Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 43
6
Building Alliances
T
he nuts and bolts of building successful alliances were the subject
of the workshop’s final two presentations. Speakers described their
experiences in bringing groups together and the lessons learned from
those experiences. Particularly with unexpected allies, the formation of
alliances requires building on shared objectives while finding ways to work
around differing goals and perspectives.
CREATING CROSS-SECTOR ALLIANCES
The Congressional Hunger Center (CHC)1 trains and inspires innova-
tive leaders who work to end hunger. These leaders bridge the gap between
grassroots efforts and national and international policies. CHC sees itself
“as a leader in the movement to ensure access to food as a basic human
right,” said its executive director, Edward Cooney. In this role, it has
had success in creating effective cross-sector alliances to protect against
attempts to cut federal food and nutrition assistance programs or weaken
or terminate federal nutrition standards. Likewise, it has made significant
headway with cross-sector alliances focused on expanding nutrition pro-
grams or standards.
As an example, Cooney cited a 1981 effort that included redefining
certain foods to maintain adherence to nutrition standards. The Reagan
administration and Congress had cut child nutrition programs by 28 per-
cent, which had the effect of cutting 8 to 10 cents per school meal. At that
1 For more information on CHC, see http://www.hungercenter.org/.
43
OCR for page 44
44 ALLIANCES FOR OBESITY PREVENTION
point, nutrition standards could not be met, which led to such proposals
as allowing ketchup to count as a vegetable and donuts as a bread product
(USDA/FNS, 1981). “It wasn’t an evil attempt,” Cooney said. “People were
really trying.”
A wide variety of groups, including unions, principals, Parent-Teacher
Associations,2 religious groups, food service personnel, nutrition and
health groups, and pediatricians, joined forces under the aegis of the Food
Research and Action Center3 and the Child Nutrition Forum.4 In addi-
tion, agricultural producers, including the National Association of Wheat
Growers5 and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association,6 were involved,
largely because they had a financial interest in the issue. These groups
worked together and kept the legislation from achieving its ultimate end,
which was to terminate the entitlement status for child nutrition programs,
according to Cooney. The coalition also succeeded in blocking a change in
the nutrition standard from providing one-third to providing one-quarter
of the recommended dietary allowances per meal.
The coalition was particularly effective in drawing attention to its
causes. For example, when cuts in school lunch funding were proposed, the
alliance arranged to have the prospective lunches served in the Senate caf-
eteria. A picture was taken that is now on display at the National Archives,
said Cooney, showing Senator Byrd, Senator Leahy, and others eating this
meal, “which sounds small and is small.”
A similar example occurred in 1995 when Speaker of the House Newt
Gingrich proposed combining nutrition programs into a block grant that
would have eliminated all federal nutrition standards. A cross-sector alli-
ance defeated that effort.
Cooney drew several lessons from these campaigns. First, each sector
has something to offer. Educators saw the relationship between nutrition
and learning and were the best group to articulate that point. School food
service personnel added their expertise on how the programs operated.
Another lesson is political. Every town in America has a school, Cooney
observed. “If you are an elected member of Congress and you are going to
cut the national school lunch program, there is only one phrase that applies
to you—former member of Congress.”
Additionally, some of the most persuasive people are the most unlikely
2 For more information on the national Parent-Teacher Association, see http://www.pta.org/.
3 For more information on the Food Research and Action Center, see http://frac.org/.
4 For more information on the Child Nutrition Forum, see http://www.schoolnutrition.org/
Form.aspx?id=11160.
5 For more information on the National Association of Wheat Growers, see http://www.
wheatworld.org/.
6 For more information on the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, see http://www.
beefusa.org/.
OCR for page 45
45
BUILDING ALLIANCES
ones. For example, agricultural producers were particularly effective at
making the case that school lunch funding should not be cut, in part
because of their financial stake in the program combined with their politi-
cal clout.
Another lesson is that sending thousands of informed comments to the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) can greatly influence rulemaking.
In 2011, proposals to change the school lunch rules generated 130,000
comments. “That’s a lot of federal workers spending a lot of time at night
going over those [comments],” noted Cooney.
The media matters, continued Cooney. In 1981, when graphics were
first coming into play on television, NBC showed on one side of the screen
an 8-ounce glass of milk with a school meal and on the other side a picture
of a farmer and a 6-ounce glass of milk. The farmers who were watching
that night and saw 2 ounces of milk disappear for 27 million children
“didn’t call 911,” said Cooney. “They called their member of Congress.
Those reg[ulation]s were toast in 2 weeks.”
Cooney noted further that the combination of well-informed national
organizations and strong networks of state and local partners has made
it possible to craft and implement significant child nutrition benefits. The
1998 and 2010 child nutrition reauthorization bills illustrate this point.
Bipartisan support also makes it possible to get proposals enacted.
Finally, partnering with groups that have a financial interest in child
nutrition programs is not morally corrupt—“it’s effective,” said Cooney,
although he admitted that not everyone agrees with that statement. Cooney
said that CHC’s guideline is “no permanent friends, no permanent ene-
mies.” The organization forms alliances with corporate partners when there
is a common interest and a clear legislative or regulatory goal and agree-
ment on a specific initiative CHC has authored. If a corporation does not
agree with the position of an alliance, it is no longer part of the alliance. If
it changes its position, it can join the alliance again. “We are not consistent.
We see no value in that as a concept.”
Accepting money from corporations opens an alliance to criticism,
Cooney acknowledged. The best defense against such charges, he advised, is
public disclosure of an organization’s priorities and of the funding received
from the private sector. It is helpful to “demonstrate that your organiza-
tion is willing or has taken a policy position on principle that a corporate
donor opposes.” He suggested that an organization have a board-approved
policy that allows private-sector funding only if no strings are attached.
In concluding, Cooney urged the audience to seek new opportunities for
cross-sector alliances.
OCR for page 46
46 ALLIANCES FOR OBESITY PREVENTION
WORKING WITH UNEXPECTED ALLIES
In the final presentation of the workshop, Miriam Rollin, national
director of Fight Crime: Invest in Kids,7 spoke about how to work with—as
well as what not to do with—unexpected allies. Fight Crime: Invest in Kids
is an organization of about 5,000 police chiefs, sheriffs, and prosecutors
and a few hundred crime victims, most of whom are parents of murdered
children. All of these spokespeople “are passionate advocates for invest-
ments in kids shown by research to have later crime reduction impacts,”
said Rollin.
Rollin also is a vice president of Council for a Strong America,8 the
parent organization for three sibling organizations to Fight Crime: Invest in
Kids. One is America’s Edge,9 which seeks to improve America’s competi-
tive edge in the world through investments in children that have been shown
by research to strengthen business and the economy. The second is Shep-
herding the Next Generation,10 which consists of conservative evangelical
faith leaders interested in social movements and policy change designed to
improve the lives of children. The third is Mission: Readiness (see Chapter
2)—a group of several hundred retired military leaders promoting invest-
ments in children that also advance long-term national security interests.
Desirable Attributes of Unexpected Allies
Rollin cited four attributes that can make for powerful unexpected
allies.
The first is the ability to get inside the door of policy makers. A
potential ally may have an articulate spokesperson or extensive research,
but according to Rollin, access to policy makers, especially moderate and
conservative politicians, is much more important.
A second desirable attribute of a potential ally is a compelling, research-
based, job-connected message and motivation. Motivation is important to
ensure that an individual is effective in meetings and can also make people
want to listen.
A third attribute is the ability to get media coverage. Unexpected
messengers can be especially attractive to the media, said Rollin. “Wait a
minute, so you have a cop talking about little kids and Head Start? You
7 For more information on Fight Crime: Invest in Kids, see http://www.fightcrime.org/.
8 For more information on the Council for a Strong America, see http://www.council
forastrongamerica.org/.
9 For more information on America’s Edge, see http://www.americasedge.org/.
10 For more information on Shepherding the Next Generation, see http://www.shepherding
thenextgeneration.org/.
OCR for page 47
47
BUILDING ALLIANCES
have a retired admiral talking about school lunches? That unexpectedness
gets you partway there.”
The fourth desired attribute of an ally, said Rollin, is not being a
direct recipient of funding associated with the issue being discussed. This
is another reason why having law enforcement representatives speak about
Head Start, after-school programs, and juvenile justice is so effective for
Fight Crime: Invest in Kids, said Rollin.
Conditions for Effective Alliances
Once an alliance with an unexpected partner has been formed, what
are the best ways of working with that partner? Rollin pointed to six
conditions: developing a research base, building relationships, facilitating
engagement, utilizing an anecdote or personal story, choosing a high-impact
messenger, and maintaining an identity.
The first condition is developing a research base specifically designed
for the messenger. The ally needs to speak in terms that both the ally and
the ally’s audiences understand and feel comfortable with. Allies are experts
in their own areas, not in child nutrition, early childhood education, or
after-school programs. “We joke now that we [Council for a Strong Amer-
ica] are a quadra-lingual organization. We speak cop, we speak military,
we speak business, and we speak religion.”
The second condition is building relationships as a key component of
the work. The allies tend to be grassroots organizations. They are not going
to respond just because their partner organization is passionate about an
issue. Rollin elaborated on this point: “You need to not just fax and e-mail
stuff out. You call them up. You do a follow-up call. When you recruit
them, you don’t recruit them by sending an e-mail or fax. You recruit them
by meeting with them. It may be at a law enforcement conference. It may be
at a lunch you have locally. It may be just going to their offices and meeting
with them. It’s a lot more intensive, but it’s relationship based. And that’s
what is going to help them become passionate about the issue and be an
effective messenger.”
The third condition is making it easy for an ally to become engaged.
Examples include arranging the logistics of a trip to Washington to testify,
preparing draft materials for op-eds and for meetings with policy makers,
and fully briefing representatives of the ally in advance.
Fourth is making sure that the ally is telling a story. The story should be
backed up by research, but “policy happens through anecdote,” said Rollin.
If a prosecutor is working on child abuse prevention, the story can be about
a child who was killed by an offender. If a sheriff from a low-income com-
OCR for page 48
48 ALLIANCES FOR OBESITY PREVENTION
munity is talking about Head Start,11 he or she can talk about the impact
Head Start has on the lives of people from those communities who succeed.
Fifth is choosing a messenger that will have the greatest impact for
particular policy makers. If a legislator is an evangelical Christian, an evan-
gelical pastor may be a powerful messenger.
The final condition is maintaining an identity that is distinct from the
service providers who receive money from the programs being promoted,
Rollin said. Unexpected allies are not child advocates or anti-hunger advo-
cates. They are law enforcement or military personnel or others.
What Not to Expect from Unexpected Allies
Rollin closed by briefly describing four things she believes should not
be expected from unexpected alliances.
The first is a response from an introductory e-mail or a fax. As Rollin
noted earlier, organizations seeking an ally need to follow up in person.
Second, messaging is more likely to be effective when knowledgeable
staff “speak the language” of the target audience. At the Council for a
Strong America, the research and organization teams are shared among the
four sibling organizations, while the membership staff that recruit, educate,
and motivate members are different for each organization.
Third, allies should not be expected to participate in multiple or long
meetings. For example, advocacy coordination meetings can be long, pain-
ful, and frequent, and grassroots organizations will not have patience for
them.
Lastly, allies are unlikely to join all the advocacy campaigns on which
a coalition works. For example, prosecutors are passionate about effective
research-based investments in prevention and intervention, but they are
unlikely to work on reducing or restricting the ability to try children as
adults. Similarly, not all of the allies in an organization are going to agree
with all of the positions held by other allies.
Rollin ended by saying that enlisting non-traditional allies can be chal-
lenging and often requires unconventional procedures. However, it also
adds great value in bringing the work of researchers to policy makers and
the media in ways that can make a difference for children.
11 For more information on Head Start, see http://www.nhsa.org/.
