Chicago, Illinois Community Networks (CCN) Study, 2013-2016

Resource Type
Dataset : survey data
  • Quiroz-Becerra, Victoria
Other Title
  • Version 1 (Subtitle)
Publication Date
Publication Place
Ann Arbor, Michigan
  • Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research
Funding Reference
  • John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
Free Keywords
Schema: ICPSR
budgets; community involvement; community organizations; community participation; social networks
  • Abstract

    The Chicago Community Networks (CCN) study gathered information about characteristics of over 300 organizations in nine Chicago neighborhoods. The CCN surveys also profiled the interactions between organizations and the strength of their relationships.
  • Abstract

    The Chicago Community Networks (CCN) Study, used social network analysis, supplemented by extensive field research, to deepen understanding of community collaborations, explore the ways power is configured in different Chicago neighborhoods, understand how neighborhood organizations cooperate across domains of work to address complex issues, and describe the ways partnerships can change over time.
  • Methods

    The first survey launched online in February of 2013. A link to the survey was emailed to staff identified as the organization's main contact. They could either complete or forward the survey to another staff person to complete. After six weeks of data collection, in April of 2013, MDRC (formerly Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation) used survey responses to reassess the initial fielded sample to determine whether to add organizations to the roster list for use in the organizational relationships' section of the survey. Organizations were added to the roster if a respondent wrote in an organization that was not on the original roster. In April and May of 2013, a total of 89 organizations were added to the roster (75 in April, 14 in May), including the 9 lead agencies, which were inadvertently left off of the original roster list. In addition, 36 organizations were added to the sample in April, and 23 organizations were culled from the sample in May. During the summer of 2013, MDRC undertook two activities to focus the survey effort. First, MDRC culled the sample based on organizational capacity and purpose and on organizational resources. Organizations that had three or fewer incoming connections at that point of the fielding period (that is, three or fewer survey respondents indicated having an interaction with the organization) and indicated low capacity (as determined by whether an organization was a 501(c)3 organization with a 990 form) and few financial resources (as determined by total assets, revenues, and expenditures) were culled from the sample. A total of 23 organizations were removed from the sample after May. Second, MDRC added a field component to the survey effort, sending field researchers out with paper versions of the survey, as well as mailing out paper survey instruments to the remaining fielded sample. From July through September of 2013, surveys were administered using both online and paper modes. Lead agency staff also helped reach out to their partner organizations to encourage survey responses. The sample included 276 respondent organizations. The second survey fielding effort was much more straightforward. MDRC researchers and staff at the lead agencies collaborated with the survey firm to encourage organizational partners to respond to the survey, despite citywide funding reductions and staff turnover. The survey was fielded to 315 organizations. Survey fielding ended in December 2016, with 229 organizations. During and after the fielding period, 35 organizations were discovered to have closed or moved.
  • Methods

    The Organizational Characteristics File includes 320 cases and 126 variables. Respondents were asked to describe their organization (such as 501(c)(3) or government agency) and give the type of organization (such as community organizing group or advocacy organization). Additional questions were asked about the organization's board of directors, employees, volunteers, and budget. Respondents were also asked the types of activities that the organization carried out, as well as the organization's strengths and challenges. The Wave 1 and Wave 2 interviews were similar and are both contained in this data file. The Wave 1 Connections File (15,847 cases; 13 variables) and Wave 2 Connections File (6,301 cases; 12 variables) are structured at the organizational relationship level. Each record indicates a potential interaction between two organizations. The Crosswalk File includes 1,550 cases and 8 variables. This file contains organization-level identifiers with participation and fielding flags that can be used to link organizations to the three other files so researchers can combine the files as needed. Each record represents an organization (whether a respondent organization, a roster organization, or an organization provided as a verbatim response by a respondent) that appears in at least once in either the Organizational Characteristics File, the Wave 1 Connections File, or the Wave 2 Connections File.
  • Methods

    Response Rates: Wave 1 response rate equals 75.4 percent. Wave 2 response rate equals 72.47 percent.
  • Abstract


    • DS0: Study-Level Files
    • DS1: Organizational Characteristics File
    • DS2: Wave 1 Connections File
    • DS3: Wave 2 Connections File
    • DS4: Crosswalk File
Temporal Coverage
  • Time period: 2013--2016
  • 2013 / 2016
  • Collection date: 2013--2016
  • 2013 / 2016
Geographic Coverage
  • Chicago
  • Illinois
  • United States
Sampled Universe
Community organizations in Chicago, Illinois Smallest Geographic Unit: Neighborhood
For both Chicago Community Networks (CCN) surveys, MDRC (formerly Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation) worked with field researchers in Chicago and lead agency staff throughout the Chicago neighborhoods under study to construct a list of their local and citywide partner organizations. The initial list was compiled from in-depth research on these neighborhoods and included organizations that may or may not have directly partnered with the lead agency. The fielded survey sample only included local organizations from the initial list. The survey also listed a roster of all the local and citywide organizations that were identified in the initial organization list identifying relationships across the network. In the first survey, the complete roster included 613 organizations. Survey fielding was launched in February of 2013 with an initial fielded sample of 393 organizations. The first survey employed one round of sample snowballing, which means that after some data were collected, MDRC researchers investigated the responses to the organizational relationships' section of the survey and added organizations to the sample and to the organizational roster based on those responses. If a respondent listed an interaction with an organization that was not on the original roster, the organization was either added to both the sample and the roster, or just to the roster if it was not a local organization, in April of 2013. In the second survey, the complete roster included 612 organizations. Survey fielding was launched on April 21, 2016, with a fielded sample of 315 organizations. The second survey did not employ a round of snowballing, so the fielded sample and roster did not change during survey fielding in the 2016 survey.
Collection Mode
  • mail questionnaire
  • web-based survey
Funding institution(s): John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation ().
This study is freely available to the general public via web download.
Alternative Identifiers
  • 37364 (Type: ICPSR Study Number)

Update Metadata: 2019-10-03 | Issue Number: 1 | Registration Date: 2019-10-03