Building and Bridging Diverse Neighborhoods in East Baltimore
The President’s
Office of the University of Maryland,
Baltimore, with involvement from
the University’s Schools of Social Work, Medicine, Law, and Nursing, proposes
to undertake a Community Building Initiative in East Baltimore. This Initiative will be a collaborative
effort between the University, the catchment area’s community based organizations,
neighborhood associations and residents, and the City of Baltimore.
The Initiative’s
theme is “diversity as strength,” meaning that the area’s multiculturalism is
an asset, even if not a fully realized one.
The overall focus is to assist the community in acquiring and
implementing key knowledge and skills, which in turn will help with cooperative
community capacity building. The
Initiative has an Education Outreach Component, a Community Engagement
Component, and a complimentary set of Research activities. It includes all, or significant parts of,
these neighborhoods in East Baltimore: Patterson Park, Jonestown, East Harbor
Village, Upper Fells Point, McElderry Park, Baltimore-Linwood, Butcher’s Hill,
Washington Hill and Dunbar-Broadway (see Appendix for map). Community members participate in, and are
represented by, a range of diverse organizations and associations within these
neighborhoods.
Rating Factor 1: Capacity of the Applicant and Relevant Organizational
Experience
A) Knowledge and Experience
The Project Co-Directors will
be Dr. Cheryl Hyde, Dr. Michael Lindsey, and Mr. Dick Cook. Dr. Hyde (MSW, PhD,
Sociology and Social Work) has over 20 years of experience in community
capacity building, diversity-related work and community based research. She is an Associate Professor at the School of Social Work, where she co-chairs the
Management and Community Organization Concentration, and chairs the Master’s
Program Committee. She is also the
Assistant Director for Community-based Research of the Social Work Community
Outreach Service. Her teaching,
scholarship and community service focus on the areas of building social
capital, neighborhood associations, collaboration and networking, multicultural
organizational development, and community-based research techniques. For the past 3 years, she has been teaching a
community based research course, where the community defines the research
problem, and then she and the students assist the community learn what it wants
through data gathering and analysis.
Three years ago, a community in North Baltimore asked her to help them
evaluate the Charles Village Community Benefits District. The evaluation that resulted assisted the
District in its re-authorization efforts, and it has become the most quoted
document by supporters and opponents alike. Two years ago, Dr. Hyde, with Dr.
Karen Hopkins, ran a research course on “Best Practices of Community Based
Agencies” with the East Baltimore Partnership (part of the proposed catchment
area). Their students assisted community
organizations in developing outcome based measurements for organizational
planning and development. Last year, she
led a student team in examining a resident mobilization effort in Jonestown
(also in East Baltimore). Dr. Hyde serves on a
number of social work journal editorial boards and is currently the President
of the Association of Community Organization and Social Administration. Dr.
Hyde will direct the Initiative’s research activities and assist with efforts
at strengthening the diversity of the community.
Dr. Michael Lindsey (MSW,
PhD, Social Work) will join the School of Social Work’s faculty in Fall 2004. He is currently completing a Post-doctoral
Fellowship at the Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, W.K. Kellogg Community
Health Scholars Program. In that
capacity, he works in East Baltimore on effective intervention programs for high-risk
African American males. His scholarly
areas of interest include violence prevention among urban youth and community
health assessments. He is a past
recipient of an NIMH Dissertation Award for his work on social network influences
on African American Adolescents. Dr.
Lindsey will work primarily on the Leadership Development objective of this
Initiative and assist with the research activities.
Dick Cook (MSW) is the
current Director of the School of Social Work’s Community Outreach Service
(SWCOS). He is a former Peace Corps
Volunteer in Latin America, and has more than 30 years of experience working with
diverse community based organizations, including the past 25 years in the
target area with Native Americans, Latinos, African Americans and Ethnic
Europeans. For the past 5 years, he has
assisted community organizations in the area successfully tackle issues such as
stopping real estate flipping, strengthening their organizational structures
through Board and Staff training, and raising funds to continue their
efforts. For past several years, he has
assisted the Baltimore American Indian Center to move from a position of
being $200,000 in debt and closing its doors, to one of eliminating its debt
and raising more than $200,000, to renovating its building and raising $45,000
to hire new staff. Mr. Cook directed the
COPC program in West Baltimore and will direct the community outreach activities for
this project.
The Project Manager, Randa
Deacon (MSW, MS economics), will dedicate at least 60% time to this
Initiative. She has three years
experience working on the West Baltimore COPC project and four years working in
East
Baltimore with the groups involved in this New Directions effort. She helped homeowners in the area, faced with
relocation resulting from a major new development, move from a position of
being offered $3000 for their property to being offered more than $70,000. She supported public housing tenants in the
area in getting the City’s attention regarding their maintenance issues. And she has assisted several organizations in
the area to develop more effective organizational structures. She will be based in the community and work
with the community partners in developing their strategies and activities, and
she will oversee reports and record-keeping for the project. She will also supervise a graduate Student
Intern assigned to the project.
Andrea Judson (MSW, LCSW-C),
part time Community Organizer on this Initiative, has worked for the past five
years in the target area. She has helped groups in the area collaborate with
each other in order to provide more effective services. She also has assisted tenants of one public
housing project design and secure $100,000 to build a new playground to replace
the one that was broken down and used by drug dealers; the new one is now the
territory of parents and children in the community. Ms. Judson will oversee the community
engagement activities and supervise several graduate student interns who be
assigned to the Initative.
Faculty and Administrative
consultants to the Initiative include:
· Terry Hickey (JD), School of Law, is founder of Community Law
in Action (CLIA), a program affiliated with the Law School, which has provided training
in street law for the past five years to some of the poorest communities in Baltimore including the West Baltimore
Empowerment Zone, COPC project. Dr. Hickey and CLIA recently won a grant and
approval from the Baltimore City School Board to develop an innovative high
school focused on teaching young people skills and knowledge of community
leadership. The Baltimore Freedom Academy has completed its first year
with 100 students, and is relocating to the East Baltimore target area. Dr. Hickey and CLIA will conduct the
Community Advocacy for Youth Trainings.
· Karen Hopkins (MSW, PhD
Social Work), School of Social Work, Co-Chairs the Management
and Community Organization Concentration.
Her specialty is the field of management and organizational development,
with particular emphasis on supervision, learning organizations, personnel
development, and evaluation research.
She has focused her classes on addressing real organizational problems
and co-taught the community research course with Dr. Hyde that worked in our
target area two years ago. She will
assist with the organizational development and research aspects of the project.
· James Kunz (MSW, PhD
Economics & Social Work), School of Social Work, has worked with
Baltimore’s poorest communities from the time he was an MSW student and interned
with the Maryland Food Committee, which helped poor communities organize around
increasing the availability of food. Two
years ago, Dr. Kunz led a community-wide project with Baltimore County’s Community Action Agency,
involving hundreds of community representatives in developing policy papers on
the county’s most pressing issues for the incoming County Executive. He will assist the project by working with
community groups to help them understand the economic impact of various
strategies and activities. He will be
particularly helpful as the project develops strategies for affordable housing
and in providing expertise in cost effectiveness measures.
· Mary Leach (PhD Mathematics),
Office of the President, has chaired the Community Advisory Board of the West Baltimore
COPC and served as a Board Member of one of the Village Centers. Along with a
community representative, she will serve as Co-chair of this Initiative’s
Community Advisory Committee. Dr. Leach
also created and leads the Covering Kids Project, an effort to secure health
insurance for uninsured children in Maryland. She will serve as the Liaison to the
President’s Office on this project as well as advising participating community
organizations on resource access issues.
· Megan Meyers (MSW, PhD Social
Welfare), School of Social Work, has worked in the target area for the past
three years, assisting groups in
developing planning strategies and using available data resources to solve
their problems. She teaches community
organizing, social action and community economic development courses at the
school. Her specialty is in the area of
conflict resolution. Two years ago, she
worked with Randa Deacon on an effort that produced a successful new community
organization in East Baltimore, which then secured a substantial increase in the
amount of money being offered for their homes.
This past year, she led a successful workshop which trained 50 community
residents in techniques of alternative dispute resolution. She will assist community partners in developing
strategies for community building and will facilitate trainings on conflict
resolution between various groups and organizations.
· Mitsuko Nakashima (MSW, PhD Social
Work), School of Social Work, specializes in aging and
cultural diversity. She currently
is a Hartford Geriatric
Social Work Faculty Scholar Fellowship.
For this project, she will assist primarily with strategies to end
isolation among the catchment area’s senior citizens.
· Larry Ortiz (MSW, PhD
Sociology), School of Social Work, specializes in outreach to
and political mobilization of the Latino population. He also has an interest in housing
development and on the impact of policy on the local level. He will be
assisting primarily with resident engagement activities.
· Barbara Sattler (RN, DrPH) School of Nursing, Director of the Environmental Health Education Center at the school. She is the Principle Investigator on a
“Healthy Homes Initiative” working to eliminate lead hazards in Park Heights. She is also the Principle Investigator for Community
Outreach on an EPA hazardous waste site grant.
She has worked for the past 10 years with Baltimore’s communities most affected
by environmental degradation. Over the
past five years she has organized an environmental task force in South Baltimore which has worked to reduce
environmental hazards. She has worked
for the past three years in the targeted communities. She will assist the community partners in
understanding the environmental health issues and what communities can do to
protect themselves.
· Dan Schulze (PhD), School of Medicine, teaches Molecular
Immunology. Dr. Schulze is the Faculty
Advisor to a group of medical students who have organized themselves as the
Baltimore Community for Medical Outreach, which provides voluntary health education
to Baltimore communities. The committee will be available for health
care workshops and community educational activities on topics the community
requests. This will dovetail well with
the work on environmental hazards.
· Steve Soifer
(MSW, PhD Social Policy), School of Social Work, teaches economic
development, community organizing and social action. One of his areas of focus is affordable
housing, specifically the establishment of land trusts. He will assist the project in strategizing
long-term affordable housing options.
B)
Past Performance
Achievement of specific measurable outcomes:
Upon notice of the initial
COPC grant, the Project Director was given 24 hours to get to a national COPC
Conference in St. Louis. During his absence, the local newspaper
contacted the President’s Office about the award. The resulting article made no mention of
community partners, who became so infuriated with this oversight that the
Project Director (upon his return) asked HUD about the process for returning
the grant. In an effort to salvage the
project, a respected city official was engaged to mediate. This process was successful, but it set the
project timeline back by about six months.
Despite this slow start, the project was able to meet and in many cases
exceed it goals.
The “West Baltimore
Empowerment Zone Initiative” was composed of University partners and four
Village Centers in the Empowerment Zone – Washington Village/Pigtown,
Poppleton, Harlem Park, and Sandtown. The following is a summary of the Goals,
Outcome Goals, and Outcomes Achieved for the COPC Grant from 1999 to 2003
(includes 2 extension years):
·
Goal 1:
Increase the involvement, organization and mobilization of community
residents and their resources to deal with problems or issues.
·
Outcome Goal: recruit 200 residents to become
involved in Village Center
activities (e.g. community clean-ups, community fairs, safety patrols,
neighborhood watches) by June 2000.
·
Outcome Achieved: recruited 350 residents by
June 2000.
·
Outcome Achieved: recruited more than 4000 residents by
December 2003.
·
Goal 2: Increase community capacity to
identify and respond to community issues.
·
Outcome Goal: identify and involve 25 leadership
prospects from the community by December 1998.
·
Outcome Achieved: identified and involved 15
leadership prospects by December 1998.
·
Outcome Achieved: identified and involved more
than 100 leadership prospects by December 2001.
·
Goal 3: Increase in employment and
community development.
·
Outcome Goal: create job seekers identification
and placement programs by December 1998.
·
Outcome Achieved: created the first job seekers
identification and placement program in Washington Village/Pigtown by December
1998.
·
Outcome Achieved: created programs in each of
the 4 Village Centers by June 1999.
·
Outcome Goal: place 200 applicants in jobs each year
by December 1999
·
Outcome Achieved: placed 140 applicants by June
2000.
§
Startup was slower than anticipated, but the
program began to make more placements in the latter part of 2000 and in 2001.
Placed 1546 total placements or 309 per year average since the COPC started by
December 2003.
·
Outcome Achieved: started Reverse Commute
Program, which took 90 job seekers from their neighborhood in Baltimore
City to jobs in Howard
County that paid $4 an hour more than
the prevailing wage in the city. This
added over $1,800,000/year in income to the project area economy by December
2000. By December 2001 the program was
carrying 120 individuals to jobs bringing an estimated $2,500,000/year in
annual income into the local economy.
·
Outcome Goal: Economic development and job
opportunities by January 1999
·
Outcome Achieved: set up Community Vendor Fair
in University bringing 40 community vendors and 60 university purchasers
together, May 1999.
·
Outcome Achieved: incorporated Poppleton CDC, which in turn built a business incubator
building and a small shopping area in neighborhood, December 2001.
·
Outcome Achieved: assisted Washington Village/Pigtown
Village Center in convincing the State to locate the Department of Natural Resources
Office in a newly developed “green building” in the community, December
2002.
·
Outcome Achieved: Washington Village/Pigtown Village
Center acquired another building for expansion, December 2002.
·
Outcome Achieved: Poppleton
Village Center
invited the university to develop a problematic vacant lot. The university
agreed and developed plans in close consultation with the community. The resulting development will generate more
than 400 community jobs and training to enable residents to access those
jobs. December 2003.
·
Goal 4: Increase community safety and
perception of safety.
·
Outcome Goal: shut down three drug houses using
nuisance abatement laws by June 2000.
·
Outcome Achieved: Assisted Village Centers in
shutting down targeted drug houses by June 2000.
·
Outcome Achieved: Additional 9 drug houses shut
down and secured by the partnership by December 2003.
·
Outcome Goal: increase public perception of
safety by January 2001.
·
Outcome Achieved: assisted all Village Centers
in organizing Public Safety meetings and facilitated/staffed monthly Public
Safety Committee meetings with residents and police in Washington
Village/Pigtown Village Center, by January 1999.
·
Outcome Achieved: provided organizer for public
safety block organizing and developed a block organizing training program, by
January 1999 through 2001.
·
Outcome Achieved: assisted with community
cleanups (e.g. streets, alleys, removal of graffiti) followed by community
building outdoor celebratory events with all Village Centers, throughout the
project period.
·
Outcome Achieved: assisted in data gathering and
planning for anti-crime camera installation in business areas, schools, senior
centers, and public places in the Washington Village/Pigtown and Poppleton
areas, 2000-2002.
·
Outcome Achieved: assisted Washington
Village/Pigtown Village Center in getting a Local Weed and Seed grant; the
program is seen as national model, June 2001.
·
Outcome Achieved: assisted in recruiting youth
for UMAR Boxing program in the Sandtown Village Center, 1999-2000. (UMAR is an alternative activity for young
people who would otherwise hang out on the streets.)
·
Outcome Achieved: helped create Alternatives to
Suspension Program for young people who committed non-violent offences in Harlem
Park, by 2000.
·
Goal 5: Increase affordable housing and
homeownership.
·
Outcome Goal: create strategy to decrease vacant
housing and create affordable housing options by January 2001.
·
Outcome Achieved: mobilized community to leverage the city’s
Housing Department to clear hazardous, drug-infested public housing and
assisted in planning with community a new mixed use housing development that is
now fully occupied.
·
Outcome Achieved: Village centers boarded up
privately owned vacant houses in community, January 2002.
·
Goal 6: Increase educational performance
·
Outcome Goal: identify needs and develop
initiatives by July 2001.
·
Outcome Achieved: school boundaries changed so
that children could avoid walking through open drug markets to get to school,
June 2000.
·
Outcome Achieved: developed program that
increased student attendance and increased parent involvement in Poppleton,
Washington Village, and schools serving
children in Harlem Park,
June 2001.
·
Outcome Achieved: through various fundraisers,
generated new monies for area schools by September 2001. Funds used to create and staff two new
libraries, with 3000 new books donated; begin a girls’ basketball program; and
build new school playground.
·
Goal 7:
Increase community health
·
Outcome Goal:
conduct community meetings about health education, June 1999.
·
Outcome Achieved: preventative health services
and educational programs conducted in the Washington Village/Pigtown area, June
1999.
·
Outcome Achieved: workshops on topics requested
by the community, including hypertension, diabetes, smoking cessation,
substance abuse, and HIV/AIDs, at all Village Centers, several faith based
organizational and local community health fairs, beginning in 2000.
·
Goal 8: Create community capacity to
design, implement and evaluate programs.
·
Outcome Goal: one Village
Center conducts its own evaluation
March 2000.
·
Outcome Achieved: each Village
Center conducted its own evaluation
by June 2002.
·
Goal 9: Increase the university’s
capacity to respond to community issues.
·
Outcome Goal: establish contact between the
university and the community by April 2000.
·
Outcome Achieved: assisted in developing or
expanding Community Outreach Programs in each of the 6 professional schools on
campus, April 2000
·
Outcome Achieved: monthly meetings of community
leaders and university faculty and administration, April 2000.
·
Outcome Achieved: University president has
representatives on each of the Village
Center boards, April 2000.
·
Outcome Goal: six new community internships
would be created by April 2000.
·
Outcome Achieved: Six new internships created, April
2000.
·
Outcome Achieved: Eight new internships created,
June 2002.
Comparison of proposed required match funds and
resources:
The COPC grant proposed to
leverage $332,000 from private philanthropy.
In actuality, a total of $750,000 private philanthropic dollars was
received: $450,000 from Lucent Technologies; $150,000 from the Fannie Mae
Foundation through the Maryland Community Partnership; and $150,000 from the
AT&T Foundation. The COPC Grant
proposed to leverage $2,943,810 from Community Development Block Grants. In actuality,
the project leveraged $3,360,000 in Community Development Block Grant funds for
operating support to nonprofit organizations in the West Baltimore Empowerment
Zone. In addition, one Village Center budgeted $5,000 towards a
student stipend. Overall, the proposed
leveraged amount was significantly more than proposed.
Rating Factor 2: Need/Extent of the Problem
Five inter-related
problems have been identified through research,
conversations with community leaders and discussions in planning meetings as
particularly pressing for the catchment area.
These are:
·
The lack of viable and varied housing options
(e.g. SROs, rental units, owner occupied), with
specific attention to the troubles caused by the dearth of safe, affordable
housing and the presence of environmental hazards in the community;
·
Community tensions/conflicts based on race,
ethnicity and/or immigration status, the result of changing community
demographics;
·
Concentrated pockets of poverty that isolate
those who live within them;
·
Weak, decentralized and uncoordinated community
infra-structure that results in economic and political vulnerability of the
community;
·
General concern with community health and
welfare, specifically a sense of fragmentation or weak linkages across
neighborhoods.
While these concerns have existed
in some form for a number of years, they have taken on greater significance in
light of the current redevelopment plans that will directly affect this
area. Specifically, gentrification from
the south and Biotech park development from the north threaten the ability of
residents to remain in their community.
These development efforts are occurring at a time of increased community
diversity, with attendant demands for more multicultural services and programs,
and decreased city and state assistance.
Baltimore
City’s heyday was in the
1950’s. Fueled by post-war economic
opportunities, the population peaked at 950,000. Since then, due to economic hardships and
racial upheaval, there has been a steady population decline. Like many northeastern and mid-Atlantic
cities, Baltimore’s population fled
to the suburbs, taking its wealth with it.
The 2000 census was 651,154:
64.3% African American, 31.6% White, and the remaining 4.1% Hispanic, Asian
or Other (Native American, two or more races).
During the 1990’s, more than 8,800 immigrants moved into the City,
helping to sustain its population (Baltimore
City, Department of Planning,
Census News 2000).
East Baltimore is one of the more diverse sections
of the city. Historically a blue collar,
working class area, it has been the point of entry for most immigrant groups in
Baltimore since the late 1800s. The
neighborhood statistical areas (NSAs) that comprise
the Initiative’s catchment area reflect a much greater diversity than that of
the city as a whole. Currently, there are approximately 28,000
people in this area; 32.5% White, 60% African American, 7% Hispanic and the
remaining ½ of 1% American Indian and Asian (Baltimore Neighborhood
Alliance Indicators, 2002).
Despite this
overall diversity, there are racially concentrated areas. There are several public housing projects in the
Initiative’s catchment area, and these are primarily occupied by African
Americans (65.3% to 96.9%). McElderry
Park is also mostly
African-American (85%). In the past decade, the Latino
population has greatly increased in Baltimore and is located in large part in
this part of the city. Baltimore-Linwood,
Ellwood Park/Monument, Perkins Homes, Upper Fells Point, and Washington Hill
have Latino populations that have grown by as much as four times that of the
city’s rate. The percentage of families
reporting that they speak a language other than English in the home ranges from
lows of 1.5% in Perkins Homes and 1.6% in Pleasant View Gardens to highs
of 18.9% in Baltimore-Linwood and 23.3% in Upper Fells Point. In these families, those reporting “speaking
English less than well” range from 10% to 87% (Baltimore City, Department of
Planning).
Baltimore could be
considered a poor city. Twenty-four
percent of its population lives below the poverty line; compared to 13%
nationally. Well over 50% of all jobs in
Baltimore are low
wage and low skill, paying at or near minimum wage. The median family income is $35,438. In East Baltimore, the
poverty rate ranges from 10.1% in Upper Fells Point to 58.6% in Perkins
Homes. The median family income ranges
from $11,618 in Perkins Homes to $47, 143 in Washington Hill.
Income
status affects an individual’s or family’s ability to successfully enter into
the housing market as an owner or renter.
In East Baltimore, median
home values range from $34,600 in Ellwood Park to
$112,100 in Butcher’s Hill. Settlement
costs and property taxes in Baltimore are
among the highest in the country (Consolidated Plan, 2001 – 2005). The average median monthly mortgage payment
in the Initiative’s catchment area is $760, ranging from $588 in Pleasant View Gardens to
$1,011 in Washington Hill. More than ¼
of homeowners pay over 35% of their income for housing. The average rent is $471 with a range of $142
in Perkins Home to $614 in Baltimore-Linwood; over 1/3 of renters pay more than
35% of their income for housing.
There are
also well-documented predatory lending practices, now being prosecuted, that
have often targeted the Latino population in East
Baltimore. Those who
lack English language skills can be easily exploited by landlords and
renters. And new immigrant groups tend
to have little access to public housing (Consolidated Plan. 2001 – 2005).
Between 1990 and
2000, the percentage of vacant housing units grew in most of the Initiative’s NSAs – from 43.3% in Butcher’s Hill to over 700% in
Jonestown. This reflected a city-wide
trend, as the number of census tracts with 100 or more abandoned houses doubles
from 23 to 45 tracts in this 10 year period (Consolidated Plan,
2001-2005). Currently, catchment area
owner occupancy rates range from 31% to 56%, depending on the neighborhood. The
city has attempted to remove marginal or abandoned housing and replace it with
affordable units for low income families; yet the demand far exceeds the
availability. The loss of relatively
inexpensive rental units has left many to choose between substandard units or
paying an extremely high rent. For low and moderate incomes individuals and
families in the Initiative’s catchment area, this increasing lack of affordable
housing is likely to be exacerbated by redevelopment efforts. It is anticipated that 1000 households will
be displaced by the Johns Hopkins
University Biotech
Park project. A subsidized rental complex in the central
part of the target area was recently sold, and 140 families now will need to
find low income housing. In the area
south of the Initiative’s NSAs, houses are selling
for over $400,000 and rents are averaging over $1000 a month; this real estate
development is moving northward.
Health and
environmental hazards often accompany vacant lots and abandoned houses. Such sites become locations for drug
trafficking and trash dumping. In
addition, community leaders have indicated that the east and southeast boundary
neighborhoods contain brownfields. Because
of the age of the housing stock (half to three-fourths of the area’s buildings
were constructed before 1939) poisoning from lead based paint is considered a
particularly serious health concern. Maryland
ranks as one of the most toxic states in the country because of lead exposure
to children. The U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development reported that Maryland
has “more than four times the national average of lead exposure children and
more than 15 times the rate of lead poisonings” (Consolidated Plan, 2001 – 2005). Eighty-five percent of Maryland’s
lead poisoning cases are from Baltimore. It is estimated that more than 7000 Baltimore
children are exposed to lead paint dust and chips, and another 1200 are
poisoned, each year (U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). Many experts believe that because of the cognitive
damage, lead exposure is a primary contributing factor to the city’s high
juvenile crime rate, failing schools and disintegrating neighborhoods.
This catchment
area is particularly vulnerable to these demographic and economic trends
because of a largely uncoordinated service/advocacy network that is comprised
of many weak or near failing agencies and associations. Agency and association
representatives report that their organizations face heightened demands from
community members in the areas of housing assistance, resettlement, protection
of property values, jobs, basic health and welfare, safety and
transportation. These representatives
also indicate that there exists fragmentation within the catchment area, such
that a broad and coherent collective response to these various concerns has not
been possible. Instead, they note that
distrust within and between the catchment area neighborhoods has developed. Moreover, grassroots agencies, in trying to
meet the needs of their clients and constituencies, are suffering from
inadequate financial resources and, in some cases, leadership with insufficient
experience and knowledge to deal with these growing problems. In general, leadership and organizational
development is needed for many (if not most) of the agencies and associations
in the area, as is coordination among them so that a more comprehensive
response to the area’s problems can be made.
Despite
the many challenges, this area’s diversity (race, ethnicity, citizenship,
language, age and economic status), has been recognized by the community
organizations in this area as a strength on which they would like to
build. Based on prior work with these
organizations, Initiative staff also are aware that these cultural differences contribute
to non-participation, misunderstandings and mistrust. In its 2002 report, “Attracting New
Americans to Baltimore’s
Neighborhoods,” the Abell Foundation echoed these
concerns. The report found that compared to other cities, Baltimore had done a relatively weak job in
responding to the needs of immigrant and refugee populations. It noted that immigrant recruitment and
retention efforts, which are necessary for the city’s revitalization, must be
done in ways that are seen as ‘adding to,’ and not displacing or putting at a
disadvantage, the current or long-term residents. In many respects, the Abell
Foundation’s recommendations for recruitment and retention of immigrants could
be applied to East
Baltimore
as a whole: outreach, communication, responsive service services and improved
housing opportunities. This proposed
Initiative seeks to address many of these concerns.
Rating Factor 3: Soundness of Approach
A) Work Plan
The proposed
community capacity building initiative emphasizes using the diversity found
within the East Baltimore city neighborhoods as a
strength for current and future community growth and development. The diversity in this community crosses
ethnic, racial, language, citizenship, age and socio-economic lines. It embraces long standing residents and
relative newcomers. It is important to
not only build the assets within each of the East Baltimore
neighborhoods, but also to bridge these neighborhoods so that strong networks
can be formed. Such alliances provide a
greater chance of securing needed resources and support from the broader public
and private sectors.
Outreach Activities
This initiative
has two components to its outreach activities.
The first is an educational component, comprised of 5 inter-related
areas: Housing Readiness, Cross-cultural Communication, Leadership Development,
Organizational Mentoring, and Community Health.
The second is a community engagement component, consisting of a
Grassroots Mobilization Model that facilitates community participation and
mobilization, and Community Coordination Plans for each of the 5 educational
outreach areas. Together, both
components will enhance the overall community capacity of East
Baltimore, specifically the empowerment of its leaders and
residents. Figure 1 illustrates this
plan.
|
Figure 1: Outreach Activities Model
|
|
Residents of East Baltimore contend with:
|
|
Initiative assists
through Outreach Activities:
|
|
Resulting in:
|
|
·
Poverty pockets that result in isolation of
residents
·
Fragmented agency infrastructure
·
Racial/ethnic tensions
·
Lack of affordable, decent housing
·
Concerns about community well-being
|
 
|
Educational Activities
 (Housing Readiness, Cross-cultural Communication,
Leadership Development, Organizational Mentoring, Community Health
|
|
COMMUNITY
CAPACITY BUILDING
(Leadership and Resident Empowerment)
|
|
|
|
Community
Engagement
Activities
(Grassroots Engagement Model,
Community Coordination Plans)
|
An important
overarching goal is to breakdown the barriers between various
neighborhoods. Workshops and other
educational activities will be rotated throughout the catchment area (by
repeating offerings) to maximize issue exposure and community engagement,
preferably with a group from one neighborhood facilitating a session in another
neighborhood. Horizontal linkages will
be purposively created through mentoring relationships between neighborhood groups
and associations. The community engagement plans will help ensure that
community members are not just recipients of educational programs and other
forms of assistance, but also are viable participants in the Initiative and
more importantly, their neighborhoods.
This section
first describes the proposed activities/tasks for each outreach area and a
general model for the community engagement plans. A “Milestones Summary” Table is then provided
that lists activities/tasks, target completion date (in six month intervals),
and person(s) responsible. Because many
of these activities involve the work of the community partners, that will also
be indicated (see Letters of Commitment for verification). Some of the activities are on-going, and the
focus is more on coordination and publicity of their availability than on
determining a specific date for community participation. It should be noted that this plan
necessitates flexibility, as activities may be altered or added as we gain more
community input and participation.
Educational Activities
1)
Improve housing readiness/stability of area
residents to become or remain viable homeowners and renters. This cluster of educational activities
focuses on helping long term residents remain in the community, while also
assisting newcomers, particularly immigrants, in settling into the area. Emphasis is placed on working with community
residents to understand and develop their fiscal health (e.g. good credit), in
order to become owners or renters.
Because many area newcomers are Spanish-speaking, a number of the
offerings (as well as written materials) will be offered in Spanish. Another population that will receive
particular consideration is the elderly, who (in addition to financial
concerns) have specific health and mobility needs that require attention in so
that they can remain in their homes. Residents
of public housing projects will be targeted through focused public efforts (see
Community Engagement section). Education
activities to improve housing readiness and stability include:
·
Home Buyer Education workshops. There will be 8 of these workshops during the
grant period; 4 will be offered in Spanish.
·
Financial Literacy workshops that include
financial health and credit information.
There will be 4 workshops, 2 in Spanish.
·
Individual credit and home ownership counseling
to community members. These are on-going
services provided by several community partners that will now be coordinated
and publicized throughout the catchment area.
·
“Aging in
Place” technical assistance services that help senior citizens remain in their
homes by addressing in-house safety concerns.
These are on-going services that will be publicized to the community in
a more coordinated fashion. The
Southeast Senior Housing Initiative (SESHI) and Baltimore Community Medical
Outreach have agreed to provide these services.
·
Coordination of an Individual Development
Account program, which helps community residents accrue personal financial
assets, with other Initiative partner housing organizations. The IDA program is offered by the East
Harbor CDC, and they have agreed to reserve space in their existing educational
programs for clients of Initiative organizations. This will be an ongoing activity overseen by
Randa Deacon and the East Harbor CDC staff.
2)
Enhance cross-cultural communication so that
community members can understand and appreciate the various cultures within and
between their neighborhoods. This
set of educational activities has a dual emphasis – to assist the Initiative’s
catchment area to appreciate and build upon its diversity, and to help area
organizations and associations better serve an increasingly diverse clientele
or membership.
·
Diversity trainings for community organizations
and associations that focus on meeting the needs of culturally changing
constituencies, members and client base.
There will be a minimum of 2 workshops each year. Cheryl Hyde and the PASO Training and
Consulting group will coordinate these workshops.
·
Cross-cultural community dialogues that promote
greater awareness and understanding across different racial and ethnic groups
in the area. At least 1 a year will be
held, with the intent that dialogue groups will become self-sustaining. Randa Deacon,
Cheryl Hyde and the PASO Training and Consulting group will oversee these
efforts.
·
Community cultural fairs in which different
racial and ethnic groups share their traditions with others. There will be one fair or community event
each year. The Community Advisory
Committee and several community partners will take the lead in this event.
·
“Spanish for the Professional” courses for
service providers who work with the Spanish-speaking community. Four courses will be offered during the 2
year grant period. Centro de la Communidad is offering this course.
·
Interpreter/translation services as needed for
the Initiative’s various meetings, workshops and written materials. These services will be offered by staff at
St. Michael’s Outreach Center
and Centro de la Communidad.
3)
Engage in leadership development with a specific
focus on youth leadership so that a new generation of community leaders can be
identified and trained. A frequently
expressed opinion by current leaders of community groups is that there is a
dearth of new leadership in the area. As
the existing leadership begins to “age out,” there is concern that there will
not be well-prepared individuals to replace them. Consequently, leadership development,
particularly of area youth, became a primary objective of this Initiative. Education activities in the area of leadership
development will include:
·
Community Advocacy for Youth Training: Six hour
training (over 3-4 sessions) that uses a problem-solving model to assist youth
in identifying, analyzing and advocating issues that are critical to their
community. Youth learn critical
thinking, communication, public speaking, writing and problem solving
skills. A follow-up workshop will be
held with each training group to qualify these youth to become part of the
Baltimore Youth Congress, which is a citywide youth-led initiative facilitated
by Terry Hickey and CLIA. Parents and/or
adult volunteers also will be trained to work with the youth groups to continue
their efforts after the grant ends.
·
Community
Leadership School:
Open to community residents, this is a 6-8 session education program on the knowledge
and skills needed for effective organizational and community leadership. Topics include: characteristics of a “good”
leader, styles of leadership, conflict resolution, facilitating meetings, member
recruitment and retention strategies, using the media, supervising staff and
volunteers, resource development, and strategic planning. Participants who attend all sessions will
receive a certificate that indicates their completion in the Leadership
School. Planning will be coordinated by Dick Cook, Randa Deacon, Michael Lindsey and the Community Advisory
Committee. Faculty consultants,
Initiative staff and community partners will serve as the school’s
instructors.
4)
Assist in organizational mentoring and development
so that groups and associations in need of some technical assistance can be
matched with those organizations in the community that can provide guidance. Organizations and associations provide the
critical infrastructure to a community.
This set of education activities focuses on organizational capacity
building with area organization’s assisting one another in that process. Activities include:
·
Comprehensive organizational assessments that
help determine the strengths and challenges of that organization, an action
plan designed to address some of these challenges, and then organizational
matching, so that organizations with particular strengths can mentor those
organizations as they implement their action plans. Two organizations at the start of each year
will be selected by the Community Advisory Committee to receive the assessment,
action plan and mentor arrangement.
Staff of the Resource Mentoring Project, a program of SWCOS, will
conduct the assessments, design the action plan, and oversee the match.
·
Organization Leader Roundtable in which area
organization/association leaders and university experts come together to
dialogue and debate particular topics or issues of concern, as determined by the
Community Advisory Committee. There will
be at least 2 roundtables each year.
·
Skill development workshops for organizational
leaders on topics such as fundraising, supervision, strategic planning and others
to be determined by the leaders. (Note:
some of these topics may overlap with those offered in the Leadership
School. If that is the case, then the organizational
leaders will attend those sessions of the Leadership
School.)
5)
Promote community health in ways that enhance
resident participation in their neighborhoods. While the other proposed sets of education
activities do, in various ways, encourage the engagement of community
residents, this cluster of activities is aimed specifically at community-level
improvements in the overall wellbeing of the community. The intent of these activities is that residents
will want to stay and more fully partake in neighborhood life.
·
Community-based health education programs
offered at local grassroots and faith-based organizations that focus on
providing knowledge to empower residents so that they can make more informed health
care decisions. These workshops use a
multicultural framework to discuss health care needs and concerns. At least 4 workshops a year will be provided
by Dan Schulze and Baltimore Community Medical Outreach.
·
Vacant lot beautification workshops in which
area residents are taught how to create community gardens and other shared
green spaces. There will be at least 4
workshops during the Initiative led by Civic Works.
·
Public safety forums/workshops organized to
address concerns and learn “safety tips.”
At least 1 such event each year will be held. The Community Advisory Committee will
coordinate the event.
·
Environmental hazards workshops and technical
assistance, so that area residents can learn how to document and take action against
community health challenges such as lead poisoning, unsafe drinking water, poor
air quality, pesticide exposure and unsafe housing conditions. There will be at least 2 workshops per year,
with follow-up assistance, led by Barbara Sattler of the Nursing
School.
Community Engagement Activities
The community
engagement activities will be guided by a Grassroots Engagement Model in
which the group or groups determine the issue (s) to be undertaken. In this inductive approach, the university
partners will serve as resources for community residents, but will not shape or
decide what concern or problem is addressed.
The Project Organizer and graduate student interns will staff this
mobilization effort. Initially, the
Initiative will work with at-risk populations in the catchment area: public
housing residents, elderly, and Spanish speaking immigrants; the Community
Advisory Committee will select or recommend the specific neighborhoods or
areas. A version of this model has been
used successfully in a prior organizing effort by Randa Deacon and Dr. Megan
Meyer, both of whom are involved in this Initiative. The goal is that by the end of the
Initiative, three collective actions resulting from grassroots mobilization
efforts will have occurred (one for each at-risk population). Table 1 presents a general overview of this
mobilization model.
Table 1: Grassroots Engagement
Model
|
Entry:
Securing Grassroots Legitimacy
|
· Secure
support from Neighborhood Association, other legitimating group or
organization, AND/OR leader who is known or respected in the community
· Let
people know that a canvas will take place and has local legitimate support
|
|
|
|
|
Listen:
Neighborhood Canvassing
|
· Ask
about the things they like about the neighborhood (assets)
· Ask
about the things that concern them (problems, issues)
· Ask
for their thoughts about what should be done
· Ask
which of their concerns they would be willing to spend some time and energy
working on
· Document
what people are saying and develop a report, without attribute, for feedback
to the community
|
|
Table 1 continued:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convene:
Providing Feedback to the Community
|
· Hold
a neighborhood meeting, preferably under the auspices of your sponsoring
group or leader
· Report
results of canvassing
· Facilitate
discussion/Q&A
· Prioritize
issues
· Have
people sign up to work on issue of top concern
· Convene
small groups to set date for first meeting of their issue committee
· Set
date for next neighborhood meeting (with enough time for issue committees to
do their work)
|
|
|
|
|
Committee Work:
Investigating the Issue
|
· Gather
information about the issue or problem – the cause, extent, who’s involved,
who’s affected
· Find
out what others have done to address the problem or issue. Indicate what you would recommend.
· Develop
a plan of action to address the problem or issue. Include securing resources in the plan.
· Prepare
a report to share with the rest of the neighborhood at the next meeting.
|
|
|
|
|
Re-Convene:
Selecting an Issue
|
· Hold
a neighborhood meeting at which the issue committees present their reports
· Have
Q&A and discussion on the reports
· As
a group, select an issue to take action on first (you can always decide to
take action on the others later)
o
Be sure to indicate why you’ve selected the
issue and what you hope to accomplish
·
Form an Action committee to oversee the effort
|
|
|
|
|
Taking Action:
Carry out Your Plan to Improve the Community
|
·
Mobilize as many residents as possible
·
Bring in allies
· Celebrate
completion of the effort by thanking everyone who helped
|
|
|
|
|
Evaluating
|
· Solicit
feedback from everyone involved: what worked and what did not, what would you
do differently next time
· Write
up the evaluation and share it with the large group
|
|
|
|
|
Moving On
|
·
Select another, possibly more ambitious,
problem or issue
|
As a complement
to these mobilization efforts, Community Coordination Plans will be
designed for each of the 5 education outreach areas. These plans will be formulated by graduate
student interns under the direction of Randa Deacon, Program Manager, and
Andrea Judson, Community Organizer, in consultation with the Community Advisory
Committee. The purpose of these plans is
to publicize the various offerings of the Initiative in a coordinated way, enhance
communication between community partners, further identify community residents
that may wish to become more involved in Initiative activities, and determine additional
issues that community residents would like addressed. Of particular concern is to reach at-risk
populations in the catchment area, specifically residents of public housing,
the elderly, and Spanish speaking immigrants.
These plans may include strategies such as canvassing select
neighborhoods, designing brochures, and working with neighborhood associations.
The plans will be designed at the start
of each grant year, and will be evaluated at the end of the first 6 months
(with adjustments made as needed).
Identifiable
tasks and person(s) responsible: Dick Cook, Project Co-Director, will
oversee the outreach activities. Day-to-day
coordination and publicity will be done by Randa Deacon, Program Manager. Andrea Judson, Community Organizer, will be
responsible for the community engagement activities and supervision of field
placement students involved in these activities. University faculty will also be available to
provide trainings and technical assistance.
See the “Milestone Summary for Outreach Activities” for more detail,
specifically as it concerns the involvement of different university and
community partners.
Tied to outreach agenda:
The Initiative
research activities are closely tied to the outreach agenda. First, the
research is being done concurrently with the outreach plan and will provide a
feedback loop to that component of the Initiative. The training of graduate students in
community-based research will dovetail with their practice training in
community engagement. The dissemination
strategies revolve around documenting the merits of innovative outreach
activities and products.
Non-duplication:
To the best of our
knowledge, having been involved in the East Baltimore
community for the past 5 years, these research activities do not duplicate
previous or current research. This
research agenda does compliment two prior research projects. One was the identification and documentation
of “Best Practices in Community-based Agencies”. The other was a community research and
mobilization project entitled, “Community
Building in Baltimore”,
designed and developed by Dr. Megan Meyer and Randa Deacon, both of whom are
involved in this Initiative.
B) Community Involvement
A Community Advisory Committee has been formed, and
its members include John Ciekot, Civic Works; Glenn
Ross, McElderry Park Community Association; Lisa Knickmeyer,
St. Michael Outreach Center; Stan Markowitz,
Southeast Community Organization; Wardell Porter, Neighborhood
Rental Services; and Carmen Nieves, Centro de la Comunidad. In addition, several community associations
have committed to being “active stakeholders” in this Initiative: Southeast
Senior Housing Initiative, International Rescue Committee, HEBCAC, Neighborhood
Housing Services, and Southeast CDC. The
Letters of Commitment (Appendix) indicate these levels of involvement.
In addition to the aforementioned community members,
the Community Advisory Committee will also include Beery Adams, Mayor’s Office
for Community Investment; a representative from each of the University’s
participating professional schools; and Mary Leach from the President’s
Office. Dr. Leach, together with an
elected member from the community partners, will co-chair the Community
Advisory Board.
Planning meetings involving university, city and community
members took place over 15 months prior to the submission of this grant
proposal (See appendix for selected meeting minutes). These meetings identified community issues
and concerns; brainstormed ideas for the project that eventually lead to its
focus and objectives; secured commitments from partners; determined additional
partners and resources; and established working relationships. In addition, East Baltimore
community organization representatives were invited to attend ongoing West
Baltimore COPC Project meetings.
C) Innovative Strategies/Best Practices
One goal of this
Initiative is to identify or strengthen promising ways for diverse
neighborhoods to work together towards ameliorating larger community problems
and creating an expanded public good.
Particularly in Baltimore,
which is very prone to small and insular organizations and associations, but perhaps
in other urban areas as well, the creation of horizontal linkages is critical
to developing a healthy urban infrastructure.
Among the anticipated innovative strategies/best practices from this
Initiative are those that illustrate how this can occur when “diversity” is
used as a focal point.
The dissemination
of Initiative findings will occur through a variety of venues and the intent is
to target the catchment area, COPC, and professional audiences.
·
A university web page will be created that will
provide information on the Initiative’s outreach activities and research
findings throughout the grant. Case
studies and other resources (practice, teaching, and research) would also be
made available. Links to other resources
in the university, community and nationwide (e.g. COPC) will be
identified. This web page will be
accessible to people within and outside the university.
·
Initiative staff will work with the University’s
Public Relations Office to publicize outreach and research activities throughout
the grant in various media outlets in and outside the university (e.g. campus
newsletters, city newspapers, radio talk shows). Particular attention will be given to
including community partners in media events.
·
As a culminating event of the Initiative, a
Community Summit will be held so research findings can be shared and commented
upon, and can serve as a foundation for future planning and action. The target audience of this event is
community stakeholders and residents, university partners, and appropriate city
and state officials.
·
The University’s Social Work Community Outreach
Service (SWCOS) has an Occasional Paper Series on Community-Based
Innovations. This series is specifically
oriented to help non-academic professionals (e.g. practitioners, students)
share their projects with a wider audience.
·
SWCOS holds an annual Tour for Funders and
Community Forum, in which representatives from area foundations and the
community are invited to learn about SWCOS projects. The focus of the 2006 session would be on the
results of the Initiative.
·
Attendance and presentation at COPC National and
Regional events during and after this Initiative. Initiative staff also plan on writing at
least one article for the COPC newsletter and would like to consider the
possibility of a COPC publication on the findings from the project. Of particular interest is a casebook on
community outreach and engagement that could be used in teaching.
·
Several professional/academic conferences have
been identified as places for paper presentations, including the National
Association of Social Workers, the Association of Research on Nonprofit
Organizations and Voluntary Associations (ARNOVA), and the American
Sociological Association.
·
Several academic journals have been targeted as
potential places for publication including Urban
Affairs Review, Nonprofit Leadership & Management, Nonprofit Voluntary
Sector Quarterly, and the Journal of Community Practice.
D) Affirmatively Further Fair Housing
The City of Baltimore,
Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plan for FY 2004-2005 identifies the following
impediments to fair housing: lack of available affordable housing,
concentration of poverty, race-based discrimination in sales and rental
practices, and illegal mortgage practices (flipping). This Initiative addresses these impediments
in several ways. First, it supports and
extends the work of several organizations directly involved in
anti-discrimination and anti-flipping campaigns including Southeast Community
Organization, Southeast CDC and Neighborhood Housing Services. Second, through its coordination and outreach
plans, the Initiative will make home ownership information, including legal and
financial rights, more available to those populations (e.g. racial minorities)
that are most vulnerable to market discrimination. Third, given the concern over affordable
housing, it is quite likely that one of the community engagement efforts will
focus on that issue.
The city’s Action
Plan also calls for “community education, outreach, homeownership counseling,
affordable housing education, eviction prevention, landlord and tenant rights,
and other fair housing activities” (p. 29).
The Initiative’s Homebuyer and Financial Literacy workshops, as well as
the individual credit and housing counseling, complement the City’s
activities. Given that the Initiative is
offering half of these workshops in Spanish, it makes these programs available
to the growing Latino population in East Baltimore.
E) HUD Policy Priorities
Priority 1: Providing Increased
Homeownership and Rental Opportunities to Low and Moderate Income Persons,
Persons with Disabilities, the Elderly, Minorities, and Families with Limited
English Proficiency:
The Initiative
will conduct homeownership workshops, financial workshops, housing counseling,
and credit counseling in English and Spanish, targeting the low and moderate
income residents of the project area. The
Initiative will also work with qualified individuals to establish Individual
Development Accounts, so that they can accrue their own private capital for the
purpose of a home or business down payment.
The Initiative
will work with elderly homeowners to assist them in identifying affordable home
repair, maintenance and upkeep services so that they may continue living in
their homes. The project will work with
elderly homeowners, renters and their landlords to identify resources which
will assist them in securing devices and improvements such as stair railings,
ramps, and bathtub/shower railings, which will allow them to remain in their
homes.
Priority 2: Improving the
Quality of Life in our Nation’s Communities:
The Initiative
will improve the environmental health and safety of families through the
Environmental Health, Vacant Lot Beautification, and Public Safety workshops conducted
during both years of the Initiative.
Each of these workshops will provide information and technical
assistance that will assist residents in addressing particular health and
safety concerns. In addition, a number
of the cross-cultural communication activities planned for both years of the
Initiative will also enhance the quality of life in the East Baltimore
communities by helping residents bridge various cultural differences.
Priority 4: Providing Full and
Equal Access to Grassroots Faith-Based Organizations in HUD Program
Implementation:
All of the
community partners are either grassroots faith-based organizations, such as St
Michael’s Outreach Center,
or grassroots community organizations, such as Centro de la Communidad. They have headquarters in the community, a
social services budget of less than $300,000 and staff of six or less. Through its organizational mentoring
activities, the Initiative aims to strengthen their abilities to improve
elderly housing opportunities, develop first time homeownership programs in
Spanish, expand affordable homeowner and renter opportunities in neighborhoods
of choice and support residents of public housing.
Furthermore, the
Initiative calls for engaging in in-depth capacity building with four of these organizations. Each organization will receive assistance in assessing
its strengths and areas that need improvement and developing an action plan to
strengthen the areas needing improvement.
The organization is then matched with a mentor organization, which will
assist it in carrying out its action plan.
Through this effort, the capabilities and access of at least four
grassroots organizations will be greatly enhanced.
Finally, the
Community Coordination plans will help improve communication among the organizations
and between the organizations and community residents, so that residents can
more fully understand the scope of programs available. Up until this point, service delivery has
been fragmented and piecemeal. These
plans will provide a more comprehensive, and accessible, “map” to area
grassroots organizations and their offerings.
Rating Factor 4: Matching Resources and Institutionalization of Program
A) Matching Resources
Match 25% over required match:
The research
activities match is 70.3%; the outreach activities match is 85%. The Match Overage is 2.22 (Match Verification
Form, #4)
Matching funds from sources
other than applicant institution:
The Annie E. Casey
Foundation has committed $45,000 for the first year of the grant. Baltimore
City has dedicated $736,300 of CDBG monies to the first year of the
grant. The following community
organizations have committed matching funds: East Harbor CDC ($10,000);
Southeast CDC ($31,760); Centro De La Comunidad
($10,000); Neighborhood Housing Services ($5,000); Civic Works ($5,000); St.
Michaels Outreach Center ($4,600); International Rescue Committee ($850); HEBCAC
($5,000); and PASO Training & Consulting ($1,500). The total match in outside sources for the
grant is $851,010.
B)
Institutionalization
Increases the number of faculty
undertaking this kind of work:
As a result of the
University’s shift in the direction of community and community outreach, each
school on campus has developed or strengthened its community outreach
programs. These programs are attracting new
faculty with community orientations, as well as engaging many long-time faculty. This New Direction’s project becomes a
critical avenue for faculty research, teaching and service plans.
The School of Social Work has attracted eleven new
faculty members with a particular interest in community outreach since 1999. Seven of them will be involved in the New
Directions project; an eighth is a long-time member of the community practice
faculty. Currently, the School has one of the largest community social work
programs in the country with nationally and internationally recognized faculty
in the fields of housing, land trusts, social capital, community organizing,
and community capacity building. The
School has been highly supportive of this faculty; all are tenured or have
received positive pre-tenure reviews. At
present, 4 of the 5 members of the Appointment, Tenure and Promotion Committee
are community-oriented scholars. In Fall
2003, the Dean created the position of SWCOS Assistant Director for Community-based
Research, in order to further help those faculty interested in this
scholarship. Finally, the current
Assistant Dean for Research has led a nationally recognized evaluation of a
community-based intervention program on child abuse and neglect.
The School of Law has attracted two new
faculty with a commitment to working with low income communities, one of whom
is a part of the project team. The School of Nursing has developed a number of
new community Initiatives and community based facilities. Two of its faculty are a part of our project
team. In the School of Medicine, a long term faculty member
has responded to growing student interest in community issues by assisting them
in organizing the Baltimore Community Medical Outreach. He is a part of our project team, as is the
student organization.
Increases in the number of
courses:
This project will provide
current experiences and case examples that will enable faculty to link their
teaching directly to their outreach experiences. Dan Schulze of the Medical School has expressed interest in
creating course material on “Community Medicine.” Barbara Sattler is engaged in
a nursing faculty development project on environmental health that covers
nursing education in 16 southern states.
The School of Law has a Law Clinic that offers
students practical experiences in poverty law.
About half of the law students sign up for the clinic.
The School of Social Work has 6 advanced courses
directly linked to the subject matter of this project – Community Economic
Development, Community Organization, Social Planning, Resource Development,
Multicultural Practice for Organizations and Communities, and Community Based
Research. These courses enroll over 100
students. The faculty teaching these
courses are involved with the proposed Initiative, which allows them to bring
community experiences directly into the classroom, as well as help the students
apply their learning to immediate community concerns. The School also offers a foundation course,
“Introduction to Organizational and Community Practice,” that is required for
all 400 first year students. This course
focuses on how to work with disenfranchised or marginalized groups,
organizations or communities. In addition, the School of Social Work’s Community Outreach Service
involves 50 students a year in community partnership settings as a way of
fulfilling the student’s internship requirements. All will be introduced to this new Initiative
in East
Baltimore. Up to eight students will be assigned projects related to the “Building
and Bridging Diverse Communities Initiative.”
Formal changes in institutional
policies related to support of outreach:
During the last
several years, the University of Maryland,
Baltimore has initiated and
solidified numerous community-based efforts that reflect changes in
institutional policy and practice. In
doing so, it recognizes and rewards the community work being done by faculty
and students. These are some examples:
·
The School
of Social Work’s Strategic Plan
includes the vision statement: “We provide, develop,
and promote service that has a positive impact on vulnerable, poor, and
socially marginalized communities.” One
of its strategic initiatives is “Expand relationships between the School and the
larger community with emphasis on vulnerable, poor and socially marginalized
communities and those who serve them.” This Initiative is being
accomplished through the following strategic planning goals: increase the
number of school-community partnerships with major community organizations/agencies;
increase the interaction between the school community and the community at
large; educate the community about who we are and what we do; create regular
community issue forums/seminars; increase inter-professional work; create
incentives for faculty to do community work.
·
All six professional schools now have Community Outreach
Programs.
·
The School of Medicine recently submitted an NIH
grant to establish an education program designed to produce culturally
competent health care professionals for local ethnic/racial communities.
·
Community Law in Action (CLIA) was founded by Terry Hickey,
when he was a law student, as part of the original COPC project. CLIA is now a non-profit affiliated with the
University’s School of Law, and Terry Hickey is on faculty
at the school.
·
The Law School Clinic, which addresses legal problems of
low-income people, is a recognized model for other law schools and frequently
is a feature at national conferences. The Law Clinic has developed a series of
sub-specialty programs in areas of particular interest to communities including
Environmental Law, Homelessness, and Community Economic Development.
·
The University’s Adolescent and Young Adult Center recently held its 3rd Annual Youth Street Fair. The fair and open house was held to
share health education resources with community partners and young people.
Booths and tents were set up to provide visitors with important prevention
messages focusing on teen pregnancy, AIDS, and sexually transmitted diseases.
·
The School
of Nursing offers a number of
programs and services including Open Gates, which offers primary and
preventative health care in inner city communities and trains urban residents
to be health outreach workers, the Well Mobile, and EnviRN, which offers
assessments for environmental hazards on-line.
·
During the original COPC grant, a group of medical students
and a faculty advisor approached the steering committee to offer assistance
with health education. That group,
Baltimore Community Medical Outreach, became a part of the COPC project and
will be a partner in the New Direction’s Initiative. As a recognized entity
within the School of Medicine, it offers a variety of
health education programs to a variety of community groups.
·
The Pharmacy School operates a Health Care
Outreach Program in low income communities.
·
The School of Dentistry operates a low cost Dental
Clinic and is creating special programs for low income individuals.
·
The Presidents Office has taken a particular interest in
outreach activities and continues to host monthly meetings of community leaders
with campus representatives of each of the schools to encourage dialogue and
joint work on solving community problems.
In addition, the Presidents Office has taken a strong role in creating
the Covering Kids program, an effort to make sure that all children in the
state have health insurance. The President created the position of Community Liaison,
which entails working closely with community groups and determining how the
University might be of help in their efforts to make their communities better.
Rating Factor 5: Achieving Results and Program Evaluation
Logic Model – attached