Key Players

Residents. Some of the most successful community mapping projects engage residents in the process of gathering, analyzing, and presenting information.  Residents have an intimate knowledge of their community that cannot be found in public and administrative data sets.  Engaging residents is also an effective community building tool that can support local leadership development.

Community Based Organizations.  Community organizations comprise the core of mapping collaborations. It may be helpful to engage a range of community partners in a mapping project.  Some may have access to data sets, others strong relationships with residents, and still others may have internal GIS capacity.  Community partnerships across program or subject area build local ownership of data and capacity to manage information within the community, including staff, residents, and youth.  However, unless a community organization already has GIS up and running, there will be significant start-up and training time.

Colleges and Universities can be strong partners for community organizations interested in mapping with GIS.  Faculty and students in urban planning, geography, and related disciplines are often eager to use their technology skills to support community revitalization initiatives.  Institutions of higher education often have centers that focus on social issues, neighborhood issues, and/or community-university partnerships that serve as links to faculty and students who are interested in doing GIS mapping.  Universities are strong players in Neighborhood Knowledge Los Angeles and Philadelphia Neighborhood Information Systems.

Advantages of a university partnership include:

• access to professors and graduate students who are highly skilled at data analysis and have a GIS infrastructure in place; and
• access to funding sources that support community-university partnerships (e.g., HUD's Community Outreach Partnership Center Program).

Limitations include:

• possibility of being directed by the university's vision (or the vision of a specific professor, research center, or student) rather than the community's;

• not necessarily increasing community capacity to manage data and maps, especially if doing so is not an explicitly stated goal; and
• project may ebb and flow based on student and faculty interests, schedules, and other commitments.

Local Intermediaries. Some nonprofit and for-profit organizations serve as data and mapping intermediaries that specialize in GIS mapping, data analysis, and technology capacity building. They can also be helpful partners.  Some intermediaries build long-term partnerships with community organizations, while others play a consultant role and create specific maps.
Advantages to working with data and mapping intermediaries include:

• capacity to produce high-quality maps quickly;
• experience in data collection and analysis; and
• needs fewer initial resources than building complete internal capacity.

Limitations include:

• community capacity to manage data and use GIS is not developed; and
• community groups will need to rely on the data or mapping intermediary to update maps.

Government Agencies.   Good working relationships with public agencies are helpful.  Housing authorities, and departments of economic development, housing, community development, redevelopment, public safety, etc. at the city, county, and state level can be useful sources of data.  In fact, a few local public agencies (e.g., planning departments) partner with community organizations that manage and map data for them.