McAuley Institute Howard
Samuels State Management and Policy Center,
JoAnn Kane the Graduate
School and University Center,
Carolyn Farrow Garland the City
University of New York
Margaret Grieve Marilyn
Gittell
Susan Rees Isolda
Ortega-Bustamante
Keven Vance Tracy
Steffy
Additional
Research Assistance
Consultants Kathe Newman
Dorothy Ettling
Colette Winlock
Additional staff assistance
Phyllis McDonough Robinson
Rhoda Stauffer
April Shaw
Karen Stults
Kathy Tyler
Interview Sites
Boston,
Massachusetts
Chicago, Illinois
Delta (Mississippi, Arkansas,
Louisiana)
El Paso, Texas and colonias in
surrounding metropolitan area
Houston, Texas
North Carolina (Raleigh/Durham,
Warrenton, Rocky Mount, Wilson, Greenville)
Oakland, California
Portland, Oregon
Washington, DC
Introduction 6
Catalysts for Change 8
An overview
and historical perspective.
Social Capital and Community Building 10
Women build social capital through
leadership, community participation,
and networking.
Investing in Women Leaders 18
Women practice participatory leadership based
on their personal life experience and their concept of community development as
human development. They are motivated
by a commitment to social change that for many is sustained by spiritual beliefs.
Bridge Building and Breaking Down Barriers
for Organizations 25
Women-led organizations experience many of
the same barriers that confront almost all community development organizations,
but they also face additional barriers due to gender, race, ethnicity, and
local culture and politics.
A Call to
Action 30
Recommendations to sustain the growth and
development of women-led community development organizations.
Acknowledgements 36
Study Participants
37
Preface
Since
the early days of this nation, women have been engaged in community building as
they tried to improve their own lives, those of their families and of the
people living around them. This study
is one of the first, however, to document the woman’s approach to modern
community development. Today, women
are leading hundreds of community development organizations in all sections of
the country. They are building housing
and creating jobs while also attending to the myriad other difficulties and
situations that their neighbors are facing.
Inherent in their style is their dedication in getting residents of
their communities to have a voice in the institutions and policies that affect
them.
From the very small to the very large, the
organizations interviewed for this study are directed and staffed by women, the
majority of whom are women of color.
Because of their gender, race and ethnicity, their capabilities and
accomplishments are often dismissed by those in positions of power, including
some who work in the broader community development field.
The
insights of women community development leaders are reflected in the
recommendations they make to sustain the growth of women-led organizations and
the community development field as a whole.
These recommendations, detailed on pages ?? to ?? and highlighted below,
are offered for all who have the power to create and sustain community change
including funders, intermediaries, governments, educational institutions,
women’s organizations and community development organizations themselves. We invite you to join us in working within
your own sphere of influence to take action on these recommendations.
Social Capital and Community Building
1. Invest in women’s organizing and community building strategies
that create social capital.
2.
Support continued collaboration between practitioners and researchers to
document and analyze women’s models of community development.
3.
Create opportunities for women to document their own development as
leaders and community activists.
4.
Expand and continue this study to investigate the role that race,
ethnicity, and class play in women’s experience in community development.
Investing in Women Leaders
1. Invest in women’s development as leaders,
activists and professionals.
2.
Support the development of local, regional, and national peer networks
for women in community development.
3. Cultivate new leaders
from within communities.
4.
Support access to post-secondary education and credentials for women in
community development.
5. Incorporate lessons from this study into
existing community development training programs.
Bridge Building and Breaking Down Barriers for Organizations
1. Change
funding policies that discriminate against women-led organizations.
2. Increase
and diversify the funding base for women-led organizations.
3. Eliminate
salary and benefit inequities for women in the community development field.
4. Encourage
political education, civic engagement, and the building of political networks.
Introduction
Across the
country, women have created innovative, comprehensive programs to meet the
needs of their communities. Women have
established themselves as leaders in the community development field and
acquired the skills that have brought positive change to their communities. As effective builders of social capital,
women leaders play key roles in establishing and maintaining important
relationships and networks in their communities. They are facing the challenges of racial, cultural, economic, and
political barriers that exist in the community development field and, in many
cases, overcoming those barriers becomes their motivation. While their comprehensive approach has
influenced the evolution of the community development field, women’s
contributions have been neither widely acknowledged nor explicitly
credited. The results of the Women in
Community Development Study provide deeper insights into women’s thinking about
community development, the barriers they perceive to women’s leadership, and
the kinds of efforts that should be undertaken to facilitate and promote their
status and roles in the field. They
also demonstrate the variety of effective ways women create social capital that
is central to the existence of healthy communities.
“It is not about being the best CDC [community development corporation]
…. What we want is the community to change.
We want better homes, a lot of self-esteem; we believe it takes a
village.”
The study was
an intensive field-based examination of women-led community development
organizations in nine sites in different regions of the country in both urban
and rural communities. It had three
goals.
·
To document the behavior of women in
community organizations, the circumstances under which they were able to gain
status and leadership within those organizations, and how they contribute to
community revitalization.
·
To explore how and under what
circumstances community organizations led by women uniquely contribute to the
development of civic capacity and community change.
·
To produce recommendations for a variety
of audiences to support and strengthen women’s leadership roles in the
community development field.
A unique
collaboration.
The Women in Community Development Study was a collaboration between
McAuley Institute, a national nonprofit intermediary that specializes in
capacity building and technical and financial assistance for affordable housing
organizations led by and benefiting women, and the Howard Samuels State
Management and Policy Center, a research center at the City University of New
York with broad public policy expertise and a significant body of work on
community development organizations and related racial, gender, and class
issues. The study was funded by the Ford Foundation,
which sought to combine the perspectives of practitioners and researchers in
this effort.
A diversity
of perspectives. The link
between local women community development leaders, practitioners with
experience working with women-led community development organizations, and
public policy researchers with experience investigating the community
development field was a defining characteristic of the study. At the outset, the research team created a
National Advisory Panel that combined grassroots leaders, policy experts,
researchers, and funders to provide advice and feedback on the study as it
progressed. During the course of the
study, the research team also convened focus groups and other gatherings of
women in the community development field to test hypotheses and gain additional
insight into the study findings. In
all, 142 interviews were conducted in nine sites: Boston; Chicago; the Delta
Region (Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana); El Paso and colonias in the
surrounding area; Houston; Raleigh/Durham and the surrounding area; Oakland;
Portland, Oregon; and Washington, DC.
The quotes cited in the following text were taken from these interviews
and focus groups and are not attributed here because of the research process
used. A listing of all interviewees is included at the conclusion of the
report.
A plan for growth and
development.
Study participants expressed many ideas that would allow them to have a
greater impact on the communities in which they work. The wealth of information and insight participants shared in
interviews and focus groups confirm the tremendous part women have played since
the inception of the community development movement. This translates directly into a plan to sustain the growth and
development of women-led organizations and to thus strengthen the community
development field as a whole. The
following report has been developed for the wide audience that has the power to
create and sustain community change including funders, intermediaries,
governments, educational institutions and women’s organizations but also
community development organizations themselves.
“A woman is more willing to persist.
If I listened to ‘what will work’, I wouldn’t be here.”
Findings.
Three primary findings grew out of the study. They are detailed in sections to follow and supported by the study’s
recommendations.
·
Women build social capital through
leadership, community participation, and networking.
·
Women practice participatory leadership
based on their personal life experience and their concept of community
development as human development. They
are motivated by a commitment to social change that for many is sustained by
spiritual beliefs.
·
Women-led organizations experience many
of the same barriers that confront almost all community development
organizations, but they also face additional barriers due to gender, local
culture and politics.
Characteristics
of study participants. The
study focused on women leaders in the community development field. Of the 142 interviews conducted (some of
which were with more than one person from an organization), 121 were with women
practitioners and leaders from an equal number of community development
organizations. Most were executive
directors of their organizations. The
remaining interviews were with funders, intermediaries, and academics. In addition to the interviews, the research
team collected the following summary data about the nature of the organizations
in which the women worked.
Boards and
staffs. The study focused on
women working in women-led organizations.
These were defined as organizations having a majority of women on the
board or on the staff or both. In the
sample, women composed 58.9% of the average board and 79.2% of the average
staff. Eighteen organizations had
boards made up entirely of women.
Community
development broadly defined.
The organizations the women led represented a broad definition of
community development, with activities ranging from the traditional, such as
housing development, to health and homeless programs. While the organizations shared a common holistic approach to
community development and a commitment to social change, they varied greatly in
terms of age, size, programs, and organizational structure.
Age and size. The average organization was 15 years old,
with roughly a third in each of the following categories: more than 20 years
old, between 10 and 19 years old, under 10 years old. The average staff size was 25, which included 9 part time
employees, but there was a tremendous variety in size ranging from one to the
hundreds. Some organizations relied
heavily on volunteers, especially faith-based organizations for whom volunteers
were central to their organizational goals.
Budget. The median operating budget was
$722,500. Budgets ranged from zero
dollars to $26 million, more than a third of the organizations had budgets over
$1 million.
Programs. The typical organization sustained an
average of more than 11 different services or activities from across six
different program categories: housing, human services, employment and economic
development, organizing, advocacy, and financial services. The three most commonly reported program
areas were, in order, housing, organizing, and advocacy. Well over half the organizations were
engaged in one or more of these activities.
Racial and ethnic composition of boards. Geographical location was a factor in the
racial and ethnic composition of boards.
Organizations in the West were more likely to have Asian and Native
American board members, while in the South a larger share were African
American. Thirteen boards were entirely
African American, five entirely Latino, one entirely Asian, and one entirely
European American. Many boards
reflected the demographic compositions of their communities in terms of race
and ethnicity but did not always include low-income community residents. Taken as a whole, however, the
organizations’ boards were quite diverse racially and ethnically.
Racial and ethnic composition of staffs. Geographical location was also a factor in
the racial and ethnic composition of staffs.
Twenty-four staffs were entirely African American, six entirely Latino,
and one entirely European American.
Again, taken as a whole, the organizations’ staffs were quite diverse
racially and ethnically.
Catalysts for
Change
A
comprehensive vision of community development. This study of women’s leadership in the
community development field comes at a time of a significant shift in the
theory and definition of community development. Community development literature has generally excluded gender and
race. It has tended to downplay
politics by focusing on either the technical aspects of development or on local
case studies. This study is part of a
continued effort to bring gender and race perspectives to bear in community
development literature, and to place women’s community development work into a
broader political context. The current
emphasis on comprehensive community development and community participation is
in fact grounded in women’s long history of community activism. Based on the
study findings, women’s persistence in their comprehensive view of community
development has played a major role in leading the field to embrace that view.
Early
history of community activism. The early history of the concept of
community development has its roots in the tradition of democratic localism in
the American experience. Citizenship
was largely defined through local organizations, local government, and concern
for community needs. Although women
were denied voting rights and equal status in the political system, they were
community activists engaged in building community cohesion. They played critical roles in the temperance
and settlement house movements at the turn of the century and brought about
fundamental change in the approach to the problems of poverty. Contact with the poor in deteriorated city
neighborhoods led activist women to recognize that the poor were not the cause
of their own poverty but rather that the causes of poverty were social and economic. The revitalization and stabilization of
neighborhoods and communities became a priority for women’s organizations. At the same time, working class and poor
women themselves provided the connection in communities between family, church,
schools, and other institutional anchors.
In the 1920s and 30s, activist women led tenant and food strikes,
affirming their commitment to neighborhoods and the needs of the poor.
The
neighborhood movement and faith-based community development. For the past three decades, women have been
major participants in community organizations.
In the 1960s and 70s, community women advocated for control of local
services and neighborhood preservation.
In the 1980s they were among the few forces pursuing neighborhood
preservation in the face of uncontrolled downtown growth. Religious congregations, particularly those
formed by women, have been an integral part of community development during the
same period and this connection has clearly been a factor in attracting talented
women to the field. Hundreds of community
development organizations began life in church basements while national
councils and local congregations have supplied millions of dollars, staff
services and ongoing support. This
spiritual dimension is unusual among current social reform initiatives. The faith-based legacy, stressing a holistic
view of community revitalization, is compatible with the approach many women
embrace. The willingness of faith-based
grassroots groups to accept women as leaders offers a valuable proving ground,
and many women have gone on to apply those lessons --- and the resources of
their organizations --- to strengthen their communities.
Broadening the
definition of community development. For the past 20 years, organizations with
strong women’s leadership have resisted the narrow definition of community
development as construction of affordable housing and economic
development. These organizations have
always defined community development issues as those responding directly to the
needs of women, children, and families, even in the absence of funding for such
broader concerns. Foundations and
governments have only recently begun to recognize the wisdom of this
approach. The current emphasis in
public policy initiatives and foundation funding on comprehensive community
initiatives (CCIs) affirms the long-term commitment of many women-led
organizations and the role women play as catalysts for social change.
Previous
research on gender in the field.
Earlier research by the Howard Samuels Center on the issue of gender in
community development found that when women were in leadership positions and
comprised a board majority, development efforts were more comprehensive than in
male-led groups. The Women in Community
Development Study confirms women’s broad, inclusive definition of community
development. Women-led organizations in
particular have taken on multiple roles in the community, including housing and
economic development, organizing, activism and advocacy, as well as human
service delivery. The roles the organizations
play and the programs that have been established reflect women’s self-described
“holistic” approach to community development.
Expanding on
previous research on women’s leadership in other fields. These findings were similar to other
research describing women’s roles in corporations, business, and
government. In addition, emerging
feminist theory was recognizing a female consciousness that placed human needs
and social rights above property, profit, and individual rights. Recent research on women’s homeownership has
shown that women are more likely to informally interact with their neighbors
and take a lead in building a sense of community at the neighborhood
level. This growing evidence of the
distinctive behavior and socialization of women provided increased motivation
and support for deeper analysis into the activities of women in community
development organizations, barriers to their recognition, and emergence as
leaders and decision-makers.
For more information on the theoretical background of the study, see
the full report entitled “Women
Creating Social Capital and Social Change” by Marilyn Gittell, Isolda
Ortega-Bustamante and Tracy Steffy, Howard Samuels State Management and Policy
Center, City University of New York (1999).
Also see Crazy for Democracy by Temma Kaplan, Routledge (New
York, 1997),“The Difference Gender Makes: Women in Neighborhood Development
Organizations” by Marilyn Gittell, Sally Covington, and Jill Gross, Howard
Samuels State Management and Policy Center, City University of New York (1994)
and “Race and Gender in Neighborhood Development Organizations” by Marilyn
Gittell, Jill Gross, and Kathe Newman, Howard Samuels Center State Management
and Policy Center, City University of New York (1994).
Social Capital
and Community Building
Women build social capital through leadership,
community participation, and networking.
Social
capital and women’s leadership.
By its definition, social capital is the establishment of social
association through common norms, trust, and networks that make social action
possible. While theorists have
recognized the strong link between citizen participation and local democracy,
it is a further step toward identification with a group, sharing values, and
developing trust that builds social capital and the ability to take civic
action. By the very nature of their
leadership style and the structure of their organizations, women leaders in
community development are among the foremost developers of social capital by
building civic capacity to create change in their communities.
“As neighbors, by communicating you have tremendous power to fight the
powers that be. Neighborhood consensus
is very important and powerful, as if knowing, talking, and dreaming together
--- it is a process of building a community.
The key is finding out what strengths people have, coming to the table
as equals, and being sincere.”
The growth
of social capital through community participation. Community participation is the key factor in the
success of women-led community development organizations in creating social
capital. Many of the organizations that
participated in the study demonstrate strong internal democracy, or are
horizontally structured, better equipping them to establish egalitarian
relationships with community members.
Women-led organizations frequently pursue participation through
community organizing, the focus of which can range from mobilizing public
protests to constituency building through leadership development. Even
organizations with more traditional housing and economic development approaches
have found ways to incorporate organizing strategies into their development
efforts despite a lack of funding.
Collaborative styles of leadership lead to a greater degree of community
presence on boards and staffs, thus enabling the creation of programs that
truly meet the needs of communities.
Identifying
with the community. Women
leaders’ identification with the communities in which they work is an important
factor in their commitment to community participation. Women have compelling accounts of becoming
leaders; while the empowerment process is varied, the common thread women
describe is an increased sense of self-worth and skills through a combination
of personal development and community work.
They see their personal development as connected to their communities. As a result, women tend to remain focused on
the local community rather than viewing community development work as a rung on
the career ladder or a path into other sectors. Most women who view their work as a life choice and are committed
to community participation also maintain close relationships and open
communication with community members.
Even women-led organizations working with extremely vulnerable people in
social work settings espoused the point of view that clients are not subjects
to be acted upon, but rather actors of their own empowerment. Programs are designed with community needs
in mind precisely because staff members communicate with community residents or
are residents themselves.
“This is the most difficult way of doing social work, but this is the
best way --- to allow her to develop herself, to come to fulfillment.”
Community
work as a personal commitment.
Women’s respectful relationship with community members provides the
foundation for community participation in the organization. This close identification with the community
and sense of personal commitment on the part of women leaders means that there
are generally few barriers between their personal lives and their community work. This perspective, which is held by many
women leaders, means that there is more opportunity for participation by
non-professionals whose personal life experiences are valued.
“Women see their work as a lifestyle, not just a job; it is a different
kind of commitment. Women have the fear
that if they step back, the true empowerment we know can occur will not. This is a process and you give to it in
whatever ways you can.”
A
human-centered, holistic view of life defines community development. The study revealed that women leaders both
describe and practice a holistic approach to community development. They see their communities as women- and
child-centered. They define their goals
and programs in response to the expressed needs of their clients and their own
perceptions of community needs. Women’s
broad view of community development integrates economic and social needs on
both the community level and the individual level. In describing community problems, many women quickly and
seamlessly move from the social to the economic level of analysis, from the
individual to the community level, and from the personal to the political.
Their commitment to a holistic view of their communities and their own roles
within those communities is focused on changing people’s lives in significant
ways.
“Women have a more holistic approach.
To women, community is people.
My interest is more in people than in buildings. Women are more likely to involve
stakeholders …. We’re more willing to collaborate and coordinate.”
Community
development is human development.
Women-led organizations invite more participation because they focus on
the “daily life” issues that affect most community residents. Women do not see addressing these issues as
an end in itself but as human development that is above and beyond providing
services or programs. This reflects the
theory that women’s activism is based on the desire for connection and
relationship and is not simply an instrument for attaining individual ends.
“I had never worked in a union.
I came here for English and leadership classes …. I learned that being a
woman is wonderful. A man doesn’t have
the ability to give life, doesn’t know the pride of knowing how to educate, how
to manage a home, to know about your commitment to the community …. I learned
and now I educate my sons who are grown.
….We need to value ourselves.
Help, defend, fight with politicians.
Lately, I really need the community; we are together learning and
teaching.”
Listening
and the collaborative process.
Women leaders described a variety of tactics for community participation
beyond traditional items such as attendance at meetings, work on committees,
and rotation of meeting responsibilities.
Women leaders who were most successful at developing grassroots
leadership created an atmosphere in their organizations that made community
women feel comfortable and welcome.
Some women describe listening and establishing a dialogue as the first
step in creating a collaborative environment.
When asked about community participation, most women in the study said
that they ask people what they want.
“Stakeholders” are frequently included in program development and
management to seek their ideas rather than to help carry out tasks.
“Everyone comes with their own experience. If you talk to them long enough, everyone has an idea about what
they want for the community.”
Volunteering
as a route to ownership.
Community participation often involves attracting volunteers and
developing their capacities and leadership abilities. When community members are consulted about projects, they often
want to participate, and it is precisely this participation that deepens their
commitment to an organization and a community.
In highly participatory organizations, women often start out as
participants in a meeting or event, then move on to volunteer, and sometimes
end up on the staff or board.
“There are no job training programs.
We train them [women] here…We mentor the mothers. We want to take the volunteers to another
level – find a job and leave us.”
Networking
and social capital. The
creation of a variety of networks helps women build effective and
representative organizations. In
addition to networks of friends who support them personally, many women leaders
also mentor younger women in their communities or encourage the formation of
personal networks by other women staff members. Most of the organizations in the study have relationships with
other groups, such as other community development organizations, cultural
institutions, and churches. Some organizations
enjoy relationships outside their community as well, with citywide
organizations, foundations, banks, local elected officials, and government
agencies. A few have networks at the
state level or with state legislators.
Building networks at many levels creates social capital by setting the
stage for creating social change.
“This is the women’s century --- the information age. It’s perfect for our way of thinking. The web, the intricate web of connections is
formulated when we form connections with each other. The spider web is our symbol.”
Personal
networks. Women’s networks
with each other give them the personal support they need to be leaders. For women with limited professional
networks, these personal connections can provide the first step toward broader
community involvement. For more
established leaders, concentric circles of personal support can range from
community residents, friends who are not involved in community development
work, professional colleagues, and mentors (sometimes male).
