Building Solidarity: A Qualitative Case Study on Building and Sustaining a Youth and Action Research Network for Youth Justice

Background and Purpose: Participatory research is a transformative methodology for democratizing knowledge and empowering participants. However, many projects suffer from project-based lifespans, where momentum and relationships fade after grant cycles end, leading to a lack of institutional memory. This paper examines the development and sustainability of the "Youth Action and Research Network" (YARN), a regional collective in the Philadelphia, PA, and Camden, NJ areas. We address two research questions: (1) What practices and processes of partnership and co-creation contributed to YARN’s development? and (2) What challenges emerged, and how were they navigated?

Methods: This paper is a qualitative single-case study design. YARN is a network of researchers, community-based organizations, K-12 educators, and other youth advocates who meet around shared interests in youth justice. We analyze multiple sources of data, including: artifacts (meeting notes, activity sheets, post-meeting surveys and ‘exit tickets’, planning committee meeting notes, network emails/listserv archive, YARN website), semi-structured interviews with YARN organizers, a focus group with YARN members, and reflective memos of the two authors. For the first order of analysis, we conducted a thematic analysis of the data. For the second order of coding, we applied an ‘explanation building’ approach, which is an iterative process of explaining the ‘how’ and ‘why’ of a process/phenomenon, rather than just describing it. Interpretation was triangulated across sources, and we conducted member checking with YARN organizers and members.

Results: Five core components of of YARN’s sustainability emerged. First, the process of collaboratively constructing a shared vision, values, and agenda was foundational for creating buy-in, fostering leadership/participation amongst network members and creating a political identity for the network. Second, we documented several ways that YARN constructed trust and relationship-building spaces and how we moved away from “experts and community members” and more towards a model where everyones’ experiential knowledge and positionality is playing a unique role in the functioning and advancement of the network’s work. Multiple modes of communication across YARN members contributed to a stronger social fabric. Third, we unpack a series of decisions made that built a governance structure that balanced democratic decision-making with necessary operations. We analyze the development of a stable organizing/planning core that kept the group moving ahead, and how communication and decisions were made with the broader collective. Fourth, we analyze the focus on the accessible and actionable resources constructed by the network, how broader community was engaged in this process and how knowledge exchange enhanced the capacities of various YARN members. Finally, we discuss how an unfunded network, in a politically challenging time, was able to leveraging resources in a way that aligned with the critical principles and values that guide the group.

Conclusion & Implications: By documenting and examining how solidarity was built, we offer insights into how regional networks can bridge the gap between academic inquiry and sustained social action, ensuring that community-based knowledge production survives beyond the lifespan of a single grant. It emphasizes relational practices and processes, and offers concrete considerations for novice PAR scholars, graduate students and educators.