Lessons Learned: The Stages of Development of a Coalition to Preserve Senior Housing in Detroit, MI

Background and Purpose

In November 2013, Senior Housing
Preservation-Detroit
(SHP-D) was created
to advocate on behalf of seniors to preserve existing low income apartments, to educate community leaders regarding the issues of displacement, and to promote the inclusion of low-income seniors in the vision for a greater Detroit. This coalition formed as a direct result of seniors being displaced as their building’s HUD contract expired and seniors. Given the prevalence of diabetes, hypertension and cardiovascular disease of older Detroiters that exceeds national and statewide prevalence, and the inadequate transportation in the city (outlined in the “Dying Before their Time” report by the Detroit Area Agency on Aging and Authority Health’s Population Health 2016 report), housing, health and social service providers became concerned about how relocation would affect already vulnerable health statuses of those living in Detroit.  Keen & Geronimus (2011)’s study of HOPE VI HUD relocations in Chicago indicated increase of older adults reporting poor or fair health (from 45 to 65%) in the years that followed relocation. 

The 17-member agency coalition maintains a database of HUD buildings and their contract expirations and estimates that over 2,000 seniors in over a dozen apartment buildings (in Downtown and Midtown alone) are at risk of being displaced from their homes and communities over the next decade. It has also met with city officials, created a documentary and was recently featured in national press.  Given that coalition’s vary in their capacities (Mizrahi & Rosenthal, 2001) and that community organizing efforts react to particular historical moments (Sites, Chaskin & Parks 2008), the coalition’s unique features of membership (e.g., community and a school of social work partnership) have lead to research and advocacy efforts being intertwined.  The purpose of this paper is to share the history of the coalition including strengths and successes as well as lessons learned about the processes entailed in the coalition’s work.

Methods: 

            Active participation by both authors in the monthly meetings of the coalition has allowed for participant observation of members and key community stakeholders of these public meetings. In addition, the research team has conducted a textual analysis of the content of the minutes of the meetings.

 

Results:

            Findings include: 1) the coalition’s has been successful in advocating for their issue and produced multi-media forms of advocacy 2) membership and participation in the coalition has been uncertain and unsteady 3) the coalition’s leadership structure has lead to indeterminacy in decision making and dissemination responsibilities and procedures 4) the coalition’s working relationships with other organizations has been unclear given the organizational structure of the coalition.

 

Conclusions and Implications:

            Many pressing social problems that communities face involve cooperation by different stakeholders.  Developing and maintaining a coalition of organization’s brought together around an issue entails both challenges and successes. By sharing “lessons learned” in this community organizing effort, this paper will offer other community organizers suggestions and guidelines for best practices of coalition work.