Community Development Projects, Organizational Development

and Effectiveness

This paper addresses the organizational development issues that emerge in Community Development Projects in Ireland, specifically the tensions between being an organisation and doing community development work. Trends in the development path and models of alternative structures are emerging from the data, and secondly tensions experienced in the organisations are identified. Suggestions are made for future organizational development and the Community Development Programme.

Introduction

This paper reports on the progress of a research study on Community Development Projects in Ireland. The research was initiated in 1996 because of a growing sense that as a practitioner in the sector we needed to reflect on the organizations/projects and how they were developing and we needed to take account of the enormous growth in the sector since 1990.

The specific organizations that are the focus of the research are Community Development Projects (CDP's) funded by the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs under the Community Development Programme as defined by the Department. This programme is part of government policy, and included in collective agreements and programmes for government since 1990.

The Community Development Programme is a state initiative to tackle poverty, disadvantage, social exclusion and discrimination through the activities of locally based resource centres that are linked together through the aims, objectives and rationale of the national programme. The programme emerged in response to the activities of locally based groups and organisations which lobbied for funding to support and resource their work in areas of extreme disadvantage and social exclusion from the mainstream of Irish society.

Background Information

The Community Development Programme began funding projects in 1990 as a result of the activity and impact of locally based organisations and projects, which were funded under the European Union funded Poverty 2 Programme. 15 locally based projects around Ireland were funded recommended that continued, centralised, funding be made available to such projects to facilitate their continued work in disadvantaged and poverty affected areas. The Third EU Poverty Programme applications were being sought in 1989 and the three projects selected continued to operate with EU funding. Nine other projects were then selected for the initial phase of the Community Development Programme. A second source of impetus for the development of the programme came from the Combat Poverty Agency, (CPA) a statutory agency set up in 1986 to advise the government on issues of poverty, exclusion and effective mechanisms for tackling the inequalities in the country.

These locally based projects/groups/organisations were operating in small geographical areas of severe deprivation, poor housing, high unemployment, high incidence of drug abuse and drug dealing, poor educational completion rates, high levels of financial poverty. The groups/projects emerged as a response to this deprivation and involved local activists working together to improve the physical, social, educational, economic and personal conditions for the other local people. There is a long history of local activity in Ireland, but this work was different in that it had elements of the self-help, social justice and Paulo Frierian models of social change rather than charitable or social service models of improvement of conditions in local areas.

Community Development Programme

The aim of the funded Community Development Projects is to support the work of community groups who were operating from a model of community development. This involves building capacity in the area, empowering individuals, facilitating people identifying their own needs and the means of meeting these needs, and providing training in skills and knowledge so that people could begin to meet these needs themselves. Development staff employed by the CDP carry out this work. The funding is provided in 3-year cycles on the basis of work-plans submitted to the Department. The local people involved in the project, i.e. volunteers working in the project, users of the project, the staff and the Management Committee of the project develop this workplan according to needs identified in the area, and in keeping with the guidelines of the Programme. This then is the work, which the CDP's are to carry out with the funding provided by the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs, and is the task of the projects, or their 'work'.

A voluntary Management Committee manages this work. This committee is made up of local people or people from the community the project is to work with, relevant professional workers from various statutory bodies and other people committed to the work of the project. The Management Committee members are usually also the Board of Directors of the Company (Limited by Guarantee), which is the legal structure adopted by the projects.

Figure 1. Community Development Programme System.

Context for the Community Development Programme

The Community Development Programme is operating in Ireland, a country with a strong record of national agreements between the social partners for the past ten years, and the programme is mainstreamed to government policy as a means of tackling poverty and disadvantage. The definition of poverty has been expanded to include social exclusion from a life-style enjoyed by the majority of people in the society. This includes discrimination, lack of access to services, resources and opportunities. It also includes exclusion from equal participation in the institutions and systems of the society.

Groups and organisations funded under the programme include Public Housing estates, rural areas, and Traveller projects, Women's Projects, People with Disabilities Projects. More recently a development of Support Agencies to the programme has included organisations working on the issues of Violence against Women and Racism.

Rationale for the research

The motivation for the research emerges from my own work, and that of the organisation I work with. I am a Community Development Organisation Consultant and our organisation has a contract to provide support services to a number of the projects/organisations funded by the programme. From our work with the programme and through networking within the system it was becoming apparent that similar issues were emerging in a number of projects, and that as a sector we did not have sufficient knowledge about the development of the projects as organisations.

Other indicators of the need for the research include:

The Community Development Programme is now in its eighth year and the number of organisations/projects funded has grown from 9 to approximately 80 in that time.

There was a major shift in the system of the programme in 1994 in relation to the support mechanism, the monitoring of the projects and the selection of new projects for funding under the programme. The system has become bigger and more complex as a result. See Figure 2.

It is not clear how the structure of the projects supports the work programme and whether there is a need to modify structures and provide options for structures to make the projects more effective in achieving the aims of the programme.

Given that there is little to no documented research on the effectiveness of the projects as organisations, it is timely to begin to develop this body of knowledge.

The body of knowledge on organisation development from other sub-sectors of the Voluntary Sector or from the for-profit sector does not seem to apply to this type of organisation/project and there is a need to explore the reasons why this is so.

There is a need to understand the development and growth needs of the projects/organisations so as to facilitate their greater effectiveness and efficiency.

The training and education needs of potential workers within the sector are not being appropriately met at the moment, because we do not have this vital information about the development of the organisations.

The theory and principles of community development propose that theory be developed from action. The theory of the organisations has not been collated or researched to date and requires doing.

It is useful for Community Development Projects to take time to reflect on what they have been doing so as to ensure their effectiveness as organisations, as well as their effectiveness in combating poverty and social exclusion.

As organisations the tensions that are emerging need to be addressed and the organisational development issues articulated, reflected and then acted upon.

This research paper does not include a literature review. It is an outlining of the preliminary results from the first stage of an action research model of research with the system of the Community Development Programme in Ireland.

Research Methodology

The type of information being sought in the research is qualitative in essence. This includes the reflections on the experience of being involved in this particular type of organisation by workers, practitioners, volunteers in all parts of the system of the programme. The data also includes accessing the ideas, proposals, theories and possible models of organisation of these same people based on their experience, knowledge and interaction with other ideas.

The model of research is action research in type. This type of research model was chosen because of the close links between action research and the action cycle of work adopted and promoted by the projects. Action, reflection, planning and then further action is how the projects work, and this reflects the action research model of generating theory from action and reflection, which then informs the next action.

Data Collection

Data will be generated in three stages.

Stage 1.

Data is collected and generated through semi-structured interviews with 20 people involved in the programme. (See appendix 1 for schedule of questions). The interviews are approximately one to two hours in length and some are with one person, some with two people and some with three people being interviewed together. These interviews are then analysed for themes, issues and patterns. This paper outlines some of these results.

Stage 2.

This stage will involve gathering reactions from the original 20 people plus 10 additional people to the emergent themes from stage 1. This data will be collected through group discussions and workshops, where people will be focusing on the same document prepared after Stage 1 and developing the theory further.

This data will be then be further analysed for patterns and themes, proposals for models of development for CDP's and recommendations for the future.

Stage 3.

A second paper will be presented to practitioners in the programme for reactions, refinement and modification. This final paper will formulate the developmental pathways for the projects, the supports needed along these paths of development and possible models for the organisational structure of the projects/organisations.

How will the research findings be used?

Because of the method of data collection there will be an open channel for the results of the research to be fed back into the programme. It is hoped that the results will be discussed and used to inform the development of the programme over the coming years. Workshops exploring the papers and data collected will be held with practitioners and other interested people who will be encourage to consider the outcomes of the research in the light of their own organisation and reflect on their own development as organisations. As a result it is hoped the findings will add to the body of knowledge about community development organisations, to the development of the organisations and to the greater effectiveness of the organisations and thence the programme.

Research Findings

The findings from Stage 1 of the research process can be categorised into four main areas.

1. Requirements at the beginnings of the life of the projects

2. Options for the structure of the projects

3. Tensions that arise for the organisations

4. Possible organisation development routes for the projects

1. Requirements at the beginnings of the life of the projects.

Given the current situation in relation to the beginnings of the projects, various tensions for the development of the organisations have emerged.

Figure 2. Options at the beginning of Community Development Projects

1. Existing project seeks funding on basis of confluence of aims with Programme.	Undergoes Training on skills, ethos and principles of the programme	Develops 3 year workplans Employs Staff or funds existing staff
2. New project developed through Regional Support Agency staff facilitating existing local community activism and groups operating in the area.	Undergoes Training and teambuilding for the newly created Management Committee	Develops 3 year workplan Recruits Staff
3. Community Development Worker deployed by Regional Support Agency to stimulate local community awareness, capacity building and needs analysis, with a view to setting up a project as per 2 above.

Beginnings of projects

Projects are all different and emerge from different circumstances and this requires recognition and acknowledgement in terms of meeting the programme requirements. At the moment the model of entry into the programme exerts undue pressure in some instances for the fledgling management committee and the support agency person facilitating the entry of the group into the programme.

The importance of the input and training at the entry point is emphasised in terms of resourcing the management committee members and the organisation and the local community for the long term. At this point emphasis must be placed on the ethos of the programme, the principles of the programme, the skills required to manage a project, the ownership of the project, the levels of responsibility and the limits on this, the time span of commitment to the project and the imperative of effective team-building/group formation.

Given the point above, the pressure to conform to time-scales, prescribed entry methods, to employ staff must be eased to actually enable projects enter the programme according to their own abilities. And options for models of employment need to be open to projects so as to chose that most relevant and appropriate for them at that point in their development.

There is a need for flexibility in terms of long-term organisational structures and function division within the Management Committee. What is chosen at the initial phase should be open to change according as the needs change.

2. Options for the structure of the projects particularly in relation to employment

The current situation of one model of organisation can inhibit the new management committees, the development of the organisations and the creativity of response to local situations. A freeing up of the requirements towards this one particular model would be useful.

Alternative models to be explored include:

A local Health Board employs the staff, who works with all local community groups in developing and implementing their respective action plans. This worker would also network the local community groups to generate a local action plan which can then be implemented by the worker in conjunction with volunteers in the community groups.

A central group is identified in each region or smaller geographic area, which has the resources and skills to employ staff. Members of staff are employed to work in designated local areas, to generate local Management Committee(s) to work for the development of the area in general, backed up by the staff working with them. These local groups are the Management Committee of the Community Development projects/organisation, and they develop work-plans in keeping with the aims and objectives of the Community Development Programme.

Local community groups are established as per the current model, but with a separation of functions. The employment function is separated from the action/programme function so that the work of the Management Committee can be focused on community development, and a designated group carries out the work of employment.

All of the above alternative models emerged from the awareness of the burden of work that is placed on voluntary Management Committees to be employers while also planning, developing and implementing a programme of community development and activism that challenges discrimination, exclusion, disadvantage and poverty. The people on the Management Committees are also from the disadvantaged community and may be unemployed, and the expectation of being able to manage the work-load leads to burn-out, dis-illusionment and is not sufficiently mindful of the realities of the situation.

A second source of ideas was the awareness of other models that already operate in other sectors in Ireland. E.g. the youth sector, previous poverty programmes, the Health Boards, local government bodies.

3. Tensions that arise for the organisations

The tensions that are identified through this first stage of the research process all point to the need for the research in relation to organisation development pathways being identified for the projects/organisations so that Management Committees can more effectively manage their work and their organisations. Secondly, the tensions illustrate the need for a radical re-thinking of the programme so that the work of community development does not continue to be negatively affected by the organisational development issues that emerge.

The tensions patterns identified are:

Doing community development work i.e. the 'work' of the organisation, and being an organisation. This relates to the size of most of the projects, the level of resources available to them, the level of staffing available to them and the expectations of the programme. The voluntary Management Committee's do not have sufficient time, resources, skills and/or experience to do both effectively or appropriately. One aspect can suffer as a result.

The ownership of the project. It is envisaged that local ownership of the project is the norm within the programme, but this can be difficult to achieve. This is especially true of second and third generation Management Committees.

The members of the Management Committees are drawn from the disadvantaged community the project targets its work towards. This can lead to complex community dynamics. Secondly, the people may not have the capacity to manage staff, finances and legal requirements while being very well able to do the community development aspects of the work.

A tension can arise between projects being worker led or management committee led. Ideally it should be the latter, with a co-operative working relationship. In some cases the worker is actually doing the work of the management committee, with the attendant disadvantages.

The requirements of the programme are a heavy additional workload to a project, which is attempting to animate and capacity build within their local communities. These requirements include the legal and financial work of a company and those of being an employer.

Some of the policy requirements of the programme can feel burdensome to projects that are not ready in their local community to address particular issues, e.g. Travellers, violence against women. Policy driven programme initiatives can be imposed without sufficient awareness of the needs of local people in projects to explore the issues for themselves initially, before presenting them to their local communities as actions or local programmes.

An inconsistency between the theory of the model of community development and the practice within the programme. This relates to a sense of there being one model of community development, which all projects must work towards. This is in direct contrast with the espoused model of community development being needs and participant led and focused.

A further tension arises from the programme requirements of action being based locally and also at regional and national levels. This places enormous strain on the time and focus of the management committees. The expectation that these small organisations be able to operate on all levels is un-realistic given their current level of staff, funding and capacities. (Figure 3.)

Figure 3. Operational Levels for Community Development Projects

The Community Development Programme is actually a state initiative and in some instances the idea of having a locally based project/organisation has to be 'sold' to a community, whereas in other instances there is a pre-existing group/organisation which is seeking funding under the programme. The latter is more in keeping with the principles of the programme, and the former situation requires a different type of beginning work.

From the above tensions, it seems that a number of changes need to be made: balances struck in the work, a greater awareness created of the normalcy of these tensions, a recognition of the organisational development issues involved and an acknowledgement of the impact of resource limitations on the possibilities for the individual resource centres/projects/organisations.

There is some indication of resource dependency emerging, as well as a programme norm that is actually not part of the funders' requirements viz. Operating at all levels. Both of these will be explored more fully in Stages 2 and 3 of the research.

4. Possible organisation development routes for the projects

Emerging from Stage 1 is an awareness of the need for organisation development, and an awareness of possible 'destination points' for the projects.

Organisation Development routes are:

Being able to work at all the levels of community development and of the programme.

Being able to learn from crises and conflicts. Having the capacity and skills and time to do this learning and reflection.

Being able to do community development at all times and at all levels. This includes applying the principles of community development to the organisations. This involves adding a layer for the organisations - between Personal and Local.

Allowing for the development of individuals who may want to move away from the management committee, and having the committee members recognise that their involvement is time limited.

Encouraging a greater and more 'real' local ownership through the work of team and group building on the committee, and ensuring this ownership is solidly in place after times of change.

Having the structures and systems of the organisation and principles of community development all congruent with each other. This is relating to the difference between espoused models and practices and the actualities.

Possible 'destination points' for the Community Development Projects

Projects/organisations act as catalysts in their local communities for activities and activism on identified needs. These newly generated groups are assisted and facilitated by the development workers of the CDP to work on that issue. These groups are independent of the CDP, but all continue to support the work of the others.

The CDP's become locally based resourcing centres, providing technical assistance, a limited number and variety of services for the local community.

The CDP's access funding from other sources which enables them develop other aspects of their work plans. This funding may be targeted via specific programmes, e.g. EU structural funded programmes, or it may be general development money. These additional programmes might lead to the development of separate groups which can then seek mainstream funding in their own right.

The CDP's recognise the limitations of their resources, and develop alternative routes to influence policy at national and international levels, as well as on issues of relevance to community development practice in general.

Next steps

In Stage 2 it is proposed that the models proposed for the beginnings of the projects be explored further in terms of possible outcomes and the differences that might emerge as a result. The lifespan of the projects will also be addressed, as it began to emerge that practitioners had not thought about the projects needing to find ways to exist for long-term time spans.

Next phase of the research

It is anticipated that during the next phases of the research further clarification of the above themes will emerge. These will include:

Tensions and their sources and possible sources of relief

Knowledge and Skills needed for the effective operation of the projects

The delineation of a number of development pathways for Community Development Projects that will be linked to geographic area, age of the project, role of the worker, strength and maturity and structure of the management committee

Developing awareness of the need for Community Development Projects to become more focused on learning about themselves as organisations and how this contributes to their work

An awareness of the need for the full programme system to learn from its activities to date.

It is expected the research will be finished within the next year, and hoped that its impact through its actual happening will impact on the programme to ensure its greater effectiveness in addressing poverty and disadvantage in Ireland. It is apparent from the research to date that a full programme evaluation is needed, but this is not the focus of this research, but perhaps the research will provide an additional impetus for this evaluation to be undertaken.

Appendix 1. Interview Schedule

ORGANISATION DEVELOPMENT OF CDP'S

The research is about the possible development paths of CDP's and what contributes to the shifts that are experienced by them.

These shifts may include changes in structures, staff, direction of the work, members of the management committee.

What I want to try to name is when these shifts happen, what causes them, and whether these are part of the life-cycle of the organizations or whether they are a feature of the type of organisation the CDP's are.

1. What changes do you see happening in CDP's over time?

2. What causes these changes?

3. Do you think there is a pattern to how CDP's develop from one 3-year period to

another?

1. The structures of CDP's

2. The tensions experienced by CDP's in fulfilling both Community Development and

Organisation functions.

3. The growth of CDP's and how this is achieved.

Specific Questions

1. Structures

What was the rationale for choosing the structure base that all CDP's begin with?

Why was the model chosen over other possible models?

What were the options open to DSCFA and CPA at the time in terms of organizational structure?

How does the structural model the CDP's operate with contribute to their effective operation?

Does the structural model inhibit the functioning of CDP's in any ways? What are these?

Given that over time people have modified the structures with which they work, why is the unitary model of Voluntary Management Committee and staff retained?

What options do you think might contribute more to the effective operation of CDP's?

What ways do the organizational structures of CDP's (whatever these might be) contribute to the work being undertaken by them? I.e. does the structure contribute to the functioning and implementation of the CDP?

In what ways are the aims of CDP's made more possible by using the structures of an organisation, as opposed to collective action, campaigning etc. for examples?

What can CDP's learn from the private sector in terms of organizational structures?

Are CDP's operating with the CDProgramme being restricted by the organizational structure they operate with? In what way? How could this be alleviated?

2. Tensions emerging through the work of CDP's

What tensions do you see arising in the work of CDP's

What are the causes of these tensions or what contributes to their existence?

Do you see a tension between being an organisation and doing Community Development? How does this manifest itself in CDP's?

How could the Community Development work be more supported by the organisation?

Do you think that because of the need to run the organizations effectively and according to the values of Community Development, do they become focused on themselves to the detriment of the work they're undertaking within the community they are serving?

How could these tensions you've identified be alleviated or tackled?

What ways do the oppositions of stability inherent in an organisation and the change inherent in doing Community Development work operate within the CDP's?

Is it possible for the tension between stability and change to co-exist within one organisation/management committee?

Could altering the structures of the CDP's reduce any of the tensions you've identified? Which ones? How would the tension be reduced?

Is Community Development served by the operation of organizations striving to implement CD? Are CDP's an effective and useful mechanism of CD?

3. Growth of CDP's and how this can be achieved?

What would represent growth for a CDP?

How can CDP's grow both in terms of organisation and of Community Development?

Is it possible for the CDP's to grow in both directions simultaneously?

What would be required for the above to happen?

How have you seen growth occur in CDP's?

Has this been beneficial? In what sense? How was it not useful?

Do CDP's have to become bigger in order to encompass the full gamut of organizational functioning? E.g. service delivery in terms of individual and community empowerment, policy development, influencing local and national politics, employing staff managing finances etc.?

Is it possible for CDP's, as Resource Centres are currently constituted to fulfil all the needs of a local community?

Is it desirable that only one organisation would try to achieve the above?

How do you think the emerging needs of the CD sector can best be met by CDP's? Would another form of action be useful instead or in addition to CDP's?

Do the two issues of structure and tensions within the CDP's and Community Development contribute to or inhibit the growth of CDP's? In what ways?