Core Issues in Comprehensive Community-Building Initiatives ...

Finding meaning in CCI research
Researchers in this project reflected not just on what made
community research more responsive to issues of power
and race, but also on the business of CCIs, whether
research was being critical enough of CCIs, potential to
catalyze change, and the potentially corrupting effect of
an increasing amount of foundation money available for
this kind of research. Said one:
It’s ludicrous to think that all this wealth—these
foundations’ assets and endowments—that’s
available for evaluation and research is largely
because of the money made on the backs of the
very people you’re trying to serve. So while, on
the one hand, you’ve got the opportunity to build
capacity in this field to be able to do this work
better, how do you deal with those contradictions?
Like the speaker above, other participants indicated
that, while it is always important to gain understanding,
their investment in the profession was guided more by a
desire to be changing things for the better. And none of
them could say for sure that the increasing sophistication
in community building approaches was making a clear
difference. For example:
I’m anxious about whether or not, as we become
a bigger business, we’re seeing the outcomes that
we’re concerned about. I have never seen families
in greater jeopardy than I see today. We’re
getting more and more sophisticated, rigorous in
our approaches and research. We’re learning a
lot more about techniques. I just don’t see the
outcomes changing. That’s where I’m having a
problem.
Another researcher, picking up on the theme, continued:
What’s happening with the global economy is
doing great devastation to poor communities in
this country, and it’s not something that a foundation
and a few hundred thousand dollars is
going to solve. I’m skeptical about the ability of
good intentions and a little bit of money to turn
things around.
There was also a suggestion by one researcher
(echoed by comments in some interviews) that making
issues of race matching and foundation power central to
this kind of discussion helped keep more important issues
off the table. She said:
The power issues are much deeper than “what’s
the complexion of the person leading this group?”
It’s ultimately about chang[ing] the systems that
cause the poverty and oppression. What are the
levers to do that?
And yet, counter to that cynicism that all the
researchers could identify with to some extent, were a
number of examples of reasons to be optimistic about the
current work in CCIs. Some researchers believe that one
or two foundations have demonstrated a real interest in
evolving away from old power relationships and are aware
of the power of money and the need for flexibility in
responding to community engagement. One or two pointed
to examples where the research questions are changing
in positive ways and where funders and communities
are developing a greater tolerance for the slowness
and ambiguity of change. And we heard about a community
foundation that commissioned a review of racial
bias in its grantmaking and actually changed its process
and structure as a result. In light of these examples, it
was little surprise that most researchers also felt that their
work could potentially have a real impact in changing
peoples lives.
There’s an opportunity here for researchers, evaluators
to play more comprehensive roles, to
shape initiatives. Some of it involves a little more
distance or integrity than those who are doing
advocacy on the street. There’s a great opportu-
Power, Race, and Community Research 15