This document summarizes research on improving community health through mobilizing formal systems and informal networks. It discusses how the researchers initially focused on preventing family maltreatment in military communities and expanded their work to civilian communities. Their social organization theory examines how community antecedents, social organizational processes, and intermediate results impact individual and family outcomes. The theory emphasizes how informal networks and formal systems intersect to build community capacity and resilience. The document provides empirical support and examples of communities in Roseto, PA, Cameron Park, TX, and Nevada County, CA that demonstrated improved health by mobilizing community members and resources.

1. Improving community health through
mobilizing formal systems and
informal networks
Department of Human Development and Family Science
Gary L. Bowen
Kenan
Distinguished Professor
Jay A. Mancini
Haltiwanger
Distinguished Professor
3rd Global Risk Forum One
Health Summit 2015, Davos,
Switzerland, October 6, 2015.

2. Early Context
• Work in the U.S. Air Force to strengthen military families through
community-based prevention activities
• Initial focus on the primary and secondary prevention of family
maltreatment—child abuse and neglect, domestic violence
• A community practice model was needed to complement a direct services
approach to families in need (remedial model)
• Recognition that the ability of military families to manage duty and lifestyle
demands is partially influenced by how successfully formal systems and
informal networks operate and interact as components of community
social organization
• Work expanded to civilian communities and other branches of the military
services—both in the U.S. and abroad

3. Social Organization Theory
Individual/Family Results
Intermediate
Results
Sense of
Community
Community Antecedents
Social Infrastructure
Physical Infrastructure
Social Organizational Process
Network Structure
Social Capital
Community Capacity

4. Early Publications: 2000 & 2005
4

6. Conceptual Articles and Chapters
• Mancini, J.A., & Bowen, G.L. (2013). Families and communities. In G. Peterson & K. Bush (Eds.),
Handbook of marriage and the family (3rd edition, pp. 781-813). NY: Springer.
• Bowen, G. L., Martin, J. A., & Mancini, J. A. (2013). The resilience of military families: Theoretical
perspectives. In M. A. Fine & F. D. Fincham (Eds.), Family theories: A content-based approach (pp. 417-
436). New York: Routlege (Taylor & Francis).
• Mancini, J.A., & Bowen, G.L. (2009). Community resilience: A social organization theory of action and
change. In J.A. Mancini, & K.A. Roberto (Eds.), Pathways of human development: Explorations of
change. Lanham, MD: Lexington.
• Mancini, J.A., Nelson, J.P., Bowen, G.L., & Martin, J.A. (2006). Preventing intimate partner violence: A
community capacity approach. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment, and Trauma, 13 (3/4), 203-227.
• Mancini, J.A., Bowen, G.L., & Martin, J.A. (2005). Community social organization: A conceptual linchpin
in examining families in the context of communities. Family Relations: Interdisciplinary Journal of
Applied Family Studies, 54, 570-582.
• Mancini, J.A., Martin, J.A., & Bowen, G. (2003). Community capacity. In T. Gullotta & M. Bloom
(Eds.), Encyclopedia of primary prevention and health promotion (pp. 319-331). New York:
Plenum.
• Bowen, G., Martin, J., Mancini, J.A. , & Nelson, J. (2000). Community capacity: Antecedents and
consequences. Journal of Community Practice, 8, 1-21.

7. Empirical Support
• Adams, R. D. (2012). Strong communities, strong families: An examination of the association of
community functioning with psychological resilience, psychopathology, and family outcomes in
active duty Air Force members (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Kansas State University,
Manhattan.
• Bowen, G. L., Mancini, J. A., Martin, J. A., Ware, W. B., & Nelson, J. P. (2003). Promoting the
adaptation of military families: An empirical test of a community practice model. Family Relations,
52, 33-44.
• Bowen, G., Martin, J., Mancini, J., & Swick, D. (2015). Community capacity and the psychological
well-being of married United States Air Force members. In R. Moelker, M. Andres, G. Bowen, & P.
Manigart (Eds.), Military families and war in the 21st century: Comparative Perspectives (pp. 210-
226). Abingdon Oxon: Routledge.
• Farrell, A. F., Bowen, G. L., & Swick, D. C. (2014). Network supports and resiliency among U.S.
military spouses with children with special health care needs. Family Relations, 63, 55-70.
• Foran, H. M., Heyman, R. E., Smith Slep, A. M., & United States Air Force Family Advocacy Research
Program (2011). Hazardous drinking and military community functioning: Identifying mediating
risk factors. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 79(4), 521-532.
• Roberto, K. A., Teaster, P. B., McPherson, M. C., Mancini, J. A., & Savla, J. (2013). A community
capacity framework for enhancing a criminal justice response to elder abuse. Journal of Crime and
Justice.

8. Social Organization
• Values, norms, processes and behavior patterns within a
community that organize, facilitate, and constrain
interactions among community members
• Process by which communities achieve their desired results
for individuals and families, including the ability to
demonstrate resilience in the face of adversity and positive
challenges
• Social organization includes networks of people, the
exchanges and reciprocity that transpire in relationships,
accepted standards and norms of social support, and social
controls that regulate behavior and interaction
* Mancini, J.A., Martin, J.A., & Bowen, G. (2003). Community capacity. In T. Gullotta & M. Bloom (Eds.), Encyclopedia of primary
prevention and health promotion (pp. 319-331). New York: Plenum.

9. Social Organization: Structure and Process
• Differentiation of structure from process
• Structure pertains to configuration and
composition; interconnecting parts. What do
communities look like?
• Process involves operations and methods of
working; courses of action, functions. What do
communities actually do?

10. Social Organization: Social Capital
• Information, reciprocity, and trust
• Aggregate of resources (information,
opportunities, and instrumental support)
• Arise from reciprocal social
relationships
• Results from participation in formal and
informal settings
• Social capital observed in actions of civic
groups, faith communities, and any
number of community-based groups
• Increases odds of achieving results
otherwise not attained

11. Social Organization: Community Capacity
• Shared responsibility
• For general welfare of the community and its
individual members
• Sentiments
• Collective competence
• Taking collective action, confronting situations
• Assumptions
• Concern directed at community as a whole and at
particular elements, action is beyond expression of
positive sentiments, action is proactive and
reactive, action targeted at threats and at
normative situations

12. Informal Networks and Formal Systems*
• Primary ways through which community life is enacted
• Informal networks comprise web of relationships with
friends, neighbors, work associates
• Formal systems associated with agencies and organizations
• Voluntary and obligatory relationships
*Mancini, J.A., & Bowen, G.L. (2009). Community resilience: A social organizational theory of action and
change. In J. Mancini & K. Roberto (Eds.), Pathways of human development: Explorations of change.
Lanham, MD: Lexington.

13. Functions of Informal Networks*
• Emotional (to deal with despair and worry)
• Instrumental (to accomplish practical tasks)
• Informational (to achieve better decisions)
• Companionate (to spend time in a context for support)
• Validation (to support feeling worthwhile, competent, and hopeful)
Contributes the power of interpersonal relationships
to the mix
*Cohen, S., Underwood, L.G., & Gottlieb, B.H. (2000). Social support measurement and intervention:
A guide for health and social scientists. NY: Oxford.
13

14. What Relationships Provide
• Attachment: feelings of intimacy, peace, and security as found in
relationships with spouses and very close friends
• Social integration: a sense of belonging to a group with whom one shares
common interests and social activities
• Reliable alliance: knowing that one can count on receiving assistance in
times of need, a function often provided by kin
• Guidance: having relationships with persons who can provide knowledge,
advice, and expertise
• Reassurance of worth: a sense of competence and esteem obtained
typically from work colleagues
• Opportunity for nurturance: being responsible for the care of others, such
as one’s children
(Weiss, 1974; Russell & Cutrona, 1984; Mancini & Blieszner, 1992)

15. Significance of Formal Systems
• Mission of providing support programs and services
• Are stronger when they are diverse and comprehensive, when outreach
is a primary activity, and when specific formal support entities
collaborate (solving “silo”-related problems)
• Key role in supporting informal networks
• Contributes specialized expertise to the community resilience mix

16. Intersection of Informal & Formal Networks
• First-order effects occur within a homogeneous network, such as in a single agency
or among friends. Efforts to deal with an issue or problem are contained within the
single network. Putnam (2000) discusses the idea of “bonding” that occurs within a
network, and its importance for enacting change.
• Second-order effects occur among similar networks, such as between a family
service agency and a community health center, or among contiguous neighborhoods.
• Third-order effects are derived from dissimilar networks, such as partnerships
between community agencies and neighborhood groups, which expand Putnam’s idea of
“bridging” from the individual to the community level. When there is agreement across
disparate groups about desired community change, the resource base for mobilizing a
community dramatically increases, as well as the probability for buffering challenge or
adversity and for achieving desired community results.

17. Intersection of Informal & Formal Networks:
An Illustration

18. Intersection of Informal & Formal Networks*
• When dissimilar networks focus on common issues, the odds increase of making
positive differences in communities. It is within these networks that social
capital develops and that community capacity evolves. In other words, networks
provide the framework for social action because it is through networks that
community members develop relationships and feel connected to one another.
• The optimal configuration and intersection of networks for achieving
community resilience likely vary depending on the combination of adversities
and challenges that the community faces. In some cases, formal networks may
need to assume greater leadership and involvement than at other times. In other
cases, informal networks may need to be mobilized and activated.
*Small, S, & Supple, A. (2001). Communities as systems: Is a community more than the sum of its parts?
In A. Booth & A.C. Crouter (Eds.), Does it take a village? Community effects on children, adolescents,
and families (pp. 161-174). NJ: Erlbaum Publishers.

19. Stories that Comprise the Story
• Communities, primary prevention, and health
(improving health, saving citizens)
• Roseta, Pennsylvania (USA)
• Cameron Park, Texas (USA)
• Nevada Co., California (USA)

20. Building Healthy Communities
Roseto, PA
• Historically low heart disease rates
• “Old world” sense of community; friends
and neighbors took time
• Mutual respect and cooperation
• “People don’t drop by anymore”
• Heart disease rates at national average
Cameron Park, TX
• Mexican border town
• Type 2 diabetes high and mismanaged
• Exercise advice unsafe and unpractical
(streets)
• Frontera de Salud
• Health professionals not trusted so
community members mobilized
• Answer to Type 2 diabetes resides in the
community

21. Building Healthy Communities
Nevada Co., CA community meltdown
• Carol Carson; support from professionals,
family, friends
• 1,000 mobilized
• “You really felt part of the community”

22. In Conclusion
22

23. Presenters
• Jay A. Mancini is the Haltiwanger Distinguished Professor in the
Department of Human Development and Family Science, at The University
of Georgia. Contact information: mancini@uga.edu; (706) 542-4844.
• Gary L. Bowen is the Kenan Distinguished Professor in the School of Social
Work at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Contact
information: glbowen@email.unc.edu; (919) 962-6542.