Imagine that community organizations serving residents with limited incomes have heard repeated concerns about access to routine health care. Community members describe several barriers: Primary-care offices are difficult to reach without reliable transportation. Appointment times may conflict with work or caregiving responsibilities. Childcare may be unavailable. Long waits can make appointments difficult to manage. Some residents report disrespectful or dismissive treatment in health-care settings. Emergency departments may be closer or easier to access when an urgent problem arises. These experiences may indicate gaps in access to preventive and ongoing care. Before assuming that one particular solution is best, advocates might examine whether the community would benefit most from a community health center, expanded clinic hours, mobile services, transportation assistance, childcare support, additional providers, or another combination of approaches. Once a proposal has been developed, the next question is how to communicate with the people and organizations whose participation may help improve, implement, fund, evaluate, or support it. This section discusses how to establish intentional communication, invite meaningful participation, and build collaborative relationships without treating people simply as sources of political influence or organizational credibility. What do we mean by establishing communication and requesting participation? Establishing communication means creating a clear and reliable way for individuals or organizations to exchange information and coordinate when necessary. The relationship may be informal or structured. Examples include: An identified contact person in each organization Periodic meetings An email or messaging group Regular project updates A memorandum of understanding Participation in a coalition, advisory group, or planning team The appropriate level of formality depends on the relationship and the work involved. A longtime community partner may need only a phone call or email. A public agency, large institution, funder, professional organization, or elected official may have a defined process for requests, meetings, testimony, partnerships, or funding. Respect those processes unless there is a legitimate reason to use another lawful and appropriate route. Requesting participation means explaining: Who you are What the effort is trying to accomplish Why you are contacting this person or organization What kind of participation you are requesting What time, resources, or responsibilities may be involved How decisions will be made How their contribution could affect the effort Participation should be voluntary and based on realistic expectations. Why establish communication and request participation? To include knowledge that your organization does not have Different participants may contribute different forms of expertise. People directly affected by an issue may understand barriers or unintended consequences that are not visible in formal data. Service providers may understand implementation. Researchers may contribute technical evidence. Public officials or agency staff may understand legal authority, budgeting, regulation, or administrative processes. No one group should automatically be treated as having all the necessary knowledge. To involve people who will be affected by the advocacy effort People directly affected should have meaningful opportunities to shape the work rather than being invited only after major decisions have already been made. Participation may include: Identifying priorities Developing proposals Reviewing evidence Making decisions Communicating with decision-makers Evaluating progress To coordinate responsibilities Advocacy efforts may involve several organizations with overlapping roles. Early communication can help clarify: Who is responsible for what Who has decision-making authority How funding will be handled How information will be shared How public statements will be coordinated How credit or recognition will be handled This can reduce confusion and unnecessary competition. To improve the proposal Potential partners may identify: Missing evidence Legal concerns Implementation barriers Costs that were overlooked Populations that were not adequately included Better alternatives Collaboration should therefore be more than a strategy for increasing support. It should also create opportunities for the advocacy effort itself to change. To build durable working relationships Organizations that communicate clearly and work effectively together may be able to collaborate on future issues as well. Strong relationships are based on trust, reliability, clear expectations, and mutual respect rather than simply the usefulness of a partner's name, influence, or contacts. More partners are not always better A large coalition can bring valuable knowledge and capacity, but the goal should not simply be to recruit as many organizations as possible. Additional partners can also create: More complex decision-making Conflicting priorities Competition over funding Unequal power within the coalition Additional communication demands Confusion about public positions Invite participation when there is a meaningful role or reason for the person or organization to be involved. Do not pressure every potential partner to endorse every part of the effort. Organizations may support one goal while disagreeing about another. With whom should you establish communication? The answer depends on the issue, the proposed change, and who has relevant knowledge, authority, responsibility, or experience. People directly affected People affected by the issue should often be among the first participants invited. Their role should not be limited to providing emotional stories, increasing attendance, or demonstrating political strength. They may contribute as: Planning partners Researchers Advisors Organizers Spokespeople, when they choose that role Decision-makers Consider compensating people for substantial time, expertise, or leadership when resources allow. Organizations already working on the issue These organizations may have: Direct service experience Community relationships Data Research Policy expertise Organizing capacity Before creating a new coalition or initiative, determine what work already exists and whether partnership would be more useful than duplication. Public officials and public agencies Relevant participants might include: Elected officials Legislative staff Agency staff Public-health departments Planning departments School systems Transportation agencies Other public bodies with relevant authority Involve them when their authority, knowledge, funding responsibility, or implementation role is relevant. Their participation should not be treated primarily as a way to give the advocacy effort political legitimacy. Professional and technical organizations Depending on the issue, useful partners may include: Medical or public-health organizations Engineering organizations Legal organizations Researchers Universities Professional associations Evaluate expertise according to relevance and evidence rather than title or prestige alone. Community-based organizations and organizers Neighborhood organizations, tenant groups, disability organizations, immigrant and refugee organizations, youth organizations, labor organizations, faith communities, cultural organizations, and other community groups may bring relationships and knowledge that formal institutions lack. Do not evaluate a potential partner primarily according to whether powerful people like or dislike them. Instead, consider: Whether their goals are compatible with the effort Whether their practices are consistent with the coalition's values Whether conflicts of interest exist Whether collaboration is likely to help the community goal Businesses and worker organizations Employers, business organizations, unions, worker centers, and other labor organizations may be relevant when an issue affects employment, wages, workforce development, economic conditions, transportation, health, or other areas connected with work. Community leaders and trusted community members Some individuals have strong community relationships and may help connect the effort with people who would otherwise be missed. This may include: Neighborhood leaders Faith leaders Youth leaders Cultural-community leaders Local business owners Teachers Health professionals Longtime residents No individual should be assumed to speak for an entire racial, ethnic, religious, age, disability, or neighborhood population. Funders Funders may be useful participants when they have a legitimate role in supporting implementation, research, capacity building, or evaluation. Be transparent about how funding relationships may affect coalition decisions. News organizations Journalists and news organizations may help the public understand an issue, but they should not be treated as advocacy partners whose role is to be “on your side.” Provide accurate information, evidence, appropriate contacts, and opportunities to ask questions. Respect journalists' responsibility to evaluate claims independently. When should you request participation? Early enough for participation to matter People should generally be invited before the major decisions affecting their role have already been made. Early participation can help shape: Goals Research questions Strategies Proposed solutions Roles Evaluation Asking someone to endorse a completed plan is different from asking them to help create it. At important decision points Additional participation may be useful when: Legislation is being developed A budget decision is approaching New research changes the issue Implementation is beginning The effort needs expertise it does not currently have New populations may be affected When circumstances change Coalitions do not have to remain fixed. New organizations may become relevant, while others may complete their role or decide not to continue. Do not recruit someone simply because an effort appears to be succeeding and their endorsement could make the coalition look larger. How do you establish communication and request participation? Identify the appropriate contact Determine who has responsibility for the issue or authority to consider the request. Depending on the organization, that may be: A program manager A policy director A community-engagement staff member A legislative staff member A board or committee An executive Another designated contact Use public contact information, organizational directories, referral from a legitimate contact, or the organization's established communication process. Respect communication boundaries Do not use someone's private email address, personal phone number, home address, or private social-media account simply to bypass an official process. Do not deliberately appear at someone's workplace, restaurant, recreational activity, home, or other location in order to create an unplanned personal encounter. Personal introductions can be useful when the intermediary and recipient are comfortable with the introduction. Relationships should facilitate communication, not be used to bypass reasonable privacy or professional boundaries. Choose a communication method that fits the situation Possible methods include: Email Phone Video meeting In-person meeting Formal letter Public meeting or comment process An organization's online contact or partnership form Do not assume that an in-person meeting is always best. Consider accessibility, distance, scheduling, technology, privacy, and the recipient's preferred communication method. Communicate clearly and accessibly Use language that the recipient can understand. Provide: Plain-language materials when appropriate Translation or interpretation when needed Accessible digital documents Disability accommodations Avoid making broad assumptions about communication preferences based on culture, race, ethnicity, nationality, disability, age, or another identity. When you are unsure, ask people what communication approach works best for them. Be clear about the request Explain: The issue The proposed goal Why you are contacting them What participation would involve Expected time commitments Whether funding, staff time, public endorsement, data, or another resource is being requested What decisions participants can influence Do not minimize the commitment in order to make participation appear easier than it really is. Explain why their contribution is relevant Tell the person or organization why their knowledge, authority, experience, community relationships, resources, or implementation role may be useful. Avoid flattering someone primarily because their name or status would make the effort look more credible. Explain the community benefit It can be appropriate to discuss how participation relates to the person's or organization's mission, responsibilities, or interests. But the invitation should not be based entirely on what political, financial, or reputational advantage the partner can gain. Emphasize the actual community purpose and the contribution being requested. Put important commitments in writing A written agreement may be useful when participants are sharing: Funding Staff Data Equipment Facilities Services Public responsibilities A written agreement might address: Roles Decision-making Funding Data sharing Confidentiality Public communication Credit and attribution Conflict resolution Duration of the agreement Respect a decision not to participate Follow-up is reasonable when a request may have been missed or when the recipient has asked for additional information. Persistence should not become repeated unwanted contact. If someone declines: Thank them for considering the request Clarify whether they would like future updates Leave open the possibility of future collaboration when appropriate Managing collaboration Clarify decision-making Coalitions should know: Who can make which decisions Whether decisions require consensus, majority agreement, or another process Which organizations retain independent authority How disagreements will be handled Address competition and conflicts openly Organizations may compete for funding, staff, public attention, or responsibility. Do not dismiss these tensions as simply “ego” or “turf.” They may reflect legitimate questions about: Resources Organizational responsibility Community accountability Credit Decision-making power Conflicts of interest Discuss those issues directly and establish clear expectations. Allow different levels of participation Not every organization needs to take the same role. A participant might: Help lead the coalition Provide technical advice Supply data Host meetings Participate in one project Endorse a specific recommendation Observe without formally endorsing the effort Flexible participation can make collaboration more realistic. Maintain communication when it remains useful Partners should receive the information they need to carry out their responsibilities. Useful updates may include: Progress Decisions New evidence Upcoming meetings Changes in strategy Results Communication should be relevant rather than constant. Ask people how frequently they want updates and through which channel. Do not continue indefinitely sending one-way advocacy messages to someone who has declined participation or indicated that they do not want updates. In Summary Advocacy often requires collaboration with people and organizations that bring different forms of knowledge, authority, experience, resources, and community connection. Establish communication intentionally and choose the level of formality that fits the relationship. Invite people early enough that their participation can actually affect the work. People directly affected by the issue should be meaningful partners rather than being included mainly for their stories, numbers, votes, or symbolic value. Recruit partners because they have a relevant role or contribution, not simply to make the coalition appear larger or more influential. A coordinated effort can be useful, but broad participation does not require every organization to agree on every issue. Be clear about the request, expected responsibilities, decision-making process, time commitment, and resources involved. Use accessible communication and ask people about their communication needs rather than relying on cultural stereotypes. Respect organizational processes and personal boundaries. Do not bypass them by using private contact information or deliberately creating unplanned encounters. Personal introductions can help establish trust when everyone involved is comfortable with them. Journalists should be treated as independent information professionals rather than recruited as advocacy allies. Put significant commitments in writing when necessary, especially when money, personnel, data, or other resources are involved. Respect a decision not to participate and avoid turning persistence into unwanted repeated contact. Maintain communication when it continues to serve a useful purpose, but do not assume every relationship must remain active indefinitely. The goal is not to build the largest possible network or accumulate political clout. It is to build the relationships necessary for people to contribute meaningfully, coordinate effectively, and work together toward a community goal. Contributor Phil Rabinowitz Resources Online Resource Communication Tools for Advocacy from the National Association for Gifted Children provides information on different ways to communicate with policy makers. Early Childhood Advocacy Toolkit provides resources on framing your message and communicating with the media as well as policy makers and elected officials. Effective E-mail Communication from the University of North Carolina provides tips on professional e-mail writing and communicating via e-mail. Four Principles of Interpersonal Communication Media Communication Tip Sheet provides tips on contributing to the local news, tailoring language and style for the media, developing messages to reach the public, and evaluating media coverage. 10 Tips provides 10 tips on effectively communicating with legislators to make your message stand out to them. Using Effective Communications from UNISON is a guide to communicating effectively in both formal and informal settings. Print Resource Fleming, A C. (2013). It’s the Way You Say It: Becoming Articulate, Well-Spoken, and Clear. Fleming offers detailed advice and exercises to teach the reader how to become an effective communicator through speech. Hipwood, M. (2012). Energized: An Introvert’s Guide to Effective Communication. In this book, Hipwood discusses effectively using individual strengths as an introvert instead of forcing communication in ways that are familiar to extroverts. Maxwell, C.J. (2010). Everyone Communicates, Few Connect: What the Most Effective People Do Differently. This book provides five principles and five practices to develop the crucial skill of connecting with others. Meredith, C. J., & Dunham. C.D. (1999). Real Clout. Boston: The Access Project. Tunney, Bradley (2014). Communication Skills: Improve Effective Communication Skills and Learn How to Communicate & Influence People. This book provides tools and techniques to becoming a better communicator.
