A Mixed‐Methods Needs Assessment of Frontline Communities: Insights for Engagement and Partnerships Between Communities and Intermediary Organizations

Abstract This research aims to understand how frontline communities and community‐based organizations (CBOs) that serve them conceptualize themselves, their communities, success, and their needs. Frontline communities experience the “first and worst” impacts of climate change due to industrialization, pollution, changing ecosystems, and other societal issues. CBOs serving frontline communities often face difficulties building organizational capacity and fostering growth in their communities. These challenges emerge from combined factors, including resistance from business and government stakeholders. Funders and scientists alike have shown interest in supporting frontline communities; however, top‐down conceptualizations of success drive existing norms for intermediaries and are often inconsistent with how CBOs define success. To understand how frontline communities conceptualize themselves, success, and their needs, we conducted a mixed‐methods study of CBOs within the network of an emerging intermediary organization supporting frontline communities. Using natural language processing, a survey, and semi‐structured interviews, we identified themes pertaining to how frontline communities conceptualize themselves, capacity building, and success. We find that frontline communities seek four things when engaging with intermediaries: understanding of being frontline as a state of active resistance, unrestricted and destigmatized funding, technical assistance, and reciprocal relationships with resource providers. Our results suggest that self‐definition of being “frontline” as active resistance impacts how frontline communities define success and therefore affects best practices for engagement. Based on this definition, we emphasize the importance of equitable relationship building and hierarchy deconstruction in the philanthropic and scientific sectors.