Roger Liska FRICS |
Regeneration or revitalization is often assumed to relate to the practical task of rebuilding and re-planning once redundant areas of our living spaces. However, the process of revitalization infers more than this, involving the community in the planning process and using local communities as part of the workforce developing these sites enables greater benefit in terms of the contribution to the local economy and the well being of its population. This process is termed as Corporate and Social Responsibility (CSR). CSR forms part of the triple bottom line approach to revitalization and regeneration and can be defined as a means of empowering local residents and those who are economically disengaged to participate in the regeneration of their own neighbourhoods (Elkington, 1998). The academic position concerning CSR is varied, but attempts to define CSR in the context of modern organizations (Aupperle, Carrol and Hatfield, 1985). The challenge in the current era is to review how organizations can achieve CSR in the constraints of construction procurement and project implementation. In this paper we compare approaches used to gain the involvement of local communities in the process of construction through leadership, management and on-site working. We compare a range of projects conducted both in the United States and the United Kingdom, with the aim to recommend best working practices to a wider audience. |
Creating Opportunities for employment
In various countries, the provision of free markets and equal opportunities prevents positive action activities. The balance therefore between opening tender offers and wide market place must be balanced with the ideal to provide a commercial benefit to local organizations, often small or micro organizations from the regeneration opportunity. In the UK and Europe tender arrangements for publicly funded projects of value of £156,442 and over for supplies and services and £3,927,260 for public works (at 2008 prices) are subject to the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) process (Office of Government Commerce (OGC), 2010). Such processes determine the process, transparency and insurance of public benefit and rights to their services. This was primarily introduced to apply to the privatization of utility supplies, but increasingly applied to wider public sector construction activities. As a means of ensuring public benefit, selection criteria has included a range of criteria from financial consideration but also those of environment and social benefit, such as employment and education. Therefore, by training local communities and aiding local enterprises, opportunities to engage and participate in landmark projects can be attained. Developing awareness in these organizations of the wider partnering and process development agenda can enable benefits to be derived in seemingly difficult situations (Dainty et al, 2001).
In the Unites States, focus has been upon social regeneration, such as the housing stock, natural disaster and the sense of social responsibility has promoted changes in approaches to public and private sector projects with regard to planning and implementation.
In this study we report on activities that promote these forms of development activities.
Methodology
This paper has been produced by a case study approach. In some cases we cite the outcomes of focus group research of participants of one of the employment schemes adopted. In this case small groups of participants were interviewed by an independent assessor as part of the evaluation of the employment and skills training programme. A series of open questions were presented to the participants, who were invited to provide comment and feedback. These comments were used as part of the learning gained from the project and are presented in this paper for wider review.
Case Study: a UK view point
Planning for Labor
To aid planning for labor and skills needs the Sector Skills Council for Construction (Construction Skills) in the UK has devised a series of modelling tools to enable estimate trades and labor needs to be determined from planned project expenditure. An example of this approach is provided by a scenario report produced by Experian for Construction Skills based upon the future trend for the industry (Experian, 2008). This approach provides a framework to enable large scale public and private sector projects to be planned in terms of expected labor demand, profile and impact. This approach enables workforce and skills planning to be adopted at the pre-tender phase with respect to not only employment but training and employment needs. The limitation of this approach lies in the possible shortfalls in organizational preparedness for many local contracting companies.
To enable local impact to be improved, tools such as those described above have been used to develop projects that seek to work with local and disadvantaged communities to foster interest, participation and achievement. Such activities may relate to women, ethnic minorities or those who are economically inactive (long-term unemployed). Richard MacFarlane, explores the legal and contracting needs to achieve these objectives in Macfarlane and Cook (2002). As project organizations seek to achieve these project outcomes, a range of projects and initiatives have been adopted in the UK that seeks to engage with under-represented and disengaged persons. Examples have included the Women and Work Sector Pathways Initiative (Construction Skills, 2010) and the Local Enterprise Growth Initiative (LEGI), which has promoted the development of productivity and economic potential of the most deprived areas in the UK through the support of community groups, local companies and individuals (Communities and Local Government, 2008). In particular, The Youth Build project, which both in the US and the UK has sought to involve local communities and community leaders to develop trust and profile for recruitment, aptitude and skills training (Youth Build UK, 2010).
In a major housing regeneration program undertaken in the North West of England, Youth Build has been used to gain participation of females, black and ethnic minority (BME) participants, long-term unemployed and those with no or low educational skills, to participate in a range of mainstream education and training programs. In a three-year program, over 150 participants were engaged in training and placed into employment at local construction organizations. The skills attainment of the participants ranged from national vocational qualification level 2 and 3, but several participants have also accessed higher education courses as part of their training. In most cases the candidates were involved in manual craft trades and some levels of supervision and community liaison roles associated with housing construction, rehabilitation and maintenance.
As part of a study undertaken by a third-party evaluator with the objective of conducting a review of the efficiency and impact of the program, the study determined that employees would migrate from the scheme as work opportunities developed, and as such, collaborative links to other schemes should be developed. Further, the evaluation study emphasized that support and continued mentoring was essential to the success of the scheme. As part of the review, the scheme was encouraged to develop a defined skills set, including site health and safety management and interview training for participants.
The focus group study was also undertaken by the sector skills council forming a wider review of the region sought to determine views and opinions of participants in construction training. The outcomes of this evaluation were of interest.
A series of focus groups were conducted with trainees and employees, covering both genders and a range of different ages, ethnic backgrounds, and geographical locations. The focus groups provided a relaxed and informal atmosphere in which people were able to comment freely and openly about discrimination and diversity issues in the construction sector. The responses from the focus groups were set in thematic headings. The outcomes of the study are described as follows.
Reasons for Entry to the Construction Industry
Reasons candidates chose to enter the program and specifically the construction industry were quite common to many of those interviewed, irrespective of an individual’s background. A large majority of the participants responded that they had been influenced primarily by members of their family, for example a father or an uncle, who were already in the sector. Other important factors were listed as pay, the opportunity to work outdoors, to be able to work flexibly with regard to when and where one works, the ability to develop a skill and acquire a recognized qualification. An aspiration element was also evident in that many respondents saw an eventual outcome being to become a company owner with time.
Some participants from an Asian Muslim background said that some within their communities viewed construction work as ‘dirty’ and not a positive career choice, although it was thought that this stemmed from a more general lack of awareness about the industry as a whole.
Participants thought that schools had not provided sufficient information about the career opportunities within the sector, where there was an increasing focus on encouraging pupils into higher education. Schemes to encourage people into the industry were also not well advertised, according to the participants. Most of those who were on specific support schemes had heard about them ‘by chance’ from friends and through word of mouth.
Race and religion in the workplace
Race and religious issues were a significant element of the focus groups’ agenda. Generally, there was recognition by older construction workers from black and ethnic minority communities that progress had been made in improving attitudes towards the ethnic minorities in recent years, and that the sector was visibly more diverse than it had been. One participant said that he used to feel the tension that his presence caused but now things had improved.
Black and ethnic minority participants within the focus groups, and particularly those from Asian and/or Muslim backgrounds, saw themselves as representing their own communities within the construction industry, and having to work that bit harder and better as a result. One participant said that he had to work to help some colleagues overcome their prejudices - “work twice as hard to prove yourself. . .let your skills and professionalism speak for themselves so that they see beyond your skin color”.
Many participants said that they still had to tolerate some use of offensive language from their work colleagues in casual conversation, although this was not usually directed at individuals. This observation was felt to be a generational issue reflecting how values and opinions had changed with time.
Some participants found it difficult to discuss issues such as religion, or religious practices (such as fasting) with workers of different faiths. This was sometimes exacerbated by discussions within the workforce about stories from the press regarding the Iraq War, or terrorist incidents. However, there was a general recognition that relationships in the workplace took a while to develop and, over time there was increased acceptance.
There were some sub-regional differences in the responses on race and religion issues. Trainees and workers from larger centers of employment were less likely to view these as significant problems, arguing that the extent of diversity within the population and at school, both of which meant that it was natural and easier for them to work in a multi-ethnic team. This was less the case with participants from smaller communities, where despite a number of generations having lived in these areas the different minority ethnic communities were regarded as being more isolated from one another, so there was less understanding and tolerance of different backgrounds.
Rights and Responsibilities
A number of trainees were unaware of the rights they had with regard to protection from racial or religious harassment in the workplace. At the same time, many older workers from the black and ethnic minority communities expressed their reluctance to bring up such harassment with their management, for fear of risking their future employment prospects.
Attitudes to Older Workers
With the exception of the use of language mentioned above, apprentices and workers in the focus groups were very positive about the role that older people played in the workplace. In particular, they valued the experience that older workers brought to the work and their willingness to share their knowledge.
Migrant Labor
A few young apprentices and trainees were concerned about the increasing use of migrant labor, especially from Central Europe, within the regional construction sector. Migrant workers were viewed as a ready source of experienced labor for firms who demanded entry-level wages. The participants felt that they would lose out on job opportunities
Future Improvements
The focus groups were encouraged to provide suggestions about how diversity could be improved within the construction sector. The respondents commented that there should be an increase in promotion of the sector in schools and youth clubs, including the professional roles, shedding its current image and focusing on the potential for good wages and career progression. There should also be more opportunities for interested candidates to complete taster sessions and work experience before entering the industry. The interviewees suggested that the use of alternative advertising methods to reach non-traditional groups, including television may be beneficial. It was important to note the role of mentors and that wider support and encouragement of mentoring from established BME workers in the industry for new trainees and apprentices. The study highlighted the need to signpost and support intermediary schemes and bodies that can help individuals from non-traditional groups overcome initial employer reluctance to take them on, as well as supporting the employers themselves. With regard to the support to participants it was recommended that it was important to avoid placing or employing people from BME communities singly, as this can increase the feelings of isolation. Likewise, the consideration of ways to improve the retention of BME workers in the sector, for example by taking more action to ensure that pay levels and training and promotion opportunities are safeguarded against discrimination. The working environment was seen to be particularly harsh when focusing upon interpersonal relations and thus BME employees have a need to develop coping strategies to manage the challenge of working in the sector. It was evident that change has taken place, but there is still work to be done and individuals need to be realistic and be able to deal with the challenges that they are likely to face.
In addition to the comments of the participants, there were a number of other, unintentional, outcomes from the focus group sessions, the study brought together a range of individuals who work within similar trades or whose companies work together, and helped them to establish new contacts. The review also offered the opportunity to hear about how others had addressed the challenge of dealing with harassment and offensive behaviour in the workplace. It provided participants with an environment where they could share their experiences and learn about practices - good and bad - in other companies and it offered a real account of working life to compare with senior managers’ perceptions of practice within their companies.
Conclusions
The focus group sessions provided an interesting and honest view of the construction sector from the perspective of its workers and trainees. The impression gained was of a sector which had improved its treatment and acceptance of workers from different minority groups over time, but which still had some way to go in improving workforce diversity. While there were some specific instances of direct harassment in the workplace, the majority of barriers identified reflect institutional discrimination, namely the lack of awareness of career opportunities, both within certain communities and more generally at school level. The study highlighted difficulties in overcoming employer reluctance to ‘take a risk’ by employing or providing a placement to someone who does not fit the traditional construction worker stereotype. The study also highlighted the extent to which workers from minority groups expect to have to build up a high level of tolerance and mental toughness to cope with feelings of isolation, as well as instances of obvious or more subtle forms of discrimination.
US Case Studies
Drivers for Change
Involving the community in regeneration or revitalization projects, especially as it relates to housing, has become more prevalent in the United States. The reasons for the upsurge include increases in the cost of living, the age and condition of the existing housing stock, recent major natural disasters and a growing sense of social responsibility within the population coupled with the creation of new non-profit private and public agencies that support the planning and implementation of revitalization projects.
In reviewing the recent literature on the issue of effective community involvement in revitalization projects in the United States, it is interesting to note that it includes studies on what motivates people to participate in community-based coalitions (Wells, Ward, Feinberg & Alexander, 2008); organizational strategic planning by community groups (Allison & Kaye, 1997, Bryson, 2004); the effective management of community coalitions (Wolf, 1999, Gelatt, 1992); education and training of community groups (Local Initiatives Support Corporation, 2010, NeighborWorks America, 2010); creating policy for revitalization projects (Bratt, 1989); Community Development Corporations (Bratt, 2006, Stoutland, 1999; Vidal, 1992); and challenges from for-profit private sector organizations (Bratt, 2009). Needless to say, the above cited studies include references to many successful community-based revitalization projects.
Based on the findings from the above cited and other studies, one finds that the essential components of any effective community-based revitalization project are as follows: Committed individuals; Adequate resources; Broad-based education and training for all participants; Attainable strategic plan; Realistic organizational structure; Documented formal operating policies and procedures; Documented duties and responsibilities of involved individuals and organizations; An annual 360 degree outcome assessment process; Formal recognition/reward program for participating individuals and organizations.
The balance of this section of the paper will examine four case studies of successful initiatives in community-based revitalization that incorporate all of the above mentioned components.
NeighborWorks
NeighborWorks America (www.nw.org), founded in 1977, is a non-profit national organization created by the United States Congress to provide financial support, technical assistance and training for community-based revitalization efforts through its 233 local organizations and district offices located in all 50 states. The mission of the organization is to create opportunities for people to live in affordable homes, improve their lives and strengthen their communities. NeighborWorks America offers the largest number of training programs in community-based revitalization topics in the United States. In addition, through its Training Institute, it offers professional certifications in the following content areas: Community and Neighborhood Revitalization; Proficiency in Community and Revitalization; Community Building and Organizing; Proficiency in Community Building and Organizing.
To achieve its various goals, NeighborWorks America receives a direct annual appropriation from the United States Congress, as well as public- and private-sector support through contributions to the national and local member organizations. In 2009 NeighborWorks received $360 (US) million in appropriations and contributions, which the organization was able to use to leverage $3.9 (US) billion to invest in 4, 500 lower-income communities – providing quality, affordable rental homes to families of modest means, advancing sustainable homeownership and preventing foreclosures through education and counseling, delivering programs that strengthened distressed neighborhoods, and bringing the benefits of green development to families and communities.
One of the more recent examples of the successful work of NeighborWorks America occurred in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Since 2006 NeighborWorks America has invested $22.7 (US) million in resources in the Gulf to support the following array of rebuilding efforts: The construction or rehabilitation of 3,718 for-sale and multifamily affordable housing units, 250 of which incorporate green building techniques; Financial and homeownership education for 23,030 Gulf Coast residents; and, support, technical assistance, and training for local non-profit affordable housing and community development organizations throughout the region.
Local Initiatives Support Corporation
The Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC) is a national organization with a community focus. It has offices in 31 cities throughout the United States. Founded in 1979, LISC is dedicated to helping community residents transform distressed neighborhoods into healthy and sustainable communities of choice and opportunity. LISC mobilizes corporate, government and philanthropic support to provide local community development organizations with: loans, grants and equity investments; local, state-wide and national policy support and; technical and management assistance
LISC (www.lisc.org) offers a wide range of technical assistance to local organizations to undertake projects and programs intended for its community. For example, it provides training opportunities, best practices resources, workshops and conferences, and local technical assistance in such areas as: real estate development; staff capacity and skill building; organizational development, expansion and crisis intervention; and the effective execution of services under successful proposals.
Since 1980, the organization has invested $9.7 (US) billion, which has leveraged $31.3 billion in total development. Its accomplishments include supporting the construction of 271,000 affordable homes and apartments, 132 schools for 46,200 students, 157 child care facilities for 16,500 children and 225 intercity playing fields for 420,000 kids.
YouthBuild
YouthBuild USA (www.youthbuild.org) was started informally in 1988 and incorporated in 1990 to engage unemployed young men and women ages 16-24, most of whom have dropped out of high school and all of whom come from low-income families, to serve their communities by building affordable housing and assists them in transforming their own lives and roles in society. There are currently 273 YouthBuild programs in 45 states, Washington, DC, and the Virgin Islands. 92,000 YouthBuild students have built 19,000 units of affordable, increasingly green, housing since 1994.
Local YouthBuild programs and YouthBuild USA receive financial support from diverse public and private, national and local sources. Primary funding for local YouthBuild programs comes from the U.S. Department of Labor under the federal YouthBuild program, administered by the Employment and Training Administration (ETA). Since 1994, over $800 (US) million federal dollars have been appropriated to support the program. YouthBuild program funds are distributed directly by the federal government through a competitive process to local community-based organizations that run YouthBuild programs in their neighborhoods. YouthBuild USA also must compete for a national contract with the federal government to provide training, technical assistance, and data management assistance to the government’s YouthBuild grantees.
The YouthBuild program model integrates education, leadership development, counseling, construction, and other vocational training skills, along with resources for graduates. Students are provided with comprehensive services and support to develop knowledge, skills, and attitudes for postsecondary success. Implementation of the design model varies based on the local context. YouthBuild students divide their time between the YouthBuild alternative school and the construction (or other vocational training) site. Students prepare for high school diplomas, vocational school, college, and careers. The curriculum integrates academics with life skills. In addition, school administrators, educators, and staff can access learning resources through the YouthBuild USA Learning Network Online.
In order to qualify for federal funding, the sponsoring YouthBuild (2010) agency must agree to provide the below noted outcome assessment information at the completion of the respective project
Adult Measures:
Measure No. 1 – Percent of participants who completed the program that entered employment within the first quarter after completing it.
Measure No. 2 – Percent of participants who completed the program and continued to be employed both in the second and third quarters after completing it.
Measure No. 3 – Ratio of total earnings in the second plus the total earnings in the third quarters after completing the program to the total number of participants who completed the program.
Youth Measures:
Measure No. 1 – Percent of participants who completed the program that entered employment or enrolled in post-secondary education and/or advanced training/occupational skills training within the first quarter after completing it.
Measure No. 2 – Percent of participants who attained a diploma, General Equivalency Degree (GED), or certificate by the end of the third quarter after completing it.
Measure No. 3 – Percent of participants who have completed a year in the program (i.e. one year from the date of first youth program service) plus the number of participants who exit before completing a year in the youth program who increase one or more educational functioning levels.
Based on YouthBuild Demographics and Outcomes (2010), between 2005 and 2009, 17,326 youth participated in the various programs. Of these 72% were male, 28% female and 22% were Caucasian and 78% minorities. In terms of the outcomes 64% completed the programs; 69% were placed in jobs or employment; 53% received a diploma, GED or certificate and the average wage after completing the program for those employed was $9.09 (US).
Gulf Coast Workforce Development Initiative
Following hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005, The Business Roundtable, an organization of 192 Chief Executive Officers of major US companies, committed to training 20,000 new construction workers in the Gulf Coast region by the end of 2009. To accomplish this goal, the Business Roundtable Table (BRT) developed a private-public partnership called the Gulf Coast Workforce Development Initiative (GCWDI), to support entry-level construction training in Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas and Alabama. The GCWDI collaboration was a major undertaking of both fundraising and coordination, through which many businesses and organizations, agreed to commit up to $5 million in revenues and in-kind contributions to fund the initiative. Additional funding of approximately $25 million came from the U.S. Department of Labor’s Pathways to Construction grant program, Community Development Block Grants and National Emergency Grants.
Recruiting and training began in May 2006 through the Get Rewarded for Education and Advancement Training campaign. This campaign used billboards, radio advertising, posters and brochures to recruit candidates for training. Then a website (www.imgreat.org) and a national call center were made available to respond to questions and direct candidates to training programs. By the end of 2008, 21,385 individuals completed the entry-level training utilizing craft training materials developed by the National Center for Construction Education and Research (www.nccer.org).
Having met and exceeded GCWDI’s original training completion goal early, in January 2009 the BRT transferred sponsorship of the GCWDI to the Construction Users Roundtable (an US-based organization comprised of 87 construction owners, companies and associations) to be integrated into the national Choose Construction Initiative (CCI), an ambitious project that builds on the GCWDI. Inspired by the GCWDI, the Construction Users Roundtable (CURT) supported the Construction Workforce Development Center (CWDC) effort to champion construction labor forecasting and workforce development nationwide and lead the CCI project. Continuing in 2009, GCWDI worked with local government officials and training partners to support entry-level construction training in the region.
With the United States’ economy in recession, recruiting and training slowed because of a decrease in construction demand and a challenge arose in connecting graduates to job opportunities. The GCWDI responded by providing advanced training to make the trainees more valuable and productive, and signed agreements to support 2009 industrial and commercial construction workforce recruitment and advanced training efforts in Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas and Alabama. Additionally, through the partnership with the CCI, the Initiative began tracking participants in order to maintain contact, gain career path information and promote continuing education programs.
The GCWDI ultimately provided the model for a successful public-private partnership to address the critical need for construction workforce development, and through the Initiative, the participating organizations developed more effective ways to not only attract new workers to the industry, but also to maintain contact with them and follow them to help ensure they remain in the construction industry. All this evolved into a collaborative national construction workforce recruitment and development effort that has the opportunity to reshape construction industry forecasting, recruiting and training throughout the United States.
Whilst there are numerous success stories, one specific example of the GCWDI’s success occurred in the summer of 2007 when one GCWDI/CCI training partner, the Pelican Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC - a US-based construction trade association) received a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) through the Louisiana Recovery Authority and what was then the Louisiana Workforce Commission to train 160 students in the NCCER curricula. These students were a mix of under- employed and unemployed individuals and students who recently graduated from high school. The grant paid for all training costs and provided each student a stipend of $50 per day for each day he or she attended and successfully progressed in the program. The training was provided eight hours per day five days a week for eight to 13 weeks, depending on the craft. Student completion rates (90%) and NCCER test scores were dramatically improved as compared to the ABC Pelican Chapter’s traditional after work evening training program.
A subsequent audit of 45 (of the original 50) students who completed the program at the ABC Pelican Chapter Training Center in Lake Charles, LA found that 86% of the students who completed the program remained working in industry; just over 4% were not employed; and just over 9% could not be contacted. Those working program graduates earned an average hourly starting wage rate of $18.74 per hour compared to an average of $5.91 per hour before completing the program. The trained welders among this group are able to reach a minimum of $25.00 per hour within one year and welders, pipefitters, and electricians will be able to take advantage of a significant amount of “overtime” if they so choose. The ABC Pelican Chapter recognized no “profit” from the delivery of this grant-funded training and provided the training, curriculum, certified instructors, training materials and consumables, staffing, labs, record keeping, infrastructure, etc. at actual cost thereby ensuring that these public dollars were maximized.
By any standard, these statistics demonstrate overwhelming success. The impact of the training on these individuals in increased income and career potential, as well as on the state/local community in increased taxes and productivity is and will continue to be tremendous.
Discussion and Conclusions
In this paper we have presented measures to involve community and develop employment and skills across local communities both in the UK and USA. The Youthbuild project has made a significant contribution to developing the profile of participants not only in the craft skills, but also in higher skills levels with specific focus upon setting targets for this in the USA. The widening of gender and ethnicity in the trades is an obvious focus. It was of particular note that in the UK, the process is developing, but there are notable barriers to overcome in smaller communities with regard to equality and worker relations. Further, widening awareness and understanding are similarly important to developing the wider adoption of the scheme. Further, the Gulf Coast Workforce Development provides an invaluable example of widening the workforce involvement through empowered local communities.
In the USA, we also report the creation of specific schemes to support the involvement of local communities and small enterprises to take leadership and direction in the rebuilding of communities, particularly following the Hurricane Rita natural disaster in the southern states via the NeighborWorks initiative and the Local Initiatives Support Corporation projects. The schemes provide advice and capability development activities for local organizations and companies.
The studies presented show that a comprehensive approach to community support, enterprise, employment and training are all key features to the successful development of communities and the local built environment. The schemes do not necessarily rely upon public finance but form an invaluable tool to aiding developers and main contractors. However, as in the case of public procurement in the United Kingdom, procurement processes can be adopted to ensure these forms of support are integrated into the selection process.
References
Allison, M & Kaye, J 1997, Strategic planning for non-profit organizations: A practical guide and workbook. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Aupperle, Carroll and Hatfield. 1985, An Empirical Examination of the relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility and Profitability. Academic of Management Journal, Col 28, No 2, pp. 446 – 463.
Andrew R.J. Dainty, Sarah J. Millett, Geoffrey H. Briscoe, (2001) "New perspectives on construction supply chain integration", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 6 Iss: 4, pp.163 – 173
Bratt, RG 1989, Rebuilding a low-income housing policy, Temple University Press, Philadelphia, PA.
Bratt, RG 2006, Community development corporations and other non-profit housing organizations: Challenges presented by the private housing market, Prepared for the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA.
Bratt, RG 2009, ‘Challenges for non-profit housing organizations created by the private housing market’, Journal of Urban Studies, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 67-96.
Bryson, JM 2004, Strategic planning for public and non-profit organizations: A guide to strengthening and sustaining organizational achievement, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Communities and Local Government 2008, LEGI: National Baseline - Executive Summary. HMSO
Construction Skills 2008, Women and Work Sector Pathways Initiative. Available at http://www.ukces.org.uk. Accessed on 03/10/10.
Experian 2008, 2020 Vision – The Future of UK Construction. Construction Skills.
Elkington J. 1998, Cannibals with Forks: The Triple bottom Line of 21st Century Business (The Conscientious Commerce Series). New Society Publishers.
Gelatt, JP 1992, Managing nonprofit organizations in the 21st century, Oryx Press, Phoenix, AZ.
Macfarlane R, Cook M 2002, Achieving community benefits through contracts: law, policy and practice. The Policy Press
Local Initiatives Support Corporation 2010, Training for community development corporations, Available at http://www.lisc.org/docs/odi/cdc_training.pdf, accessed September 20, 2010.
NeighborWorks America 2010, Available at http://www.nw.org/network/training/training.asp, accessed September 5, 2010Office of Government Commerce. Procurement Principles.
http://www.ogc.gov.uk/introduction_to_procurement_procurement_principals.asp (accessed 02/10/2010).
Stoutland SE 1999, Community development corporations: Mission, strategy and accomplishments. In R F Ferguson & W T Dickens (eds.), Urban problems and community development, Brookings Institute Press, Washington, DC.
Vidal AC 1992, Rebuilding communities: A National study of urban community development corporations¸ New York: Community Development Research center of the Graduate School of Management and Urban Policy, New York School of Social Research.
Wells R, Ward, AJ, Feinberg, M & Alexander, JA 2008, ‘What motivates people to participate more in community-based coalitions?’, American Journal of Community Psychology, vol. 42, no. ½, pp. 94-104.
Wolf, T 1999, Managing a non-profit organization in the twenty-first century, Simon & Schuster, New York.
Youth Build UK 2010, http://www.ybuk.org (accessed -2/10/10).
YouthBuild 2010, YouthBuild Outcome Measures, Available at (http://www.doleta.gov/performance/guidance/tools_commonmeasures.cfm), accessed September 18, 2010.
YouthBuild 2010, YouthBuild Demographics and Outcomes, Available at
Roger Liska [1] and Andrew Platten [2]
1 Department of Construction Science and Management, Clemson University, 120 Lee Hall, Box 340507, Clemson, SC 29634-0507,USA
2 Faculty of Arts, Environment and Technology, Leeds Metropolitan University, Civic Quarter, Leeds, LS1 3HE, United Kingdom
Written by Roger Liska FRICS
Director of Clemson University’s Center for the Improvement of Construction Management and Processes
Roger Liska has more than 35 years of experience in construction and construction education, including 23 at Clemson University. He chaired the department once before and returned to the faculty to serve as director of its Center for the Improvement of Construction Management and Processes, a position he still holds. Mr. Liska has developed and taught more than 300 continuing education courses for the construction industry worldwide, including in the United Kingdom, South Africa, Australia and China. He helped develop and currently facilitates and teaches in the Supervisor and Project Manager Academies in conjunction with the National Center for Construction Education and Research. The professor is the author of numerous books, articles and research reports on management, education, safety and training in the construction industry. Mr. Liska chairs the board of governors for the American Institute of Construction Constructors Certification Commission. He is a past national president of both the American Institute of Constructors and the American Council for Construction Education and serves on the boards of both organizations. He is co-founder of the Construction Industry Cooperative Alliance and is a Fellow in the American Institute of Constructors, the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors and the Chartered Institute of Building in the United Kingdom.
|
