Community Engagement Strategy - Assignment Example

Community Engagement Strategies Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation Community Engagement Strategies Child safety Promotion Part 1 Introduction Communities need to be built using an inside out approach if sustainable change is to be achieved. The well-being of children will only be ensured if violence is reduced in their environment (Robinson & Green, 2011). Not only does this need to be the duty of numerous government agents and service providers, it should also be the obligation of community residents, as well. Child safety is an essential part of community development, especially since children are the future of a community (Houston et al., 2010). Nurturing a safe environment will create a cycle of security for the community, which will be beneficial in the long term. This community engagement strategy will involve teaching the community to respond to family violence by helping rather than ignoring it. Background Advocates for domestic violence and child welfare service providers have found that there has been a significant increase in domestic violence and child abuse. These two situations are together referred to as family violence, and they both have a profound effect on the welfare of children (MaCashen, 2004). Domestic violence and child abuse often occur in the same families. Previous programs for community engagement have been addressing these issues separately and very few have made attempts to address them together. Family violence continues to have devastating consequences on communities, families and individuals (Houston et al., 2010). Approximately one third of women in the United States have reported sexual or physical abuse in the hands of their boyfriend or husbands (Robinson & Green, 2011). There is an equally alarming situation of child abuse and maltreatment, which has produced about one million child victims. Eighty percent of the children who die because of neglect or abuse are under the age of five. A report by the US Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect found that domestic violence has a very strong link to neglect and abuse fatalities of children as a precursor (Robinson & Green, 2011). Context The most popular response to family violence has been founded within criminal justice systems and welfare systems. Strategies adopted from different points of view have resulted in different strategies that do not address the problem effectively. There is often tension between domestic violence workers and child protective services over the right processes to follow to ensure safety of children in communities (Deslandes, 2006). Child protective services have a mandate based on government obligations, and they focus their attention on preserving the family and safety of the child, while domestic violence workers focus on protecting women from being battered and helping them transition away from abusive relationships. The lack of collaboration meant that they rarely worked with the community to meet the goals of their programs. Hence, there is need to develop a strategy that addresses child safety from the perspective of family violence. The community needs to be engaged in different violence prevention strategies. Those who are most involved and affected by family violence are often left out of significant discussions about plausible solutions, especially since they have first hand information about the sources and effects of violence (Robinson & Green, 2011). Community members play a critical role in preventing violence in the family for various reasons, including that women and children who have been abused first turn to those closest to them such as neighbors, friends and extended family members. In addition, families experiencing violence are often incapable of seeking help from traditional service providers such as the government and other welfare services because they are isolated from others. Community members present the best possible option for helping with the problems of family violence because they have the best idea about the families that need to be helped and how they should be helped. Community members are aware of the social and cultural aspects of their society that promote violence, as well as the best ways to manipulate these cultures to intervene and stop violence. The community is constituted of men, women and youth, who understand the connection between violence in homes and that on the street, and are able to see the obvious barriers that it has to child safety and community revitalization and development (Deslandes, 2006). Leaders and residents in the community will also have the capacity and willingness to develop, as well as sustain skills needed to implement intervention strategies meant to prevent family violence and keep children safe. Community initiatives such as these are aimed at changing behaviors of those within the community often guided by theoretical perspectives. Theory In order to understand how communities will be engaged in bringing about change to help keep children safer, it is essential to understand this under the concept of security communities. This concept is meant to find a remedy for issues that deal with insecurity of a smaller state within the context of a larger international arena (Ulusoy, 2003). It is, thus, a concept related to collective cooperation for security. Community engagement strategies mean to improve child safety through reducing the rate of family violence. Community concepts have always undergone more celebrating than investigation, which leaves little room for imagination and creativity on different strategies that can be implemented for change and security enhancement (Ulusoy, 2003). This theory defines security community as a group that is integrated to the point where they possess real assurance that community members will both fight for each other, and settle disputes in a constructive way (Ulusoy, 2003). Through this, a stable community will be developed with stable peace and safety. Community based change initiatives require that those organizing it understand how and why people change their minds. Social psychologists have been making efforts to understand how change occurs in individuals and communities, in that security communities work towards providing a collective type of security for its members. Theories of social change define the process of change as one that involves the modification of a behavior or substitution of particular behavior with another (Inglehart, 2001). The perceived change is often considered as being beneficial to those who undertake it and the actors are, thus, motivated to change for this reason. Ensuring that there is better safety for children in the community is beneficial to the society, and this is a good motivator for the community engagement process. The change lens is one that individuals can use to predict and perceive processes involved in change. Social change specifically refers to a modification of the social order within the society. It often refers to a notion of social-cultural evolution or social progress, in that the society has to move forward by an evolutionary of dialectical means (Inglehart, 2001). Change is inevitable and the society will only progress if changes that are beneficial to the community are embraced. The change in this case refers to a paradigmatic change in the cultural structure that is concerned with family violence. Social change could include a change in social relations, social institutions, societal nature and social behaviors. Without the community embracing the change as a whole, the chances of a successful social change are slim. There are two major sources of social change. One category of the sources includes unique and often uncontrollable factors such as the presence of particular groups of people or climate. The other source, which is most relevant to community engagement strategies is systematic changes, which covers issues such as resources, stability and governmental systems. Backer (2001) suggests that behaviors and attitudes are likely to change if the individuals in question have a strong positive intent to change, make a commitment to perform better, do not encounter constraints, and have the necessary skills to actualize the change. These areas should be addressed in the community engagement strategy. Stakeholders Community stakeholders need to be involved in community engagement strategies in order to ensure that the project is sustained, hence raising the chances of a successful strategy. The major stakeholders in this strategy will include government run domestic violence centers and child welfare service centers within the community. Private and nongovernmental organizations involved in family violence elements will also be stakeholders in this engagement strategy. Schools, women’s shelters and other community welfare societies, will be involved as stakeholders. The mayor and other movers and shakers who have a pull in the community will be stakeholders, as well. Research shows that programs involving high community levels of control and participation also have greater participation from the community (Green & Haines, 2012). In addition, the engagement from stakeholders will help build social capital for the engagement strategy. By engaging the different stakeholders, as well as the community, participatory decision making will be encouraged, and this will subsequently mobilize and uncover community strengths, resources and assets that may have been overlooked otherwise. The process The process of this community engagement program for enhancing child safety will take place in four stages. The community engagement program will be implemented using a strategy that will involve educating the community on family violence, along with showing the community what should be done in case of an occurrence of family violence. The first of these stages includes raising awareness about the issue of family violence, and through this awareness, establishing social norms within the community that will make violence unacceptable. The first step is raising awareness so that the community will be aware of what is going on. Since people often keep issues about violence private, this step is essential in changing initial perceptions (McGuigan et al., 2003). The community will be reached through churches, town meetings, schools and community outreach centers. The awareness will include notifying the community on what to do when they notice a child being hurt or if they feel like their welfare is endangered. The second step for the engagement strategy is to connect community residents to the available services. Following awareness, the next step is to let the community know of places where they could get help. These places should allow for safety and privacy for the sake of the victims and the community. The centers for reporting will contain at least two individuals who have gone through abuse before in their lives, in order to make it easier to report. Meetings should be arranged between the victims and the service providers on a regular basis for them to be conformable with seeking help. This will create numerous access points for people in the community and enhance their capabilities to connect, find and help the victims through social networks. The third step is to change community and social conditions that pertain to attitudes and environmental conditions, such as economic conditions, community habits, cultures and health habits that contribute to family violence. This will also help families be aware of specific issues that make them susceptible to family violence. By gaining knowledge on these issues, the community will then engage in activities and programs that reduce the risk factors to family violence. This includes having counseling sessions for couples with marital problems and individuals with anger management issues. Children will have afterschool programs that keep them away from trouble and risk. The fourth stage of the strategy will be building networks of leaders in the community, in order to sustain the changes and interventions that have been implemented. Developing a leadership framework is core to the community engagement effort. Fostering and finding new leaders within the community who will be instrumental in raising awareness about family violence and articulating the various links between domestic violence and child abuse (Kenny, 2011). The fifth stage is ensuring that the institutions and services that have been implemented are accountable to community needs. Part 2 Barriers and risks In order to gain a clear comprehension about the nature of partnerships within the community where strategies are implemented, it is essential to highlight barriers and risks to this program. Analyzing the barriers will also help in planning ahead and enable the community to take proactive action. One of the barriers is that there could be conflicting interests and competing agendas in the community. There is always a barrier in the society when one is dealing with young people within the community (Kretzmann & McKnight, 1993). This is because there are often more organizations and institutions working within the community at any given time, and bringing them to a cooperative, as well as cohesive existence is impossible. Another barrier is that there is often a lack of clear understanding of expectations of procedures and roles between agencies and the workers, resulting in a slowing down of the strategy. Another major barrier is geographical limitations that often occur when families are unable to reach the services that have been provided to them. This barrier also affects the reach of program coordinators to their target population. There is a vast amount of paperwork that is needed to implement such a program. This may translate into too much bureaucratic consideration, which has a great potential of slowing down the project. In addition, when agencies overlap, this becomes a barrier to implementation of the strategy in certain parts of the community because the stakeholders’ may be busy with different projects. Conclusion The child protection community engagement strategy to help reduce family violence is a complex undertaking. The changes do not occur at once, but one at a time. Starting from one individual to the family, then to the rest of the society, the community changes one step at a time. It is essential to note that such monumental changes cannot take place if the entire community is not involved in the undertaking. It is not enough for one individual or one family to be concerned with the welfare of the child through stopping family violence. Without help from others in the community, such endeavors will be futile. Synthesis Family violence is not an aspect that exists in a vacuum. Hence, solutions that are offered by community engagement programs should illustrate this fact and represent it accordingly. The strategies presented here reflect the scope of the issues that residents need to be concerned about. The strategy is meant to enhance child protection through stopping or reducing family violence. Having a partnership with the community pushes for advocates of change to develop creative approaches to appeal to the residents. This does not only stop at stopping family violence, but it will create a network within the community that people will always use whenever there is a problem. Families will always know how and where to seek help. Since the violence first occurs within the local level, this is where the change has to start. Involving the locals is essential to success because they are directly involved with the problem, and they will shed light on the solutions in a unique way. They help in identifying the exact problem, spreading awareness about the project, and developing strategies for intervening and implementing strategies to reduce family violence. The project is too large to implement for a single individual or a single organization, involving stakeholders and the community will help reduce the time taken to implement it. Community awareness and participation will ensure that the systems that are charged with responding to issues of child welfare and domestic violence are held accountable for the current situation and the changing scenario. When the solutions that are implemented come from within the community, the development and changes that occur are a reflection of the community’s culture, goals, resources and needs. References Deslandes, R. (2006). Designing and implementing school, family and community collaboration programs in Quebec, Canada. The School Community Journal, 16 (1), 81-106. Green, G. P., & Haines, A. (2012). The Role of Assets in Community-Based Development. In Assest Building and Community Development. 3rd Edition. Sage: Los Angeles. Chapter 1 Houston, P. D., Blankstein, A. M., & Cole, R. W. (2010). Leadership for family and community involvement. Bloomington: The HOPE Foundation. Inglehart, R. (2001). Sociological Theories of Modernization." in International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, edited by Neil J. Smelser and Paul B. Bates. New York: Elsevier. Kenny. S. (2011). Developing Communities for the Future: Community Development in Australia. 4th Edition. South Melbourne: Nelson ITP. Kretzmann, J., & McKnight, J. (1993). Building Communities from the Inside out: a path toward finding and mobilizing a community’s assets. Chicago: ACTA Publications. MaCashen, W. (2004). Communities of hope: a strengths-based resource for building communities, St Luke's Innovative Resources, Bendigo National Council of Social Services (NCOSS). (1987) The Community Action Book, Sydney, NSW. McGuigan, W. M., Katzev, A. R. & Pratt, C. C. (2003). Multi-level determinants of retention in a home visiting child abuse prevention program, Child Abuse & Neglect, 27, 363-380. Robinson, J. W., & Green, G. P. (2011). Introduction to community development: Theory, Practice, and Service-Learning. Sage: Los Angeles. Ulusoy, H. (2003). Revisiting Security Communities After The Cold War: The Constructivist Perspective. Perceptions,Journal of International Affairs, 8, 161–96. Read More

Community members are aware of the social and cultural aspects of their society that promote violence, as well as the best ways to manipulate these cultures to intervene and stop violence. The community is constituted of men, women and youth, who understand the connection between violence in homes and that on the street, and are able to see the obvious barriers that it has to child safety and community revitalization and development (Deslandes, 2006). Leaders and residents in the community will also have the capacity and willingness to develop, as well as sustain skills needed to implement intervention strategies meant to prevent family violence and keep children safe.

Community initiatives such as these are aimed at changing behaviors of those within the community often guided by theoretical perspectives. Theory In order to understand how communities will be engaged in bringing about change to help keep children safer, it is essential to understand this under the concept of security communities. This concept is meant to find a remedy for issues that deal with insecurity of a smaller state within the context of a larger international arena (Ulusoy, 2003).

It is, thus, a concept related to collective cooperation for security. Community engagement strategies mean to improve child safety through reducing the rate of family violence. Community concepts have always undergone more celebrating than investigation, which leaves little room for imagination and creativity on different strategies that can be implemented for change and security enhancement (Ulusoy, 2003). This theory defines security community as a group that is integrated to the point where they possess real assurance that community members will both fight for each other, and settle disputes in a constructive way (Ulusoy, 2003).

Through this, a stable community will be developed with stable peace and safety. Community based change initiatives require that those organizing it understand how and why people change their minds. Social psychologists have been making efforts to understand how change occurs in individuals and communities, in that security communities work towards providing a collective type of security for its members. Theories of social change define the process of change as one that involves the modification of a behavior or substitution of particular behavior with another (Inglehart, 2001).

The perceived change is often considered as being beneficial to those who undertake it and the actors are, thus, motivated to change for this reason. Ensuring that there is better safety for children in the community is beneficial to the society, and this is a good motivator for the community engagement process. The change lens is one that individuals can use to predict and perceive processes involved in change. Social change specifically refers to a modification of the social order within the society.

It often refers to a notion of social-cultural evolution or social progress, in that the society has to move forward by an evolutionary of dialectical means (Inglehart, 2001). Change is inevitable and the society will only progress if changes that are beneficial to the community are embraced. The change in this case refers to a paradigmatic change in the cultural structure that is concerned with family violence. Social change could include a change in social relations, social institutions, societal nature and social behaviors.

Without the community embracing the change as a whole, the chances of a successful social change are slim. There are two major sources of social change. One category of the sources includes unique and often uncontrollable factors such as the presence of particular groups of people or climate. The other source, which is most relevant to community engagement strategies is systematic changes, which covers issues such as resources, stability and governmental systems. Backer (2001) suggests that behaviors and attitudes are likely to change if the individuals in question have a strong positive intent to change, make a commitment to perform better, do not encounter constraints, and have the necessary skills to actualize the change.

Read More