230P
Nonprofit Human Service Organizations Survival in High-Poverty Neighborhoods: A Case Study of Social Entrepreneurship in a Los Angeles Neighborhood
The field of social entrepreneurship, still in its nascent phase, lends itself to inquiry from various disciplines. Nonprofit human service organizations (NPOs), those that have 501(c)(3) status and are considered public charities, that is, they focus on social services - do provide a suitable context for inquiry into this field. Further, NPOs located within neighborhoods of concentrated disadvantage - a particular type of social entrepreneurship - do survive in such deprived climates, yet we do not understand how or why. Thus, to better understand the survival of these NPOs within such contexts and to fill the gap in the literature, it is necessary to understand how social entrepreneurs are able to navigate systems in these neighborhoods, gain legitimacy, and mobilize resources. The focus of this study is on NPOs founded by social entrepreneurs located within a high-poverty, high-minority neighborhood of Los Angeles, California.
Methods:
I utilized purposeful multiple entry point snowball sampling with in-depth, semi-structured, face-to-face interviews, participant observation, and document analysis. The purposive sample populations were social entrepreneurs who were founders of an NPO located in the selected neighborhood. I then conducted fifteen initial face-to-face interviews, with additional follow-up interviews. Next, I transcribed verbatim and analyzed the data (interview transcripts, field notes, and IRS 990 tax-exempt forms) through Atlas.ti. I recorded my findings using an institutional theoretical framework with a focus on social movement theory and social construction of target population theory.
Results:
The findings indicated two separate paths to survival. Path one, entrepreneurs come from outside the neighborhood and have greater external connections to mobilize resources, with high intangible assets; yet such organizations are also constrained in the work that they do. They are not grassroots; they are not attempting a social movement or mobilization of people, rather this type of social entrepreneurship appeals to the elite, foundations, and government.
The alternative path, are those entrepreneurs who are committed to their neighborhood and desire to mobilize from within by challenging the status quo. As residents recognize the importance of their organization, and partly they can rely on their ethnic identity as this enables them to connect with diverse groups within the neighborhood (i.e., politicians and gangs) they can then leverage this social capital to gain outside funding. Constrained from limited financial resources, such organizations become more of social movement organizations. Such organizations are filling a niche need in the neighborhood, as they are able to be innovative.
Conclusion:
This research can help us to better understand what factors influence the success of these human service organizations, which is critical to understanding how social entrepreneurs survive in these geographical, social, and institutional environments. By aiding funders, policymakers, and leaders of the greater community in better understanding the particular challenges confronted by these organizations, this research can help shape future policies that will expand residents of high-poverty neighborhoods access to NPOs. If NPOs that serve these communities are unable to survive in such neighborhoods, the gap between the needy and the wealthy neighborhoods will continue to grow.