Justice System Reform for Health Equity: A Mixed Methods Examination of Collaborating for Equity and Justice Principles in a Grassroots Organizing Coalition

Abstract

Recent critiques of collective impact have provided a conceptual alternative that emphasizes the necessity of community organizing, and more explicit emphasis on advancing equitable systems and policy changes. This article reports results from a study of a citywide coalition in Chicago, IL that espoused many of these same principles. The coalition focused on justice system reform—systems and policy change that would dismantle punitive policies disproportionately affecting people of color—but also sought to connect these efforts with broader social determinants of health. The organizations that comprised the coalition were a pairing of those traditionally involved in restorative justice practice, and those traditionally involved in grassroots organizing. An action research partnership provided an opportunity to investigate processes and outcomes of a coalition created to advance equitable systems and policy changes. This analysis of the coalition’s functioning employs a mixed methods approach. We utilize two waves of interorganizational social network data and qualitative data including participant observation, in-depth interviews, and archival document review to examine the coalition’s successes and challenges related to each of the six core principles of Collaborating for Equity and Justice. This analysis provides practical insights into the benefits and challenges of implementing deeply participatory processes to address policy and systemic drivers of social determinants of health. Findings show that fully integrating all six principles is challenging, especially when a coalition represents broad constituencies across race, geography, and organizational philosophy. In such diverse settings, considerable time must be spent to build relationships and a strong foundation for sustainable processes.

Psychological sense of community and motivation toward collective social change among community coalition members of color in the southwestern United States

“…Moreover, there was a similar finding as that of previous studies that these dimensions of membership and emotional connection were associated with both member ownership and leadership (Cooper & Christens, 2019), as well as the belief that the bonds with their community were critical to enact social change (Barvosa-Carter, 2001;Bermea et al, 2018). Yet, it is important to note that while these qualitative findings seem to align well with the extant literature, they are also in tension with recent quantitative empirical outcomes (e.g., Peterson et al, 2019) that have shown lower levels of psychological sense of community among coalition members outwardly focused on policy change.…”

“…Furthermore, we were able to understand the mechanics of the psychological sense of community and the ways it contributes to coalition members' drive to engage in the coalition, as well as outward community change. Moreover, findings partially support assertions that a psychological sense of community operates through a mechanism of needs' fulfillment (Prati et al, 2020), and that among these coalition members, dimensions of membership and emotional connection also seem to be relevant for joining the coalition, sustaining membership and enacting sociopolitical change (Christens et al, 2019;Cooper & Christens, 2019;Lardier, Bergeson, et al, 2018), despite potential vulnerabilities such as documented status (Barvosa-Carter, 2001;Muñoz, 2018;Negrón-Gonzales, 2014).…”

“…Community coalitions can be an important location for leveraging access to resources to support | 557 community wellness (Butterfoss, 2007;Butterfoss & Kegler, 2009), as well as extend the power and voices of community members to enact social change (Lardier, Bergeson, et al, 2018;Minkler, 2012). Several studies have specifically positioned community coalitions as a setting to fight racism, socioeconomic inequities, and health disparities (Cooper & Christens, 2019;Johnston et al, 2019). Some research has also focused on the role of coalition partnership dynamics, shared leadership (Reid et al, 2019;Wolf et al, 2019), and the ways coalitions even begin to be created and maintained to fight inequities in the community (Bermea et al, 2018;Lardier, Bergeson, et al, 2018;Peterson et al, 2019;Powell & Peterson, 2014).…”

Consolidated Framework for Collaboration Research derived from a systematic review of theories, models, frameworks and principles for cross-sector collaboration

“…Described cross-sector collaborations spanned the formation, maintenance, and institutionalization stages of collaboration, with many articles applicable to multiple stages. Articles described a variety of collaborative objectives including coordinate a system or multi-sector response to complex issues [ 30 – 33 ] such as health disparities [ 34 – 37 ]; engage community in multi-sector approaches to change [ 38 – 45 ]; avoid duplicating efforts to address a complex problem [ 46 , 47 ]; work together to create structural change [ 48 ]; build public health or health care infrastructure and coordination [ 49 – 57 ]; institutionalize partnerships [ 58 ]; mobilize resources [ 59 ]; and implement multi-sector programs and policies [ 60 , 61 ].…”

Narrative change for health equity in grassroots community organizing: A study of initiatives in Michigan and Ohio

“…For instance, some have been narrowly focused on specific issues or prevention goals (Subica et al, 2016). Others have sought to align organizing and practices related to health equity promotion at a deeper or more holistic level by cross‐pollinating between fields, building shared understanding, and collaborating across multiple issues or domains (e.g., Cooper & Christens, 2019).…”