Reflection from March 6th - Research Presentations and Lee Higgins
I had a conversation with Lee Higgins In the buffet line (and later at his table) about the nature of his upcoming research with/for Ethno. I am using this reflection to process some of the ideas and questions he asked me to send him in an email — I’d love to hear your thoughts Deanna[DY1] !
I am very interested in the effect an influx of cash might have on what Lee described as a grass-roots organization of interconnected groups serving a particular philosophy of participatory music making/sharing. Even if the money comes without strings attached — as he described it — it may have a profound effect on Ethno, and may even change the nature of the organization as he is studying it[DY2] . For example, Lee told the class that Ethno did not have a centralized database, and implied that this would be/would need to be rectified. However, it is my experience in working within a grass-grass-roots organization that the collection and coalition of data is not always desired or considered positive. The lack of a centralized database may even be intentional. The activity of data collection on marginalized or fluid groups of people (I would include youth in this definition) can change the nature of their relationship with a program, service, or person — overlaying a grid of administration that may narrow or flatten the defining characteristics of said person or group and their ability to relate or access[DY3] .
Two examples from the history of The Working Centre:
St. John’s Kitchen at The Working Centre refused to collect data on people dropping in for a free meal, rest, or meet-up. This data collection was a necessary component for ongoing operational funding. By refusing to add this administrative layer to the sharing of food and space at St. John’s Kitchen, The Working Centre was responding to a group of outsiders that appreciated the real relationships — not the anonymity — that St. John’s Kitchen inspired. The consequences of this refusal are a vibrant and unusual space in downtown Kitchener that is a safe haven for the most marginalized in our community…and a continued lack of operational funding from any governmental body[DY4] . St. John’s Kitchen operates with its spirit intact on the strength of significant community donations. Other projects co-located at and directly inspired by St. John’s Kitchen HAVE received operational funding and contribute to the bottom line. These project include: a community medical and dental clinic, a used furniture and housewares store, a pre and post-palliative care home for street involved people, and two emergency-use small houses[DY5] .
When Joe and Stephanie Mancini founded The Working Centre, they did not receive enough funding to cover even one of their (already meagre) salaries. When they finally landed a significant contract, it was a two year deal with significant (for TWC) monies attached. Instead of increasing their own pay (which is common practice amongst precarious not-for-profit groups), Joe and Stephanie continued to draw a small salary and rolled the excess into the purchase of a building. This building gave them organizational stability into the future, at the cost of short term assurances in their on personal finances. This action was aligned with the growing principles of the organization, and cemented the values of TWC in practical activity: that people should take less so that others may have more, and that the supports of The Working Centre were being held by TWC in community trust for the people making use of them — it was a matter of community ethics to build a solid future for The Working Centre[DY6] .
I suggested to Lee that the postdoctoral associate attached to the project (in his mind map) may be a good candidate to follow this narrative (or meta-narrative) for Ethno: what are the systemic effects of significant funding on Ethno — it’s philosophy, core values, accessibility, and spirit? A cash injection is —of course — not necessarily a bad thing for a grass-roots organization (as noted in example 2. above) if it strengthens foundational vision and practice. It would be, I think, a mistake for Ethno to consider increased funding as a reward for long suffering commitment to their vision. It is not unusual for organizations to abandon their grass-roots values in favour of robust administration when presented with significant new income — the private sector models this practice, and most modern not-for-profits are modelled on the private sector (an unfortunate hangover from the 1980s). But money changes things[DY7] . It changes people and how we relate to one another and our communities. It inherently arrives with structures attached that may seem benign, but can weigh on the people we serve if we aren’t careful: breaking spirit and rupturing relationship. Any significant damage to spirit and relationship in favour of process signals the beginning of the end for even the most well-meaning organization.
[DY1]Great idea
[DY2]This totally occurred to me—that the research project itself will define or structure the organization.
[DY3]I think these are important considerations but I also think Lee knew very little about the organization and process. Does the org really serve marginalized people? Is there no info collected? That being said, I’m really enjoying your line of thinking here—I’d say that few places are like the Working Centre in the intentionality of structures as you are describing here.
[DY4]Very stark choice to make. Strong values help clarify the right choices it seems
[DY5]Some ingenious ways of creating sustainability without compromising the fundamental values. Also how those values are context-specific (eg the kitchen must not collect data but is more ok in the clinic)
[DY6]Interesting. This also reminds me how the leadership really informs the culture of the space. Even if Joe and Stephanie aren’t leaders (ie collaborative/collective model) they’ve set that ethos by all of these choices.
[DY7]Actually it seems like the first thing to find out is what are the values of Ethno—not just the stated values on a web site, but the ethics/values of the organization, the people—how do camps work individually and with each other—is there a centralized office and how does it communicate? All of these basic questions informs the foundational vision and practice as the money comes in—and perhaps helps to identify what might change.
