EPA’s Environmental Justice 

Collaborative Problem-Solving Model 

United States 

Environmental Protection Agency 

2201A 

Washington, DC 20460 

EPA 300-R-06-002 

December 2006 

www.epa.gov/compliance/environmentaljustice 

Welcome Message 

I

n just a short time, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Environmental 

Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving (CPS) Program has grown and evolved. The 

backbone of this exciting new program is the Environmental Justice Collaborative 

Problem-Solving Model (CPS Model). 

EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model is a handbook for all 

stakeholders to understand the basic tenets of the CPS Model and, through practical 

examples, it describes how the CPS Model is used to address environmental and/or 

public health issues in distressed communities. 

The Office of Environmental Justice presents an overview of the CPS Model in this publication in order to share this dynamic approach with all environmental justice stakeholders. 

We invite you to explore the CPS Model and see how it can work for your community. 

Barry E. Hill, Director 

Office of Environmental Justice 

Contents


Chapter 1: Introduction .................................................. 1


Chapter 2: Collaborative Problem-Solving and


Environmental Justice....................................3


Chapter 3: The Collaborative Problem-Solving Model .....5


CPS Element 1: Issue Identification, Community Vision, 

and Strategic Goal-Setting .............................................................6


CPS Element 2: Community Capacity Building and 


Leadership Development................................................................9


CPS Element 3: Consensus Building and Dispute Resolution .........10


CPS Element 4: Multi-Stakeholder Partnership and 


Leveraging of Resources ..............................................................12


CPS Element 5: Constructive Engagement by Relevant


Stakeholders...............................................................................13


CPS Element 6: Sound Management and Implementation..............15


CPS Element 7: Evaluation, Lessons Learned, and 


Replication of Best Practices .......................................................16


Chapter 4: ReGenesis – A Practical Application 


of the CPS Model.........................................19


Chapter 5: The Environmental Justice Collaborative


Problem-Solving Cooperative Agreement 


Program.......................................................33


Chapter 6: Conclusion...................................................36


Chapter 1: 

Introduction 

I

n 2004, the Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ) of the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) developed a grant program to provide direct financial and 

technical assistance to selected community-based organizations. OEJ established a 

cooperative agreement program around the framework of the Environmental Justice 

Collaborative Problem-Solving Model (CPS Model). The concepts of collaborative problemsolving were initially examined by EPA and other federal agencies through the Federal 

Interagency Working Group (IWG) on Environmental Justice after gathering accomplishments 

and many lessons learned from the IWG’s 30 demonstration projects in communities around 

the country. Since then, OEJ has developed the CPS Model into an effective approach to 

addressing local environmental and/or public health issues in a collaborative manner with 

various stakeholders such as communities, industry, academic institutions, and others. 

Through OEJ, EPA created the CPS Model as part of its ongoing commitment to ensure 

environmental justice for all communities, including low-income and/or minority communities. Ensuring environmental justice means not only protecting human health and the 

environment for everyone, but also ensuring that all people are treated fairly and given 

the opportunity to participate meaningfully in the development, implementation, and 

enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. 

Environmental and/or public health issues arise in urban, rural, and tribal communities 

that are environmentally, economically, and socially distressed. Situations where community residents are exposed disproportionately to environmental harms and risks require the 

application of science (both physical and social), environmental and civil rights law, public 

policy, urban planning, and other academic disciplines pertaining to community health, 

community development, natural resource management, and dispute resolution. These situations, more often than not, fall outside of the regulatory or programmatic responsibilities 

of any single governmental agency. It is virtually impossible for any single organization, 

institution, or sector of society, no matter how large or well established, to adequately 

address the environmental and/or public health problems experienced by communities. 

Considerable progress has been made since Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to 

Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 

issued on February 11, 1994) to address environmental and/or public health conditions 

in communities around the country. Despite this progress, however, some communities 

still lack the means to address the complex, interrelated factors related to environmental 

justice, such as environmental, public health, economic, and social concerns. Thus, 

OEJ began exploring the use of collaborative problem-solving to provide a systematic 

approach for communities to build partnerships with other stakeholders to improve their 

environmental and/or public health conditions in local areas. 

Introduction
 1 
The EPA’s Environmental Justice 

Collaborative Problem-Solving Model is 

designed to give readers a basic understanding of the CPS Model and how it can 

be used to address local environmental 

and/or public health issues. This booklet 

will provide an overview of the CPS Model 

and its relationship to the Environmental 

Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving 

Cooperative Agreement Program (EJ CPS Program) and how some communities are 

already using the CPS Model successfully around the United States. A basic overview of 

the CPS Model is discussed in Chapter 3, followed by several sections devoted to each 

of the CPS Model’s seven elements. 

This publication is intended for a diverse audience of environmental justice stakeholders, including: 1) community-based organizations, 2) federal, state, tribal and local governments, 3) industry, 4) non-governmental organizations, and 5) academia. It provides 

insights on how such entities can work together to use the CPS Model’s techniques to 

address environmental and/or public health issues in local communities. In addition, 

this document can be used by EPA staff and members of the public who are interested 

in EPA’s EJ CPS Program, which is further discussed in Chapter 5. 

2 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model

Chapter 2: 

Collaborative Problem-Solving 

and Environmental Justice 

Before examining to the CPS Model in great detail, this chapter discusses the concept of collaborative problem-solving and the need for partnership-building to 

address multi-stakeholder interests and concerns related to environmental justice. 

Collaborative problem-solving simply means that various stakeholders agree to work 

together to address a particular issue or concern. In situations involving environmental 

justice issues, stakeholders often have to reconcile divergent interests in order to address 

complex and interrelated environmental, public health, economic, and social problems in 

local communities. Many of these problems are deeply rooted and difficult to resolve 

without the concerted effort and active participation of all the stakeholders. When multiple stakeholders work together, they create a collective vision that reflects mutually beneficial goals for all parties. Such collaboration fosters the conditions that enable the parties to mobilize the resources necessary to realize stronger, more lasting solutions. 

Collaborative problem-solving, in the context of environmental justice, involves proactive, 

strategic, and visionary community-based processes that bring together multiple parties 

from various stakeholder groups (e.g., community groups, all levels of government, industry, and academia) to develop solutions to address local environmental and/or public health 

issues. Partnerships and negotiations are required to achieve such a goal. Partnerships 

refer to arrangements by which different stakeholders work together to achieve a common 

goal. These partnerships can range from informal working relationships to very structured 

arrangements in which goals, membership, ground rules, and operating principles are 

clearly defined. Negotiations refer to processes, ranging from informal to formal, by 

which different stakeholders agree to come together and resolve disagreements. 

The next chapter describes the CPS Model and its seven elements. The CPS Model is a 

flexible approach that can be applied to many situations that require collaboration but is 

particularly useful when dealing with environmental justice issues that are complex and 

involve many stakeholders, and where conflicts need to be resolved. There are many 

benefits to using the CPS Model. For instance, it provides a framework for leveraging 

the necessary human, social, intellectual, technical, legal, and financial resources to 

make long-term progress in communities disproportionately affected by environmental 

and/or public heath issues. Also, the CPS Model encourages consensus-building processes and skills to help ensure successful collaborations and negotiations. Finally, it 

addresses the ongoing capacity-building needs of community-based organizations, as 

well as those of government, industry, academia, and civic organizations. 

Collaborative Problem Solving and Environmental Justice
 3 

Chapter 3: 

The Collaborative ProblemSolving Model 

The CPS Model represents a systematic, community-based approach for stakeholders to achieve lasting solutions to local environmental and/or public health issues 

or concerns. It provides the framework for the CPS Program, which is 

discussed in Chapter 5. 

There are seven elements in the CPS Model. These elements can be used in distressed 

communities where people are committed to working together to bring about positive 

change. Each element is discussed in detail in the sections that follow. 

3

1 2

Community 

Vision 

& Strategic 

Goal-Setting 

Community 

Capacity-Building 

& Leadership 

Development 

Consensus Building 

& Dispute 

Resolution 

Elements of the 

Collaborative 

Problem-Solving 

Model 

7

Evaluation, Lessons 

Learned & Replication 

of Best Practices 

4

Multi-Stakeholder 

Partnerships & 

Leveraging of 

Resources 

5

Constructive 

Engagement 

by Relevant 

Stakeholders 

6

Sound 

Management 

& Implementation 

These elements are cross-cutting and interdependent and should be utilized in a proactive, 

strategic, and iterative manner. Determining which elements to undertake, and in what 

order, can vary greatly, however, depending upon the unique facts and circumstances surrounding each environmental and/or public health issue. Not all the elements are required 

to be used in every situation. Rather, the CPS Model and its seven elements can be 

viewed as a “tool box” filled with different tools that can be used as needed. 

The CPS Model has been used successfully in many situations around the country. The 

seven elements can help pave the way for anyone interested in bringing environmental 

justice to their community. For instance, Chapter 4 describes how the CPS Model was 

used effectively in Spartanburg, South Carolina, where a community-based organization 

The Collaborative Problem-Solving Model
 5 
called ReGenesis brought together the community, government, and industry to overcome 

tremendous obstacles to realize a vision of addressing long-standing local environmental, 

public health, and socio-economic ills. In doing so, all the stakeholders took part in 

improving the community’s quality of life and creating the potential for economic growth 

and sustainability. Each of the sections that follow refers to the ReGenesis example. 

Furthermore, Chapter 5 briefly describes how the CPS Model is being applied by other 

communities through the EJ CPS Program. 

CPS Element 1 - Issue Identification, 

Community Vision, and Strategic Goal-Setting 

The first element involves identifying the problem, such as environmental contamination; 

envisioning possible solutions; and then setting goals to achieve those solutions. 

CPS Element 1 at a glance: Situations in which community residents are exposed disproportionately to environmental risks and harms invariably involve complex 

• Build upon existing leadership and issues. Community-based organizations should think strategically to 

experience in the community.	 ensure that their community’s limited resources are mobilized effectively to achieving priority goals. Involving the broader community 

• Involve community residents early in strategic planning activities usually leads to greater clarity in setin identifying concerns.	 ting goals, establishing common understanding and trust, and honing the ability to act collectively. Strategies should not only address 

• Identify partners. the problem but also lead to greater community capacity, viable 

partnerships, and more resources being leveraged. 

• Build on community plans and 

goals.	 Most organizations or partnerships start with an awareness of a problem. People come together when they realize that something is 

• Involve community residents in wrong. At some point, individual concerns transform into an organ- planning and goal-setting (e.g., ized community effort to address those concerns. The concerns can 

forums, workshops). include “substantive issues,” such as the high incidence of asthma 

or higher than normal rates of lead poisoning in children. They also 

can include “process issues,” such as lack of meaningful involvement in the decision-making processes of government or industry. 

Collaborative problem-solving seeks to move beyond identifying environmental and/or public health problems to formulating viable strategies to address and resolve them. This goal 

is realized by: 1) creating a vision that articulates the desired outcomes to be achieved, 

and 2) developing a strategy that identifies the actions needed to produce such results. 

In a visioning process, the participants think about what they want their community to 

eventually look like. In essence, the community visualizes what their own version of a 

6 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model

healthy and sustainable community might be. Focus groups, leadership forums, retreats, 

and planning charettes can be used to accomplish this process. The visioning process 

helps to establish the community’s goals. They serve as the basis for subsequent planning and action. Ideally, the vision should reflect the aspirations of the whole community 

rather than a small group of individuals. 

Using stories or images can effectively communicate a community’s goals to others. 

Stories or images also can help all stakeholders understand the community’s environmental and/or public health concerns. 

Goals should be based on a community’s vision of a healthy and sustainable community. 

They are formulated as specific solutions or desired outcomes to the particular public 

health and/or environmental problems identified. Goals should be strategic and accomplish 

several objectives simultaneously. Through a visioning process, community organizations 

develop a vision of their aspirations of a healthy and sustainable community. Specific 

goals in areas such as environmental cleanup, transportation, economic development, 

housing, public safety, green space development, and health/medical care are components 

of that vision. For instance, here is ReGenesis’ goal statement with several components: 

Overarching goal: The goal of the ReGenesis Redevelopment Project in the 

Arkwright-Forest Park communities of Spartanburg's South Side is to prepare a plan 

of action for this 500-acre site, which has been adversely affected by pollutants from 

industry and landfills. 

• Environmental objective: To provide a healthy and safe community that is free of air 

and water pollution caused by industrial facilities and landfill sites. 

• Housing objective: To provide good housing conditions for existing and potential new 

residents. Where relocations are deemed necessary in order to clean up industrial 

pollution, relocation housing should be made available within the immediate area. 

• Community objective: To provide community facilities which will not only serve the 

immediate ReGenesis neighborhoods, but will also have a regional benefit drawing 

diverse populations and interests. 

• Transportation objective: To enhance the community with improved vehicular and 

pedestrian access - especially emergency services - as well as local and regional 

access for shopping and employment opportunities. 

• Infrastructure objective: To provide the same high level of service for power, water, 

sewer, and telephone as are prevalent in Spartanburg neighborhoods. 

The Collaborative Problem-Solving Model
 7 
• Economic objective: To ensure stable economic growth with a sound environment to 

improve economic conditions for residents. 

• Implementation objective: To establish an implementation strategy to ensure that the 

Redevelopment Plan is carried out in a timely fashion. 

Techniques to identify issues, create a vision, and set goals: 

Collaboration between different stakeholder groups, government 

agencies, and academic disciplines is critical to coalescing a 

community’s vision and goals. Mapping tools, like Geographic 

•	 Build upon existing leadership and Information Systems (GIS), represent one way to foster such collaboration. GIS enables stakeholders to appreciate the conditions expertise in the affected community. and issues of the particular community. Once the information is 

• Conduct local outreach, education,	 compiled and configured, GIS maps can also become effective 

fact-finding, and assessment. 	 tools for integrated problem-solving. GIS tools allow for the


simultaneous examination of the physical and social environ­


• Involve affected residents early to	 ments, as well as the natural and human-made environments. 

identify issues and concerns. 	 GIS tools also help to overcome fragmentation by promoting integrated approaches to problem-solving across different agencies 

• Identify potential partners from all and disciplines. stakeholder groups. 

Community groups also should pay close attention to power imbal­

• Build upon a strong understanding of ances during the process of setting goals. 	For instance, more community history and practices. powerful groups often exert pressure to further their own agendas. 

• Build upon a clearly articulated com-	 “Who sets the agenda?” is an important question. It speaks to 

munity vision of its goals. 	 the issue of ensuring that the community defines its own problems, understands its own vision and interests, and develops its 

• Employ tools for involving affected res- own agendas and strategies. Likewise, community-based organiidents in planning project activities. zations should realize that non-community stakeholder groups and 

outside experts will provide good ideas and needed information. 

Finally, the community group should not underestimate the value 

of building strategic relationships with potential partners early on. These relationships 

can come into play later when such partners are needed to help implement a vision. 

Planning charettes are effective tools for bringing together community residents, government 

leaders, and experts to translate the community’s aspirations into realistic visions. In addition to a structured schedule and an open process for participation, the charette includes 

three defined mechanisms: 1) idea generation; 2) decision making; and 3) problem-solving. 

In Chapter 4, ReGenesis used a charette exercise sponsored by the Department of Energy to 

engage all of Spartanburg’s stakeholders, particularly the local residents, in a visioning 

process to shape their new community (see page 26). 

8 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model

CPS Element 2 - Community Capacity


Building and Leadership Development


The second element calls for what’s known as community “capacity building,” which 

means finding a way to provide interested parties such as residents with the skills, information, and resources they need to achieve their goals. 

Once a community-based organization has identified an environmental and/or public 

health concern, it must: 

• Educate itself about the issue 

• Gather appropriate information about the issue 

• Conduct assessments regarding the causes of and potential solutions to the problem 

• Identify and mobilize persons and organizations who can provide technical assistance 

• Educate residents about the problem and involve them in formulating solutions 

and strategies 

Community-based organizations devote considerable time and resources to educating 

community residents on a multitude of issues. They provide 

awareness and understanding not only of the environmental and/or 

public health issues at stake, but also the government policies 

and programs, industry practices, potential solutions, remedies, 

and other areas of concern. • Build upon community efforts/work. 

CPS Element 2 at a glance: 

• Community education activities often focus on the scientific, legal, Identify ways to work with community 

and policy aspects of environmental and/or public health impacts. needs. 

When community residents develop a greater understanding of their • Ensure community leaders and mem­ own environmental and/or public health concerns, they have a better bers have the ability to participate in understanding of the options available to address these concerns. collaborative problem-solving processes. As a result, they acquire a greater capacity to meaningfully engage in 

negotiations or participate in other decision-making processes. • Provide training, mentoring, technical

help, and funding support. However, building community capacity also includes addressing


organizational development and management issues. Just how well • Nurture the leadership skills of key


a community-based organization is managed affects the overall suc- individuals in a project.


cess of a community-based collaboration with other stakeholders. 


• Build trust. 

Basic management issues, such as organizational governance, 

financial management, and personnel policies, are critical. Any 

community-based organization that has matured to the point of adopting a proactive, 

strategic vision must address issues of organizational development. 

The Collaborative Problem-Solving Model
 9 
Community-based organizations require resources and training to focus on organizational 

development and management needs. Institutions such as universities, civic organizaTechniques to boost community 

capacity building: 

• Tailor specific capacity-building activities to community assets and project 

goals. 

• Institute training, mentoring, and 

technical assistance activities. 

• Provide training to those community 

representatives directly involved in collaborative problem-solving processes. 

• Develop sustainable processes that 

ensure capacity building and leadership development for community 

residents in the future. 

tions, and government agencies can help meet some of these 

organizational development and management needs, but the community-based organization should proactively develop its own 

independent organizational capacity and infrastructure. 

Most importantly, leadership development is the key ingredient to 

community capacity building. Though the attributes are unique to 

each individual, the essential qualities of leadership strengthen a 

person’s ability to think strategically, create a vision, manage 

processes, communicate effectively, build consensus, and achieve 

results. In many cases, it takes only one person to change the 

course of action in a community, and yet it is the task of the entire 

community to grow its own leaders to continue to serve as their 

champions. In the ReGenesis example in Chapter 4, the qualities 

of leadership are embodied in Harold Mitchell, who steadfastly 

brought his community to the table and built a vibrant partnership 

with government and industry to resolve the nagging environmental, 

health, economic, and social problems that plagued Spartanburg for 

decades (see page 21). By empowering the community—particularly engaging the youth in leadership and job skills training—Spartanburg is assured of a 

new crop of leaders to sustain their future progress. 

CPS Element 3 - Consensus Building and 

Dispute Resolution 

CPS Element 3 at a glance: 

• Ensure partnering organizations are 

treated fairly and can participate. 

• Build trust. 

• Establish a common set of ideas and 

plans to address concerns. 

• Help organizations develop agreements. 

• Resolve conflicts; use techniques like 

dispute resolution when necessary. 

The third element entails “consensus building” and “dispute resolution,” which means finding effective ways of making group decisions, involving all appropriate parties and, when necessary, 

resolving disagreements. This is perhaps one of the most complex 

and challenging elements in the CPS Model. 

Even though this is presented as the third element in the Model, it 

represents an ongoing process that generally begins prior to visioning and goal-setting and continues throughout any collaboration. 

What is consensus building? Collaborative problem-solving efforts 

involve decision making by consensus. Such processes encourage 

all participating stakeholders to seek common ground and derive 

mutual gains. Building consensus means seeking agreement 

among different and, often times, competing interests. In the collaborative problem-solving process, consensus building meets the 

10 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model

needs and interests of each member of the group and requires members to work together to seek creative solutions. While building consensus is important to reaching agreements, it also serves to create and strengthen the relationships that form the basis for 

current and future collaborations. 

Collaborative problem-solving efforts involve decision making by 

consensus. Such processes encourage all participating stakeholders to first build and bridge trust in order to seek common ground 

and derive mutual gains. In the collaborative problem-solving • Design processes, both formal and inforprocess, consensus building meets the needs and interests of each mal, to ensure fair treatment and meanmember of the group and requires members to work together to ingful participation of all stakeholders.

seek creative solutions. 

Techniques to build consensus 

and resolve disputes: 

• Promote the development of a common

Using consensus-building processes to achieve common goals also has vision and goals among all partners.

the secondary effect of enhancing the problem-solving capacity and 

leadership skills of the key players. Overcoming challenges involving • Utilize facilitators or mediators to 

extreme stress is like going through a “ring of fire,” from which an assist in the communication and 

individual emerges stronger and clearer than before. Additionally, negotiation processes. 

relationships among stakeholder groups are strengthened. 

• Identify, nurture, and promote win/win 

What is dispute resolution? Invariably, conflicts arise in some scenarios and mutual gains. 

cases. Where there is disagreement, dispute resolution processes 

can be used to work through conflicts. A dispute happens when a • Utilize alternative dispute resolution 

conflict between different parties has reached an impasse. To techniques to resolve crystallized 

resolve disputes, there is a full spectrum of techniques for which disputes. 

parties have varying levels of control over the process and outcomes, depending upon the particular process used. Dispute resolution processes are 

both adjudicative (e.g., litigation or arbitration) and consensual (e.g., mediation or 

negotiation) in nature. 

The following dispute resolution processes support the consensus-building approach: 1) 

unassisted negotiation, 2) facilitation, 3) mediation, 4) neutral fact-finding, and 5) the 

use of an ombudsperson. These processes provide the parties with greater control over 

the process and outcomes. Communities and other stakeholders seeking to address 

adverse and disproportionate environmental and/or public health issues can benefit from 

a greater understanding of these processes. Such processes are often needed in cases 

involving disproportionate environmental and/or public health impacts 

Other essential components. There are other important components to note in this element of the CPS Model. The first is to correctly assess the conflict at hand. Conflict 

assessments are structured analyses that can be used to make informed decisions prior 

to and/or during consensus-building and dispute resolution processes. While assessing 

the conflict, disagreements about facts or the interpretation of data may arise in virtually all situations involving disproportionate environmental and/or public health issues. 

When such disagreements occur, the stakeholders can jointly choose to use an expert or 

The Collaborative Problem-Solving Model
 11 
team of experts to conduct fact-finding in a neutral manner. Another key component 

when coming to consensus is to factor in contingency conditions that ensure agreements 

are implemented or enforced. Such conditions can provide for monitoring of the agreement or can trigger certain activities to occur if certain circumstances arise. 

The stronger and more effective the overall collaborative process is, the greater positive 

impact it will have on the group’s ability to resolve disputes. Chapter 4 illustrates this 

point; ReGenesis and Rhodia, Inc. used a dispute resolution technique called a facilitated 

dialogue, which used a neutral third-party to assist in crystallizing the issues and finding 

mutually agreeable long term solutions (see page 27). The dispute involved community 

concerns about the Rhodia chemical manufacturing facility, which the community 

believed had caused environmental impacts and is located in the middle of a redevelopment area that the community’s revitalization plans envisioned. The community and the 

company entered into a facilitated dialogue that produced several actions by the company, including ground water testing, odor control, emergency preparedness exercises, and 

support for community redevelopment efforts. Because this dialogue took place in the 

context of a well-developed community vision, the participants explored a wide range of 

options that addressed the community’s concerns as well as the company’s interests. 

CPS Element 4 - Multi-Stakeholder 

Partnerships and Leveraging of Resources 

CPS Element 4 at a glance: The fourth element involves creating partnerships with key stakeholders. Environmental justice efforts across the nation have pro­

• Talk early and often with possible duced some remarkable partnerships between communities, faith 

partners who need to be involved in groups, philanthropic organizations, universities, all levels of govaddressing concerns. ernment, business and industry, and academia. These partnerships seek to examine problems together, develop action plans, 

• Create a common vision, goals and and bring together the resources necessary to achieve everyone’s 

objectives among the partners.	 goals. But exactly which stakeholders come together and 

when/how is unique to each situation or circumstance, as evident 

• Develop a clear and workable plan to in this section. 

address identified issues. 

Partnerships consist of diverse individuals and organizations who 

• Identify and invite partners to share agree to work together to achieve a common goal. Partnerships 

their resources (e.g., human, institu- enable different groups to examine a problem together, leverage 

tional, technical, legal, financial). resources, or achieve a mutually agreed-upon goal. They represent an important mechanism for a community to achieve its 

• Look for new partners to help address short-term goals as well as its long-term vision of a healthy and issues as new issues and needs are sustainable community. In some cases, out of necessity, some identified. partnerships are formed from the most unlikely of allies. 

Multi-stakeholder partnerships, consisting of entities representing different sectors of 

society (e.g., community, government, business and industry, academia) enable these 

entities to access needed resources. In situations where community residents are 

12 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model

adversely and disproportionately exposed to environmental harms and risks, the various 

stakeholder groups might require different kinds of assistance to ensure their effective 

participation a collaborative problem-solving process. For example, community groups 

might need support in accessing government resources, while industry might need education on how to work effectively and proactively with communities. Well-designed partnerships are important vehicles for mobilizing the needed 

resources – human, institutional, technical, legal, and financial – 

to address a problem. In this way, partnerships are a critical part 

of a capacity-building strategy. Such partnerships enable community-based organizations to access individuals with needed expertise. Likewise, a government agency may enter into a partnership 

Techniques for achieving 

well-structured multi-stakeholder 

collaborative partnerships: 

• Establish dialogues that lead to possible with a community-based organization to more effectively provide partnerships with all relevant stakehold­ public information and services to the local community. ers/parties, including the community, 

Building a successful partnership is a critical investment that businesses, and government. 

requires vision, clearly defined goals, organizational capacity and • Ensure clarity of common vision, commitment, individual leadership, technical expertise, financial goals, objectives, strategies, and resources, and, in some cases, use of a facilitator. Each partner- actions among the partnership. ship should be tailored to the community-based organization’s 

existing capacity, as well as the capacity of other stakeholders. • Develop a clear, workable organizational 

Although many organizations may enter into a partnership, the structure and workplan to address comeffectiveness of that partnership usually depends on understand- munications and coordination needs of 

ings and working relationships between individuals. When circum- the collaborative partnership. 

stances make for unfavorable working relationships (including the 

time, effort, and resources involved in maintaining it), a group • Identify and recruit partners to address 

should end the partnership. the resource needs of a project 

(e.g., human, institutional, technical, 

Chapter 4 clearly demonstrates ReGenesis’ ability to develop legal, and financial). 

multi-stakeholder partnerships and leverage the necessary 

resources in order to realize the community’s vision (see page 26). • Strengthen partnerships as new issues 

Also, ReGenesis and the city and county of Spartanburg formal- and relationships are understood. 

ized their agreement by signing a Memorandum of Understanding 

• Add processes that allow for the inclu­ to establish a Community Development Task Force, thereby mobi­ sion of new partners as they emerge. lizing the people and resources of local government agencies to 

focus attention on this community (see page 25). 

CPS Element 5 - Constructive Engagement by 

Relevant Stakeholders 

The fifth element calls for an active, supportive role by other stakeholders, such as businesses, academia, civic organizations, and all levels of government. These relevant noncommunity stakeholder groups can play an important role in participating and assisting 

in the collaborative partnership. The possible roles that each of these stakeholder 

groups can play are outlined in this section. 

The Collaborative Problem-Solving Model
 13 
Government agencies at the federal and state level can play many roles in collaborative 

problem-solving efforts. They can: 1) act as a convener or facilitator, 2) provide technical assistance, information, and organizational capacity, 3) assist in coordination and 

communications, 4) provide financial resources or services, 5) enforce applicable provisions of laws or regulations, 6) focus attention on a problem, and/or 7) provide legitimacy to an effort. For example, government agencies make regulatory and/or enforcement 

decisions, provide technical assistance and resources, and help ensure that all relevant 

stakeholders come to the table. Even though state and federal agencies play significant 

roles in the creation and development of certain partnerships, they cannot maintain a 

CPS Element 5 at a glance: 

high level of commitment to all partnerships indefinitely. Local 

government involvement is crucial for the sustainability of longterm efforts to address local environmental and/or public health • Identify where the government can issues. It is therefore important that community organizations support the efforts of the community to seeking to resolve a problem formulate a clear strategy to foster address issues through information proactive engagement by government agencies at the local, state, resources, technical assistance, finan­ tribal, and/or federal levels. In the ReGenesis example, the feder­ cial assistance, or even policy changes. al, state, and local government each played a critical role to sup­

• Seek support and cooperation from port the collaborative partnership and put vital improvements into 

industry or business. motion (see page 23). 

• Use academic institutions for techni- Historically, business and industry groups perceived themselves to 

cal assistance such as research and be the object of allegations that their activities exposed communianalysis. ty residents disproportionately to environmental and/or public 

health risks and harms. Nevertheless, this perception may be 

• Engage civic organizations to help slowly changing as more companies see the benefits of being 

raise the community’s awareness of more open and proactively involved in the local community and 

the issues and mobilize support. that many misperceptions are rectified through changes in business policies and practices and increased communication with the 

community. Chapter 4 provides positive accounts of how two businesses, Rhodia and 

Vigindustries, became unlikely but crucial supporters of the Spartanburg community’s 

revitalization efforts (see pages 25 and 27). 

Academic and civic organizations include universities, nonprofit public interest groups, 

faith-based organizations, labor organizations, and philanthropic organizations. They can 

be an invaluable asset in a collaborative problem-solving process and provide innumerable support to community-based organizations. For instance, universities and public 

interest groups can provide information, training, and technical assistance in many areas 

(e.g., research, issue analysis, organizational development, and facilitation), while foundations can provide financial resources. Academia and civic organizations can also play 

an intermediary role by linking communities to money, material goods, services, experts, 

and decision-makers. For this reason, government and philanthropic organizations have 

funded university-based programs to provide technical services to communities. In 

Spartanburg, technical outreach service centers provided ReGenesis with fact-finding 

assistance by analyzing and interpreting results for the community during its facilitated 

dialogue with Rhodia and EPA Region 4. 

14 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model

CPS Element 6 - Sound 

Management and Implementation CPS Element 6 at a glance: 

• Seek clear results and improve 

The sixth element involves developing sound organization and community conditions. 

management to produce results. This means developing and carrying out work plans with clear goals and a clear timeframe and • Clarify commitments of each partner. 

giving responsibilities to various people. This element also 

involves choosing who will be a leader, spokesperson, or decision- • Clarify plans and timelines. 

maker within each group. Results-oriented activities include: • Use community’s abilities and talents. 

• Partnership design, which fosters consensus around a common • Use strengths of partners. vision, defines the role of partner organizations, and establishes 

clear operating procedures. • Identify and build upon small 


successes. 


• Management plans, which ensure proper communications, coordination, and utilization of resources. • Organize work to maximize time and 

resources. 

• Action plans, which include clear objectives, timelines, organizational commitments, and delegation of responsibilities. 

Ensuring sound management is particularly challenging for community-based organizations 

that are working on projects to address specific environmental and/or public health issues. 

These organizations are often understaffed and underfunded and lack management systems 

and expertise. These organizations are often hard pressed to address day-to-day issues of 

organizational and staff development, governance, budget, administration, and personnel. 

Government and philanthropic assistance programs should focus their support on management and implementation matters when providing technical assistance, skills development, 

and financial resources to community-based organizations. 

Techniques to Promote Sound Management and Implementation: 

• Be visionary, but guard against 

setting unrealistic goals. 

• Focus on tangible outcomes 

and improvements in community 

conditions. 

• Develop strategies tailored to 

the community’s assets and 

deficits. 

• Design projects that build on 

the strengths and capacities of 

partners and resources. 

• Ensure clear commitments from 

all partners. 

• Develop a cogent and clearly 

visible organizational structure. 

• Produce clearly defined, wellformulated action plans and 

timelines. 

• Cluster and order tasks to promote the efficient use of time 

and resources. 

• Develop plans and provide people 

to facilitate regular and productive 

meetings. 

• Provide structures for coordination 

and communications. 

• Build in space and time for 

training and capacity building of 

all partners. 

• Build in evaluation from the 

very beginning. 

• Identify and build on small 

successes. 

The Collaborative Problem-Solving Model 15 
Addressing management and implementation issues should start as early as possible in 

the collaborative problem-solving process. The lead in this process, such as a community-based organization, should make every effort to ensure continuing cooperation among 

different parties, maintaining partnership focus and momentum, and keeping key decision makers involved. Equally important considerations are the community-based organization’s: 1) decisions about the issues it chooses to address, 2) strategies it seeks to 

pursue, and 3) collaborations it forms. To the extent possible, the organization should 

think carefully through these questions as part of its initial goal-setting and strategic 

planning process, not as an afterthought. 

As noted in the case study in Chapter 4, the establishment of the Environmental Justice 

Partnership—the steering committee comprised of multiple stakeholders—not only 

shaped the process but is working effectively to implement the vision. Each stakeholder 

group has a seat at this table and has a vested interest in making sure that the vision is 

realized (see page 23). 

CPS Element 7 - Evaluation, Lessons Learned, 

and Replication of Best Practices 

The seventh element calls for reviewing the lessons learned over time and deciding what 

is working or not working. Evaluation helps determine whether a program is achieving 

its goals. Evaluation is a valuable tool when undertaking any project, especially for 

CPS Element 7 at a glance: 

• Periodically evaluate progress. 

• Use lessons learned as the project 

proceeds. 

• Clearly describe measures of success. 

• Document and share information on 

successes. 

measuring results. In its broadest definition, evaluation is a systematic way to learn from past experience by assessing how well a 

project is working. It also helps move the project into the future 

by building on strengths and correcting problems. The ability to 

summarize progress in quantitative, qualitative, institutional, and 

social terms, as well as to incorporate lessons learned into a continuous process, is critical to sustaining the work. And finally, the 

project’s best practices should be identified and communicated so 

that others can learn and use them. 

Although presented as the last element in the CPS Model, evaluation should be incorporated from the very beginning of a project and 

woven in as an integral part of all its phases; doing so will make any 

effort more effective and valuable to others. Not only will evaluation help projects make 

adjustments and stay on course, but it will also help provide more meaningful lessons 

learned. To replicate best practices broadly, lessons learned should be shared with the 

affected community residents, as well as other communities and stakeholders. 

Why is evaluation important? Projects that incorporate evaluation from the very beginning are 

usually stronger projects, with a clearer idea of vision, goals, objectives, strategies, actions, 

and measures of success. Evaluation helps to clarify the project’s underlying assumptions 

and causal relationships. In addition, evaluation can enable the participants to proactively 

identify opportunities and deficiencies and make adjustments as early as possible. 

16 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model

Evaluation can help the projects meet two different but interrelated goals: 1) addressing 

the program development needs of community-based efforts and 2) addressing the 

accountability needs of the organizations that provide resources 

(i.e., financial and technical assistance) to such community-based 

efforts. Resource-providing organizations typically are concerned 

with responding to competing demands for investments and 

demonstrating investment results to their stakeholders. EPA is an • Use a logic model to develop a 

example of such a resource-providing organization. “template” for the project plan. 

Techniques used in 

the evaluation process: 

In the case of ReGenesis, evaluation comes in several forms, such • Define clear measures of success for 

as the regular meetings with its community advisory board as well project outputs and outcomes. 

as partner meetings and the Environmental Justice Partnership • Develop mechanisms to integrate the steering committee. Likewise, the ongoing facilitated dialogues lessons into future efforts as new among ReGenesis, Rhodia, and EPA Region 4 result in the develop- issues and challenges emerge. ment of an annual status report that evaluates their performance 

and achievements in terms of environment and health protection, • Share, publish, and disseminate 

job creation, and community revitalization. Moreover, ReGenesis lessons learned and best practices. 

manages several federal, state, and local grant projects, each of 

which requires evaluation mechanisms. 

Proper evaluation requires appropriate and realistic measures of success. Measurement 

is the ongoing monitoring and reporting of project accomplishments against pre-established goals. A measure is the indicator used to gauge performance; it may be qualitative or quantitative. “Qualitative” refers to data or comparisons that are a narrative 

description of a change rather than numerical. “Quantitative” refers to data or comparisons based on numerical changes. It is important to distinguish “evaluation” from 

“measurement”, as well as to understand that they are closely related. Measurement 

seeks to record or track what is happening, and evaluation seeks to explain or diagnose 

what is happening. 

What are lessons learned and best practices, and why should these be shared? A successful 

evaluation should be more than an information-gathering activity. It is only valuable if 

the results are communicated and they meaningfully impact decision making. The findings from an evaluation should be shared with project partners, so they can make 

informed decisions to improve project performance. Lessons learned are significant 

conclusions regarding activities and outcomes, both positive and negative, which had an 

impact on the project. Best practices refer to specific actions taken that helped make 

the project successful. Lessons learned should be shared with other community groups 

and interested stakeholders, so they can replicate best practices in their own efforts to 

address similar issues. Evaluation results are important elements in the overall process 

of analysis and feedback. The benefits extend beyond a specific project. They can be 

used to enhance ongoing and future program performance. 

The lessons learned from Spartanburg have been shared in dozens of workshops around 

the country. Their story has been presented in various symposia and conferences, and 

The Collaborative Problem-Solving Model
 17 
their successes have been documented and analyzed by others in numerous occasions – 

in print, media and over the Internet – including some peer-reviewed academic publications. And finally, ReGenesis has partnered with the University of South Carolina 

Upstate on an ambitious plan to design an academically based Environmental Justice 

Institute to systematically develop and disseminate best practices and lessons learned. 

18 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model

Chapter 4: 

ReGenesis - A Practical 

Application of the CPS Model 

“When you have a situation where the local governments come to the table, when 

industry comes to the table, when the community is driving the effort, it's really


hard not to be involved and be engaged and be excited about it because this is


the type of thing that needs to happen in so many other places.” 


— Cynthia Peurifoy, EPA Region 4 

This chapter presents the case study of a nonprofit, communi­


ty organization called ReGenesis and its use of the CPS


Model. This is a story about one partnership—with commu- • Harold Mitchell and ReGenesis, Inc.


nity groups, all levels of government, industry, and a university—


working together to address the environmental and public health • City of Spartanburg, SC


issues in Spartanburg, South Carolina. 


Key players: 

• County of Spartanburg, SC 

Spartanburg is an “every community.” In general, this means that 

the environmental, public health, economic, and social challenges • SC Department of Health & 

in Spartanburg can be found in any community facing similar neg- Environmental Control 

lect and degradation. What is unique is how this community was • EPA and other federal agencies able to use the CPS Model to envision a brighter future, which they 

are closer to realizing each day. • Spartanburg Housing Authority 

This story is presented in chronological order to preserve the • University of SC Upstate 

sequence of events, and the significant events are highlighted and 

referenced in terms of the CPS Model’s seven elements. This chap- • Vigindustries, Inc. (a subsidiary of the 

ter shows how the CPS Model can be applied to any given situation Mosaic Company, formerly IMC Global) 

in which collaborative problem-solving is used to address environmental and/or public health issues. • Rhodia, Inc. 

• Tetra Tech EM, Inc. 

Spartanburg, South Carolina 

Located within Spartanburg County, the city of 

Spartanburg (population 40,000) has been profiting from 

a downtown renaissance, with a new hotel, new business 

ventures, and new goals for growth. However, less than 2 

miles from the city center—literally, on the other side of 

the tracks—lie the Arkwright and Forest Park communities, with a combined population of about 5,000. These 

neighborhoods were established around textile mills and 

Applying the Model
 19 
industrial facilities, many of which have since closed—a place where residential neighborhoods and industry exist side by side, due to few zoning restrictions or land use 

controls in the 1970s. 

Based on the 2000 U.S. Census, the poverty rate in Arkwright and Forest Park was 25 

percent, and 10 percent of the population was unemployed. Residents of these predominantly low-income and African-American communities live among two hazardous waste 

sites and an active chemical manufacturing plant. 

This area is, in many ways, just like many similar to other communities in the United 

States, where people of color or indigenous or low-income populations may be disproportionately exposed to environmental hazards. In these communities, environmental issues 

are often linked to other concerns such as: 1) lack of access to adequate healthcare, 2) 

public safety problems, 3) substandard housing, 4) transportation problems, 5) lack of 

economic development, 6) high rates of unemployment, and 7) lack of social services. 

In these neighborhoods, residents often feel helpless, and the broader community often 

seems indifferent, with no one willing or able to reverse the downward trend. Change 

requires new thinking, new strategies, new models—and new partnerships. 

Today, the communities of Arkwright and Forest Park boast a new, $2 million health 

center, brand new housing developments, and plans for a sports complex, a much-needed highway, green space, new job opportunities, and more. 

Identifying the Issues 

Some of the seeds of the community’s initial 

growth—and its decline—were planted in 

1910, when a company called International 

Minerals & Chemicals (IMC) Global Inc. 

opened a fertilizer plant within one mile of 

more than 4,000 residents in the Arkwright 

community. Employing many residents from 

the nearby mill village, the plant operated 

until 1986. A year later and without a complete cleanup, IMC sold the 45-acre property. 

It was eventually acquired by another company to use as a storage warehouse for textile 

mill parts. When the county condemned the property in 1999, the new company 

attempted to demolish the facility. 

On a separate front, in 1954, the city opened a 30-acre solid waste landfill, known as 

the Arkwright Dump, within a quarter-mile of more than 200 residents. It operated with 

little supervision until it closed in 1972. Covered with only a thin layer of topsoil, barely 

concealing the municipal, medical, and automobile wastes buried beneath, the landfill 

was sold to a private citizen in 1976. 

20 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model

Environmental standards were not as rigorous in the old days, and no one questioned 

the fertilizer plant practices back then; no one wondered what was being thrown into the 

dump. But in the late 1990s, after a community resident named Harold Mitchell began 

to link neighborhood health concerns with the fertilizer plant practices, he requested 

that the federal government get involved because residents perceived that there were 

high rates of illnesses, miscarriages, stillbirths, and deaths, and that there was a relationship between those health issues and the environmental contamination that began 

to be uncovered. 

Environmental and health issues were just some of the problems these communities 

faced over the years, however. Another major problem was the lack of economic development. So-called “urban renewal” efforts in the 1970s wiped out 70 black-owned 

businesses in the community. Homes and businesses were condemned and left in 

dilapidated conditions, and later used by drug dealers. Today, whole sections of the 

Arkwright and Forest Park area of town are still devoid of commercial development. In 

addition, much of the public housing was old and severely distressed, dating from the 

1950s. Even recently, residents still lacked access to retail stores and play areas for 

children, and have been concerned about public safety. 

As a result of these and other problems, potential new residents haven’t wanted to move 

to the area. And because they lacked the resources, current residents have been unable 

to move away. Despite these conditions, little was being done. 

Harold Mitchell and his family are long-time residents of 

the Arkwright community, having lived there since 1931. 

His childhood home was located just a few feet from the 

IMC fertilizer plant. Based on his observations and his 

own health problems over the years, however, he began to 

feel that something was wrong in the community. But it 

was his father’s suffering and death from lymphoma at age 

59 that catapulted Harold into action. 

In 1996, he began talking to residents, asking questions informally, such as”How many 

people in your family have been sick or have died?” ”What did they die of?” ”Where 

did they live and work?” He organized his data in terms of the residents’ proximity to 

the radius of the fertilizer plant and found that many of the local residents were suffering from the same illnesses. 

With his findings, Harold took his concerns to EPA in 

1997. He was directed to EPA’s regional office in 

Atlanta. A representative from EPA’s Region 4 office 

conducted an initial site visit of the Arkwright Dump 

and the former IMC facility. Although no contaminants 

were found that would pose an immediate, short-term 

threat to human health or the environment, the physical evidence led EPA to conduct more investigations. 

Applying the Model
 21 
Harold conducted additional research on his own, using the “Freedom of Information 

Act” to obtain data, maps, and aerial photographs from the city and county. He also 

conducted Internet research on chemicals and their health effects. 

Harold convened a community meeting in 1997 to present all of his information and 

concerns about the environmental problems. More than 100 local residents, including 

the city mayor, attended. Based on this information, people began to believe that their 

families’ illnesses and deaths may not be isolated cases. 

Also at the meeting, a map was taped to the wall, 

showing the location of the two hazardous waste 

sites (Arkwright Dump and former IMC fertilizer 

plant) and the operating chemical plant (Rhodia, 

Inc.) in relationship to the community. Local government representatives who hadn’t really understood 

the proximity of the neighborhood to the facilities 

suddenly realized why people were so concerned. 

In 1998, Harold founded a nonprofit community 

organization called ReGenesis to provide leadership 

and to represent neighborhood interests in cleaning 

up the contaminated sites and revitalizing the surrounding community. ReGenesis began by merging 

existing neighborhood associations in Arkwright 

and Forest Park. 

To educate the community about the issues at hand, ReGenesis organized several workshops 

about toxic waste and about community revitalization. At the same time, Harold traveled to 

Washington, D.C. and also attended meetings at local universities to educate himself. 

Between 1998 and 1999, EPA conducted additional tests of the fertilizer plant and the 

Arkwright Dump. At the former IMC property, EPA 

detected chemicals associated with fertilizer 

products, such as nitrate, fluoride, sulfate, and 

phosphorous, in the ground water. At the 

Arkwright Dump, EPA found dioxins as well as 

toxic heavy metal pollutants, such as mercury, 

lead, and cadmium. EPA designated both areas 

as Superfund sites, which are abandoned or 

uncontrolled hazardous waste sites that may need 

to be cleaned up if they pose current or future 

threats to human health or the environment. EPA 

earmarked $100,000 for redevelopment planning 

at these sites. 

22 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model

Building the Partnership and 

the Supportive Role of Government 

A meeting in August 2000 was a major turning point for the development of the project 

partnerships. More than 100 people, including representatives from federal agencies, 

the city, the county, businesses, universities, and ReGenesis, came together to discuss 

the issues. It was a group of people that had never come together before. There were 

uneasy relationships among many of these parties. For instance, the city and county of 

Spartanburg were reluctant at first because they didn’t know how the community was 

going to react during the meeting and whether they would be blamed or sued for the 

conditions that existed in these neighborhoods. But because Harold felt that the residents didn’t have time for rallies and protests and civil disobedience, he explained the 

communities’ concerns in a calm and organized manner. 

At this breakthrough meeting, the community presented ideas of what its residents had 

envisioned for themselves, and government officials talked about what they could provide to the community. The more everyone 

talked, the more the groups realized that goals 

such as improving public health, eradicating 

crime, improving housing, and creating jobs 

were actions everyone wanted. 

It was at this time that EPA suggested an organizational structure for the project. This resulted 

in a mutual agreement among the city, the 

county, ReGenesis, EPA Region 4, the South 

Carolina Department of Health and 

Environmental Control, and later the 

Spartanburg Housing Authority and the 

University of South Carolina Upstate, to serve as 

a steering committee on an equal representation 

basis. This was the beginning of the ReGenesis 

Environmental Justice Partnership. 

With EPA Region 4’s help, ReGenesis was also designated as one of the first 15 national 

demonstration projects of the Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice 

in 2000, which gave ReGenesis access to resources, advice, and information. This Working 

Group was established by Executive Order 12898 and consists of 11 federal agencies (see 

page 1). With this designation, the doors to funding were opened, and federal, state, and 

local agencies began to take notice of the gravity of the situation in Spartanburg. 

“Maybe the environmental justice mantel woke us all up. Maybe it put a pressure on us to change the way we do business.” 

— Bill Barnet, 

Mayor of Spartanburg 

Applying the Model
 23 
By trial and error and through advice from others, Harold learned that many different agencies offered something ReGenesis could use, but he had to be sure to seek the right kind of 

help from each agency. He began identifying agencies whose purpose matched what 

ReGenesis needed and sought to bring them on as partners. He also realized that ReGenesis 

did not have the people, resources, or ability to do everything alone, so other partners helped 

out in areas that ReGenesis lacked. In addition, as a nonprofit organization, ReGenesis was 

not eligible to apply for or administer certain kinds of grants, but the city and county could. 

“Harold was out in front, but he needed that support, and it was, I think, government’s responsibility to help him with that.” 

— Jim Hartmann, 

former Spartanburg County Manager 

Addressing Problem Areas: 

Brownfields and Superfund Sites 

In another important milestone for the partnership, EPA suggested that some of the 

problem areas in Spartanburg be designated as “brownfields.” A brownfield is an abandoned, idled, or under-used industrial and commercial property where expansion or redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived environmental contamination. EPA’s 

Brownfields Program helps clean up these areas and assists in attracting reinvestment. 

Together, ReGenesis and Spartanburg County received $200,000 in brownfields assessment 

grants from EPA and, ultimately, six sites in the ReGenesis project area—including the old 

Arkwright Mill and several dump sites—have been designated as brownfields for assessment 

and redevelopment. As a result, contamination was found at the mill and dump sites, and 

additional grants from the federal, state, and local government have been secured to facilitate their cleanup. The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control 

has committed nearly $490,000 towards brownfields redevelopment. 

“It may offer jobs for the community. It also improves property values for the community. So it really affects a lot of ways, economically as well as just community 

spirit-wise, to have some of the potential problems addressed and revitalized.” 

— Gail Jeter, Brownfields Coordinator, 

South Carolina Department of Health & 

Environmental Control 

The federal Department of Housing and Urban Development also awarded an $848,000 

grant to ReGenesis and the city. This money was earmarked to help buy up “problem 

properties” such as the brownfields sites and take control of how they are redeveloped. 

The money has been used to test for lead-based paint and asbestos at the mill site and 

to pay for initial studies before building a new plant at that location. 

24 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model

In addition, the city of Spartanburg entered into an agreement with EPA Region 4 and 

has spent approximately $1.2 million to assess the nature and extent of contamination 

at the Arkwright Dump site, evaluate the potential risks to human health and the environment, and evaluate cleanup alternatives. 

As a result of this agreement, the city conducted ground water monitoring at the 

Arkwright Dump, and plans to conduct ground water remediation and install a cover to 

contain the contaminated soils. The city also volunteered to arrange and fund a technical advisor for the Arkwright Dump site to work with the community to more effectively 

involve people in the Superfund process. 

But things weren’t always as easy as they sound. Like any project, the stakeholders had 

their own interests and didn’t always work well together. As mentioned earlier, the city 

feared that it might be held responsible for the Arkwright Dump site—and the cost to 

clean it up. The same was true for the county because it felt that investing in and rebuilding the community was going to take a lot more money than what it was ready to commit. 

“After the first meeting, it was clear to me that there was an expectation being 

built. I was very nervous that that expectation would include funding from the 

county government, which, just frankly, was not there in any substantial form.” 

— Jim Hartmann, 

former Spartanburg County Manager 

Ultimately, the county established a Community Development Task Force with representatives from many county departments and agencies to take a more comprehensive 

approach to community development concerns, such as demolishing abandoned housing. 

To formalize their relationship—and to spell out each partners’ specific roles and responsibilities—the city, county, and ReGenesis signed a Memorandum of Understanding. 

Formal agreements such as this solidify relationships so that partners are clear on their 

level of participation, while also ensuring that the partnership will remain intact. 

In 1999, the former IMC site changed 

hands once again. Vigindustries, a subsidiary of IMC, now the Mosaic Company, 

purchased back the fertilizer plant. 

Vigindustries is now working with EPA 

and state officials to properly clean up 

the site. In addition to using a deconstruction plan developed with nearby residents, the company placed air monitors 

around the property at ReGenesis’ 

request. It pitched in $50,000 for a 

technical advisor for its site. The company also and committed $1 million to cover EPA 

oversight costs and nearly $2 million for the assessment and remediation of its site. 

Applying the Model
 25 
A Vision for a New Spartanburg 

In 2001, the community visioning process began, in the form of design charettes, funded in part by a Department of Energy grant. A charette is a creative brainstorming meeting often used to work through difficult planning challenges confronting communities. 

Charettes involve listening to problems and ideas, defining needs, envisioning new ideas, 

and literally, drawing and sketching. Several design charettes were held in Spartanburg, 

resulting in drawings for a parkway, a community park, shopping areas, an entertainment 

center, a job training center, a technology center, and more. 

“I said, ‘Hey, just dream. Just think outside the box for a second and go back to 

what we once had—before urban renewal– and just picture the commercial, 

retail, housing, parks, and things of that nature.’ And then they began to come up 

with a concept for the new housing and things that they could have if they had a 

safe neighborhood once again.” 

— Harold Mitchell, ReGenesis 

Since then, 2003 brought a new wave of partnerships and improvements. With a 

$650,000 grant from the federal Department of Health and Human Services, ReGenesis 

opened a small, temporary Community Health Center. Astoundingly, it saw more than 

2,000 patients within the first 90 days of operation. It was a breakthrough for this 

medically underserved community. 

In 2005, the Spartanburg Regional Healthcare 

System and the ReGenesis Community Health 

Center formed a relationship to bring healthcare 

closer to residents of Arkwright and Forest Park. 

The Community Health Center relocated to a stateof-the-art facility donated by the University of 

South Carolina Upstate. This location is three 

times larger than the old site, allowing for more 

patient visits and services. Everyone involved agrees that the availability of health services is one of the most vital aspects of uplifting the community. 

With all of these positive changes in Arkwright and Forest Park, the community was on 

the road to becoming a place where people actually wanted to live. 

26 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model

Building Trust and Resolving Conflicts 

Through Facilitated Dialogue 

But one other issue remained to be 

addressed. Sharing a fenceline with a handful of residents, Rhodia, Inc. is an operating 

chemical plant located on 35 acres in the 

Arkwright Community. When a South Carolina 

businessman purchased this site in the 

1970s, he told residents he would be building apartments. Instead, he built a chemical 

warehouse, later changing it into a chemical manufacturing plant. Rhodia purchased this 

plant in 1998 and makes ingredients for home and health care products. 

The initial relationship between Rhodia and ReGenesis was not friendly. Many residents 

in the community felt strongly that having a chemical manufacturing facility in the 

neighborhood was incompatible with plans to improve their quality of life. Rhodia, however, didn’t want to move because it felt that it had a right to stay in the community. 

Also, the company felt its facility was not causing any adverse impacts on public health 

or the environment. 

Ultimately, because both sides wanted to avoid hostility and an expensive legal debate, 

they agreed to use an approach known as a “facilitated dialogue.” A facilitated dialogue 

is a form of “dispute resolution,” which is often more civil and productive than a lawsuit. In this case, it involved using an independent third-party facilitator. 

“My role was to be an honest broker, to make sure that I represented the interests 

of Rhodia, ReGenesis, and EPA Region 4 in this dialogue. I think they both realized 

there was no other way to resolve the issues between them. The only way to resolve 

the issues was for them to sit down at the table and talk, but they were unwilling to 

have that dialogue unless there was someone there who they viewed and both 

respected as an honest broker to make sure that both sides were given an equal 

voice and given a fair say in how the resolution of those issues was arrived at.” 

— Tim Fields, Tetra Tech EM, Inc. 

The facilitated dialogue has resulted in 

improved noise and odor control, enhanced 

health and safety procedures, new air and 

ground water monitoring, job creation for members of the community, new emergency preparedness procedures, and facility beautification. These changes have come about over several years as a result of weekly telephone conferences and frequent face-to-face meetings. 

Applying the Model
 27 
“You just cannot short-circuit this process. You can’t speed it up. It’s not a sixmonth process. No matter how much you want it to be a short process, you just 

have to sit down, and it takes time. And it takes a lot of dedication, and it takes 

a lot of effort—to build that trust.” 

— Jim Trafton, Rhodia Plant Manager 

For a facilitated dialogue to be successful, three critical factors are needed: an organization, like ReGenesis, that can unite and speak for the community; a company, like 

Rhodia, willing to be a good neighbor; and supportive government officials such as those 

in EPA Region 4 who are willing to be part of the dialogue to help resolve the issues. 

Collaborative Problem-Solving in Action 

Ultimately, through the collaborative effort of more than 200 agencies, the ReGenesis 

project has acquired $141 million in funds as of 2006. And the work continues. The 

ReGenesis partners still meet frequently. In fact, different subcommittees—dealing with 

specific issues such as transportation or housing—meet as often as twice a week to 

present updates on current projects and talk about plans for the future. The work in 

Spartanburg is still moving forward with a vision. 

Along with the Spartanburg Housing Authority, ReGenesis is currently a partner in a $102 

million housing project grant, known as “Hope VI.” The Hope VI grant is being used to 

remove old public housing units, some of which had become a haven for drug dealers, 

and replace them with brand new homes. 

Before After

“As a result, we committed to removing 184 distressed public housing units and 

coming back with over 500 units in the community of both rental and home ownership... [W]hat’s especially amazing to me is the fact that we’re taking such a 

large area that’s deteriorated and there’s been ill health concerns, and other types 

of issues, and turning it around and making it a completely new neighborhood— 

completely changing the face of that particular environment and bringing something back that’s so healthy and that’s going to draw so many people to it. It’s 

just amazing to be a part of that.” 

— Roy Johnson, Spartanburg Housing Authority 

28 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model

ReGenesis is also encouraging the participation of 

minority and women-owned businesses in the demolition of an old housing complex and the construction of new, safer subdivisions. The organization 

has also been providing job training in vocational 

skills to formerly unemployed residents. As a result, 

job creation has been an essential part of the effort 

to revitalize the entire community. 

“This is a long-term project—not only to deal with the brownfield issues or the 

environmental issues of this specific site, but to really take this to a much different level; to have a vision that’s not just about fixing a brownfield site or an environmental problem, but rather, to open up an area to economic development, to 

create a new set of expectations for a community. So we’re focused on rebuilding 

our neighborhoods, rebuilding our job market, getting people to really believe that 

this is a community into which they should invest jobs and dollars.” 

— Bill Barnet, Mayor of Spartanburg 

Building a Brighter Future for Spartanburg 

A $2 million appropriation from Congress to the South Carolina Department of 

Transportation is funding the studies and initial construction of the new Matthew Perry 

Parkway. This two-mile long roadway will open up 500 acres of currently unused land 

for commercial and residential development. It will also connect two new neighborhoods 

and provide emergency access to Rhodia and the existing community, whose main 

access road is often blocked by the railroad. 

There is also much progress on another front. The former IMC site—just across the road 

from Harold’s childhood home—is undergoing a significant environmental cleanup. 

Vigindustries, the property owner, is in the process of cleaning it up and is also working 

with ReGenesis to develop plans for the future use of the property—and other nearby 

properties—to benefit the local community. As part of a large-scale effort to restore and 

preserve green space in Spartanburg, plans involve to designing a world-class golf course 

along the new parkway. This project will be a successful reuse of the two cleaned up 

Superfund sites and six Brownfield sites. 

“I personally first met Harold Mitchell in the EPA Region 4 Office in Atlanta. He 

explained the project in detail, and there I made a commitment to him that we 

could probably work this property into the development of that community. [T]he 

ReGenesis Project only reinforces my experience throughout my career, and that is 

industries within communities must be in touch with those communities. They 

must be actively involved in those communities. They need to be good neighbors.” 

— Ozzie Morris, President, Vigindustries 

Applying the Model
 29 
Proposed Redevelopment of Project Area 

At the same time, the community has become a 

model for the National Diabetes Collaborative for working to prevent the disease and provide nutrition counseling. In fact, the community health center now provides services to more than 14,000 patients who didn’t previously have a medical home. 

Looking into the future, ReGenesis is developing an 

Environmental Justice Institute and has partnered with 

the University of South Carolina Upstate to form an 

international center for research, education, and training on environmental issues, focusing on the impact 

of environmental contamination on communities. It 

will also bring the “Spartanburg story” to people 

around the world. 

Summary


The ReGenesis and its partners and stakeholders continue to forge ahead with its vision for the community. 

The way that this Spartanburg community developed 

its vision and is bringing all its stakeholders together 

to realize it, despite all odds and obstacles, is a prime 

example of how the CPS Model works. Here is a synopsis of the seven elements in terms of ReGenesis’ 

experience: 

Element 1: Issue Identification, Community Vision and Strategic Goal-Setting – For example, 

Harold Mitchell initially identified health issues and brought them to the attention of 

EPA and state and local officials. The residents of Arkwright and Forest Park developed 

a vision to improve the community. And, through the use of charettes, the stakeholders 

and partners crystallized that vision and developed strategic goals. 

Element 2: Community Capacity-Building and Leadership Development – Through Harold’s 

leadership and the support of partners and stakeholders, ReGenesis improved its capacity to represent the community in the ongoing dialogue and redevelopment activities. 

One result of this process is that more and more residents have signed up for city- or 

county-sponsored training to learn new job skills. 

Element 3: Consensus Building and Dispute Resolution – Through the facilitated dialogue 

among ReGenesis, Rhodia, and EPA Region 4, these entities agree by consensus to 

make specific improvements in Spartanburg. 

30 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model

Element 4: Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships and Leveraging of Resources – Over time, 

ReGenesis successfully built the essential partnerships to revitalize Spartanburg. 

Through the partners, ReGenesis was and continues to be able to leverage much-need 

resources through grants, technical assistance, and in-kind assistance. 

Element 5: Constructive Engagement by Relevant Stakeholders – As the community’s representative, ReGenesis has been able to engage members of the community as well as 

industry, academia, and civic organizations, and all levels of government in order to work 

together to realize the community’s vision. 

Element 6: Sound Management and Implementation – The Environmental Justice Partnership 

steering committee has built in the administrative, management, and coordination processes needed to ensure that the project activities are implemented as planned. 

Element 7: Evaluation, Lessons Learned, and Replication of Best Practices – Evaluation 

processes have been instituted in the activities of steering committee, grant projects, 

and the facilitated dialogue. The lessons learned and best practices have been documented and shared across the country through speeches, presentations, training workshops, educational seminars, a video, and publications such as this one. 

ReGenesis and its stakeholders and partners have made an indelible impact on 

Spartanburg for generations to come. Through the use of collaborative problem-solving, 

they are on their way to realizing the community’s vision to revitalize the community. 

Almost a decade has passed since Harold Mitchell began his quest and now, thanks to 

this amazing partnership among many stakeholders, Spartanburg has come a long way. 

Harold’s words best sum his experience with using the CPS Model: 

“The satisfaction out of this is looking back nine years ago and thinking I was 

like some of the other community members at the big public forums in 

Washington, not knowing where to go or who to turn to, to resolve the major 

issues in my community. But now, by being a part of the CPS process, we have a 

roadmap that other communities can use to find out what they need to do and 

with whom they need to engage, to turn around those complex issues that are 

impacting their communities.” 

— Harold Mitchell, ReGenesis 

Note: All the quotes mentioned in this case study were derived from a series of film 

interviews for an OEJ-produced training video entitled Environmental Justice: The Power 

of Partnerships – The Collaborative Problem-Solving Model at Work in Spartanburg, 

South Carolina, to be released in 2007. 

Applying the Model
 31 

33

Chapter 5: 

The Environmental Justice 

Collaborative Problem-Solving 

Program 

I

n 2003, OEJ launched the Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving 

(CPS) Cooperative Agreement Program to provide $100,000 in financial assistance 

to local community-based organizations that wish to engage in collaborative problemsolving activities. Through this grant program, these organizations use tools that EPA 

and others have developed to find viable solutions for their community’s environmental 

and/or public health issues/concerns. In addition, the CPS Program seeks to achieve 

certain goals, which include: 

• Empowerment: Community-based organizations engage directly in collaborative problem-solving activities (e.g., partnership building, consensus building, negotiation, 

alternative dispute resolution) with other stakeholders to address environmental and/or 

public health issues. 

• Strategic Planning: Community-based organizations understand the distinction 

between short-term and long-term environmental and/or public health outcomes, and 

plan and act accordingly. 

• Education: Community-based organizations understand the potential links between the 

environment, public health, and good government, and sharing this knowledge with 

members of the community. 

• Good Government: Community-based organizations engage the federal, state, or local 

governments as potential partners in collaborative problem-solving processes, which 

enables community residents to participate meaningfully in the government’s environmental decision-making processes. 

• Sustainable Development: Community-based organizations secure and wisely use 

resources (e.g., community-based, intellectual, social, technical, financial, and institutional) now and in the future. In doing so, ongoing benefits will be created through 

the continuation of collaborative problem-solving activities that provide others with 

valuable lessons learned. 

Examples Using the Seven Elements 

OEJ developed the CPS Model as the framework for the CPS Program and help achieve 

the goals stated above. As stated in Chapter 2, the CPS Model can be applied to almost 

The Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Program
 33 
any environmental justice circumstance. With the 

first round of CPS projects unfolding over the past 

two years, the grant recipients have had ample 

opportunities to put the CPS Model elements into 

practice. These selected community-based organizations and their partners have already realized 

many of their short-term goals by carefully applying 

the CPS Model’s seven elements. Since each community’s circumstances are unique, the elements 

were customized to suit their needs. Each grantee 

has also identified performance measures to track 

and evaluate their progress in meeting their goals. 

Here are some of the projects’ best examples of 

using the CPS Model: 

Element 1: Issue Identification, Community Vision and Strategic Goal-Setting – In Anahola, 

Hawaii, the Anahola Homesteaders Council’s project (Project Imua) documented the 

environmental conditions and cleaned up the solid waste of a 20-acre brownfield in 

order to jump-start a larger vision of a comprehensive multi-purpose community center 

called Project Faith. This center will serve the social, economic, educational, and cultural needs of Hawaiians living on their homelands. 

Element 2: Community Capacity Building and Leadership Development – Pioneer Valley Project 

in Springfield, Massachusetts, is working with local Vietnamese nail salons, vocational 

schools, and health care providers to address the issue of workers’ risk of exposure to 

harmful chemicals in the nail care products. With their leadership, the partnership has not 

only built a model salon but will also develop and provide training on the use of proper protective gear and equipment and the proper handling and disposal of salon products. They 

are also working with local health care professionals to properly diagnose, communicate, 

and treat health symptoms resulting from exposure to these chemicals. 

Element 3: Consensus Building and Dispute Resolution – When West End Revitalization 

Association’s project documented high levels of contamination in local surface water in 

Mebane, North Carolina, this community-based organization brought this environmental 

and public health issue to the attention of the city, which is now working to correct this 

issue by providing basic amenities such as sewer and drinking water services. 

Element 4: Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships and Leveraging of Resources – Make the Road by 

Walking formed a partnership with a local hospital and the city health department to publish a report and develop and disseminate outreach materials on indoor asthma triggers 

and barriers to proper asthma treatment in the Bushwick section of New York City. 

Element 5: Constructive Engagement by Relevant Stakeholders – In Tacoma, Washington, 

the Indochinese Cultural and Service Organization engaged the community’s youth and 

elders, other grassroots groups, and state and local government agencies in a project to 

34 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model

35

raise awareness about safe and sustainable shellfish harvesting and thereby reduced the 

incidence of shellfish poisoning among Tacoma and Pierce Counties’ Asian and Pacific 

Islander residents. 

Element 6: Sound Management and Implementation – 

Neighbors Assisting Neighbors’ ambitious local 

cleanup project in six communities and one 

waterway in St. Louis, Missouri, removed and 

properly disposed of approximately 250 tons of 

bulk waste and 1,200 tires. 

Element 7: Evaluation, Lessons Learned and 

Replication of Best Practices – As part of its extensive project workplan and evaluation, Pacoima 

Beautiful in Los Angeles, California, developed a 

set of indicators of community sustainability to 

help guide efforts to address multiple community 

quality of life issues. 

These are only some of the many significant ways in which the CPS Model has already 

touched the lives of several communities around the country. The potential to reach 

even more communities depends on the level of funding for the CPS Program. 

Reflections of the CPS Program 

OEJ recently asked the CPS Program’s current grantees for some reflections from their 

projects. In their own words, here is what they have to say about using the CPS Model: 

• “We created a vision of community health and sustainability, and developed strategies 

to achieve it.” 

• “We used innovative approaches to involve and educate our local community residents 

and youth.” 

• “We leveraged other resources using the partnerships we formed through this program, 

including partnerships with former adversaries.” 

• “We learned that environmental statutes can be a useful tool to solving our local 

issues.” 

• “We achieved tangible environmental and health improvements in our communities.” 

• “Government agencies played a critical role in supporting our community’s efforts to 

form collaborative partnerships.” 

The Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Program
 35 
Chapter 6: 

Conclusion 

The CPS Model is a valuable tool to help distressed communities and other stakeholders work together to address their local environmental and/or public health 

issues in a positive, non-adversarial way. In particular, when stakeholders use the 

CPS Model’s seven elements, they greatly enhance their ability to address these issues. 

As presented in the ReGenesis case study in Chapter 4, the CPS Model can be viewed 

as a tool box from which several tools can be used to deal with specific situations. 

Indeed, each of the seven elements is a valuable tool in and of itself and has many 

facets, as described in Chapter 3. However, when these tools are used together in an 

iterative process, a collaborative partnership not only takes shape but can also be quite 

effective in dealing with the complex environmental, public health, economic, and social 

factors that often compound environmental justice issues. 

36 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model


2 Recycled/Recyclable—Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% 

Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper