{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03128258602711158, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.0588235294117645, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Private foundations and community development: differing approaches to community empowerment

Comprehensive community change through focused, place-based is gaining traction among private foundations and public partners frustrated with the lack of systemic change in poor neighborhoods. As they work to engage low-income residents, private foundations often describe their work as “bottom-up” participation. However, “bottom-up” approaches to empowering communities vary in their strategies, implementation and outcomes. We use an “outcome-based” and a “process-based” approach to explain the tension of two private foundations engaged in revitalizing two Southern California neighborhoods. Our findings suggest that the variation between approaches to community engagement is centered in the response of strategies to the political, organizational, programmatic, political, and cultural context of communities, as well as the foundation's mission and values.