This document summarizes a presentation about community and academic partnerships, particularly in post-disaster contexts. It defines partnerships as collaborative relationships where both community programs and academic institutions bring expertise. Successful partnerships are characterized by mutual goals and benefits, a strengths-based approach, and a commitment to improving client services. The presentation provides strategies for developing partnerships, overcome myths and distrust, and gives two case examples of post-disaster mental health and homeless services programs partnering successfully with universities.

1. COMMUNITY AND ACADEMIC PARTNERSHIPS: REALITIES AND POSSIBILITIES Presenter: So`Nia L. Gilkey, PhD, LCSW, Cmdr Conference Title: Best Practices Disaster Mental Health and Resilience Tulane University School of Social Work March 20, 2009

2. General Overview Community and Academic Partnerships Defined General Characteristics of Successful Partnerships Truths and Myths of Partnerships Using Strengths-based approach Forging Partnerships in Post-Disaster Era Two Case Examples Disaster Mental Health Recovery Program Homeless Services Programs Conclusion

3. Traditional - partnerships between community-based programs and academic institutions to address needs of targeted populations and/or issues of community Partnerships viewed as collaborative and supportive Both parties bring various expertise on issue/problem Research and/or evaluation activities major part of partnership Community and Academic Partnerships

4. Partnerships Continued Post-Disaster – partnerships can be defined as having mutually collaborative interests, but where disaster-related impact is included as significant component of the partnership Partnerships based in cooperative, problem-solving framework where benefits of the relationship are balanced and activities of the partnership designed to promote resilience and well-being of the community-based program Practice-based activities in addition to research and evaluation are key components of partnership

5. General interest in partnering General desire to improve client services Goals and products mutually negotiated Activities focused on strengths Challenges and barriers considered and solutions sought Commitment to partnering viewed as valuable and relevant General Characteristics of Successful Partnerships

6. Truths and Myths of Partnerships Truths Relationships between community and universities encouraged Community-based programs have access to university expertise Universities have access to practice expertise Partnership commitments responsibility of both parties Improved understanding of systems impact Increased opportunities to demonstrate program-related outcomes Increased opportunities to improve client services

8. Relationship between community and universities are problematic

9. Community-based programs viewed as less capable of responding to community needs

10. Universities viewed as disconnected and unresponsive, and with self-promoting interests

11. Universities viewed as interested only in data collection

12. Distrust of partnerships is general stance

13. Systems with different interests can’t work together effective

14. Community programs only benefit on limited scale

17. Overcoming distrust

18. Hesitant of university interest

19. Establishing commitment to partnership

20. Negotiating goals of relationship

21. Terms of partnership pre-determined

22. Value of expertise initially challenged

23. Desired outcomes non-negotiable at onset

24. Focus of partnership – Improved Client Services in Post-Disaster ContextCase Example #1

25. Case Example #2 Homeless Service Provider Overcoming Distrust Welcomed university partnership Mutually agreed upon parameters of partnership Terms of Partnership flexible Goals of partnership negotiable and regularly evaluated Desired outcomes evolved based on success of partnership Value of expertise of both parties emphasized and viewed as foundation of partnership Focus of partnership – Improved Client Services in Post-Disaster Context

26. Strategies to Improve University-Community Partnerships Be proactive – reach out Consider context – pre vs. post-disaster Recognize value – them vs. us Be willing to contribute “something for nothing” Recognize that partnerships are ongoing and require consistent nurturing Understand that successful partnerships develop over time Determine motivation and commitment and be honest about it Enlist the support and commitment of all interested parties

27. Be clear about goals of relationship Be committed to collaborative and cooperative relationship Consider barriers to successful partnership and strategies to address barriers Identify a plan for the partnership and be willing to negotiate/revise the plan View partnership as win-win Strategies to Improve University-Community Partnerships Con’t

28. University-community partnerships can work Commitment is key Strengths-based approach is desirable Everyone contributes to success or failure Disaster impact can help or hinder partnership Individuals, families, groups, communities and systems benefit when partnerships are supported and successfully implemented Conclusion

29. Question and Answer