2. Role Services
Capacity Building Assistance Provide Services
Coordinate resources, skills and talents
to enhance the practice of community
engagement with the City of Dubuque
Provide staff with the following:
Coaching, Planning, Facilitation and
Coordination.
Research, design and implement
programs which meet community
engagement needs and assist with
partners on CE initiatives.
Community
Engagement
1 2
3
3. Who is responsible for CE?
Community
member
perceptions are
influenced by all
of our processes,
tools, skills and
decisions.
As a result, it
takes all staff to
do CE in shared
ways and with
adequate support
so that the public
sees consistency
in practice across
departments and
roles.
Community
member interest,
capacity and
support.
Community
Engagement3
4. What does CE look like?
8
Community
Engagement
Inform Consult Involve Collaborate Empower
To provide the
public with
balanced and
objective
information to
assist them in
understanding
the problem,
alternatives,
opportunities
and/or
solutions.
To obtain
public
feedback on
analysis,
alternatives
and/or
decisions.
To work
directly with
the public
throughout
the process to
ensure that
public
concerns and
aspirations
are
consistently
understood
and
considered.
To partner
with the
public in each
aspect of the
decision
including the
development
of
alternatives
and the
identification
of the
preferred
solution.
To partner
with public in
each aspect
of the
decision and
provide
flexibility for
shared
ownership of
action.
5. Project: Research & Development
Community
Engagement
Internal document
Topics Covered
• Why institutionalize CE
• What is CE?
• What does CE look like?
• Process of CE
• Vision for Community Engagement
through Partnerships
• Staff CE skills
• Barriers and opportunities to CE
• Resources
• Potential tools
Main Sources
• Institute for Local Government
• National Coalition for Dialogue
and Deliberation
• International Association for
Public Participation
• Involve Organization
• Queensland Government
• City of Austin
• City of Portland
• City of Madison
Input process
• Content approval by
Human Rights Department
• Content approval by City
Manager
• Content approval by the a
group of internal staff
15
6. Barriers to institutionalizing & practicing CE
• Engagement Experience Level
➢ Defining problems and solutions in
advance.
➢ Episodic, time-limited or narrowly
focused engagement experiences.
➢ The interest in participation is not
matched by the willingness to
change and integrate input into
final decisions.
• Process Level
➢ Finalizing the timing of
engagement in policy development
and planning processes.
➢ Determining and securing needed
leads and facilitators.
➢ Addressing and managing distrust
and disinterest.
➢ Finding ways to reduce barriers to
involvement.
• People level
➢ Lack of time to plan and design.
➢ Beliefs that “My job/position is to
make smart and sound decisions for
the public and they should trust
me” and “It is not my job to fix
what I’m paying taxes for you to
fix.”
• Organizational level
➢ The will and commitment to
promote participation is greater
than the individual and
organization capacity to make it
effective.
➢ No connections between key
departments/collaborators.
➢ Legal barriers or limitations.
➢ Community level
➢ Weak or non existent civic
infrastructure.
7. Next Steps
Infuse the research into the culture of the
organization.
Community
Engagement
8. Project: Internal Staff Group
This multidisciplinary group
will be working on a realistic
and practical short-term and
long-term action plan to
institutionalize the content
from the internal document.
Current members:
• Cori Burbach- Sustainability Coordinator
• Megan Starr- Economic Development Coordinator
• Dan Kroger- Recreation Division Manager
• Jerelyn O’Connor- Neighborhood Development
Specialist
• Kelly Larson- Human Rights Director
• Teri Goodmann- Assistant City Manager
• Nikola Pavelić- Community Engagement Coordinator
# of meetings held: 4
Current accomplishments
• Approval of the Internal Document (40+ pages)
• Agreement on the process to institutionalize CE
• Developed our tasks and action steps
Current activities
• Working on adopting a CE process
• Working to finalize the action step timeline
• Identifying what other city staff should be at the table and why Community
Engagement
9. Institutionalizing the practice of CE
Decide on a framework-what does CE look like
Determine the process
Develop tools
Integrate into existing organizational processes/tools where possible
Allocate resources
Provide develop opportunities
Evaluate impact
Develop an improvement process
Diffuse away from one person/one department solely
Community
Engagement7
10. CE process Outcomes
We
understand
the CE
process
within the
bigger
objectives of
the:
• Project
• Dep service
• Policy
• Decision-
making
process
• Resource
allocation
process
We know the
stakeholders
to engage in
meaningful
and relevant
ways for them
and us.
We have
named the
goals of the
CE process,
aligned them
with the
bigger
objectives
and resources
of org./dep.
We have
identified the
risks and ways
to manage
them.
We have an
evaluation
process in
place which
covers the
process itself
and what
impact it had
on the overall
objectives.
We have
increased our
knowledge,
attitudes,
skills and
aspirations
related to CE.
We have a
communicatio
ns plan which
invites and
communicate
s progress in
meaningful
and relevant
ways to our
stakeholders.
Community
Engagement
