90 likes | 104 Views
Established in 2009, this programme aims to increase capacity in the LGBT sector in Ireland. Its outcomes include expanding access to safe spaces, enhancing cohesion, and fostering shared experiences among LGBT groups.
E N D
LGBT DIVERSITY An Irish Programme to Build Capacity of the LGBTI Sector
Background • The Building Sustainable LGBT Communities Programme established in 2009. A Transgender Strand (TENI) and LGBT Strand (LGBT Diversity) • LGBT Diversity a joint programme of 12 LGBT groups- national advocacy bodies (GLEN,LGBT Noise, Marriage Equality, NLGF, TENI) services with national remit (BelongTo) and local services (Cork Gay Project, Dundalk Outcomers, LinC, Outwest, Rainbow Support Services.) • Five staff members and Independent Chair
Programme Outcomes • Outcome 1: Existing services, groups, organisations, and centres that work with LGBT people have increased capacity • Outcome 2: People living in parts of Ireland that currently have little or no supports for LGBT people will have greater access to safe spaces/groups • Outcome 3: The LGBT sector in Ireland is more cohesive, with greater opportunities for shared experiences, shared learning and collaboration.
Classic Growth Model • Aims to increase the overall size of the sector. • Get more people involved. • Create more groups • Move people up the hierarchy of influence • Move groups up the hierarchy of influence
Strategic Refocus • The programme was conceived in the boom years, and its aspirations for growth fitted in to that time • The economic crisis made those aspirations much more challenging and the logic of the programme was shaken • A lot of the targets for the programme were met very early on, but keeping the momentum going for new developments is difficult • But needed to remember that what we trying to do was still needed
Sustainability Approach to Sector Building • Less interest in growth • Capacity is therefore defined as a combination of: the social capital of the sector (how different organisations relate); the quality of the service provided; the demonstrable need that is being met; and the broader social agenda that it is framed within.
Lessons Learnt • The advocacy gap is not a lack of local activists engaged with the big, national issues; but is rather lack of activists who can influence local and regional decision makers, or decision makers within specific fields • Capacity building should be aspirational, progressive and shouldn’t be afraid of having an agenda. But some groups will neither want nor need that kind of directional support • “Lone Ranger” community development doesn’t work
Successes • Leadership programme; creating networks of activists, shared vision, and mentor relationship with the major agencies • Joint development of regional strategies; the success being the process, collectively agreeing priorities and creating working relationships between community and mainstream • Follow through (research → seminar → action group → funded initiative)