Creating lasting change.

Our mission is serve the poor through community economic development. We choose this method not because it is easy or fast, but because it acknowledges and addresses the complexity of poverty. Well-designed community economic development strategies are comprehensive, integrated, and long-term in nature. They are not a quick fix to the very visible symptoms of poverty. They address the foundational issues, and thus their pace is often measured in decades.

Ministries serving the poor and underserved around the world have been going through a significant transformation over the last 20 years. Initially, outreach was expressed through single-issue missions (SIM) that addressed the apparent needs of the constituent groups being served. Examples included church planting, water projects, health issues, and micro-finance initiatives. 

Although virtually all of these ministries were rightly motivated, they often failed to distinguish between cause and effect, treating symptoms that would quickly resurface when the root cause would reassert itself. The principle theory of change was that that this one thing, done well-enough and long enough, would lead to lasting change. Success was measured in terms of activity and/or participation (e.g., number of people fed, number of people vaccinated, number of wells drilled, etc.). In many efforts, the focus was on the needs of individuals, families or small groups of individuals with a specific need.  However, time and time again, the initiatives were not self-sustaining and when the program came to an end and/or the resources were withdrawn, the gains quickly atrophied as things returned to their original state. Time and learning encouraged a more comprehensive and holistic approach. 

The more comprehensive and integrated CED strategies focused on and encompassed the wider community versus individual segments within it. Ministry/service providers became more adept at developing authentic partnerships with recipient communities – partnerships in which the ministry was clearly not there to do something for or to the community, but with it. These high-trust relationships facilitated the process needed to tease out cause versus symptom, and to more accurately assess the needs and assets of individual communities. The result was more impactful and lasting results. These strategies proved to be more adaptive to changing contexts, more aligned with the aspirations and capacities of the communities being served, and, as a result, more sustainable. 

— Dr. Bob Lupton