Building Better

Communities
Fall 2004

A Getting Started
Resource Guide
for Community
Foundations
Publication Produced and Distributed by:
Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities
1500 San Remo Avenue, Suite 249
Coral Gables, FL 33146
(305) 667-6350
(305) 667-6355 fax
[email protected]
www.fundersnetwork.org

Prepared by:
Victoria Eisen
Transportation and Regional Planning Consultant
1516 McGee Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94703
[email protected]

Special Thanks:
This resource guide is a product of the Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities’
Community Foundations Leadership Project. Peer review was provided by John Chapman, East Bay
Community Foundation; Meredith Hatfield, New Hampshire Charitable Foundation; and Patricia Jenny,
New York Community Trust. Editorial assistance was provided by Maureen Lawless and Ben Starrett of the
Funders’ Network. Additional guidance, feedback, and interview and review time were provided by the
members of the Community Foundation Leadership Project (CFLP). We are grateful for their insights,
talents, and time. As of the date of this publication, CFLP members and supporters include:
Baltimore Community Foundation Humboldt Area Foundation
Baton Rouge Area Foundation Long Island Community Foundation
Berks County Community Foundation Marin Community Foundation
The Boston Foundation The Minneapolis Foundation
California Community Foundation New Hampshire Charitable Foundation
The Cleveland Foundation New York Community Trust
Coastal Community Foundation of South Carolina Rhode Island Foundation
Community Foundation for Greater Atlanta Rochester Area Community Foundation
Community Foundation for Greater New Haven San Diego Foundation
Community Foundation for Muskegon County The San Francisco Foundation
The Community Foundation of New Jersey Santa Barbara Foundation
Community Foundation for Southeastern Michigan Truckee-Tahoe Community Foundation
East Bay Community Foundation Vancouver Foundation
Essex County Community Foundation Ventura County Community Foundation
Greater Cincinnati Foundation Westchester Community Foundation
Greater New Orleans Foundation

© 2004 The Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities

Printed with soy-based ink on recycled paper.

The mission of the Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and
Livable Communities is to expand funders’ abilities to support
organizations working to build more livable communities through
smarter growth policies and practices. The Network serves as an
active resource and focal point for foundations, nonprofit
organizations, and other partners working to solve the
environmental, social, and economic problems created by
suburban sprawl and urban disinvestment and attempts to leverage
organizational, financial, and intellectual resources towards solving
these problems. The Network’s primary roles and responsibilities
include raising awareness of the connections between sprawl and
quality of life issues to communities of funders; bridging gaps
between sectors that are working on issues separately; ensuring
that diverse constituencies better understand the goals, objectives,
and benefits of smarter growth policies and investment practices;
adding knowledge through research and cataloging; and convening
and networking change agents in the field.

The Community Foundations Leadership Project (CFLP) was

launched in 2000 by community foundations within the Funders’
Network that joined forces to nurture community foundation
leadership in the livable communities movement and within the
Network. Many of the actions needed to be taken to assure that
communities grow in ways that benefit everyone are local.
Community foundations represent an existing philanthropic
infrastructure capable of influencing change at the local level
across North America. The CFLP strives to assure that this critical
constituency of place-based grantmakers has the information,
resources, and connections it needs in order to effectively impact
community growth and development issues. The CFLP is guided
by a national steering committee, chaired by Angel Fernandez-
Chavero from The Community Foundation for Greater New
Haven.
Foreword

Many community foundations across North America are acting to

assist their communities to make better decisions about growth and
development. This Getting Started Resource Guide draws on their
experiences to serve as a resource for other community
foundations interested in ensuring that better choices are made by
their communities regarding how and where they grow. Well-
planned future growth and development represents an
opportunity to improve communities and the environment. But
this requires good decisions to be made. Community foundations
can help in this process. This guide describes the roles that
community foundations can play in building better communities
and offers corresponding examples from community foundations
currently engaged in this work and resources available to help.

The Community Foundations Leadership Project of the Funders’

Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities is a
member-driven effort that strives to assure that community
foundations and other place-based grantmakers have the
information, resources, and connections they need. To help foster
information-sharing and raise awareness among the more than
600 community foundations in North America, the Network
documents the stories and experiences of the community
foundations with whom we currently work. If this guide interests
you, we would encourage you also to read the Network’s
publication, Leading the Field: Volume Two, which profiles the work
of 25 leading community foundations. Perhaps your community
foundation will be profiled in Volume Three?

On behalf of the members, board, and staff of the Network, we

are pleased to share this resource guide with you. We are
continually impressed by the leadership commitment,
resourcefulness, and imagination demonstrated by community
foundations. We welcome your advice, input, and involvement in
this work.

L. Benjamin Starrett
Executive Director
Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities
Fall 2004
Table of Contents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Connecting Community Foundations

to Livable Communities Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Building More Livable Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Taking Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Bringing in Financial Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Glossary of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Introduction

The manner in which regions grow Because the missions of community

and invest can assure they consist of foundations relate directly to
vibrant, healthy communities or can improving the quality of life for all
saddle them with ever-worsening residents of a community, becoming
traffic, air quality, income engaged in work that encourages
stratification, and a declining overall smarter growth development patterns
quality of life. Growth and and improves the livability of a
development decisions typically are region can be a natural evolution.
determined in public policy arenas Community foundations are using
that govern the use of land and tools such as grantmaking, creating
transportation investments. While collaborations, convening public
these may not be traditional areas of officials, educating community
grantmaking or action for community members, or creating new initiatives
foundations, they are critical influences to affect public land-use decisions.
on other programs areas such as public
education, economic opportunity, For some community foundations,
housing, environment, and health becoming involved in what some call
(some of the topics in what is referred “smart growth” work is a gradual
to as the suite of quality of life issues). process, while others are initially
If communities make choices about introduced to these issues in the
their growth and development that context of a specific opportunity or
lead to suburban sprawl1 and urban catalytic event. Regardless of how it
disinvestment, these choices are begins, it is important not to get
ultimately root causes for other caught up in the labels. Whether one
community concerns, such as poverty, calls it smart growth, livable
environmental degradation, and lack communities, quality growth, sensible
of opportunity for disadvantaged growth, or fair growth, the bottom
children and families. line is to help assure that communities
grow in ways so that everyone
Some community foundations are benefits. Important steps include
refocusing their attention to these root helping residents to have meaningful
causes, recognizing that addressing opportunities to participate in
them is integral to improving a planning processes, encouraging
community’s overall quality of life. public officials to undertake planning
For example, community foundations with an eye on the big picture, and
are engaging in local efforts to create ensuring that development benefit the
urban and suburban neighborhoods entire community, not just single
that, among other things: provide interests.
housing opportunities affordable to
everyone; give children the option to Activities available to community
walk and bike safely to school; protect foundations range from simple,
open space and productive farmland; short-term efforts, to multi-year,
and retain working families’ access to comprehensive initiatives that engage
good jobs. all facets of a foundation. Many
community foundations have found
1
1
Throughout this guide, the first reference to terms that are defined in the glossary are highlighted
in bold. Turn to the Glossary of Terms section that begins on page 39 for full definitions.
that they are well positioned to While this guide was written with
address these issues due to their community foundations in mind,
standing as respected conveners and many of the ideas and methodologies
civic leaders in their community with in the following chapters are equally
a commitment to place and that this applicable to any foundation with a
work is directly connected to other commitment to place (meaning
community issues they care about. commitment to a specific geographic
Because leadership is always place, as opposed to commitment to
attractive, this type of work has an issue).
attracted donors, due to its urgency
and effectiveness. The following section, Connecting
Community Foundations to Livable
Opportunities for getting involved in Communities Issues, highlights the
land-use and transportation activities connections between numerous areas
are available to fit nearly every budget in which foundations typically work
and endowment range for community and the opportunity to improve
foundations. Community foundations quality of life through smarter
are well suited to address these issues growth strategies. Later in the guide,
—and resources are available to help. Building More Livable Communities
In addition, national experts from the introduces issues, planning processes,
Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and solutions that have worked in
and Livable Communities are ready to other communities. Taking Action
help. The Network maintains a roster describes a number of roles that
of community foundation trustees, various community foundations have
CEOs and program officers that are employed in this work. Finally,
willing to help or to serve as resources Bringing in Financial Resources
to other community foundations. suggests ways of attracting additional
funds to augment a community
Designed to demystify the language foundation’s investment in this arena.
and processes associated with land-use Examples from community
and transportation planning, this foundations currently engaged in
resource guide outlines the connection various efforts are featured
between these issues and other quality throughout the guide. Further, a
of life concerns and provides examples listing of organizations that can
of community foundations that are provide additional web-based and
currently engaged in this type of work. printed resources appears towards the
The guide is primarily intended for end of the guide. The guide
community leaders who are interested concludes with a glossary that defines
in addressing these problems but may some of the terms related to smart
not know how best or where to start. growth and livable communities
Community foundation donors and issues. Throughout the document,
potential donors, trustees, CEOs, and the first reference to a term that
program and other staff considering appears in the glossary is highlighted
this direction will each benefit from in bold.
the resources listed in these pages.
2
Connecting Community Foundations
to Livable Communities Issues

T he core mission of community foundations, by and large, is

to improve quality of life in the communities they serve,
particularly for low-income and other disadvantaged residents.
Historically, this has meant grantmaking focusing on the visible
symptoms of the social and economic problems faced by low-income
communities and working families. But the challenges they face are
rooted in deeper problems stemming from how communities are
growing. As development has moved farther from the urban core,
finite public resources have been stretched outward as well, leaving
behind those who can neither afford nor access suburban housing
and jobs. Educational inequity and declining urban tax bases emerge
as a result. Further, research shows that inner cities are not the only
places that suffer the consequences of dispersed development
patterns. New development on a region’s edge also means loss of
open space and farmland, reduction of rural character, and immense
traffic congestion as commuters travel to new jobs that are scattered
far from traditional employment centers and public transit.

Beyond the inefficient location of new development, the

preponderance of large lot single-family homes also has contributed
to other quality of life issues about which community foundations
care. Such development—by virtue of its single use, spread-out
nature—isolates neighbors from informal interaction that takes
place and the civic engagement that occurs when residents can walk
to community destinations and spend less time in traffic.

Community foundations that are supporting efforts to entice

development back to established cities and inner-ring suburbs
understand that working on land-use and transportation issues is
essential to achieving their missions. For example, appropriate public
land-use regulations and subsidies can stimulate the private market to
provide a mix of housing types, commercial centers, and transportation
options. Community foundations can play a role in changing the
regulations and incentives to encourage this type of action.

Foundations may find it helpful to look at the work in which they

already are engaged through the lens of smart growth and livable
communities. The series of Translation Papers published by the Funders’
3
Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities describes the
links between smart growth land-use frameworks and many other issues
of importance to community foundations. Examples include:

Civic Participation It is increasingly difficult for members of

many communities to participate in
their children’s schools, to volunteer Due to their knowledge
on local boards and commissions, of local issues and
even to vote. These trends are, in reputation as neutral,
part, a result of commuters spending even-handed leaders,
more time driving and less time community foundations
taking part in their communities. are well-positioned to
Revitalizing urban areas and building tackle growth and
diverse, mixed-use communities in development concerns.
the suburbs offers workers housing They can choose to
and transportation choices which support local
have the potential to reduce average community-building
commutes, provide opportunities for efforts through
walking, and give families more time traditional grantmaking
to spend together and participate in or by participating in or
determining their communities’ initiating local planning
future (Translation Paper No. 4). processes.
Agriculture Farmers—particularly those at the edges of urban
areas—are constantly tempted by the prices their land could bring if
sold for development. To help sustain agriculture and preserve the
unique character of rural areas, farmers need substantial financial
incentives to continue farming and effective land-use regulation to
keep their land in agricultural production (Translation Paper No. 5).

Education In recent years, when a community approved the

construction of a new school, it was often sited on the edge of the
community. A new movement is afoot to reverse this trend, whose
goals include investing in existing urban schools and locating new
schools in existing neighborhoods (thereby knitting them into the
fabric of the surrounding community). Advocates of this movement
argue that schools being built today at the edges of communities fail
children in at least three ways: site size, funding that favors new
construction, and lack of walkable schools (Translation Paper No. 8).
4
 Children and Families The negative effects of current
patterns of growth and development on poor and minority families
by now are well understood. But the evidence is mounting that
sprawl has begun to take a toll on middle class children and families,
too. While conventional suburban design has been marketed, and
largely perceived, as an environment created especially for families,
concern is growing that its extensive focus on the dictates of the
automobile and neglect of some basic human needs may actually
come at the expense of children. Growing commute distances
among two-worker families are stealing parental time (and
supervision) from children. The combination of unwalkable
neighborhoods, sedentary lifestyle, and drive-through diet means
one in four of today’s kids will suffer from diabetes as an adult if
trends continue. Auto-oriented sprawl is causing people to drive
more, reversing gains in controls on air pollution at a time when
asthma rates among children are soaring; smog is known to trigger
potentially life-threatening attacks, and to exacerbate other ailments.
In fast-developing areas on the metro fringe, kids must be driven to
huge, anonymous schools that often are overcrowded when they
open (Translation Paper No. 9).

Public Health As work and home move farther apart, a car is

increasingly necessary to reach stores, school, and other day-to-day
activities. Automobile dependency is increasing the sedentary
nature of our lives, respiratory ailments, environmental pollution,
and accompanying health impacts and trauma associated with
automobile accidents. A growing number of public health
practitioners and researchers understand these connections and the
importance of incorporating community design into public health
strategies (Translation Paper No. 11).

Arts The arts have become a focal point for community building,
while the smart growth movement has become a focal point for
creating better places. In some communities, the overlap of these two
movements is a key community-building strategy. In other
communities, these two movements proceed along separate tracks.
This paper explores the role each movement plays in building
communities and the potential they have to work together to this
end (Translation Paper No. 12).
5
 In addition to these topics, the Funders’ Network has published
translation papers on air quality, energy, water, community
development, biodiversity, aging, transportation, parks and open
space, workforce development, and regional equity. For a more
detailed discussion of how each of these issues and others relate to
community decisions about growth and development, visit the
Network’s website at www.fundersnetwork.org to download copies
of all of the translation papers (readers may also request printed
copies of the papers in the series—at no charge—by completing a
publications order form, available online).

The series of Translation Papers published by the Funders’ Network for Smart
Growth and Livable Communities describes the links between smart growth land-
use frameworks and many other issues of importance to community foundations.
Examples (referenced in the preceding pages) include:
Civic Participation
Civic Participation and Smart Growth:
Transforming Sprawl into a Broader Sense of Citizenship
Translation Paper No. 4, November 2000
Agriculture
Agricultural Sustainability and Smart Growth:
Saving Urban-Influenced Farmland
Translation Paper No. 5, April 2001
Education
Education and Smart Growth:
Reversing School Sprawl for Better Schools and Communities
Translation Paper No. 8, March 2002
Children and Families
Children, Youth and Families and Smart Growth:
Building Family Friendly Communities
Translation Paper No. 9, August 2002
Public Health
Health and Smart Growth: Building Health, Promoting Active Communities
Translation Paper No. 11, February 2003
Arts
The Arts and Smart Growth: The Role of Arts in Placemaking
Translation Paper No. 12, April 2003 6
Building More Livable Communities

M aking a connection regarding the relationship between growth

and development patterns and other issues that community
foundations care about is a critical first step toward influencing
patterns of growth. As important, though, is understanding the
elements that make neighborhoods, towns, cities, and regions more
livable. The solutions are part community design—the physical
layout of buildings, streets, parks, and other parts of the built
environment—and part governmental intervention—how public
sector decisions and programs can induce the private sector to build
in a particular way. These elements may be considered the “rules of
the game,” which determine where, how, and what gets built.
Decoding the rules and reforming them so that they give a
community the desired results is a big part of the challenge of this
work.

The Taking Action section of this resource guide describes how

some community foundations have helped their communities
become more livable through grantmaking and/or direct
participation in influencing community design and governmental
intervention, while this section defines the specific elements
associated with community design and governmental intervention.

Community Design What constitutes progress toward a

more livable community varies, of course, from one place to
another. In some places it is encouraging market rate and affordable
housing development to breathe life back into downtown districts.
Elsewhere, it is providing opportunities for compact, transit-
oriented development on underused parcels adjacent to rail and
bus stations. In some suburban areas, it is encouraging new retail,
office, and residential development to be in shared structures or at
least adjacent, thereby creating places that foster plenty of
opportunities for walking and informal social interaction. The
following characteristics are common to livable communities:

• Downtown and Older Area Revitalization: Bringing housing,

retail, and jobs back to urban centers—without displacing existing
residents—can create vibrant 24-hour downtown and neighborhood
centers while reducing public expenditure on new infrastructure.
7
• Parks and Farmland Protection: Providing parks in urban
neighborhoods helps relieve the stress of urban life while better
planning for growth along cities’ edges allows local farms to
continue producing, provides recreational opportunities and
wildlife habitat, and helps to preserve the character of rural
communities.

• Places for Multiple Generations: Providing a variety of

development types offers housing choices that are affordable to
residents of all ages and income levels. This strategy allows teachers,
firefighters, and service industry employees to live in the
communities in which they work and senior citizens to live near
family and friends.

• More Choices among Housing and Neighborhoods: Development

that includes a variety of land uses—housing, shops, offices, parks,
public buildings—and the people that work in each creates vibrant
communities that are as enjoyable to visit as they are to live in.

• Meaningful Transportation Choices: Constructing housing and

jobs close to public transit and providing safe, reliable service
reduces regional traffic congestion, improves air quality, and offers
residents and workers transportation options.

• Reusing Vacant Properties: Supporting efforts that allow

abandoned shopping centers, empty homes, and industrial sites,
which are sometimes contaminated, to be reused for new walkable
neighborhoods and other productive uses maximizes resources.

• Walkable Neighborhoods: Building communities where children

and other residents can walk to school and other destinations can
help provide more social interaction and reduce obesity rates linked
to sedentary lifestyles.

Governmental Intervention Local and state governments

throughout North America are increasingly offering financial
incentives and/or regulatory relief for development that enhances
and revitalizes existing communities. While sometimes misused,
these programs are designed to stimulate the private sector to
provide a mix of housing types, revitalize inner cities, offer
8
 transportation options, protect open space, and the like. For the
most part, elected officials weigh-in only on very large or perhaps
controversial development decisions. Most day-to-day business
regarding zoning, codes, and other design regulations is managed by
local departments, often called the planning and zoning department
or the community development department, while permits are issues
by the building department. Collectively, their responsibilities
include dealing with the public on what, where, and how things are
built and leading public processes to update citywide and
neighborhood plans. There may also be regional or multi-
jurisdictional planning agencies that deal with planning, open space,
or transportation issues. For example, every urban area has a
metropolitan planning organization (MPO), which is responsible for
regional transportation plans that guide the use of federal (and
usually state and local) transportation funding. Staff and
representatives of planning/community development departments
and/or regional or multi-jurisdictional planning agencies will be
both resources and audiences for a community foundation’s work on
land-use, transportation, and related quality of life issues.

Throughout the United States, there is a general framework for

how a community grows. The overarching document is each city’s
general or comprehensive plan—updated every decade or so—that
defines the type of land uses that can take place in certain areas and
lays-out plans for new transportation facilities, parks, and the like.
Other documents, such as area specific plans or zoning ordinances,
guide future growth in a more fine-grained manner, identifying
building types and heights, public facilities, and transportation
patterns in a particular neighborhood or several block area.
Community foundations working on growth and development
issues should clearly identify the impact they wish to have at the
different levels in the planning process decision-making chain.
Community foundations that have a good understanding of the
forces that shape local community design and have identified
effective leverage points to influence decision-makers are well-
positioned to help build better communities (and thereby impact
their other issues of concern, from poverty to the environment to
the arts).

9
• Building Design: In the context of community livability,
building design determines a project’s relationship to the street and
to what degree it enhances its surroundings. Examples include
pedestrian amenities—benches, light posts, and wide sidewalks—
and features that allow development near a transit station to
capitalize on its location.

• Planning for Infill Development: Many developers describe the

ease with which they can build on greenfields, relative to the
challenges of building in existing neighborhoods, as a primary
incentive for building on the edges of town. There are many ways
to level the playing field between greenfield and infill development,
including developing neighborhood consensus on desirable
development and providing an expedited building permit process
for developers who build consistent with these consensus visions (as
has been done in the city of Milwaukee, Wis., for example). These
arrangements provide developers with an enhanced level of
certainty, thus making infill development more appealing.

• Local Ordinances: A community’s zoning regulations dictate the

type and intensity of land use allowable in each neighborhood.
Building codes prescribe key features that determine the feel of
structures from the street and the ease with which older buildings
can be refurbished and reused. Street design standards—usually
based on state statute—impact a community’s walkability. The
development of local codes and ordinances that clearly establish the
parameters of future development is another potential leverage
point for influencing community growth patterns. In such an
environment, permits are issued quickly to builders proposing to
develop consistent with these regulations. In addition, by
addressing increasingly prescriptive fire codes2, many communities
are showing that neighborhoods can be designed to protect public
safety while allowing for walking as a viable transportation option.

• Working at the Regional Level: A very large share of new growth

and development is occurring at the edge of metropolitan regions.
Therefore, making sure these new communities are as well designed
as possible is as important as working to improve existing
10
2
Examples include extremely wide streets and turning tadii (the tightness of a turn)
designed to allow two fire trucks to pass between parked cars. In contrast, narrower streets
can encourage walking by calming or slowing traffic and easing pedestrian street crossings.
 neighborhoods. As the nation’s suburbs grow and as commutes
lengthen, one community’s growth decisions increasingly impact
quality of life in neighboring cities and beyond. Working at the
regional level is becoming more imperative as people increasingly
live in one community, work in another, and shop in a third.
Activities can range from hosting and/or coordinating convenings
to discuss the region-wide impacts of a particular development
proposal to engaging in efforts to develop a region-wide vision.
Dozens of regions throughout North America have created or are in
the process of creating a vision of how they would like to grow in
the coming decades, such as Salt Lake City, Utah, and the Twin
Cities in Minnesota. These processes, usually assisted by planning
consultants, bring together all segments of a region’s population to
learn about the repercussions of and alternatives to current growth
patterns. These parties then work together with maps, often aided
by computers, to illustrate their visions for the future of their
communities.

• Working with State Government: In many states, development is

largely driven by state policies that unintentionally encourage
sprawl development. For instance, where local governments receive
a much greater proportion of their revenue from sales tax than
from property tax, there is an incentive to approve retail
development—particularly “big box”—over housing. Similarly,
state transportation funding criteria often embody a preference for
reducing traffic congestion over helping people reach their
destinations. This results in wider, longer freeways rather than
improved public transit, bikeways, and sidewalks. Working to shift
state law to improve local conditions is more difficult for
community foundations and will likely require a stronger focus on
partnerships and collaboration.

11
 Communication
Research shows that people throughout the United States and Canada share
many basic values. Most want to live in a place where there is a sense of
community, with a variety of housing and transportation options, and where
historic structures are valued and preserved3. And they want community input
to be considered in all public development decisions.
Not everyone uses a common vocabulary when it comes to growth and
development. Researchers have found that many of the words used by
planners and developers to describe the concepts outlined in this guide do
not effectively communicate key aspects of their work to the public. This
research shows that the words “smart growth” can be the most
misinterpreted of all. If infill, mixed-use development with a sense of place is
smart, then is edge development dumb? What about the leaders who
approved it? The residents who live there? This is not the type of sentiment
that the smart growth and livable communities movement intends to convey.
In written materials prepared by grantees and by community foundations
themselves, good communicators are striving to use language that is more
descriptive to lay people and planners alike. For instance, rather than relying
on such terms as “mixed-use,” “mixed-income,” “walkable communities,” and
“smart growth,” these concepts are increasingly being conveyed in terms that
emphasize the housing and transportation choices available to residents of
communities that offer a variety of housing types, sidewalks, and nearby
shopping districts.
Similarly, lumping apartments, duplexes, townhouses, and small lot single-
family homes under the name “affordable housing,” evokes (right or wrong)
images of drugs and crime. Rather than labeling housing by how much it
costs, community foundations should instead talk about members of the
community such housing is designed to serve (e.g., “workforce housing” is a
term used to describe the ability for teachers, police officers, firefighters,
emergency responders, hotel and other service employees to live in or near
where they work) or to use alternative descriptions to describe cost (i.e.,
“modest” or “moderately priced” housing). Some foundations have found that
increasing awareness of statistics that compare average local home prices to
local salaries can provide one of the most convincing arguments for building
a greater variety of housing types.
Many community foundations have found that the most perfectly chosen words
are no match for local examples of community-enhancing projects. Showing the
challenges these developments overcame, the sense of neighborhood and
community they helped create, and their legacy for future generations help to
show how far smarter growth development strategies can go toward building
better communities that appeal to people across North America.
12
3
ActionMedia, “Communicating Smart Growth,” for the Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and
Livable Communities. August 2004
 Taking Action

S ometimes the most compelling information is from other

community foundations that have grappled with the very issues
another organization is facing. How have other community
foundations throughout North America succeeded in helping to
shape their communities? What sorts of issues have they taken on
and with what results?

In 2001, the Funders’ Network published Leading the Field:

Community Foundation Leadership in Smart Growth and Livable
Communities, an anthology describing over two dozen pioneering
North American community foundations involved with improving
the quality of life in the communities they serve. An updated sequel
to Leading the Field highlights how these and other community
foundations continue to work in this arena (fall 2004).

The community foundations interviewed for and profiled in this

report became engaged in smart growth and livable communities
work in a variety of ways. For some, it was a gradual process, while
for others it was more sudden, precipitated by a specific event or
development proposal. Activities can range from simple, short-term
efforts, to multi-year, comprehensive initiatives that engage all
facets of a foundation. As a result, this guide outlines examples of
roles ranging from grantmaker, convener, educator, engaged
participant, and initiator.

Community foundations across North America have taken a

number of different paths in pursuit of smarter growth principles.
Some use their grantmaking to directly impact the rules of the
game, by making grants, for example, in support of land-use and
transportation advocacy, research on the potential impacts of
development proposals, and reports assessing water and air quality.
At other foundations, staff convene key stakeholders in local
planning processes, providing a venue or process in which the
community can reach its own consensus. Some foundations focus
their resources on educating decision-makers and other community
members. Some community foundations assign staff or trustees to
be engaged and at the table regarding local, regional, and state
policymaking related to growth and development. Finally, some
13
community foundations have gone even further towards
participating in shaping their community’s future by creating
staffed initiatives that undertake multiple tasks. While there is
significant overlap among these roles and activities, following are
specific descriptions and examples pertaining to each.

Taking the Next Steps

at the Foundation
First, a community foundation leader must understand the
growth-related issues facing her or his community, become
familiar with its local planning process, and find out the ways in
which other community foundations are working in this area to
improve community quality of life. The next step is to increase
the number of allies she or he has at the community foundation.
For example, CEOs need the support of trustees. Trustees need
the support of program staff. Program staff members need the
support of their CEO and colleagues.

Sometimes research efforts uncover a local expert who

understands the issues that resonate with the community
foundation and can communicate them effectively. If so, she or
he could be invited to present at an upcoming board meeting or
to brief foundation staff. In addition, national experts from the
Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities are
ready to help. The Network maintains a roster of community
foundation trustees, CEOs, and program officers that are willing
to help or to serve as resources to other community foundations.

14
 Foundation as Grantmaker

M aking strategic grants is one way that foundations can help

their communities grow smarter. Strategic grants in this arena
may support research and technical assistance, public education and
media work, consensus building efforts, and community
assessments. Often this type of work provides the data needed by
decision-makers to make informed assessments of community needs
(and sometimes, overcome local opposition to change—frequently,
data provided by developers are the only types of information
available). The focus of such research efforts may include increasing
density without decreasing livability, revitalization without
gentrification, and understanding the availability of and need for
housing that is affordable to all in a region.

While most community foundations make these types of grants

independently, others have joined together to form a funding
collaborative for an even bigger impact. Some foundations also
have been involved with creating land trusts—using a revolving
loan or grant funding to protect irreplaceable land—administered
either by the foundation or externally. As with a community
foundation’s work on any type of important community issue, the
possible approaches are only limited by imagination and resources.

A Funders’ Collaborative: Making a Bigger

Impact by Working with Other Funders
The Greater Cincinnati Foundation
The Greater Cincinnati Foundation has created a “funders’
collaborative”—multiple grantmakers working toward a shared goal—
for the region’s Better Together Cincinnati efforts. The collaborative
supports initiatives intended to achieve greater equity, opportunity,
and economic inclusion for the African American community. It is a
model for other foundations, particularly in communities with
corporations that may be willing to back efforts to improve their
regions, but that do not have time to engage as fully on local issues
as a community foundation. When a community foundation
facilitates the process of working together with other funders by
organizing a funding collaborative, it is giving itself and other
funders in the community the opportunity to make a bigger impact
than they could by working alone.

15 www.greatercincinnatifdn.org
 The Long Island Sound Initiative:
Developing a Partnership of Community
Foundations Using Grantmaking
New York Community Trust
Long Island Sound, sandwiched between New York and
Connecticut, is recognized as one of the nation’s premier
estuaries. The New York Community Trust (NYCT) sponsored
the Long Island Sound Initiative with twin aims of protecting
remaining open space around the Sound, and increasing public
access to it. At the same time the Trust saw the initiative as a
vehicle for engaging community foundations in neighboring
Connecticut in this regional environmental issue. Responding
to recommendations from a 1994 comprehensive plan for the
Sound, three nonprofit organizations—Regional Plan
Association, Save the Sound, and Audubon New York—came
together in 1999 to identify ways to preserve, restore, and
increase public access to the Sound’s coastal areas and open
space. The goal of these three groups (known collectively as
Long Island Sound Partners) is to set up a network of protected
sites—including natural areas and developed parks—by
claiming the few parcels of land that have not been developed
and by reclaiming other key sites.

Apart from the obvious environmental benefits of NYCT’s Long

Island Sound Initiative, the Foundation supports Long Island
Sound Partners in an attempt to encourage Connecticut
community foundations to join in the effort. Toward that end, in
2003, the Foundation convened a meeting of half-a-dozen
Connecticut community foundations to discuss ways to get
them involved in addressing the challenges facing the estuary,
possibly using a portion of the money NYCT has allocated to
the Long Island Sound Initiative. New York Community Trust’s
strategy is to give their neighboring community foundations the
resources they need to gain the experience working on
environmental issues that will let them go on to initiate and
sponsor other environmental efforts of regional significance.

www.nycommunitytrust.org

16
 Foundation as Grantmaker

Affordable Housing Land Trust

California Community Foundation (Los Angeles)
In response to Los Angeles’ acute shortage of affordable
housing, the California Community Foundation has developed a
unique urban land trust, formed by a December 2002 vote of
the Foundation’s board of governors that formed a supporting
organization—The Community Foundation Land Trust (CFLT)—
and funded its initial operations with a $3.8 million grant. The
CFLT acquires residential property in low-income communities,
removes it from the marketplace, and places it in trust for
affordable homeownership without raising the cost of the land
for 99 years. The Land Trust has many partners and has
received additional operating support from the Fannie Mae
Foundation and Washington Mutual Foundation.

The Trust provides low-income families an opportunity to own

their own home without having to acquire the expensive land
upon which it sits. Each family will own its Trust Home with only
two restrictions: 1) the family must occupy the home; and 2)
when they are ready to move, the family must sell the home to
a like kind income buyer.

Because CFLT purchases the land, which in Southern California

can account for over 40 percent of the total cost of a home,
the homeowner does not need to finance the land component,
and therefore has a smaller mortgage to service. A Land Trust
home can therefore be financed on a 15-year self-amortizing
mortgage rather than a 30-year mortgage. Instead of the tax
deduction write-off of interest payments, CFLT homeowners
accumulate principal. Furthermore, after 15 years they will no
longer have a mortgage payment. Stabilized communities and
long-term stakeholders with economic security are among the
key benefits built into the Land Trust model.

www.calfund.org

17
Foundation as Convener

Due to the respected position community foundations hold in their

communities, and the breadth of contacts foundation staff have
with grantees and other civic leaders, one of the most common
roles community foundations play after grantmaking is that of
convener. Often, meetings initiated
by foundations offer the first Where smart growth
opportunity for funders, decision- and livable communities
makers, and other community issues are concerned,
leaders to sit down face-to-face in community foundations
pursuit of mutual goals. These
often have a unique
convenings can take the form of a
meeting, a series of meetings or opportunity to be the
larger, almost conference-like, first to bring important
processes. constituencies together
in a community for
Where smart growth and livable
communities issues are concerned, conversation about
community foundations often have how and in what way a
a unique opportunity to be the first community wants to
to bring important constituencies grow.
together in a community for
conversation about how and in what way a community wants to
grow. Due to the fact that livable communities concerns cross not
only regions, but also issue areas, community foundations represent
a wealth of expertise and often have connections to representatives
from all sectors affected by development decisions. In some areas,
this convening role can help fill the vacuum of region-wide
leadership, particularly where county government is weak or where
no effective regional association of governments exists.
It is important to understand that community foundations that do
this work typically are not “neutral” in the classic sense of the word.
They do have a point of view, which is that the community needs
to make better decisions regarding how it grows. But because the
community foundation is perceived as fair and even handed, it can
provide a valuable forum for the community to come to consensus
around these sometimes contentious issues.

18
 Foundation as Convener

First Suburbs Consortium: Helping Cleveland’s

Inner Suburbs Work Together
The Cleveland Foundation
Since 1996, The Cleveland Foundation has supported the
First Suburbs Consortium, a collaborative effort of the
mayors of ten of Cleveland’s inner suburbs. In the context
of the Consortium, these neighboring municipalities sit
down together to talk about their common issues—
including how to work with the city of Cleveland, diversify
their housing stock, and make their retail areas more
competitive.
www.clevelandfoundation.org

Prosperity! The North Coast Strategy

Humboldt Area Foundation (California)
The Humboldt Area Foundation serves the northernmost
counties of California, a region whose economy has historically
relied on seasonal industries such as forestry, fishing, and
agriculture. In the early 1990s, law enforcement officials and
social service providers showed the Foundation’s board that
rates of substance abuse and domestic violence were rising
during seasonal layoffs.

The Foundation was not satisfied that its efforts were

stemming the need for social services. It decided to expand its
efforts toward diversifying the economy in an attempt to even-
out the swings in employment and unemployment. The
Foundation convened business and civic leaders, developers,
educators, and others to discuss what various sectors could do
to strengthen the region’s economy.

Together, the group eventually created Prosperity! The North

Coast Strategy, a plan that identifies steps that businesses, the
public sector, and others can take to strengthen the region’s
economy by integrating sustainable development concepts.

www.hafoundation.org
19
 Creating a Bay Area Region-Wide
Community Foundation Collaborative
The San Francisco Foundation
East Bay Community Foundation
Marin Community Foundation
Peninsula Community Foundation

The San Francisco Bay Area is home to several large

community foundations with significant resources. Although
there is some overlap between their service areas and
instances when two or more have co-funded an effort, these
community foundations to date have never worked together
on a project of region-wide significance.

Since 2003, the foundations have been meeting to identify

opportunities for collaboration to improve quality of life in
neighborhoods and at transit hubs throughout the Bay Area.
Because of the belief that the region’s community foundations
together can accomplish more than they can working alone, in
the summer of 2004 this collaborative committed to drafting
a proposed business plan for a “Bay Area Livable
Communities Initiative.” Pooling and leveraging grant dollars
and capitalizing on each foundation’s local contacts and
reputation could provide an effective and powerful
partnership.

While still in the formative stages, this collaboration of

community foundations will assuredly lead to joint endeavors
that are worthwhile and relevant for each. Yet, even absent a
common undertaking, the meetings are improving the ability
of each to engage in local planning decisions by virtue of
participants’ better understanding of the regional context in
which they all are working.

www.sff.org

20
 Foundation as Educator

While the convener role is primarily targeted—in the initial stages—

to constituencies that already have some familiarity with and
connection to growth and development issues, some foundations also
try to educate those who are less familiar with the relationships
between development patterns and traffic, poverty, commerce, and
the environment. Whether these foundations are working with
government officials, community groups, or the general public, their
roles can include fostering one-on-one dialogue, arranging a lecture
series, or being part of a larger broad-based effort. Local newspapers
or television stations often are interested in partnering in this type of
work. Some community foundations that engage in education take
on a pubic relations role by building awareness of the linkages
between quality of life and better community design.

Influencing Policy through Education

The Community Foundation for Greater New Haven
(Connecticut)
In the early 2000s, the Community Foundation for Greater New
Haven (CFGNH) invited nationally respected political economist
Myron Orfield to study the greater New Haven region. Orfield
concluded that, as in other metropolitan areas across the
United States, greater New Haven’s urban problems are no
longer limited to urban areas. In order to solve them, urban,
suburban, and rural areas need to work together to find
solutions that work for everyone.

Supported with funding from CFGNH, the Archdiocese of Hartford

is using these findings in a gradual grassroots campaign—called
CenterEdge—to educate the general public about the need for
regional cooperation and, eventually, for statewide solutions to
economic development, transportation, and other quality of life
challenges in the greater New Haven region.

The Foundation’s president and board overcame their

trepidation of supporting a grassroots effort for the first time
and were willing to fund the project because they understood
that CenterEdge is important to the success of other
Foundation efforts to improve quality of life in the region.
21 www.cfgnh.org
 HousingMinnesota: Education with an Edge
The Minneapolis Foundation
In 1998, The Minneapolis Foundation issued a Request for Proposals
(RFP) to spur a new approach to affordable housing advocacy:
professional advertising and public relations—never before used in
Minnesota to sway public opinion and influence legislators on the
issue. The RFP called for nonprofits to partner with a public relations
firm to distill a clear, cohesive message and bring the issue to public
attention and onto the radar screen of state legislators.

HousingMinnesota—the statewide collaborative that formed as a result—

created billboards, bus signs, radio and print ads, a website, and a
brochure rooted in messages of self-interest—making connections
between affordable housing and healthy economic development,
children’s academic success, and other issues that enjoy broad public
support. Examples of the provocative nature of the campaign include a
teacher at a blackboard with the caption, “Meet another member of your
community who needs an affordable place to live,” and “If he can’t
afford a place to live, he can’t afford to keep you running,” next to a
picture of a car mechanic.

As one observer noted, “As a result of these advocacy efforts,

affordable housing catapulted from relative obscurity to the top of
the public policy agenda in a very short period of time. There is now
widespread public acceptance of the primacy of this policy issue, as
witnessed by the willingness of virtually every local political
candidate and official to embrace this goal.”

www.minneapolisfoundation.org

Improving the Livability of the Vancouver Region

Community Dialogue Series
Vancouver Foundation (British Columbia)
In order to engage members of their grantmaking advisory committees
and board, inform their grantmaking, and raise the Foundation’s profile,
the Vancouver Foundation recently hosted a Community Dialogue
Series. Each day of this four-day series was organized around trends
that were identified earlier by a Foundation-sponsored demographer:
Canada’s aging population; immigration vis-à-vis the country’s negative
birth rate; the dichotomy between Canada’s urban and rural
economies; and issues related to aboriginal (or “First Nation”) rights.
The Simon Fraser University-Wosk Centre for Dialogue provided space
and facilitation and the Vancouver Foundation, using unrestricted
funds, paid for the series’ expenses.
22
www.vancouverfoundation.bc.ca
 Foundation as Advocate—
Engaged and at the Table
Increasingly, community foundations are investing staff time in direct
engagement with decision-makers, neighborhood and business groups,
and other parties interested in collaborating on ways to improve an
area’s quality of life. These foundations are making use of their positions
in their respective communities as even-handed leaders that have the
best interests of the entire community at heart when they engage in
community planning processes initiated by local governments, residents,
developers, or other parties.
Being engaged and at the table can
Being engaged and at range from speaking at public
the table can range from meetings where key decisions are
speaking at public scheduled to be made, to
meetings where key participating in the evolution of such
decisions are scheduled decisions from inception to research,
to debate at multiple boards or
to be made, to commissions and at the decision-
participating in the making body. The staff resources that
evolution of such a community foundation invests in
decisions from inception such endeavors can similarly range
to research, to debate at from a portion of existing foundation
multiple boards or employee time to dedicating one or
commissions and at the more staff members to engaging in
policy discussions about local and
decision-making body. regional growth. This staff
investment is often—but not
always—accompanied by a budget to develop supplementary
information and studies to assist decision-makers. Examples of this
work include traffic studies that reveal the local and regional impacts of
transit-oriented development, economic analyses to estimate the market
for various types of development, and planning assistance to develop
alternative codes and ordinances.
Initially, community foundations may be concerned about staff taking a
position where important decisions regarding use of land and
transportation investments are being made. Yet many have found that,
due to the urgency of these issues and the effectiveness of participating
in efforts to influence growth, these leadership activities have actually
attracted donors and helped to fulfill the foundation’s mission.

23
 The Livable Communities Initiative:
Advocating for Community Change
East Bay Community Foundation
(San Francisco Bay Area)
Since 1998, the East Bay Community Foundation’s Livable
Communities Initiative (LCI) has worked in six diverse
communities throughout the Foundation’s two-county service
area. From neglected inner-city neighborhoods to sprawling
outer-ring suburban cities to rural communities on the
metropolitan fringe, LCI is committed to creating more
equitable and sustainable growth patterns in all parts of the
East Bay.

One of the hallmarks of LCI is its adaptability to the context in

which it is working. In the city of Oakland’s Uptown district, LCI
plays one of the key roles of a community foundation—that of
convener—by bringing together stakeholders groups. The
movement is also working in Pleasanton—an outer-ring
suburban community—to convert the largest office park in
Northern California into a mixed-use, transit-oriented
development. In Brentwood—a rapidly growing agricultural
area—LCI is working with city staff, farmers, and residents to
create mechanisms to preserve farmland while providing
affordable farm worker housing.

Through these diverse efforts, LCI staff has discovered that

they add the most value to East Bay growth challenges in the
roles of convener, broker of technical assistance, educator,
grantmaker and—most notably—advocate for the policies and
projects that the Foundation believes will improve the quality
of life for residents of the East Bay region. Outside
foundations have provided 90 percent of LCI’s initial funding.
Staff members believe that building an internal donor base
that supports this work is critical to the sustainability of the
LCI, given the long-term commitment required to affect real
change in land-use issues.

www.eastbaycf.org

24
 Foundation as Advocate

Livable New Hampshire:

Leading a New Statewide Movement
New Hampshire Charitable Foundation
The New Hampshire Charitable Foundation (NHCF) has
become a key player in smart growth discussions throughout
the state through its in-house Livable New Hampshire
program. Livable New Hampshire coordinates and
consolidates the Foundation’s smart growth-related
grantmaking and convening.
Through its convening work, NHCF has emerged as a key
smart growth connector in the state. As a result, the New
Hampshire Department of Transportation (DOT) has asked
NHCF to play important roles on two major transportation
projects. One involves convening and facilitating an advisory
group of state opinion leaders to help the DOT use the
state’s first comprehensive long-range transportation plan to
inspire better land-use planning. The Foundation also is
working closely with DOT to develop a unique technical
assistance program to help communities that will be
impacted by a major highway widening project deal with
increased growth from the project and to work better as a
region to preserve quality of life.
www.nhcf.org

Concerned About the Legal and Tax Implications

of Influencing Public Policy?
Community foundations, as leaders in a region, have powerful voices
that can be used to articulate community needs and emphasize
required public policy changes that can be more effective than any
one grant or program. Public policy engagement is both a legal and
ethical activity for community foundations. Organizations and
resources are available to help navigate the types of advocacy and
lobbying activities in which foundations can be legally involved:
• Council on Foundation’s Community Foundation Program: www.cof.org
• Charity Lobbying in the Public Interest (CLPI): www.clpi.org
• Alliance for Justice: www.allianceforjustice.org
25
Foundation as Initiator

While the convener role is primarily targeted—in the initial stages—

to constituencies that already have some familiarity with and
connection to growth and development issues, some foundations also
try to educate those who are less familiar with the relationships
between development patterns and traffic, poverty, commerce, and
Community foundations that are engaged and at the table
participating in local planning processes are influencing how their
communities grow. Many of these foundations are finding now that
creating new issue-specific initiatives on aspects of the smart growth
and livable communities agenda can accomplish much more than can
the intermittent engagement of program staff in a number of ways.

By dedicating one or more foundation employees to such efforts,

initiative staff can be fully engaged in local planning issues, leaving
program staff to focus on grantmaking. Such personnel are
sometimes former program officers, but many times have experience
in the local planning realm and are well positioned to bring a higher
profile to their new employer by working visibly in the community
on development issues of importance. Community foundations that
have made the decision to form an initiative often begin by
developing an overall vision of what they want to accomplish so that
they can allocate their time and financial resources more strategically.
Such foundations can initiate needed planning activities, rather than
being limited to participating in already established processes. Finally,
staffed foundation initiatives have the time and vocabulary to seek
and attract resources from private foundations, corporate donors, and
grantmakers that specialize in growth and development issues. Many
discover that these (sometimes high-profile) initiatives appeal to
existing donors—or even bring in new ones—who favor a proactive
approach.

Some community foundation initiatives advocate for issues that are

important to their local neighborhoods and regions. In addition to
funding advocacy work, these foundations speak publicly on behalf
of particular projects, organize and encourage individuals to do the
same, and engage directly in the development of public policy.
Foundations involved in advocacy work have found that it often
attracts donors who might not have otherwise supported the
foundation’s traditional efforts.
26
 Foundation as Initiator

Using Indicators to Measure and Drive Change

The Boston Foundation
From input at a series of meetings with grantees in 1997,
Boston Foundation staff began to see the connections
between the disparate grants it was making to improve
housing, health, transportation, and the environment. One of
the common elements of the funded efforts was difficulty in
measuring their impact. This was of interest to the
Foundation, which had earlier taken on the challenge of
developing neighborhood level data for planning and advocacy
purposes and for tracking demographic changes between U.S.
census cycles. Thus was born the Boston Indicators Project.

The data developed by the Indicators Project—which is

managed and funded by The Boston Foundation—helps
communities in the greater Boston area organize themselves
strategically, especially around issues related to education.
The Boston Foundation feels that educational equality is a key
to smart growth, particularly to the extent that poor urban
schools drive white flight, which, in turn, fuels suburban
sprawl and urban disinvestment, thus reducing the resources
available to inner-city schools.

A number of community foundations across the country are

now adapting and adopting the Boston Indicators Project
framework for thinking about citywide and regional change.

www.tbf.org

27
A Smart Growth Circuit Rider: Bringing Tools to Planners
Essex County Community Foundation (Massachusetts)
Despite Essex County Community Foundation’s youth (it was founded in
1998) and its relatively small endowment ($5 million), the Foundation has
proven that any community foundation—regardless of age or size—can serve
as a catalyst for smart growth activity in its community.
The Foundation’s Environmental Stewardship Initiative provides leadership in
promoting smart growth in Essex County, which has no other organizations
focusing on such issues. An example of the Initiative’s proactive approach is
their 2004 hiring of a “Smart Growth Circuit Rider”—a professional planner
available to all 34 cities and towns in Essex County to offer hands-on technical
assistance to planners, zoning boards, and town administrators. The Circuit
Rider provides information, maps, model bylaws, and any other materials
communities need to learn the principles and processes of making smart
growth a reality in Essex County. Local communities have been so responsive
that, in addition to one-on-one appointments, the Circuit Rider is now offering
sub-regional meetings on common topics.

www.eccf.org

Helping Create a New Urbanist Downtown

Baton Rouge Area Foundation (Louisiana)
In response to a decades-long trend of affluent residents abandoning their city for
outlying suburbs, Baton Rouge Area Foundation brought in a lecturer from the
Congress for the New Urbanism to make public presentations and meet with key
civic leaders about the benefits of a vibrant, diverse, walkable downtown.
When the community embraced these concepts, the Foundation convened an
advisory committee and hired the renowned architecture and town planning firm,
Duany Plater-Zyberk and Company to lead a weeklong design charrette. The
eventual outcome of the Foundation’s education and convening efforts was Plan
Baton Rouge: a downtown master plan—including follow-up work needed for
implementation—funded by the Foundation and the state and local governments.
To facilitate and monitor the implementation of the master plan, the Foundation
also funded and houses the staff of Plan Baton Rouge. The Foundation first
renovated an older building downtown for its own offices and now has built a
20,000 square foot “green” building for its permanent home in downtown.
Widespread support for the plan has resulted in over $500 million in new public,
private and philanthropic investment in a broad spectrum of retail ventures,
cultural amenities, and infrastructure improvements.

www.braf.org 28
 Foundation as Initiator

The GreenWays Initiative:

Using Trails to Promote Green Ways of Living
Community Foundation for Southeastern Michigan
(Detroit)
Using the publication, A Vision for Southeast Michigan
Greenways—published by the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy in
1998 and funded in part by the Community Foundation for
Southeastern Michigan (CFSEM)—to help define the potential
for what could be done on the ground in southeast Michigan,
CFSEM announced a five-year, $25 million GreenWays
Initiative in 2001.

The GreenWays Initiative supports the planning, design, and

construction of greenways, which are landscaped paths for
walking and biking, technical assistance, and training for
organizations and agencies responsible for greenways, and an
improved understanding of the benefits of greenways. It
encourages communities to plan and work together, thus
ensuring the connectivity of the regional greenways network,
shared benefits across jurisdictional lines, and the stimulation
of a number of multi-jurisdictional partnerships that expand
beyond joint grant applications to tackle common challenges.

Although the GreenWays Initiative is an initiative of the

community foundation, all administrative costs of and grants
made by the program come from funds raised expressly for
the GreenWays Initiative.

www.cfsem.org

29
Bringing In Financial Resources

C ommunity foundations may not initially think that they have

the financial resources required to independently bankroll
either direct staff work or a long-term foundation initiative. As with
other complex social problems, the effects of ill-planned development
and sprawl require long-term investment in order to achieve desired
outcomes, change, and results. Therefore, in addition to new
knowledge, attracting new money may be instrumental as a
community foundation proceeds to work on these issues.

Attracting grants from larger foundations and public agencies requires

the investment of staff time and skill in using small grants to leverage
larger ones. To be successful, rather than limit themselves to the
livability issues that motivated them to enter this arena in the first
place, community foundations should think broadly and strategically
about connections to other issues that may make them eligible for a
much wider range of outside grants. For instance, a foundation’s
efforts to have more housing affordable to area workers built may be
appealing to corporate interests whose employees must commute
long distances to find an affordable place to live. Public health
grantors battling childhood obesity may be interested in partnering
with a community foundation’s efforts to make community design
changes that encourage walking and/or bicycling. Funders that
support the work of land trusts and conservation groups sometimes
support projects that facilitate infill development.

Creating a foundation initiative can attract the attention of

potential donors interested in enhancing community livability.
Some foundations have found that such donors would not
otherwise have considered contributing to their organizations.
Others have found that working on environmental issues has
brought a suite of new, younger donors to their door.

Bringing in requisite financial resources can be one of the most

challenging aspects of engaging in livable communities work (due
to the long-term perspective needed to garner the outcomes the
movement seeks to achieve). Yet as foundations and others increase
the visibility of community design, transportation choices, and
other issues related to livability, new financial resources are
emerging:
30
 • Donor-Directed Funds: Increasingly, community foundations
that dedicate unrestricted funds to growth and development issues
are encouraging donors to do the same with donor-directed funds.
By creating “philanthropic engagement officers,” foundations such
as Peninsula Community Foundation (in the San Francisco Bay
Area), The Minneapolis Foundation, The Community Foundation
for Greater New Haven, and others are cultivating and educating
an active and informed donor base that understands the
relationship between smarter growth patterns and the societal and
environmental challenges in which they seek to invest, as well as
other complex public policy issues.

• Other Prospective Donors in the Community: Individual

philanthropists who may not be current donors to their local
community foundation are likely to be familiar with the issues
facing their community and may be more willing to support a
specific growth-related effort or initiative than to give more
generally to the foundation.

• National and International Philanthropic Resources: It is

common for a community foundation to go beyond its region in
search of financial support. For instance, a number of national and
international foundations have funded community foundation
initiatives throughout North America. If a foundation chooses to
pursue such resources, it is important not to compete with
nonprofit partners for the same funds (but rather, to complement
one another’s efforts).
• Public Sector: Some municipalities and counties, most regions,
and all state governments offer grants to address a variety of
objectives. Community foundations also have been partners in
projects funded with federal grants from the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, the Department of Energy, and other federal
agencies. To find and apply for competitive grant opportunities
from all federal grantmaking agencies, go to www.grants.gov. Please
note that it is important to be well-informed about both the rules
and restrictions associated with being a grantee of the federal
government (particularly regarding lobbying and financial and
auditing rules).

31
 • Other Resources: In addition to grants aimed at growth and
development issues and challenges such as public health and
housing affordability, there are many other resources available to
entrepreneurial community foundations. For instance, the
endowment for the South Florida National Parks Foundation was
capitalized by a judge looking for an effective place to direct
settlement funds from litigation over water pollution cases. Other
foundations reduce costs by performing “back office” functions for
nonprofit organizations with similar goals.

Models of Attracting Outside Financial Support

Berks County Community Foundation (Pennsylvania) uses the

$5 million settlement from a local utility’s rate case to make grants that
support energy conservation and environmental projects.
Rochester Area Community Foundation (New York) funds the
Common Good Planning Center—a region-wide resource for information
on sprawl—through an interested family supporting foundation.
Santa Barbara Foundation (California) has invested a portion of its
corpus in a loan for a local affordable housing development, simultaneously
achieving an adequate return on the financial investment and directly
achieving a key goal for the Foundation.
The Coastal Community Foundation of South Carolina is the
recipient of a Ford Foundation grant that it is using to improve property
rights for the rural poor.
The Community Foundation for Southeastern Michigan’s
GreenWays Initiative secures private foundation grants and public sector
funding to administer the program and to make grants for trail planning,
design, construction, and the like. These funds, in turn, leverage federal
and state funding to further support the project.

32
 Conclusion

There are many direct linkages families. This resource guide is

between community growth and designed to outline such linkages as
development patterns and the quality well as offer resources available for
of life issues about which community community foundations to access tools
foundations care most. Learning more and actions that can help them expand
about the smart growth and livable their understanding of how they can
communities movement is but one help assure their communities grow in
way to address community concerns ways that benefit everyone. For more
such as equity, jobs, open space, civic information, please contact the
engagement, farmland preservation, Funders’ Network for Smart Growth
transportation, education, aging, and Livable Communities.
health, and children, youth and

Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities

www.fundersnetwork.org
1500 San Remo Avenue, Suite 249
Coral Gables, FL 33146
(305) 667-6350 phone
(305) 667-6355 fax
[email protected]

33
Resources

Resources to Help Build Better Communities

American Planning Association (APA). A nonprofit
membership-based public interest and research organization
committed to urban, suburban, regional, and rural planning
(www.planning.org). The Growing Smart Legislative
Guidebook is a project of the APA that provides model statutes
and guidance for smart growth planning
(www.planning.org/growingsmart).
Congress for the New Urbanism (CNU). A nationwide
nonprofit organization that works with architects, developers,
planners, and others involved in the creation of cities and
towns, teaching them how to implement the principles of the
New Urbanism (www.cnu.org).
Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities.
A coalition of community and private foundations and other
funders that provides resources to inform and strengthen
philanthropic funders’ efforts to advance social equity, create
better economies, build livable communities, and protect and
preserve natural resources (www.fundersnetwork.org).
Smart Growth America (SGA). A nationwide coalition of
nearly 100 advocacy organizations that promotes farmland and
open space protection, neighborhood revitalization, housing
affordability, and more transportation choices
(www.smartgrowthamerica.com). It is also developing a Smart
Growth Leadership Institute that will offer training courses for
elected and public officials and serve as a clearinghouse for best
practices, case studies, and proven strategies
(www.smartgrowthamerica.com/SGLI.html).
Urban Land Institute (ULI). A nonprofit research and
education organization of land-use and real estate professionals
who are dedicated to creating better places and to providing
responsible leadership in the use of land to enhance the total
environment (www.uli.org). It sponsors a separate website that
consolidates its smart growth-related work and services
(www.smartgrowth.net).

34
 Resources

Resources with Current News about Smart

Growth and Livable Communities
New Urban News. A professional newsletter for planners,
developers, architects, builders, public officials, and others
interested in New Urbanism and smart growth
(www.newurbannews.com).
PLANetizen: The Planning and Development Network. A web-
based source of smart growth news taking place throughout the
United States and Canada (www.planetizen.com). PLANetizen
offers a free electronic newsletter
(www.planetizen.com/forms/enewsletter.php).
Sustainable Communities Network. A web-based organization
that provides information on how to make communities more
livable. Topics include living sustainably, creating community,
growing a sustainable economy, protecting natural resources,
smart growth, and governing community
(www.sustainable.org).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Smart Growth
Network. A coalition of environmental groups, historic
preservation organizations, professional organizations,
developers, real estate interests, and government entities that,
among other services, manages Smart Growth Online, a web-
based catalogue of related news, events, information and
resources to advance public understanding of smart growth and
how growth can improve community livability
(www.smartgrowth.org). The Network offers a free weekly
electronic newsletter (www.smartgrowth.org/news/signup.asp).

35
National Issue-Specific Organizations
Enterprise Foundation. The Enterprise Foundation and its
2,400 members work together to provide low-income people
with affordable housing, safer streets, and access to jobs and
child care (www.enterprisefoundation.org).
Growth Management Leadership Alliance (GMLA). A network
of leaders from state, provincial, and regional organizations in
the United States and Canada that carry out programs to
directly shape and implement smart growth policies and actions
(www.gmla.org).

Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC). A national

nonprofit intermediary that works with nonprofit community
development corporations (CDCs) and their governmental and
private sector partners to revitalize distressed communities
(www.liscnet.org).
PolicyLink. A national nonprofit research, communications,
capacity building, and advocacy organization that works to
advance a new generation of policies to achieve economic and
social equity using the wisdom, voice, and experience of local
constituencies (www.policylink.org).
Reconnecting America. Reconnecting America is a new national
organization formed to link transportation networks and the
communities they serve. It supports three major initiatives:
Reconnecting America’s Transportation Networks, the Center
for Transit-Oriented Development, and Reconnecting Rural
America (www.reconnectingamerica.org).
Surface Transportation Policy Project (STPP). A nationwide
nonprofit coalition working to ensure safer communities and
smarter transportation choices that enhance the economy,
improve public health, promote social equity, and protect the
environment (www.stpp.org).

36
 Resources

Resources that Provide Tools that Help Illustrate

Smart Growth Concepts

The Orton Family Foundation. A private foundation that

provides communities struggling with rapid economic, social,
and environmental change with the tools—primarily software-
based—they need to engage residents in better land-use
planning (www.orton.org).
PlaceMatters.com. A national organization working to engage
communities in planning their future using a combination of
unique computer-aided visualization and modeling tools
(www.placematterstools.com).
U.S. Department of Energy’s Smart Communities Network. An
annotated and linked menu of information and services on how
communities can adopt sustainable development as a strategy
for well-being (www.sustainable.doe.gov). Features a
sustainability toolkit that links users to tools for land use
planning such as visual simulation and visual preference surveys
(www.sustainable.doe.gov/toolkit/ landuse.shtml).

Resources about Advocacy and Lobbying by

Community Foundations
Alliance for Justice (AFJ). A national association of advocacy
organizations working to advance the cause of justice,
strengthen the public interest community’s ability to influence
public policy, and foster the next generation of advocates
(www.allianceforjustice.org). The Alliance manages a
Foundation Advocacy Initiative which educates grantmakers on
their legal rights to support advocacy work
(www.allianceforjustice.org/foundation/index.html).
Charity Lobbying in the Public Interest (CLPI). An
organization that educates charities—including community
foundations—about the important role lobbying can play in
achieving their missions (www.clpi.org). For community
foundations, visit www.clpi.org/community_foundations.pdf.
37
Council on Foundations (COF). A worldwide membership
organization of more than 2,000 grantmaking foundations and
giving programs that provides leadership expertise, legal
services, and networking opportunities to members and to the
general public (www.cof.org).

Resources to Find Private Sources of Funding

Foundation Center. A service that collects, organizes, and shares
information on U.S. philanthropy and provides education and
training on the grant-seeking process (www.fdncenter.org).

Regional Associations of Grantmakers. Nonprofit membership

associations of private and community foundations,
corporations, individuals and others committed to
strengthening philanthropy in the geographic areas in which
they operate, within the United States (www.givingforum.org).

Resources to Find Public Sources of Funding

Grants.gov. A website that allows organizations to electronically
find and apply for competitive grant opportunities from all
federal grantmaking agencies (www.grants.gov).

38
 Glossary of Terms

Affordable housing. Safe and sanitary shelter whose

monthly rent or mortgage payment, including taxes, insurance,
and utilities, does not exceed 30 percent of a household’s gross
annual income.
Big box retail. Retail development that typically occupies
more than 50,000 square feet, with typical ranges between
90,000-200,000 square feet, that derives profits from high sales
volumes rather than price mark up. Characterized by large
windowless, single-story buildings with standardized facades,
acres of parking, and site development lacking community or
pedestrian amenities. Relies on auto-borne shoppers.
Brownfield. An industrial or commercial parcel that is
abandoned or underused and often environmentally
contaminated, especially one considered as a potential site for
redevelopment.
Charrette. An intensive process involving a series of
collaborative design and public input cycles for multiple,
consecutive days. A central element of the charrette is the
“design team,” a multidisciplinary group of professionals that
provide the necessary expertise to create a feasible plan that
considers all relevant input.
Community assessment. Process whereby a
neighborhood, town, or region is evaluated using an agreed-
upon set of indicators.
Density. The average number of people, housing units, or
structures per unit of land.
Gentrification. The impact of steadily rising housing
prices as a result of neighborhood improvements, which can
result in displacement of lower-income households.
Greenbelt. A ring of connected parks, farmland, and/or
uncultivated land surrounding a community.
Greenfield. Undeveloped property, sometimes in
agricultural use, located on the edges of or outside of existing
urban areas that can be used for real estate development.
39
Greyfield. An obsolete or abandoned retail or commercial
site, usually a shopping mall.
Indicators. A series of easily measured community
attributes—such as school dropout rates, air quality, acres of
urbanized land, and health insurance coverage—that are used
to identify and monitor progress on various aspects of the
health of a community.
Infill. The use of vacant land and property within a built-up
area for new construction or redevelopment.
Livability. Quality of an area as perceived by residents,
employers, and visitors, including safety and health,
environmental conditions, quality of social interactions,
opportunities for recreation and entertainment, aesthetics, and
existence of cultural and environmental resources.
Mixed-use. Multiple land uses, such as residential, retail,
and office, combined in a structure, on a single parcel of land,
or built adjacent to one another on multiple parcels.
New Urbanism. International movement to restore existing
urban centers and towns, reconfigure sprawling suburbs into
communities of real neighborhoods and diverse districts,
conserve natural environments, preserve historic structures, and
create compact new towns and villages.
NIMBY. An acronym for “Not In My Backyard,” a term that
describes people who oppose change in their neighborhood,
sometimes regardless of the public good.
Open space. Undeveloped land or land that is used for
recreation, including farmland and natural habitats (e.g.,
forests, fields, wetlands).
Regional and neighborhood equity. A learning and
action framework designed to: a) reduce social and economic
disparities among individuals, social groups, neighborhoods, and
local jurisdictions within a metropolitan area; b) connect
neighborhoods to regional and state public policy decision-making;
and c) harness private markets opportunities for community benefits.
40
 Glossary

Social capital. The collective value of all “social networks”

(who people know) and the inclinations that arise from these
networks to do things for each other (“norms of reciprocity”).
Smart growth. A series of policies and practices that result
in well-planned development that protects open space and
farmland, revitalizes communities, keeps housing affordable,
and provides transportation choices.
Sprawl. The unplanned spread of urban development into
areas beyond the edges of a city. Sprawl defines patterns of
urban growth that include large acreage of low-density
residential development, rigid separation between residential
and commercial uses, development in rural areas away from
urban centers, strip commercial development along highways,
and minimal support for non-motorized or alternative
transportation.
Sustainable development. Development with the goal
of preserving environmental quality, natural resources and
livability for present and future generations. Sustainable
initiatives work to ensure efficient use of resources.
Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs). A system
that gives owners of undeveloped parcels in non-urbanized
areas—usually working farmland or ranchland—the option of
transferring their development rights to urban lands in
exchange for financial payments. In return, the property owners
accept deed restrictions protecting their land from development
in perpetuity. When these rights are purchased, not transferred,
these programs are known as PDRs.
Transit-oriented development. The development of
housing, commercial space, services, and job opportunities in
close proximity to public transportation.
Urban Growth Boundary (UGB)/Urban limit line.
A politically-determined boundary beyond which a jurisdiction
prohibits development.

41
Walkability. Ability of an area’s residents, workers, and
visitors to reach common destinations on foot in a short
amount of time. Walkable communities mix land uses, build
compactly, and provide safe and inviting pedestrian corridors.
Workforce housing. Single-family and multi-family
housing that is decent and affordable to all of a community’s
local workers.
Zoning. Classification of land by a community into different
areas and districts, each with stipulated restrictions pertaining
to such attributes as allowable land uses, building placement
and density.

42