EPA’s Environmental Justice 

Collaborative Problem-Solving Model 

United States 

Environmental Protection Agency 

2201A 

Washington, DC 20460 

EPA-300-R-06-002 

June 2008 

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. 

Charles Lee, 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 Partnerships 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 
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 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

Issue Identification, 

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 

issues. Community-based organizations should think strategically to • Build upon existing leadership and ensure that their community’s limited resources are mobilized effec­ experience in the community. tively to achieve priority goals. Involving the broader community in 

• Involve community residents early strategic planning activities usually leads to greater clarity in setting 

in identifying concerns.	 goals, establishing common understanding and trust, and honing 

the ability to act collectively. Strategies should not only address the 

• Identify partners. 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 decisionmaking 

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 ArkwrightForest 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 that will not only serve the 

immediate ReGenesis neighborhoods, but will also have a regional benefit by 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 among different stakeholder groups, government 

agencies, and academic disciplines is critical to coalescing a 

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

Information Systems (GIS), represent one way to foster such col­ • Build upon existing leadership and laboration. 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. 

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

the issue of ensuring that the community defines its own prob­ of the community’s goals. 

lems, 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) decisionmaking; 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, 

• Build upon community efforts/work. 

CPS Element 2 at a glance: 

and other areas of concern. 

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

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

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 decisionmaking 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 decisionmaking 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. 

Using consensus building processes to achieve common goals also has 

the secondary effect of enhancing the problem-solving capacity and 

leadership skills of the key players. Overcoming challenges involving 

extreme stress is like going through a “ring of fire,” from which an 

Techniques to build consensus 

and resolve disputes: 

• Design processes, both formal and inforindividual emerges stronger and clearer than before. Additionally, mal, to ensure fair treatment and meanrelationships among stakeholder groups are strengthened. ingful participation of all stakeholders. 

What is dispute resolution? Invariably, conflicts arise in some • Promote the development of a common 

cases. Where there is disagreement, dispute resolution processes vision and goals among all partners.

can be used to work through conflicts. A dispute happens when a 

conflict between different parties has reached an impasse. To • Utilize facilitators or mediators to 

resolve disputes, there is a full spectrum of techniques for which assist in the communication and 

parties have varying levels of control over the process and out- negotiation processes. 

comes, depending upon the particular process used. Dispute res­

• Identify, nurture, and promote win/win olution processes are both adjudicative (e.g., litigation or arbitrascenarios and mutual gains. tion) and consensual (e.g., mediation or 

negotiation) in nature. • Utilize alternative dispute resolution 

techniques to resolve crystallized The following dispute resolution processes support the consensus 

disputes. 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 

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 Collaborative Problem-Solving Model
 11 
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 at a glance: CPS Element 4 - Multi-Stakeholder 

Partnerships and Leveraging of • Talk early and often with possible Resources
 partners who need to be involved in
 

addressing concerns.
 The fourth element involves creating partnerships with key stakeholders. Environmental justice efforts across the nation have pro­

• Create a common vision, goals, and duced some remarkable partnerships between communities, faith objectives among the partners. groups, philanthropic organizations, universities, all levels of government, business and industry, and academia. These partner­ • Develop a clear and workable plan to 

ships seek to examine problems together, develop action plans, address identified issues. 

and bring together the resources necessary to achieve everyone’s 

• Identify and invite partners to share goals. But exactly which stakeholders come together and 

their resources (e.g., human, institu- when/how is unique to each situation or circumstance, as evident 

tional, technical, legal, financial). in this section. 

• Look for new partners to help address Partnerships consist of diverse individuals and organizations who 

issues as new issues and needs are agree to work together to achieve a common goal. Partnerships 

identified. enable different groups to examine a problem together, leverage 

resources, or achieve a mutually agreed-upon goal. They represent an important mechanism for a community to achieve its short-term goals as well as 

its long-term vision of a healthy and sustainable community. In some cases, out of 

necessity, some 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 

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

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

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

groups might need support in accessing government resources, while industry might 

12 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model
 
need education on how to work effectively and proactively with communities. Welldesigned 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 with a community-based organization to more effectively provide public information 

and services to the local community. 

Building a successful partnership is a critical investment that 

requires vision, clearly defined goals, organizational capacity and 

• Establish dialogues that lead to possible 

Techniques for achieving 

well-structured multi-stakeholder 

collaborative partnerships: 

commitment, individual leadership, technical expertise, financial partnerships with all relevant stakehold­ resources, and, in some cases, use of a facilitator. Each partner­ ers/parties, including the community, ship should be tailored to the community-based organization’s businesses, and government. existing capacity, as well as the capacity of other stakeholders. 

Although many organizations may enter into a partnership, the • Ensure clarity of common vision, effectiveness of that partnership usually depends on understand- goals, objectives, strategies, and ings and working relationships between individuals. When cir­ actions among the partnership. cumstances make for unfavorable working relationships (including 

the time, effort, and resources involved in maintaining it), a group • Develop a clear, workable organizational 

should end the partnership. structure and workplan to address communications and coordination needs of 

Chapter 4 clearly demonstrates ReGenesis’ ability to develop the collaborative partnership. multi-stakeholder partnerships and leverage the necessary 

resources in order to realize the community’s vision (see page 26). • Identify and recruit partners to address 

Also, ReGenesis and the city and county of Spartanburg formal- the resource needs of a project 

ized their agreement by signing a Memorandum of Understanding (e.g., human, institutional, technical, 

to establish a Community Development Task Force, thereby mobi- legal, financial). 

lizing the people and resources of local government agencies to 

focus attention on this community (see page 25). • Strengthen partnerships as new issues

and relationships are understood. 

CPS Element 5 - Constructive • Add processes that allow for the incluEngagement by Relevant sion of new partners as they emerge. 

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. 

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 proviThe Collaborative Problem-Solving Model
 13 
sions of laws or regulations, 6) focus attention on a problem, and/or 7) provide legitimacy 

to an effort. Government agencies also 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 high level of 

commitment to all partnerships indefinitely. Local government involvement is crucial for 

the sustainability of long-term efforts to address local environmental and/or public health 

issues. It is therefore important that community organizations seeking to resolve a problem formulate a clear strategy to foster proactive engagement by government agencies at 

CPS Element 5 at a glance: 

the local, state, tribal, and/or federal levels. In the ReGenesis 

example, the federal, state, and local government each played a 

critical role to support the collaborative partnership and put vital

• Identify where the government can improvements into motion (see page 23). support the efforts of the community to
 

address issues through information
 Historically, business and industry groups perceived themselves to 

resources, technical assistance, finan­ be the object of allegations that their activities exposed communicial assistance, or even policy changes. ty residents disproportionately to environmental and/or public 

health risks and harms. Nevertheless, this perception may be

• Seek support and cooperation from slowly changing as more companies see the benefits of being industry or business. more open and proactively involved in the local community and as 

many misperceptions are rectified through changes in business • Use academic institutions for technipolicies and practices and increased communication with the cal assistance such as research and 

community. Chapter 4 provides positive accounts of how two analysis. 

businesses, Rhodia and Vigindustries, became unlikely but crucial 

• Engage civic organizations to help supporters of the Spartanburg community’s revitalization efforts 

raise the community’s awareness of (see pages 25 and 27). 

the issues and mobilize support. 

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, 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 decisionmakers. 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 

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

• 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. 

Techniques to promote sound management and implementation: 

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 decisionmakers 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 composed 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 

measuring results. In its broadest definition, evaluation is a sysCPS Element 7 at a glance: tematic way to learn from past experience by assessing how well a 

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

• Periodically evaluate progress. by building on strengths and correcting problems. The ability to 

summarize progress in quantitative, qualitative, institutional, and

• Use lessons learned as the project social terms, as well as to incorporate lessons learned into a conproceeds. tinuous process, is critical to sustaining the work. And finally, the 

project’s best practices should be identified and communicated so • Clearly describe measures of success. that others can learn and use them. 

• Document and share information on 

Although presented as the last element in the CPS Model, evalua­ successes. 

tion 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 

• Use a logic model to develop a 

Techniques used in 

the evaluation process: 

demonstrating investment results to their stakeholders. EPA is an 

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

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

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

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 decisionmaking. 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. Its story has been presented in various symposia and conferences, and its 

The Collaborative Problem-Solving Model
 17 
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 Key players: 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. 

• 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 

able to use the CPS Model to envision a brighter future, which it is 

• EPA and other federal agencies 

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. 

Spartanburg, South Carolina 

• Tetra Tech EM, Inc. 

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 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, an emergency 

access road, 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 20 yards 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 areas 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 partner’s 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 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. 

Two years later, the Spartanburg Regional 

Healthcare System provided a new, state-of-the-art 

facility so the ReGenesis Community Health 

Center could relocate and expand its services. The 

two entities formed a relationship to bring healthcare closer to the residents of Arkwright and Forest 

Park. 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 $166 million in funds as of 2006. And the community’s transformation 

continues, as new projects emerge, current initiatives expand or change, and project leaders develop fresh ideas. 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. This project was implemented following the award of a 

“Hope VI” grant from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. 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... 

What’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 $2.2 million appropriation from Congress to the South Carolina Department of 

Transportation is funding the studies and initial construction of an alternative access 

roadway. This roadway will begin to link several 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 being transformed. Vigindustries, the property owner, 

is now cleaning up this site and working with ReGenesis to develop plans for the future 

use of the property to benefit the local community. As part of a large-scale effort to 

restore and preserve green space in Spartanburg, there are plans to design a world-class 

golf course and other recreational areas in the community. 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
 

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 muchneeded 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 the 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 up 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. 

Applying the Model
 31 

33

Chapter 5: 

The Environmental Justice 

Collaborative Problem-Solving 

Cooperative Agreement 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 share 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 decisionmaking processes. 

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

resources (e.g., community-based, intellectual, social, technical, financial, 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. 

The Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Program
 33 
Examples Using the Seven 

Elements 

OEJ developed the CPS Model as the framework 

for the CPS Program and to help achieve the goals 

stated above. As stated in Chapter 2, the CPS 

Model can be applied to almost 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. 

34 EPA’s Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model
 
35

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 

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