Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
24 <br /> 3. Community Expert Sessions: <br /> Another result of Paternalism shows up as the failure to listen to the community. Often organizations and <br /> government bodies pre-determine what "best practice" should be applied, and community members are not <br /> trusted to determine their own solutions or know what is best. Community-led solutions require not just lis- <br /> tening to community feedback, but shifting power to community members and allowing them to guide each <br /> step of the conversation 3. <br /> Four sessions were held with a larger group of Community Experts to analyze County budget data <br /> from 2017-2022, share experiences, and develop key recommendations for decision-makers. Com- <br /> munity Experts from a broad range of backgrounds, including those from rural, urban, Black, Latinx, <br /> Refugee and Immigrant communities, participated in this process. These Experts represented those <br /> most impacted by food insecurity. During the sessions, budget data was presented and Community <br /> Experts engaged in conversation about what issues are important to them, if they see this money <br /> from the budget impacting their community, and where there are clear gaps in county priorities and <br /> community needs. The first session focused primarily on sharing budget data and asking the Commu- <br /> nity Experts to help design the following 3 sessions - this included developing a shared community <br /> agreement between all Experts and outlining some general goals. The following 3 sessions were pri- <br /> marily guided by the Community Experts. This approach varied from a traditional focus group format <br /> because Experts guided the conversation, allowing for a more open space and deeper analysis. They <br /> chose which areas to focus on, what conversations to have, and when to begin developing recom- <br /> mendations. The result is a list of candid recommendations and solutions to mitigate food insecurity <br /> substantiated by quotes directly from Community Experts. <br /> Assessment Team Practices <br /> The team met weekly to evaluate our approach and adapt in order to best suit community needs <br /> and Community Expert feedback. Constant iteration was a vital part of the process in order to center <br /> equity and ensure that the community was guiding the report. The assessment team used Arnstein's <br /> Ladder of Citizen Participation as a reflection tool to gauge where power was being held 4. The aim <br /> of this report is to provide direct community recommendations as the community experts shared <br /> them. While we have adapted Community Expert feedback into a report format, we have attempted <br /> to minimize any filtering and interpretation that has not come directly from the Experts. This required <br /> an additional Community Expert session to ensure that recommendations were being captured accu- <br /> rately. Additionally, the team's Community Consultant oversaw report writing and the Consultant along <br /> with Experts provided edits before the final report was released. Despite these efforts, there is still a <br /> level of interpretation that had to be done to meet the request for this assessment by the county. We <br /> recommend that county officials support additional community-led efforts and qualitative research to <br /> inform policy and funding distribution with an equity lens. <br /> 3 Ups://wfpc.sanford.dukeedu/wp-content/uploads/sites/15/2022/05/Whiteness-Food-Movements-Research-Brief-WFPC-October-2020.pdf <br /> 4 https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225 <br /> 9 <br />