Shining the Light: A Practical Guide to Co-Creating ...kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/reports/2010/05_2010_ShiningtheLightOrganizingGuide.pdfShining the Light: A Practical Guide to Co-Creating

Shining the Light:A Practical Guide to Co-Creating

Healthy Communities

Isaiah

and

The Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity

May 2010

Report Contributors:

Jillian Olinger, Research Associate, The Kirwan Institute Michelle Oyakawa, ISAIAH OrganizerSarah Mullins, ISAIAH Chair of Metropolitan Equity Task ForceChristy Rogers, Senior Research Associate, The Kirwan InstituteDoran Schrantz, ISAIAH Executive DirectorPhyllis Hill, ISAIAH Lead OrganizerJeanne Ayers, ISAIAH Chair of Health EquityDave Mann, Grassroots Policy ProjectGraphic design by Craig Ratchford

Photo Credits:

City photo: Courtesy of Flickr user bikinisleepshirt (http://www.flickr.com/photos/bikinisleepshirt/3429026436/)

Congregation photo: Courtesy of Evangelical Lutheran Church of Southern Africa (http://www.elcsant.org.za)

ISAIAH and the Kirwan Institute May 2010

2

How to use this guide

Are you…

Critiquing a policy or institution?

Planning an issue campaign?

Looking at whether or not your own organization or group upholds principles of racial equity?

Writing a policy?

Training leaders to take action for racial and/or economic equity in the public arena?

Educating individuals on the role that institutions and policies play in their lives?

Wondering about how to address racial and/or economic inequity in your community but don’t

know where to start?

What is this guide?

This guide is a collection of learnings from ISAIAH leaders and organizers. Through years of

hard work aimed at creating transformative change in Minnesota, and through our collaboration

with the Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity, we have made breakthroughs in our

organizing methodology. We believe that the ideas contained in this document build upon the

methodology and collective wisdom of community organizing and movements for social change.

Most importantly, the guide provides additions to the existing trainings.

This field guide is therefore intended to be a series of navigational tools that organizers and

community leaders can use to help in their work for more racially and economically just

communities. The concepts found in the following pages can be applied to a wide variety of

situations, not limited to what is described above.

A New Way of Thinking, Talking and Acting

The tools found within articulate a re-imagination of the work of community organizing in

‗the world as it is.‘ This world is a complex web of ideologies, institutions, and inequitable

outcomes across race, class and region. Through our development as an organization, we have

created tools that can help to orient individuals and organizations in this often confusing and

overwhelming context.

This is a guide to a new way of thinking, talking and acting for racial equity in our

communities. As such, we hope that this guide will inspire you to work both individually and

collectively to understand the values you hold, the questions you need to ask, and the actions you

need to take. It is our hope that this guide will re-shape organizing strategies so that the work for

transformative change in this world is more effective and more powerful.


3

Table of Contents

Preface ......................................................................................................................................................... 4

About ISAIAH and The Kirwan Institute, the path we have walked together in developing a new

vision for healthy communities, and revealing the choice between the path of crisis or the path to

healthy communities in Minnesota.

Section I. Opportunity Stories .................................................................................................................. 6

Articulating stories of opportunity and listening to the stories of others allows community leaders

from diverse backgrounds to understand how structures and institutions play a role in every

person‘s life and in determining the fortunes of every family.

Section II. Thinking and Talking about Race to Expand Opportunity for All ................................... 9

If race is not being considered in a plan, conversation, or action around equity, then the plan,

conversation, or action is incomplete.

Section III. Values and Assumptions ..................................................................................................... 11

Uncovering the values that underlie inequitable outcomes from policies and institutions and

identifying alternative values is the key to transformational change.

Section IV. Asking the Right Questions ................................................................................................ 13

We need to ask certain types of questions about policies and institutions to get to the heart of

what creates inequities in our communities and what we can do to change this reality. Asking the

right questions creates clarity and a path for action.

Section V. How this framework works in action ................................................................................ 19

ISAIAH‘s transformational relationship with the Minnesota Department of Transportation

provides an example of this framework in action. The learnings in this document emerged in part

from our work transforming MNDOT

Worksheets

Helpful tools for you to use in constructing your own strategies

Worksheet A: My Personal Opportunity Story .......................................................................... 8

Worksheet B: Topic Area of Interest ........................................................................................ 26


4

Preface

Minnesota: The Good Life?

For many, Minnesota is a state where the American ―good life‖ has survived; some might even

say thrived. Unfortunately, the ―good life‖ in Minnesota, while an alluring narrative, was and is a

reality only for some Minnesotans. Many Minnesotans are not able to reach their full potential

because they are locked out of opportunities in the political arena, in their schools, in their

workplace, and even in terms of their own health, safety, and well-being. When not everyone can

thrive and contribute, we are all hurt by these inequities. But these inequities are not natural or

inevitable; they are built, and they can be dismantled. As Minnesotans we need to fundamentally

realign our public policies if we wish to create a sustainable and prosperous future that provides

opportunity for all. The search for sustainability and renewal must be based on a more equitable

vision of community.

About ISAIAH and the Kirwan Institute

In the spirit of developing this new vision of community, ISAIAH reached out to the Kirwan

Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity at the Ohio State University. ISAIAH is a collection

of congregations, working together in the St. Paul, Minneapolis and St. Cloud regions, who have

committed themselves to each other in order to build power for a worldview that prioritizes racial

and economic justice. ISAIAH‘s values are centered on a vision of community, hope, and God‘s

abundance for all people. The Kirwan Institute is a multi-disciplinary research and advocacy

organization at The Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio. The mission of the Kirwan

Institute is to think about, talk about, and act on race – in partnership with people and

organizations worldwide -- in order to expand opportunity for all.

ISAIAH and Kirwan’s Path Together

Kirwan and ISAIAH are working collaboratively to develop three documents: a report focusing

on the Minneapolis-St. Paul region, ―Shining the Light: Revealing Our Choice;‖ a report with a

special focus on St. Cloud, ―Shining the Light: Revealing Our Choice for the St. Cloud Region;‖

and this ―field guide‖ for organizers and community leaders. We came together because we both

believe that peoples‘ and communities‘ fates are interconnected, not isolated; we both believe that

racial and ethnic hierarchies are wrong and must be dismantled; and we are both committed to

expanded opportunity for all. At ISAIAH, we felt that our existing organizing and advocacy tools

were insufficient to take on the full scope of transformation needed to respond to the multiple

layers of crisis in our state. In this collaboration to develop a robust vision of a path to healthy

communities, we each have gained a new and deeper appreciation of these shared values, and the

transformation possible.

Shining the Light: Revealing Our Choice

Kirwan and ISAIAH believe that we can work together to address the crisis in Minnesota,

acknowledge the impact race has, and make positive change. In ―Shining the Light: Revealing

Our Choice,‖ Kirwan and ISAIAH worked together to understand and acknowledge that

Minnesota has been on the ―path to crisis‖ for quite some time. This path was marked by an

intentional lack of investment in communities of color, lack of access to the vehicles of

opportunity we all need to succeed (like education and wealth building), and growing apart. In

contrast to this path, we proposed a new path that turns these old dynamics around.


5

These are the three principles we think shape the path to healthy, equitable, livable communities:

1. Restorative investment in the most marginalized communities that prepares for the future

of Minnesota

2. Opening access to opportunity, cultivating all human potential

3. Growing together, integrating and connecting communities

Targeting restorative investment describes investment directed to those communities most

negatively impacted by our current economic recession, those who have borne the brunt of

historic policies that favored new, suburban, white communities. Examples of these types of

investment include community development, resident capacity building, job training, small and

minority business lending, and neighborhood revitalization. The health of the region, and the

state, rests upon the health of each of its communities. Our fates are intertwined; we are only as

strong as the weakest among us.

Opening access to opportunity is defined as affirmatively connecting people to opportunity; for

example, opening up housing choices through inclusionary zoning policies, de- concentrating

subsidized housing, re-thinking school boundaries, and providing quality, comprehensive public

transit that connects more people to opportunity. To cultivate the health of the state, we need to

grow opportunity for all our residents.

Growing together is defined as building healthy environments for all, and providing newcomers

with access to opportunity. An example of this might be building strong coalitions between city-

suburb-tribal governments, developing regional master plans, coordinating and integrating

housing, transportation, and infrastructure plans. Growing opportunity for all cannot be

undertaken in segments or in isolation—we are all in this together, so we must work in

communion with each other.


6

Section I. Opportunity Stories

Karen, St. Paul, MN: “My grandpa owned a business that did very well. When my parents

married around World War II, my dad started his father’s business in California. He got a GI

loan for housing, worked hard, and built a good business there. Property values in California

increased more than 100% and my parents and grandparents made money from their land,

housing, and the business. When my grandparents died, I inherited money and passed it on to my

sons so they could go to college debt-free. My parents paid for my schooling and I was able to do

the same for my kids.”

Dianne, Rosemount, MN: "After my parents got divorced, my mom didn't have a car. There was

no transportation for my brother and I to get to after school activities, sports, scouts, etc. so we

had to drop out of everything. My husband and I worked hard and living in the suburbs provided

our kids with a lot of opportunity. Due to a lack of affordable housing, it is doubtful that my kids

will be able to return to the community they grew up in to work and live."

Tim, St. Louis Park, MN: "I was born to teenage working class parents and raised in St. Paul

Minnesota with my 5 younger siblings. Neither of my parents even had a high school education.

But education played a huge role in opening up opportunities for me. And so did my [white]

race. Being a lawyer has helped to support me and my family through situations that swamp

others with fewer opportunities, things like divorce, illness, tax problems and bankruptcy."

Cheryl, St. Paul, MN: “When I graduated from college I found it hard to start a career. I was

only able to find temporary or part-time jobs. People stereotyped me as a young woman and

would not take me seriously. I was turned down for some jobs with Christian organizations

because I was a woman. In addition, my mother had cancer and my father had to spend his

resources for medical bills, instead of my graduate school. I finally obtained a Stafford loan but

couldn’t afford a computer and IT services, fell behind, lost financial aid, dropped out. I still

want to go back.”

Arline, St. Paul, MN: “When I was 7, my parents started looking for a new place to live on the

city’s North side. We toured an apartment that we all liked. The nearest supermarket was only a

block away, and my dad had to take only one bus to get to work. My parents told the landlord we

wanted to rent it. Shortly after we got home, our phone rang and mom picked it up. It was the

landlord from the new apartment. He told my mother he was sorry, but that he had made a

mistake, and the apartment wasn’t for rent anymore. Another family, he said, had seen it earlier

and he was leasing the apartment to them. My parents were angry, and my sister and I were

disappointed. I realized from what mom and dad were saying that the landlord didn’t really want

to rent it to us because we were not white."


7

How we interpret racial inequities is crucial

These are just some of the stories of opportunity people have shared with us through the process

of developing the field guide. In ISAIAH, we have been using opportunity stories as a way to

educate and move our large base of people of faith into understanding how structural racialization

works.

There is always a danger of inequities being interpreted through the dominant worldview. In this

frame, either people of color are responsible for their position of disadvantage, or any

discrimination that takes place is the result of individual racists. One of the challenges in

organizing people to work for racial and economic equity is getting people to see racial inequities

in a new way, beyond analyses of individuals and power, and through an expanded view of the

structural barriers to opportunity.

Why are opportunity stories important?

We have found that by connecting to their own family histories and life stories, individuals can

truly see how their lives have been shaped by the ways in which our communities are built and

governed. When people can articulate how doors of opportunity have been opened or closed in

their own lives by policies and institutions, it is not a big leap to understand how social structures

can affect people of various races differently and create inequities on a wide scale. Understanding

structural racialization is one of the first steps on the path to creating healthy communities.

This being said, telling opportunity stories is about more than just creating an intellectual

understanding of social forces. These stories are real and personal and lead to some painful

realizations about the world in which we live. They illuminate the ways we separate ourselves

from one another. Opportunity stories show how our society tells some children that they are

worthwhile and others that they are worthless. It is this very personal pain and consequent

dissatisfaction with the world as it is that moves people to act.

Racial inequities are harmful to all people

Sharing these stories with one another is a powerful way to make working for racial justice not

about ‗helping other people‘ or about advocating for the interests of just one group of people.

Opportunity stories can create an experience that helps individuals from diverse backgrounds

understand how structural racialization is deeply harmful to all people. We as a society have

often acquiesced to the brokenness of relationships and spirit that deep- seated, on-going racial

inequities create. But seeing that racial inequities are built, reinforced and, importantly,

challenged by people can show us that something different is possible.

We invite you to take a moment and reflect on your own personal story of opportunity by filling

out Worksheet A, below.


8

Worksheet A: My Personal Story of Opportunity

What in my life and my parents’ life opened up and created opportunities for me?

What in my life and my parents’ life has restricted opportunity for me?

How has this impacted me? How has it shaped the story of my life?

How does access to and restriction from opportunity impact my children’s lives?


9

Section II. Thinking and Talking about Race to Expand Opportunity for All

Opportunities are different across racial, ethnic, gender and class lines

These voices from Minnesota reveal different sets of opportunities afforded to people and to their

children, and what they are able to make of them. When we dig deeper into people‘s stories we

often find that their lives have been meaningfully impacted by the opportunities their parents and

grandparents had—if their parents or grandparents owned a home, or owned a business, and were

able to pass on some wealth, for example. We realize our parents and grandparents were often

afforded different opportunities along racial, ethnic, gender and class lines. Even today, when

many discriminatory and overtly racist practices are now illegal, the effects from policies applied

to previous generations linger. These exclusions from opportunity, whether intentional or not,

have consequences for people and their families, and for our common future. This is why it is

important to talk about race and racial equity when we talk about the path we have walked in

Minnesota, and the new path we want to forge together.

We need to talk about race, racism, and the structural barriers to opportunity

We need to acknowledge in constructive dialogue the role that race and racism has played, and

continues to play, in creating opportunities for some individuals while denying them for others.

We need to be mindful of race when we identify dominant assumptions, define meaningful

outcomes, and assign accountability to people and institutions for the decisions they make. It is

not only a matter of relating to each other as people and valuing each other, but it is also

important for understanding how our institutions and decisions, past and present, impact

opportunities for ourselves and others, and how these impacts differ for people in different

neighborhoods.

A structural racialization view focuses on outcomes, not intent

Our traditional way of thinking about race is one where we think of individuals as either racist or

not. We do not believe this is an effective way of thinking-- or talking-- about race today. Instead,

we want to encourage people to think beyond the individual, and stress looking at outcomes,

rather than the intent of people, policies, or practices, to show that race still matters in our

country. Such an approach highlights how institutional policies, interactions among institutions,

and differences in resource distribution or investment, can produce racially unequal outcomes.

This is what we mean by ―structural racialization.‖

Not talking about race locks us into a path of crisis

To talk about how race continues to impact outcomes is not easy for many people. Fear and

anxiety can sometimes prevent even well-intended advocates for justice from engaging in

conversations about race. Conversations about race can be messy, tense, even painful. So instead,

we ignore the issue in the hopes that all this talk about race will just go away on its own. Or, we

try to substitute class, income, or poverty as a proxy for race and opportunity in this country. But

despite the fact that we have made great strides from the days of legalized segregation and overt

racial hostility—even electing our first African American president—race continues to be a

meaningful social category, and continues to powerfully shape lives in divergent ways. For

example, Black men in the US live approximately eleven fewer years than white women.1 We are

1 David Brown. “Life Expectancy Hits Record High in United States.” The Washington Post. June 12, 2008.

Accessed May 27, 2010


10

talking about a loss of eleven years of life – it is hard to think of a more powerful marker of

racialized opportunity.

When we fail to acknowledge the powerful role of racial inequities, we lock ourselves into

this path of racialized crisis. And in turn, this ensures that we will remain thwarted in our efforts

to achieve healthy, livable, equitable communities to which we all have a right. If we do not

explicitly name racial inequities and combat them, we can inadvertently reinforce racial and

economic disparities.

Talk and silence are both forms of action

We do have a choice: to continue with the path of crisis marked by scarcity, fear, isolation, and

confusion, or to choose a path of health marked by abundance, hope, conversation, and action in

communion with each other. Talk is a powerful tool, a form of action. Silence too, is a form of

action. Silence leaves assumptions unchallenged, and perpetuates the status quo. This guide will

help us learn how to talk about race and racial inequity in ways that are constructive for moving

towards a path to healthy communities. Talking is the first step along that path, but it is by no

means the only step along that path—charting this new path requires a long term commitment to

action. This field guide is intended as a navigational tool to take you through a step-by-step

process to think critically about racial inequities, to talk constructively about how to change what

perpetuates these racial patterns, and to act courageously in ways that promote racial and

economic justice. In other words, this guide offers a new way of thinking, talking, and acting

around racial and economic injustice.


11

Section III. Values and Assumptions

Identifying Values and Assumptions is key

Identifying the assumptions and values that undergird the decision-making institutions in our

society is imperative. We need to create a world in which people and institutions think, talk, and

act in a new way, oriented always toward equity and the common good. Therefore we must

always be engaging in a conversation about values and assumptions because it is through

transforming dominant values that people of faith will be able to transform society.

Values and Assumptions are often hidden

These values and assumptions are often so ingrained that we may not be aware of them, or blindly

accept them as ―truth.‖ Yet these values underlie the outcomes we see—the policies and

processes are merely the means to the end. This is why only changing any given policy or

process, without fundamentally reassessing the values and assumptions that underlie it, will only

meet with partial success. This is why we need to unmask the path to crisis in order to achieve

racial and economic equity.

ISAIAH’s Values and Assumptions

In ISAIAH, we are people of faith. We speak from a perspective grounded in faith values. In the

tradition of the prophets in the Christian faith and those from various religious and cultural

backgrounds who have shared a vision of a new world, we want to act powerfully together as a

prophetic voice in the public arena.

We currently live in a world of racial and economic injustice

The real abundance of the world is only shared by a few. This injustice is upheld by a myth of

scarcity. This myth of scarcity builds a world of fear. Because we are afraid we act in isolation,

as individuals. Our sense of community erodes and we become even more afraid and more

isolated. This perpetuates the myth of scarcity. The world becomes more unjust.

We envision a world of racial and economic justice

A world where the abundance of this world is shared by all people, by all creation. We believe

that this shared abundance is possible when we are acting as community rather than as isolated

individuals. This vision and our faith call us to act out of hope instead of fear.

Dominant Worldview: The world as it is

ISAIAH’s Worldview: The world as it should be

Injustice Justice

Scarcity Abundance

Isolation Community

Fear Hope

Consumer Co-creator


12

Some questions to think about:

Where do you see the dominant worldview (fear, isolation, scarcity, consumerism) in

your life? In your community?

What is most compelling for you in the assumptions and values we are putting forward as

people of faith? What is most challenging?

Unpacking the values that can constrain or enhance opportunity for all

The values we hold are often in conflict with the dominant values asserted by the institutions that

shape and govern our society. These dominant values translate into assumptions that are often

unspoken but determine decision-making processes and policies. In order to unmask the path to

crisis, then, ISAIAH determined that there was a need to name the values and assumptions that

are held by our decision-making institutions and unpack what they mean. Below are some of the

values and assumptions of the dominant worldview and some of those held by ISAIAH.

Dominant Assumptions and Values ISAIAH Assumptions and Values

The value of people lies in how much and what type of work they do, and how much and what they consume. Because the value of people is tied to their productivity and consumption, the role of the government and its institutions is to protect the individual right to consume and accumulate as much as possible. Market forces will serve as the balance for any possible negative consequences to society.

As people of faith, we believe that all people are sacred, that all people are meant by God to have access to dignity and opportunity, that any oppression is a sin and should be rooted out systemically. We are called to act powerfully to eradicate that which undermines the fundamental sacredness of every human being.

Human beings are fundamentally individuals who, in isolation from one another, are in competition with one another for scarce resources. Inequities are the result of individuals who have made the wrong decisions. There is no need for an analysis of access to opportunity.

We believe that the fates of all people are interconnected. We are one body; what negatively affects one part of the body negatively affects the whole body. If people of color and people living in poverty are not afforded the opportunities they need, then our community as a whole is broken and unhealthy.

Racial and economic inequities are inevitable. They are part of the natural order of things

We believe that God created a world of abundance that can provide for everyone. Racial and economic inequities are not natural or inevitable; they are built by human beings and can therefore be dismantled when we work together.

Unmasking the values underlying decisions is crucial

We know from our organizing experiences that we need to fundamentally realign the

relationships between communities and institutions. The way things are currently arranged is not

working for most of us. To achieve change, we need to focus on the values and assumptions that

are at the core of our policy- and decision-making processes. To this end, in the next few sections

we include questions that aim to unmask the assumptions and values that underlie decisions and

decision-making institutions. These questions about assumptions are crucial.


13

Section IV. Asking the Right Questions

We need to be grounded in our values and start with a set of questions that citizens, organizations

and elected officials can use to understand why we can still get unacceptable outcomes, even with

good intentions. In order to use our three guiding principles grounded in the values of hope,

community, and abundance to make change, we have to know what we are doing now—what is

working, what is not working. In order to create new solutions, we need to re-examine the kinds

of questions we ask, of whom we ask the questions, and how we understand the problems. These

questions are critical for understanding how opportunity is distributed throughout our state. The

underlying dynamics of power and opportunity are played out through our policies, processes,

and assumptions.

Defining Policies, Processes, and Assumptions

Policies are the decisions made about how our communities will be built and governed.

Processes are the ways in which those decisions are made. And assumptions are the underlying

values that shape every process and determine every policy. Often, assumptions are hidden.

Critically assessing our policies and processes can help reveal these assumptions. When we

challenge assumptions guiding institutions, we reveal new ways of thinking, and new ways of

doing things.

Asking the right questions is a path to action for change

We also need to be proactive and ask the questions about what to do to move forward and make

positive change – what do we need to do together to build the lives and neighborhoods we want

for our children? The process we suggest for charting a new path is to look at a problem, ask new

questions, see the problem in a new light, and generate new solutions. This is a flexible

framework that can be adapted to any issue, and most importantly, this framework highlights the

interconnections among issues. On the following pages we have listed what we believe are the

central questions to begin with when trying to uncover the policies, processes, and assumptions

that form the path to crisis.


14

The central questions to unmask the path to crisis when looking at policies are:

What are the outcomes?

Who benefits?

Who is left out?

The central questions to unmask the processes shaping this path are:

Who is at the decision-making table, and who is not?

Who has the power at the table?

Who is being held accountable and to whom or what are they accountable?

The central questions to unmask the assumptions dictating the path to crisis are:

What values underlie the decision-making process?

What is assumed to be true about the world and the role of the institution in the world?

What standards of success are being applied at different decision points, and by whom?

To forge a new path to healthy communities, it is not enough to just unmask the policies,

processes, and dominant assumptions that propel us down a path of crisis. We have to co-create

new values that will then illuminate more equitable policies and processes, and in turn, provide

more equitable outcomes. We have to chart a new path.

The central questions to help design new policies are:

What outcomes do we want?

Who should be targeted to benefit?

The central questions to help develop new processes are:

How should the decision-making table be set, and who should set it?

Who should hold decision-makers accountable, and where should this accountability take

place?

And lastly, the central questions to define new assumptions are:

What are our values?

What would it look like if equity was the starting point for decision-making?


15

Application: Understanding the Path to Crisis and Co-Creating Healthy Communities

The following figures illustrate a general framework of this dynamic, and how our three

principles align.

General Application:

How are assumptions, policies and processes racialized?


16

What would the path look like with equity at the center of decision-making?


17

In order to get to the answers for the core questions outlined previously, these are some examples

of additional questions that can prompt the unmasking of the path to crisis and illuminate the path

to health.

Policies:

Unmasking the Path to Crisis Co-creating a New Path

Who benefits from this policy? Who could be benefitting?

How are the benefits distributed among groups? Among places?

How might the benefits be more equitably distributed?

What groups are burdened by this policy? Which places?

How might the burdens be more equitably distributed?

Does this initiative/policy maintain things the way they are now?

Should it? Or should it change things?


18

Does this policy provide people with equal rights and opportunities?

If not, what needs to change? If not, what needs to change?

What have the outcomes been? Were these the intended outcomes?

Are there unintended consequences from the policy? Is there a way to correct for unintended outcomes? Can we be better positioned to respond to change?

Are policies in different areas impacting the effectiveness of this policy?

Where could policies be coordinated?


19

Processes:

Unmasking Path to Crisis Co-creating a New Path

Who is making decisions? How is responsibility for decision-making shared? What mechanisms are in place to ensure the process considers the long-term interests of the state’s growing diverse populations?

How inclusive and empowering is the process, especially for those historically excluded? How connected are the decision-makers to the communities affected—how could responsibility be shared? What structures/mechanisms could ensure that experts and agency staff are “on tap” as resources versus “on-top” as deciders?

What is the implementation process? Is the implementation process shared, understood? Is it reflective of stakeholder needs and values?

What were the criteria used to make the decision? Are these the right criteria? Could there be others?

How are outcomes tracked and reported? Are there ways to improve data collection and transparency? Who is deciding this? Are these outcomes publicly available? Easy to access?


20

Assumptions:


How is opportunity defined? For whom? How might it be defined to include everyone?

What is a healthy community? For whom? How might a healthy community be defined?

Is equity a concern in public policy? How could we better address equity? Are access to opportunity, restorative investment, and growing together main concerns? If not, why not?

What is a successful outcome? For whom? What could we be measuring?

What is government’s role? Who decides? What is an effective, participative, and equitable public process?

What are the roles/responsibilities of the institution/organization/office? What are not?

What should the roles/responsibilities include?


21

Section V. The Framework in Action: MNDOT Jobs Equity Example

In this section we will model a detailed example of how this process of ―unmasking the old path‖

and ―forging a new path‖ was applied to transportation investment and jobs in Minnesota by

looking at the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT).

ISAIAH’s campaign for equity in jobs at MNDOT

Since 2005, ISAIAH has been bringing community members and people of faith to a campaign

for jobs equity at the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT). Some very simple

information started our work: people of color have high unemployment rates in Minnesota,

MNDOT spends around a half-billion dollars per year building and maintaining Minnesota roads

and bridges, and federal law permits .5% of federal highway dollars to be spent on job training

for the construction trades. ISAIAH‘s initial request to MNDOT was to create a stakeholder

process for utilizing the .5% job training funds. What has unfolded over the last five years has

been a revealing of core questions and principles that highlight whether or not everybody has the

opportunity to contribute their work, skills and training to the ongoing public investment of our

transportation system, and to receive the benefit of these investments.

Moving from a transactional relationship to a transformational relationship

What started as a policy transaction on spending some federal highway dollars now holds the

potential for transformation of how MNDOT prioritizes racial equity in their organizational

mission. ISAIAH learned that we could unmask the path to crisis and create a path to healthy

communities by asking new questions. In this process, we engaged stakeholders from all over the

transportation construction business, Department of Transportation, unions, contractors, training

providers, Disadvantaged Business Enterprises, and workforce advocates.

Unmasking the path to crisis at MNDOT

To reveal the path to crisis, we asked who works on MNDOT construction projects, how did they

get there, what is their role, who is benefitting from these training investments, and who is

missing out? What are the underlying policies, processes, and assumptions that have dictated

who wins the contract to build MNDOT construction projects? Does everybody have the

opportunity to contribute their work, skills, and training to the public investment, and to receive

the benefit of that investment? What do policies and processes at MNDOT reveal about their

assumptions, and how they define success? And then we asked how we could change this so that

groups and places historically left out of jobs growth are included in the process, and a new path

is forged.

Categories are a helpful tool, not a rigid framework

The example uses one of ISAIAH‘s experiences to help outline questions about policies,

processes, and assumptions that both acknowledge the old path of crisis and begin to forge a new

path. This example makes clear that these questions are not mutually exclusive. Rather, the

―categorization‖ (i.e. a ―policy‖ question, a ―process‖ question, an ―assumptions‖ question) is

simply a helpful way to begin critically thinking about the design and outcomes of our systems

and structures. For example, questions posed to unmask the processes behind the path to crisis

may also reveal things about our policies and assumptions.

The following figures graphically represent some questions we learned to ask that prompted the

uncovering of the path to crisis and promote the three principles of the path to health. We came to

these questions over time, and now can share them as good practice. This is just an example of


22

some questions we asked at a point in time, but this process is iterative—it takes many rounds of

questioning and reflection to come to this point. And this is not the ending point--the answers to

these questions might require another round of questioning, and so on. The process evolves as our

understanding of the dynamics of power in any given issue is deepened.


23


24

The three principles on the path to health are targeting investment, growing together, and opening

access to opportunity. Examples of questions that might be useful in exploring transportation

issues for each principle follow.

Policies

Targeting investment: Public investment in transportation is important, but transportation

systems cannot be created in isolation from the communities they will serve. We have to create

them intentionally—addressing the specific needs of different communities—for them to work in

ways that benefit all residents. Not all public investments in transportation work the way we

intend them to— some have unintended consequences (e.g. environmental impacts), others have

disproportionately favored some businesses (e.g. trucking industry, car makers), or types of

investment (i.e. highway investment over public transportation). But there is another side too--

inaction is itself a choice, for instance, choosing to not take affirmative steps towards increasing

workforce participation of women and people of color, even though MNDOT officials may be

aware of a gender and race imbalance. What policies in the past have had these unintended

consequences, and how can we begin to correct those?


What percent of total MNDOT investment goes to contractors? What are the gender and race breakdowns of the businesses that receive contracts and subcontracts?

How might the benefits of contracting be more equitably distributed? Could MNDOT collaborate with other agencies to increase minority and small business representation?

Are the minority and disadvantaged business contracting goals met? Meaningful? Who are we benchmarking against?

What should the minority hiring goals be? Could our goals be redefined? Enforced better? Who should we be benchmarking ourselves to?


25

What, if any, information does MNDOT require before and during the contracting on workforce participation (i.e. people of color and women)? Who does MNDOT report this to?

How should workforce participation be valued and accounted for?

When MNDOT is deciding which projects to do, what criteria are used to rate them (e.g. placement in Transportation Improvement Plan, availability of funds)? How is project success defined?

What criteria should be included? Is equity and improved opportunity a part of the definition of project success?

Processes

Growing together: We are growing more diverse as a state. A healthy Minnesota has all

residents working in communion towards a shared vision for our future. This requires that we

consider the availability of stable, living wage jobs across the state, such as MNDOT construction

jobs. When we are growing together, the MNDOT workforce and contracting should reflect

participation levels that represent the changing demographics of the state.


What are the long- term opportunities for people of color and women in the workforce-- are they able to make careers at MNDOT? For example, do apprentices become journeymen/women?

Who is mentoring people into careers? How can stakeholders work together to expand the career ladder for these groups, and match work capacity with workers?

How are outcomes tracked and reported? Who is deciding this? Are these outcomes publicly available? Are they easy to access? What is the frequency of reporting?

Are there ways to improve data collection and transparency? How would we use more timely data collection to improve outcomes?


26

Assumptions

Opening Access to Opportunity: We value equal opportunity, and we want people of color and

women to have the ability to access MNDOT construction jobs and turn them into careers. Often,

however, women and people of color face barriers to entry and sometimes a hostile work

environment. Opening access to these employment opportunities represents not only a pathway

to stable employment for these groups, but an investment in the future of our state.


How does MNDOT view its mission, roles, and responsibilities? What is the primary motivation of MNDOT? What is the standard of "success"?

How should the mission be defined—is jobs equity explicitly stated in the mission, and should it be? What should their standard of success be, and how does equity fit in?

What is the retention rate for different groups? Why do people of color stay on the job, and why do they leave? How long do they typically stay? What does MNDOT do to create construction site work structures that support retention of all workers?

What other agencies/groups could we be working with (i.e. contractors, training programs, and community organizations) to support retention? Can we develop a retention rate goal? How can we use different groups’ input to create work structures that support these groups?

What is “the job”? What are the different labor categories involved in MNDOT projects (electricians, heavy equipment, etc) and what are the points of entry for new people in these jobs? Are the job requirements appropriate? Do they disproportionately impact/exclude certain groups?

What supportive services can be used to increase opportunity for new people in these jobs?

How is compliance defined—as just meeting the minimum standard? Is MNDOT actually in compliance with its targets?

Are the targets meaningful? How can communities hold MNDOT accountable, and ensure compliance that does not just meet the minimum standard? How can we create a culture at MNDOT that values (and rewards) exceeding its own compliance targets?


27

Status of ISAIAH’s MNDOT Campaign

In 2010, after asking these questions for five years and holding stakeholders accountable to the

answers, we can actually point to ways that the outcomes have started to change. In May 2010,

MNDOT committed to the 0.5% funding set-aside, which means $6.2 million for training,

retention, and support services, to increase the participation of people of color and women in the

construction workforce on MNDOT highway projects in 2010-2014. Many of the questions about

measuring and monitoring the participation levels are serving as a foundation for new policies

around transparency and accountability of contractors. The stakeholder group that started in 2009

now exists in Minnesota State statute, has a professional facilitator, and produced a commitment

by MNDOT Commissioner Thomas Sorel to implement the recommendations developed by this

collaborative group.

ISAIAH’s mutually transformative relationship with MNDOT

This has happened not because we knew all the questions or all the answers at the start, but

because the stakeholders were engaged in asking the questions and held accountable for the

consequences of the answers. This process transformed how MNDOT stakeholders thought

about, talked about, and acted upon equitable workforce participation in Minnesota transportation

projects. The ISAIAH/MNDOT relationship also helped to transform the way ISAIAH leaders

and organizers think about how to work for change and do the work of co-creating racially just

communities.

This is a framework that can be replicated in other areas of racial and economic injustice. In

creating a transformative relationship with MNDOT, we now have a responsibility to continue

that relationship and hold MNDOT accountable to whether or not the policy change achieves the

desired outcomes. We can change our path.


28

Worksheet B: Topic Area of Interest

Instructions: Choose an area of interest (i.e. housing, education, etc.) and fill in the blank

―Unmasking the Path to Crisis‖ column with as many questions as you can think of that will help

unmask the policies, processes, and assumptions for that issue area. The baseline questions and

general columns are provided to help shape your questions, but please be specific to your issue

area. Follow the same procedure for the ―Co-creating a New Path‖ column. Feel free to use a

separate sheet of paper if more space is needed.


29

Policies

The critical questions to unmask the policies shaping the path to crisis include: what are the

outcomes; who benefits, and who is left out?

Unmasking Path to Crisis Co-Creating a New Path

Who benefits from this policy? Who could be benefiting?

How are the benefits distributed among groups? Among places?

How might the benefits be more equitably distributed?

Who is burdened by this policy? Which places? How might the burdens be more equitably distributed?

Does this initiative/policy maintain things the way they are now?

Should it? Or should it change things?

Does this policy provide people with equal rights and opportunities?

If not, what needs to change?

What have the outcomes been? Were these the important outcomes for measuring success?

Were there unintended consequences from the policy (or from the process)?

Is there a way to correct for unintended outcomes?

Are policies in different areas impacting the effectiveness of this policy?

Where could policies be coordinated?


30

Issue Area:

Policies



31

Processes

The critical questions to unmask the processes shaping this path include: who is at the decision-

making table, and who is not; who is being held accountable and to whom or what are they

accountable; and who has the power?


Who is making decisions? How is responsibility for decision-making shared? What mechanisms are in place to ensure the process considers the long-term interests of the state’s growing diverse populations?

How inclusive and empowering is the process, especially for those historically excluded? How connected are the decision-makers to the communities affected—how could responsibility be shared? What structures/mechanisms could ensure that experts and agency staff are “on tap” as resources versus “on-top” as deciders?

What were the criteria used to make the decision? Are these the right criteria? Could there be others?

How are outcomes tracked and reported? Are there ways to improve data collection and transparency? Who is deciding this? Are these outcomes publicly available? Easy to access?

Did the process produce unintended consequences, and how can this be changed?

Can we be better positioned to respond to change?


32

Issue Area:

Processes



33

Assumptions

The critical questions to unmask the assumptions dictating the path to crisis include: what values

underlie the decision-making process; what is assumed to be true; and what would it look like if

equity was the starting point for decision-making?


How is opportunity defined? For whom? How might it be defined to include everyone?

What is a healthy community? For whom? How might a healthy community be defined?

Is equity a concern in public policy? How could we better address equity?

What is a successful outcome? For whom? What could we be measuring?

What is government’s role? Who decides? What is an effective, participative, and equitable public process?


34

Issue Area:

Assumptions


Gamaliel FoundationGrassroots Policy ProjectOrganizing Apprenticeship Project

We would like to recognize the following organizations whose work has been foundational in shaping the work we do and our understanding of organizing:

Shining the Light: A Practical Guide to Co-Creating ...kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/reports/2010/05_2010_ShiningtheLightOrganizingGuide.pdfShining the Light: A Practical Guide to Co-Creating

Documents