Follow the Money: Resource Allocation and Academic Supremacy among Community and University Partners in Food Dignity

Abstract

A guiding principle in participatory action research collaborations is to strive for equity in relations between community and academic project partners. One promising way of assessing equity and power sharing in such partnerships is to trace and analyze financial resource allocation within them. This paper reports and assesses how nearly US$5 million in grant funding was allocated and spent between community and academic partners in a research, extension, and education project called Food Dignity in the United States. Findings from this analysis of extensive financial project records include that 36% of the funding was subawarded to the five community-based organization (CBO) partners, 40% supported the work of two university partners, and the remaining 24% was invested in developing and supporting the collaboration of many diverse partners on a wide range of project goals. Staff salary and fringe composed the single largest spending arena, making up about two-thirds of spending for CBOs and collaboration, and half for universities. However, had faculty salaries been paid from the grant, rather than by the partnering universities, then this component would have been FoodDignity

Triple-rigorous Storytelling: A PI's Reflections on Devising Case Study Methods with Five Community-based Food Justice Organizations

“…Particularly prominent inequities included ones created by racism, classism, and, what I call "academic supremacy." Academic supremacy refers to systemic inequities between community-based and academic organizations (Porter & Wechsler, 2018). I offer reflections and lessons from our experience, rather than conclusions.…”

“…To support your labor in providing files to us, or to hire researchers or yourselves to document and tell your story." I was referring to research budgets I had proposed and then allocated to each CBO partner; these averaged US$12,900 per organization each year for staff time to assist the lead community organizers (Porter & Wechsler, 2018). Unlike academic partners, no CBO staff joined the project with preexisting job descriptions or goals that included doing the kinds of research I was asking for.…”

“…Issuing subawards to each CBO and mostly paying these in advance, rather than arrears (Porter & Wechsler, 2018). This enabled the partnerships to form in the first place.…”

The Cost of Community-based Action Research: Examining Research Access and Implementation through the Food Dignity Project Community Support Package

“…Also, instead of animator funds, BMA was budgeted for farmers market managers. See Table 1 in Porter and Wechsler (2018) in this issue for details of the community support package funding lines.…”

Graduate Students Bringing Emotional Rigor to the Heart of Community-University Relations in Food Dignity

“…Although Christine and the tenured professors and community partners who led Food Dignity sought to create collaborative processes within it, some basic structural inequalities persisted. Porter and Wechsler (2018) use the term "academic supremacy" to refer to "systemically inequitable social relations between institutions of higher education, especially universities, and community-based people and organizations" (p. 75). Within Food Dignity, graduate students had little say in the overall project design; however, not only did they spend more time doing "field work" with community partners than academic mentors, but they also spent more time on campus than community partners.…”