I. Introductory Session on Expectations--Thursday:

Participants were asked to form small groups, each with a funder, an academic, and an organizer/leader. Each group was to develop a list of their top three expectations for the gathering. Below are the results.

1. relationship building and reconnection
2. Hear about models/examples of collaborations and hear where interests overlap
3. Discuss possible role that funders can play.

Group 5

1. What is the role of funders in this process? Interest/self-interest?
2. What is the set of self-interests or limits on what academics can do in collaboratives?
3. How can we build a mechanism to broaden ever-widening circles of collaboration? Among academics? Among funders? Among other constituencies-labor?
4. What on-going collaborations are now underway? What gets funded?

Group 6

After the groups reported back to the larger group, the larger group identified the following themes:

Further discussion focused on:

Participants asked us to remember:

• to make our definitions explicit
• the media context, selling of images/ideas

II. Panel Session--examples of Collaborations--Thursday:

In this session, four panelists each spoke for 10 minutes, and a discussion followed.

Rob Kleidman, Cleveland State Unviersity: Lessons in collaborative work-relationships are important; how be honest w/someone who is not part of your organization; better understanding by actually being involved; become a better teacher; have an effect on the world. For organizers-have an outsider to reflect org.; bring new resources in. Learn importance of collaboration as a process.

Lisa Donner, ACORN. About how to find academics. -"hunting expedition"-finding out what research was out there (useful to have tips); finding data for local area (needed to get people to create data and do studies-timeline was an issue here); looking for expert spokespeople (usually use only own people so used member-academic teams); needed people to do educational meetings; "hamburger study" looked at McDonald's pay in suburbs compared to downtown did by ACORN itself (suburbs paid more). Now research came out by academics.

Larry Ferlazzo, Sacramento Valley Organizing Community. A little wary of academics. But working with some research organizations (not universities). Would rather have others do research and organizations use it. Have done visits to UC-Davis but can't find partners. Have had some help with Harvard Business School, USC. Potential-academics are smart and have access to resources. How can developing relationships transform both parties.

Rachel Parker Gwin, Virginia Tech University. Service learning is a way to get students involved with community groups. Some issues: negotiate true partnerships (diversity training to teach students are not helpers); keep students involved beyond course requirements; institutionalize relationship within university-create centers and get U. to fundraise for community projects.

Discussion:

1. academics not having time or resources-how to get work supported above and beyond normal expectations. What does time cost? Problem is pressures are to publish stuff not useful to activists. Hiring people on a short-term basis helps.

2. Question of objectivity.

3. How do you hold institutions accountable-or do you just find individuals who sneak it on the side? Should you transform whole institution or just find some space to do good work?

4. Utilitarian nature of the discussion-academics do research and organizers do organizing. Maybe the right doesn't make such distinctions between roles and we shouldn't either. There are a lot of people in the academy looking for something good to do.

5. What is the role of funders in this? Could foundations pay organizations to do their own research? Why were funders not on the panel? (answer-funders here not really funding this yet)

6. Could use model similar to separate community development and community organizing model (where independent community organizations partner with CDCs when needed and pressure them when needed) to also manage university-community relationships. An attempted litigation effort in California to get universities to do community power research in rural areas failed.

7. Can't expect researchers to invest in basic organizing-it's outcomes of organizing that helps universities. We need to know what organizers do that impacts the agendas of the researchers.

8. Cites examples of UNO Urban Planning, and Oakland U (?).

9. A lot of different boxes-academic can't find entry point to community, problems in community are interdisciplinary.

10. Want to hear from academics some practical strategies for funders to support this kind of work. Want to know strategies and leverage points. Also fund interdisciplinary work. Also service learning work can be funded by grants-students often have to do internships for free and can't do that in some places-at least need living expenses. Kellogg Foundation and Bonner Foundation have also done that. A couple of meetings convened by funders in Cleveland. PRAG in Chicago is another model. NCRP study on the right shows right-wing foundations are pouring enormous dollars into research, but left-wing foundations not doing that. Have community groups control resources and decide whether they want to link up with academics.

11. In approaching universities, need to enter into relationships with representatives so that institution can engage in internal change.

12. Want some kind of network so people can find each other.

III. Separate Funder, Organizer, Academic Small Group Discussions--Thursday

In this session, we separated organizers into one group, funders into another, and academics into a third. Each group was to identify what their interests were in a organizer-academic partnership, what they could offer to the other two groups, what they wanted from the other two groups, and what the opportunities and challenges were in collaborative work. Following the report backs from each group, there was a general discussion to identify common themes and issues.

Funders

1. develop relationships with academia as well as do direct funding
2. build links to reveal the worth of CO
3. show outcomes
4. influence public policy; but fragmentation and fragility of community organizations make it hard to see them as an ally in this
5. fund groups not on the margins; academics are instrumental in helping groups move from margins
6. fund organizations with potential for scale
7. help organizations become more purposeful learners
8. move organizations to drop purist attitude

1. cross disciplines, open doors
2. vantage point
3. funding collaborations
4. access to the community for academics

1. scale
2. impact
3. get out of the box
4. see us as other than money
5. be in learning relationships
6. long-term vision
7. help us step back and evaluate ourselves
8. honest evaluation of your work

1. scale
2. get word out to media

Organizers and Leaders

Interests

1. credibility and credentialing of the work
2. policy analysis
3. recruiting
4. strategic planning
5. growth relationships for intellectual capital
6. help framing policy debates
7. measurement framework and tools
8. diverse ideas
9. tell stories
10. revitalization strategies
11. critical look at our work
12. regional strategies

Can Offer:

13. power
14. agitation, challenge, threat
15. access to resources
16. meaningful work, opportunity for academics to put their work to use
17. something to analyze for academics
18. live audience
19. "cover": opportunity to speak out and hide behind organizing effort, be in new arenas
20. improve neighborhoods where academies are located
21. reality
22. credibility
23. alternative to identity politics

Want:

24. curiosity and understanding
25. honesty
26. commitment to relationship around certain principles
27. integrity in stated goals
28. write about in plain English
29. let community set agenda

Opportunities;

30. increased resources
31. better knowledge
32. ability to develop broader vision

Challenges

33. sometimes misunderstanding of our work
34. not be taken over

Academics

Interests:

1. more exciting ways to do work
2. energize students offer opportunities
3. affect the world
4. reality check
5. help change the world
6. mentor students
7. further democratic potential of CO
8. hope in hard times
9. access to community
10. creates rigor in our work
11. open our institutions, get more leverage

Want:

12. From organizers:
• 1. access and info to develop the partnership
• 2. acknowledge institutional pressures
• 3. willingness to invest time in relationship
• 4. mutual respect (demand accountability, test us, take risks w/ us)
• 5. respect our independence - don't ask us to lie
13. From funders:
• 1. money for policy research, funding
• 2. money for think tanks
• 3. willingness to talk to us
• 4. respect academic integrity
• 5. network existing resources better
• 6. long-term commitment
• 7. be part of the intellectual process
• 8. network actors more

Offer:

14. skills: analysis, research, writing
15. independence
16. body of knowledge
17. access to academic community
18. resources: libraries, etc
19. spreading the word
20. students
21. ourselves as dialogue partners
22. we're self-directed
23. ideas

Challenges and opportunities:

24. we do different work, have different time frames, rewards, etc.
25. we're often more respected than activists by powers that be
26. ways to structure ongoing relationships
27. we can accomplish more together
28. inform policy through new models
29. complementarity - challenge and opportunity
30. more fun

The discussion generated the following themes and issues:

Themes:

1. strongly against utilitarian relationships, for deep encumbered relationships
2. overlap between academics and organizers: reality, change the world
3. public policy as an opportunity to come together
4. massive collaborative think tank
5. pace of change is such that we need each other; can share in developing theory of change
6. fun
7. recognition that right wing is way ahead in visioning and creating change
8. need to get the word out

Issues:

9. resources
10. written vs. oral culture
11. academics wanting independence from particular community organizations. vs. organizations saying we want to call the shots
12. acknowledge demands on each group
13. mutual respect
14. what drives the research agenda (independence v. control)
15. funders bringing groups together: different views of this (academics stressed, organizers did not)

IV- Reflections--Friday

We adapted the agenda on Friday, based on what we learned Thursday, to begin with some reflections from the large group after they had a night's sleep behind them. So we began with about 40 minutes of discussion asking people to talk about what moved them, what intrigued them, and what surprised them. Here's what people said:

1. research can be done confidentially
2. beyond CO, there are other kinds of advocacy and issue groups; are we talking about working with them
3. desire by funders not to be treated instrumentally
4. tension between academic freedom and organizers wanting control: (Richard Wood): I will show people stuff, but not give them veto power over what I write
5. lots of funders were activists, academics before became funders; struck by our interests to be part of this triumvirate in more meaningful way; tension between institutional role and personal desires
6. role of the media; how lift the stories, deal with indifference and cynicism
7. intrigued by interest in creating something very significant that would counter what the religious right has done; nationally, bring people together that have not been working together in the past
8. almost all organizing ventures have some research going on; how teach this
9. sociology umbrella for the academics; where are you in intersecting with other disciplines; how boost that work
10. interest in organizers in movements;
11. surprise that this conversation is only coming up now; have talked with lots of organizers about are you building a movement or an organization; I've always felt organizing will lead to change because they change people; movements can't be planned
12. academics are removed from the real world; from another planet
13. academics want to connect; all politics is local; hard to know how to connect without knowing who you are; who wants to connect: individual, institution; how can we be useful to one another?; uncomfortable with vagueness of what this is
14. overlaps
15. from academics: organizers aren't purely instrumental, do want deeper relationships
16. there's still a level of our discourse that assumes that we are about trying to do something, change things in the dominant culture. We're not being clear enough about the need to think hard, be clear and critical, about changing the way mediating institutions operate. Doing so opens up whole news ways to collaborate.
17. We're operating very individualistically; talking to organizers is not the same as talking to communities; there's another level of engagement beyond organizers; in academia there's something beyond sociology. Engaging institutions and communities
18. Agree with frustration about vagueness; if I were an organizer would not be clear about value of collaborations. Disagree with notion that collaborations need to be purely local. Power comes also from knowledge and ideas, which are completely portable. Don't need to look just at local academics.
19. If we were to build trust across lines, we have to get beyond where we have a lot of faith about getting people in the same room, assuming exchange of ideas builds community. We need enough time to get to know one another. I applaud this start, but this is only a start.
20. If an individual CO needs research, they do need to be comfortable with researcher. There is another level of research, involving studying many organizations, over large geographic span. We're working with archives, reports, etc. that may be useful in understanding effects of organizing. That doesn't necessarily depend on profound relationships.
21. There' s much more than research: help CO groups to sharpen point of view, provide road map to policy process, etc. It is data, there is value in giving community-based efforts research tools.
22. I had assumed we were talking about relating to institutions; now have to deal with forming relationships with individuals.
23. Self-interest of Interfaith Funders: we stepped out of our usual model of funding to say one of our long-term interests is to see organizers get out of the box at how they look at making change. It is hard to talk about collaborative work outside of local context. But to move forward we need to be in conversation about collaborative work, even if there is no framework now. How develop relationships including beyond utilitarian ones?

V. The Vision Discussion--Friday

We had planned to break up into some special topic interest groups, but when we asked people to indicate which ones they wanted to be involved in, nearly all chose the "vision discussion" so we convened mixed small groups (academics, organizers, and funders together in each) to address four questions:

1. what is the context that creates a need or desire for collaborations/partnerships?
2. What role might collaboratives/partnerships play in addressing the context and how are they related to other responses?
3. What could collaborations/partnerships look like?
4. How could collaborations/partnerships frame public policy?

Here are the report backs from each group:

Group 1

Context:

1. Need for more leverage in policy arena; looking for synergy
2. Failures of previous funding efforts and emerging concern about participation
3. Too much for community groups to do
4. Our power is diffused, fragmented
5. Need to be smarter about dealing with media
6. Context of global economy

Role:

7. Shared information
8. Make available more resources
9. Sharpen analysis and messages
10. New venue for leadership development over the long term

What do they look like?

11. Foundation that's involved as fiscal agent, community organization. manages, constituency steers
12. Diversified leadership
13. Clearinghouse
14. Connect research centers
15. National networks

Influencing public policy:

16. 1. State level
17. 2. Influence our larger visions of what kind of world we want to live in

Group 2.

Context:

1. need for power, understanding social change, devolution, corporate merger
2. globalization
3. understanding political, religious, economic system

Role:

4. Personal satisfaction
5. Broader perspective
6. Allies
7. Students learn more about real world
8. Broaden academics view of community
9. Deepen capacity to make funding decisions
10. Provide tech. Skills, open doors

What do they look like:

11. 1. local informal conversations with the players
12. 2. a university department becoming a member of the community organization
13. 3. contractual relationships
14. 4. umbrella for funding for education of community
15. 5. ad hoc advisory group

Influencing Policy:

• 1. publishing and studies
• 2. popular writing
• 3. understand context
• 4. restore faith in public debate
• 5. knowing who players are

Group 3:

Context:

1. global economy, marketization of life, etc
2. poor people losing
3. global disparities
4. need for everyone to recognize this context
5. retrenchment?

Roles:

6. develop relationships w/ health care
7. universities produce professionals who, e.g., teach
8. organizers change people, academies change ideas
9. figure out how to speak to folks, as powerfully as does the right
10. the right supports each other, we don't
11. how do individual organizations add up to a movement
12. organizers start where people are, are afraid of introducing ideas (debated)
13. popular education and dialogue
14. include pastors in political education
15. change the academy from inside

What do they look like:

16. Interfaith education
17. Scale of thinking - need to increase
18. More and better organizing
19. Start from where we are, much further along than 10 years ago

Larger Discussion:

1. Sue Lacy - My biggest fear as an organizer is when I'm 60 I'll be reading the same news as today. How do we transform our organizing, which is good, into undeniable explosion such that media will have to pay attention?
2. There is a real hunger to talk about the bigger issues, not many opportunities
3. Conspiracy: the only way to order the relationships is to conspire together because this is where we need to go. Too many things have kept us apart, but it's not enough to say we have to find ways to research together. I'm interested in whether we're going to go somewhere together
4. That implies we agree on where we want to go
5. Never heard "electoral politics" mentioned. Discussion invited
6. Increasing solidarity around ideas and relationships
7. Need for strategic visioning

1. How modify market economy (earlier comment of how find alternative to it).
2. Karen Paget, in American Prospect, we either have to organize ideas or organize people

6. Next Steps--Friday:

We spent some time at the end both presenting what our next steps would be and what next steps others wanted.

1. Jeannie Appleman will develop a list of funders who fund community efforts, who are interested in developing relationships between organizing and academia. Spence Limbocker will help on this; and will continue to collect information.
2. Madeleine Scammell, of the Loka Institute is organizing a conference on similar topics, and creating guidelines for community-academic partnerships.
3. Randy Stoecker is writing up this report for distribution.
4. Rob Kleidman is organizing a core group to develop further next steps.

Suggestions for other possible next steps:

1. Connect with each other electronically? Jeannie: can send stuff to me and I'll send it out.
2. Question: for local funders, want national funders to partner with - convene together
3. More polished report, that gets out to the rest of the academic and activists communities, publishable
4. Discussion around this: is it worth doing, who else should be part of the conversation?
5. Short version of key points - 2-3 pages.
6. Briefly described best practices, conditions for them, impacts. (Randy: there are two examples, Madeleine's and U. Tenn.)
7. Madeleine: there are 16 campuses
8. Sue: Does this group of people want to move forward to create something we're not able to do separately.? Discussion - how to do that, what to do.
9. Jeannie - there are funders interested in organizers talking across disciplines. May be possible to have another conversation.
10. Rob: core group to figure this one. One from each constituency
11. Richard: need to put legs on this
12. Randy: stay in conversation, contact
13. Ken: Two possibilities. Form left-progressive organizing think tank. Don't see that happening. Too diverse etc. What can happen is a place for people of talent and spirit to compare what they have done. Because of this conversation I'll be more lively in my work. Resources are very important. Even if not a think tank.
14. There are research activities and institutes that are not networked, connected to the communities, and they can be.
15. Other people interested: Marshall Ganz, Mark Warren.