ST EOBHCSunset 072321 - Flipbook - Page 13
transformation was identified as critical in building movement toward the policies and systems
changes that would institutionalize more equitable material, social, and environmental conditions
for East Oakland residents for the long haul.
• Leadership: Strengthening local capacity and developing local leadership that is grounded in a
vision for transformation and change was lifted as a strong priority. Community residents felt that
local politicians had failed in adequately representing and advocating for the needs expressed
by poor and working families. They asserted that local leaders needed to be developed from,
accountable to, and supported at the grassroots level but also nurtured from the grassroots to
become systems and policy-making leaders. Developing local accountable leadership would
require deep engagement of residents in the decisions that impact their lives.
Who actually “governed” EOBHC was a constant paradox throughout the ten years. On the one
hand, BHC was TCE’s brainchild, and as such, TCE provided a rigorous set of requirements, stated
outcomes, and “drivers” as frameworks that BHC grantees were expected to adopt as a condition
of funding. On the other hand, EOBHC had a high degree of autonomy with respect to its own
developmental process and ultimately its programmatic direction. Sandra Davis, TCE Program
Manager based in Oakland, while expressing strong opinions—especially regarding the critical role of
community organizing—did not dictate direction to EOBHC, and in fact, often supported the decisions
of EOBHC’s decision-making bodies in spite of disagreeing with them or expressing concerns. She
would often remind EOBHC partners that TCE did not intend for BHC to be a “blanket” initiative, but
rather recognized the nuance of each place-based site, including East Oakland.
In hindsight, the leadership of EOBHC could have taken more ownership of its direction with Sandra
Davis’ support. However, TCE as a whole had not come to terms with this reality, creating a set of
contradictions that continued to frustrate the initiative’s implementation.
For example, TCE wanted residents to drive BHC, yet all of its funding went to nonprofit
organizations. TCE wanted the community to own BHC, yet it had a set of prescribed outcomes and
frameworks and made all of the funding decisions by itself. These unresolved contradictions and
resulting symptoms would surface throughout the entirety of BHC.
“There are just too many cooks in the kitchen...and the structure is not set up
to support organizing. There’s been three years of confusion! The structure
does not allow for organizing and systems change. It’s really frustrating.
All these meetings, to give reports. I just can’t go to all these meetings,
coalitions…then I have to go to EOBHC meetings to hear updates…all you
can do is update! With EOBHC, the structure was set before the work was
defined. Then there was the big super lofty logic model, honestly, it’s so big
it includes everything. We need to put the work in the structure. We need to
ask, ‘what’s the work?’ first.”
—EOBHC CBO partner
FOR THE LOVE OF BLACK EAST OAKLAND: EOBHC Sunset Report
7