Memphis Religious Health Assets - FatCowmrhap.fatcow.com/om_provider.pdf · Background Research included a review of Religious Health Assets Mapping projects in southern Africa, various

Memphis Religious Health Assets

Provider-level Workshop Report

Orange Mound

June 27th, 2008

PIRHANA Workshop: Participatory Inquiry into Religious Health

Assets, Networks and Agency

Prepared by:

Stephanie Doan, MPH*

With Collaboration from: Chip Clay, MDiv* Patience Jarrett† Stephen Nelson‡* Katherine Pritchard† Teresa Cutts, PhD *

* Methodist Le Bonheur Healthcare † University of Memphis, Department of Anthropology ‡ Rice University, Poverty, Social Justice, and Human Capabilities Program

This report is available online at: www.memphischamp.org

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION A 1

1. AREA & LEVEL ................................................................................................................1 2. DATE & PLACE OF WORKSHOP .......................................................................................1 3. FACILITATION TEAM ......................................................................................................1 4. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................1 5. PREPARATORY WORK .....................................................................................................2 6. PARTICIPANTS................................................................................................................3

7. INTRODUCTION TO PIRHANA WORKSHOPS ....................................................................4

SECTION B 5

1. TIMELINE........................................................................................................................5 2. AREAS OF ENGAGEMENT IN HEALTH AND WELL-BEING ...................................................9 3. RELIGION/ HEALTH INDEX............................................................................................11 4. COMMUNITY MAPPING.................................................................................................13 5. SOCIAL CAPITAL AND NETWORKING ............................................................................15 6. CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD PRACTICE .......................................................................19 7. LOCAL ACTION ............................................................................................................20

APPENDICES 21

Table 1: Orange Mound Demographic Data .....................................................................21 GIS Map 1: Religious Health Assets—Entities Identified Before Workshop........................22 GIS Map 2: Religious Health Assets—Entities Identified Through Workshops...................23 GIS Map 3: Soulsville Religious Health Assets— Combined ..............................................24 Table 2: Religion Contributes to Health—Voting Round...................................................25

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 25

PIRHANA Provider-level Workshop Report—Orange Mound

Page 1

SECTION A

1. AREA & LEVEL As a component of the Religious Health Assets Mapping project, a half-day workshop was held at the health provider level—focusing on the people and organizations that provide health and religious services in the Orange Mound community. The boundaries for the study area were formed by Southern Ave. to the north, East Parkway/Airways Blvd to the west, Lamar Ave./Kimball Ave. to the south, and Semmes Rd to the east. Most of the Orange Mound community is located primarily within zip code 38114 and includes parts of zip code 38111. The basic demographics of the study area can be found in Appendix Table 2.

Map of study area

2. DATE & PLACE OF WORKSHOP The workshop took place from 8:15 AM to 1:30 PM on June 27th, 2008 in the Multi-purpose Room in the Senior Center building of the Orange Mound Community Service Center Complex.

3. FACILITATION TEAM Lead Facilitators: Teresa Cutts, PhD

Methodist Le Bonheur Healthcare, University of Tennessee College of Medicine

Rick Thomas, PhD Health and Performance Resources

Facilitation Team: Stephanie Doan, MPH

Stephen Nelson

4. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION The workshop room was located in the middle of the Orange Mound Community Senior Center. A subdivision of a much larger room, there was a stage to the front of the room, with plenty of wall space for large papers and 2 flip charts for recording information. Behind the rows of seats facing the stage were 2 square tables that groups could stand around. Coffee and snacks were available at a table on the left side of the room.

Room Layout


Page 2

5. PREPARATORY WORK Preparatory work for this PIRHANA workshop included several different activities including: background research, field study, data collection, map generation, facilitation team training, workshop planning, and workshop materials preparation. Background Research included a review of Religious Health Assets Mapping projects in southern Africa, various approaches to community mapping, and models for participatory research projects. Field Study included a series of transect drives through the study area with team members familiar with this area and the initial identification of key assets and potential key informants. These transect drives, in combination with the insights from key informants, were used to decide the preliminary boundaries for this mapping exercise. Data collection included the acquisition of basic demographic, socioeconomic and psychographic data in the study area. Study staff compiled lists of known assets and interviewed key community informants. Map Generation involved the processing and analysis data on the study area, the incorporation of these data into a geographic information system, and the generation of geographical and special representation of area information through a series of GIS map layers. Facilitation Team Training occurred through team member’s participation in training events, past workshops held in similar locations, and a familiarity with the PIRHANA methodology and other participatory models for focused group discussion. Workshop Planning involved identifying potential participants for the Health Providers workshop, developing and disseminating a letter of invitation, and following up with potential participants. Workshop staff held face-to-face meetings, sent emails, and made follow-up telephone calls during the 2 weeks prior to the workshop. Workshop staff also identified the Orange Mound Senior Center as an appropriate site for the workshop and made the arrangements for AV equipment and lunch. Workshop Materials Preparation included the generation and printing of neighborhood maps, the printing of materials to be handed out, the packaging of these materials, and the organization of all the materials needed for the workshop exercises (for example, large pieces of paper, post-it notes, writing utensils, flip charts, and beans).

Orange Mound Community Center—the location of the workshop


Page 3

6. PARTICIPANTS A total of 11 ‘health providers’ participated in this workshop. The term ‘provider’ is used throughout this report to broadly include anyone who provides services in the community (including healthcare, religious, and social services). The workshop participants included 7 females and 4 males, with ages ranging from 22 to 71 years (median=35 years). Many of the participants have been long-time residents of Memphis—with 82% of participants living in the Memphis area for 20 years or more. Participants represented a range of religious traditions: Baptist, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Disciples of Christ, and other non-denominational congregations. Two participants did not list a religious affiliation. Workshop participants represented a number of health and social service organizations in the Orange Mound community, including Christ Community Health Services, Service over Self, Shelby County Government, Orange Mound Development Corporation, and Grow Memphis. In addition, two participants were associated with Harrison’s Funeral Home. The participants were highly educated; all the participants had a bachelor’s or associate’s degree with a majority of participants completing some type of graduate school. On average, participants had more than 17 years of education. The selection of participants using a ‘snowballing technique’ can often create small pockets of similar participants. While this workshop included some of the young and middle aged-adults that were not represented in the seeker-level workshop, there are many organizations and congregations involved in the Orange Mound community that were not represented in this workshop. The results and data generated must be interpreted with an understanding of the composition of the workshop (and those groups that were not represented).


Page 4

7. INTRODUCTION TO PIRHANA WORKSHOPS The workshop began with a short introduction of the workshop participants and facilitation team. Participants were asked to share not only their names but also a short description of the organizations they represent and any other connections to the study area community. Participatory Inquiry into Religious Health Assets, Networks, and Agency (PIRHANA) is a research model developed by a group of researchers in sub-Saharan Africa known collectively as the African Religious Health Assets Program (ARHAP). Rather than focusing on the problems and deficiencies in communities, the purpose of the PIRHANA workshop is to identify the things that are good and positive influences within these communities. While the original PIRHANA focused on community assets working in the area of HIV and AIDS in Africa, the model is equally useful for identifying community assets that play an important role in the overall health of communities in the United States. The process is different from a traditional focus group or town hall meeting since the participants actually become ‘researchers’ during the workshop and speak as community experts. In addition, the results will be used to create a report that will be presented back to the participants and the community for use in planning and future activities. The basic goals of the PIRHANA project in Memphis are to: 1) understand and assess the impact and growth of religious health assets in fostering health in all of its dimensions; 2) fuel research that will promote a greater and more complete understanding of the role of religion and religious institutions in health promotion and delivery; 3) strengthen leadership and organizational capacity to advance health and wellness. A similar workshop was held at the ‘health seeker’ level (with various members of the community) on June 26th. These workshops are just 2 of many workshops that will be held throughout Memphis during the next 3 years.


Page 5

SECTION B

1. TIMELINE

a) Data The focus of the first exercise of the workshop is to identify the development of important community assets and to place that development into a broader social, political, and religious context. To create a timeline to examine important events and trends, each participant was asked to fill out at least one post-it note for each of following categories, accompanied by an approximate date:

• One key significant social, political or economic event • The name of the organization they represent or belong to • A key event that deals with religion or health

After each participant had added his/her post-it notes to the blank timeline at the front of the room, participants were asked to continue to add important events that might be missing. Participants were given an opportunity to explain their additions to the time-line and were asked to comment on any trends that they could see in the data. Throughout the conversation, participants continued to add additional events to the timeline.

Facilitator asks for more information about an item on the timeline


Page 6

Religious and Health Events Formation of Organizations Political and Social Events 1830 - The MED Regional Center at Memphis opens 1870 - Yellow fever epidemic 1950-Polio Epidemic 1950s and 1960s-Church neglects the community 1962-St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital opens 1980s - Impact of HIV/AIDS virus on funeral services and care provided by clinics Mid-1990s - Rise of mega-churches 1994 - TN Care starts 1995 - Methodist and Le Bonheur merge Late 1990s - Concern for the city increases—see a move back into the inner city 2000 - MMHI Events 2000s - Health Loop Network created 2000s - Created Community Gardens to promote healthy eating and summer activities for people in the community. 2005 - Baptist Medical Center torn down 2005 – TN Care disenrollment-120,000 in Shelby County

1923 - Orange Mound Funeral Home opened 1968- MIFA established in the community 1971-FedEx opens 1973-FedEx moves to Memphis 1978-Neighborhood Christian Centers formed 1986-Creation of the Memphis Leadership Foundation 1986- Birth of SOS 1987-Church Health Center 1990s-Orange Mound Funeral Home was incorporated and changed its name to Harrison’s Orange Mound Funeral Home Inc. 1991-Orange Mound CDC opened 1994-Assisi Foundation 1995-Christ Community Health Services founded 1998-Binghampton as SOS target neighborhood 2001 – GROW Memphis 2002 - Le Bonheur Foundation 2003 - Research into what non profits are in Memphis 2006 - CCHS Orange Mound clinic opens 2007 - 4 weeks of camp in Orange Mound 2009 - Official start of SOS in Orange Mound

1920 - 19th Amendment grants woman’s suffrage (right to vote) 1930s and on - Boss Crump rules 1950s – Integration of schools 1960s - Bussing 1968-Dr. King assassinated 1977-Elvis dies 1980s-Ongoing burden of financial issues for funerals 2002-Orange Mound established first Community Garden with GrowMemphis. Concerned with leading issues in the community. 2008-Barack Obama gets Democratic nomination 2008-Dr. King’s remembrance celebration at the museum when his children visited


Page 7

b) Discussion Participants began to describe the various events and organizations that were placed onto the timeline. Participants noted that the majority of the organizations and entities on the timeline were placed on the timeline within the last 20 years. Participants discussed the importance of the government and social context on the health and health services provided in Memphis, including the opening of major Memphis hospitals, HIV and AIDS epidemic in the 1980s, the creation of Medicare/Medicaid in the 1965 and TennCare in the 1994, the closing of St. Joseph’s and the subsequent creation of the Assissi and Le Bonheur Foundations, the creation of the Health Loop Clinics in the 2000s, the decrease in services for people with mental health issues, and Baptist leaving downtown (and the “suburbanization of healthcare”). Participants also discussed some trends related to religion. One participant suggested that “Back when I was growing out, churches were smaller and community-friendly but now churches are like mega businesses . . . it’s not even dealing with religion with many of these churches, it’s like dealing with business.” Other participants reflected on some “dark periods” in the religious timeline. For example, in the suburban, evangelical churches, there has been a “neglect of the community” especially in the 1950s and 60s when “inner city and African American churches that were doing far more than many of the churches that are in the suburban parts of our city . . . the African American churches were critical factors in our community in terms of change and dealing with the turmoil of our city. And I think that our [suburban/evangelical] churches failed during that time period.” Participants also talked about the creation of services to deal with social issues—for example the creation of Metropolitan Interfaith Association (MIFA), the emergence of church-run, private schools, and the creation of various parachurch and leadership entities across the city. Another participant talked about a recent shift in last 10 years among churches (and individuals) who want to specifically be involved in the city. Participants discussed the various social and political context that has shaped health in Memphis. Participants focused on the importance of the civil rights movement, rich music history (from Stax to Elvis), and the creation of jobs because of Federal Express coming to Memphis in the 1970s. One participant mentioned that Memphis has also been shaped by what “hasn’t happened here.” Participants also talked about the specifics of particular organizations represented in the workshop and noted on the timeline.

Service Over Self (SOS): Came out of Christ UMC youth group in 1988. SOS works with partners across the country to do home repairs for people in Memphis. While SOS has been focused primarily on Binghampton, about a year ago SOS started experimental work in other neighborhoods in Memphis, toward the goal of planting a new SOS site in Memphis. In 2009, Orange Mound will be the newest site for SOS. Christ Community Health Services (CCHS): Founded in 1996 by four doctors who wanted to start a clinic to serve underserved people. After a nationwide search, they picked South Memphis as a place with one of the most medically underserved communities in the nation. They started with support from Baptist and side jobs, struggling along for many years, until they became a federally qualified clinic. The Orange Mound Clinic has been open since 2006. The clinic began slowly but when the other clinics had too many patients, they would send them our way. CCHS has adopted a two-pronged strategy that focuses on providing clinical services and ministering to the community. CCHS serves people who are not enrolled patients—by referring people to various social service providers, posting job information, etc. Orange Mound Development Corporation (OMDC): Founded in 1991 to help foster comprehensive development in the Orange Mound community, especially to deal with the issues of substandard housing and overcrowding. OMDC offers services ranging from counseling (debt/credit, delinquency/foreclosure, etc) to building projects. Harrison’s Funeral Home: Even though people don’t like to hear about the funeral home, we do more than just hold funerals—“we try to educate people as well.” The staff educate people about different methods of burial/cremation, different types of insurance/wills/etc, and various aspects of holding funerals. “After you’ve lived your life, the funeral home is the last stop.” One problem is that funerals aren’t inexpensive, and we often deal with families without the resources needed to hold a funeral. A vast majority of the ‘education’ we do is centered on financial matters: “Funeral directors now have to be paralegals, and need to know how to deal with issues in families.” The funeral home does advocacy and education at the front end so that people don’t have to be turned down in the end.


Page 8

GROW Memphis: Supports 5 different gardens in the Memphis Community (St Augustine, Binghampton, Hollywood North, Beltline, and Orange Mound) by providing technical assistance, seeds, education, etc. GROW Memphis works to clean up some of the areas in Memphis by turning blighted properties into gardens. Another goal is to improve nutrition by providing fresh, affordable vegetables to people who live in the community. GROW Memphis works with international agencies like Heifer International and International Agrocenter—to receive additional training.

A provider gives more information

c) Observations The timeline created by this group of providers was less than the timelines created by providers in other communities in Memphis. Despite this, participants made several valuable insights concerning religious and health events and trends. A majority of the social services working primarily in Orange Mound seem to be clustered into the last 10 to 20 years. Perhaps this results from a more recent push by social service organizations that have worked in Binghampton and other areas of Memphis to begin projects/sites in Orange Mound; this phenomenon can be seen in the history of CCHS, SOS, Grow Memphis, and even OMDC which was formed later than similar development corporations in other parts of the city.


Page 9

2. AREAS OF ENGAGEMENT IN HEALTH AND WELL-BEING

a) Data The goal of the second exercise was to create a categorized list of organizations and the services they provide in respect to health (prevention, treatment, care-giving, support services, other) as well as to examine the religious or non-religious nature of each organization or entity. Participants were asked to place the organizations they represent (plus others in the community) into the matrix on the board. After participants added entities to each category, participants discussed the things they put up and the trends that emerged out of the data.

Religious HFH HFH 2PC

HFH HFH 2PC

HFH SOS (

Prevention Treatment Care-Giving Support Services Other

Public

CCHS HFH OECY OMDC

CCHS HFH OECY SOS

HFH CCHS OECY OMDC IMO

CCHS HFH OECY OMDC

Key: HFH: Harrison’s Funeral Home CCHS: Christ Community Health Services OECY: Office of Early Childhood and Youth OMDC: Orange Mound Development Corporation SOS: Service Over Self 2PC: Second Presbyterian Church IMO: ImproveMemphis.org Description of Activities in “Other” Category: SOS: Community development, academy, support, high school runners, strategic neighbors OECY: Policy; Data OMDC: Public Entity, Literacy/Education CCHS: Outreach in the community i.e. involved with schools, community organizations, community

events, etc.

Adding to the chart


Page 10

b) Discussion Participants described the details of the activities in which their organizations were involved. In the prevention category, community organizations were involved in financial education (prevention of bankruptcy/foreclosure), teen pregnancy/abstinence education, drugs/HIV education for youth, and health fairs/general health information. Particular programs mentioned include CCHS’s Choices and Healthy Memphis program and the Community Voices program. In the treatment category, CCHS provides both counseling and general healthcare, with a stronger focus on specialized care focused on people living with HIV/AIDS. SOS does direct repairs to homes in the community, usually fixing major structural issues within the home; before being added to a prioritized list of homes to be repaired, community members fill out application, and a staff member meets with the family. In the category of Support, OMDC talked about providing work and computer access to youth in the community in addition to literacy education. CCHS focuses on connecting patients to various social services available in the neighborhood. Second Presbyterian Church is involved in supporting a large number of parachurch organizations and community organizations involved in care-giving and support. The congregation has also adopted a local elementary school. In area of community development, many of the staff of CCHS and SOS live within the community. SOS is involved with a one-year urban service leadership program called SOS Academy which attempts to build partnerships with other ministries and organizations working in the neighborhood. When examining the gaps in service, participants suggested that congregations often provide a great number of benefits and services to their own members, but that those services rarely reach other members of the community. One participant said, “Churches, to me, seem to be getting richer. . . but I would be very interested to see churches step outside their own community and supporting them.” However, participants mentioned a number of organizations that actually have done a good job of developing relationships with the community and community members.

c) Observations It is interesting to note the ways which community organizations described their religious/public nature. These organizations suggested that they were qualifying the type of service they were providing (the predominant receivers/consumers) rather than the nature of the organization/entity. Even though there were many more entities placed in the ‘public’ category, SOS, CCHS, HFH, OECY all mentioned specific ways in which they partner with working hand in hand with local congregations.


Page 11

3. RELIGION/ HEALTH INDEX

a) Data For the third exercise, the large group of participants were asked the question, “If the Health Department asked you to identify the two most important ways that religion/faith/spirituality contributes to health in your community – what would you say?” One of the facilitators recorded the responses on one of the flip charts. Participants were each given two large post-it notes and were asked to ‘vote’ for the two most important factors listed during the brainstorming round. These factors were mentioned by participants during the first ‘brainstorming’ round:

o Various Institutions/Organizations/Congregations, specifically CCHS, Mt. Pisgah, New Salem, Friendship, Mt. Gilliam, SOS

o Institutional split between body, mind, spirit—but people aren’t like that. Faith-based organizations can serve the ‘whole’ person

o Prayer for health with doctor/counselor/other service provider (even at the funeral home) o Many congregations involved in Memphis Healthy Churches initiative—educating members on

health issues o Faith/religion helps create a more unified community o Churches have health ministry o SOS needs housing-may be based in church site

The answers in the 2nd ground were grouped into 3 main categories (with a few other factors that did not fit into these categories):

(Factors grouped together, for full list, see Appendix Table 4)

Connecting Resources at Grassroots level (4) Life Wholeness/Holistic Approach (3) Prayer/Healing (3) Provide message of Hope Counseling those in need

The post-it index


Page 12

b) Discussion During the brainstorming round, participants pointed out several strengths of the Orange Mound community. One participant suggested that Orange Mound has strong sense of community/history/ identity; there is a strong interest among community to be involved with direction and leadership of many services organizations and ministries. In addition, one participant noted that Orange Mound has one of the highest percentages of African-American home ownership.

c) Observations At the beginning of this conversation, the participants were focusing their responces onto particular organizations and the services they provide. However, this question is meant to develop a list of behavioral/social factors or characteristics of religious organizations that are beneficial for health rather than the names of particular organization. As the exercise moved forward, however, the resulting list of ways that religion contributes to health covered a broad range of ideas, from a holistic perspective to connections to resources, to prayer and healing. There was little conversation among participants considering the final grouping of factors into categories. Instead the facilitation team created the groups. This was perhaps the least participatory part of this workshop.


Page 13

4. COMMUNITY MAPPING

a) Data For the third exercise, the participants were divided into two groups. The groups were provided with pre-printed maps and were asked to verify the entities listed on the maps and to add any other entities that they thought were missing. One map was of the study area (Group A); the other map was of Shelby County (Group B). After a few minutes, participants in the group at the Shelby County Map switched to just listing general locations of organizations and entities based on the boundaries of the study area. Participants noted new additions to the maps with small post-it notes. Group A listed the following entities:

o Airways/Lamar Shopping Plaza o Anthony Amp Elmo’s Business o Beulah Baptist Church o Burger King-social network o Cawthon Clinic o Community Center o CCHS o Dunbar Elementary o Fairgrounds o Fashion Cleaners o Fred Davis Insurance Agency o Hanley Elementary o Harrison’s Funeral Home o Mason’s Florist o Melrose High

o Melrose Park o Mt. Gilliam Baptist Church o Mt. Moriah East Baptist Church o Mt. Pisgah CME Church o Orange Mound Development

Corporation (OMDC) o New Era Baptist Church/Neighborhood

Christian Center o New Olivet Baptist Church o New Salem Missionary Baptist Church o Greater New Shiloh Baptist Church o NJ Edwards Funeral Home o Police Co-Act o Tom’s Shoe Shop o Whittman Bros.

Group B listed the following entities:

o Airways/Lamar Business Association o Beulah Baptist Church) o Cawthon Clinic o Christ Community Health Services o Dunbar Elementary o Hanley Elementary o Harrison’s Funeral Home o Fred Davis Insurance o Lamar/Airways Shopping Center o Melrose Booster Club o Melrose High

o Mt. Gilliam Baptist Church o Mt. Moriah Baptist Church o Mt. Moriah East Baptist Church o Mt. Pisgah CME Church o New Olivet Baptist Church o New Salem Missionary Baptist Church o Orange Mound Community Center o Orange Mound Grill o Orange Mound Development Corp. o Park and Swimming Pool o Whitten Bros. Hardware

Making maps


Page 14

b) Discussion Group representatives discussed the various entities they added to the map. Group B noted important neighborhood churches as well as some important family run business (for example, Whitten Brothers Hardware and Harrison’s funeral home). They suggested the Melrose Booster Club (with their annual BBQ competition, the shopping center, and the park/pool as important neighborhood places—since they are places where people congregate. New Olivet and New Salem are two churches outside of the study area—however, they make valuable contributions to the community. Group B mentioned many of the same locations but included a few other small business that are owned by people who are in the neighborhood (Fashion Cleaners, Fred Davis Insurance, Tom’s Shoe Shop). The group noted that there is a group of older gentlemen from the community who meet every morning at the Burger King. They also noted the importance of the Police Co-act to the community.

Explaining maps c) Observations Both groups added a similar number of entities to the map (22 and 28, for groups A and B, respectively) both groups mentioned nineteen of these entities. The facilitation team noted that Cawthon Health Loop Clinic and the Mental Health Center were somewhat afterthoughts in both groups. This was also the case in the health-seeker workshop, as participants were quick to identify the CCHS Clinic but slower to identify the local Health Loop.


Page 15

5. SOCIAL CAPITAL AND NETWORKING

a) Data (Step 1) In order to understand more fully the types of relations that exist among community entities, participants were provided with blank forms on which they could write the names of different organizations and entities with whom their organizations were connected. Summarized data from completed forms: Christ Community Health Center (CCHS) connected to: State Government, Federal Government, Private Donors, Foundations like Assisi (Funders); BDC, SEEDCO, Churches (Memphis Healthy Churches), Hospitals, Schools (Melrose, Hanley, Dunbar, Airways, Middle) and Airways-Lamar Business Association (Working Partners) Orange Mound Development Corporation (OMDC) connected to: Local Government, State Government and Federal Government (Funders); Banks/Lenders and Contractors(Working Partners); Schools, Churches, Businesses and Residents (Receive Services) Service Over Self (SOS) connected to: CCHS, EIKON Ministries, OMDC, OM Community Center, Reggie and Mary Tucker, OM residents and community leaders, OM churches, Memphis churches and other churches across the country Office of Early Childhood and Youth (OECY) connected to: State Government (for Funding/Leadership), University of Memphis (Research/Data collaborators), OB Services, health clinics, Pregnancy Centers, the MED and other area hospitals, UTHSC, Core Group on Infant Mortality Reduction, Butterfly Project, Library/LINC Resources, March of Dimes, Community Voice Program, and the Urban Child Institute Second Presbyterian Church connected to: SOS, CCHS, OMDC (exploring opportunities for a new community project), and Hanley Elementary (provided library books) Harrison’s Funeral Home connected to: OMDC, C&J Trophy, Tennessee Funeral Directors and Morticians Association, Hanley Elementary, Melrose High, Mt Pisgah, Mt Moriah, Benevolent Center, and Park Avenue b) Data (Step 2) In order to better understand the connections between the organizations and entities that were present at the workshop, as well as those that were most often mentioned during prior exercises, the participants in the workshop worked together to create a ‘spidergram’ of the networks and relationships in the community. Using a list of key community organizations identified during previous exercises, each organization was placed into a circle on a large piece of paper in the front of the room. Several blank circles were drawn on to the paper to form a second concentric circle around the identified organizations. Participants were then invited to come to the front of the room and draw lines to designate relationships between different organizations. Red lines signified funding relationships and blue lines signified working relationships that are not primarily financial.

Blank Spidergram


Page 16

After each participant had the opportunity to add additional lines to the ‘spidergram,’ the moderator lead a discussion concerning the interrelationships that exist between these community assets and the extent to which the provision of services has been integrated. Nine organizations were placed into the first group of concentric circles. An additional 11 organizations were added to the outer circle by participants. Of the 20 organizations included in the spidergram, 3 could be described as healthcare providers, 9 could be described as social service agencies/community-based organizations, 4 could be described as government entities. While only one specific religious congregation (2nd Presbyterian Church) was placed on the spidergram, a participant added the more general “churches” to the spidergram. Two local business (Harrison’s Funeral Home and C & J’s Trophy Shop) and the local primary and secondary schools were also included in the spidergram.

Participants completing the spidergram


Page 17

SOS(6)

2nd

Presbyterian(4)

GROWMemphis

(1)

OMCommunity

& SeniorCenter (3)

Schools(Melrose/

Dunbar/Hanley)(5)

OECY(4)

OMDC(11)

Harrison’sFuneral

Home (4)

CCHS(11)

Hospitals

MemphisHealthy

Churches Churches

HealthLoop OB

City ofMemphis

AssissiALBA

StateGovt.

Peace andJustice

C&JTrophyShop

FederalGovt.

Recreation of Spidergram

c) Discussion Participants were given an opportunity to comment on what they saw in the spidergram as well as their thoughts on connections. A participant from CCHS suggested that both their location in the center of Orange Mound, as well as their focus on ‘giving back’ and ‘outreach’ has helped to build a strong network with other organizations. One participant suggested that collaboration and ‘giving back’ is central to getting results in the community—“You shake my hand, I shake your hand, or however the saying goes. That’s how you make a lot of connections and you get the word out. You try to get as much help as you can or you try to help as much as you can. Because that is the foundation of what [our organization] does.” Several organizations described their relationships with schools (from sponsoring sport teams to providing counseling or health education. The Office of Early Childhood and Youth is working the OB Health Loop clinics on a project to decrease maternal mortality. Several organizations (OCEY and SOS) are newly formed or new to the Orange Mound community. They noted that while their connections are limited now, they hope to increase the number of connections in the coming months and years.

d) Observations The workshop staff observed a great deal of variability among different organizations placed on the spidergram (between 1 and 11 connections for each entity listed). Christ Community Health Clinic and Orange Mound Development Corporation had the largest number of connections to other entities listed on the spidergram (11 each). Both of these organizations were represented by at least one individual with insider knowledge of the workings of the organization. CCHS has a central goal of building collaboration with other community organizations, especially those organizations servicing a similar clientele. Orange Mound Development Corporation has been working in Orange Mound for more than 15 years, building relationships with other community and city organizations throughout their history.


Page 18

The variation in connection may be attributed to the differing cultures and work done by the organizations described through this exercise. However, the data collected is also highly dependant upon the personality and ‘insider knowledge’ of the people describing these relationships. The selection of organizations that were placed onto the spidergram did not directly relate, in all cases, to the knowledge and expertise of the workshop participants. For example, the individual representing GROW Memphis was not present for this exercise; as a result, GROW Memphis only had 1 connection line. This exercise was not focused on understanding the nature and directionality of these relationships. The only particular type of relationship distinguished from general working relationships were relationships with a financial nature. Unlike prior workshops, participants drew in nearly the same number of “funding relationships” as “working relationships.” While a majority of the funding relationships involved organizations who functioned solely as either funders or receivers, CCHS and OECY drew lines going in both directions. The relationships and connections in this exercise were depicted by individuals who generally were directly involved with one or more of the listed assets. While this provided a perspective and knowledge that would not be available to an outsider, it also presents the possibility that participants may over-emphasize the role of the agency that he or she represents.


Page 19

6. CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD PRACTICE

a) Data In order to identify which religious assets provide an example of an effective contribution to the health of the community, participants were asked, “In light of the previous discussion, what do you think are the two most important religious organizations that contribute to health in your community.” Participants were once again given two post-it notes each. The collected post-it notes were made into a bar graph. Participants were then given the opportunity to describe the characteristics of these organizations that make them exemplary. The group identified the following religious organizations:

Christ Community Health Services (9) SOS (2) Memphis Healthy Churches (Part of CCHS) OMDC Churches

b) Discussion Participants described the following ‘exemplary’ characteristics of Christ Community Health Services.

o When they came to Orange Mound, they reached out to the organizations already working in the community.

o They show a strong commitment to the community (outreach activities and staff living in the community).

o CCHS has broadened the picture of health to include ‘body/mind/spirit’ and a “wholistic view.” o One of the only organizations that deals with health care, social services, and spiritual counseling

all in one location.

Providers discussing good practice

c) Observations The strong support shown for CCHS and their model of providing healthcare was incredible (and matched up closely with the comments from participants in the seeker workshop). While participants were hopeful and proud of the work of their own organizations, there did not appear to be any “protecting turf.” Rather, participants were eager to concede the contributions of other community organizations and to look for ways to collaborate with other community organizations in the future.


Page 20

6. LOCAL ACTION As the final exercise of the workshop, participants were asked, “Now that we’ve talked about all the assets in the community, like organizations, relationships and networks, what do you think would be the next steps to bring this process forward?” The discussion generated the following suggestions:

o This process has been encouraging. There is a potential for great things in Orange Mound. It would be useful to have that ‘potential’ documented (in a report, through other data, etc.) to show stakeholder that investing in Orange Mound is a valuable and worthwhile course of action.

o Learning from visionary leaders and organizations. o Hear about what the ‘seekers’ talked about in their workshop. It would be useful to hear the

‘expressed needs of the community.’ o Bring community members and social service providers together. We could gain a lot by talking

together o Stronger Collaboration among Orange Mound community organizations so we can “collectively

move forward and strategically plan.” o Clearinghouse of information


Page 21

APPENDICES TABLE 1: ORANGE MOUND DEMOGRAPHIC DATA

Orange Mound Demographic Information Source: US Census 2000

Orange Mound*

Shelby County

United States

Total Population 14,254 897,472 281,421,906 Gender

Male 45.8% 47.8% 49.1%Female 54.2% 52.2% 50.9%

Race White 3.9% 47.3% 75.1%Black or African American 94.9% 48.6% 12.3%Other 0.5% 3.1% 10.2%More than one race 0.7% 1.0% 2.4%

Educational Achievement (25 years and older)

High School Diploma or higher 59.1% 80.8% 80.4%Bachelor's Degree or higher 6.7% 25.3% 24.4%

Marital Status (15 years and older) Never Married 41.7% 31.8% 27.1%Married 24.8% 46.6% 54.4%Separated, Divorced, Widowed 33.6% 21.6% 18.5%

Employment (16 years and older) In labor force 57.1% 65.6% 63.9%

Employed 50.2% 61.1% 60.2%Unemployed 6.9% 4.5% 3.7%

Not in labor force 42.9% 34.4% 36.1%

Nativity: Born in USA 97.9% 95.5% 87.7%

Median Age 33.6 yrs 32.9 yrs 35.3 yrs

Households 5,396 338,366 105,480,101 Families (Family Household) 65.3% 67.60% 68.10%

Married-couple family 21.5% 42.80% 51.70%Female-householder, no husband

present 36.5% 20.10% 12.20%Non-family Households 34.7% 32.40% 31.90%

Households with individuals <18 years 38.6% 39.00% 36.00%Households with individuals >65 years 25.6% 19.50% 23.40%

Income Median Household Income (1999) $20,156 $39,593 $41,994 Households with Social Security Income 28.19% 21.40% 25.70%Households with Public Assistance

Income 8.24% 4.50% 3.40%Poverty

Family households below poverty line 27.50% 12.90% 9.20%Non-family households below poverty

line 40.36% 19.10% 17.40%

Families with grandparent responsible for own grandchildren <18 years 9.92% 5.20% 3.40%

Average Household Size 2.64 2.60 2.59 Average Family Size 3.28 3.18 3.14

Housing Units 5,995 362,954 105,480,101 Owner-occupied 48.82% 58.80% 60.20%Renter Occupied 41.18% 34.40% 30.80%


Page 22

Vacant 9.99% 6.80% 9.00% *Compilation of Census Tracts: 0067, 0068, 0079

GIS MAP 1: ORANGE MOUND RELIGIOUS HEALTH ASSETS—

ENTITIES IDENTIFIED BEFORE WORKSHOP


Page 23

GIS MAP 2: ORANGE MOUND RELIGIOUS HEALTH ASSETS—

ENTITIES IDENTIFIED THROUGH WORKSHOPS


Page 24

GIS MAP 3: ORANGE MOUND RELIGIOUS HEALTH ASSETS—COMBINED


Page 25

TABLE 2: RELIGION CONTRIBUTES TO HEALTH—VOTING ROUND Participant Listed Factor Grouped Factors Indigenous leadership development

Connect resources from various entities to get the word out about resources/assistance that’s available Broader avenue to get the word out Provide safety net support system

Connecting resources at grassroots level

They contribute to health because they deal with your mental health which is linked to your physical well being

Life wholeness: physical, mental, emotional, spiritual, relational, etc.

Christ Community Center combining religion and medicine for whole person approach

Life wholeness/ Holistic approach

Prayer is seen as an important part of the healing process God heals

Prayer which is given not only by the community but also by many churches

Prayer/Healing

Provide message of hope Counseling those who are in need

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We gratefully acknowledge the support of Paula Jacobson and the Methodist

Healthcare Foundation, Cerner Corporation, and CIGNA for their grant funding and interest and passion for the Memphis community. We wish to thank the Urban Child Institute, Cindy Martin and the Shared Urban Data System for their contributions to

the GIS portion of this work. Also, we thank Dr. Ruthbeth Finerman, the University of Memphis Department of Anthropology, and the many graduate students who worked

to help staff the workshops and to compile the database and GIS maps.

Documents

Memphis Religious Health Assets - FatCowmrhap.fatcow.com/om_provider.pdf · Background Research included a review of Religious Health Assets Mapping projects in southern Africa, various