1. Conceptualization of Community Practice from a Generalist Perspective
Dr. Amy Murphy-Nugen
Department of Social Work
Western Carolina University

2. Learning Activities Generalist practice refresher Defining community
Defining and understanding the concepts of community practice
The strengths-based perspective in relationship with community practice
Social workers in community practice
Case study: Competency-building application

3. Generalist practice “refresher””
Work with individuals, families, groups, communities, organizations in a variety of social work and host settings
Strengths perspective
Evaluate service outcomes to continually improve service delivery & client outcomes
Recognize, support, and build upon the innate capabilities of all human beings.
Engage, assess, broker services, advocate, counsel, educate & organize with & on behalf of client & client systems
Engage in community & organizational development
Generalist social work practitioners work with individuals, families, groups, communities and organizations in a variety of social work and host settings. Generalist practitioners view clients and client systems from a strengths perspective in order to recognize, support, and build upon the innate capabilities of all human beings. They use a professional problem solving process to engage, assess, broker services, advocate, counsel, educate, and organize with and on behalf of client and client systems.  In addition, generalist practitioners engage in community and organizational development.  Finally, generalist practitioners evaluate service outcomes in order to continually improve the provision and quality of services most appropriate to client needs.
Generalist social work practice is guided by the NASW Code of Ethics and is committed to improving the well being of individuals, families, groups, communities and organizations and furthering goals of social justice.

4. Defining community (Netting, Kettner, McMurtry, & Thomas, 2017)
As a matter of geography
As a matter of identity/interests
As a matter of collective relationships (network)
Commonly, community is defined in three ways:
Geographically: Definition: bounded by a geographically defined parameter
Examples: Neighborhood, city, town
Interests/identity: Definition: Non-geographical, bound together by common interests & commitments
Examples: political action groups, child welfare advocacy groups, right to choose/right to life groups, religious groups
Collective relationships/network: Definition: Constellation of relationships that gives meaning to an individual’s life
Examples: professional colleagues, personal friends, neighbors
Can you think of examples of each?
(Netting, Kettner, McMurtry, & Thomas, 2017)

5. Positive outcomes of community
Gemeinschaft
Loyalty, kinship, strong ties
Collective efficacy
A community’s ability to organize its resources to attract positive forces or mitigate negative ones
Social capital
Definitions differ, but resources that one can draw on via the social networks that one is a part of
Communities have social functions, one of which is the ability to respond to the needs of its members.
 (Tönnies, 2001; Lin, Cook, & Burt, 2008)

6. Enhancing Community Competence
Commitment to each other
Self-awareness of shared values/interests
Openness in communication
Wide participation in community decision making
Fellin (2001) suggests that community competence is enhanced when residents have:
-a commitment to each other
-self-awareness of their shared values and interests
-openness in communication
-wide participation in community decision making.
Hardcastle, Powers, & Wenocur (2011) contend the modern world brings fragmentation, alienation, disengagement and increased mobility, which make it more challenging for communities to achieve competence in these areas.
(Fellin, 2001)

7. Conceptual Community Foundation
Horizontal Structures
Vertical Structures
Reciprocity
Social Exclusion
In order to understand how to approach social change processes, it is important to become familiar with four community concepts.
(Hardcastle, Powers, & Wenocur, 2011)

8. Conceptual Community Foundation
Horizontal Structures
Vertical Structures
Horizontal structures share the same geographic domains, members know each other and decision making occurs within the community.
Vertical structures are characterized by hierarchical levels of authority beyond the community geographic boundaries; they are less interdependent and cohesive; social relationships are fragmented with alienation and normlessness; individuals grow a sense of isolation and anomie with a loss of community values to guide their behavior;
Hardcastle, Powers, & Wenocur (2011) draw upon these examples to emphasize the differences between horizontal and vertical structures:
“The community hospital and the independent doctor have been supplanted by the proprietary and distant profit-driven national health maintenance organization operating under managed-cost principles. The mom-and-pop family business has been replaced by the multinational megacorporation. The global multimedia entertainment industrial conglomerate has deposed the local newspaper. Decision making for all these structures is generally distant from the local community of living and is based on narrowing economic self-interest rather than a consideration of community well-being.” (p.102)
I provide an example from my own practice and research area—housing. In the recent past, mortgage lending was primarily handled by local banks. Residents would go to their local community bank for a loan when they wanted to purchase a home. Under unfortunate circumstances, residents could also go and speak with their local lender when they were having problems paying their loan—such as a job loss or other circumstance. It was then the decision of the local lender to decide to negotiate the terms of the loan or to move to foreclose. Because there was a closer connection between lender and customer—consideration was often given to renegotiation of the loan terms rather than foreclosing it. The lender had a vested interest in not seeing an increase in foreclosures—since he or she also lived in the community their property values may also be impacted. After financial deregulation, many small banks were purchase by larger ones and larger banks merged with one another—loans are now bought and sold frequently and there is typically no local connection between a lender and customer. Decisions about loan renegotiation and foreclosures are made far away from the community in which the customer lives.
(Hardcastle, Powers, & Wenocur, 2011)

9. Conceptual Community Foundation
Reciprocity
Social Exclusion
Community cohesion requires reciprocity and responsibility commensurate with individual rights and benefits. In other words, people need to contribute to the community on the basis of what they receive from it.
Social exclusion relates to individual social marginalization and alienation. With the growth of vertical structures, individuals are become more excluded within communities. Social exclusion is the flip side of the concept of social solidarity—which essentially is the idea that “we are all in this together.”
(Hardcastle, Powers, & Wenocur, 2011)

10. Warren’s Concept of Community
Space
People
Shared values & institutions
Interaction
Distribution of power
Social system
Warren includes different, but similar, notions of community in his conceptual framework that are also helpful in understanding community behavior and change.
(Netting, Kettner, & McMurtry, 2017))

11. Warren’s Functions of Community
Production, distribution, & consumption
Designed to meet people’s needs, including the most basic of food, clothing, shelter
Socialization
Guides prevailing norms, traditions, and values of community members
Social control
Process by which community members ensure compliance with norms & values
Social participation
Interaction with others in community groups, associations, and organizations
Mutual support
Function that families, friends, partners, neighbors, volunteers, professionals carry out when they care for sick, unemployed, distressed
Much like we use bio-psycho-social-spiritual frameworks to assess the state of well-being of our individual & familial clients; we can use Warren’s framework to assess the functioning and health of a community.
Production, distribution, & consumption: People are dependent on one another to meet these needs—including medical care, sanitation, employment, transportation, & recreation. Accepted medium of exchange for goods/services is money—which becomes an important factor in defining the limits of consumption & plays a roll in almost all community-change efforts
This function is based on two major assumptions: 1) the community must develop and maintain a system for producing the goods and services needed in a community and 2) they must arrange the distribution of the production to its members so that production can take place.
Socialization: In order for social workers to understand an individual or population it is important we understand the norms, traditions, and values of the community or communities from which the individual or population was socialized.
Socialization occurs beyond family, religious and civic affiliations, and informal peer groups—it also happens through the media and internet. Media influence is important to consider in community practice—certain communities are represented in various ways—negative, positive, and some times biased. It is critical to be aware of these socializing influences.
Social control: Social control is a process of obtaining compliance to community rules. Typically achieved through laws, rules, regulations, as well as systems of enforcement. Social control is often performed by diverse institutions such as government, education, religion, and social services. Social workers must balance the sometimes conflicting roles as helpers and agents of social control—particularly in settings such as schools, correctional institutions, probation & parole offices, and employment/training programs. Behavior control can be achieved in two ways: 1) internal control through socialization—”do this, don’t do that,” 2) or through external control, which are typically punishment based.
Social participation—is the interaction with others in community groups, associations and organizations. It is an essential community function, which allows citizens to participate in governance and community activities. It is an outlet for people to fulfill need of social interaction—local religious institutions, civic organizations, neighborhood groups
Mutual support—is a social welfare function provided by families, friends, partners, neighbors, volunteers, and professionals when they respond to others in a time of need. McKnight (1995) is critical of the modern-day social service delivery system in that he contends it has weakened the informal mutual support traditionally provided in neighborhoods & communities
(Hardcastle, Powers, & Wenocur, 2011; McKnight, 1995; Warren, 1975)

12. Understanding the Community to Create Change
Resources
Power
Actors
Values
The World as it Ought to be
Interests
The World as it is
Needs
In order to create change in a community, social work practitioners need to understand community context:
Needs—are essential necessities, desires, and requirements to live and carry out one’s life; but needs alone cannot tell us why people do the things they do.
Values—the communities in which people live influence what they value and how to prioritize some needs over others, as well as, the way to go about meeting their needs.
Resources—In addition to needs and values, people find themselves with access or barriers to resources (i.e. capacities, skills, money, etc.-that they are born with or have acquired). There are two types of resources: 1) Natural resources (time, energy, ideas, body, spirit, etc.).
2) Acquired resources (money, skills, knowledge, land, etc.).
Based on people’s cultural experiences, they assign values to their needs, and based on their access to resources, they turn values into “interests.”
Interests: In Latin, interest means to “exist among” and it is defined in relation to others. Interests are not the same as values but are influenced by them. Learning to recognize your own agenda (or self-awareness) and the interests of others is critical to community change and organizing.
Actors: are individuals who act purposefully on their circumstances and try to mobilize their resources to achieve their purposes. In community practice, it is important to understand the difference in language and meaning between a client and constituent. Constituent are the people we work with in community practice—who we assist in organizing, serving and are accountable to. The word comes from Latin and means to “stand together/to set-up.” Constituents are the individuals who come together to meet their interests. In contrast, the word client comes from the latin word, clinare, which means to lean. In community practice, we are there to help constituents stand on their own—not lean on us.
Power: is the interaction between needs, values, resources, actors, and interests. It represents the ability to achieve a purpose. In its most traditional sense, it is about the ability to get what you want, when you want—despite the oppression of others—and is concerned with gaining and losing control; however, there are also alternative definitions that emphasize shared power.
(Kansas University, Work Group for Community Health and Development, 2016)

13. Power With (Relational)
Two Types of Power
Power With (Relational)
Power Over (Linear)
Power with (interdependency/relational): Collaborative, non-hierarchal
Power over (linear, hierarchal, claim-making): Find a way to generate power with what you have.
In community practice, there are time and places for both…can you think of examples (i.e. relational—building trust, engaging, etc.; linear in situations of natural or human-made disaster where decisions must be made quickly)
(Loomer, 1976)

14. CPR, Strengths Perspective
P: promise & possibilities
Saleeby’s CPR model and strengths-perspective has relevance at community-level, too…
The main idea of Saleebey’s strengths perspective is to improve the quality of life by:
Help indiv., family communities utilize their own capacities by
Identify and use their options
Understand barriers
Leverage the hopes and aspirations
Align them with their inner and outer resources
C: capacities, competencies, character
R: resiliency, resources, reserves
(Saleeby, 2000)

15. Social work roles in community practice (historical)
Settlement House movement
Located in neighborhoods with high poverty rates, focused on providing support (groups, classes, childcare, etc) to neighborhood residents
Goal to have “rich” and “poor” living in close proximity
Learn more:
Charity Organization Society
Worked in large urban areas in “scientific” ways, forerunner to United Way

16. Social work roles in community practice (modern)
Community planning =
Examine needs that exist in a community and identify means of addressing the deficits
Not conflictual
Community development =
Use entrepreneurial skills to build or a strengthen a financial base in a community; may also work to develop social service programs, educational programs, etc
Community organizing = Moral Monday Movement,
Engage community members in mobilizing forces to increase power, fight oppression and injustice
More likely to be conflictual

17. Case Study: Community Assessment
Best job in the neighborhood—and they own it: Worker co-ops expanding despite rust-belt economy Susan Arterian Chang Yes! Magazine Fall 2011

18. References
Chang, S.A. (2011). Best job in the neighborhood and they own it: Worker co-ops expanding despite rust- belt economy. Retrieved from neighborhood-and-they-own-it
Fellin, P The community and the social worker. Itasca, IL: Peacock.
Kansas University, Work Group for Community Health and Development. (2016). Community tool box. Retrieved from
Lin, N., Cook, K., Burt, R.S. (2008). Social capital: Theory and research. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Loomer, B.M. (1976). Two kinds of power. Criterion, 15(1),
McKnight, J. (1995). The careless society: Community and its counterfeits. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Netting, F.E., Kettner, P.M., McMurtry, S.L., & Thomas, M.L. (2017). Social work macro practice (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Saleebey, D. (2002). Power in the people. In D. Saleebey, The strengths perspective in social work practice (3rd ed.) (pp.1-22). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Tönnies, F. (2001). Community and civil society. J. Harris (Ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University.
Warren, R. (1975). A community model. In K. Kramer and H. Specht (Eds.), Readings in Community Organization Practice (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.