Social tension, community division, political polarisation. These are phrases we’ve heard repeatedly over the last few years, used to describe the state of our towns, cities and neighbourhoods. It paints a bleak picture of a fraying social fabric and places that are becoming increasingly hostile.
But these headlines only skim the surface. Beneath them sit quieter, structural issues in the invisible plumbing of our communities - the relationships and shared spaces that allow people to belong, collaborate and act together. When this plumbing is neglected, tension rises. And when it is tended to, something else becomes possible.
This raises an important question: who is expected to do this tending? Who are we waiting for to notice the strain and step in, when so much already falls on under-resourced community groups and small organisations? Perhaps this is where community builders come in.
In our last Knowledge Share Session of 2025, we were joined by Miranda Eeles - a connector, facilitator and network weaver - who shared her experience working with Gloucester Community Building Collective, during her time as Executive Director from March 2023-December 2024.
The Gloucester Community Building Collective (GCBC) formed as a CIC in 2019, emerging out of the Barnwood Trust’s county-wide community building team. This was a unique partnership that brought together individuals from the Trust, the police, Gloucester City Council and the county council, with the aim of creating a Gloucester “where everyone belongs and contributes”. The Collective supports communities in Gloucester to form meaningful connections, unlock their full potential and bring about social change.
The GCBC has hired 14 community builders across the city, rooted in neighbourhoods and paid to do the work of connection, care and coordination. In a world where grassroots change is so critically underfunded and ‘interventions’ are often designed in boardrooms far from the places it affects, this is radical: trusting local people, resourcing them properly, and letting communities lead change from the ground up.
Gloucester, like many places across the UK - and our world, has been experiencing growing social tension and conflict within and amongst communities. Our conversation with Miranda made it clear that we can’t ignore this. There is a need to understand the lives of people, especially those who have not been heard for a while, to give them the space to talk and to imagine.
The Collective’s approach to community building models a way of navigating places and communities as a genuine listener. Someone who can be the “thread linking people, ideas and opportunities”.
A relational approach to community building
So what actually is community building, and what does it really look like in practice?
At its core, community building, as stated by Miranda and GCBC, is essentially about building relationships. By nature, this is a slow process; it takes time to build familiarity and even more to build trust.
Community builders go in with an open mind and see what is there. Inspired by the Asset-Based Community Development (ABCD) approach and the work of Cormac Russel, the focus is on working with the assets of the place, the neighbourhood, or even just the individual, rather than focusing on the issues or enforcing a “solution” onto them. It is a craft of prioritising the gifts and skills already here and unearthing the ones buried beneath the surface, rather than fixating on what’s missing.
GCBC has developed an adaptive four-step framework for this process, moving from discovery to connecting, to mobilising and movement-building.
The discovery stage is arguably the most difficult. This is a period of listening - spending time in the neighbourhood, sitting on benches, walking in local parks, visiting churches or community centres and starting conversations. This exploratory time is an opportunity for the community builder to carve out a delicate but steady presence, and crucially, begin mapping out the local assets.
Miranda outlined for us a list of key community assets that could exist within a place, however hidden or quiet they might be:
The individual: these are the dreams, passions and interests that people hold
The environmental: the natural spaces, the green areas, empty or underutilised land
The economic: the local businesses, resources, infrastructure and human capital
The cultural: the identity, stories, heritage and traditions of a place
The organisational: the associations, the networks and leaders that already exist
The craft work only really starts to materialise from the second stage: the connecting. Once the community builder has formed a presence, established those first relationships, found some loose threads - this is when they can begin pulling them together. The community builder’s role is not to do things for people or to provide solutions. Instead, they encourage people to pursue ideas and passions, to use their talents, they help them find and access resources, and most importantly, they help connect them to other people. In Miranda’s words, community builders are gently repairing the “invisible plumbing that sits underneath communities”.
The mobilisation stage picks up here, as more and more people are involved and connected to each other, community builders encourage people to take on new projects and initiatives that interest them.
GCBC complete their four-step framework with movement-building, inviting communities to join forces and support each other so this work can be sustained over time.
The more real relationships that exist, the greater the potential for collaboration and collective action - and the greater the potential to build a movement that could transform a place.
The magic a community builder can bring
Between 2019 and 2023, GCBC community builder, Carena, worked in the areas of Elmbridge and Longlevens, focusing on social isolation and loneliness amongst older residents. The full report takes us on her journey working in these neighbourhoods.
One notable group that emerged during Carena’s time in Longlevens, was the Recycled Teenagers. What began as a handful of older residents that started meeting together, is now a group of over 70 members doing many different activities. Carena understood that a few people were interested in doing something together. And at the same time, she had discovered that the owners of the Longlevens Community Centre had the space, time and interest in hosting coffee mornings. The connection was made, the group had a place to gather and grow, and that was that.
This practical asset-based approach and the subtle weaving is what separates community building from loud and prescriptive issue-based approaches to place-based work. Rather than arriving with a defined problem to fix, community building starts by noticing who and what is already present and makes those connections between people, spaces and resources that might otherwise remain separate.
One resident said this about Carena’s work: “She gave me the confidence to do things. She helped facilitate, not do it for me”.
The tightrope: agency vs. dependency
Carena’s departure from Elmbridge and Longlevens revealed a key question that many community builders and place-based practitioners need to grapple with: How do you support people without creating dependence? And how do you know when to step back?
As the residents of Elmbridge and Longlevens began taking on more responsibility, conversations about Carena moving on began to surface. And when the moment of her departure arrived, it landed heavily. This moment became a point of reflection and learning for GCBC, especially around how community builders can develop an “exit strategy” that is shaped with the communities they are working with.
Time and trust are the currencies of community builders. Removing that person who has crafted those relationships and facilitated the growth of new spaces and groups, can have deep ripple effects on a place. This story reminds us that community building is complex and relational all the way through to the point of departure.
Community builders walk a constant tightrope between creating dependence versus nurturing the conditions that help people recognise their collective agency.
One practical tool that GCBC has developed to unlock agency and creativity within communities is a micro-grant scheme or their Community Chest. The grants were initially £200–£250, and later rose to £500. The application process asked only a few straightforward questions: What’s your idea? What will it do? Who will you do it with? That was it.
These modest pots of money helped catalyse allotments, tidy-ups, shared meals, local gatherings. Miranda emphasised that it was not the amount of money that mattered, but the simplicity and accessibility of it. Community builders help draw awareness towards these resources; they can encourage people who have ideas and passions to apply for them.
Measuring what matters: Ripple Effect Mapping
But then comes the next challenge. As detailed above, community building is about “relationships, connections and what grows out of them”. The depth of this can never truly be quantified. This is where standard metrics of measurement fail and shows why the wider system struggles to value this work.
Miranda introduced us to what is called ripple effect mapping. GCBC partnered with the University of Bristol to develop this evaluation tool using timelines and diagrams to capture how connections, groups and initiatives emerge and interweave over the years. It is a way of visualising the cumulative impact of a community builder’s presence within an area. It’s showing what their invisible plumbing really looks like and how far it can reach.
If traditional metrics are missing the point, could ripple effect mapping become standard practice for telling stories that aren’t linear or immediate?
The cost of undervaluing community builders
Often, when an organisation or authority wants to hear from or consult a community, they form a controlled and asymmetrical environment - an assembly, a project consultation session, a digital feedback form. They create a temporary and formal environment that the community is obliged to go to or show up for, and generally for the purpose of responding to something being done to them.
Community building subverts this completely; it is the practice of meeting people where they are, going to a community’s space, or finding a space they are comfortable and willing to be in, rather than expecting them to go to yours. It is a much slower approach, focused on listening, trust-building and empowerment.
Miranda clearly stated that this engagement process is not set in stone; it varies and shifts depending on the context of the neighbourhoods community builders are working with. It can take up to 6 months to become a familiar face, up to a year to build those strong relationships, and about two years to start seeing a real impact. In fragmented neighbourhoods, where community spirit has been missing for a while or where tensions are strong, it can take double that time.
The reality is simply that “communities are messy”, and this makes the job of a community builder incredibly challenging. They are not bringing communities into a controlled space for an hour or two; they are directly placing themselves on the ground amidst people’s daily lives, their complex relationships, and for an uncertain amount of time. It is a relational craft that requires high skill, emotional maturity, a level of groundedness and adept conflict navigation skills.
The aforementioned report on Community Building in Elmbridge and Longlevens included residents’ testimonies on Carena’s impact and influence. They talked about the energy, positivity and encouragement that she brought along with her skill of weaving people, groups and resources together.
Miranda’s message was simple: if we don’t pay community builders and if we don’t recognise how valuable they are to creating stronger and more resilient neighbourhoods, then the quality and continuity of this work will be compromised. There is a potential pathway here that is moving us away from social fragmentation and isolation, and towards the revitalisation of our places and communities. We ought to invest in this.
Final reflections
The work of Gloucester Community Building Collective shows that a shift in culture, neighbourhood and place does not come from imposing solutions, but from harnessing what already exists, listening to what is wanted, connecting people and resources and trusting communities to lead.
Community building is ultimately a craft of patience, presence and careful attention. It is a practice that could be experimented with in many places and contexts, tending to the unseen and messy but vital plumbing beneath our communities.