This paper presents a new approach to the design and implementation of community change efforts like a System of Care. Called the ABLe Change Framework, the model provides simultaneous attention to the content and process of the work, ensuring effective implementation and the pursuit of systems change. Three key strategies are employed in this model to ensure the integration of content and process efforts and effective mobilization of broad scale systems change: Systemic Action Learning Teams, Simple Rules, and Small Wins. In this paper we describe the ABLe Change Framework and present a case study in which we successfully applied this approach to one system of care effort in Michigan.

Many community decision-making bodies encounter challenges in creating conditions where stakeholders from disadvantaged populations can authentically participate in ways that give them actual influence over decisions affecting their lives (Foster-Fishman et al., Lessons for the journey: Strategies and suggestions for guiding planning, governance, and sustainability in comprehensive community initiatives. W.K. Kellogg Foundation, Battle Creek, MI, 2004). These challenges are often rooted in asymmetrical power dynamics operating within the settings (Prilleltensky, J Commun Psychol 36:116-136, 2008). In response, this paper presents the Exchange Boundary Framework, a new approach for understanding and promoting authentic, empowered participation within collaborative decision-making settings. The framework expands upon theories currently used in the field of community psychology by focusing on the underlying processes through which power operates in relationships and examining the evolution of power dynamics over time. By integrating concepts from social exchange theory (Emerson, Am Soc Rev 27:31-41, 1962) and social boundaries theory (Hayward, Polity 31(1):1-22, 1998), the framework situates power within parallel processes of resources exchange and social regulation. The framework can be used to understand the conditions leading to power asymmetries within collaborative decisionmaking processes, and guide efforts to promote more equitable and authentic participation by all stakeholders within these settings. In this paper we describe the Exchange Boundary Framework, apply it to three distinct case studies, and discuss key considerations for its application within collaborative community settings.

Significant social problems have proven to be wickedly difficult to resolve. Arising from numerous intersecting, multileveled factors over time and supported by deeply entrenched community patterns (Rittel & Webber, 1973), significant social problems require strategies and approaches that can incorporate and effectively tackle this complexity (Lounsbury & Mitchell, 2009;Patton, 2011). Although more and more funders, researchers, and practitioners are demanding intervention and evaluation/research methods that attend to this complexity (e.g., Patton, 2011), this request continues to outpace the development and use of research and practitioner approaches that consider and effectively tackle these wicked problems (Foster-Fishman, Nowell, & Yang, 2007;Luke & Stamatakis, 2012).This chapter provides one promising approach for understanding and addressing complex social problems: the pursuit of transformative systems change. Systems change refers to a process of shifting and realigning the form and function of a targeted system, such as a neighborhood, organization, service delivery system, and even a whole community (Foster-Fishman et al., 2007). It includes altering the deep structures that drive system behavior such as policies, programs, relationships, resources, and values, and the interactions across these structures (Foster-Fishman, 2002). Overall, systems change initiatives are rooted in the assumption that significant improvements in the outcomes of a targeted population (e.g., reduced poverty rates among families, improved school readiness for vulnerable children) will not occur unless the surrounding

Generations of scholars and activists have argued that racial inequities emerge not only because of racist ideologies but also from a hierarchical system of racial oppression. This theoretical tradition has highlighted numerous ways in which systemic racism manifests itself, from racist policies to differential access to material conditions and power. However, given that by definition systemic racism is focused on systems, theories of systemic racism would be more comprehensive and actionable by drawing on scholarship related to systems thinking. Systems thinking is a conceptual orientation that aims to understand how different types of systems function over time. This paper builds on the work of previous scholars to propose a systems thinking approach to understand and strategically disrupt racist systems. We provide a typology of system characteristics (organized into the categories of paradigms, structures, elements, and feedback loops) that together can be used to help understand the operation of systemic racism in different system contexts. The paper also provides an approach to identify and strategically target multiple system leverage points to simultaneously disrupt the status quo of racial inequity and promote the emergence of conditions enabling racial equity. This systems thinking approach can be used to guide learning and action within an ongoing process of antiracist praxis.