Senior Research Scientist NORC at the University of Chicago, United States
Abstract Information: In recent years, approaches such as “community engagement,” “stakeholder engagement,” and engagement of individuals “most impacted” or with “lived experience” have become common within public, nonprofit, and philanthropic circles. This renewed interest has been driven by efforts to enhance parent and family involvement in education reform, support youth leadership development, include resident viewpoints in place-based initiatives, and share decision-making through participatory grantmaking. It has also been driven by a growing societal focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion which recognizes that engagement, through inclusion, has the potential to mitigate racial disparities in access and power. Engagement, however, means different things to professionals and leaders within the public, nonprofit, and philanthropic spheres as they work to address pressing health and social issues and help revitalize communities. This paper provides a framework to help evaluators grapple with the complexity of community engagement efforts. It briefly explores the theory and practice of community engagement, with special attention to the role of funders. It then provides concrete approaches to conceptualizing the inputs, activities, and potential outcomes of community engagement efforts.
Relevance Statement: In recent years, approaches such as “community engagement,” “stakeholder engagement,” and engagement of individuals “most impacted” or with “lived experience” have become common within public, nonprofit, and philanthropic circles. This renewed interest has been driven by efforts to enhance parent and family involvement in education reform, support youth leadership development, include resident viewpoints in place-based initiatives, and share decision-making through participatory grantmaking. It has also been driven by a growing societal focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion which recognizes that engagement, through inclusion, has the potential to mitigate racial disparities in access and power. Engagement, however, means different things to professionals and leaders within these spheres as they work to address pressing health and social issues and help revitalized communities. It is important to note that the concept of engagement is not new and represents a core democratic principle. Indeed, engagement has historically been a purported behavior of large institutions, such as government and corporations that, in theory, either work on behalf of or have a responsibility to citizens and their communities. Nonetheless, community engagement may often be more performative than substantive. Engagement remains, in large part, a time limited, discrete activity rather than an embedded institutional or cultural practice. Even if engagement efforts are well intentioned, funders and their collaborators may encounter limited interest and energy with few people embracing opportunities for participation. This is often driven by factors such as a lack of trust, a legacy of broken promises, limited opportunities for real influence, perceived misalignment between the funded efforts and real individual and community needs, poorly conceived outreach, and unaddressed barriers to individual or group participation. Even recognizing these ongoing challenges, public, nonprofit, and philanthropic efforts focused on engagement are important. These institutions have an underlying mission to improve lives and can leverage resources to support capacity building and leadership development for everyday people. We, as internal or external evaluators, often step into these complex, highly sensitive spaces and are asked, “Can you tell us how our community engagement is going?” This paper seeks to provide a framework to help evaluators answer such questions. It briefly explores the theory and practice of community engagement, with special attention to the role of funders. It then provides concrete approaches to conceptualizing the inputs, activities, and potential outcomes of community engagement efforts.
