The Limits of Community and Collective Impact: Two Case Studies from Chicago

Background and Purpose

Collective impact models of community development rest on a theoretical foundation that defines community as a social system or “the activity space in which goods and services are provided and consumed … and the circumstances of local life are held in common” (Chaskin, 2013:109).  Collective impact approaches build on the tradition of community initiatives by placing a primacy on the role of community and community collaborations as the solutions to any number of social problems. This study examines two collective impact interventions in two very different neighborhoods in the city of Chicago in order to investigate whether either case supports the argument that collaboration alone leads to improved outcomes in distressed communities. 

Methods

The study is based on surveys of workforce development and adult education providers in a predominantly African-American community on Chicago’s West Side and a predominantly Latino community on Chicago’s Southwest Side, as well as key informant interviews and limited participant-observation study.  The surveys were designed in collaboration with community partners and the research results have already been presented as policy briefs to local community development organizations.

Results         

The research indicates that while efforts to engage providers and other key elements of the social system in collaborative efforts are necessary to improve outcomes for individuals and families, they are ultimately insufficient to overcome the significant systemic challenges that residents of these neighborhoods face.   In both cases studied here, strong collaboration among adult education or advanced manufacturing programs in these communities produced laudable outcomes for individuals and families, but the broader effects of both efforts were constrained by public policy and economic realities in the city of Chicago and state of Illinois. 

Conclusions and Implications

This finding is in line with earlier research indicating that collaboration cannot fully compensate for the political and economic realities that shape the contexts that constrain or facilitate community development efforts (DeFillipis, et.al, 2010) This case study adds to the discussions among collective impact practitioners about the role of organizing and other social action interventions in their work, and contributes to theoretical discussions about the role of community, social capital, and service providers in community practice interventions.