Global Ideas: Lessons on Community Power

Building Community Power: Global Insights for the U.S.

From 2020 to 2024, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s Global Ideas for U.S. Solutions team focused on three key themes: sustainable and equitable urban development, gender equity, and community power. This work generated a wealth of insights, partnerships, and practical experiences for policymakers, practitioners, advocates, and community members in the U.S. and beyond, proving that good ideas have no borders. Through a series of grants, we sought to understand the role of community power in fostering healthy, equitable societies. We explored how practices from around the globe can inform U.S. strategies. This focus was driven by the belief that community power is essential for advancing racial and health equity.

Our Learnings

Through our grants, we aimed to answer key questions about community engagement and community power. Here’s some of what we learned: 

• What strategies work best to involve leaders from communities affected by trauma, limited resources, or systemic racism? Effective strategies to involve community leaders include the "accompaniment model" by Partners in Health, which trains community members as health workers, building power and engaging residents in their care. The Henry Ford Health System in Detroit drew inspiration from TIP Global Health’s (formerly the Ihangane Project in Rwanda) unique Hope Framework, which promotes health systems that foster a hopeful mindset among healthcare providers and the women they serve. Using the Hope Framework, community members and healthcare providers co-design solutions through workshops and focus groups, ensuring interventions are culturally relevant and accessible. This focus drives care quality, patient engagement, and lasting improvements in maternal and child health outcomes. Global team grantee Apolitical uncovered digital tools for collaboration, such as the Decidim platform from Spain, which enables online deliberation, Minecraft workshops used by two Kenyan towns to help community members co-design redevelopment areas, and the vTaiwan platform, which gathers public input through hackathons and voting tools. 
• How can we measure the effectiveness of community engagement and which metrics are most meaningful to different actors? Measuring the effectiveness of community engagement can be done using resources from initiatives such as the Training and Research Support Centre’s (TARSC) Shaping Health initiative. TARSC documented approaches to community power, participation, and decisionmaking, drawing on international case studies from Australia, Canada, Ecuador, India, Zambia, Vanuatu, Brazil, Chile, Kenya, New Zealand, Scotland, and Slovenia. The research showed that incorporating lived experiences in evaluations of social participation is essential. By using participatory methods, evaluations become more inclusive, accessible, and reflective of local realities while supporting ongoing learning and planning. Additionally, combining quantitative and qualitative methods gives you a more comprehensive view–quantitative measures provide a broad perspective of what is happening, and qualitative methods explain how and why. Finally, the research showed that effective evaluations rely on collaboration and dialogue among funders, implementers, and communities and address power dynamics (more information is available on the Shaping Health website along with an Implementers Guide, in English and Spanish, which helps participants measure the success of local health system efforts to integrate social participation and power). 
• What policies and practical supports are essential for building long-lasting community engagement systems at local and state levels? Important policies and practical support for building long-lasting community engagement systems include collaborative and participatory governance models. For instance, Santiago, Chile, developed a manual on adolescent sexuality (available in Spanish) through a committee of teens. Global team scans also documented Poland's Citizens' Assemblies and Paris' Permanent Citizens' Assembly, which ensure equal representation and participation in public policies, England's "Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007," which requires local authorities to involve the community in decisionmaking and service provision, and Cali, Colombia, which created Roundtables for Civic Peace, where social workers, psychologists, and sociologists collaborate with public servants and residents on neighborhood projects.
• What can U.S. organizations learn from successful global examples of community engagement, especially in post-disaster recovery contexts? U.S. organizations can learn from global examples of community engagement in post-disaster recovery by studying programs like MEDICC's Community Partnerships for Health Equity, which connects U.S. communities with Cuba's public health and health equity experiences. The Healthier Democracies project by Public Agenda highlights 15 case studies of community engagement efforts globally and associated lessons learned to support more collaborative relationships between governments and communities. Aspen's Communities First Global Collaborative shares proven practices from community leaders worldwide, while Root Change's Community Power learning initiative identifies and strengthens U.S.-based community groups through learning exchange partnerships. Faith in Action promotes learning from Haiti, El Salvador, and Rwanda through leadership exchanges and strategic communications.
• How do trust and legitimacy in institutions affect efforts to build community power, and how does increased community power influence trust? Institutions must earn trust and legitimacy from communities to set the stage for effective and lasting collaboration. When governments face difficulties meeting community expectations, it erodes their support and strains community relationships. The U.S. is experiencing historic distrust in governing institutions, with only 20 percent of Americans trusting the federal government in 2024 compared to three-quarters in 1958. Increased community power allows communities to demand that institutions are responsive and accountable to community needs, improving individual and community wellbeing, democratic participation, and community cohesion. Aspen’s Communities First Global Collaborative insight report shares proven practices from community leaders in the U.S. and across the globe in tackling misinformation and distrust in government.
• What gaps faced by U.S. community leaders could benefit from lessons learned in other countries? U.S. community leaders can benefit from examples of collaborative governance and community-led initiatives from other countries. For instance, Berlin's Citizens' Juries ensure equal representation for women, youth, and foreigners in urban project oversight. Dublin's Building Community Resilience initiative strengthens community ties and addresses structural issues driving crime. South Australia conducted Zoom interviews with community leaders to understand needs during the pandemic.

Key Takeaways

U.S. practitioners can learn valuable lessons from other countries' examples of community engagement. Adapting these practices can help U.S. leaders address local challenges and build community resilience.

• Sustained Community Engagement: Community-led engagement processes are more sustainable than those initiated by decisionmakers. If governments initiate community engagement processes, they should collaborate closely with community leaders, using trusted messengers to reach residents, genuinely listen to their perspectives, and respond to their priorities. Accessible digital tools can also be a significant asset in promoting transparency and broadening the reach of civic engagement efforts.
• Innovative Approaches: Emerging models emphasize participatory and collaborative governance, aiming to shift power dynamics in decisionmaking. Two related but distinct approaches are participatory governance and collaborative governance. Participatory governance seeks to increase resident involvement in policymaking, whereas collaborative governance aims to shift and share decisionmaking power. Effective strategies include offering various forms of engagement, proactively involving underrepresented groups, having dedicated staff, proving yourself trustworthy, and consistently applying collaborative tools. 
• Ongoing Evaluation: Continuous evaluation is crucial as more states and localities implement community engagement efforts. It ensures that the objectives of these initiatives are clear, adequately implemented, and respond to community priorities. Evaluation also keeps governments accountable and helps improve future engagement practices by learning what works, what can be enhanced, and what works for specific marginalized groups.

Collectively, our grants in this focus area helped us understand the importance of prioritizing community power to address underlying power dynamics in decisionmaking.