Chapter Eleven: Safety Concerns - Myth vs. Reality
Chapter Thirteen: Community Action and Involvement"In the year I've been here...meeting with service providers regularly, maybe two have come down here. They don't come down here and see what's going on. It's 'You tell me [what's going on], and I'll analyze it.'"
-Service provider
In the introduction to Community Organizing & Community Building for Health, Meredith Minkler (1997) wrote, "The professional's role is one of helping to create the conditions in which community groups, rather than outside experts, can determine and set the...agenda and then act effectively to help transform their lives and the life of their community." While interacting with the people living in Trinity Court and Pritchard Park and the people working for the residents, our community diagnosis team began to notice discrepancies in the perceived needs of the communities. The perspective of both service providers and residents regarding the needs of Trinity Court and Pritchard Park will be discussed in this chapter.
Unfortunately, what service providers view as the greatest concerns of residents is incongruent with what residents view as their greatest concerns. According to residents and service providers, service providers of Trinity Court and Pritchard Park have not taken the approach Minkler states in her text. Instead, they take a very traditional approach and assign what they think are the appropriate and necessary solutions and programs to the residents in these two housing developments.
Provider Perspective. During interviews, service providers most often cited safety and the drug abuse problem as the most pressing issues to address in the Trinity Court and Pritchard Park communities. Keeping non-residents out of the communities is seen as important and necessary for the residents' safety. However, the vast majority of residents do not see the need for restrictions on non-residents in the same way. A typical resident's response to keeping non-resident visitors out was, "There's nothing wrong with outsiders coming in, as long as they don't cause no problems." In Chapter Eleven: Safety Concerns - Myth vs. Reality, the disparities between residents and service providers regarding the presence of police and the Trespass Law are discussed further. Another service provider concerned with safety said, "I think enforcement is something that the community needs, whether or not the community always realizes it." Yet, all of the residents interviewed feel their neighborhood is a safe place to live and raise children.
One service provider who felt drug abuse was the most urgent problem in the communities stated, "The first most important thing would be substance abuse. If I could magically change all of those addicts into non-addicts that would make the hugest impact." Another service provider supported this position saying, "I would say the largest problem would be illegal substances. Crack cocaine, I think, is the biggest problem in terms of substances."
The same provider said, "I think the second problem would be unwanted pregnancy. I think if all the children in Trinity Court and Pritchard Park were planned and wanted...there would be far fewer births, that's for sure." Not a single resident mentioned unwanted pregnancy as a problem in Trinity Court or Pritchard Park. There may be some residents who do agree that unplanned births should be prevented. However, when prioritizing the issues which most affect the communities, crime, drug abuse, outsiders, and unwanted pregnancy are not on most residents' agendas.
Resident Perspective. When interviewed, residents were far more concerned about having a say in decisions about rules and regulations imposed on them and improvements to their homes, than those problems identified by service providers. For example, a resident explained, "There have been problems with the Trespass Law partly because [the police] don't know the residents well, but they don't have a right to harass people." Another community member said, "People who pay rent for their homes should have some control." In regard to the Trespass Law, the same resident said, "[Residents] can look out for each other. We should be able to rely on each other before going to the cops."
Other top concerns for community members involve basic, yet very important, changes in living conditions. Providing safe play areas for children and child-proofing the dangerous areas of the apartment units were significant concerns for some residents. These issues are discussed in depth in Chapter Ten: Children - Providing a Strong Foundation. One resident also voiced concern for the needs of disabled residents like herself. "My doctor recommended I try to move [from my apartment on the second floor] to an apartment on the ground floor," she said. "I'm on a waiting list, but I don't know how long it'll take [to be re-assigned]." Other home improvement suggestions which would improve the safety and comfort of Trinity Court and Pritchard Park apartments include, installing air conditioning units, over-head lights in the living rooms, and doorbells. Community members are concerned about having these basic essentials addressed to improve the well being of all residents. Other concerns, such as those cited by service providers, may rise in importance after these changes have been addressed.
Service providers and residents cited different issues when asked what the greatest needs of their communities were. A great deal of frustration was evident on both the part of community members and providers. Several service providers were exasperated because residents did not seem to take advantage of the wealth of services made available to them. Meanwhile, residents complained that their needs and requests went unmet. Clearly, where there should be an understanding between the two groups, a break down in communication has occurred.
Luke Warm Reception. By their nature, most of the services and programs offered to Trinity Court and Pritchard Park residents are not mandatory for community members. This means that strong participation rates are no guarantee. "We had a Food and Nutrition Group, a women's group. [They] started off strong and dwindled off. We had a Health Walk, which started off strong and dwindled off," reported a service provider. Citing the Family Resource Center as an example, another service provider said, "With FRCs, if people in the community aren't cooperative, there's nothing you can do about it. It's totally voluntary." When the efforts and services of providers go unused by the residents whom they feel need them the most, providers are often left discouraged. "After a while [I felt] my efforts were wasted," admitted one service provider. Another provider said, "I felt like people in the community didn't dislike me, but I wouldn't say that I felt supported. People either thought I was okay and thought I was trying to do something, or ignored me. One or the other. I never felt hostility." The issue of community participation is discussed at length in Chapter Thirteen: Community Action and Involvement.
Categorical Funding. In some cases, service providers feel compelled to offer services simply because a source of funds exist for a specific issue. "In [my department] currently, money is tied to certain [service areas]," a provider explained. "In order to use those funds practically, we have to meet criteria the funding is designated for." Sometimes, these highly specific services paid for by categorical funds are implemented regardless of whether the community feels the service is needed or appropriate. This issue was discussed in regard to Smart Start funds in Chapter Ten: Children - Providing a Strong Foundation. The dilemma for service providers lies in deciding whether to pass up funding for services that may not be entirely necessary.
As we discussed earlier in this chapter, sometimes what residents see as their needs and priorities differs from what service providers perceive as the needs and priorities of the communities. Many service providers stated during interviews that some residents did not realize what they needed most to improve their circumstances. These providers consider it their job to deliver what they think is best for community members. Unfortunately, in many cases it is not feasible for service providers to concentrate their attention solely on Trinity Court and Pritchard Park because these residents are just a small portion of a larger community they serve. Yet, taking the effort to understand and build trust in the Trinity Court and Pritchard Park communities is still necessary.
Increasing Understanding. A well informed assessment of community needs is essential to the success of services and to the relationship between providers and recipients. "[Service providers] really don't know what's going on," a service provider said. "They can tell you exactly what they tell us [residents]. Trinity needs this, and Trinity needs that but they don't know what Trinity wants." In fact, one service provider confided that measuring the needs of public housing community members is often difficult and imprecise. "It's kind of like the shotgun approach," she said, "where you've got the problem and you're shooting and you bullet all around it. But it's not one particular solution." Simply communicating with community members to hear their perspective may help.
The problem stemming from the lack of understanding is exacerbated by the fact that often service providers must justify their services with hard data and statistics to receive funding. In many cases, this information is unavailable for communities small in size, like Trinity Court and Pritchard Park. "There's no hard data to back this up," a provider said. "We're kind of in a catch-22 position because there are significant [indicators] that are only on the state level. There are a few that trickle down to the county level, but there ain't nothing at the local level or the community level." The same provider said, "We're not real sure where the first line of [usage] is. We're a provider. Now whether we are the very first provider or not, we don't know."
Knowing the Community. Both service providers and residents agree that providers who know what life is like in Trinity Court and Pritchard Park are better able to serve the communities. With the exception of three or four individuals, most providers who issue services to Trinity Court and Pritchard Park neglect to interact with residents on a regular basis. "Very rarely do I interact with community members," a service provider acknowledged. "I have more interaction with the providers who have interaction with the residents." A service provider estimated that in the year since she began meeting with service providers regularly, "maybe two have come down here [to Trinity Court and Pritchard Park]. They don't come down here and see what's going on. It's 'You tell me [what's going on], and I'll analyze it.'"
Trust. Building trust among individuals who often feel misunderstood and mistreated by society can be quite difficult. Without trust, little can be accomplished for the intended recipients of a provider's services. "When you're working with a community that is not really accustomed to trusting outside agencies," a service provider said, "there's no real way to get your foot in the door unless someone invites you in, which doesn't happen all that often." It isn't difficult to see why residents of public housing, who are often made to feel like the least deserving people in society, distrust the very people who are working to aid them. A service provider explained, "Chapel Hill Housing tends to put every single teenage mother who reaches age eighteen in Trinity Court. I guess Trinity Court is sort of a turn around to see if they're going to last or if they're going to be out soon; if they're going to follow the rules or totally disregard the rules."
Also, because the majority of providers are Caucasian delivering services to communities of primarily African-Americans, there are issues of cultural sensitivity to overcome before trust can be established. In addition to time, providers will need to prove they have the communities' intentions in mind to overcome the stigma of a patrilineal relationship. Increasing the knowledge about, and familiarity with, the communities will foster the trust needed to overcome these assumptions. Clara Pennix, a former resident who became Interim Director of the Family Resource Center for a period of six months, held a unique place in the communities. She was able to bridge the division between community members and providers in Trinity Court and Pritchard Park. "Clara has always had a much better relationship with the residents. I don't feel as though I ever felt a trusting relationship with a majority of the community," one provider reported.
Respect and Privacy. Because of their proximity to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Trinity Court and Pritchard Park are uniquely positioned to receive a great deal of outside attention. At times, the attention is uninvited. During any given school year, between fifteen and twenty students from the Schools of Public Health, Social Work, Sociology, Anthropology, and the Campus Y may be assigned to study or volunteer to serve in Trinity Court and Pritchard Park without prior consent from the residents themselves. In some cases, the presence of students are welcomed. For instance a resident said, "The students who come here are fine. They help out with the kids during [the After School Program] a lot." However, when the students' attention turns to the parents, some residents are less than enthusiastic about their presence. One student assigned to the communities admitted, "If a bunch of people I didn't know came into my neighborhood, I wouldn't want to talk to them either." Non-residents must remember that Trinity Court and Pritchard Park are not simply there for their use. These two communities are homes to people who deserve privacy.
Regardless of the outcome of their efforts, service providers have the best intentions for community members in mind. Beginning to make positive changes by addressing the issues which residents consider most urgent will facilitate the relationship and strengthen the community in the long run. Community capacity and empowerment will be discussed in Chapter Thirteen: Community Action and Involvement. Ideally, service providers would have the time and money to conduct thorough needs assessments with input from residents, and ideally they would have the freedom to interact with community members frequently and regularly. Unfortunately, this approach is not always feasible, which makes open communication, involvement, respect, and trust between residents and service providers so important.
|
Chapter Eleven: Safety Concerns - Myth vs. Reality |
Back to TOC | Chapter Thirteen: Community Action and Involvement |