Inside Out

final
report
Inside out
Rethinking inclusive
communities
A Demos report
supported by Barrow Cadbury Trust
February 2003
Open access. Some rights reserved.
As the publisher of this work, Demos has an open access policy which enables anyone to access
our content electronically without charge.
We want to encourage the circulation of our work as widely as possible without affecting the
ownership of the copyright, which remains with the copyright holder.
Users are welcome to download, save, perform or distribute this work electronically or in any
other format, including in foreign language translation without written permission subject to the
conditions set out in the Demos open access licence which you can read here.
Please read and consider the full licence. The following are some of the conditions imposed by the
licence:
• Demos and the author(s) are credited;
• The Demos website address (www.demos.co.uk) is published together with a copy of this
policy statement in a prominent position;
• The text is not altered and is used in full (the use of extracts under existing fair usage rights
is not affected by this condition);
• The work is not resold;
• A copy of the work or link to its use online is sent to the address below for our archive.
By downloading publications, you are confirming that you have read and accepted the terms of
the Demos open access licence.
Copyright Department
Demos
Elizabeth House
39 York Road
London SE1 7NQ
United Kingdom
copyright@demos.co.uk
You are welcome to ask for permission to use this work for purposes other than those covered by
the Demos open access licence.
Demos gratefully acknowledges the work of Lawrence Lessig and Creative Commons which
inspired our approach to copyright. The Demos circulation licence is adapted from the
‘attribution/no derivatives/non-commercial’ version of the Creative Commons licence.
To find out more about Creative Commons licences go to www.creativecommons.org
First published in 2003
© Demos
All rights reserved
Typeset by Politico’s Design, design@politicos.co.uk
For further information and subscription details please contact:
Demos
The Mezzanine
Elizabeth House
39 York Road
London SE1 7NQ
telephone: 020 7401 5330
email: mail@demos.co.uk
web: www.demos.co.uk
This page is covered by the Demos open access licence. Some rights reserved.
Full details of licence conditions are available at www.demos.co.uk/openaccess
Contents
final
report
Foreword 4
Executive summary 5
1. Introduction 9
2. Community capacity-building: why does it matter? 13
3. The goals of inclusion 14
4. Building capacity for inclusion 18
5. Conclusion and recommendations 24
Notes 28
Inside out 2
Foreword
final
report
Barrow Cadbury Trust has a reputation for tions and voluntary-sector organisations to learn
funding cutting-edge projects on social inclusion from one another in order truly to advance
that make a real difference in their local commu- inclusion and build capacity in our local commu-
nities. The trust has an ethos of working in nities.
partnership with funded projects to promote their Our thanks are due to our partner projects –
contribution and speed up the pace of social WAITS in Edgbaston, Birmingham, TELCO in
change. We are now seeking to engage other East London and the St James Advice Centre in
partners to get better leverage for the practical Aston, Birmingham – for their participation in the
work of our projects and enable them to achieve fieldwork, and to all our funded projects in this
impact with a range of audiences. We thought it field for responding to the questionnaire survey.
fitting to join forces on this report with Demos, a Finally, we would like to thank Jeremy Crook
think tank that places an emphasis on ideas that (Black Training and Enterprise Group), Carole
grow out of practice. Harte (Birmingham Women’s Advice &
Through this project, the trust aims to Information Centre), Neil Jameson (Citizens
highlight the enormous potential of community- Organising Foundation) and Marcia Lewinson
based organisations to provide local leadership, (WAITS) for their contribution to the project.
reach people who are often marginalised and
champion change. The report also reveals the Sukhvinder Stubbs
challenge facing government, charitable founda- Director, Barrow Cadbury Trust
4 Inside out
Executive summary
final
report
This report was undertaken for the Barrow multiple deprivation, or social exclusion, in disad-
Cadbury Trust to help review the context in which vantaged neighbourhoods. Reducing exclusion
it undertakes its grant-making programme. The and improving outcomes for those who are worst
report focuses on the challenge of building off is also an explicit objective in several main-
inclusive communities, and addresses both the stream areas, including health, education and
public policy and the organisational challenges of employment policy.
investing in community capacity to encourage In several of these areas, ‘building
inclusion in diverse communities across the UK. community capacity’ is a priority, either implic-
The research has involved a review of national itly or explicitly, and government has introduced
policies relevant to social inclusion and a number of smaller funds and programmes to
community development. In addition, there has boost the capacity of locally based community
been qualitative fieldwork with organisations that organisations.
have been funded by the Barrow Cadbury Trust However, relatively little is known about the
(BCT) to ascertain their experiences of working complex processes by which policies based on
with local communities, with government and the inclusive values such as participation and partner-
public sector and with other voluntary and ship achieve in practice the full engagement of
community-based organisations (CBOs). local communities and the diverse groups and
individuals within them. The experience of BCT-
funded community projects is instructive in
Rethinking inclusive communities
helping us to understand these processes better.
The role of communities in tackling social exclusion Using in-depth case studies and qualitative survey
is high on the political agenda of Western govern- findings, this report assesses the role played by
ments, international institutions, civil society independent grassroots-based organisations in
organisations and grant-making bodies. The facilitating capacity-building and leadership in the
challenge of developing ‘community capacity’ is one communities they serve.
that has long applied to governments of all political
persuasions, and the discourse of ‘community’ is an
The goals of inclusion
important strand both in current public debate and
in the UK government’s social policy agenda. It is Demos identified three key dimensions of
particularly prominent in the National ‘inclusion’ relevant to the work of community-
Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy, but is also based organisations.
obvious in a host of other policies – from education The first of these is access to social goods.
and health reform to local government, and in This involves ensuring that all individuals and
initiatives such as local strategic partnerships. groups, including those in the most marginalised
The government’s current approach to this communities, have equal access to collective
issue involves several strands of policy and many goods that represent the citizen’s basic social
different types of investment and intervention. entitlement, such as welfare, housing, legal
Alongside income redistribution through the tax advice, social services, public transport, training
and benefits system, several major programmes and employment. Many BCT projects provide
are designed overtly to tackle the problems of services and support to hard-to-reach groups,
Inside out 5
therefore identifying and filling service gaps ! generating change internally to strengthen
where statutory agencies struggle to achieve social cohesion and empower marginalised
effective impact. sub-groups, such as women or youth.
The second dimension is empowerment.
Many BCT projects aim to transform relationships This approach contributes a valuable perspective
of dependency into individual and collective capa- to the mainstream public services reform
final
bilities for autonomous action. These CBOs go agenda, which has tended to frame citizens as
report
beyond service provision by developing leadership consumers of services, albeit from an increas-
skills in individuals and within groups, thus ingly diverse and responsive state. The
building the capacities required to demand real capacity-building work of CBOs offers
change in the balance of power between citizens, important lessons for the government in its
government and employers. plans to enlarge the role of the voluntary sector
The third dimension is institutional trust. in service delivery and to develop its thinking on
The findings of this research suggest that the building public value through user engagement
current government’s emphasis on participation and ‘co-production’.
and user engagement has not yet achieved the However, it also suggests that, for sustainable
conditions for effective institutional collaboration social inclusion to be achieved, a layer of inde-
to solve common problems. In the experience of pendent civil society organisation must be
many CBOs, the new local governance arrange- nurtured and supported to generate trust and
ments – built primarily around multi-agency mutual understanding between different social
partnerships – do not give central place to the real groups across particular local communities.
experiences and concerns of communities. The Government cannot achieve this directly, and very
survey and interviews found that BCT project often large public-sector providers have difficulty
leaders are often dissatisfied with formal struc- in developing ongoing, responsive and high-trust
tures for participation at local or regional level, relationships with citizens, particularly among
such as local strategic partnerships, domestic some client groups.
violence forums and consultation processes, In light of this, Demos identified three key
finding them time-consuming and often unre- conditions that need to be fostered if CBOs are to
sponsive. The general culture and level of carry out successful capacity-building work:
professional jargon surrounding these formal
structures can make them inaccessible to the Longevity – the importance of staying power for
socially excluded individuals and groups served by community organisations hoping to gain and keep
BCT community projects. the trust of the communities they serve. This is
facilitated by sustained commitment from staff
Capacity-building for inclusion over a period of years and by a stable relationship
These three goals – access to social goods, empow- with funding bodies that cover core running costs
erment, and institutional trust – can best be as well as project work.
achieved by taking a ‘capacity-building’ approach
to developing communities. This concept has Leadership – the quality of leadership that exists
gathered growing recognition from policy- across the full range of stakeholders. BCT projects
makers, grant-making bodies and international flourish under strong internal leadership, as well
development agencies in recent years. It rests on as by drawing on the resources of both formal and
the principle that investing in the human and informal leaders in the communities they serve.
social capital of marginalised individuals and Commitment to the values of inclusion from local
groups enables them to develop the capacities government leaders and independent trusts can
needed to thrive, and to play an autonomous role also enhance the environment in which CBOs
in developing and renewing their communities. operate.
The case-study projects achieved this through:
Leverage – leverage on financial resources and
! acting collectively to demand change from learning opportunities. This is generated by
others, such as local officials or employers CBOs through trust-building relationships
6 Inside out
within and beyond the community sector. Most to gather and spread the lessons of capacity-
organisations are involved in formal or informal building at a system-wide level.
networking activities at some level, and seek to
enhance the impact of their work by building
Areas of priority
strategic alliances with others, sometimes
including larger voluntary sector organisations The report identifies three key areas of priority
or statutory agencies. that must be addressed before such an agenda can
final
report
be moved forward.
Tensions
Clearly there are limits on how far these three Mainstreaming across all areas of social policy
conditions can be achieved in the current environ- First, there must be better understanding and
ment. The nature of grassroots-based projects recognition across government of the conditions –
themselves creates challenges for the capacity- identified through research and experience – that
building agenda: enable CBOs to contribute to the inclusion
agenda. Second, this must be accompanied by a
Funding – BCT projects argue that they are under strong commitment to identify the lessons learnt
continual pressure to secure funds for core from capacity-building work across departmental
running costs. As well as being time-consuming, boundaries.
this reduces their ability to plan ahead and to
sustain the trust of user groups. In addition, many Recommendations
organisations value their independence from The Active Community Unit and Regional Co-
government and other large organisations, and ordination Unit should take a lead in
some will avoid applying for government funding mainstreaming community capacity-building
wherever possible. This contributes to their fragile activity in the implementation of three key policy
financial position. agendas in particular:
Campaigning role – many organisations partici- ! the Futurebuilders Fund for modernisation
pate or aspire to participate in political debate of the voluntary sector
and to influence policy at a national level. This ! the Private Action, Public Benefit agenda
can put pressure on their role as service providers for legal and regulatory reform of the char-
rooted in the experiences and needs of local itable and wider not-for-profit sector
communities. ! the Review of Area-Based Initiatives,
designed to improve the coordination and
Internal differences – the potential for successful integration of area-based initiatives,
networking and alliance-building is limited by including support for community groups.
fragmentation within the community sector.
Often organisations are competing for the same Governance
scarce resources, or avoid joint working due to This commitment at central government level
anxiety about losing their independence and must also inform local government reform
identity. processes, especially those relating to regulation of
the community sector. As this report shows, a
Practical challenges heavy audit culture often breeds an atmosphere of
The experience of BCT projects proves that there distrust and risk aversion, which encourages
are examples of good practice and effective uniformity in programme design and inhibits the
capacity-building work going on in many commu- distinctive contribution that CBOs make.
nities across Britain. The current government’s Government policy thus must do more to
investment in a range of area-based initiatives has encourage experimentation with new methods
provided opportunities for pockets of innovation and structures for partnership that balances the
and good practice to emerge. demands of upwards accountability with the
The challenge, therefore, is no longer to make needs of communities. This might include
the case for the value created by CBOs, but rather extending and developing ‘people-based’ systems
Inside out 7
that emphasise ongoing, face-to-face contact build up the strategic capacity and longevity of
between partners and rest on horizontal or mutual effective community-based organisations.
forms of accountability, or reducing the number of
externally determined indicators and promoting Strategic role of independent trusts
locally determined priorities and outcomes. While CBOs hold the potential to play a key role
There is a further role for various types of in improved service delivery, the distinctive value
final
organisational ‘intermediaries’ in building the they contribute is inextricably linked to their
report
enabling middle ground through which this sort of status as a constitutive part of a rich, multi-faceted
collaboration can be successfully achieved. A key civil society. Given this, there is an important role
part of this challenge is to reconcile the profession- for non-state actors in providing leadership and
alised culture of formal partnership structures with leverage for social change and fostering a shared
the ‘bottom-up’ orientation of grassroots-based commitment among CBOs for increasing the
capacity-building activity. Formal structures, such capacity of the sector as a whole.
as local partnership boards and regional forums, Independent trusts are ideally placed to
might be better placed to address this challenge if occupy this space if they can meet the organisa-
supported by informal networks and relationships tional, learning and advocacy challenges of
of learning and trust that provide more flexible capacity-building in this sector. These challenges
access points for participation. include:
Recommendations ! developing coherence and a distinctive

The principles of two-way accountability and identity for specific grant-making
people-based relationships should be promoted programmes
throughout all multi-agency schemes, all central ! fostering productive networking, learning
and local government funding programmes, and and knowledge transfer across their
in the implementation of the Area-Based families of partner organisations
Initiatives Review Action Plan for Support for ! supporting the dual role of CBOs as local
Community Groups. service providers and independent voices
Within the National Neighbourhood Renewal with a wider advocacy role.
Strategy, community empowerment networks
(CENs) are an area of great potential for building There is real scope for a community capacity-
capacity across the community sector. However, their building movement in the UK today, which could
progress to date is unclear, and there is a danger that take the debate to a new level and establish
the opportunity for strengthening the long-term organisations and social outcomes that create
development of capacity in this sector will be lost long-lasting value. If independent trusts are to
amid the continuing pressure to deliver year-on-year take up this challenge, they will require the active
outcome and service improvement objectives. engagement and support of policy-makers, high
We therefore recommend that government levels of trust between all community stake-
should initiate a review of the progress of CENs, holders and a readiness to challenge
with the aim of connecting them more strongly to conventional wisdom and established practice in
other efforts, across government and beyond, to many different arenas.
8 Inside out
1. Introduction
final
report
Context and challenge

thinking for education, health, crime, social
The role of communities in tackling social security, equalities and many other key areas of
exclusion is high on the political agenda of policy.
Western governments, international institutions, Within this picture, investing in the capacities
civil society organisations and independent grant- of communities is presented as a key pathway
making bodies. In Britain, the current government towards public policy and interventions that can
has taken up the community discourse in its social understand and combat social division and
policy agenda, developing a cross-cutting strategy exclusion more effectively. Current policies and
that integrates the task of building stronger spending programmes therefore shape much of
communities with a range of broader objectives, the short-term context in which the role of
from reducing child poverty and health inequali- communities and community-based organisations
ties to boosting economic regeneration and public needs to be considered.
services reform The key policy narratives that give shape to the
The role of community-based organisations government’s social exclusion strategy can be
(CBOs) and civil society is equally important organised around five core messages:
across the political spectrum. The role of non-
state actors in strengthening social cohesion and 1. Participation – the engaging of individ-
citizenship has a central place in the liberal uals and groups in the renewal and
tradition, and these themes have surfaced recently strengthening of their own communities –
in thinking on the centre-right around civic is, at least rhetorically, at the heart of the
conservatism and the impact of market reforms strategy. The NNRS, launched in 2001,
on the fabric of communities. places ‘giving local residents and
This direction represents a response to the community groups a central role in
growing phenomenon of economic polarisation turning their neighbourhoods around’
and social inequality in the UK and other indus- high among its objectives.1
trialised societies. Several interconnected drivers 2. Inclusion is recognised as a key principle
of change have, over the last two decades, for facilitating participation. The Active
contributed to the emerging phenomenon of Community Unit (ACU) was created
‘social exclusion’. These range from declining within the Home Office in May 2002, with
confidence in national governments to deliver and the aim of making real the government’s
the perceived breakdown of shared moral and aspiration ‘to support strong and active
social norms, to environmental disintegration and communities in which people of all races
the increasing pressures of risk in the spheres of and backgrounds are valued and partici-
work, family and retirement. pate on equal terms, by developing social
Combating and reversing these trends is a central policy to build a fair, prosperous and
objective for the current government, and cohesive society in which everyone has a
provides a focus across its major public spending stake’.2 The ACU complements the work of
programmes. This objective appears most promi- the Community Cohesion Unit, estab-
nently in the National Neighbourhood Renewal lished after riots in Burnley, Oldham and
Strategy (NNRS), but also shapes strategic Bradford in the summer of 2001 to
Inside out 9
integrate diversity and cultural pluralism makers in the 1960s and early 1970s, informed by
with regeneration and race equality strate- the flowering of new grassroots-based social
gies at local level. movements and the civil and human rights
3. Enhancing the role of the voluntary and agendas they espoused.
community sectors is a crucial element in Marilyn Taylor sees similarities between the
the government’s strategy for facilitating current NNRS, which prioritises the coordination
final
both participation and inclusion. Last of services and community participation initia-
report
year’s cross-cutting Treasury review and tives in the most deprived areas, and key policy
the Strategy Unit report Private Action, initiatives of more than three decades ago, such as
Public Benefit3 both highlighted the impor- the US government’s ‘War on Poverty’ or the
tance of building the capacity of voluntary National Community Development Project and
and community organisations and the Urban Programme in the UK.6 Capacity-
increasing public confidence in the sector building and community-development work has
to deliver public services. had a strong presence in the not-for-profit sector
4. Partnership is another element in the in the US ever since, represented by leading organ-
government’s community agenda. This is isations such as the Coalition for Low Income
framed as the new mode of governance Community Development and the Center for
capable of engaging stakeholders across Community Change.
the community in tackling cross-cutting The 1990s arguably marked the end of a
problems. Most new area-based initiatives period in which individualism and economic
since 1997 are grouped around the rationalism dominated mainstream policy
framework of multi-agency partnerships, discourse, and witnessed the renewal of interest in
from local strategic partnerships (LSPs) ideas about community as a force for social
and ‘Excellence in Cities’ clusters to the cohesion. This was driven in part by the rise of
New Deal for Communities and Sure Start. ‘civil society’ after the fall of the Berlin Wall, and in
5. Local leadership is the final element part by a flurry of new thinking around the
driving this agenda. One objective of local concept of ‘social capital’ and an emerging
government reform is to enhance the role ‘communitarian’ agenda.7 These new ideas have
of councils and councillors on the basis of particularly informed the development work of
their status as locally elected representa- international institutions such as the World Bank,
tives. The Department of Transport, Local the IMF and the UN over the last ten years, but
Government and the Regions’ (DTLR) have also gained purchase with national govern-
white paper of 2001 asserted that ‘thriving ments increasingly occupied with rising inequality
communities and strong democratic lead- at home and the emergence of a ‘south within the
ership go hand in hand.’4 north’.
In Britain, the debate has centred around the
However, there is also some recognition of the capacity of the central state to provide welfare in
importance of informal leadership via the the context of growing societal complexity, and
Department for Education and Skills’ Community the implications of a larger role for the private and
Champions Fund. This scheme looks for energetic voluntary sectors in service provision.
individuals within the community who take ‘an Constitutional reform and the prospect of greater
entrepreneurial approach’ and can inspire others devolution of decision-making powers to the
to make change happen on the ground.5 regions is also shaping the terms of this debate.
In meeting this challenge, New Labour has
championed a vision of ‘governance’, framing the
Community and the policy-maker
renewal of political engagement and community
There is nothing especially new about the Labour cohesion in terms of a reinvention of govern-
government’s interest in communities as a ment’s traditional policy instruments. In this new
resource for tackling poverty and exclusion. approach, government institutions are to be
Community development and ‘empowerment’ relocated as one player among many, charged with
were fashionable terms among Western policy- an enabling role involving the devolution of
10 Inside out
decision-making powers to frontline providers the multi-causal nature of exclusion and in under-
and users and the fostering of participatory forms standing the multi-dimensional nature of
of policy planning, implementation, evaluation ‘community’ remains a daunting task. The
and review.8 One of the most recent contributions changing configurations of local governance –
to this debate relates to the concept of ‘public through ongoing devolution, growing diversity
value’. This discourse attempts to develop more and partnership with stakeholders from the
sophisticated tools for assessing performance that private and voluntary sectors – only adds to this
final
report
reflect all aspects of the costs and benefits of challenge. As a recent Demos pamphlet
government policy, including trust, legitimacy and summarised: ‘Government and public agencies are
perceptions of distributional equity.9 still struggling to find a coherent and credible
approach to the engagement of communities in
solving public problems or generating legitimacy
The challenge: making inclusive
for leaders and public institutions.’12
communities a reality
Despite this commitment to rethinking the rela-
The fourth sector?
tionships between government and citizens, there
Community-based organisations
remains considerable uncertainty about how
successfully the current framework for tackling Of particular salience here are the distortions and
social exclusion is effecting real change on the dependencies as well as the capabilities and
ground. The goals of community development and enhanced outcomes that can be generated by
capacity-building are now widely recognised as funding regimes (both state and independent) and
legitimate; however, the mechanisms required to the CBOs that are their beneficiaries. Government
realise them and spread best practice at a system- policy shows some signs of seeking to enhance the
wide level have not yet been fully developed. role of smaller members of the voluntary sector
The challenge of coping with increasing who work directly with communities, through
complexity is widely recognised among policy- moves to simplify funding regimes and unleash
makers today. Reflecting on the achievement of central government funds via grant programmes
the Attlee government after the Second World with a dedicated community theme, such as the
War, David Blunkett argued recently that Community Empowerment Fund, Community
Chest and the Active Community Funding
fifty years on, we need to recognise how much Package.
more complex and sophisticated most people’s However, the importance of the sector’s role in
expectations have become. A welfare society, providing an independent voice for civil society
and the institutions and norms which presents a dilemma for policy-makers who hope
underpin it, must meet a greater diversity of to harness the resources of CBOs in pursuit of
need. It must also serve higher aspirations by their social policy objectives. The current govern-
recognising forms of well-being and fulfilment ment produced a key document early in its first
which were not available to most people for term setting out the framework for relations
most of the twentieth century.10 between government and the voluntary sector,
which recognised that ‘an independent and diverse
A similar view was expressed by Ed Balls, Chief voluntary and community sector is fundamental
Economic Adviser to the Treasury, in the foreword to the well-being of society.’13 In practice, as
to a recent pamphlet on localism: government makes more demands on voluntary
and community organisations as agents of
in today’s complex world, it is simply not delivery, the independence and ability of the
possible to run economic policy or deliver sector to scrutinise and challenge policy decisions
strong public services using the old, top-down, has come under strain.14 This is particularly the
one-size-fits-all solutions.11 case for small community-based organisations
with limited capacity operating in the context of
This shift in thinking is promising. Nonetheless, an increasingly demanding infrastructure of local
forging a coherent role for government in tackling governance. In this light, the role of independent
Inside out 11
trusts in offering an alternative source of leverage placed to provide responsive services to a variety
and support for community capacity-building of hard-to-reach user groups, and to offer
work is crucially important. However, the organi- valuable lessons about how relationships of trust
sational challenge for trusts wishing to take on this and legitimacy are forged between provider and
role is significant. Independent grant-making user.
bodies must develop a coherence and distinctive
final
identity for their work that adds value to govern- Empowerment – the social location of
report
ment’s social inclusion objectives, but which community-based organisations and the user
avoids duplication or becoming absorbed too groups they serve creates the conditions and
heavily into any specific public policy agenda capacities for empowering the most excluded by
(such as neighbourhood renewal). transforming relationships of dependency –
Nonetheless, identifying exactly what is commonly associated with the state – into indi-
distinctive about this diverse and little docu- vidual and collective capabilities to act
mented CBO sector and what forms of investment purposefully and autonomously for change.
best enhance its impact is far from straightfor-
ward. The multiple roles its members play as Institutional trust – community-based organisa-
service providers, practitioner networks and tions increase the legitimacy of decision-making
political pressure groups present a challenge for processes and public debate by giving voice to and
policy-makers and trusts looking to maximise the making visible the hidden needs of marginalised
resources of this stakeholder group in combating and informally disfranchised groups.
exclusion. One of the objectives of this report,
therefore, is to examine the place of community- These hypotheses provide the themes for the
based organisations in wider ecologies of trust, analysis that follows in this report.
norms and social ties, and to assess their potential The case for community capacity-building
for creating a new kind of social value. and development in combating social exclusion is
In this endeavour, we make three hypotheses well established in policy circles, and as this report
about the types of contribution this sector might will show, pockets of best practice exist in margin-
make to the inclusion agenda, all focusing around alised communities across Britain. The challenge
a central concept of ‘capacity-building’: now is to understand better the sorts of capacities,
cultures and relationships needed to generate and
Service innovation – unlike public-sector spread this best practice at a system-wide level,
agencies or larger voluntary-sector providers, and to identify the forms of governance and part-
community-based organisations are uniquely nership that enhance learning.
12 Inside out
2. Community capacity-building:
why does it matter?
final
report
Given the growing recognition in policy debates excluded women in the Birmingham area.
around exclusion of the importance of developing Services include community organising,
communities’ capacities for change, this piece of training, counselling, and support and
research sets out to explore the question of how advocacy for sufferers and survivors of
this is achieved in practice through the focus of domestic violence. WAITS was established
community-based organisations funded by the in 1992, and currently has a team of two
Barrow Cadbury Trust (BCT). full-time members of staff, and two part-
The objectives of the research were to examine time support and development workers.
the role of community-based organisations ! The East London Citizens Organisation
(CBOs) in facilitating capacity-building and lead- (TELCO) A broad-based citizens’ organi-
ership in the communities they serve, and to sation affiliated to the Citizens Organising
produce a set of recommendations that will Foundation Institute, this is composed of
inform a new working agenda on building civil society institutions in the East End of
inclusive communities. London. TELCO’s members engage in a
Crucially, the research aimed to uncover the series of campaigns at local, regional and,
frontline experiences of CBOs within the infra- occasionally, national level on issues that
structure of local governance, and identify the impact on their communities. The ‘Living
types of organisational qualities, relationships and Wage for London’ campaign was launched
wider cultural norms that produce and sustain by TELCO in spring 2001.
good practice. ! St James Advice Centre Based in Aston,
The first method employed was the develop- Birmingham, St James Advice Centre
ment, collation and analysis of a qualitative provides free expert legal advice to the
questionnaire directed at service managers in local, largely Bangladeshi and Pakistani,
community projects funded by the BCT. This was communities. The centre is located within
designed to generate a broad, impressionistic St James Church (Church of England), and
account of their experience of developing specific is managed by a sub-committee of the
services, their relationships with statutory organi- church’s board.
sations, and how they and their clients are able to
relate to wider community resources and institu- The fieldwork on these case-study projects was
tions in seeking to tackle exclusion. primarily carried out via on-site visits and in-
The second method involved qualitative depth individual interviews with staff members
fieldwork involving three key projects supported and representatives from partner organisations.
by the trust: The purpose of these interviews was to build up a
fine-grained picture of how relations between
! Women Acting In Today’s Society projects, the public policy framework and
(WAITS) This is a grassroots organisation statutory agencies work in practice, as well as to
that works to develop and support socially identify and evaluate examples of good practice.
Inside out 13
3. The goals of inclusion
final
report
The twin concepts of ‘exclusion’ and ‘inclusion’ are throughout the research was the extent to which
freely deployed in political debate, despite being many individuals and groups do not enjoy equal
highly contested and opaque in nature. Both terms access to benefits, housing, legal advice, public
are typically used to refer to a cluster of related transport, education and training or other
ideas, such as ‘poverty’, ‘disadvantage’, ‘deprivation’ services. In the overwhelming majority of cases,
or ‘inequality’, with different emphases depending this lack of access is due to the informal barriers of
on the context and stakeholder in question. language, culture, disability or gender plus many
Despite this variability of usage, the others or, more often, a mixture of two or more. In
exclusion/inclusion discourse is useful for policy contrast to the familiar narrative of rising public
thinking in that it implies the multiple dimensions expectations and increased consumer literacy, the
of deprivation and locates these in the complex majority of these excluded individuals are not in a
relationships between individuals, groups and the position to articulate their needs, make demands
wider society. on the system or ‘opt out’ altogether.
On the basis of Demos research, it is possible For example, a support worker at WAITS high-
to identify three key dimensions of ‘inclusion’ with lighted the service gaps that exist for the Chinese
direct relevance for policy-makers, public institu- community in Birmingham, whose status as one of
tions and independent trusts with an interest in the smallest minorities in the city in terms of
advancing this agenda. population means that their culturally specific
needs are often overlooked in council planning
processes.
Access to social goods
One of the major problems in this regard is the
At a very basic level, inclusion involves ensuring absence of ‘joined-up’ thinking at local level.
that all individuals and groups, including those in Another support worker at WAITS described the
the most marginalised communities, have equal fragmented nature of local government’s approach
access to the collective goods that are the citizen’s to domestic violence, pointing to its failure to ‘join
basic social entitlement. A recurring theme up’ in any systematic way its work with sufferers
The surveyed organisations
Of the organisations selected by the Barrow served include: women, black and minority ethnic
Cadbury Trust (BCT) to participate in this research, groups, asylum seekers/refugees, disabled people
41 responded to the Demos questionnaire. All are and young people. A few organisations serve trade
independent organisations, the majority with char- unionists, single-parent families and the elderly.
itable or charitable company status, and with staff Practitioner and policy communities are also repre-
numbers ranging from 1 to 26 full-time members, sented among the surveyed sample.
and annual turnovers ranging between £14,000 Most of the organisations have a local focus for their
and £1m. frontline work. However, around half also provide
Annual numbers of frontline users vary between information or training services at the national level,
under 50 to over 10,000. The major user groups and one fifth have an international reach.
14 Inside out
and survivors to closely related policy on child women they work with; they use the ‘One to One’
protection and family services. to help their clients articulate the issues they care
In this context, many of the Barrow Cadbury about, and to encourage them to form support
Trust (BCT) projects surveyed see their role as groups for further exploration of these issues in a
filling the gaps where statutory agencies have safe, supportive environment.
proved ineffective – for example, by providing WAITS organisers were careful to emphasise
training opportunities for unemployed black that they do not go into community groups or
final
report
communities, childcare for single mothers or legal meetings with individual women with a predeter-
advice and translation services for non-English mined agenda regarding which issues to raise or
speakers. One of the most frequently cited benefits organise around. Instead, they help the women to
of partnership working was its usefulness in iden- identify the issues that are important to them and
tifying these gaps and publicising them to the state let this evolve in a flexible way, led by the women
through the partnership itself, through informal themselves. As such, the issue that initially brings
contact with officials from statutory agencies or a group of women together may not be the one
through lobbying campaigns for legislative change that sustains longer-term action. The value of
at national level. having an open and flexible agenda was contrasted
by WAITS staff to government-led initiatives that
often appeared predetermined and unresponsive
Empowerment
to what women perceived as their needs and the
This critique of exclusion was developed further needs of their communities.
by most BCT questionnaire respondents, many of Driving these activities is the principle that
whom frequently referred to the idea of ‘empower- empowering individuals also empowers the
ment’ as a way of pushing the goals of inclusion communities to which they belong. TELCO
beyond service provision. Inclusion in an particularly targets individuals who act as ‘gate-
‘empowered’ sense means more than considering keepers’ to larger communities – perhaps a priest
individuals as passive recipients of services, albeit or a schoolteacher or a shop steward – and who
increasingly diverse and responsive. Rather it have the potential to engage a ‘following’. One such
implies a transformative experience for the indi- gatekeeper, a Roman Catholic priest from
vidual, who transcends the relationship of Stratford, got involved with TELCO because he
dependency with a paternal and controlling state was concerned about the declining social cohesion
by discovering his or her own capabilities and of his congregation and the number of individuals
capacity for autonomous action. located ‘on the edge of things’ for whom the
This vision of empowerment involves an church was not a source of friendship and
analysis of power relations that leads to political support. Active participation in TELCO’s Living
action of various kinds. These ideas are important Wage for London campaign has, in his view,
in the work of both WAITS and TELCO, who generated a stronger sense within the congrega-
draw on models of ‘community organising’ first tion of ‘what we’re about’, and has given those
popularised in the US in the 1930s by Saul Alinsky marginalised individuals the self-esteem and
in his pioneering work around citizen-led political confidence to play a fuller role in decision-making
action. within the church.
A technique used by both organisations is the In this sense, the inclusive force of TELCO’s
‘One to One’ interview. This is an intensive session work hinges on the relationship between the ‘root-
in which the organiser attempts to uncover the edness’ of the civil society institutions it works
issues that drive and agitate each individual, and with and their capacities for pooling their social
which have the potential to motivate him or her capital resources for positive change. Another
into action. TELCO regards every person as a TELCO gatekeeper, a chaplain in a Roman
‘project’, and the purpose of the ‘One to One’ Catholic secondary school with responsibility for
sessions are to uncover and foster the qualities and the citizenship curriculum, believes that member-
strengths within individuals that create the ship has provided her students with an enabling
capacity for leadership and action. WAITS organ- space in which disparate communities can engage
isers employ a similar process with the grassroots in dialogue and mobilise around a shared
Inside out 15
objective. Their participation in the Living Wage their independence; a few asserted that they will
demonstrations not only brought the Catholic not apply for funding from organisations whose
social teaching tradition to life for her students, past activities have conflicted with their objec-
but offered them an unprecedented experience of tives; and a number of the community-based
community, through collective action with a range organisations (CBOs) whose work is under-
of diverse groups. To borrow Putnam’s termi- pinned by a strong Christian ethos will not take
final
nology of social capital, the ‘bridging’ relationships National Lottery money because they disapprove
report
across the community operate here in symbiosis of gambling.
with the ‘bonding’ processes that aid internal Others described more general fears of
cohesion – the one reinforces the other.15 becoming co-opted by multi-agency partnerships
WAITS’ model operates along the same without having a genuine stake in the decision-
theme. Its work often indirectly strengthens its making process. These anxieties and fears
clients’ family relationships, and the local illustrate CBOs’ perceptions of their fragile and
community might also benefit from the women’s tenuous position in wider structures of power.
collective actions – for example, if a WAITS
group decides to lobby for better street lighting
Institutional trust
or a children’s playground. However, WAITS’
work also creates new communities through From the perspective of CBOs supported by the
bringing women together to form support groups BCT, it is clear that government commitment to
around issues that affect them, such as a shared inclusion through ‘participation’ must extend
medical condition or a shared concern about beyond the creation of formal partnership struc-
their treatment as single mothers. Some of this tures and embrace instead a relationship of genuine
work is aimed at challenging and turning around power-sharing with community groups. Making
existing dominant views held by a local visible and giving voice to the hidden needs of
community. For instance, WAITS is currently marginalised groups and the work of CBOs implies
working with a group of under-16 single mothers a governance agenda that looks far beyond
living in a hostel for homeless people who are ensuring a nominal role for a small number of
experiencing a high level of hostility from the CBOs in consultations or local partnerships.
surrounding community. With WAITS’ help, they Demos’ research suggests that the community
are holding open days and beginning to raise participation agenda is under pressure from what
their profile in positive ways. has been labelled ‘initiativitis’. A recent study
Central to this vision of inclusion is a funda- estimates that, in its first term, the government
mental change in the established balance-of-power introduced over a dozen different multi-agency
relationships within which individuals or groups schemes, each carrying annual spending commit-
are located. TELCO, in particular, sees power as a ments from between £50m and £600m, and
key social dynamic, and much of its work involves leading to the creation of thousands of individual
helping members to understand relations of power partnerships.16
between their partners, employers and the Other commentators see signs of government
statutory bodies with which they interact and, willingness to rethink this ‘chaotic centralism’ and
through understanding, to learn how to use power move instead towards a ‘steering centralism’ in
for themselves. which the centre facilitates and enables rather
Few other organisations were as explicit in than commands and controls. This new direction
their analysis of power as TELCO, but an anxiety is reflected in the thinking behind local strategic
that recurred frequently among the groups partnerships (LSPs) – designed to help make sense
involved the preservation of their independence of a mixed range of schemes in any one area and
and the integrity of their work. to help them cohere – and in attempts to ratio-
Many expressed this in terms of maintaining nalise and lighten inspection regimes for
a distance from the agendas of government or high-performing councils.17 The recent Area-
other powerful institutions. For example, a signif- Based Initiatives Review also highlights the need
icant number of the sample surveyed will not to coordinate and mainstream new initiatives and
take government funding because they value targeted schemes.18
16 Inside out
However, there is little indication from Demos’ equality and participation “for all” are very
research that these policy moves have made ‘partici- difficult to practise in a framework that demands
pation’ any more of a reality for communities on the high levels of communications skills and very
ground. Furthermore, WAITS pointed out that one specific styles of working and learning.’
of the unintended consequences of ‘initiativitis’ is This problem has not gone unrecognised by
that people in areas where a high level of government the government, which in response has created
effort is concentrated often become either fatigued ‘Community Empowerment Networks’ (CENs) in
final
report
or develop a dependency on others to take action for 88 deprived areas of the UK as part of the
them. One WAITS organiser said that they find it Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy. These are
very difficult to engage people in such areas, and this designed to serve as a communication mechanism
was particularly worrying because they often between local government and the community
remained the areas of greatest need. sector to help local authorities meet the require-
Staff at WAITS adopt a largely pragmatic ment for community representation within LSPs.
approach to local partnerships, selecting carefully Given that most are still in the process of being
the forums or boards they will join through made operational, it is probably too early to judge
matching their objectives to WAITS’ mission goals how well CENs are working; their presence was
and calculating the time commitment that partic- not significantly felt by the organisations surveyed
ipation will entail. They encourage users to engage in this report.
with formal structures of power as part of their TELCO organisers were more insistent that
group action plans – for example, one WAITS partnerships with government rarely lead to any
group produced a report in response to a Strategic change in the balance of power between state and
Health Authority consultation, and a member citizens, and while generous financial resources
from another group now sits on a low pay forum. might be on offer, as the weaker partner CBOs will
However, while WAITS believes that the voices always be in danger of becoming co-opted on to a
of grassroots women should be heard wherever government-determined agenda. TELCO prefers
possible, the jargon and culture surrounding the to engage with local government and public-
professionalised structures of local government sector agencies through building relationships
are such that full and equal participation is not that facilitate dialogue, rather than participating as
really a meaningful possibility for most of their an unequal voice in the formal structures of part-
users. This view was echoed by one questionnaire nership. This ‘relationship model’ could offer a
respondent, who suggested that the organisational fruitful alternative, or addition, to the current
values of CBOs were not always promoted by the focus on the ‘partnership model’ as the way to
current local partnership model: ‘Principles of progress community engagement.
Views expressed by BCT projects relating to govern- resulted in positive outcomes, such as the creation of
ment partnerships and consultations tended to fall a local area forum for voluntary-sector organisations,
into one of two categories. First, that partnerships or a local authority presence at events organised by
drain time away from organisational objectives BCT projects. Participation in policy consultations
without adding any clear value: ‘The local authority was also mentioned by several questionnaire
we work with . . . has no real concept, commitment or respondents – one BCT project believes that its input
experience of collaboration or partnership work.’ into a government consultation on immigration
And second, that partnerships attempt to turn helped shape the final guidelines that were issued.
CBOs into agents of delivery, which compromises This handful of success stories demonstrates that
their independence and autonomy: ‘[The local effective collaboration is possible, but that the
authority] doesn’t help community partnerships. It conditions and capacities that facilitate good
tries to determine/direct them.’ practice are not yet present at a more system-wide
There were some instances in which dialogue had level.
Inside out 17
4. Building capacity for inclusion
final
report
Much of the work of the case-study organisations communities. But what does it mean? And how
can be usefully described as ‘capacity-building’ can it be fostered by policy-makers, service
activities, involving investment in the human and providers and grant-making institutions?
social capital and the individual and organisa-
tional capacities of communities.
Longevity
As a part of the terminology of community
development, ‘capacity-building’ has a growing A key theme recurring throughout the research
presence in the grant-making programmes of was the importance of staying power for
large independent trusts. As a concept, however, it community organisations hoping to gain and keep
encompasses a range of activities that focus on the trust of the communities they serve. For many,
transforming relationships of dependency into this is quite simply the bottom line. If CBOs fail to
individual and collective capabilities to act provide the support and services they have been
purposefully for change in their communities. created to provide over a sustained period of time,
Thus much of the work of stakeholders, from the trust needed to reach the most marginalised
central government to community-based organi- user groups rapidly dissipates.
sations (CBOs), involves some capacity-building St James is a strong example of where longevity
element. At the same time, it is important to has produced a high level of trust, despite consider-
acknowledge that the term has been criticised in ably challenging conditions. As a Church of
the past for being ‘top-down’ in usage and England-run service, the advice centre has worked
implying deficit on the part of the communities. hard to gain the trust of the mainly Muslim local
This report argues that the concept of capacity- community, and has, over its 27-year history, main-
building remains a useful one when understood in tained a strong commitment to reflecting the
terms of drawing out unrecognised or dormant diversity of its user groups in its management struc-
potential by enhancing opportunities and access tures and staff. This trust, built through the advice
to resources.19 centre’s demonstrated staying power, has facilitated
It is this formulation of capacity-building that the widening out of the user group to reach the
this report believes government and grant-making most marginalised – namely, women. The recruit-
bodies should promote. The challenge now for ment of two women’s support workers ten years ago
these parties is to make the goals of community saw the proportion of female clients rise rapidly
capacity-building explicit, to communicate them from 5 to 50 per cent. A mark of St James’ success is
effectively and to identify the sorts of cultures, that the local men are comfortable with their wives
conditions and relationships that most enhance attending the centre – in contrast, newly arrived
their impact. women’s support workers at a neighbouring advice
The short answer to this challenge is repre- centre experienced hostility and threats from the
sented in one word: trust. This precious asset was husbands of their clients.
cited repeatedly by staff at TELCO, WAITS and St A related element to longevity is reputation.
James and by the organisations surveyed as being Both the priest and the chaplain whom Demos
the most valuable resource they could possess, but interviewed had heard of TELCO several years
also the hardest to develop and sustain. As such, before they actually made contact and were
trust represents the vital membrane of inclusive impressed by the extent to which it was held in
18 Inside out
high regard. St James relies primarily on word-of- is less significant in this case than the enabling
mouth publicity within the immediate locality to cultures it achieves or fails to achieve.
raise awareness of its services, rather than For example, the community organiser at St
pursuing any formal outreach initiatives. James has, for many years, been a well-known and
However, these information chains can reach quite respected local figure with an influential family
far: the centre sees a small number of clients who name. As such, his social location in the
travel from other parts of Birmingham or from community gives him strong leverage to intervene
final
report
even further afield. effectively in local issues, and his relationship with
senior local government officials gives him a
wider public role in the city. The women’s support
Clearly there are obvious barriers for CBOs worker at WAITS who works with Chinese
hoping to achieve staying power. survivors and sufferers of domestic violence (DV)
displays a very different but equally effective sort
! Long-term funding was cited by nearly all of leadership. Given the taboo status of DV in the
the surveyed organisations as a facilitator Chinese community, her role involves great sensi-
of sustained, high-quality service tivity and discretion, which a more conventionally
provision and strategic planning. This sort ‘charismatic’ or public leadership style would
of funding is, however, hard to secure. struggle to achieve.
! Short-term funds for specific projects can One important ingredient in successful leader-
sometimes push organisational agendas ship, for both individuals and organisations, is
forward. However, all too often they political impartiality. The community organiser at
create incentives for starting work that is St James argues that much of his success in
unsustainable in the longer run, resulting mediating between Bangladeshi and Pakistani
in, as one CBO described it, ‘a roller- communities over issues such as youth crime or
coaster existence’. between husbands and wives over marital disputes
! Reputation can also be damaged by rests on his being known as an impartial figure,
competitive in-fighting between distanced from the sort of local ‘politics’ found in
community groups over resources. This other spheres of community life – for example,
was cited as a common reason why part- governance structures within the mosques.
nerships failed or CBOs avoided them Individuals perceived to be motivated by personal
altogether. or political gain are unlikely to facilitate the
building of trust.
An interesting commonality between all three
Leadership case studies is the extent to which individuals
move freely from user status to assuming leader-
The second related element crucial to building trust ship roles within the CBO. Many members of staff
is the quality of leadership across the full range of at WAITS and St James had been users and volun-
stakeholders. Certainly leadership capacity is teers before they took on salaried positions. One
crucial within CBOs and the communities they staff member at WAITS suggested that this gave
serve, but of importance, too, are the capacities for credibility to the central message of their work
leadership around social inclusion within the local that grassroots women can empower themselves:
government infrastructure and other funding insti- ‘Many look on us as role models.’
tutions, which are key players in shaping the This was also a theme among the surveyed
environment in which CBOs operate. CBOs, many of whom described users going on to
become volunteers, to sit on forums or to carry out
Community organisations and their users further community work elsewhere.
The case-study organisations encompass a range To enhance these opportunities, many CBOs
of leadership styles, but their success in building run formal leadership-training programmes,
trust rests on the authority conferred on them by workshops and mentoring schemes, often drawing
the community. Leadership mandated by internal on the skills and expertise of trustees. One BCT
or external structures of governance and seniority project has developed, through reflective practice,
Inside out 19
a model for developing leadership in the individ- prospective parliamentary candidates for the 2001
uals they work with. Informal leadership-building election to a question-and-answer session for local
activities were also widely cited, such as organised residents in the church hall.
sports, picnics, trips and outings to the theatre. However, what most concerns CBOs is their
relationship with the executive arm of local
government and the statutory agencies with which
final
The questionnaire asked BCT project leaders to they and their user groups have most day-to-day
report
select the qualities they believe are necessary contact.
for effective leadership. Listed in order of impor- Attitudes towards local authorities were
tance, they were: mixed. Some organisations found them generally
supportive, and a few respondents were very
1. Strategic thinking positive about their relationships with particular
2. Honesty agencies or local government departments. The
3. Forward-looking staff at St James, for instance, have a good rela-
4. Inspiration tionship with the Neighbourhood and Benefits
5. Approachability team at the local council. Other respondents were
6. Determination fiercely critical, while still others were ambivalent.
7. Fair-mindedness On balance, the two factors most strongly
8. Courage determining the level of support available from
9. Ambition local authorities are:
Other words and phrases used to describe good ! the quality of local political leadership, and
leaders included ‘openness’, ‘listening’, ‘trans- how far commitment to the community
parency’ and ‘no self-interest’. and voluntary sectors extends down the
infrastructure of local government to
frontline managers and officials
Local government ! the extent to which the local authority
The role of formal political leadership is less clear- understands the challenges facing the
cut. Certainly a total lack of official commitment sector and supports its ways of working.
to partnerships with community organisations
inhibits the building of inclusive communities. Achieving this commitment throughout all levels
However, a more likely scenario is that some level of local government will require more than tighter
of official interest from council leaders will exist, strategic management from senior council execu-
but success in translating that commitment tives or other public-sector managers. A recent
downwards throughout all levels of the local study of communities in Coventry found that
government infrastructure is highly variable. trust between public officials and residents tended
Despite the government’s commitment to to be particularly low where those officials had no
renewing local democracy through the constitu- social ties to the local area, leading residents to feel
tional reforms for councils contained in the Local that ‘the professionals and managers they dealt
Government Act 2000, there is little sense among with had no real understanding of their needs or
the case-study organisations that local govern- experiences.’20 This is where CBOs, with their
ment has become significantly more accountable distinctive rootedness in the communities they
to communities. TELCO organisers suggested that serve, have potentially more leverage in providing
the creation of directly elected mayors in Newham responsive services and in building trust and legit-
and Hackney in London has provided some focus imacy among the most socially excluded.
for public accountability around a persona, Where local authorities directly fund
although the mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, community groups, the research revealed the
remains a more important focus for TELCO’s potential limitations of statutory funding given
campaigning work. Certainly all the case-study the divergent priorities and approaches of
organisations encourage their users to vote in statutory and community groups. Birmingham
elections. St James, for example, invited the City Council has recently introduced productivity
20 Inside out
targets for the 250 community advice centres that Using the example of the Festival Against Racism
it funds, one of which is St James. The targets are in Bristol in 1994, Alison Gilchrist and Marilyn
based on the number of enquiries the council Taylor argue that networks build capacity across
believes each advice centre should deal with each the community as a whole by drawing on the
year. While the council has been careful to leverage of informal relationships and personal
negotiate the targets with individual community contacts within the community sector, and using
advice centres, it is acutely aware of how its this leverage to connect into key local power
final
report
primary responsibility to maximise the number of structures, such as larger voluntary-sector organi-
people receiving the statutory minimum (in terms sations, trade unions and statutory agencies.
of, for example, housing or benefit advice) However, as is the case with partnerships,
contrasts sharply with the approach of many CBOs are often ambivalent about networks if they
community groups who emphasise the impor- appear too formalised. There can be fears that
tance of longer-term development programmes formally structured networks will attempt to
for individuals who come to them for help. impose uniformity of practice, or will become
hijacked by statutory agencies wishing to use them
Other funding bodies as instruments of government policy. For example,
All the case-study organisations acknowledged the WAITS is a member of the West Midlands
positive impact of their long-term funding rela- Domestic Violence Network, created two years ago
tionships with the Barrow Cadbury Trust (BCT). to open up communication and learning among
Equally, many organisations highlighted the value the multiple providers in the area. Although there
of the ‘people-based’ relationship and face-to-face was wide recognition of the need for some sort of
contact they had with the trust, and contrasted coordination, many members voiced concerns
this to the ‘paper-based’ accountability structures about autonomy when the network secured
that tend to characterise their relationship with funding from the West Midlands Government
statutory agencies. Office in mid-2001, and was asked to produce a
TELCO believes that it is important that inde- ‘regional strategy’ for domestic violence support
pendent, forward-looking trusts lead the way in services in the area. This case study illustrates the
community development by funding organisa- challenge of building trust between the state and
tions whose work would be compromised by the community sector, and of developing a culture
dependency on government financial support. of governance which enables effective collabora-
Bold leadership by these grant-making bodies in tion. The network has seen some success in
championing capacity-building activities thus facilitating the sharing of best practice, but there is
represents an important force for both challenging a sense that some members are less willing to
and reconfiguring the context currently set by engage, particularly those who have struggled with
mainstream government social exclusion under-resourcing for many years and who conse-
programmes. quently take a somewhat protectionist attitude to
their knowledge and experience.
This clearly relates to the dynamics of power
Leverage
discussed in Chapter 2, and raises an important
The third element in building capacity for question about how the value created by
inclusion is the leverage generated through trust- community-based organisations can be enhanced
building relationships within and beyond the by investment in networking activity. The fortunes
community sector. of CENs in the Neighbourhood Renewal Zones will
It has been argued by thinkers in the field of serve as something of a test bed for policy interven-
community development that networks represent tion in this area. The organiser of the Birmingham
a particularly appropriate method of organising Community Empowerment Network describes his
for CBOs. Given that much of the sector’s strength role as a facilitator of new, value-adding relation-
lies within its diversity, networks can mobilise a ships rather than as the convener of a new structure
broad range of constituencies around a set of of governance for grassroots organisations. The
common values, and spread information and thinking behind CENs emphasises the importance
learning across a highly distributed system.21 of tapping into pre-existing community networks,
Inside out 21
so as to create a type of ‘network of networks’ that creating inclusive communities. Given the examples
will provide easier access for CBOs to the structures of good practice found among BCT projects and in
and procedures of local strategic partnerships.22 other studies of community development, our
The resilience and capacity of a CEN, however, will research suggests that there may be specific cultural
rest on how well supported it is by the cross-cutting, and organisational characteristics that enable such
horizontal links that already exist in the organisations to operate effectively amid the chal-
final
community, and how well it can generate more of lenges and contradictions of the wider environment.
report
these strong and weak ties. There is a danger that, if The scope of our research is not sufficient to
the CEN is seen as the only or primary access point establish these characteristics authoritatively, but
to participation in LSPs, the challenge of building a there do seem to be common characteristics that
wider range of more flexible routes into the formal might act as a focus for further development.
power structures of local governance will be pushed These recognisable qualities, common to
to one side. many of the CBOs that took part in this research,
Related to this is the function of community include:
networks to support not only learning or
knowledge sharing, but also action and advocacy. ! strong commitment to the value of social
Many CBOs funded by BCT view networking in and organisational diversity, following a
terms of building capacity to influence national user-centred model that sets organisa-
policy or public attitudes and discourse around tional priorities in line with individual
the broader issues surrounding social exclusion. needs
WAITS, for example, while emphasising the ! strong commitment to building an organi-
personalised nature of their work with individual sational culture and identity around the
women, expressed an aspiration to communicate values of integrity, openness and trans-
at a national policy level their message about parency
grassroots empowerment. This illustration points ! sustained effort to develop the skills and
to the dual role of CBOs: they might, individually, capacities of client groups themselves, to
help to alleviate the symptoms of exclusion, but enable autonomous action that improves
some also see a role for themselves in contributing quality of life within their communities
to the diagnosis of the problem at the level of ! continuity in relationships, respect, mutual
public policy and debate. understanding and social identity between
CBOs thus occupy an ambiguous space, user groups, volunteers and staff, and
needing to face in several directions to achieve strong links to informal leaders in the
their full potential. Their ability to deliver and community
sustain positive social outcomes rests on their ! the development of wider organisational
‘rootedness’ in the communities they serve, and on relationships, leadership roles and
the levels of trust they can build with user groups. personal networks that help small organi-
However, this social location can make it more sations to gain leverage on the use of wider
difficult to deal with the routines, languages and resources
formal systems of large-scale governance and ! strong, people-based systems of mutual
public service management. Nonetheless, some accountability based on trust and shared
CBOs have found themselves ‘in demand’ among expectations, which often work alongside
local authorities and other statutory organisations more formal structures and systems of
charged with the task of ensuring ‘community accountability
representation’ on partnership boards and forums, ! the ability to form networks and alliances
and their participation and other advocacy work around broadly shared values, and to use
draw them into national policy debates as the them pragmatically.
informed and independent voice of ‘grassroots’
experience. These characteristics may be important for
At the beginning of this report, we suggested government in understanding how to deliver and
three hypotheses about the distinctive contribution sustain improved social outcomes. But in the
that CBOs might make to an overarching agenda for long run, they may be even more important to
22 Inside out
the overall health and vitality of civil society and arguably be taken forward by organisations that
the chances of generating trust and self-organ- have a long-term presence, political and financial
ising capacity, particularly in those communities independence and the ability to shape their
most affected by social and economic disadvan- investments and activities according to good
tage. This latter agenda is one that should evidence.
final
report
Networking and alliance-building between CBOs CBOs use these strategies to widen their geograph-
engaged in similar or related work is a standard ical reach – for instance, by coordinating meetings
activity within the sector. between activists from different localities, or to
The most common forms of contact are: replicate what has worked in one community in
communities elsewhere.
! information exchange – for example, They also help CBOs to understand better the
regarding new funding streams or policy values underpinning the work of others and,
changes through coalitions and networks, to avoid fragmen-
! joint activities, such as special events, trips or tation under funding regimes that force them to
workshops compete against each other for resources.
! joint bidding for projects Some organisations are linked at regional or
! joint campaigns national level to larger voluntary-sector networks,
! client referral such as NCVO or NACVS, or to practitioner networks
! shared resources, such as training materials for specific areas of work – for example, education or
or legal expertise. working with disabled people.
Inside out 23
5. Conclusion and recommendations
final
report
This report has reviewed the potential role of non- the long run, diverse communities can become
governmental community-based organisations both inclusive and sustainable.
(CBOs) in tackling social exclusion and set out a
forward-looking analysis of the challenges
Mainstreaming community capacity-
involved in making inclusion a positive reality. It
building as a principle for social inclusion
has used qualitative research to gauge the experi-
ences of some of these organisations, in order to
assess their potential role in creating wider If government is to maximise the potential of
societal change. CBOs in combating social exclusion, it should
Our conclusion is that, in the short to medium think more clearly about the forms of direct
term, a public policy agenda committed to investment and strategic thinking across main-
combating exclusion needs to find even more stream spending programmes that it can use to
effective ways of supporting and partnering these involve such organisations in service delivery in a
kinds of organisations. In the long term, however, sustainable way.
such organisations play a crucial role in creating This may mean developing further the
and sustaining ecologies of social and institutional guidance and incentives for large public-sector
trust, and in enhancing the capacity of different delivery organisations and other statutory agencies
communities for self-organisation, adaptation to to work effectively with distributed groups of
social and economic change, empowerment of smaller, community-based organisations.
vulnerable or marginalised citizens and collective For this effort to be effective, central govern-
problem-solving. ment needs to draw together existing lessons
The research has illuminated some of the limi- about community capacity-building and partner-
tations of the present policy instruments and ship from the many different sources of direct
governance arrangements, and has shown that experience embedded in its current programmes,
efforts to create more flexible institutions and including Sure Start, Welfare to Work, the New
funding streams still face significant challenges. Deal for Communities and local strategic partner-
As the experience of the Barrow Cadbury ships (LSPs). The government’s investment in a
Trust (BCT) projects shows, there are examples of range of area-based initiatives has created oppor-
good practice and effective capacity-building tunities for pockets of innovation and good
work going on in many communities across practice to emerge. But to have a systematic
Britain. The challenge is no longer to make the impact, the urgent task is to identify and learn
case for the value created by CBOs, but rather to from pioneering practice, share lessons across
understand it better and develop the conditions departmental and agency boundaries and foster
that enhance its impact. capacity-building work at multiple levels of gover-
In conclusion, this report identifies three areas nance.
of priority that need to be addressed if, first, the
obstacles preventing CBOs from taking a fuller Recommendations
role in building inclusive communities are to be The Active Community Unit (ACU) in the Home
removed, and second, a better understanding Office and the Regional Co-ordination Unit
among all stakeholders can be achieved of how, in (RCU) in the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister
24 Inside out
should lead this process. It will involve taking a Government policy must thus encourage
cross-cutting approach to gathering the lessons of experimentation with new methods and struc-
capacity-building across all major social policy tures for achieving accountability in partnership
areas and facilitating collaborative enquiry and and funding relationships to foster collaborative,
reflection among departments and agencies. The jointly owned projects and a culture based on
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister should also trust. This will involve balancing the demands of
be fully involved in identifying the ways in which upwards accountability with the needs of commu-
final
report
local authority structures and practices can nities – through, for example, extending and
encourage the identification of similar lessons. developing ‘people-based’ systems that emphasise
To ensure that these lessons have a full impact ongoing, face-to-face contact between partners
on the short- to medium-term agenda for throughout all stages of funded projects.
communities, the ACU and the RCU should Monitoring should be understood on both sides as
emphasise the importance of mainstreaming a learning experience, not punishment for failure.
community capacity-building activity, particularly Accountability should flow downwards, too,
in the implementation of the following three key with local communities having a greater say in the
policy agendas: criteria against which performance is measured.
Reducing the number of externally determined
! Futurebuilders Fund: created to meet the indicators and shifting the emphasis on to
need of long-term investment for outcomes defined by local communities and
modernisation in the voluntary sector and agencies together is more likely to build legitimacy
informed by the Treasury’s cross-cutting and trust around partnership working, as well as
review of 2002. deliver enhanced inclusion outcomes.
! Private Action, Public Benefit: the Strategy Identifying the intermediary organisations –
Unit’s agenda for reform of the charitable which are often to be found in and around local
and wider not-for-profit sector, focusing government, and which can help to establish the
largely on law and regulation. shared spaces in which productive collaboration
! Review of Area-Based Initiatives: carried can flourish – is another important task. A host of
out by the RCU to improve the coordina- new methods and techniques of civic engagement
tion and integration of area-based and public participation in decision-making have
initiatives, including support for grown up over the last decade. The task in this
community groups. context is to ensure that they become effectively
integrated into mainstream decision-making,
particularly where community-based organisations
Governance
are involved in partnership with statutory bodies.
If these new learning processes at central govern- A key part of this challenge is to reconcile the
ment level are to impact at local level, they must professionalised culture of formal partnership
inform the local government reform agenda, with a structures with the ‘bottom-up’ orientation of grass-
particular emphasis on regulatory structures and roots-based capacity-building activity. Formal
accountability systems governing the community structures, such as local partnership boards and
sector. regional forums, might be better placed to address
As this report has shown, a heavy audit culture this challenge if supported by informal networks
often breeds an atmosphere of distrust and risk and relationships of learning and trust (among
aversion, which encourages uniformity in CBOs, community leaders, larger voluntary-sector
programme design and inhibits the distinctive organisations, independent social entrepreneurs
contribution that CBOs can make. Too strong an and consultants) that provide more flexible access
emphasis on quantitative outputs, advance specifi- points for participation.
cation of priorities and performance criteria
determined by external administrators and Recommendations
funders can sap morale and undermine the These principles of two-way and mutual
knowledge and expertise of community leaders on accountability should be promoted and
the ground. developed across all multi-agency schemes (Sure
Inside out 25
Start, LSPs, EYCDPs, Regeneration Partnerships, the ability to participate equally in public debate
New Deal for Communities, etc.) and all central and conflict.
and local government funding programmes It is increasingly recognised that independent
(Active Community Funding Package, Children’s grant-making bodies are ideally placed to occupy
Fund, Community Empowerment Fund, this space, and collectively to act as stewards of
Community Fund, Single Regeneration Budget, independent, community-based capacity for
final
Neighbourhood Renewal Fund, etc.), and in the social problem-solving and adaptation.
report
implementation of the Area-Based Initiatives As has been noted in a recent report on the
Review Action Plan for Support for Community future of philanthropic foundations:
Groups. They are also highly relevant to the
grant-making programmes of independent In a society in which government, business and
trusts. mainstream voluntary sector increasingly
Given its local status and level of resources, the resemble each other and are driven by short-
Community Empowerment Network (CEN) is an term, often spurious, performance measures,
area of great potential for developing capacity foundations have a unique role to play in ques-
across communities via the intermediary role. tioning conventional wisdoms, making new
However, the various directions in which CENs connections, thinking and working ‘outside the
have progressed are not yet clear, and neither are box’ . . . They can become the intellectually
the levels of community engagement they may active, independent and informed institutions
have achieved across the 88 Neighbourhood that push innovation and social justice in
Renewal Zones. This report, therefore, recom- modern societies.23
mends that the NRU should initiate a review of
the progress being made by CENs, the lessons Developing coherent long-term support for
learned so far and the potential for making clearer community-based organisations dedicated to
connections between the establishment of CENs empowerment and social inclusion is one area of
and the development of a further-reaching agenda focus for foundations seeking to play this kind of
for increasing understanding of how to support role. Several major trusts and foundations in the
and work with community-based organisations UK treat this area as a priority, but the ways in
across the whole of social policy. which they can have the greatest collective impact
on the capacity of the sector and the problems it is
addressing are still unclear.
Strategic role of independent trusts
Issues of best practice and knowledge-sharing
While CBOs might play a key role in improved among grant-giving bodies are important here,
service delivery, the distinctive value they and the potential role of umbrella initiatives such
contribute is inextricably linked to their status as a as Philanthropy UK, established by the
constitutive and independent part of a rich, multi- Association of Charitable Foundations, deserves
faceted civil society. Strong partnerships with more concerted attention. Several trusts and foun-
government are crucial if the multiple dimensions dations – including the Barrow Cadbury Trust, the
of social exclusion are to be tackled. Joseph Rowntree Foundation, the Baring
However, in a diverse and complex society, Foundation, the Esmée Fairbairn Trust, the
the longer-term value of these organisations may Sainsbury Family Charitable Trusts and the
be as part of an independent tier of organisa- Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation – all prioritise
tional life, enlarging and enriching the public support for community-based voluntary organisa-
sphere and enhancing opportunities for civic tions. In 2000, the Baring Foundation’s Speaking
participation, without ever becoming fully Truth to Power report explicitly made the case for
dependent on the mandate or the resources of sustaining the credibility and independence of
government. There is a vital role, extending far voluntary organisations whose concerns or
beyond the life of any one government, for non- methods might not fit neatly within governmental
state actors in providing leadership and leverage priorities at a given time. All such organisations, in
for social change, and in building community their different ways, are committed to creating
capacity, the independent voice of citizens, and both knowledge and capacity in this area. But the
26 Inside out
UK still does not have the philanthropic culture or encourage networking and learning. How
the strategic influence exerted by such organisa- can trusts enhance knowledge-sharing
tions in other countries. relationships across their families of
While the specific focus of different institu- partner organisations? What strategic
tions will rightly vary, there is enormous potential alliances and methods of knowledge
for drawing together relevant knowledge about creation and diffusion are needed to
what practices and strategies are effective in ensure that lessons are genuinely learned
final
report
seeking to build up independent organisational and spread? How can a shared responsi-
capacity at community level. Inevitably, this bility for building the capacity of the sector
agenda is not one that can or should be taken be nurtured?
forward by any institution other than the 4. Balancing the roles of local provision and
community of trusts and foundations itself. But national advocacy across their partner
our analysis and the growing salience of organisations. Many CBOs provide
community capacity in a wider social and political essential services to marginalised groups at
context suggest that there is an important oppor- local level, but their leaders are also
tunity to establish momentum behind this motivated by a desire to influence policy
overarching goal that could have a powerful long- decisions at national level and beyond.
term impact. How can trusts support both these roles?
How far should trusts and foundations,
Recommendations individually and collectively, commit
Independent grant-making bodies with a long-term themselves to supporting and amplifying
presence are ideally placed to lead this agenda, both the experience of locally based organisa-
by providing focused support for particular kinds of tions through advocacy? What are the
organisation and by designing programmes and ethical or political dilemmas for trusts in
knowledge-spreading networks that can influence doing this?
the behaviour of other institutions.
Given this opportunity, an exploratory The potential role of civil society organisations in
account of the organisational challenges facing helping to create social value and sustain trust across
trusts is as follows: increasingly diverse communities is becoming
widely recognised across political parties, sectors
1. Determining organisational priorities in and regions in the UK. There is real scope for the
terms of grant-making programme design development of a movement dedicated to
and selection of partners. How is the goal community capacity-building that could have a
of social inclusion to be reflected in the cumulative, long-term impact on the UK’s social
types of projects trusts decide to support? fabric. Developing such a movement will challenge
What sorts of themes are most appropriate government to take more risks in its approach to
or most helpful in providing focus for governance and social inclusion, grant-makers to
CBOs’ capacity-building activities? lead in championing innovative practice and finding
2. Managing this commitment over the longer effective ways to share it, and community-based
term. How are trusts’ social inclusion organisations and their leaders to engage in much
programmes to develop an identity and wider sets of learning relationships.
added value that represent more than the If these kinds of commitments combine in the
sum of the CBOs they support? How can right ways, the ideas and practice of social
these programmes enhance shared policy inclusion could become embedded in community
objectives in tackling exclusion while life in the twenty-first century in ways that reduce
remaining independent of any specific our dependence on short-term events and on the
public policy agenda? shifting priorities of public policy for securing the
3. Strategic investment in partners to well-being of all our communities.
Inside out 27
Notes
final
report
1 Social Exclusion Unit, A New Commitment to centre-local relationship (London: New Local
Neighbourhood Renewal: national strategy action plan Government Network, 2002).
(London: Cabinet Office, 2001). 12 D Chesterman with M Horne, Local Authority? How to
2 Home Office, Getting It Right Together: compact on develop leadership for better public services (London:
relations between government and the voluntary and Demos, 2002).
community sector in England (London: Home Office, 13 Home Office, Getting It Right Together.
1998), Aim 7. 14 Baring Foundation, Speaking Truth to Power: a discussion
3 Strategy Unit, Private Action, Public Benefit: a review of paper on the voluntary sector’s relationship with govern-
charities and the wider not-for-profit sector (London: ment (London: Baring Foundation, 2000).
Cabinet Office, 2002). 15 RD Putnam, Bowling Alone: the collapse and revival of
4 DTLR, Strong Local Leadership: quality public services American community (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000).
(London: Department of Transport, Local Government 16 H Sullivan and C Skelcher, Working across Boundaries
and the Regions, 2001). (Basingstoke: Macmillan Palgrave, 2002).
5 Department for Education and Skills, 17 D Corry and G Stoker, New Localism.
www.dfes.gov.uk/communitychampions/about/index.cfm 18 Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Review of Area-
(accessed February 2003). Based Initiatives: action plans (London, ODPM, 2002).
6 M Taylor, Public Policy in the Community (Basingstoke: 19 M Taylor, Public Policy in the Community.
Palgrave Macmillan, 2003). 20 V Nash with I Christie, Making Sense of Community
7 RD Putnam, ‘Bowling Alone: America’s declining social (London: IPPR, 2003).
capital’, Journal of Democracy 6, no 1 (January 1995): 21 A Gilchrist and M Taylor, ‘Community networking:
65–78; A Etzioni, The Spirit of Community: rights, developing strength through diversity’ in P Hoggett (ed),
responsibilities and the communitarian agenda (London: Contested Communities: experience, struggles and policies
Fontana, 1993). (Bristol: Policy Press, 1997).
8 M Taylor, Public Policy in the Community. 22 Neighbourhood Renewal Unit, Community
9 G Kelly and S Muers, Creating Public Value (London: Empowerment Fund: preliminary guidelines (London:
Strategy Unit, 2002). NRU, 2001).
10 D Blunkett, Politics and Progress: renewing democracy and 23 H Anheier and D Leat, From Charity to Creativity: phil-
civil society (London: Politico’s Publishing/Demos, 2001). anthropic foundations in the 21st century – perspectives
11 D Corry and G Stoker, New Localism: refashioning the from Britain and beyond (Stroud: Comedia, 2002).
28 Inside out

Inside Out

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Inside Out

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

final

Typeset by Politico’s Design, design@politicos.co.uk

For further information and subscription details please contact:

2. Community capacity-building: why does it matter? 13

3. The goals of inclusion 14

4. Building capacity for inclusion 18

5. Conclusion and recommendations 24

Recommendations ! developing coherence and a distinctive

Context and challenge

The surveyed organisations

You might also like