Liz Brandt, Community Engagement Director, the Corella & Bertram F. Bonner Foundation
In August 2021, Bonner Foundation Community Engagement Director, Liz Brandt, completed a master's thesis research project through the School of Education at Drexel University in Philadelphia, PA. The project examined the critical practices that support Community Engagement Professionals (CEPs) in actualizing the fulfillment of higher education’s civic mission.
Liz explains,
"From my personal experience and that of working closely with the Bonner Network across higher education, I understood firsthand the impact of marginalization – including lack of resources, support, power dynamics, and positionality – that affects individual staff members, and thereby the students, institution, and broader community."
In her research, Liz conducted a review of the literature, pointing to ways that Community Engagement Professionals are largely missing from the current scholarship. Existing community engagement research tends to focus on students, faculty, and increasingly on community partnerships. The little research on staff that does exist focuses on conceptualization and professionalization the Community Engagement Professional role with no current research examining the critical practices related to CEPs.
Liz developed an electronic survey that was administered to self-defined CEPs who responded to an invitation emailed across three online platforms, including the Bonner Network Staff Listserv and a national higher ed listserv for community engagement. To develop the survey questions she drew on her own experience as a Community Engagement Professional, Welch & Saltmarsh’s article “Current Practice and Infrastructures for Campus Centers of Community Engagement” (2013), Lina Dostilio's The Community Engagement Professional in Higher Education: A Competency Model for an Emerging Field (2017), and the Bonner Foundation's Bonner Pipeline Project Core Competencies Framework.
Through quantitative research methodology, Liz analyzed participants responses to questions regarding demographics, job satisfaction, and quality and institutionalization of community engagement on campuses.
The key themes that emerged from the findings included:
Community Engagement Professional role in faculty development and institutionalization:
This study found that "Institutionalizing Community Engagement" and “Faculty Development and Engagement" were the two categories of typical job roles and responsibilities for community engagement professionals least contributing to CEP job satisfaction. This is an important finding because the literature suggests that supporting faculty development and rewards, building infrastructure, and integrating and aligning community engagement with other institutional initiatives are key components to advancing and institutionalizing community engagement (National Forum on Higher Education for the Public Good, 2005; Saltmarsh, & Johnson, 2018).
Positionality and power dynamics:
Almost sixty percent of respondents identified “Institutional politics and/or power dynamics” as the factor least contributing to their job satisfaction. Multiple qualitative responses highlighted this concern including “Recognize and value the decades of effort in developing partnerships and programs,” “Having our work more respected by faculty,” and “Allowing students, faculty and nonprofits to see the staff as experts/primary contacts would do wonders for motivation.”
Compensation and support for Community Engagement Professionals:
49% of respondents reported being “not adequately compensated with salary/benefits” when asked about factors least contributing to job satisfaction. One respondent named compensation as the primary factor that would most influence them to leave their position and/or the field of community engagement in higher education, stating: “A position with another organization (whether nonprofit or for-profit) that compensates to my level of education and skill, that offers consistent and reliable opportunities for career advancement and skill development. My future at my institution is uncertain because I cannot anticipate a stable, upward trajectory, and am currently living barely above the poverty line despite 5-6 years of professional experience and a Masters degree.” Despite their unique skills, knowledge, and expertise, CEPs are not being adequately compensated or supported in their roles. In order to retain uniquely talented and skilled staff to foster quality programs and institutionalization of community engagement, increased compensation and support for CEPs should be a top priority.
Institutional infrastructure and support for community engagement:
43% of respondents reported that the “Institution lacks or does not provide adequate resources” as a top factor least contributing to their job satisfaction. The frequency with which hiring more community engagement staff showed up in the findings was striking. Having "adequate staffing to meet program needs” was one of the lowest mean responses for factors influencing practices that best support CEPs. One respondent said, “Get more staff! The departments that have the most impact on students and within the community are the most unsupported and understaffed offices on campus.”
Importance of institutional consistency in support for community engagement:
One interesting finding is the frequency with which CEPs identified inconsistencies in the institution promoting civic/community engagement as a priority (in statements, strategic plans, etc.) but not providing the necessary resources, staffing, and support. Over half (56%) of respondents identified “lack of institutional support for community engagement” as a factor that would most influence them to leave their current position and/or the field of community engagement in higher education. One respondent said, “Fully integrating service and volunteerism as part of a strategic plan, and not just in words, but in resources and institutional practices and actions. I am an office of one with less than $7,000 annual budget, yet 'civic responsibility' is one of the stated values of the college. Institutions must support their community engagement offices with resources that adequately address the interests and needs of students and our community partners.”
Community Engagement Professionals’ demographics and future implications:
67% of the respondents in this research held the job title of program coordinator or director and 61% with 10 or less total number of years working in the field. Meaning this research captures the perspective of CEPs who are not yet in senior leadership but would likely advance professionally into a center director role. The demographics of the respondents puts into perspective the rest of the findings from this research. It shows that those starting out or in the middle of their careers are dissatisfied with compensation, advancement and professional development opportunities, the lack of infrastructure and support for this work, the institutional power dynamics and politics, and challenges around positionality and lack of respect for the CEP role and the CE field. If budding CEPs are continually dissatisfied, higher education runs the risk of losing these skilled, experienced, and talented staff to other fields and positions.
As the world continues to face deeply troubling social, economic, political, and environmental crises, colleges and universities are uniquely positioned to be catalysts for change in communities. With students to mobilize, expertise from faculty, staff as builders and connectors to relationships and opportunities, and institutional resources (funding, technology, social capital), higher education has the pieces in place to partner with communities to address real and pressing needs.
However, in order for higher education to embrace this civic mission, it must prioritize and invest in the necessary infrastructure and support of campus-community engagement. Liz believes this research is important because it sheds a light on a critical piece of the infrastructure that's often missing from the conversation – the staff.
She explains,
"I chose this topic because the staff (CEPs), although a critical component of effective campus-community engagement, are largely left out of the current literature and scholarship. I hope to shed a light on CEPs and the critical practices that best support them and provide recommendations to campuses based on the findings."
According to the findings, the recommendation(s) of the practices that would most support CEPs that institutions are least engaging in include:
Support Community Engagement Professionals in their efforts towards advancing faculty development and institutionalization of community engagement. These practices include:
Reduce CEP workload by shifting or eliminating low-level activities and responsibilities to open time and capacity for CEPs to work on faculty development and institutionalization of community engagement.
Invest in Community Engagement Professionals with adequate compensation and support. These practices include:
Providing adequate compensation (salary, benefits, etc.) to CE staff
Ensuring mentoring and advancement opportunities
Engaging CE staff in conducting research
Publishing opportunities for CE staff
Including CE staff in campus professional development program(s)
Provide more infrastructure and support for community engagement. The number one recommendation is:
Provide adequate CE staffing to meet program needs. An institution could consider partnering with external organizations (National or Community Foundations, Other Grants, Local Businesses) to obtain additional funding and resources or shift existing institutional funds to hire more staff. Supporting staff to work with advancement offices to cultivate donors is critical.
Address inequities that foster barriers posed by power dynamics, positionality, and institutional politics. These practices include:
Establish awards for CE staff
Publicly recognize CE staff accomplishments
Liz aspires to publish this research in order to share it with a larger audience in hopes that community engagement professionals can get more support. Eventually, she plans to continue and expand on this research in a doctoral program. You can read the full thesis report on the Bonner Wiki here.