Harlem Children’s Zone in Chicago Wrap-Up

Posted by: Atena on: March 6, 2010

In: events
Comment!

These are my final thoughts on Replicating Harlem Children’s Zone in Chicago, an event hosted by Loyola University last week featuring Paul Tough, and a panel of local human services and education experts. Tough is the author of Whatever it Takes, a book chronicling Geoffrey Canada’s work creating and managing the Harlem Children’s Zone in New York. I attended and wrote a live blog of the event last week.

During the Q&A session, there seemed to be an air of skepticism in the room, which is not surprising. One woman asked very plainly, how can this mixed funding structure work in a state where the budget is not doing well, and human services has taken such a big hit? The essence of that statement is not so much a question of where matching dollars will come from, but rather, if we don’t have the collective will to pull it together and fund the myriad programs and services already in place, then how will we manage to get something like HGZ going? Paul Tough described Geoffrey Canada’s statement to potential Promise grant hopefuls at the HCZ conference, in which he told them, basically, ‘If you only think you can do this with the grant money, you should leave now.’ It’s a hard statement, but a necessary one. Budget troubles of the past year make it quite clear that the most powerful among us have not been prioritizing the well-being of people who are poor, who have the most need. To be realistic, we have to question whether or not the dedication is there.

Chicago would have a truly formidable system of comprehensive social supports for families that struggle with poverty and lack of resources, if only the programs that currently exist could pull together under a common/shared set of goals. If service providers would view themselves as links in a chain, they could be so powerful. It is unfortunate that many service providers are fairly uninspired, and end up serving to perpetuate the status quo. And as panel member Azim Ramelize stated, if things are going to change, it won’t be business as usual. I think it is difficult for many people who have been serving in non-profits for years to see anything beyond business as usual. But I also think that there are many, many people in non-profits who are tired of business-as-usual, tired of feeling like their work is a drop in the ocean, tired of talking themselves into believing in what they do every day. Some of those people must have been in the audience that night, looking for a thicker strand of hope to pull on.

From what I’ve read, hope is much of what Geoffrey Canada’s concept is riding on now: hope with an almost desperate promise of metrics, if we could all be patient for a while. And many of us are willing to be patient, because we believe as we have believed for years, that he’s making it happen – he’s doing it. He’s doing what we thought should be done all along: comprehensive services, for all stages of childhood, supportive of the family and community as well as the child. This is the silent promise we’ve been imagining, and Canada actually managed to speak the promise out loud. And it’s a little tense, because we have this seed of fear deep within us that something bad will happen, and when the math is all done, it won’t be proven. Our children won’t succeed, even with all of this money and effort, and then no one will invest in them ever again.

But I do believe. I think it must work, once all is said and done. These families that are going through the Harlem Children’s Zone will be generally better off, better prepared. These children who are starting in the Harlem Gems, and going through the HCZ schools and programs will do better than they would have done, statistically speaking, and will advance further as a group. I am reminded of the new Illinois Action for Children mission: Strong families, powerful communities, where children matter most. The HCZ model essentially creates a community environment where children do matter most; where money is spent on their education, and they are shored up on all sides. We shall see how it all plays out, but I think that it really does take this much money and effort to level the playing field, considering how much goes into throwing it off-balance. When the panel responded to the woman who asked about state funds, each response resonated along the same lines: it’s not that we don’t spend money on children, it’s that we spend it on the wrong things. I appreciate that they were willing to name this as a problem. This kind of programming would reflect an increased dedication to the success of children in all of our communities.

It was good to hear the perspectives of the different experts, but with such a diverse audience, I would have liked to have heard more of a conversation between the panel and the audience, or even among and between the panel members. Less lecturing, more interacting. Ultimately, I don’t think we got a good sense of what it would take to bring Promise Neighborhoods to Chicago, besides hearing people say the phrase “political will” over and over again. One issue that was touched on, though not in-depth, was the fact of Canada being a charismatic leader who drives the program with his own determination; Can anyone expect to replicate that? It makes me think of that book Three Cups of Tea by Greg Mortenson, in which his colleagues admit that at a certain point, the organization that he founded was essentially advancing based on Mortenson’s reputation and personal character. Not that other people were not involved or highly dedicated, but when one person’s relentless will and determination breathe life into a project, it is difficult for someone else to take the helm, or to create the same effect without that charismatic leader. Can Promise Neighborhoods work with dedicated teams that are not led by a desperately ambitious, intensely driven go-getter with a compelling personal story? I think much could be done if a strong replication model is developed, but I also think that it is an issue worth investigating further. Canada’s vision is genius, but genius tends to be obsessive and willing to sacrifice a lot. Can Promise Neighborhoods find that in enough leaders besides Canada to take Obama’s money and spend it well? I hope so.

The idea of Promise Neighborhoods and the model of the Harlem Children’s Zone is very exciting for people who want to serve children and families. Along with that excitement, however, comes a healthy degree of wariness. Will this happen? Can it? Our time and resources are so limited – will this be worth the effort? These Promise dollars will be highly sought after, so I am confident that more events will follow. I look forward to seeing how Chicago rises to this challenge, and whether or not we can make the most of this opportunity.