand urban issue. Because of that, Americansarc subject to cultural and racial explanationsfor poverty and social distress. He stressedthat foundation-sponsored research shouldnot overlook groups like Appalachians andmust let people know that there are poor andsocially distressed white people. The povertyand social distress in large cities have to belinked with poverty in small cities and in ruralareas to illustrate how pervasive are structuralforces that buffet low-skilled people.

Connecting cities and suburbs

In the effort to reframe the discussion onpoverty. Edelman posed the question: Can weget suburban support for an urban changeagenda? While conceding that this is a difficultquestion and not an easy sell, Edelman sug-gested ways to get support as a political matter.

The first is to package messages that appeal tothe self-interest of suburbanitessuch as thepromotion of economic growth and tax fair-nessand second to educate suburbanitesabout how America needs the best from all itspeople to he productive and competitive intoday's global economy.

26 DEALING WITH RACE AND Eli INICITY IN URBAN CI IANGE STRATEGIES

Alice O'Connor of the Social ScienceResearch Council speculated that anyone inNew York City on the Friday after the RodneyKing verdict would not have held much hopefor this strategy. She described how suburbanprofessionals abandoned the city at midday,frightened by rumors of an impending riotrumors that encompassed blatant racial andclass stereotypes. She asked Edelman to offerconcrete strategies for building coalitions withsuburbanites, and inquired about whethernew strategies to reduce segregation should bedeveloped or whether older strategies shouldbe invigorated in an effort to promote integra-tion.

Edelman responded to the first questionby admitting that he had no solutions, addingthat working with central-city populations hasceased to he a part of the nation's politicalagenda. The only way that poverty issues cannow be addressed is by packaging them as partof larger issues. He suggested that detachedsuburbanites may begin to see that their long-term interests are better served by remainingconnected to inner-city people and issues.Edelman also noted that the Supreme Courthas cut off most metropolitan desegregationstrategies involving litigation. FIe suggestedthat the kind of work being done by the FairEmployment Council offered a new form ofintegration strategy by addressing the ques-tion of discrimination in the workplace.

Esther Bush asserted that cities and sub-urbs have no choice but to work together toresolve urban problems. She mentioned thatsuburbanites and city dwellers in the I Iartfordarea have a common interest in maintaining avibrant downtown. Bush also mentioned thatshe has heard less discussion lately aboutintegration and more about ensuring equalresources within segregated communities."People are starting to feel okay that someschools are all black, provided they have theexact same resources as the white schools.Nothing gave me a stronger cultural base thangoing to [historically black] Morgan StateUniversity. People should have the option tosend their children to all types of schools, andeach community should pursue its own solu-tions."

Art Naparstek of Cleveland added thatwhen dealing with issues of pluralism anddiversity, communities should identify local

issues and seek out state and national solu-tions. Ile suggested that community activistsand policymakers could learn from the civilrights movement, when local problems wereidentifiedblack people couldn't eat at cer-tain lunch counters, couldn't vote in certainprecinctsand national solutions were sought.

Supporting urban economicdevelopment

In examining community development strat-egies, Bush argued that the phenomenon ofracism in America must be thoroughly ex-plored because it deals not only with discrimi-nation but also with the distribution of powerand control of resources. She advised thatadvocates and activists keep this power dy-namic in mind when developing programs andpolicies.

Mincy agreed that Bush had defined animportant issueracism is about power. Hefurther asserted that serious deliberadons aboutpoverty must consider minority economicdevelopment, a subject that had been littlediscussed during the conference. Mincy in-sisted that academics, activists, andpolicymakers are fighting a losing battle if theonly way they will engage in a process ofeconomic development is through a public-sector, human services orientation.

He reminded the group of William JuliusWilson's keynote address that examined theimplications of "a new discrimination." Wil-son descra- 2d a set of employment outcomeswherein young blacks, males in particular,were discriminated against not exclusivelybecause of their race but because they dis-played workplace behaviors that employersfound unacceptable. Mincy added that otherstudies have shown that some employers re-cruit Mexican and Puerto Rican workers toreplace black workers. Therefore, he arguedthat race-neutral strategies designed to stimu-late aggregate demandstrategies intendedto encourage employers to hire more work-erswill not help enough blacks achieve suc-cess in the workplace.

I Iowever, Edelman argued, we need tocontinue to pursue antidiscrimination efforts.People should have real options about wherethey live, work, and go to school. Edelmanagreed that an urban agenda should include

When dealing withissues of pluralism anddiversity, communitiesshould identify localissues and seek out stateand national solutions

DEALING wm RACE AND Eli INICTIY IN URBAN CI !AWE STRATEGIES 3 27

Professional andmiddle-income blacksmust seek more avenuesto interact withnonprofessional andlow-skilled blacks,particularly youths

neighborhood-specific policies, but we alsoneed broad integrative policies. Policies thatcan create viable inner-city communities arethe same policies that give people the where-withal to make real choices.

Ronald Homer reinforced Mincy's com-ments and added a related anecdote. Homerrecounted that several years ago while he wasvisiting Jerusalem, a Jewish friend explainedto him just how important the state of Israel isto Jews around the world. In the height ofemotion, his friend declared, "Ron, you haveto understand our need for our own nation,our own military, our own place where we canbe Jews. Otherwise we'll he just like you blackpeople." I- omer said that comment reallystruck horn because, Homer conceded, "hewas right."

Homer insisted that "African Americanprofessionals embrace black urban communi-ties as our own Isracls" and that all AfricanAmericans Should respond to and interactwith these communities the way that Jewsrespond to Israel. He concluded that blackAmericans should value government programs,foundation support, and private enterprise inblack communities to the degree they em-power African Americans as they strengthentheir own communities.

Angela Blackwell of Oakland added thatAfrican American professionals need to lookseriously at neglected commercial strips inblack communities and plan to replace theabandoned storefronts with a variety of busi-nesses. Blackwell cited research indicatingthat 33 percent of the businesses launched inmiddle-income commercial corridors routinelyfail. Yet only 15 percent of the businesses ineconomically blighted areas founder, indicating a good potential source of economic powerfor inner-city neighborhoods. Furthermore,according to Mincy, small business is thebiggest employment growth sector, and mi-nority-owned small businesses tend to employminority workers. Minority economic devel-opment is critical to the employment of moreyoung black workers, Mincy concluded.

Uniting professional and poor urbanyouth

Bush noted that many middle-class AfricanAmericans have moved away from largely

black urban areas and have placed their chil-dren in private schools. She emphasized thatthe growing classism within the African Amen-can community should be addressed throughredoubled efforts from black professionals toreach out to non-professional black youth andfamilies. Bush maintained that peer pressurefrom other poor people and fear of successcombine to keep people clinging to povertybecause it is familiar. Black professionals canplay a major part in breaking that cycle.

Mincy agreed that professional and middle-

income blacks must seek more avenues tointeract with nonprofessional and low-skilledblacks, particularly youths. lie explained thatinformal tutelage in proper workplace behav-ior, job networking, and other sharing of "soft"workplace skills used to occur in black com-munities before they became segregatedalong class lines. But now, Mincy main-tained, professional and employed blacks aredecreasingly perceived as mentors and in-creasingly functioning as the custodians ofnonprofessional and low-skilled blacks. Mincyillustrated that this occurs in the juvenile jus-tice system, in which blacks are employed asdistrict attorneys locking up black youths; inthe educational system, in which blacks areemployed as teachers, often ashamed of whatblack youths are doing and unable to relate tothem. Choco Meza disclosed that in someI lispanic communities we also see profession-als moving out, leaving poor, nonskilled youths

with a lack of role models.

Increasing personal interactionacross racial and class boundaries

An important lesson for any initiative in neigh-borhood development, according to Edelman,is inclusiveness. Echoing Audrey Rowe's pa-per, Edelman suggested that to achieve broad-based support you have to build multiethniccoalitions. A critical question, as suggested byRowe, is identifying who should be at thetable. And once you get to the table, how youobtain consensus.

To highlight one city's approach to explor-ing racial and ethnic issues, Frieda Garciadescribed the work of the Boston PersistentPoverty Project. Garcia recounted that theProject convened 43 individuals representingeconomic and ethnic diversity, and expertise

28 DEALING WITI I RACE AND ETI INicrrY IN URBAN CI LANGE STRATEGIES

and leadership in the problem solving. Projectactivities included group retreats and otheropportunities for group members to get toknow each other. During the sometimes pain-ful sessions involving close personal conversa-tions, it became clear that many had experi-enced poverty and racism. Garcia related thatthrough this sharing "the boxes we put aroundourselves and others began to fall away." Ad-ditionally, a series of roundtahles centered ondifferent ethnic groups, and a series of focusgroups targeted specifically to poor peoplewere conducted to gather information aboutthe differences and similarities among groupsexperiencing poverty.

Garcia recounted that during the week-end following the disturbances in Los Angelesafter the Rodney King verdict, many ralliesand meetings were held in Boston. Garcia wasstruck by how these rallies and meetings re-flected of the city's different ethnic groups.Representatives from Boston's Asian, I Iis-panic, black, and white communities seemedto share a greater consciousness that povertyproblems cut across ethnic groups, althoughsome groups feel and experience poverty is-sues more acutely. Garcia suggested that insome measure this awareness was a result ofthe Boston Persistent Poverty Project's workover the previous year.

Chance Brown of the Ford Foundationdiscussed prevailing attitudes about youngAfrican American males. From his perspectiveas a member of that group he has recognizedan "industry" in academia specializing in nega-

tive research on the problems ofAfrican Ameri-

can males, but asserted that asset-based re-search is definitely the way to go. He describedmeetings he had conducted with young blackand Latino high school students about theireducational and life choices. Brown notedthat although many of these students woreclothing and had mannerisms that threatenedmainstream society, they expressed sincere

interest in scholastic achievement and wantsuccess for themselves.

Brown emphasized the importance ofinteraction to change perceptions of

people perceived as different. I le argued thatnegative images of young black males shouldhe confronted and demystified to give theseyouth stronger self-regard and to help activistsand policymakers better articulate their issuesto colleagues.

Dwight agreed that stereotypes remain asubstantial problem, compounded by simplis-tic media images that help form children'sperceptions of other people. She lamentedthat the stigma attached to being an Appala-chianoften portrayed by media as clownishhillbilliesmakes it difficult for Appalachiansto celebrate their diversity.

Addressing interethnic conflict

Meza spoke about the disturbing reality thatracial and ethnic minorities arc not free ofracist behavior, despite the pain they haveexperienced as victims of racism. She recalledthe intense conflict between African Ameri-cans and Koreans during the disturbances inLos Angeles after the Rodney King verdict andrecommended that as people of color work tocreate racial sensitivity within society at large,they also work within and across minoritycommunities. Meza argued that integratedcoalitions based on respect and understand-ing can work: "I have seen them in action."

Mincy affirmed Meza's point about inter-ethnic conflict as a critical matter to he ad-dressed. He added, however, that blacks withintheir own racial group and Hispanics withintheir own ethnic group must begin to negoti-ate for themselves the terms of their upwardmobility. "Whites who want to be a part of thatshould extend to us the courtesy and opportu-nity to work out our own strategies before webring them to the table," Mincy concluded.

Stereotypes remain asubstantial problem,compounded bysimplistic media imagesthat help formchildren's perceptions ofother people

DEALING Will I RACE AND INICITY IN URBAN CI IANGE sTRATEG1ES 2')

"Schools are animportant part of anystrategy to improve theexperience and lifechances of children insituations that placethem at risk."

Ralph Smith.

SESSION 5

Toward community-responsive schoolsPresenter: Ralph R. Smith, President, Philadelphia Children's Network

Moderator: Ron Register, Project Director, Community Foundation of Greater Memphis

Panelists: Cesar Batalla, President, Puerto Rican Coalition _Bralegeport; Elaine Berman, Co-Director,

The Piton Foundation Poverty Project, Denver; Ruthie Bush Mathews, School Board Chair, Hartford

Public Schools

Schools are an indispensable component of

any strategy for urban change, often providing

the sole institutional contact for families whomay have no other connections, argued Ralph

Smith. The panel discussion, moderated byRon Register, reviewed Smith's paper,cowritten by Michelle Fine, identifying ob-stacles to and strategies for relbrrning school

systems and developing community-respon-

sive schools.

Teaching elephauordance

Although Smith has consulted on educationissues for public agencies across the country,

he emphasized that he is in, but not of, theschool system.. Professing a deep respect for

teachers and an equally deep distrust of edu-

cation bureaucracies, Smith suggested thatthe unwritten compact between schools andthe communities they serve is founded onmutually low expectations. To strengthen the

relationship between schools and communi-

ties, he proposed that communities improveyoungsters' school readiness by providing stron-

ger family support and child developmentservices.

Smith encouraged parents and commu-

nity activists to push for a "strategic engage-ment" with the education system. lie pro-posed that the elements of such an engage-

ment include:Forging an alliance with insiders.

Anchoring local educational improvement

processes in a national framework such as the

national education goals set forth in "America

2000," the nine points of the National Busi-ness Roundtable, the recommendations from

the National Commission on Children, andthe Secretary of Labor's Commission on

Achieving Necessary Skills.

Accepting the challenge posed by America

2000 and holding the president accountableto his education strategy.

Assisting children to become school-ready,

and creating schools and caring communities

for all children and families.Creating a safety net of comprehensive

services, including school-based and school-

linked programs.Investigating the feasibility of establishing

an initiative to obtain a radically decentralized,

transformed system of governance for public

education.I Ie suggested that large, hierarchical school

bureaucracies no longer work to educate chil-

dren. These systems are often more respon-

sive to political issues than to education issues.

"Our task," he proposed, "is like teaching anelephant to dance. Trained elephants are in-structed from birth to stay within an accepted

circle. Our school districts are like those el-ephants. We have to break their circles. Weneed to teach them to wander."

Revolution or reform?

Maria Carrion of Boston alleged that the crisis

in public education exemplifies the intersec-tion of many other issues discussed during the

conferencethe divergence between thehaves and the have-nots, conflicting interests

of culturally diverse populations, and powerand control over resources. She stated that she

was uncomfortable with the notion that com-munities should advance school reform. In-stead, declared Carrion, communities need arevolution that will bring them into a new age.

She proposed that demographic and techno-

logical revolutions occurring in American soci-

30 DEVELOPING RESPONSIVE SCI IOOLS

ety have overwhelmed schools and families,which are often viewed as dysfunctional.

Smith replied that radical restructuring isneeded. He stated that there are examples ofhow to produce good community-responsiveschools. But the next step is to create schoolsystems that can nurture, sustain, and repli-cate the school successes that are currently theexception rather than the rule. He observedthat school districts are often dragged intoroform efforts by mandate or through finan-cial incentives, but they escape once the man-date or money runs out. Then they proceed toundermine the reform.

Smith shared his view that central bureau-cracies are no longer needed for purposes ofeducation. I le suggested that decentralizedmanagement, school-based and anchored inparents and communities, could provide amore appropriate strategy to improve educa-tion. A dilemma, however, is that during theprocess of reform, communities must workwith the same bureaucrats who must be un-seated if schools are to he transformed.

Ruthie Mathews added that reform in-volves changing the culture of school systemsand the way that people think about educatingchildren. This culture change, Mathews de-clared, can't happen overnight.

Mike Suntag, a public school employeefrom Bridgeport, joked that, "Revolution forschool people means changing the date ofgraduation night." I le upheld his view that apublic school revolution should not entailoutright abandonment of the schools, but apush for change within existing school systems.

Suggesting that top-down mandates rarelywork, Suntag argued that imposing deadlinesfor developing site-based management teamsis unfairteachers and parents can't justchange roles overnight. However, CesarBatalla, a community activist and cofounderof the Bridgeport Futures Initiative, insistedthat mandates can work and in some instancesare needed to get leadership moving.

Parent power

Mustafa Abdul-Salaam of New I laven shared

with the group his belief that parenting histhree children is his most significant activity.As the president for the citywide ParentTeacher Organization (PTO) in New Haven,

DEVELOPING RESPONSIVE SCHOOLS

he has observed the PTO's impact on policy atthe school level and the city level. Abdul-Salaam proposed that parents must organizeto keep school systems and local governmentsmore accountable to their consumerstheparents. Parents, he asserted, should spear-head bottom-up reform efforts.

Batalla added that the Bridgeport FuturesInitiative attempts to help parents do just that.Noting that in school reform efforts, the par-ents' agenda typically comes last, Batalla men-tioned some of the objectives of the Initiative'sparent-involvement strategy: to increase neigh-

borhood safety, to become more politicallyactive, to hold board of education membersaccountable, to have parents and communityresidents identify resources to meet their needs,and to increase parents' overall empower-ment. Karl Walden from Bridgeport addedthat communities should encourage a con-tinuum of parent involvement in educationfrom preschool through high school.

Mathews mentioned that school boardscan play an important role as advocates forparental involvement. She described the stu-dent and parental participation in the I lart-ford School Board's strategic planning pro-cess, remarking that their concerns over healthand counseling issues were incorporated intothe plan. She remarked that the board hasbeen able to involve parents by going to them,not expecting them to come to the hoard.

Smith pointed out that I lead Start alsoprovides an excellent example of parentalinvolvement. Programs are required to enableparents to take part in I lead Start as volun-teers through classroom interaction, as well asparticipation in program governance. Unfor-tunately, Smith commented, many parentswho prove themselves competent throughI lead Start are suddenly shut out when theirkids move into regular schools.

Angela Blackwell of Oakland also citcI lead Start as a wonderful example of paren-tal involvement. But Blackwell claimed thatthe recent expansions in I lead Start fundingare also a classic illustration of the gulf be-tween the federal government's policies andlocal communities' needs. In Oakland, I leadStart funds have been augmented to servemore four-year-olds, despite Oakland's re-quest for additional funds for one- to three-year-olds. She appealed to conference partici-

Decentralizedmanagement, school-based and anchored inparents andcommunities, couldprovide a moreappropriate strategy toimprove education

31

School sites must haveauthority, autonomy,stability and resources,which central districtsare loathe to give up

pants to organize and proclaim loudly aboutwhat local experience reveals. In that way,when national policies are created, they will fit

local community needs.

Less central bureaucracy, morecommunity

Register asked why there seems to have beena move toward school system decentraliza-tion. In response, Elaine Berman describedDenver's school reform efforts led byColorado's governor, Roy Romer. The reformcame out of a bitter contract dispute betweenthe school administration and teachers union.Governor Romer intervened to end the dis-pute and created a contract that incorporatedmuch more decentralization than either sidehad previously considered. A key componentin the contract is the Collaborative DecisionMaking teams (CDMs), including teachers,parents, community business people, and non-teaching school staff. Berman reported thatthe CDMs have focused most of their atten-tion on process issues and will soon move theconversation on to improving education out-comes for children in the schools.

Smith emphasized that for site-basedmanagement to he "more than just anothershell game," some entity must take responsi-bility for the full education of children. : hoofs

and communities have to move children intoadulthood, preparing them for college andwork. Smith asserted that school sites musthave authority, autonomy, stability and re-sources, which central districts are loathe togive up. But without these, site-based man-agement becomes just another way of puttingall of the complex triage-like decisions on theshoulders of people who have no capacity todeliver significantly improved education forchildren.

Choice in education

Ron Mincy of the Urban Institute asked whythe concept of "choice" had not been ad-dressed during discussion on education re-form. I le expressed his view that enablingparents to choose where to send their childrento school seems to be the best way to make thesystem responsive to parents as consumers.Within a choice framework, he asserted, if

schools did not improve, they would loseenrollments and resources.

Smith responded that "choice" is a politi-cal concept that seems hard to refuse, addingthat he believes in choice in virtually every-thing, including choice in education. Butchoice, Smith maintained, is not a good strat-egy to reform or improve education because itassumes that the market is a truly of way

to allocate public goods. I le offered the example

of America's health care system as one thatoffers choice, yet miserably fails poor people.

Smith proposed that the real choice eachfamily should have is the option to send theirchildren to schools in their own neighbor-hoods without having to compromise educa-tional quality or safety. I le stated that "choice,"as it's presently conceived, promises to in-crease die isolation and abandonment of poorchildrLr. But Smith agreed that he wouldsupport a scenario in which a $7,000 voucherwere available for every person receiving pub-lic assistance and every person who is eligiblefor Chapter One, so that the poorest people inthis society could alkyd to exercise the samechoice as everyone else.

I le concluded that parents choose schoolsbased on comfort, ideology, proximity, conve-nience, safety, and a range of other factors,including the quality of education. This widerange of criteria involved in such decisionsmakes it difficult to conclude that parentalchoice will necessarily improve education.

Within the context of choice, Bermandescribed an effort in Colorado to develop anindependent public school district, in whichan individual schoolincluding the parents,teachers, and administrators--could elect toleave its school district and become part of theoverall public school system in Colorado.Berman reported that the first year this legis-lation was introduced, it passed in the statehouse of representatives, but failed in thesenate. She predicted, however, that morestates would adopt this strategy.

Mathews commented on the issue ofchoice by describing a 20-year-old program in

lartfOrd's public school system. ThroughProject Concern, Hartford parents can electto send their children to schools in the sub-urbs. I however, these children do not achieveany more academically than kids in the I I art-

ford public schools.

52 DEVELOPING RESPONSIVE SCI FOOLS

School desegregation

Toward the end of the session, Register notedthat segregation had not been addressed dur-ing the discussion. Berman reported that inDenver, after 20 years of support for busingand desegregation, the school board, the cityadministration, and I lispanic and black lead-ership groups have unanimously decided totry to free themselves from the mandates ofthe desegregation court order. Their schooldesegregation efforts not only failed to im-prove Denver students' academic perfor-mance, but achievement has actually decreased

substantially. Berman recounted that 20 yearsago Denver's school district served 90,000kids, 60 percent of whom were white. Todaythe district serves 60,000 children, 30 percentof whom are white. There has been massivewhite and middle-class flight to the suburbs.

Berman predicted that if and when Den-ver releases itself from the court order, thecommunity will not return to segregated school-

ing. She speculated that some students wouldstill be bused, but not under tight restrictionsthat the current court order requires. There isconsiderable initiative in Denver to integratehousing as an alternative to busing.

Integrate housing as analternative to busing

DEVELOPING RESPONSIVE SCHOOLS 33

Foundation documentswritten in the 1960s areremarkably similar topapers and staff debateson urban povertydeveloping today

34

A dialogue with the foundationsModerator: Ann Rosewater, Conference Facilitator

Panelicts: Ira OAT, Associate Director, The Annie E. Casey Foundation; Prue Brown, DeputyDirector, Urban Poverty Program, The Ford Foundation; James 0. Gibson, Director of EqualOpportunity Program, The Rockeklla Foundation

The luncheon dialogue between conferenceparticipants and the of ficersof the Ford, Rock-efeller, and Annie E. Casey Foundations pro-vided an opportunity for participants to solicitthe officers' perspectives on the impact andfuture plans for their foundations' multisiteinitiatives. Ann Rosewater launched the ses-sion with several general questions for thepanelists, then fielded questions from confer-ence participants.

Consider the history and values that the Ford,Rockefeller, and Casey Foundations bring totheir reb's in creating change. 7 hen describe how

your initiative the Neighborhood and Familynitiative, Com mun ity Planning and Action Pro-

gram, or New Futures Initiative fits into thelarger vision for your foundation.

In response, Prue Brown contemplatedthe many roles that national foundations canplay in influencing social change, suggestingthat they can help get controversial issues onthe national policy agenda, create or buildinstitutions that become advocates for change,test new change strategies and develop newknowledge that informs the change process,develop the infrastructure and leadershipin a field to accelerate its development,attempt to influence public attitudes, andinform the policymaking process. Since theGrey Areas program in the 1960s, the FordFoundation has played these roles in its workon issues of urban poverty with varying de-grees of success.

The language used and principles embod-ied in foundation documents written in the1960s are remarkably similar to papers andstaff debates on urban poverty developingtoday. This is troubling, commented Brown,because 30 years later urban poverty has be-come more persistent and concentrated but,

unlike the 1960s, there is no reservoir offederal funds to apply to urban problems. Sheasserted that national foundations need 10think strategically about how to use their mod-est resources to work on social change issues.This has become a difficult stratgic questionbecause their role in helping the federal gov-ernment design and evaluate programs in-tended to reduce poverty has diminished.

Brown then cited four significant ways inwhich national foundations' approaches toreducing urban poverty have shifted since the1960s:

After decades of supporting categorical andfragmented programmatic interventions, foun-dations have embraced the need to workholistically with individuals, families, and neigh-

borhoods.An increasing number of foundation initia-

tives require collaboration among public, pri-vate, and nonprofit sectors, national and com-munity foundations, neighborhood residents,and government officials to ensure that urbanchange initiatives launched todavwill be around

tomorrow. Federally driven and funded pro-grams introduced in the 1960s involved noother players, which made them extremelyvulnerable to termination.

The level of public concern about and hopefor the conditions of urban poor people hasgreatly diminished since the 1960s. Nationalfoundations now find themselves trying toinspire hope by mounting successful demon-strations in selected sites.

Foundations have begun to foster experi-mental participatory structures like thecollaboratives in the Neighborhood and Fam-ily Initiative to create community voice andcontrol.

Jim Gibson agreed with Brown's observa-tions, adding that a national foundation hasthe capacity to mobilize large-scale research

A DIALOGUE WITII TI IL FOUNDATIONS

and provide a framework in which a variety ofpeople from local contexts share perspectivesand exchange information. It can also attemptto influence public opinion by helping to shapegeneral information available to the public.He recalled that this became a critical role forfoundations during the mid 1980s when theideological right controlled the definition andpolicy interpretations of poverty issues.

Gibson stated that the two major con-cerns of Rockefeller's Equal Opportunity Pro-gram are protecting basic rights by supportingcivil rights litigation and advocacy and publicpolicy analysis concerning the conditions andtrends affecting minorities, and identifyingand addressing phenomena in the minoritycommunity that are not responsive to purelyrace-oriented strategies.

He reported that the activities of the EqualOpportunity Program have been organized inseveral related areas. One area, designated"Building Understanding of Persistent Pov-erty," constitutes an investment in researchand policy analysis. Researchers at the SocialScience Research Council and in other aca-demic institutions have worked across disci-plinary lines to interpret complex race andpoverty-related issues. Washington-based or-ganizations concerned with the policy inter-ests of minority groups and those living inurban poverty conditions have then funneledthe findings from this research intodecisionmaking streams by educating mediaprofessionals and program and policymakersat the federal, state, and local levels.

The Community Planning and ActionProgram, currently operating in six cities, makes

up another component of the Equal Opportu-nity Program. This program was developedaccording to the premise that any programdistributing resources to and affecting familiesshould he conducted within a communitycontext. Gibson emphasized the RockefellerFoundation's commitment to demonstrationresearch and advocacy activities to generateinsights about what works in job training,education techniques, and other areas.

A third strand of the Equal OpportunityProgram invests in organizations like theChildren's Defense Fund to enhance generaleducation around programs that successfullyassist children and families and to influencerelated public policies.

Gibson noted that his past job experi-ences as a local government official and a localfoundation executive have shown him theneed for local urban organizations to connectwith national partners like national founda-tions. Most local governments and founda-tions cannot invest in long-term research andfocus instead on advocacy and service deliv-ery. rIe suggested that the Ford, Rockefeller,and Casey pr,;ects represent the best of localinitiative taking in connection with what na-tional foundations have to offeran institu-tional set of relationships and the staff capabil-ity to sponsor and manage long-term expen-sive, complex research on urban issues.

Ira Cutler responded to the opening ques-tion by remarking that the Annie E. CaseyFoundation, formed in 1948, had, until recently,

used its resources to support direct long nfoster care services. Jim Casey, the founder ofUnited Parcel Service and the Casey Founda-tion, believed the provision of stable home care

would be a valuable investment of his resources.

After Casey's death in the mid 1980s, thefoundation trustees made a strategic decisionto spend the foundation's resou rces to influencepublic policy and take a more indirect rolerather than a direct services role. To illustratethe reasoning behind this decision, Cutleroffer?.d a dramatic example: If the entireresources of the Casey Foundation were dis-tributed directly to 10 percent of Ohio's AFDCfamilies, they would be sufficient to raise theincome level of these families to the medianincome of the United States for only one year,no more. And, he pointed out, these familieswould also lose all of their Medicaid coverage.

The New Futures Initiative and the ChildWelfare Reform Initiative were the first twoexamples of the Casey Foundation carryingor t strategic social policy ventures. In NewFutures, a few cities were selected and cityleaders were asked to organize themselvesinto a collaborative and engage in a planningand activity effort that would address drop-out, teen pr.4,mancy, and youth employmentproblems. For the Child Welfare Initiatives inMaryland and North Dakota, the foundationrequested that similar governance structuresbe formed to reach the goal of becoming moresupportive of preserving families.

Cutler related that in both major initia-tives, the Casey Foundation has experienced

A national foundationhas the capacity tomobilize large-scaleresearch and provide aframework in which avariety of people fromlocal contexts shareperspectives andexchange information

A DIALOGUE \XT1i 1 11 LE FOUNDNHONS 35

There has been atremendous tensionbetween competingforcespeople andinstitutions concernedwith maintainingcurrent social systemsand people interested inradical changes

difficulty organizing communities in a waythat seeks to change systems. Foundationofficials have learned that there is tremendousmomentum, manifested in laws and personalvested interests, to maintain current people-serving systems.

Recognizing that all of these initiatives are still in

progress, at different points of maturity, withdifferent design elements, are there any lessons

that can be shared?

Cutler acknowledged that there has beena tremendous tension between competingforcespeople and institutions concernedwith maintaining current social systems andpeople interested in radical changes. For ex-ample, New Futures' planners thought it wouldbe a good idea to bring together people whocontrol the resources and policymaking au-thority in the communities. Others arguedthat those were the worst people to gathertogether because of their vested interests incurrer t systemswhy would they want tochange them? Yet Cutler posed that theopposite scenario convening completelypowerless people and asking them to changesocial systemsis no more logical. The ongo-ing challenge for the Casey Foundation hasbeen to maintain an initiative that involvespeople who currently have the control overpeople-serving systems, so that they don'tsabotage the reform effort, but not givingthem so much control that the reform effortbecomes ineffectual.

Gibson responded that a primary lessonfor him has been that national foundationsdon't have the answers to the problems inAmerican society. Therefore, the most profit-able investment of foundation resources is inprocesses that facilitate people seeking an-swers, as opposed to funding some proposedsilver bullet. Investing in processes sometimesproves risky, because processes don't alwaysyield instantaneous results and working incollaborative ventures with multiple commu-nity interests can be frustrating. Yet Gibsonconcluded that this seems the best way forfoundations to influence urban change becausethey just don't have an abundance of ready-made solutions lined up for distribution.

Brown underscored Gibson's comments,adding that the foundation culture is one that

wants to see results. She said that she encour-ages foundation colleagues to view the Neigh-borhood and Family Initiative as a long-termundertaking and to resist any undue pressurefor immediate results that may undermine theventure.

Many of the lessons beingrai sed deal wi th shifting

relationships between the foundations and theirgrantees, with whom you all interact very closely.

Are you givingsomethingup by empowering them?

Gibson observed that the novel relation-ships that sometimes develop between thefoundation officials and grantees requires foun-dation officials to exercise a remarkable de-gree of discretion. In a related comment hementioned that a benefit of foundation workis trial and error without condemnation. Ingovernment, if an experimental program,policy, or relationship doesn't work, you getpunished.

The rioting in Los Angeles could have beenpredicted based on research findings that we'vehad kr many years- showingthe need forincreased

services. Yet it seems the only way to get people to

pay attention to these research findings is to burn

up our cities. When will the foundations move to

being proactive rather than reactive?

Cutler offered a perception that researchis valuable in justifying the continued exist-ence or expansion of programs, for example,Head Start. But, he maintained, research re-sults rarely inspire Congress or a state legisla-ture to appropriate money. Cutler contendedthat the most proactive role for the founda-tions and their initiatives is to continue to provide

examples of successful local-level urban change

activities that can spread from one communityto another. Because, he concluded, it doesn'tseem as though there's going to be a nationalpolicy supporting fundamental urban change.

Foundations have money, resources, research,and documentation about which social servicesmake a difference. So why don't foundationscollectively approach the federal government to

make some changes?

Gibson answered that the opportunitiesto talk with and influence federal government

36 A DIALOG ur, THE FOUNDATIONS

are extremely limited and remarked that theperception of the foundations' power wasgreater than their actual force. If anything,Gibson declared, the foundations are suspectin the eyes of federal government officialsbecause they fund advocates that castigateand sometimes even sue them. He reiteratedthat he views foundations as institutions thathelp build capacity within society, not as insti-tutions that attempt to be all-powerful andinfluential in and of themselves.

What not steps will be taken with these founda-

tion initiatives based on your experiences withthem? And how do these initiatives fit in thelarger foundation programs?

Gibson replied that a next step he envi-sions is expanded networking among citiesthat are experimenting with approaches tosocial change. He explained that because theactivities occurring across local communitiesare so decentralized, many people may notperceive that they are part of something larger.These activities and the people involved inthem should coalesce to place urban issues atthe center of the national policy agenda. Therelevance of local communities joining forcesto effect national change has been made veryclear, according to Gibson.

If foundations are really serious about movingtou'ard a more comprehensive, flexible, awl's-oriented approach, holding is going to have tochange. Many of us are required to collaboratewith others in our communities to work moreholistically, yet funding is still categorically tar-

geted to specific issues in the same geographic area.

This increase in collaborative activity means that

we spend all of our time going to meetings!

Many knowing nods from conferenceparticipants greeted this question. Cutler re-sponded that he has been encouraged to see insome of the cities in which New Futuresoperates the ability of one structure to servemultiple purposes. Some of the collaborativesare being collapsed into single, collaborativecommunity decisionmaking bodies that areaddressing multiple, interlinked problems,cutting down on the need to have multiplecollaboratives or a coordinating body for thecollaboratives.

Although some foundation staffers may holdprogressive social views, many social activistssee national foundations as part of "the Estab-lishment." Foundation trustees are the samepeople who are profiting from the perpetuationof this nation's economic and social systems, yet

program officers and grantees continue to talkabout using these foundations as instruments ofsocial change. When the real change begins tocome and the trustees of these foundationsrealize that their exalted places may he threat-ened, how much continued support can local-level change agents expect from these founda-tions?

Gibson acknowledged the concern, andpointed out that most of the money appropri-ated by foundations goes to museums, col-leges, and hospitalsnot to projects focusedon social change. Brown noted that philan-thropy, like other fields, is more differentiatedthan the question presupposes. Trustees' viewson social change depend on many factors suchas the foundation's mission, staff's ability tomake a good case for social change strategiesin light of the mission, and the diversity of thetrustees.

The perception of thefoundations' power wasgreater than their actualforce

A DIALOGUE WM I 111E FOUND/MONS 37

nference gapers

When we seek adefinition of"neighborhood," Ibelieve we must beflexible and allow forneighborhoods to beself-defining and selfidentifying

qo

PAPER 1

Neighborhoods as an entry point forchangeRonald Shiffrnan

Defining the term "neighborhood" is fraughtwith difficulties and dangers. The desire tohave a clear definition quickly leads one todescribe, or attempt to describe, what consti-tutes a good neighborhood. History has clearlydemonstrated the failures of this approach.

All of us can cite neighborhoods in theprocess of dramatic decline that contain all theassets that one ascribes to a healthy commu-nityparks, schools, infrastructure, and so on(the Crotona Park Area of the Bronx). We canalso identify areas that have few if any of theseamenities and yet exhibit a great deal of vitality

(the Northside in Brooklyn, Soho in NewYork, and Boston's West End as described byHerb Gans in TheUrban1/21lagers[1962] ). So,when we seek a definition of "neighborhood,"I believe we must be flexible and allow forneighborhoods to be self-defining and self-identifying. Gans argues that neighborhoods,whether defined by place or social organiza-tion, differ in their appearance and socialcharacterand in the importance they play inthe lives of the people who live in them: "As aneighborhood is more than an ecological orstatistical construct, some of its qualities canperhaps be captured only on paper by thesociologically inclined poet or artist."

The definition of a neighborhood is oftenthe result of a mutual agreement betweenthose outside it and those in it. The definitionis often enhanced by natural or built harriersthat form boundaries and give the neighbor-hood an identity as a "place." This idea thatneighborhoods have an identity is also difficult

to delineate. As my City Planning Commis-sion colleague Amanda Burden recently said,"neighborhoods arc very much like pornogra-phy; they are impossible to define, but whenyou see them you know what they are." LarryBourne tackles the question this way: "Whatdo we mean by community and neighbor-hood? A community has been described as aneconomic unit, a polity, a formal social system,

a geographic unit of territory, or as a society onits own. Each definition, of course, was putforward with a different purpose in mind, andeach has some validity. But there is no generalagreement on definitions.... Communities ingeneral are as varied as the characteristics ofthe urban population they house. Greatercontrasts may in fact exist between neighbor-hoods within the same urban area than be-tween cities in different cultures."

Other characteristics often cited are cohe-siveness and attachment to neighbors, localinstitutions, and traditions to the exclusion ofother people, institutions, and traditions. AsLou Winnick, paraphrasing Charles Abrams,said: "a neighborhood is defined by the linethat, if crossed, you get beat up." Othersdescribe neighborhoods as "that geographythat people feel a sense of control over, and asthey move from its center to its peripherybegin to sense a loss of control," or an areawhere an "ascribed grouping and its membersare joined in a common plight whether or notthey like it and where they often 'share acommon fate' at the hands of others."

Jane Jacobs recognizes the characteristicsdescribed above and sets them in a useful context

when she writes: "A successful city neighborhood

is a place that keeps sufficiently abreast of itsproblems so it is not destroyed by them. Anunsuccessful neighborhood is overwhelmedby its defects and problems and is progressivelymore helpless before them." This definition un-

derscores the crucial role that neighborhoods can

and must play as an entry point for progressivesocial and economic change. It points out thatchange is the result of an interplay betweenmicro and macro forces within our society.

Neighborhoods as entry points forchangea macro view

In the context of an entry point for change, theneighborhood is "the arena where individuals

NEIG I 1130R1100DS AS AN ENTRY POINT FOR CI 1ANGE

and families live and also where larger forcesand policiesinvestment, development, edu-cation, service delivery, socializationareplayed out." This theme is critically importanttoday, when as a nation we must once againforge a domestic agenda.

The need to develop positive change strat-egies in the neighborhood, or workplace, is asimportant today as it was in the 1930s and1960s. The lessons from those periods shouldnot be forgotten or dismissed. Self-determi-nation, self-reliance, and self-sufficiency arelaudable and desirable goals that have sur-vived political and economic oppression overthe ages. But communities cannot be trulyself-sufficient and self-reliant unless they de-velop the organizational and political capac-ityindividually and collectivelyto makelocal, regional, and national governments re-sponsive and accountable to the needs of localresidents and their communities. We cannotafford to shift that responsibility from govern-ments to the neighborhood, the family, theindividual, or, for that matter, to a "for-profit"or "not-for-profit" corporation.

Clearly we need a better understanding ofthe responsibilities and obligations that theindividual, family, neighborhood, and govern-ment have to each other. A definition of theseresponsibilities, including the benefits inher-ent in them, can emerge once all the partieshave the capacity to hold each other account-able. The problem is that low-income indi-viduals, families, neighborhoods, and citieshave not exercised their power to hold stateand federal governments accountable. So theresources and programmatic initiatives neededto address issues of concern to neighborhoodresidents are virtually nonexistent.

The danger is serving objectives that harmneighborhoods and the people we purport torepresent. Arguments for "self-sufficiency" and

"self-reliance" are used by reactionaries toargue that governments s!iould not engage inprograms that address problems of neighbor-hoods and the poor. It is ironic that the samecrowd that wants to shift the burden andblame to the victims of structural and societalinequities also espouses policiessuch as ab-rogating the right to choosethat deny con-trol of our personal and individual freedoms.When we talk of self-sufficiency, self-reliance,and empowerment, we must he clear that

these concepts do not conflict with, and in-deed depend on, government responsibility toaddress fundamental, structural social, politi-cal, and economic inequities in our society.

Empowerment of neighborhoods, thepoor, and other disenfranchised populationsmeans enabling them to make informedchoices among viable alternativesand tohave the political and economic ability ofrealizing those choices. This can't be done ina vacuum. It depends on a domestic policythat recognizes the roles and responsibilitiesof the private sector and of each tier of thepublic sector, including local, state, and fed-eral governments as well as the neighborhoodand communityhowever they choose todefine themselves.

Neighborhood-based organizingstrategies

In seeking positive change, we must under-stand and develop community and neighbor-hood-based organizing strategies. The neigh-borhood is one of several important interven-tion points from which social, political, andeconomic change can be initiated. Others arerelated to but distinct from neighborhoods,such as church, workplace, and constituent-basedorganized by gender, religious, eth-nic, or racial group.

All are locally based organizing strategies,hut, too often, progressive groups view localorganizing and development efforts as a diver-sion from the more important task of nationalorganizing efforts, or as a threat to develop-ment projects that target specific local needs.Conservatives often see organiz:rig as a way ofinternalizing the debate within the neighbor-hood and community. They focus the need forchange on the individual and the locality,avoiding societal accountability. In essence,they "blame the victim." Both positions im-pede recognition that community and neigh-borhood empowerment is integrally linked tonational and regional domestic policies.

The disastrous decline of the quality of lifein many neighborhoods and cities, and today'seconomic recession, clearly demonstrate thedevastating effects of the absence of a progres-sive and accountable domestic program.Clearly, then, one means of enabling neigh-borhoods to become an entry point for change

NEIGI IBOR11OODS AS AN ENTRY POINT FOR CI lANGE I

The neighborhood isone of several importantintervention points fromwhich social, political,and economic changecan be initiated

41

Communitydevelopment programsshould resist donor-ledattempts to divert localefforts to organize andengage in nonviolentpolitical action

is recognizing the need for community-basedc rganizing and nonviolent political action. AsRichard A. Cloward and Frances Fox Pivenput it: "by definition and by necessity local.Ordinary people have always been moved topolitical action... where they live and work....The skill of the organizer cannot overcome theconstraints of localism; it can only discoveropportunities that are buried in local institu-tional relationships. Whether people bandtogether as tenants, workers, minority mem-bers, women, or environmental or peace activ-ists, it is their neighborhoods, factories, hous-ing projects and churches that provide thenexus for mobilization. We think it is wrong toconclude that electoral and political concen-tration has made local organizing futile, forlocal mobilizations can sometimes have pow-erful reverberations on national power. Theproblem is to identify the contextual condi-tions and the action strategies by which localprotest can influence centralized power. Inthe 1930s, the industrial workers' movementwon large concessions from the Rooseveltadministration by the means of an unprec-edented wave of locally organized industrialstrikes.... The southern civil rights movementprovided an example of a different kind ofstrategy by which local resources were mobi-lized for national influence."

Community development programsshould resist donor-led attempts to divertlocal efforts to organize and engage in nonvio-lent political action. Progressive donors arebeginning to recognize organizing as a keyelement in the social, political, and economicdevelopment of communities. Neighborhoodsand their funders must rediscover their re-sponsibility to engage in regional and national

debates.One of the many tragedies of the past 12

years has been our acceptance of structuraland attitudinal changes that have adverselyaffected low-income and moderate-incomecommunities. Liberal initiatives of the 1960sto empower low-income communities socially,economically, and politically shifted by the1970s to a service and maintenance strategy.In the 1980s even those minimal efforts weresacrificed to laissez-faire policies that neglectedthose in need and concentrated wealth in thehands of a few. That decade of greed andneglect made poverty worse and intensified

racism, class, and gender conflict and eco-nomic decline. The Bush administrationdoesn't understand the recent domestic his-tory of our country. Many of the resourcesauthorized for the War on Poverty were di-verted to the Vietnam War. Many programsintroduced at the national level were neverimplemented, never given a chance. We needto give them a chance and to test them in acritical way in our neighborhoods.

The need to (,,larrize locally is predicatedon the need to empower people and theircommunities in order to build two structures:

The internal social, political, arid organiza-tional base to address problems on the ground.

The political base througl which substan-tive social, political, and economic change canbe achieved at all levels of government, par-ticularly federal.

Comprehensive -and integrative planningshould play a central role in realizing thesegoals. This is a prerequisite for organizing,development, and progressive change. Anydiscussion about neighborhood change mustrecognize that planning and development re-quire the direct participation of communityresidents in all facets of the process. Thisconcept of community development not onlyempowers area residents but also forms, de-velops, and maintains community-based insti-tutions.

Community developmentcorporations as a vehicle forneighborhood-based change

In the early 1960s, as an outgrowth of theantipoverty movement, strong local institu-tions emerged to provide a base for social andcommunity development. They gave residentsof low-income communities the opportunityto participate in the planning and develop-ment process. By the mid 1960s, the conceptof the community development corporation(CDC) emerged. These local institutions wereto have the capacity to plan, develop, andinitiate community development initiatives.They were to he responsible for building theintegrative planning framework within whichthese development initiatives could take place.As originally contemplated by both the foun-dation communityled by the FordFoundation's CDC initiative, and the federal

NEIGI !ROM 100I)S AS AN ENTRY POINT FOR CI IANGE

government in its Demonstration Cities Pro-gramCDCs were to get specialized govern-mental and nongovernmental technical assis-tance in community planning and develop-ment. The CDCs were to link social, eco-nomic, and physical needs and programmaticresponses to those needs in order to attack theproblems of poverty confronting their com-munities comprehensively. It was understoodthat if they were to succeed, they would needconsistent personnel, technical assistance, andfunding support.

The resources to sustain those CDC ef-forts over the years were sporadic, and theexpectations of donors and the federal gov-ernment changed substantively. Except for ahandful of foundations, external sources sim-ply ceased to support the integrative planningefforts of community-based organizations.

Despite the withdrawal of governmentsupport, many local development organiza-tions were able to carry out successful devel-opment- related efforts, but these were oftenresponses to externally defined standards ofneed, accountability, and productivity ratherthan activities that emerged from plans thatmet locally determined needs and priorities.The result was greater emphasis on "reachingscale" and on increased "units produced."

Comprehensive versus categoricalstrategies

The reliance on quantifiable resultsdeemphasized qualitative, or soft, projectsand programs. Comprehensive strategies andplans to integrate social, physical, and eco-nomic activities were set aside. Qualitativeactivities, if they existed at all, focused onproject, not community, planning and build-ing. Comprehensive planning predicated on acommunity development process emphasiz-ing empowerment of the disenfranchised gaveway to project planning and development asan end product.

Today, there appears to be a general beliefby government and many funders that povertyis inevitable. There is a growing sense that ourability to bring about positive social change isseverely limited. Unfortunately, too many com-

munity-based development organizationsshare these dramatically lowered expectations.Neighborhood leaders and their organiza-

tions must address this problem not onl, byorganizing but also by developing integrativeneighborhood strategies that will, in turn, af-fect national policies.

Planning that integrates job creation, daycare services, housing, commercial develop-ment, and health, education, and social sup-port programs can and should take place at theneighborhood level. We have had some lim-ited success in categorical areas such as hous-ing and lending. The Community Reinvest-ment Act and the National Affordable I lous-ing Act, while woefully underfunded, reflectlocal efforts gone national. The malignantneglect of government's responsibilities isclearest where all interventions, public and orprivate, eventually come to restthe neigh-borhood arena. Categorical programs interactat the neighborhood level, whether intendedor not, because that is where the people theseprograms are designed to benefit live andwork. Neighborhoods must be capable ofintegrating programs in such a way that thecumulative impact of their efforts is greaterthan the parts.

It would be naive to believe that anysignificant change can come about withoutsignificant new initiatives. These, in turn, won'teven be contemplated if communities andtheir advocates do not organize and begin todemand them. It would also be naive to be-lieve, given the current economy, that com-prehensive community-based plans could sig-nificantly alter prospects for low-income resi-dents. Nevertheless, as the executive panel ofthe Ford Foundation's Project on Social Wel-fare and the American Future said in 1989: Ahealthy economy, while essential, will not ofitself generate the human investment andmutual caring that are necessary for a strongand just society. And while America has grown

properly skeptical of programs that foster de-pendency, it has also learned that it is futile toask people to take greater personal responsi-bility for their lives unless they have a realchance to escape from the material conditionsthat foster insecurity and despair. The deeperissue is the need to create a fairer system in which

all will share both obligations and benefits.The dilemma is that comprehensive poli-

cies for economic growth are feasible only tothe extent that they are supported by work-place or neighborhood organizing efforts.

NEIGI 1130R1100DS AS AN ENTRY POINT FOR CI LANGE

Planning that integratesjob creation, day careservices, housing,commercialdevelopment, andhealth, education, andsocial support programscan and should takeplace at theneighborhood level

43

Planners must recognizethat planning isn't adecision-avoidanceexercise or anabstraction

44

Those efforts, in turn, can succeed only ifneighborhoods and communities can initiatecomprehensive community development ef-forts in which organizing, planning, and devel-

opment are all viewed as ongoing processes.Susan Motley and I wrote that focused ortargeted development does usually produce aproduct, and it is important to build uponthose successes; that as intractable as they mayappear, problems of poor communities can besolved by a strong and enduring partnershipbetween community residents and private andpublic support; and, finally, that the problemsare complex and multidimensional and re-quire long-term, integrative approaches.

Comprehensive and integrative plans areneighborhood-based and address the myriadproblems faced by residents, including educa-tion and training, day care, recreation, health,social services, criminal justice, transporta-tion, housing, economic opportunity, and jobcreation. Before starting, planners must rec-ognize that planning isn't a decision-avoid-ance exercise or an abstraction. It must he aconscious process putting in place a set ofstrategies and activities that enable the neigh-borhood and its development organizations toarticulate and achieve goals and objectives. Itmust create a framework against which alter-native strategies can be evaluated, decisionsmade, and actions initiated.

There is a growing trend to bring togetherdiverse groups to discuss the development ofcomprehensive plans to address the myriadproblems facing their communities. This pro-cess, sometimes referred to as "visioning,"uses discussion or dialogue groups to talk outvital issues of concern to the community.These are often structured to jump ahead intothe future to disarm those that come to thetable with their own agenda. Once a vision forthe future is agreed to, discussion can shiftback to the present without risking domina-tion of the dialogue by narrow interests. Thisis possible in part because people have learnedto trust each other and because consensus hasbeen reached on long-term goals.

Gianni Longo describes the process thisway: "The goals, recommendations, and strat-egies developed through a vision process leadto the development of a comprehensive endagreed-upon agenda. As comprehensive stra-tegic planning efforts, vision initiatives en-

compass all aspects of the life of a community,from economic development, to education,from the natural environment to the builtenvironment, from culture and recreation tosports, from human needs to race relations,from youth to senior citizens. In a departurefrom traditional top-down planning, partici-pants often reject the notion that the agendaitems need to be prioritized stressing that eachfitemil and everyone is equally important....Participants take ownership of the results ofthe vision process and lead the way in theimplementation of the agenda."

The vision process shifts the emphasisfrom "why don't they?" to "how can we?"Longo cites successful efforts in San Antonio,Chattanooga, Kansas City, and Springfield,Massachusetts. Anecdotal data about the pro-cess suggests that it is worth exploring. Similarefforts are now under way in Europe, wherethe vision process is often stimulated by devel-oping alternative scenarios. These scenariosare discussed by broadly based groups ofstakeholders, with outside participants invitedto expand the range of possible alternativesand to talk about other efforts to addressrelated problems. Such a process is under wayin Frankfurt, Germany, and in the planningprocess emerging from the unification of Ber-lin. Community-based entities can engage inother kinds of planning and organizing pro-cesses that can help them develop compre-hensive change strategies. These processes, ifcarefully drafted, can become blueprints forlocal development and progressive micro andmacro change.

The following ingredients are prerequi-sites tc progressive social change:

Obtaining a political mandate to under-take an agressive planning process with anagreement to respect the process.

Agreeing on a set of goals and a commonvision of what is to be accomplished.

Establishing a community-based planningand development entity that is accountable toits constituency and is recognized by a variety

of the area's stakeholders.Selecting and engaging in a planning pro-

cess that is inclusive and participatory.Selecting a mode of intervention that is

commensurate with the community's organi-zatiouql capacity and its ability to influencedecisions.

NEIGHBORIIOODS AS AN ENTRY POINT FOR CI IANGE

Committing to a continuity of effort overtime and demanding from public and privatesources the resources for carrying (2 ut thatcommitment.

The best process for a particular situationdepends on the level of organization andinfluence that the community entity has at-tained. Each process requires an understand-ing of the basic means of influence and thevarious modes of intervention needed toachieve change.

The three intertwined modes of influencethat are commonly acknowledged are force,inducement, and agreement. Cox, Ehrlich, andothersin their book Strategies of Coammum kvOrganizationput it this way: "Planning as anintervention technique articulates best withthe inducement means of influence. Planninginvolves a complex of processes (which mayinclude, as elements, action and development).Fundamentally the planner attempts to in-duce the system to adopt a proposed planthrough a variety of techniques. Typically, thesituation is one of high complexity, and theplanner brings to hear significant expertise onthe location and the extent of the problem,past attempts to deal with it, and the mostdesirable alternatives in view of current cir-cumstances."

Mobility and choiceorg- -trification and displacement

One aspect of the critical questions facing usis dealing with unintended outcomes such asgentrification, displacement, and outmigration.Jane Jacobs addresses a prerequisite question,one of primary concern to us today: whetherwe "arc trying to make a better environmentfor current residents or giving people opportu-nities to leave or to aitract different types ofresidents?" She writes: "Whatever city neigh-borhoods maybe, or may not be, and whateverusefulness they may have, or may be coaxedinto having, their qualities cannot work atcross-purposes to the thoroughgoing city mo-bility and fluidity of use, without economicallyweakening the city of which they are a part forparenthetically, I would add, without limitingthe opportunity available to the individual orgroup residing in the neighborhood]. The lackof either economic or social containment isnatural and necessary to city neighborhoods

simply because they are parts of cities..,. Butfor all the innate extroversion of city neighbor-hoods, it fails to follow that city people cantherefore get along magically without neigh-borhoods. Even the most urbane citizen doescare about the atmosphere of the street anddistrict where he lives, no matter how muchchoice he has of pursuits outside it; and thecommon run of city people do depend greatlyon their neighborhoods for the kind of every-day lives they lead."

The strong interplay between neighbor-hood and the city that Jane Jacobs describes,and the mobility she alludes to, is an importantconcept to understand and foster. When wetalk of "community as an entry point forchange," we mean the structural and societalchange discussed earlier, as well as the impactof those macro structural changes, combinedwith the micro activities we undertake, on thequality of life and the day-to-day realitiesfacing area residents.

One major objective of progressive change,and inherent to it, is the maximization ofindividual and collective "choice." The rightto live in a particular neighborhood and theright to move out of a neighborhoodtheconcept of outward mobilityshould be fos-tered. At the same time, it is critically impor-tant to develop policies that foster upwardmobilitythe ability of a person or family togrow socially, economically, or culturally. Thismeans that one needs social, economic, andcultural opportunities to be able to choose(and not be coerced) into moving in or out ofa community. If 1 desire to move to a particular

area, and if that area doesn't have affordablehousing available, my choice is limited. If I amreluctant to move to a neighborhood becausethe educational system is not well regarded orthe streets are unsafe, my choice is limited. IfI am forced to move out of my neighborhoodfor any reason, be it economic, social, cultural,or because my opportunities are proscribed,my choice is limited.

Two interrelated goals of neighborhoodchange begin to emerge. The first is to en-hance people's ability to exercise choice byproviding the opportunity structures that en-able them to stay or to leave. The second is toenhance people's ability to choose by eliminat-ing obstaclescrime, poor schools, dirtystreets, lack of decent and affordable hous-

N ER; I IBORIIOODS AS AN ENTRY POINT FOR CHANGE

The strong interplaybetween neighborhoodand the city that JaneJacobs describes, andthe mobility she alludesto, is an importantconcept to understandand foster

-15

Development andinvestment decisionshave, historically, led todisplacement andgentrification

46

ingthat deter people from moving into thearea or upwardly mobile residents from re-maining. These two goals can be achieved byclosely linking economic and social invest-ment strategies.

Enhancing opportunities for existing resi-dents and improving the quality of life sets the

stage in a way that the community becomesdesirable to others. This becomes a problem ifthe first goal of establishing opportunity struc-tures for the present population is not at-tained. Public policies are usually driven bymarket forces and market opportunities ratherthan by public benefit or social concerns.Development and investment decisions have,historically, led to displacement andgentrification. The way to counter this trend isto make sure that public policy is driven bypublicly accountable structures rather thanprivate entities.

Public benefit policies, not market oppor-tunities, should drive policy and program de-cisions. The alternativeto discourage in-vestment and community revitalization in or-der to avoid gentrification and displacementis short-sighted and self-defeating. The idea ofcreating second-rate communities to protectthem from gentrification and displacementmay sound absurd, but the fear that permeatesmany communities has resulted in adoptingthose kinds of planning and developmentpolicies. In any other context, these policieswould face enormous opposition.

We don't have to search the literature orleave our cities to find examples of recent devel-

opment activities that reinforce patterns ofsocial and economic segregation and restrictchoice. This is often the result of poor qualityand regressive development activities purport-edly designed to benefit low-income residents.

Compare these efforts with similar-costdevelopment activities in other parts of theregion with exclusionary practices, and thisemerging pattern of separate and unequaldevelopment becomes clearer. The key is tocombine social and human investment withmore equitable physical development and in-vestment strategies such as linkage andinclusionary zoning requirements. When com-munities avoid investing in the quality of lifefor area residents for fear that others maybenefit, they often accelerate decline and causelarge-scale displacement and disinvestment.

A

Balanced development is needed if choiceand enhanced opportunities for upward oroutward mobility for neighborhood and low-and moderate-income residents are to beachieved. The strategy for retaining leadershipand upwardly mobile people within the com-munity so that they don't become outwardlymobile should not be based on restrictingchoices, but on expanding choices. Makingthe neighborhood desirable and attractive tothem does that. One way to achieve desirablecommunities is community economic devel-opment. It addresses the economic needs of acommunity and focuses on building opportu-nity structures that are the foundation for aviable and desirable place to live.

Community change and communityeconomic development

Successful community development requirescomprehensive and holistic interventions thatrecognize a range of community needsso-cial, economic, physical, cultural, spiritual,politicalas well as opportunities for per-sonal, group, and community growth. NealPierce and Carol Steinbach point out that:"Being poor does not just affect individualsbut is a systemic disease that afflicts wholecommunities. Deteriorated housing, impairedhealth, nonexistent or low wages, the welfareassault on self-respect, high crime rates, lowtax rates and reduced police and school ser-vices, child neglect and wife abuse, and alwaysthe continuing export of human and financialcapitalall of these feed on each other.... IWeneed] a community-based and comprehen-sive approach to improving the local economyrather than trying desperately to rebuild eachindividual so she and he can leave the impov-erished conditions behind."

This concept of community economicdevelopment stresses the role of the commu-nity. Its success is measured in benefits accru-ing to the community as a whole rather than toany individual, set of individuals, or sector. Itbuilds on positive contributions of communitydevelopment corporation initiatives over thepast 30 years and on significant programs thatgrew out of the antipoverty and Great Societyinitiatives, such as education and training,health care, day care and lead Start, criminaljustice alternatives, low-cost housing, job cre-

NEIGI IBORIIOODS AS AN ENTRY POINT FOR CI 'AWE

ation, and small business development. Theseinitiatives launched many successful demon-stration projects.

In 1965 the first two CDCs were estab-lished in Bedford-Stuyvesant and in Cleve-land. More than 2,000 CDCs actively func-tion throughout the United States today. Whilemany people benefited from them, the pro-grams were never funded at the levels prom-ised, they never approached the level of need,and they were not sustained over time. Never-theless, these efforts have played a key role indeveloping progressive community leaders andgovernment officials.

Community economic development, asoriginally conceived and practiced by CDCs,is neither Marxist nor capitalist in ideology. Itrelies on participatory and democratic pro-cesses that bring benefits to the community asa whole. It can, and often does, embrace bothpublic and private initiatives and reward bothcollective and individual efforts. This underly-ing philosophy and the resultant integrativeapproach arc often not consciously under-stood by planners, donors, grants officers, andgovernment officials who want to prioritizeand who view things programmatically andcategorically. But they are embraced by neigh-borhood residents who experience the cumu-lative impact of these sectoral phenomena.Indeed, it is at the neighborhood level that onefeels the impact of these phenomena andsenses the potential for developing and deliv-ering integrative approaches to achieve com-munity development objectives.

The success of community economic de-velopment in eliminating or substantively re-ducing poverty is to a great extent dependenton macro socioeconomic and political forces.Federal funding cutbacks over the past 12years resulted in a substantial increase in thelevel of poverty in the United States. Someargue that this signals the failure of communityeconomic development and the CDC move-ment; others, including me, argue that com-munity economic development and CDC ac-tivities are not widespread enough to have animpact on the problem, and that where theyare in place, they have kept the situation frombecoming considerably worse.

Despite their limited reach and the drasticcutback in federal support, these programshave had a significant impact. In Boston more

than 80 percent of the city's low-cost housingproduction over the past five years is CDC-sponsored and built. The same is true in NewYork City, Chicago, St. Louis, Denver, Mi-ami, and Cleveland. Over a five-year period,CDCs have developed almost 17 million square

feet of commercial and industrial space andhelped launch more than 2,000 enterprises.They generated close to 90,000 jobs between1985 and 1990.

All this was achieved despite the fact thatthe Reagan-Bush administrations dramaticallyslashed support for infrastructure investment,education and training, job creation, smallbusiness development, and housing. Thesecuts have not only deprived us of necessaryservices and undermined the fragile fabric ofour neighborhoods and the families who livethere. They have sharpened divisions in oursociety and generated class, gender, ethnic,and racial conflict. We need community-baseddevelopment entities where none now exist.We need to reinvigorate existing community-based institutions and help them focus on theneed for social, economic, and physical change.

We need for groups to clarify their goals andinitiate a participatory planning process thatfirst focuses on community needs and secondleads to comprehensive and integrative plan-ning initiatives that transcend narrowly de-fined categorical initiatives.

This doesn't mean that these entities orany one organization, for that matter, shouldhe responsible for the implementation of ev-ery aspect of the plans that evolve. It doesmean that a framework for synergistic activi-ties must he developed, and that each organi-zation engaged in the delivery of services anddevelopment should understand its role in thesocial, physical, and economic developmentof their community. It means that the assets ofa community will he identified and the gaps inservices highlighted.

The process should focus on the needs:To undertake community plai ining (not to

he confused with an organization's need toundertake its own internal strategic planningprocess),

To organize internally and externally tobring about change,

To identify internal and external strengthsand weaknesses,

To coordinate existing activities whenever

NEIGI IBORI MODS AS AN ENTRY POINT FOR CI LANGE

These cuts have notonly deprived us ofnecessary services andundermined the fragilefabric of ourneighborhoods and thefamilies who live there.They have sharpeneddivisions in our societyand generated class,gender; ethnic, andracial conflict

47

Change -improving thequality of life for all ourcitizenscan besustained only if we areready to organize fromthe neighborhood levelup

48

and wherever possible, recognizing that there

will be differences among many of the organi-

zations and a need by some to retain theirautonomy,

To integrate strategies and program initia-

tives to maximize potential outcomes,To establish systems of evaluation and

feedback, particularly those that reinforcepositive outcomes and relationships, and torethink those activities that do not work,

To understand the interdependence be-tween local initiatives and the macro-political

environment, and to try to engage on both the

micro and macro level.The people in this room are testimony to

the fact that if issues are put hack on the table,

and if resources are put in place, we can abate

those conflicts. Your efforts demonstrate that

by coming together and abandoning parochial

and sectoral attitudes, we have the capacity to

plan, initiate, and bring about change in theway that people live. I Iowever, as 1 have said

repeatedly today, changeimproving thequality of life for all our citizenscan besustained only if we are ready to organize from

the neighborhood level up to bring about the

structural social and economic changes weneed to create a more equitable and caringsociety.

In conclusion, Id like to quote a passagefrom Mamphela Ramphele and FrancisWilson's book, 1prootingPinw y . They wrote:"We distinguish...between short-run, or im-mediate, and long-run action: between whatcan usefully he done now and what will needto he done, after the political transition, in amore democratic society: the former primarily

by independent nongovernmental organ isations,

the latter primarily by the state. Our argument

is that much work can he done now in the

present political circumstances, which can also

he complementary in important ways to theprocess of political change itself."

They were refernitg to poverty in SouthAfrica. The painful truth is that their wordsapply to the political and economic situation in

this country as well.

Ronald ,Sbiffman is Director of the GraduateCoder Jr O Planning and Dci'elopment at thePratt Institute School of Architecture and Older

for Community and Envininental Develop-ment. f le is also a member of the New York City

Planning Commission.

References

Cloward, Richard A., and Frances Fox Piven.

1984. "Introduction." In Roots to Power,

Lee Staples.

Cox, Ehrlich, et al. 1979-rive/leg/mg/Commu-

nity Organization .

Ford Foundation. 1989..rochd Welfare and the

American Future.

Gans, Herb. 1962. The Urban Villagers..Jacobs, Jane. 1961. awl) and Life' in Great

American Cities.Longo, Gianni. Article in Livable Cities news-

letter, Winter 1992.Motley, Susan, and Ron Shiffman. March

1990. "Comprehensive and IntegrativePlanning for Community Development."Paper published by the Community De-velopment Research Center at the NewSchool for Social Research, New York.

Pierce, Neal R., and Carol Steinbach. 1987.Corrective Capilcrlirllr. "Ibe Rise OfAilleriCa'S

Community Development Corporations.

Ramphele, Mamphela, and Francis Wilson.1989. Uprooting Poverty.

NEIGHBORIIOODS AS AN ENTRY POINT FOR Cl LANGE

PAPER 2

The implications of an asset orientationfor urban change strategiesBiandina Cardenas Ramirez

The broad outlines for this discussion--con-ceptualized before Los Angeleshave almostfaded from consciousness in the light of theevents that began Wednesday evening, April29, 1992. As a member of the United StatesCommission on Civil Rights, an educator, achild and family development advocate, femi-nist, quasi-politician, and believer in the prom-ise of our democracy, I reel at the continuedinjustice that has inflamed people to destroyeach other and their environment. And I amterrified by the feeling of impotence visited onme when I listen to the inept responses ofelected officials. The magnitude and com-plexity of the urban change challenge thatfaces the nation appear to be hardly under-stood, much less appreciated by the privilegedindividuals who take control of what theybelieve to he the instrumentalities for "re-building." There is no connectedness betweenthose who proselytize on the causes or solu-tions for the tragedies of inner-city life and thekaleidoscope of people who occupy the worldof "savage inequality." At times it seems thatwe have lost the capacity to see each other,much less to feel each other's condition. Forme to speak analytically without giving voiceto the passion is impossible.

The question we address todayaboutthe implications of an "asset" orientation forurban change strategiesis not new. For years,most of the human development entrepre-neurs with whom I have worked have spokenof "strengths" as well as "needs." The problemhas always been that "strengths" have neversold or have not been ieard. In the media, inpolicymaking, in grantmaking, in program de-velopment, in scholarly work, the emphasishas always been on painting the bleakest pic-ture possible to justify a response. Moreover,deeply held biases about the populations ofinterest have often been just below the sur-face, and these biases have pi jailed overattempts to paint impoverished communities

as reservoirs of human potential. Oversimpli-fied quantitative evaluations of early efforts toaddress issues of urban poverty and lack ofopportunity fail to capture the dynamic ofindividual and community empowerment thatresulted from programs even as they missedthe mark of their original, often exaggerated,objectives. Over time, the often paternalistic1960s liberal perspectives on poor and minor-ity communities gave way to the hardening ofthe ideological resistance to "social programs."The onus for their condition shifted to the"undeserving poor," the "affirmative actionhire," the "underclass." At the level of publicpolicy debate, the will to do nothing was based

on the rationale that nothing could be done,while the myth of exaggerated benefits to theundeserving grew.

The evidence is clear that successful strat-egies abound for improving the condition ofcommunities and the life chances of individu-als within those communities. In child andfamily development, in community health pro-

grams, in education programs, in economicdevelopment, and in civic and political em-powerment, we have no scarcity of strategiesthat work. What we seem unable to developare systems that work. At the core of ourinability to develop systems that work is ourinability to identify and make visible the assetsin a community that are founded on thereservoir on intellectual and emotional poten-tial that abides in individuals and in systemsand on the interrelations and interactions theydevelop to sustain family, life, and spirit.

I low do we identifyand make visiblefor purposes of urban change systemstheoften intangible assets in a community? I Iowdoes the recognition of such assets cause us toreframe the context in which community needand family dysfunction occur? I low does acontext that recognizes both assets and needscause us to rethink both our program strate-gies and our advocacy? I low do we keep from

What we seem unableto develop are systemsthat work

TI IE IMPLICATIONS OF AN ASSET ORIENTATION FOR URBAN Cl IANGE:STRATEGIES 49

An an asset orientationproceeds from ananalysis of the humanassets--individual,family, andcommunitythat exist,to a greater or lesserdegree, in everycommunity

"romanticizing" poverty, alienation, and de-spair? How do we ensure that the strategies wehave formulated for either program or advo-cacy are playing out as intended in the contextof our assessment of assets and needs? I lowdo we ensure that an asset orientation does notbecome a "creaming" orientation? How dowe evaluate the effectiveness of what we do inthis new context? How do we communicatewith the larger community in "asset" terms? Inshort, how do we define an "asset" orientationin the context of our work and our passion?

The asset orientation

The concept of "asset" orientation drawsheavily, but not exclusively, on JohnMcKnight's work that suggests focusing on aneighborhood's assets rather than its deficitsas a basis for development and renewal. It alsodraws heavily on the family resourcemovement's principles of universality and fam-

ily strengths. While McKnight's emphasis ison the physical assets of a community, I wouldlike to focus on an asset orientation thatproceeds from an analysis of the human as-setsindividual, family, and communitythat exist, to a greater or lesser degree, in every

community.In 1981 the Civil Rights Commission held

two hearings that have been among the mostinstructive to my understanding of some of thedynamics in our inner cities and the lack ofconnection between those dynamics and thepolicies of government. The first was a hearing

in Miami shortly after the violent unrest insome of the black inner-city neighborhoods.The situation, as I saw it, was grievous. Aninflux of a large Latino populationmanywith the professional, technical, and entrepre-neurial skills to succeed not only on an indi-vidual level but also to create communityassets such as media, financial, and educa-tional institutionshad transformed Miami.Frankly, African Americans had largely beenleft out of the transformation. African Ameri-cans in Miami were isolated, alienated, de-pressed, and ultimately enraged by conditionsthat were getting worse instead of better.

While much of Miami's real power struc-ture remained outside minority hands, Latinoswere visible, hopeful, and successful. A fewAfrican Americans held high positions in gov-

emment and education, but many of thesehad been imported in an early era of affirma-tive-action consciousness. They appeared tohave few direct links to the inner-city AfricanAmerican community. That community ap-peared to be suffering from a considerabledrain of persons with talent and credentials,many of whom chose to live in Atlanta or othersouthern cities where the prospect of a criticalmass of African Americans slowly reversinghistorical powerlessness provided a more en-ticing arena in which to seek upward mobility.While I have since become aware of a largercommitted pool of African American leader-ship in Miami, the 1981 hearing did not bringto the surface a critical mass of African Ameri-can community leadership.

The Latino community in Miami had farless money than was popularly believed, but itused the money it had, and the perception thatit had money, very well. Even today, themedian income for Latinos in Miami is $10,000

below that of the population at large.Moreover, Latinos had or created many

more important "assets" for community vi-ability than did African Americans. The Latinocommunity in 1980 could use several televi-sion stations, numerous Spanish-language ra-dio stations and "periodiquitos" as well as ElNuevo Herald to advertise services, secondjobs, and political campaigns. But the AfricanAmerican community had ownership of al-most no mediums of communications. Andwhat was found in the English-speaking me-dia had little connection to the needs or reali-ties of the African American community. TheLatino community was highly organized insocial and mutual assistance clubs based onthe province or city of origin in Cuba or LatinAmerica. Thesc clubsalong with cornerbeauty shops, coffee stands, and eateries whereone could find good conversation, support,and services at unbelievably low prices pro-vidcd an infrastructure for the workings ofnemorks for business, education, and com-munity life. These places are where people areaffirmed and information is shared. More-over, at the time of the first two waves ofCuban immigration, the asset of familiaritywas preservedas businesses that had ex-isted in Cuba relocated with the same nameand often the same staff and merchandise.Although few of these businesses had start-up

50 TILE IMPLICATIONS OF AN ASSET ORIENTATION FOR URBAN CI IANGE SIR/VIE( IES

1111111I,

capital, they did have ready markets for theirproducts and services.

The family structure among the Latinopopulation followed very traditional, extendedfamily patterns. Although Miami Latinos tendto mirror the U.S. pattern in the number ofbirths per family, the evidence of kinship-based multigenerational family support sys-tems is everywhere. The beauty, the humor,and the power of these large kinship sys-temstios and tias, abuelos, pintos, conzadresand compares, limas and animadosare be-ginning to surface as the subject of fiction byLatino writers. But they are far from fictitious.You can see them in most Latino barrios,moving en masse through airports, hospitals,and especially picnic sites.

Perhaps the most important asset in theLatino communityand lacking in the Afri-can American communitywas evidence ofinstitutionalized cultural affirmation, a con-figuration of public events and rituals thatprovided the context for validating the com-munity and its strengths. Many other factorscome into play, of course. Miami's Latinos asa group are Caucasian, but prejudice andbigotry have hardly been absent from theirSouth Florida experience. Miami's Latinosmay feel oppressed, but they tend to view theiroppressors as offshore. What is clear to menow, after some years of strongly heldmisperceptions, is that the success of Miami'sLatino community depends much more onthe community assets created or recreatedhere, albeit in a hospitable environment, thanon the concrete assets brought here at the timeof immigration.

Ten years after the end of those hearings,I cannot recall that in five days of hearings Iheard about any assets in the inner-cityAfricanAmerican community. I do not suggest thatthey were not there but no one made themvisible and no one had integrated them intotheir understanding of the context in whichthe violence occurred. I remember only onevery young community activist who seemed tohave any hope that things could change. Theneeds statements were clear and well-re-hearsed. The rationalizations from those witheconomic or political power were almost rhyth-

mic in their glibness.The second hearing looked at the eco-

nomic development successes in Baltimore,

and the participation of Baltimore's minoritypopulation in that process. Millions of dollarsintended by federal policy to rebuild innercities had been used to rebuild the Baltimoreharbor area. The city's rebirth was a marveloussuccess, one I regularly enjoy, but the partici-pation of minorities in that redevelopmentwas minuscule. Even though it was obviousthat there had existed in Baltimore a signifi-cant infrastructure of black community assets,it was also clear that these assets were largelyignored in the redevelopment of the down-town and the harbor area.

At the core of this effort was money, verybig money, very big public money. I saw clearly

in the Baltimore hearings a pattern I have sinceseen repeated in a number of cities, even thosewhere minorities ostensibly hold power. Whenthese big redevelopment efforts begin, a tightcircle of financial players present themselvesas the only ones with the "assets" to leveragethe far greater "public" assetsdespite thefact that there may be assets in minority anddisadvantaged communities that when lever-aged to the same degree could participate insignificant ways. I am concerned about thisbecause we are now talking about possiblereinvestment strategies for cities. It becomesvery important to have a good understandingof inner-city assets or they will be ignored once

again.

I do not wish to be misunderstood. I amnot presenting the Miami Latino communityas a model. Each community is a product ofits history, and for most historical minoritygroups in this country, including my ownMexican American community in South Texas,the environment for developing communityassets has been hostile. But the lessons ofasset-filled communities are also part of ourhistory and, in many cases, our present. Youcan see the assets when you walk down Au-burn Avenue in Atlanta or on Columbia Roadin Washington, D.C. They are the assets em-bodied in African American churches and inhistorically black colleges and universities. They

are the assets that held East Los Angelestogether even as South Central Los Angeleswas decimated. When I was a child, everyborder town from San Diego, California, toCorpus Christi, Texas, had a Spanish-lan-guage newspaper, a Spanish-language moviehouse, a Camara de Comercio Mexicana,

THE IMPLICATIONS OF AN ASSET ORIENTATION FOR URBAN CHANGESTRATEGVEi

The evidence ofkinship-basedmultigenerationalfamily support systems iseverywhere

51

An asset orientationmust function on atleast four levels: theindividual, the family,the immediatecommunity, and thelarger community

social clubs and church clubs. What we did nothave access to were libraries or other institu-tions that could chronicle the history of andthe ethic around those community assets.These were largely lost in the absence ofinstitutional reinforcement. The presence ofculturally appropriate mirrors of a communityensures that children understand they are partof a historical continuum. This gives them asense of hope and trust in their own initiative.

Can we learn to see our assets and leverage

them in ways that do not dismiss needs butplay on strengths? Does it make sense to doso? Are there examples of an asset orientationworking where a deficit model has failed? I will

speak from my own perspective as an educator.

The educational system: Anexample

An asset orientation must function on at leastfour levels: the individual, the family, theimmediate community, and the larger com-munity. An asset orientation defines the levelof our expectations, our effort, and the char-acter or our encouragement. Recent innova-tions in education provide a powerful exampleof the shift from a deficit orientation to anasset orientation.

Since World War II, this nation's educa-tional system has operated, even though itshould know better, on the assumption that"ability equals achievement." This belief isreinforced and justified many times over inmost educational systems by the use of variousand sundry tests that serve to explain that theeducational system fails to educate certainpredictable groups of children because theylack the essentials for achievement and ability.Moreover, since ability has been proven tocorrelate with the assets, genetic or environ-mental, one has at the time of birth, there islittle to he done but to keep the system go-ingand to keep administering the tests thattell us that there is little to be done. The response

has been a massive investment in efforts toremediate deficits in the student rather thandeficits in the approach to education.

Recent notable successes in the educationof disadvantaged and minorityyouth led me toexamine the work of Treissman, Escalante,Corner, Collins, Xavier University, and nu-merous others--as well as the phenomenon

of the high-achieving recent Asian immigrantpopulation. High expectations, strong prepa-ration, and a support system sensitive to thecultural, familial, and socioeconomic circum-stances of the population appear to character-ize every successful effort to improve theachievement of low-achieving groups in soci-ety. These are not deficit or remedial ap-proaches. At the core of these efforts is atenacious teaching that assumes that minoritystudents can do more, not less, that the cur-riculum must be enriching rather than com-pensatory, and that the context of teachingand learning must affirm the students' senseof self, build on cultural strengths, and re-spond to socioeconomic needs.

Those efforts have not romanticized theminority and disadvantaged they serve. Theyhave not minimized the gaps in preparationthat characterize the education of many mi-nority students. They do not even dismiss thepower of tests in marking students for educa-tional treatment. What they do is begin withthe belief that students have the ability to learnwhat they are taught when they are taught well."Belief" is an asset that must exist in thestudents as well as the teachers. Indeed, it iscentral to the functioning of any human devel-opment activity. It is the fuel that mobilizes theassets in the individual and in the community.

The formula for success in this asset-oriented educational approach changes to"expectations plus effort or strong prepara-tion plus encouragement well grounded in asupport system sensitive to culture and basicneeds equals achievement."

In this formulation, high expectations donot equal tougher tests. They mean the as-sumptionreinforced by gesture, language,and teaching stylethat the student will putforth the level of effort necessary to succeed.Effort implies strong preparation by the teacher

as well as the students. It is demanding, unre-lenting, exciting, and fun. Encouragementinvolves the articulation of shared dreams andthe exploration of endless possibilities. Cul-tural sensitivity is embedded in substance andprocess. It is more than having an Aztec calen-dar on the wall. It is being sensitive to culturally

specific ways of welcoming, affirming, com-municating, nurturing, and problem solvingand to values and traditions that frame theindividual's concept of self. It means respond-

52 n 1E IMPLICATIONS 01: AN Assyr ORIENTATION FOR URBAN CI IANGE STRATEGIES

ing to basic conditions of students and theirvulnerabilities in the context of poverty andisolation.

Early and sustained outreach to studentshas proven essential to increasing the successof minorities and disadvantaged students inhigher education. These efforts assume thatthe student has the "asset" represented byability early onand provide the educationaland personal development experiences thatwill ensure that the student is not tracked intoearly failure. The Mother-Daughter Prat the University of Arizona, started sew.. aiyears ago by a group of I lispanic women, nowserves more than 500 mother-daughter pairs.In this effort, not only are the students seenfrom an asset perspective, their mothers areseen as a key asset. The program has markedlyincreased the college enrollment of these stu-dents and of many of their mothers.

In Louisiana, a man by the name of Taylorhas developed a program similar to the Eu-gene Lang Program, which guarantees minor-ity and disadvantaged students that they willbe supported in college if they do well. Irecently had the pleasure of meeting the woman

who runs that program in New Orleans. She isthe most demanding, no-nonsense, loving,supportive, no-excuses woman I have evermet. She plays to the assets, she knows theneeds are there and she'll beg, borrow, or stealto find some way to meet them. But she neverlets on to her Taylor Scholars that she is doingit, and she never accepts an excuse for theirfailure to meet her high standards in academ-ics, personal behavior, personal appearance,or ethics. She has taken an asset orientation.She has a very clear understanding of thestrengths and the enormous needs of thestudents with whom she works, but she em-phasizes the assets to her students and thewider community.

Program development for urban changerequires the acquisition of information that isaccurate, relevant, and timely fordecisionmaking. An asset orientation in pro-gram development is best understood if oneunderstands program development, manage-ment, improvement, and evaluation as a pro-cess of gathering, making judgments about,and using information to make decisions (bigand small) about what and how the programwill do its work.

An inventory of assets: Individual,family, and community

Using an asset orientation in tandem with ourunderstanding of the extreme need in most ofour inner cities is required to give us accurate,relevant, and timely information about thecontext in which urban change strategies willoperate. In the acquisition of context informa-tion (as opposed to merely needs assessment),the methodology recommended by McKnight

,)ful. McKnight suggests that it is appro-priate to conduct an asset inventory of acommunity. In our multicultural urban cen-ters such an asset inventory must be approached

in a culturally congruent manner. In this con-text culture must be examined not in the senseof formal or superficial culture, but in thesense of deep culture. Mow is it that the peoplein this community sustain their humanity? Itmay be useful to inventory assets and frameresponses to potential from three perspec-tives: individual, family, and the immediatecommunity. This is at the core of what is real.We tend to lose sight of the reality that thereare assets in individuals, families, and commu-nities.

Individual

It is essential to engage in an analysis of theasset represented by individuals in a commu-nity. In my experience working with disadvan-taged populations all over this country formore than 25 years, I never fail to be amazedand inspired by the potential in individualseven in the most desperate circumstances. 1remember in particular the Head Start motherwho met me in an embarrassingly luxuriousLos Angeles hotel suite to advocate the pro-gram. She was alive, strong, articulate, charm-ing, and funny, but she told me that HeadStart had saved her from suicide.

I ler son had not attended I lead Start atage three because she was too depressed toengage in the registration process. Abandonedby her son's father, she spent most of her dayin bed, getting up only to eat and feed herchildren. A social worker intervened and suc-ceeded in convincing her to allow the child toattend the program. With her son absent sheslept even more. One day she went to theI lead Start center to give her son some missed

IMPLICAIIONS OF AN ASSET ORIENTATION FOR URBAN CI LANGE STRATEGIESr

We tend to lose sight ofthe reality that there areassets in individuals,families, andcommunities

53

There exists in poor andinner-city communitiesthe same spectrum ofintelligence, talents,character, wisdom, andstamina as exitsanywhere in oursociety

medication. She was so welcomed and theplace was so inviting that slowly she began tovisit more frequently. Over time she becamean active, involved parent. She had sinceearned her GED and was enrolled in juniorcollege. At the time I met her she was acandidate for a national office in the HeadStart Parents' Association. This story stayswith me all the time because she was isolatedfrom support. But simply coming out of isola-tion and becoming involved in kinship groupsand support systems released her potential.

The stories are endless. The ex-drug ad-dict who taught me about the disease, theartist in jail, the alcoholic mast er,carpenter, thesoprano in the laundry, the foster grandfatherwho taught master's degree teachers how towork with autistic children, the migrantfarmworker family who at last count had pro-duced three slide-rule champions. I am con-vinced that there exists in poor and inner-citycommunities the same spectrum of intelli-gence, talents, character, wisdom, and staminaas exists anywhere in the our society. What ismissing is the opportunity, the exposure, thesupport, the wherewithal!, the models, theexpectation of possibilities. As professionalswho presume to intervene in the lives ofindividuals, we would do no harm to system-atically inventory these assets. If we can seethese assets, it then becomes necessary toframe programmatic responses with those as-sets in mind. We must he prepared to ask thequestions, "What does the program need inorder to tap those assets? What is the sensitiv-ity to culture, language, economic circum-stances, and conditions of daily survival thatmust exist or be developed in order to have thecapacity to tap the assets of individuals?"

Family

Analyzing the community assets representedby families in all their diversity and tailoringprogrammatic responses to those assets canhe among the most fruitful by-products of anasset orientation. When we will look at fami-lies we have the responsibility to he keenlysensitive to cultural characteristics and differ-ences. I think that the lesson of the 1960s isthat a lot of people who were seen as devoid ofassets and with little potential were given achance to be creative, responsible, innovative,

to show what they can doand some of thosepeople made incredible contributions to oursociety. I think an asset orientation that looksat people in these communities with new eyes,and engages them in person-to-person part-nerships for the creation of new goals andopportunities is essential.

Immediate community

The human infrastructure that makes up manyinner-city communities has been developedover time to respond to the harsh realities ofinner-city life. In this respect, such an infra-structure may have more organizational assetsthan those found in more affluent neighbor-hoods where individual family units tend to be

much more self-contained.What are some of the ways to inventory

those organizational assets and develop pro-grammatic responses that address needs bymaximizing assets? Clearly, the communityhas a system for communicating the basicinformation needed for survival. The systemmay include media outlets such as radio andprint media, bulletin boards, church bulletins,retail outlets, as well as informal networksformed at laundromats, human service agen-cies, and other sites. The community makesdecisions about the rituals, events, andemergencies that will bring them together fora common purpose. An inventory should askwhat are the institutional settings in whichthis coming together occurs and who are thekey individuals who effect this coming to-gether?

On a deeper level, it is necessary to under-stand the motivation and ethics that influencedaily life in a community. I would not presumeto work in the Latino Washington, D.C.,metropolitan area without knowing some-thing about Central American politics. Indeedif you listen to Spanish radio in Vashington,D.C., what you learn is that the communityextends from Woodbridge, Virginia, toBladensburg, Maryland. You would know thatthe community will gather in their functionalnetworks as family to commemorate country-of-origin holidays, for soccer games, and forculture and entertainment. The Spanish-lan-guage radio station would give you an indica-tion of the importance of the country-of-originbecause you would hear direct news broad-

54 TT IE IMPLICATIONS OF AN ASSET ORIENTATION FOR URBAN CI LANGE STRATEGIES

;,1)

casts from those countries. You would hearadvertisements for immigration, customs,travel and courier services as well as other legal

services. If you listen to the radio program thatis a kind of "want-ads" of the air, you wouldhear that people are advertising housing ar-rangements, soliciting jobs and job improve-ment opportunities, and a range of supportservices. You come to understand that thereexists a whole network of businesses, restau-rants, dance halls, food stores, and bakeries which

cater to this population in ways that makesense to their survival. It is in these establish-ments that people learn about jobs, humanservices, and civic life. You begin to under-stand something of the tremendous develop-ment of Latino community assets that haveemerged in Washington in the last decade.

An asset orientation is not a panacea forthe formidable array of dysfunction among

individuals, families, or communities in oururban centersor in our suburbs. Nor will iterase the need for a clear-eyed assessment ofneeds. It does, however, suggest that we mayhave been inordinately focused on needs andhave thus failed to assess the strengths in ourcommunities. Perhaps if we could learn to seethe assets, we could once again begin to trustthat the solutions to our inner-city problemsmust be fashioned not for those communities,but with, of, and by those communities.

BlandMa Cardenas Ramirez is the Di rector of the

Southwest Center for Values, Achievement, and

Community in Education, SouthwestTenisStateUniversity in San Marcos, Tows, and serves on

the United States Commission on Civil Rights.Ramirez was the Director of the Office of Minori-

ties in Higher Education in Washington, D.C. at

the time of the conference.

The solutions to ourinner-city problemsmust be fashioned notfor those communities,but with, of and bythose communities

11 E INIPLICNI1ONS OF AN ASSET ORIENTATION FOR URBAN CI IANGE STRATEGIES 55

States have responded toincreased demands anddepressed revenues by

cutting basic incomesupports and safety-net

programs

56

PAPER 3

Structuring effective communityservicesAudrey Rowe

As a nation, we are awash in a sea of dramaticand telling changes in American governmentand policy. The era of increasing federal spend-

ing to achieve social progress has ebbed. Andwith this ebbing the federal government hasentered a retrenchment period that beganwith the Reagan administration and could lastwell into the 21st century. This federal re-trenchment has forced the engineering of newpartnerships at state and local governmentlevels to design the social welfare agenda.

The White Housein its budget messagefor fiscal year 1993stated that the adminis-tration had asked the governors, state legisla-tors, and local officials to review theadministration's proposed block-grant prin-ciples and identify other program candidatesthat they would consider suitable for "turn-over to the states."

In that same budget message, the admin-istration encouraged states to take the lead indesigning and testing programs to improveassistance programs for low-income families.This means that leadership for social welfareprogress has shifted to the state and locallevels, precisely where it flowered during the1920s when states were hailed as "laboratories

of democracy" (Steinbach 1986). But thisshift comes at a time when states are grapplingwith the dual realities of shrinking resourcesand increased demands for services. Accord-ing to a May 1991 survey by the NationalConference of State Legislatures, prospectivestate deficits for fiscal 1992 totaled more than$30 billion. According to the National Asso-ciation of State Budget Officers, many statesare experiencing the worst economic pres-sures since the Great Depression of the 1930s.Twenty-six states were forced to cut theirbudgets midyear due precisely to revenueshortfalls.

States, by and Inge, have responded tothese increased demands and depressed rev-enues by cutting basic income supports andsafety-net programs. It is noteworthy that:

California reduced AFDC benefits by 4.4percent.

Maryland reduced AFDC benefits by 7percent.

Michigan reduced AFDC benefits by 6percent and eliminated all special-needs pay-ments.

Tennessee reduced benefits by 4.9 per-cent.

Fourteen states cut their general assis-tance program.

Despite the severe economic constraints,these developments have also generated op-portunities for new approaches to public ser-vice delivery. State and local governments arebeing forced to reassess their public servicedelivery systems' function and role. Risinglabor costs, due to union contracts, and risingoperational costs are increasing the costs ofservices. Yet citizens are rebelling when askedto support the costs of paying for these in-creases. Government is being blamed for fail-ing to meet the needs of our poor children andfamilies; poor children and families are beingblamed as irresponsible and hopelessly dys-functional. These conflicting mandatesshrinking resources and increasing demandsfor services--are exacerbated by the publicfrustration that "something" must be done,and must be done quickly!

Private funding for community initiativeshas been encouraged as never before. Theseinitiatives have arisen, in large measure, be-cause of an acci:eration of alternative fundingapproaches by state governments. These al-ternatives have included contracted services,privatizations, direct grants and vouchers, andintergovernmental agreements. Voluntary ser-vices by individuals and groups, including vastnumbers of self-help programs, have alsogrown. All these alternatives for service deliv-ery are useful insofar as they allow governmentto be responsive, efficient, and (*din inmeeting citizen needs and demands. And asstate and local governments have embraced

STRUCIURIM;EFFECI1VECOMMUNITYSERVICES

these alternatives, they have increased theirreliance on community-based organizationsto provide a range of services.

States have met with varying degrees ofsuccess in this endeavor. In some states theseefforts have increased accessibility, and thecomprehensiveness of programs, and whereapplicable, affordability when fees are neces-sary, and requisite charges are imposed inaccordance with an ability to pay. But theseapproaches face the considerable problems oforganizational capacity to endure and thriveover substantial periods of time, as well as theorganizational ability to involve communitymembers in program development, planning,and operations. It has also been difficult forlocal and state governments to restructuretheir systems' expectations, regulatory man-dates, funding cycles, and contracting proce-dures to respond to these alternative methodsfor the delivery of human services.

Structuring an appropriate response

Collaboration, coordination, and integratedservices at the local level for poor familiesappear to be the new rallying cry of profession-

als working in human services. Interest in thisapproach is also found within city halls, state-houses, and governors' offices.

One such example of a state-sponsoredinitiative in Connecticut, introduced throughthe State Department of Education, is thecoordinated Education and Training Oppor-tunities (CETO) grant. The result of a year ofcooperative planning at the state and locallevels, the intent of CETO has been to imple-ment a funding structure and planning pro-cess to enhance local decisionmaking in thedelivery of education and training services todisadvantaged populations. The frameworkdeveloped promotes a comprehensive plan-ning model for the delivery of services througha regional, client-centered system. Designedto bring together similar progrqms and re-sources into one planning process, one man-agement structure, and a common Requestfor Proposal, it currently includes federal fundsfrom the Carl D. Perkins Vocational andApplied Technology Education Act of 1990(Single Parent/Displaced I lomemaker/SinglePregnant Women, Adults in Need of Trainingand Retraining, and Community-Based Or-

ganization funds), the Job Training Partner-ship Act/Ed ucation Coordination and Grants,the Adult Education Act, and state resourcesfrom the Department of Income MaintenanceJob Connection for remediation.

CETO is implemented and operatedthrough an area collaborative. The coyabora-tive is responsible for the development andimplementation of a plan for the delivery ofservices to target populations and for the attain-

ment of interagency coordination. The suc-cess of the CETO initiative raises questionsabout effective, comprehensive service deliv-ery strategies that move beyond cooperation.

Cooperative initiatives usually improve the

coordination of existing services but do notrequire commitment to a reallocation of re-sources toward mutually agreed upon com-munity agencies. Cooperative ventures engagein networking and information sharing to bet-ter match needs with resources.

Collaborations, by contrast, establish com-mon goals and mutual agreement for resourceahocation. Collaborations jointly plan, imple-ment, and evaluate the joint effort. "A collabo-rative strategy is called for in localities wherethe need and intent is to change fundamen-tally the way services are designed and deliv-ered throughout the system" (Education andHealth Consortium, p. 16).

Linking services to schools is a frequentlydiscussed model of collaboration. The modelof school-linked, integrated services placesthe school in the central position to facilitateaccess to a range of support services: counsel-ing, day care, health care, and family planning.

Among the longer running programs are "Cit-ies in Schools," which has programs operatingacross the country. Although the model isrecognized as a successful strategy, research-ers have raised questions about building agovernance structure that favors a single insti-tution. They contend that multiple accesspoints are necessary to meet the varied needsof children and their families.

Another model of collaboration is theNew Futures Initiative in Savannah, Georgia.This initiative, one of four to receive a grantfrom the Annie E. Casey Foundation, seeks toreduce the overlapping problems of disadvan-taged youth, school failure, unemployment,and teen pregnancy through substantivechanges in the design and delivery of services.

Collaboration,coordination, andintegrated services at the

local level for poorfamilies appears to be thenew rallying cry

STRUCTURINC; EFFECIWECOMMLINITYSERVICES 57

The advantage ofcollaborative initiativesover cooperativeventures among existingservices is the possibilityto restructure resourceallocation, programdesign, and delivery ofservices

58

The New Futures Initiative model uses a15-member public corporation empoweredby state statute. It pools resources from mul-tiple jurisdictions to enter into multiyear con-tracts, as well as to plan, coordinate, andevaluate the Initiative's progress. The ultimateobjective is "to trigger and sustain a politicalprocess that is powerful enough not only tomodify established institutions, but actually toredefine their objectives, their accountabilityand their interrelationships." What is criticalto the initiative's success is its receipt of localas well as state administrative and financialsupport. It further establishes community in-put and "ownership" through the 15-memberpublic corporation and institutionalizes a con-tinuum of planning, coordination, and evalu-ation.

As a strategy, collaboration means morethan either integration or coordination of ser-vices. The advantage of collaborative initia-tives over cooperative ventures among exist-ing services is the possibility to restructureresource allocation, program design, and de-livery of services. It is collaboration, far morethan coordination, that offers the possibility ofreal and systemic movement toward the cre-ation of integrated community-based services.

Building on families' andcommunities' strengths

Beyond structure and design issues, programsthat work build on the strengths of familiesand communities, empowering them as anintegral aspect of program activity. Two of themost successful and enduring Great SocietyinitiativesI lead Start and CommunityI Icalth Centers---share these basic attributes.Both require extensive community involve-ment in the planning and design of services.Both require programs to maintain commu-nity-based governing boards that set policyand oversee operations. Both programs useextensive means to foster involvement by par-ents and families, including frequent and openmeetings, convenient locations and hours,vigorous emphasis on the needs of all familymembers, and an overall institutional de-meanor that invites families to use services.

A community-based system that governsthe development and delivery f servicesand provides and nurtures act . to them

needs to he flexible, available, and account-able to the population it hopes to serve. It mustbase its work on the needs of its clientele.Therefore, such a system requires mecha-nisms whereby the resident can contribute tothe development, planning, and delivery ofnecessary services. Building on communitystrengths has been a fundamental principle inthe field of Community Development Corpo-rations (CDC). During the past two decades,CDCs have become the principal suppliers oflow-income housing in some of this country'spoorest communities. However, these com-munity-based economic initiatives do not seephysical development, he it housing, commer-cial, or industrial development, as a single endin itself. Rather, these economic initiativesbecome a means to an expanded set of goalshaving to do with the stabilization of andimprovement in the lives of the communityresidents.

The Mid Bronx Desperados in New Yorkrepresent one such corporation concernedabout the quality of life within their commu-nity. The corporation, through its communityboard, involves residents in setting programpriorities and performance goals. All new resi-dents are provided orientation to communityprograms and resources. Community resi-dents are encouraged to share their skills andgoals for themselves and their children. Pro-grams are designed to enhance resident op-tions toward achieving economic self-suffi-ciency.

Effective community-based programsknow that poor families endure grim condi-tions and endless waits for services. Theseprograms attempt to mitigate, if not eliminate,these conditions, and to build a family's senseof self-worth about having come through itsdoors. By involving and showing fundamentalrespect for children, families, and communitymembers, successful programs have had ademonstrable impact on the willingness of thehardest-to-reach families to seek services in-dependently. Programs with community in-volvement also build a cadre of communityleaders capable of making change. In commu-nities suffering the loss of cohesion and infra-structure, building a core group of leaders canbe as vital a goal az, the more immediate needto get basic services to families in need. In-deed, using service delivery to build commu-

sTRucruRINGEFFEcrivEcommuNnYsi:Rvicis

nity leadership may be a basic condition forsuccessful service delivery.

Engaging the stakeholder

The power and position of the participantdetermines whether community-based initia-tives will have the necessary authority to alterthe delivery of services, or to negotiatesystemwide policy changes. Potential partici-pants must come to regard the benefits ofcommunity-based initiatives as outweighingthe perceived advantages of continued au-tonomy and independence. This shift in per-ception is crucial to the long-term viability ofcommunity-based initiatives.

I ligh-level sponsorship and the visibilityprovided by private funders can attract broad-based participation. However, mandates ofthis sort do not necessarily result in stake-holder buy-in for long-term institutionalchanges. The New Haven Family Alliance, aCasey Foundation child welfare reform initia-tive, began with full gubernatorial support.However, agency partners were unable toovercome the harriers that policy differences

created. This failure to overcome policy barri-ers meant that the alliance was not able tosustain a commitment beyond a new guberna-torial administration. The affected agenciesand community partners were unable to de-velop a commitment toward shared vision andgoals. The commitment to change did notextend into the organizational structure ofeach participant agency, and hence the poten-tial for a long-term and systemic reform waslost. Tangible stakeholder "buy-in" requires asystematic overcoming of the "loss" of inde-pendence for the "gain" of community-basedservice collaboration.

Ensuring accountability

When community-based services for familiesare designed to be interdisciplinary and fam-ily-centered, judgments of effectiveness shouldhe comprehensive and interdisciplinary innature, rather than narrowly defined or single-

agency focused. Program evaluation mustencompass the recipient of the services as well

as providers and funders (local, state govern-ment, foundations). Factors such as a sense ofcommunity empowerment and enthusiasmshould not be overlooked. If cost-effectivestrategies are to be identified, they also musthe based on a broad rather than a narrow viewof program success. Measurements of pro-gram success and accountability are both quan-

titative and qualitative.For, ultimately, it is the community use of

the program service that will be its measure of

success and accountability.

Audrey Rowe is Commissioner of the Depart-ment of Income Maintenance for the State of

Connecticut.

References

Education and I fealth Consortium. "Struc-turing Interagency Partnerships to Con-nect Children and Families to Compre-hensive Services," 1991.

National Association of State Budget Offic-ers, 1991 survey.

National Conference of State Legislatures,May 1991 survey.

Steinbach, Carol. "America's CommunityOrganization: Diamonds in the Rough,"The National Journal, A Mott Foundation

Paper, 1986.

Using service deliveryto build communityleadership may be abasic condition forsuccessful servicedelivery

smucruRINGEFFEcrivEcommuNnysimicEs 59

Both perspectives arecorrect. Integration andneighborhooddevelopment are bothimportant strategies

PAPER 4

Dealing with race and ethnicity inurban change strategiesPeter B. Edelman

The "modem" history of dealing consciouslywith issues of race and ethnicity in urbanchange strategies begins in the 1960s, as I seeit, although it has echoes that go hack to thedebate between W.E.B. DuBois and BookerT. Washington. In the 1950s, with Brown v.Board of Education, and the early 1960s, withthe sit-ins and the Freedom Rides and JamesMeredith, the racial challenge, at least as thelarger society saw it, was one of integration: avision of equal opportunity, of integratedschools and neighborhoods and workplacesnot a melting-pot America, because we alwaysknew that skin color doesn't melt, but at leastan America where, as Dr. King said, a personwould be judged by the content of his charac-ter rather than the color of his skin.

As the 1960s wore on, complicating factsappeared. The achievement of legal rightsrevealed the even tougher next layer of theproblem: economicsthe fact that you arcentitled to eat at a lunch counter doesn'tnecessarily mean that you have the money topay for your meal. And when the battle forequality went North, we found that many whohad cheered for civil rights in the South wereless enthusiastic about it closer to home. TheWatts rebellion, coming less than two weeksafter the historic Voting Rights Act was signed,

drove home the drama and urgency of theeconomic agenda. And the West Side of Chi-cago taught Dr. King that integration wasevery bit as tough a sell up North as in George

Wallace's Alabama. Integration was going tobe hard to achie'e, and economic opportunitywas going to cost money.

Watts, Detroit, and Newark reminded usin ominously rapid succession that there wereracially homogeneous and disproportionatelypoor inner cities that demanded an attentionthat, in a practical if not an ideological sense,would have to be monoracial in large measure.The ultimate aim might be integration for thepeople of the inner city as for others. But atleast in the short run, change, if it was to be

meaningful, would have to begin within theghetto. Spurred initially by the communityaction program of the war on poverty, organi-zations bent on inner-city developmentsprouted widely.

Indeed, for some the idea of inner-citycommunity development was an end in itself,separable from aims or aspirations of integra-tion. Among other forces shaping this per-spective was the Black Power movement,which told us that some African Americanspreferred racially homogeneous solutions (al-though, for others, Black Power was an asser-tion of the terms of dignity and self-respectthat should underlie moves toward integra-tion).

So, the second half of the 1960s featureda visible tension between those who still pur-sued or professed a belief in integration andthose who, either instrumentally or intrinsi-cally, had fixed on a course of neighborhoodand community development.

Vision of a just society: A racial andethnic perspective

If the first question put to me is, what kind ofsociety arc we trying to build in racial andethnic terms, my personal answer is, what welearned or should have learned from the expe-rience of the 1960s is that both perspectivesare correct. Integration and neighborhooddevelopment are both important strategies.Integration and racial and ethnic pride arcboth desirable values. Integration and cel-ebration of racial and ethnic history and cul-ture are both right. People should have realchoices and not he constrained by legal dis-crimination or economic privation. Of course,the question remains, how do we pursue the,esometimes conflicting aims simultaneously?What is the appropriate bal ance between t hem?

The premisemy premise, anywayisthat we need to be two things at once: onecountry in which all are citizens in the fullest

Ig4,11.1NG WITI I RACE AND ETI INICITY IN URBAN CI IAN( STRATEGIESt.i )

sense of the word and in which all can partici-pate equally, and a series of diverse communi-ties in which we are free to celebrate our own"differentness" based on history, national ori-

On, culture, or religion.This synthesis, helpful as it may be in

resolving the tension I mentioned, still leavesmajor unanswered questions. Unfetteredchoice about many different things is a funda-mental American principle, but there are times

when one person's choice conflicts withanother's. These conflicts are at the heart ofmuch of the racial and ethnic politics we areexperiencing in the country today. We stillhave not fully resolved the question of whetherthere are any racially or ethnically identifiedactivities or privileges that can legitimatelyexclude the eligibility of others or the exerciseof their freedom of movement or choice.

Each of us has a freedom of association.Who wins each con,2st over "associationalspace," to borrow a phrase from my newcolleague Mari Matsuda? We can demandthat you convert to Catholicism to be a Catho-

lic, but can the black table in the lunchroomexclude white students? At what point is theassertion of one's differentness acceptable asa basis for differentiation from others, and at

what point is it unacceptable? At what pointdoes the celebration of differentness that wevalue become so fragment ing of our identity as

Americans that we risk losing the very idea that

we are one country? The Soviet Union breaksinto republics. The republics may break up yetagain into ethnic units. Are we so charmed orimmune in America that we need have noconcern about balkanization? Does the fact

that we fought a great civil war over secessionand stayed together mean that we can blithely

ignore the question for all time?If we are going to build a new racial and

ethnic politics, we are going to have to workout accommodations that respect differences

in all directions and find the points of commonground on which to build. I hope I haveadvanced the ball a little when I say our vision

should he of a single, unified, diverse society in

which diversity is a value to be respected andencouraged. That is the premise, or at least it.is my premise. And while it may not needsaying, I want to say explicitly that it is apremise that is not solely about blacks andwhites, or even solely about race, but about

unity or community in all respects and diver-

sity in all respects.

Elaborating the vision: The role ofplace-specific strategies

In urban terms, the issue of unity versus diver-sity gets tied up with questions of place. Thepoor tend to live in the inner city, and they tend

to be disproportionately people of color. There

are of course poor people in the suburbs, andthere are nonpoor people of color in thesuburbs hut poverty rates are far higher inthe central cities, and as I said, the poor aredisproportionately people of color.

So when we talk about integration versuspursuit of legitimately monoracial ormonoethnic activities in an urban context, wenecessarily turn to questions of place. And ofcourse this is where things get even morecomplicated. To what extent should our hous-ing, education, and economic strategies hemetropolitan, or integrative, and to what ex-tent should they take as a given thatpeople will

live in their current neighborhood, and workand attend school in geographic proximity to

where they live?I feel fairly confident there is no unanimity

about that question. It depends in part onwhere you live: smaller or larger city, localpolitics, local economics, and so on. It de-pends on your personal beliefshow muchyou value integration yourself. It also depends

on your views about practical politics and

programmatic efficacy.Let's take practical politics first. It was

easier 20 years ago to call for dispersal andmetropolitan solutions. The Supreme Courthadn't yet decided Milliken and ArlingtonHeights, which cut litigative education andhousing strategies off at the metropolitan pass.Right at the moment, the suburbs seem a long

way away as a matter of political as well asjudicial reality. We are constrained by thetimes if nothing else to focus on people wherethey an-, although that focus does little to case

our task in these times of scarce resources and

ebbing societal concern about minorities andlow-income people.

The programmatic efficacy issue is whetherplace-specific initiatives in the inner city canwork. Some say too many leaders and role-models have moved outthat without them

Our vision should he ofa single, unified, diversesociety in whichdiversity is a value to herespected andencouraged

DEALING wrn I RAoi AND LEI INICIPi IN URBAN CI IANGE STRATEGIES 61

We need both place-specific orneighborhood-specificpolicies and broaderintegrative policies

it is impossible to build a successful and viablecommunity among those who have been leftbehind. The preachers and the teachers andthe doctors and the lawyers and the businesspeople have left, they say, and inner-city eco-nomic and community develop cnt towardcreating a stable community is as a conse-quence just not possible.

Therefore, these observers say, dispersal isthe only solution. We have to advocate poli-cies of employment, education, and economicdevelopment that transcend a base in a par-ticular inner-city place, so that we can givemany more people the wherewithal to get out.

I myself am agnostic about this point, forthe following reason. It seems to me that if youare going to give people the wherewithal to get

out of the inner city, you have to take the samesteps and pursue the same policies for theinner city itself that you would take if you weregoing to try to create a viable communitythere. You have to have good schools if peopleare going to be employable. You have to haveaccessible employment so people can acquirethe resources to move if they want to. Youhave to have good housing and effective lawenforcement and decent health care and allthe other aspects of a safe and secure neigh-borhood and community if you are to givepeople sufficient security to he able even tothink about planning to get out. It is alwayspossible theoretically to scatter chronic wel-fare recipients into publicly assisted housingthroughout the metropolitan area, but thepolitics of that aren't too promising, at leastnot at the moment. Helping people acquiretheir own wherewithal to he mobile seemsmore promising. And the policies necessary todo that are in my estimation largely the samepolicies one would follow in an endeavor tobuild a viable inner-city community. More-over, I expect many of you work in neighbor-hoods that are more stable and viable thanthose with the most severe confluence ofproblems, but that are nonetheless in need ofrenewed development strategies and improvedservices for families.

At the same time, I would continue topursue broader integrative strategies. Race, aswe all know, is disproportionately tied up withpoverty, so we need to continue to pursueantidiscrimination efforts with maximum vigor.

Employment and housing should he open

everywhereto all. People should have realoptions about the education of their children,and education at the postsecondary level is inany case likely to he available only outside the

particular inner-city neighborhood in which afamily lives.

Let me clarify something. When I talkabout broader integrative strategies, I am ac-tually talking about two different, althoughoverlapping, ideas. One is the idea of couch-ing remedies that speak to the broader com-munity in a nonracial and nonethnic senselike employment, education, health, housing,and child care. The other idea is more specifi-cally integrative, and involves breaking downlines of discrimination based on race, ethnicity,religion, or class. Both are important.

My point is that we need both place-specific or neighborhood-specific policies andbroader integrative policies. So, if my firstpremise is that we can and should pursue bothunity and diversity as a society, my secondpremise is that our urban policy can andshould he both place-specific and integra-tivenot either-or, but both.

Can we get suburban support for anurban change agenda?

Can we get the people of the suburbs toparticipate in a positive WM` in any of this? Thisis a very difficult question. The demographics

of the electorate have changed in a way thathas to he disturbing in the extreme to advo-cates of better policies for the inner city. Somany people now live in the suburbs thatpeople can get elected president totally with-out regard to the views of those who live incentral cities. At least Republicans can. Whenthe Democratic candidates for president ap-peared before the United States Conferenceof Mayors earlier this year, the only candidatewho drew any sustained response for his re-marks on behalf of cities and the people wholive in them was Larry Agran, the formermayor of Fresno, California. And you mayhave noticed that he not only won no delegatesin the primaries but was not invited to debateanywhere else either. There was a modestexpression of commitment to cities by candi-dates Bill Clinton and Jerry Brown in NewYork, but it looked like both were noticeablypleased when that particular primary was over.

62 DEALING Nem I RACE AND ETI micrry IN URBAN CI 1ANGE STRATEGIES

S

I have two suggestions to get support from

the suburbs as a political matter. One is topackage what one is advocating in terms broadenough to include and reach the self-interestof suburbanites. This is particularly possiblebecause of the recession and the widespreadperception that the presidents of the past 12years have run our nation's economy into theground.

So our ten-point economic policy pro-gram for the country might begin with ways topromote economic growth and tax fairnessgenerally. But points five and seven, if you will,

might relate to jobs and economic develop-ment for people in the inner city. Points sevenand nine of an overall education programmight relate to poor children. Points eight andten on housing in general might discuss low-income housing. The point is one of packag-ing, not substance.

Second. and this is hardly original either,we need to get across to the people of thesuburbs that America needs all its people to be

productive. You have all heard the projectionthat more than eight of ten new workersduring this decade are going to he female,people of color, or foreign-born. If we do noteducate and train everyone for the labor force,we will not have the workers we need, and jobswill disappear abroad or he replaced by tech-nology and automation at an even faster rate.

These generalizations are not instant win-ners. They will have some appeal to a nationaladministration more interested than the cur-rent one in these issues, particularly if thebusiness community will join in the appeal.But we should not kid ourselves. This is not aneasy sell. Our place-specific strategies are un-likely to have campaign salience at any time,but we have at least some hope of success inpursuing them legislatively if we package them

properly.Let me restate this a little differently. I see

a difference between national themes or cam-paign themes and appropriate policies andprograms. I am suggesting that we need a new,transcendent politics wherever we can frameissues broadly for thematic or campaign pur-poses. Transcending race, ethnicity, and pov-erty, I believe we can maximize middle-classsupport for real agendas of change for minori-ties and the poor if we frame our proposals aspart of larger agendas in aas of broad con-

cern. Our pro-grammatic politicswith itsplace-specific strategieswould then be pur-sued post-electorally in arenas and forumswhere technical policy detail finds a readieraudience.

Racism and responsibility: Whatshould we say out loud?

I low do we handle issues of race and racism inpursuing urban change strategies? I supposethat before we can talk about that we need todefine more precisely the urban change we arediscussing. If it is rebuilding our roads, bridges,tunnels, sewers, and water mains, I don't thinkthere is too big a race problem in how we talkabout things. On the other end of the spec-trum, if we are talking only about urban pov-erty when we talk about urban change, we arecolliding directly with people's perceptionsthat this is !-eally a race problem with a slightly

euphemistic name.My first suggestion is along the lines of

what I said above concerning the framing ofthe issue. Not everyone who lives in cities ispoor. Not every urban person who has a housing

or education or employment problem r con-cern is poor. So I would suggest, again, that wewant to frame discussion in the broadest termsthat are nonetheless credible and relevant.

Still, a lot of what we are trying to remedyis poverty, and the poor are disproportionatelyAfrican American and I lispanic American.

I think it is critically important to prove toour fellow citizens that racism is alive andwell--that ugly, operative, effective racism isdenying people jobs and stunting lives as we sit

here, as we speak. There is a tendency in thebody politic to say that racism is confined to aDavid Duke fringe or to Willie I lorton cam-paign appeals, but that we legislated effectiveand operative racism out of existence with the

civil rights laws of the 1960s.I happen to be one who thinks that some

people cry race too often to mask shortfalls intheir own performance or evade responsibilityfor their own failures. But I also know thatracism is hurting other peoplea far greaternumber, I should sayon a daily basis, and Ithink America tries its hest to sweep that ugly

fact under the rug.Let me tell about something some of us

are doing in Washington, D.C.which proves

We can maximizemiddle-class support forreal agendas of changefor minorities and thepoor if we frame ourproposals as part oflarger agendas in areasof broad concert

DEALING WIT! I RACE AND ETI INICFIN IN URBAN CI LANGE STRATEGIES 63

It is- time to putdiscussion of racismback into our publicdebate

6-1

my point and which I think deserves widepublicity and circulation. Our little organiza-tion is called the Fair Employment Council ofGreater Washington, and our hypothesis isthat black and hispanic young people arelosing out on jobs every day solely because oftheir race or ethnicity. We have sent youngpeople out as testers of this hypothesis, and wehave found that it is indeed true. The youngpeople apply for or inquire about jobs inperson, by mail, or by telephone, offeringsimulated resumes that are carefully pairedwith simulated white applicants who ask aboutthe same job at the same time. Time after time,

the y. 'cites are hired or invited to the next stagein the process while the black and I Iispanicyoung people are shunted aside. Private em-ployment referral agencies, hotels, upscalerestaurants, retail stores, and car dealers haveall been tested. Companies in every categoryhave failed the test. The situation is appalling.

I need to say parenthetically that thismethodology is like one of those demonstra-tions in television commercials where there isa disclaimer about some stunt done with theproduct that says, don't try this at home. If youare interested in carrying out employmenttesting in your communityand I think youshould be talk to me or write or call me, andI will put you in touch with the Fair Employ-ment Council. The methodology is compli-cated, but we would be glad to help you use it.

Getting back to the point, we need to dothree things about the issue of race:

Get the demographic facts about race andpoverty o at on the table. It is still true that themost of tlie poor in America are white.

Get the facts about racism out on thetable. In today's skeptical world, this requiresproof.

Get the message out to the outside worldand to our constituencies that we know thedifference between racism at. ' he limitationsor failures to take responsibility on the part ofsome individuals. This last is obviously a pain-

ful and complicated IN lint, but I hope I do notoffend anyone when I suggest that it belongson the list.

1 low do we make these points in thebroader community? It is not easy, of course,and I have no magic suggestions. It would helpif we had more people in leadership positionswho would talk about racism- --and it is one of

the strong points of Bill Clinton's candidacythat he has done so. Apart from that, I think itis important to document the facts about thecontinuing devastation that racism is causing,and I think it is equally important to find waysto say that we understand people have to takepet-tonal responsibility for themselves in ap-propriate measure.

It is time to put discussion of racism hackinto our public debate. I think I understandhow hard this will be for people to do in ameasured and balanced way. It is excruciat-ingly difficult to be persistent and patient inpressing a point that should he obvious toeveryone. It is exasperating and painful toraise matters ahoy' which one feels a totallyjustified anger. And it is easier to contain thatanger so long as it is totally repressed than ifone tries to discuss it with restraint and re-serve. But we must try. We must fight theracial stereotyping that is going on just belowthe surface and sometimes totally out in theopen.

Let me he a little more specific. Most ofyou meet with or have a dialogue in one way oranother with the civic and elected leadershipof your city. That is one thing that has changedsince the 1960s. They may not know how to heas helpful as they should he, or, deep down,they may not care very much, or they may notknow where to find the resources to he ashelpful as they would in fact like to be. Burmost of them now participate in task forcesand committees of one kind or another thataddress pressing questions about education,housing, homelessness, or economic develop-ment. You can talk to them about discrimina-tion. You know as well as I do that if you seemto overplay the race card, they will get defen-sive and nothing will be accomplished. Butperhaps you can even get them to participatein studying what happens to black, I lispanic,and other minority young people who try toplay by theAmerican rules and still get shunted

aside. Perhaps careful discussion accompa-nied by persuasive evidence can produce somenew insight.

What is happening now in many cities, Ifear, is that civic leaders think that they havetried to make an effort and that the problemsare intractable. 1 think this is happening irlschool reform, the main area of business com-munity involvement in recent times. And I am

DEALIN( I RACE AND ETHNICITY IN URBAN CI IAN( ill. STILATI.GIES

afraid that loco; business leaders in someplaces are coming to the conclusion, probablynot stated out loud, that the real problem is astubborn underclass out there that just doesnot want to he helped. This is a classic case ofblaming the victim, and it is partly occurringbecause our national leadership is so derelict.But another reason, I think, is that the businessleaders really do not understand the odds thatinner-city young people face. This is what we

have to try to communicate better than we have.

Role models and empowerment:Two sides of the same coin

A nagging issue nearly everywhere is, where is

the leadership of the racial or ethnic commu-nity in question? Insofar as we are talkingabout inner-city neighborhoods, the middle-class leadership has in large part moved outand is not physically present.

A key resource, underused andunderinvolved in many cities, is the church,especially the black church. I am talking aboutboth the ministers and the congregants. I amtalking about role models as tutors and bigbrothers and big sisters for children, and I amtalking about programmatic and policy lead-ership and advocacy involvement.

I have no doubt that the ministers getinvolved when there is an election going on.That is a time-honored American tradition.But what about the rest of the time? Who isspeakingout about the violence that has young

people killing each other in the streets? Whois organizing the message that there is anotherway that might pay less in the short runbut will

result in life going on past age nineteen? Whois organizing the effort to get a permanent,visible presence in the schools and the settle-ment houses and the playgrounds of success-ful adults who by their presence and theiractions and their assistance send the messagethat you can do it if you try?

Everybody is busy. I know that. But I havethe feeling that even people who work full-time on community development and im-provement don't necessarily make themselvesvisible and accessible to real people and espe-cially real children. What about it? Am I wrong?

When I started working on these issues inthe 1960s, it was the la.ihion to say that tutor-ing and mentoring were handaids and not

worth the effort, and that the only thing worth-while was the revolution or at least full-timeefforts at systemic change and reform. Wecertainly need more people working at sys-temic change than we have now, but we alsoneed to be absolutely clear that one-on-onecontacts with children are vitally important.They don't change the system, but they canmake all the difference for a particular child.That is not a handaid.

I think role models and empowerment gohand in hand, although I hasten to say thereare a myriad of other ways to build empower-ment that are beyond the scope of my particu-lar assignment here: tenant management ofhousing and moves toward ownership as well,parent participation in schools, I lead Start,and child care centers, neighborhood residentinvolvement in economic and communitydevelopment initiatives.

But a key component of what needs tohappen is to involve the people of the samerace or ethnicity who live elsewhere. It is veryimportant to break down the isolation andhelp in illuminating pathways and routes tothe outside world.

Building multiethnic coalitions forcommunity change

I would begin here with what I call the OceanI sill Brownsville lesson. When Mayor JohnLindsay decided to experiment with schooldecentralization and community control inNew York City in 1968, a black neighborhoodbecame the primary battleground of the ex-periment. Without going through even a tidbitof the tortured history of how things wentwrong, it has always seemed to me that thedemonstration would have had a much greaterchance of success if there had been a way tokeep the issue from becoming racial. The wayin which things played out created a destruc-tive racial politics, and especially an ugly black-Jewish confrontation because of the fact thatso many of the teachers wereJewish.

So the Ocean 11111Brownsville lesson isabout inclusiveness. If a city is going to under-

take an initiative in neighborhood develop-ment, it should see if it is possible to build abroad base of support for it by connecting it to

a multiplicity of the constituencies that make

up the city's electorate.

DLALING itAcE AND ETHNICITY IN URBAN CI IANGE STRATEGIES

Business leaders reallydo not understand theodds that inner-cityyoung people face

65

We do not do nearlyenough about tellingour nation of the stakesinvolved in all of this.The violence nowraging in inner cities haslethal implications foreveryone

I hasten to say this comment may not itevery situation. If the need is for an initiativeto tackle highly concentrated poverty in one ormore neighborhoods, it may unfortu.ately bethe case that highly concentrated poverty ex-ists only in African American and HispanicAmerican neighborhoods. There are clear his-torical reasons why this might he the case. Andif we are talking about school-based initia-tives, in many cities it is by now the fact thatAfrican American and I Iispanic Americanchildren constitute nearly all of the children inthe public schools. Nonetheless, we need tobuild as broad a base for change as possible,and the basic insight is that we need to give asmany people as feasible a stake in the en-deal. or.

But the coalitions should not be built onlyacross racial and ethnic lines. They need to hebuilt across lines of class and interest as well.This goes back to what I said earlier aboutrelating to the people of the suburbs, relatingto the civic and political leadership, and relat-ing to the successful business and professional

people and clergy of one's own racial or ethnicgroup. It also goes hack to the point I madeabout the need for people who work in neigh-borhoods to cut across professional or disci-plinary lines. It has to he recognized that there

are not enough hours in the day, but I wonderif one of our problems may be the narrownessof the piece of turf on which each of us works.Do the people who work on improving ser-vices to families pay attention to problems ofschool quality? Do the school reformers focuson the way public housing is administered?

Everyone cannot he an expert in everything,but political coalitions for improvement in theway various institutions function at the neigh-borhood level could perhaps he usefullybroader and consequently have more clout.

Conclusion

We do not do nearly enough about telling ournation of the stakes involved in all of this. Ifnothing else, it should he apparent that theviolence now raging in inner cities has lethalimplications, sometimes all too real already,for everyone. And it should be possible tomake greater headway with the point thatanything less than an infinite expansion ofprison cells will not contain the violenceonlypolicies to create real life chances and oppor-tunities stand any chance of doing so. Thereare of course large numbers of leaders andrank-and-file people who could care less andwill not he reached no matter what anyonesays. But there are others, in every community,who could be enlisted with the right pitch. And

perhaps the rightest pitch of all is what is goingto happen to America if we let our inner-cityand urban neighborhoods deteriorate for an-other quarter of a century as we have since theelection of Richard Nixon in 1%8 signaled theend to a decade of activism and nationalattention to these issues.

Peter B. Edelman is Professor of Law atGeolgerozen University Law Center, and BoardChairofth e Fair Employment CouncilofGreaterWashington.

66 DIALING WITH RACE AND ETHNICITY IN URBAN CI IANGE STRATEGIES

PAPER 5

Toward community-responsive schoolsRalph R. Smith and Michelle Fine

The task of revitalizing urban America is inter-twined with what happens (or fails to happen)in that space called schooland to the centralbureaucracies that contain and control schools.While diehards exist still, those who wouldhave urban schools focus exclusively on edu-cationnarrowly definedthey arc an en-dangered species. Fewer still are those whowould deny that schools are an important partof any strategy to improve the experience andlife chances of children in situations that placethem at risk. But, as often is the case, consen-sus, while essential, is insufficient.

U.S. schools arc being encouraged to domore than they have ever done before even asthey are being pressured to do better than theyhave ever done before. These two objectivesare neither identical nor inherently consistent.In an era of limited resources and social triage,doing more by attending to a broader array ofstudent needs and doing better by improvingstudent academic outcomes could even ap-pear to be mutually exclusive imperatives. Thechallenge facing those who would have theschools do either is to realize that schools, tosucceed, must do both.

Across the country, in different ways, in-voking different histories and using differentlanguages, local communities are challengingexisting school systems to enable the emer-gence of schools that respond to the commu-nities they purport to serve and not just to thebureaucracies they inhabit. Within these "com-munity responsive" schools, it is thought, con-cerns for academic outcomes and social ser-vices could coexist with priority being ac-corded to each. Whether community-respon-sive schools in reality could deliver all that they

promise in theory is a quite interesting ques-tion to he contemplated elsewhere. I Jere, weassume the continuing desirability of commu-nity-responsive schools and posit two ap-proaches, both preliminaly, contingent, con-ditional, and open to debate.

First, community-responsive schools couldbe sought as a desired outcome of the school

reform movement. If this is to occur, localcommunities will have to understand andengage the school reform movement in itsdifferent, community-specific at id idiosyncratic

incarnationspressing unwelcome questionsand raising unwanted issues.

Second, community-responsive schoolscould he achieved by renegotiating the rela-tionship that now exists between schools andthe local communities they purport to serve.The objective of this renegotiation would be toreplace the unstated but powerfully presentcompact of low expectations with an articu-lated willingness of both schools and com-munities to do and be held accountable forsubstantially more than either has committedto thus far.

Imagine two scenarios: In the first, thecommunity latches onto an incipient schoolreform initiative and seeks to broaden anddeepen the reform, transforming school intospaces in which different and competent agen-das could flourish. In the second, the commu-nity embarks on a more circuitous course,demonstrating that it can create the externalconditions essential to school success.

A third scenario, beyond the scope of thispaper, acknowledges the probable limits ofboth reform and restructuring and offers intheir stead the image of a dismantled andradically transformed central bureaucracy.

Dueling anthems

In recent years school-community collabora-tion has amassed an impressive chorus ofsupport. But these are not the only voices to beheard.

The careful listener will hear the plaintiveinvitation to "walk a mile in my shoes" fromschool teachers, administrators, and stall Withthis anthem, they would tell of seeing superin-tendents, union leaders, and rank-and-ile playreluctant roles in a discourse of ventriloquismcommitting to "accountability," "improvedstudent outcomes," and this or that new "re-

Revitalizing urbanAmerica is intertwinedwith what happens (orfails to happen) in thatspace called school

TOWARD CONINILINITYRESPONSIVE SCI1001.S 67

Many hold out hopethat the school reformmovement will createnew possibilitiesforschool-communitycollaboration

form." All the while seething, feeling put upon

by an awful mixture of naivete, demagoguery:,scapegoatingall at the expense of schoolsand the people who work in them.

Urban public schools sit at that placewhere the consequences of untended prob-lems fall. Ours is a society without a nationalfamily policy, in which race and gender lines

arc coincident with privilege, and where the

gap between the top and bottom rungs of theeconomic ladder has grown into a chasm.Children have borne the brunt of these phe-nomena. And because schools are populated

by these same children, schools are stationarytargets for much of the blame.

Outside the school gates, yet another an-

them rises. R-E-S-P-E-C-T. Aretha Franklinvocalized what is at issue for many parents andcommunity leaders who care about schools.From their vantage point, in far too manycases, whether viewed as inputs or outcomes,urban schools convey an absence of regard forthe children, families, and communities theyserve. The graffiti-scarred walls, high raggedfences, pock-marked playgrounds, dingy class-

rooms all suggest a reluctant enterprise run by

the uncommitted for the insignificant. All toooften the personal interactions confirm andunderscore this impression. The morning andafternoon convoys of arriving and departingteachers and staff emphasize that their com-munity is elsewhere. This is merely their job.

Without the primary serendipitous contactthat conies from living in the same commu-nity, teacher-parent interactions occur in role,

at predetermined times and under circum-

stances in which the parent is hardly ever likely

to he comfortable.These dueling anthems converge to create

a cacophonous background against which toconsider school- community issues. We need only

ask those who fought the uncivil war over com-

munity control less than orK generation ago.

Hope for new possibilities

Many hold out hope that the school reformmovement will create new possibilities forschool-community collaboration. Perhaps.

The question of reform loitering aroundmany of American cities today takes remark-ably different fOrms, with the rule of parentsand community perhaps the most dist inguish-

ing feature. In Chicago, for instance, reformlegislation was passed in the later 1980s re-quiring all Chicago schools to he led by LocalSchool Councils, constituted by six electedparents, two community n tembers, two teach-

ers, and the principal. The task of the council

is to hire, fire, and contract with the principalfor a four-year tenure and to manage theschool budget. In Chicago, then, after years oflabor strife and terrible academic outcomes,the decision was made by strange bedfellowscorporate and community activist groupstoconsolidate efforts, struggle for state legisla-tion, and put parents and communities at thefront of "cracking the bureaucracy."

Avery different tack is taken for reform in

New York City. There, the most dramaticevidence of educational transformation comesfrom the alternative schools dotting the mapwith increasing frequency. Alternative schools

are allowed to bend district and union policies

so that teachers can be selected by school staff,

and so that the schools operate with substan-tial authority and autonomy. Although thealternative schools in New York still sufferfrom inadequate school-based resources andcentrally driven requirements, they neverthe-less enjoy relative autonomy, stability, andauthority. Within these alternative schools,parents are typically deeply involved in their

children's education, but not necessarily (oreven typically) in governance. That is, parents

are engaged in the education of their children

in conferences, report card conversations, andperhaps on-site visits, but parents are not, as arule, engaged in the governance of theseschools. In fact, the alternative schools areperhaps the best instance of "professionallydriven reform" that New York has enjoyed.

A second life of reform in New Yorkinvolves "community schools" supported pri-marily at this point by NewYork State Dep,ft-

ment of Education. These schools receive

funds to better integrate educational serviceswith social services at the school sitetoimport community and culture into theschool-

house. An emerging evaluation of these schoolsfinds, however, that even in sites most pro-foundly successful at evincing a "sense ofcommunity" in their schools, academic out-comes ( as traditionally measured) are notaffected. That is, one has to intentionallyconnect the sense of "community" with the

(,gTOWARD CoNINIUNITY-1{1 SPoNS11T1 St.11001.S

sense of "academics" for positive effects toflow both ways. If not, it is easy to affect one,with no obvious consequence for the other.

A third city, Philadelphia, brings yet an-other page of reform and the role of parents tothe national picture. Under the auspices of thePhiladelphia Schools Collaborative, compre-hensive high schools have been deeply en-gaged in "radical restructuring"democraticgovernance, interdisciplinary curriculums,small intimate learning communities calledCharters, performance-based assessments, andlots of college support for students and fami-lies. Each school that has opted for school-based management, and shareddecisionmaking has selected a governancecouncil with parent-teacher ratios in inverseproportion to those in Chicago. Four parents,approximately eight teachers, and two admin-istrators and nonteaching staff. Governancecouncils are supposed to make decisions byconsensus, and indeed parents are on thesecouncils as critical decisionmakers (not merelyto represent the interests of their children).Tensions between parents and teachers areobvious in some sites. Relationships are fluidand delightful in others. In Philadelphia, therole of parents is to engage with educators aspeers in the governance of the school, shapingthe educational plan and acting as advocatesfor the children.

Schools nationally, then, are engaged indiverse forms of reworking their interiors atthe level of relationships, roles, responsibili-ties, and rules. The work of reform has beendubious in some instances, especially for aca-demic outcomes. But in Philadelphia, initialevidence suggests that if councils of teachersand parents are engaged and supported inpursuing educationally rich Charterscom-munities small enough to negotiate among ademocracy of differencesstudent outcomescan indeed he enhanced. After two years ofoperation, course passage rates have increasedacross all 22 high schools, and there is compel-

ling evidence that students enrolled in theseCharters stay, attend, and achieve in excess oftheir d-:mographically comparable peers whoare not in Charters.

All this is to say that the govt ance ofschooling is in the midst of rethinking, andwithin that work, the role of parents andcommunity is undergoing radical revision. It is

M'Alt1) (.( )NIN1 ((NEI).- RESPONSIVE )()LS

probably fair to say that across communities,parents are welcome with weak to hostilegestures from "professionals." In many urbancommunities, schools have been establishedas the fortresses from which children would he

"salvaged." In these contexts, a rhetoric ofschool-community partnership often seemsquite remote from practice.

We offer three insights:First, schools are deeply involved in trans-

forming their governance and educationalwork. This is engaging them in internal de-bates about the nature of education, theirrelation to the community, and their "naive"beliefs about intelligence, mobility, and therole of education in reproducing or transform-ing the class-race structures around them.

Second, when schools are asked to "takeon another project," like teen pregnancy orAIDS counseling, or multicultural sensitivity,the fragmentation inside schools leads them tobelieve that these are indeed other projects,not an extension of good schooling.

Third, when these social service or com-munity projects are "added on" (unfortunately,Velcro is the most apt meta' Dt- we've got ),

their relation to academic outcomes tends tohe remote.

But there arc two images of integration. InPhiladelphia, now that many high-school teach-

ers are deeply engaged with small communi-ties of students grades 9 through 12, we havefound that they are engaged not only with thestudents as "minds" but also as "whole chil-dren." That is, the "discipline problem" in theback of the room who used to he suspended,or sent to the disciplinarian, is now known bya group of teachers. She lives alone. He takescare of a crack-addicted mother. She doesn'thave a home. I le doesn't know what theteachers are talking about. The "personal"suddenly is explicitly in the room I always was,

but got coded as "discipline" or "lack of moti-vation") and is now part of the curriculum. So,at one of our poorest schools, all students inthe Connections Charter are engaged twice aweek with teachers and social workers inFamily Groups in which the "personal prob-lems" of daily living are volunteered, explored

critically among students and faculty as the stuffof curriculum, as knowledge produced, nego-tiated, and experienced by students --as the raw

material for the creation of intellectual work.

The governance ofschooling is in the midstof rethinking, andwithin that work, therole of parents andcommunity isundergoing radicalrevision

To presume that theschool building can (orshould) do itsimply because it isthereis naive andfoolish

Family Groups have transformed howstudents engage with each other, and withfaculty and how they negotiate the worldoutside school. These aren't "rap sessions" to"ventilate." Instead, the "personal" becomesintellectual material. Nor arc they sessions forsomeone else to "fix" the students' problems.These young people know well how to nego-tiate their streets, peers, and communities,but they need resources, a place to reflect,images of "what else could be," and supportfor all their negotiations. Family Groups pro-vide just that. Family Groups are part of thecurriculum for all. They are not a pull-outprogram for "problem children" and not asocial-work intervention alone. Instead, theyare a process of community-building wherebythe strengths, passions, outrage, cultures,voices, and pains of young people interruptand transform the bureaucracies they know asschools and the adults they know as teachers.

At another high school, the CommunityService Charter students are involved for credit

in projects of community service in which they

learn about activism, community organizing,making a difference in a world in which so littledifference seems to be made for them or theirkin. Teachers report that students involved incommunity service are transformed by thesense of responsibility they carry when they

tutor younger children (evidence suggests thattutoring helps the tutor significantly morethan the tutee ), or when they work in hospitalswhere they are responsible for patients' well-being. Evidence from Uri Treisman and Eliza-beth Cohn suggests that low-income youths,particularly African American and Latino, aremore engaged and academically motivated

when the outcomes are collective and sharedthan when they are individualistic and com-petitive. And so, community service becomesa connection to "home" as well as a way toengage young students in the collective con-struction of knowledge where, as a commu-nity of differences, they are experts.

These stories tell us much about the pos-sibilities of engaging educational and commu-nity outcomes from within the same institu-tions. But more often, interventions that seekto provide educational change and yield com-munity benefits unfortunately do neither oronerarely oth. These connections need tobe reworked. They are not automatic. Indeed,

these connections are counterhistorical andcounterbureaucratic. Comprehensive highschools were designed to "save" children from"those families" to enable "those children" (orthe "talented ones") to escape from "thosecommunities." Notions of community affir-mation, partnership, and strengths are indeedforeign, if not suspect, within public schools.Further, budgets, funds, and institutional hi-erarchies are separate and fragmented. Tryingto do the work is just thatwork.

We need, then, to decide. Arc we envi-sioning schools as the site for the colocation oflots of services with no agenda for transform-Ing education? Or arc we trying to import,interrupt, and improve educational projectsby injecting rich images of community, cul-ture, families, needs, and passions into theclassroom and into the curriculum? Or are wesimply trying to get schools to he as good asthey can be at teaching young people what itmeans to survive and thrive. These are verydifferent projects for schoolscalling on verydifferent strategies and calling for very differ-ent outcomes. To presume that the schoolbuilding can (or should) do it allsimplybecause it is thereis naive and foolish, as wehave all learned.

Renegotiating the school-communitycompact

The uncertainty that school reform holds forgenerating community-responsive schools ar-gues persuasively for considering an alterna-

tiveone that engages schools while beingless dependent on the inner workings of schools

themselves. One such approach is renegotiat-ing the existing school-community compact.

Viewed unsympathetically, the existingrelationship between schools and local com-munities could be regarded as a compact ofmutually low expectations. Beyond taxes, anddespite rhetoric to the contrary, schools askand expect little from the communities inwhich they reside. These communities in turnbemoan poor performance, all the while ex-pecting school systems to remain permanentlyfailing organizationspersist ing with perform-

ing, failing without consequence.A new compact could encompass recipro-

cal commitments and mutually high expecta-tions. In exchange for being able to demand

70TOWARI) CONINIIINIT\'-ITSPONSIVL SCI 1001.Sr

more from schools, communities would domore to enhance the likelihood of schoolsuccess. Under the new compact, schoolswould agree to be held accountable for (1)delivering improved student academic out-comes, (2) allowing some social services to beschool-based, (3) transforming the school intoa community resource center, and (4) ensur-ing effective participation of parents and othercommunity stakeholders in all aspects ofschooling, including governance.

In return, each local community wouldagree to accept responsibility for the two in-gredients for school success overwhich schoolscan exercise virtually no control: the assuranceof school readiness, and the safety net of socialservices with which to surround the school.

All this is easier said than done. Even so,there is ample precedent for many of theprogrammatic componentsespecially on theschool's side. All across the nation are ex-amples ofeffective schools, school-based healthclinics, and school-community resource cen-ters. The much-praised Head Start Programprovides a time-tested model for parent in-volvement.

Enough is known to articulate standardsand criteria for effective parent involvement,school-linked services, and community-edu-cation resource centers. But on the commu-nity side of the ledger, there is less understand-ing of how hest (and even whether) to makeany substantial commitment at all, much lessto two amorphous concepts such as "schoolreadiness" and "a safety net of support ser-vices." These are amenable to less succinctexplanation.

School readiness

"By the year 2000, all children in America will

start school ready to learn." Counted as thefirst of the nation's education goalsandtouted as the most importantschool readi-ness had enormous intuitive appeal.

True story: In one to1/2an school one offOur first gmders fails in fir st grade, one of two fails

at least once before leaving elementary school,

and of thosz' who hare failed more than once and

are sixteen rears or older upon leaving eighthgrcidejewer than I0 percent complete high school.

Anecdotal information offers support to the suspi-

TOWARD CONIMUNVIN-RESPONSIVE SCI COOLS

don that these school-leavers are especially likely

to become young parents earlierand at a fas ter rate

than their peers, more often than not complicating

then-livesandfurthercompmmisingthelifechancesof their children. The cycle umtinues.

A compelling case is made for preventingearly failure. There is virtually no question thatchildren who are failed in the early grades areoften casualties of that perilous trek from birthto school. They are children who enter schoolmalnourished, with undetected, undiagnosed,and therefore untreated physical ailments,vision, and hearing impairmentswith devel-opmental delays and emotional scars of abuseand neglect. While it is true that schools andteachers must he held accountable for teach-ing the students they have and not just thosetheywould like to have, it is also true that much

could be done to make the task more doableand less like an impossible mission.

In naming "school readiness" as the first ofthe national educational goals, President Bushand the nation's governors rightly set out toemphasize high-quality and developmentallyappropriate preschool programs, parent train-ing and support, prenatal care, preventivehealth care, and good nutrition. What theyoverlooked, however is that school-ready chil-dren need school-ready caregivers who inturnneed the help of school-ready employers andcommunities. Thus expanded, "school readi-ness" presents some new challenges as well asadditional avenues for mobilizing resources,interest, and support.

Safety net of social supports

The institutionalized discontinuity betweenhome and school might work on some levels.It rarely, however, poses a serious obstacle toproblems. Not unlike the proverbial lamb,these problems follow Mary, Mike, Maria,and Malik to school every day. Teachers,counselors, and school nurses deal everydaywith the consequences of isolated families and

stressed-out parents. Their students, patients,and clients arc the victims (and sometime theperpetrators) of abuse in all its noxious formsphysical, psychological, sexual.

True story: Barbara, a teaching superrivor, ob-serves that a newly minted teacher is unable to

r;r

School readiness hadenormous intuitiveappeal

71

Since the system itself isa large part oftheproblem, changing thesystem must be a majorpart of the solution

72

reach a twelve-year old girl in her class. Deciding

to model effective teacher behavior, Barbara puts

her arm around the girl and says, "I just want you

to know that I love you. Even when I'm annoyed

at you, even when you do and say not nice th. ings,

I'll still love you." The girl begins to cry. Between

the sobs and amidst the tears, the girl tells Barbara

ofbeingmolested when she was nine, about being

called ugly for as long as she could remember,about being embarrassed by her frumpy clothesand her hair; ofhavingto take care of two younger

siblings while her mom worked a night job; ofbeing too tired to do her homework; of beingafraid to walk home after school. Barbara's heartsinks. She had reached this girl, gotten her to ham

her soul, and in her own way, to ask for help--help that Barbara has no way of providing."Beyond taking her home with me for good,"Barbara would say later, "there was absolutelynothing I could do about the plight of this child.

For weeks I felt as though I had betrayed her."

Barbara's story explains in part why one

senses in classrooms and in schools the samedetachment one observes in a hospital emer-gency room. It is not only that emergencies are

routine in that setting. Of even greater signifi-

cance is that the detachment creates the buffer

that prevents the professional from becomingoverwhelmed and rendered ineffective. De-tachment thus becomes more than an occupa-

tional hazard. It becomes an occupationalnecessity. However, the result of this distanc-

ing is an estrangement between teachers and

students, teachers and families, and an alien-ation of teachers from their work.

True story: A senior administrator in a largeurban school district assembled a workgroup todevelop a comprehensive plan to deal with thegrowingnumberofpregnant and parentingsch. ool-

age women. After listening to descriptions of

various programs, he asked the group todevelop a

"service trail" for a hypothetical sixteen-year-oldwho suspects that she is pregnant, wishes to know

for certain, and decides that, ifshe iv pregnant, she

will carry her child to tem and continue her high

school education. He asked the group to assume

that (I) she would have to find someplace to live,

and (2), she wasa reasonably conscientious young

seaman who would have to avail herself of the

1.1117.0lls programs available for her and her un-

born child.

Two weeks later; the group reported its find-

ings: The hypothetical young woman would beeligible for public assistance, food stamps, prena-

tal cam and nutritional supplements. Moreover,arrangements could he made for emergency aswell as long-term housing. There was one catch,

however. To get these services, the young woman

would have to arrange twenty-two contacts withthirteen different agencies, federal, state, and lo-

cal, public as well as private, in various locations

around the city. There were instances where acontact consisted primarily of standing in line to

get a form which., when properly completed,

qualified its hearer to stand in yet another line f)r

an appointment or interview, which in turn could

lead to the desired service. In short, the "servicetrail" was a virtual maze that often could henegotiated only by dforced choice between school

attendance and needed services.

Few would be surprised if our hypotheti-cal teenager left school. As a dropout, shebecomes yet another statistical accusation ofschool failure when, in truth, the failure en-compasses all the systems and, in some re-spects, school less so than others. What isremarkable is not that so many pregnant andparenting teens drop out of school. Given themaze they must negotiate to take care ofthemselves and their children, the remarkablething is that so many remain in school

In far too many areas, schools are literallyand figuratively catching the children andyouth who are free-falling through the safetynet of social programs established to supportfamilies. It is not enough to push for school-based or school-linked social services. There is

an important and appropriate debate to behad in this regard. Whatever the merits ofschool-based social services, schools shouldnot have to concede the debate simply be-

cause communities refuse otherwise to pro-

vide appropriate, accessible, affordable, andtimely care for school-age children.

School personnel need to see and hearcommunities demanding that the other child-

serving system become more family-focused,more preventive, less crisis-driven, more coor-

dinated, and less fragmented. This "systemchange" effort would h':gin with the simplepremise: Since the system itself is a large partof the problem, changing the system must he

a major part of the solution. That the existing

TUWAlt1) CONINit IN ITY.RESPONSIVE SCI 1001,S

systems for child care, primary health care,early education, and parent training and fam-ily support do not work isvirtually self-evident.

More troubling is the growing suspicion thatthese systems, as currently conceived and con-figured, cannot work. There is increasing evi-dence that these systems do not have thecapacity (in terms of the structure, relation-ships, or organizational culture) to succeed. Ifthis is so, communities have much to do ifschools are to he supported with the servicesthat students need.

Dismantling the bureaucracy

There is much to commend the quest forcommunity-responsive schools. The examplesmentioned in this essay are a hare fraction ofthe growing number of successful schools andprograms. We know enough to understandthat the task is neither futile nor impossible.Since we can create community-responsiveschools, the real challenge might he that ofdefining and ensuring the conditions underwhich such schools are realized, nurtured,supported, and sustained. We fear that thechallenge is formidable and the prognosisdiscouraging.

Again, we hear the voices of the parents,teachers, and others who are engaged in schoolreform initiatives across the country. They tellof small victories at enormous cost, of seeingthings change only to remain the same, ofhearing commitment only to discover Nien-triloquy, and of learning firsthand about bu-reaucratic resistance and resiliency. Theydespair of negotiating new understandingswhen they can hardly get a hearing.

Their voices and the lessons distilled fromtheir experience suggest that committing tocommunity-responsive schools might make itimperative to confront the scenario we re-served at the outset of this essay: imaginingand then working to achieve a dismantled andradically transformed central bureaucracy.Within this scenario, school reform (with itspromised school restructuring and therenegogiated school-community compact)joins a radically decentralized anddehureaucratized school systemnot as al-ternative approaches- but as essential condi-tions for sustainable, community-responsiveschools.

Ralph R. Smith is the Executive Director ofPhiladelphia Children's Network and Professorof Law at the University of Pennsylvania.

Michelle Fine is Professor of Psychology at City

University of New York Graduate Center.

References

Beyond Rhetoric: A New American Agenda for

Children am Families. Final Report of theNational Commission on Children, 1991.

Five Million Children: A Statistical Profile ofOur Poorest Citizens. National Center forChildren in Poverty. School of PublicI lealth Columbia University, 1990.

Smith, Ralph. "Help the C'rrildren. Fix theSystem." Penn Law Journal 27 no. 1 (Feb-ruary 1992): p. 20-23.

C0111171UniiV Education Resource Centers

Harkavy, Ira, and John Puckett. "TowardEffective UniversityPublic School Part-nerships: An Analysis of a ContemporaryModel." Teachers College Record 92 no. 4(Summer 1991).

Papers from the Conference on "Universities,Community Schools, and School-BasedI Iealth Facilities and Job Training," inUniversities and Community Schools 2 no.1-2 (Spring/Summer 1.991). Published bythe University of Pennsylvania.

Cooperative Learning

Cohen, Elizabeth. DesigningGroupwok: Strat-egic's for the Heterogeneous Classroom. New

York: Columbia University Teacher's Col-lege, 1986.

Treisman, Philip Uri. "Mathematics Achieve-ment among African American Under-graduates at the University of California,Berkeley: An Evaluation of the Matt :mat-ics Workshop Program." Journal of NegroEducation 59 no. 3 (Summer 1990): 463-78.

Parent Involvement

Epstein, Joyce. "School and Family Partner-ships." Center on Families, Communities,Schools and Children's Learning. Reportno. 6, March 1992.

The challenge isformidable and theprognosis discouraging

'r( ) \VARI) ( X )MMI,11,11riItESPONSIVE SCI 1001,S 73

Hale-Benson, Janice. Black Chi Urea: TheirRoots, Culture, and Learning Styles. Balti-

more: Johns Hopkins University Press,

1982.Henderson, Anne, Carl Marburger, and

Theodora Ooms. Beyond the Bake Sale.Columbia, MD: National Committee forCitizens in Education, 1986.

Rich, Dorothy. Mega Skills: How Families CanHelp Children Succeed in School and Be-yond. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1988,

School-Linked Services

"School Linked Services." The Future of Chil-

dren 2 no. 1 (Spring 1992) Center for theFuture of Children.

Sugarman, Jule. Building Early ChildhoodSystems: A Resource Handbook. Child

74

Welfare League of America, Washington,D.C., 1991.

School Readiness

Caring Communities: Supporting Young Chil-dren & Families. The Report of the Na-tional Task Force on School Readiness.Sponsored by the National Association ofState Boards of Education. December

1991.

School R(forin Efforts

Chicago: I less, Fred. Restructuring Schools.Amherst, Mass.: Bergen & Garvey, 1992.

New York: "New Visions Schools." NewYork City: Fund for Public Education,1992.

TOWARD CONIMUNITYRESPONSIVE SCI IDOLS

Conference Participants

76

1

a

Conference ParticipantsNew Futures Initiative

Bridgeport Futures Initiative

Cesar Bata Ha

Supervisor, Community RelationsSouthern Connecticut Gas Company

Rose DwightCommunity EducatorPlanned Parenthood

Kathleen J. EmeryExecutive DirectorDayton New Futures

Robert Francis Richard I lelwigExecutive Director ManagerRegional Youth Adult Substance City of DaytonAbuse Project

Maria MojicaExecutive DirectorBridgeport Futures InitiativeUniversity of Bridgeport

Michael SuntagEducation LiaisonBridgeport Futures Initiative

John MooreCommunity ActivistParity 2000

Bootsie NealCity CommissionerDayton City Commission

New Future for Little Rock Youth

Rev. Vernon S. Thompson Don CraryExecutive Director, I Iuman Resources Executive DirectorDevelopment New Futures for Little Rock YouthCity of Bridgeport

Karl WaldenDirector, Parent Education SupportBridgeport Futures Initiative

Da)'ton New Futures

Tom DaltonCity ManagerCity of Little Rock

Les I IollingsworthAttorney at LawI Iollingsworth Law Firm

Jean BookerPresident Mahlon MartinDayton Board of Education President

Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation

Amy Rossi

Executive DirectorArkansas Advocates for Childrenand Families

Joyce Williams WarrenCircuit Chancery Juvenile JudgePulaski County Juvenile Justice Center

Pittsburgh New Futures, Inc.

Susan BrownleeConsultantAllegheny Conference on CommunityDevelopment

CONFERENCE PARTV;IPANTS

George D. Harris, PhDPittsburgh New Futures, Inc.

Gerri KayConsultant, Allegheny Conference onCommunity Development

Jake Milliones, PhDCity Councilman

Rick StaffordExecutive DirectorAllegheny Conference on CommunityDevelopment

Chatham-Savannah Youth. FuturesAuthority

Susan I luttonPolicy AnalystChatham-Savannah Youth FuturesAuthority

Otis S. JohnsonExecutive DirectorChatham-Savannah Youth FuturesAuthority

Erma Jean MobleyCounseling CoordinatorUpward Bound Program

I lenry MooreAssistant City ManagerCity of Savannah

Gave Morris-SmithDeputy DirectorChatham-Savannah Youth FuturesAuthority

Bernard PoliteTraining ManagerUnion Camp Corporation

Casey Child Welfare Reform Initiative

Maryland State

Diane Bell-McKoyAssistant to the Mayor

I luman Services, Baltimore

Anita MarshallSenior Policy Analyst

Maryland Services Reform Initiative

CONFERENCE PARTICIPANTS

Janis Parks

Executive DirectorBaltimore City Family PreservationInitiative

Toni Samuel

Chief, Bureau of Planning, Grants, Contracts

Prince George's County Department ofFamily Services

Donna StarkState DirectorMaryland Services Reform Initiative

Margaret WilliamsExecutive DirectorFriends of the Family

Neighborhood and Family Initiative

Neighborhood and Family Initiative,Memphis

Steven BurfordScout Master, Troop 159

Stan I Island

ChairmanAnthropology DepartmentMemphis State University

Ron LovingQuality OfficerTennessee Valley Authority

Rev. Louis PurhamMount Pisgah C.M.E. Church

77

Ron RegisterProject DirectorNeighborhood and Family InitiativeCommunity Foundation of GreaterMemphis

Gail SmithClerkInternal Revenue Service

Gid SmithPresidentCommunity Foundation of GreaterMemphis

Neighborhood and Family Initiative, Detroit

Frank G. McGheeProgram AssociateDetroit Urban LeagueMale Responsibility Program

Victoria MillerBand DirectorSpain School

Miriam C. NolandPresidentCommunity Foundation tierSoutheastern Michigan

Robert SlatteryDetroit, MI

Neighborhood 'md Family Initiative,Hartford

Esther BushPresident and CEOUrban League of Gregter :ford

ti

Alan L. GreenAssistant DirectorI lartford Foundation for Public Giving

Thomas 13. Harris, IVProject CoordinatorUpper Albany Neighborhood Collaborative

Ralph KnightonExecutive DirectorNorth Hartford Development Corp.

Ruthie Bush MathewsPresidentI Lanford Board of Education

Sue Ann Shay, S.N.D.Attorney at LawNeighborhood Legal Services

Neighborhood and Family Initiative,Milwaukee

Sarah Ann FordProgram Officer and Project CoordinatorMilwaukee Foundation

Adriane I lookerCollaborative MemberMilwaukee Foundation

Dru RisleyCollaborative MemberMilwaukee Foundation

Community Planning and ActionProjects

Bostr ?resistant Poverty Project,The Boston Foundation

Maria Estela CarrionResearch Associate, Labor Studies ProgramUniversity of Massachusetts

Lisa ChapnickExecutive Director, Inspectional ServiceCity of Boston

Frieda GarciaExecutive DirectorUnited South End Settlements

Ronald I IornerChairman and CEOBoston Bank of Commerce

7$ CONFERENCE PAR YICIPANTS

Charlotte KahnProject DirectorBoston Persistent Poverty ProjectThe Boston Foundation

Nancy Root)Program and Project ManagerBoston Persistent Poverty ProjectThe Boston Foundation

Cleveland Center for Urban Poverty& Social Change, and theCleveland Foundation Com filissionon Poverty

Goldie AlvisSenior Program OfficerThe Cleveland Foundation

Julian C. ChowAssistant Director, Center for UrbanPmerty and Social ChangeCase Western Reserve University

Claudia CoulsonDirector, Center for UrbanPoverty and Social ChangeCase Western Reserve University

Tom CmPresidentNeighborhood Progress, Inc.

Carol Gib.ionExecutive

Cleveland 11!1-. 'vacation

Angela LowderAssociate Director, Clevc:,od Foundation Com-mission on PovertyCase Western Reserve University

Nina McLellanSenior Planning AssociateFederation for Community Planning

Sharon E. MilliganAssociate Director, Center for UrbanPoverty and Social ChangeCase Western Reserve University

Steven MinterExecutive DirectorThe Cleveland Foundation

Art NaparstekDirector, Cleveland Foundation

coNFERENce, PARTicIPANTs

Commission on PovertyCase Western Reserve University

Rollie Smith

Executive DirectorNeighborhood Centers Association

The Denver Poveily Project,TI:/(: Piton Foundation

,:rri Bailey

Research OfficerThe Piton Foundation Poverty Project

Elaine Gantz BermanCo-DirectorThe Piton Foundation Poverty Project

Mary Gittings CroninExecutive DirectorThe Piton Foundation

Samuel GaryPresident'Pie Piton Foundation

Grant JonesCo-DirectorThe Piton Foundation Poverty Project

Adele PhelanPresidentThe Clayton Foundation

the 1r ',ban Strategies Council, Oakland

A144-4" Blackwell

E. .ArcctorUrban Strateg:es Council

79

Maria Campbell CaseyAssociate Executive DirectorUrban Strategics Council

Jane GarciaExecutive DirectorLa Ciinica de la Raza

David GloverExecutive DirectorOakland Citizens Committee forUrban Renewal

Mayor Elihu I larrisCity of Oakland

Susan LubeckT egal Analyst

Urban Strategies Council

Marty MakowerStaff WriterUrban Strategies Council

Partnership for Hope, San Antonio

Dr. Lewis J. Agnese

PresidentIncarnate Word College

Laura CalderonConsultantPartnership for I lope

Representative Christine I lernandezSan Antonio, Texas

Choco G,,itzalez MezaExecutive DirectorPartnership for I lope

Ruddini: Snong Communities

Suategto tai t than ( hange

80

Larry WittePublic Information OfficerPartnership for I lope

Committee on Strategies to Reduce chronicPoverty, Washington, DC

Shari CurtisBureau Chief, Training and EmploymentDC Department of Human Services

Darryl HardyActing Deputy Director, Training & DvIpmntDC Department of Employment Services

Sue MarshallCommunity Partnership for thePrevention of I lomelessness

Joan MaxwellSenior AssociateGreater Washington Research Center

Ibrahim MumimProject OfficerCommittee on Strategies to ReduceChronic Poverty

Carrie L. ThornhillPresident and Project DirectorCommittee on Strategies to ReduceChronic Poverty

Annie E. Casey FoundationParticipants

Mustafa Abdul-SalaamExecutive DirectorNew I lawn Family Alliance

Ira BarbellSenior AssociateThe Annie E. Casey Foundation

Cheryl CascianiPlanning AssociateThe Annie E. Casey Foundation

Tony CippoloneAssociate. Directo:The Annie E. Casey Foundation

Ira CutlerAssociate DirectorThe Annie E. Case!, Foundation

CONFERENCE PARTICIPANTS

Sharon Lovick EdwardsSenior AssociateThe Annie E. Casey Foundation

Sid GardnerDirector of DevelopmentCenter for Collaboration for ChildrenCalifornia State University

Eric R. JohnsonChairFresno Tomorrow, Inc.

Kathleen JohnsonSenior AdvisorThe Atlanta Project

William A. JohnsonPresident and CEOUrban League of Rochester

Bonnie PolitzSenior AssociateThe Annie E. Casey Foundation

Mary Ellen PowellSenior AssociateThe Annie E. Casey Foundation

Bill Rust

Communications DirectorThe Annie E. Casey Foundation

Miriam SharkSenior AssociateThe Annie E. Casey Foundation

Ford Foundation Participants

Chance BrownResearch Assistant, Urban Poverty ProgramThe Ford Foundation

Prue BrownDeputy Director, Urban Poverty DivisionThe Ford Foundation

Keith L. I JoltCommunity Planning SpecialistCenter for Community Change

Susan MotleyDirectorNeighborho(xl and Family Initiative

Andrew MottDirector, Field OperationsCenter for Community Change

Renae OgletreeResearch AssociateChapin Hall Center for ChildrenUniversity of Chicago

Rockefeller Foundation Participants

Robin BroilerProject CoordinatorAmerican Writing Corporation

Ron FergusonProfessorKennedy School of GovernmentI Iatvard University

Michael FixSenior Research AssociateThe Urban Institut 2

Jim GibsonDirector, Equal Opportunity ProgramThe Rockefeller Foundation

Andrew I lahnAssociate Dean, I Idler SchoolBrandeis University

Karen I loinChairman and CEOBank One Cleveland

CONFIAilACE PART1( :WANTS 81

Sam KarpExecutive OfficerI landsNet

Peter MarrisConsultant

Ronald Nlincv

Senior Research Associate

The Urban Institute

Alice O'ConnorStaff AssociateSocial Science Research Council

Danielle ParrisSenior Communications AssociateThe Rockefeller Foundation

Paul PetersonChair, Department of GovernmentI larvard University

I lugh Price

Vice PresidentThe Rockefeller Foundation

Susan ReesConsultant

Aida RodriguezAssistant DirectorEqual Opportunity ProgramThe Rockefeller Foundation

Anthony RomeroSenior Program AdvisorEqual Opportunity ProgramThe Rockefeller Foundation

142

Bruce Ross-LarsonPresidentAmerican Writing Corporation

Michael WisemanProfessorLa Follette Institute of Public AffairsUniversity of Wisconsin

Conference Plenary Presenters

Peter EdelmanProfessor ')f LawGeorgetown University Law Center

Blandina Cardenas RamirezDirectorSouthwest Center for Values, Achievement, andCommunity in EducationSouthwest Texas State University

Audrey RoweCommissionerConnecticut Department of Income Maintenance

Ron ShiffmanExecutive DirectorPratt Institute Center onEnvironmental and Community Development

Ralph SmithPresidentPhiladelphia Children's Network

Keynote Speaker

William J. WilsonLucy Flower University Professor ofSociology and Public PolicyDirector, Center for the Study of UrbanInequalityUniversity of Chicago

Facilitator

Ann Rosewater

Conference Coordinators

Sheri Dunn BerryProgram CoordinatorCommunity Planning and Action Program Secre-tariat

Gloria KennardAdministrative 11:rectorUrban Sinner. Council

CONITRIACE PARTICIPANTS