Collaborative in Cambridge: A Rising Trend of Interagency Cooperation

Consider your image of the city of Cambridge. What characteristics first come to mind? Some see traces of the bohemian and intellectual, others innovation and novelty. Certainly a great deal of the appeal of Cambridge lies in the very elusiveness of its character.

 I recently spoke with the Cambridge Community Foundation intending to pin down some demonstrated characteristics of the nonprofit sector in Cambridge. (CCF was the perfect resource for this project: they’ve been around for decades, they’re involved with a huge number of local organizations, and they even conduct their own research on the needs and concerns of nonprofit leaders.) “Diverse” came to mind first, followed closely by “caring” and “cutting-edge.” CCF sees Cambridge as a collaborative community of modest yet effective organizations, spearheaded by innovative thinkers and reinforced by a rich network of supportive city offerings.

 A growing trend in the Cambridge nonprofit community is an attitude of cooperation and solidarity. Partnerships exist among organizations, city departments, and nonprofit leaders, to name a few, and agency mergers are not unheard of. Such coordination among agencies has produced, for example, the Agenda for Children, an initiative designed “to bring together city departments…the Cambridge Community Foundation, community-based organizations, businesses, and residents to ensure that the city's children are healthy and successful in school, while living in strong communities.” According to CCF, this type of collaboration – which is echoed in similar programs such as Aging in Place and the Homeless Continuum – has helped to stabilize the community in the current economic climate. Organizations have recently focused on establishing the most efficient methods of collaboration to maintain levels of services provided. This represents a critical strategic move as the demand for these services increases in the face of already tight economic times.

 A further discussion of the economy seems crucial to a deeper understanding of the existing situation in the Cambridge nonprofit sector. CCF illustrated the particularly relevant “time lag” phenomenon of the recent changes in the economy, whose effects are steadily surfacing. While a significant amount of nonprofit belt tightening has already taken place, especially in response to previously announced reductions in state funding, some foundation giving is just now beginning to reflect the full impact of the economic situation. This nationwide tendency will only aggravate those financial tensions that developed earlier in the year.

 Here in Cambridge, though, there is every reason for hope. The local community has already established the maintenance of service levels as a priority. Moreover, contrary to a recent national trend of decreased civic participation, many Cambridge organizations have seen an increase in both volunteerism and appeal giving. The former, which works hugely in Cambridge’s favor, can be traced to an abundance of idealistic students and recent grads struggling for job experience in a slow market. The latter is perhaps less explicable, but nonetheless provides concrete evidence of a local generosity of spirit despite economic difficulty. Both reflect the inspiring possibilities of community collaboration.