Introduction
This story begins with the story of Flint, Michigan to reveal a different way for universities to engage with society. When a public health disaster threatened children's lives, official channels and regulatory protocols failed to uncover the truth. The breakthrough came from community members partnering with researchers who stepped out of traditional academic roles and collaborated directly with the people most affected.
What unfolded in Flint challenges assumptions about how knowledge is generated, validated, and applied. When research institutions immerse themselves in the lived realities of their communities and treat those communities as equal partners in defining problems and co-creating solutions, everything changes.
This chapter retells Flint's story to explore a growing imperative for research universities: to become active participants in addressing society's most pressing challenges. The question becomes not only what universities know, but whom they serve and how deeply they engage in social transformation.
The Flint Story
Part I
January 2016, Downtown Flint, Michigan
Dr. Mona Hanna-Attisha stood at her office window at Hurley Children's Hospital, watching snow fall on empty storefronts below. The data in her hands—blood lead levels from hundreds of Flint children—would change everything. These numbers revealed a betrayal so profound it would reshape how universities engage with their communities.
Eighteen months earlier, the story seemed straightforward. State-appointed emergency managers switched Flint's water source from Detroit's system to the Flint River to save money. The water tasted bad, looked cloudy, and smelled strange, but officials assured residents it was safe. When community members like LeeAnne Walters brought brown water to city council meetings, officials dismissed them. When residents complained of rashes and hair loss, officials called their concerns unfounded.
Dr. Hanna-Attisha, a pediatrician who had spent her career caring for Flint's children, suspected something deeper was wrong.
The Community's Awakening
The crisis began with a mother's persistence. LeeAnne Walters noticed something alarming in early 2014: her tap water was brown, and her four-year-old twin boys suffered mysterious health problems. When she took samples to the city, officials dismissed her concerns. When she demanded answers, they blamed "old plumbing."
Walters refused to accept these explanations. She documented everything—photographed the discolored water, kept detailed health records of her children's symptoms, and reached out to anyone who would listen. Her persistence would eventually connect her to researchers who understood what she instinctively knew: something was wrong with Flint's water.
At Virginia Tech, Professor Marc Edwards—a water treatment expert who had exposed lead contamination in Washington D.C.'s water system—began receiving calls from Flint residents. The parallels to D.C. were unmistakable: a city switching water sources, inadequate corrosion treatment, and official denials despite mounting evidence.
By summer 2015, Edwards had partnered with Walters and other residents to conduct independent water testing throughout Flint. Their findings were devastating: lead levels in some homes reached 13,200 parts per billion—nearly 900 times the EPA's action level. The Flint River water, without proper corrosion treatment, was leaching lead from aging pipes directly into residents' taps.
The Academic Response
As news of the water testing circulated, Dr. Hanna-Attisha faced a crossroads. Trained at the University of Michigan Medical School and serving as both director of pediatric residency at Hurley Children's Hospital and assistant professor at Michigan State University's College of Human Medicine, she embodied the traditional academic model: careful, methodical, published in peer-reviewed journals.
This crisis demanded something different.
"Research was the scientific safety net," she later reflected. "It was the source of truth." Working with her team at Hurley, Dr. Hanna-Attisha analyzed blood lead level data from before and after the water switch. Her findings confirmed residents' worst fears: blood lead levels in Flint children had increased significantly, particularly in areas with older housing and aging water infrastructure.
The data was clear, but presenting it would require breaking from academic tradition. Rather than submitting her findings to a medical journal and waiting months for peer review, Dr. Hanna-Attisha made a radical choice: she would go directly to the community and the media.
On September 24, 2015, at a packed press conference at Hurley Medical Center, Dr. Hanna-Attisha presented her research to the public. Standing beside flip charts showing before-and-after blood lead data, she declared that Flint's children were being poisoned by their water supply.
Officials responded swiftly and harshly. State health officials accused her of creating "near hysteria" and dismissed her research as flawed. They questioned her methods, her data, and her motives. For a young academic, the attacks were devastating.
"When I first presented the research, they tried to discredit it," she recalled. "They said I was wrong, that I was causing hysteria. But the community supported me. They knew their truth."
The Community-University Partnership
What happened next revealed the power of genuine academic-community partnership. Rather than retreating to the safety of academic institutions, Dr. Hanna-Attisha and her colleagues doubled down on their community engagement. They worked directly with residents like LeeAnne Walters, who had become a powerful advocate for water testing and transparency.
The partnership between Virginia Tech's Marc Edwards, community activists like Walters, and local physicians like Dr. Hanna-Attisha created something unprecedented: a coalition that combined rigorous scientific research with grassroots organizing and medical expertise. They shared data freely, trained residents to collect water samples, and used social media to disseminate findings in real-time.
This collaboration departed from traditional academic practice. Instead of working in isolation and communicating primarily through scholarly publications, these researchers embedded themselves in the community they served. They attended town halls, spoke at churches, and made themselves available to answer residents' questions directly.
The results were immediate. Within weeks of Dr. Hanna-Attisha's press conference, state officials who had initially dismissed her findings were forced to acknowledge the data's validity. By October 2015, the state had reversed course, admitting that Flint's water was unsafe and recommending that residents use bottled water or filters.
The New Model
The Flint crisis revealed both the limitations of traditional academic research and the power of community-engaged scholarship. When government institutions failed, universities stepped into the breach—not as distant experts delivering verdicts from ivory towers, but as partners working alongside residents to solve urgent problems.
Dr. Hanna-Attisha's approach embodied this transformation. Rather than simply documenting the crisis, she and her colleagues began working on solutions. Michigan State University announced a new Pediatric Public Health Initiative in January 2016, bringing together experts in pediatrics, child development, psychology, epidemiology, nutrition, toxicology, geography, and education to address the community's needs.
"The creation of this Pediatric Public Health Initiative will give Flint children a better chance at future success," Dr. Hanna-Attisha explained at the announcement. "This initiative will bring in a team of experts to build a model pediatric public health program which will continue to assess, monitor and intervene to optimize children's outcomes."
The initiative leveraged MSU's expanded Division of Public Health, supported by the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, and the university's 35-year collaboration with Hurley Medical Center. It represented a new model of academic engagement: responsive, community-driven, and focused on immediate impact rather than long-term research goals alone.
Beyond the Crisis
The transformation that began in Flint continues to expand. Dr. Hanna-Attisha, now Associate Dean for Public Health at Michigan State University's College of Human Medicine, has built on the lessons of the water crisis to address broader issues of health equity and social justice.
Her Rx Kids program, launched in Flint and now expanding across Michigan, provides cash assistance to new mothers to combat poverty's effects on child health. "Poverty makes kids sick," she explains. "So I wanted to prevent it."
In August 2025, MSU opened a new 40,000-square-foot addition to its College of Human Medicine in downtown Flint—the Charles Stewart Mott Department of Public Health. The facility houses 18 new researchers and more than 200 staff members, all focused on community-engaged research and intervention.
The expansion represents more than physical growth; it embodies a philosophical transformation. As MSU President Kevin Guskiewicz noted at the facility's opening, "Michigan State's program in public health is a great example of how our College of Human Medicine's community-based approach creates positive impacts here in Flint... Through this program, Michigan State's physicians and researchers can address critical issues we've identified with collaboration of community members and partners."
The Lasting Legacy
The Flint water crisis exposed a truth about the relationship between universities and their communities: traditional academic distance can be harmful when urgent problems demand immediate action. The crisis demonstrated that universities have the potential to serve as powerful platforms for addressing public needs—but only when they abandon the ivory tower model in favor of genuine partnership with the communities they claim to serve.
Dr. Hanna-Attisha's journey from careful academic to public health advocate illustrates this transformation. Her willingness to risk her career by going public with preliminary findings, her partnership with community activists, and her ongoing work to address root causes of health inequality represent a new model of university engagement.
"The water crisis in Flint was a preventable public health disaster that exposed the deep-seated racial and economic disparities in our society," she has said. But it also revealed something else: the power of universities to serve justice when they choose to work with communities rather than apart from them.
Today, as Dr. Hanna-Attisha continues her work addressing poverty and health inequality, and as MSU expands its community-engaged research presence in Flint, the lessons of the water crisis continue to transform how universities understand their role in society. The crisis forced a reckoning with academic privilege and institutional responsibility that continues to reshape higher education's relationship with the communities it serves.
The children of Flint, whose elevated blood lead levels first revealed the scope of the crisis, are now approaching their teenage years. They grow up in a city where the university is no longer a distant institution but an active partner in addressing the challenges their community faces. Their story—and the academic transformation it sparked—offers a powerful example of what becomes possible when universities choose to serve not just knowledge but justice, not just scholarship but their neighbors.
The Relevance Reset Framework
Part II
The Flint water crisis illustrates a transformation occurring across public institutions. LeeAnne Walters' brown water, Dr. Hanna-Attisha's press conference, and Marc Edwards' community partnerships represent more than individual heroism—they demonstrate a fundamentally different relationship between institutions and the communities they serve.
Redefining the Public Mandate
When state-appointed emergency managers switched Flint's water source, they operated under the traditional understanding of public mandate: authority-driven compliance focused on statutory procedures and fiscal targets. The decision followed proper channels, met legal requirements, and achieved cost savings. By these standards, it was a success.
But residents like LeeAnne Walters measured something different. They evaluated the water switch based on lived experience: taste, safety, health outcomes, and trust. When officials dismissed their brown water samples and health complaints, a gap opened between institutional authority and public legitimacy that would prove unbridgeable.
The public mandate has shifted from authority-driven compliance to outcome-driven stewardship. Problems cross jurisdictions and information moves faster than policy cycles. People judge relevance by tangible improvements in daily life: time saved when accessing services, safety secured before crises escalate, fairness experienced in outcomes rather than procedures.
This shift is structural and irreversible. Three forces drive it: First, problems are networked—pandemics, cyberattacks, heat waves, and supply disruptions cascade across sectors, so single-agency proficiency cannot guarantee community safety. The Flint crisis exemplifies this: lead contamination required coordination between water utilities, health departments, educational institutions, and community organizations. Second, information asymmetry has collapsed—if residents can test their own water and share results instantly through social media, they won't accept official assurances that contradict their evidence. Third, inequality is path-dependent—neutral processes generate divergent outcomes because they ignore starting positions such as broadband access, language, health, or work schedules.
The redefined mandate therefore begins with explicit outcome claims that match public needs over institutional comfort. Instead of "we switched water sources within statutory limits," the commitment becomes "we will provide safe, reliable water while achieving cost efficiencies, with transparent monitoring and rapid response to quality concerns."
From Outputs to Outcomes
Dr. Hanna-Attisha's choice between journal publication and press conference crystallizes the difference between outputs and outcomes in institutional practice. The traditional academic model optimized for scholarly outputs: papers published, peer reviews completed, conference presentations delivered. These metrics said nothing about whether children were safer or communities were healthier.
Public institutions regain relevance when they stop counting what they produce and start proving what changes for people's lives. Outputs—permits issued, inspections completed, patrol hours logged—are activity tallies that say little about whether public needs are met. Outcomes capture the end-state citizens care about: time to secure benefits, safety people feel on their street, avoidable hospitalizations prevented.
The Flint researchers demonstrated this shift in practice. Instead of measuring "research activities conducted," they tracked blood lead levels in children—an outcome parents could directly understand and verify. When Dr. Hanna-Attisha presented flip charts showing before-and-after data, she made the abstract concrete and gave families evidence they could use to protect their children.
This transformation requires linking outputs to outcomes through explicit causal chains. Dr. Hanna-Attisha's blood lead analysis worked because she could trace a clear path: water source change → lack of corrosion treatment → lead leaching → elevated blood levels → health impacts. The causal logic was transparent, testable, and actionable.
Consider the contrast with official responses that emphasized process compliance. When state officials defended their decision based on "following proper procedures," they offered outputs (compliance activities) without demonstrating outcomes (safe water). When they dismissed community concerns as "unfounded," they prioritized institutional authority over empirical evidence.
Closing the Legitimacy Gap
The harsh official response to Dr. Hanna-Attisha's press conference—accusations of creating "near hysteria," attacks on her methods and motives—illustrates the legitimacy gap in action. This gap is the distance between the authority institutions claim and the trust people are prepared to grant, and it widens whenever public systems deliver what they measure rather than what people need.
The legitimacy gap appears when processes are optimized for throughput while outcomes languish, when consultation is performed but not internalized, and when accountability is defined by compliance paperwork rather than experienced value. In Flint, officials could point to completed environmental assessments and regulatory filings while residents lived with poisoned water.
Dr. Hanna-Attisha's experience shows how to close this gap. When she chose transparency over traditional channels, she aligned claimed authority with verifiable, citizen-centered results. Her academic credentials gained legitimacy because they served community-defined needs rather than institutional priorities.
The community's support proved decisive. As Dr. Hanna-Attisha recalled, "the community supported me. They knew their truth." When residents could see that her data matched their lived experience, trust flowed from demonstrated results rather than formal authority.
Closing the legitimacy gap requires aligning claimed authority with verifiable, citizen-centered promises and building operating systems to keep those promises under stress. This means converting goals into service commitments with remedies, measuring and reducing the time tax imposed on residents, replacing compliance accretion with risk-by-design, and empowering frontline discretion within guardrails.
In Flint's case, this transformation is ongoing. MSU's expanded presence in downtown Flint, with its community advisory boards and shared decision-making structures, represents an attempt to institutionalize the lessons learned during the crisis.
Community Problem Ownership
LeeAnne Walters' persistence in documenting water quality issues and demanding answers exemplifies genuine community problem ownership. She didn't simply report concerns through official channels; she defined the problem's scope, established her own success criteria, and refused to accept explanations that contradicted her evidence.
Problem ownership means the community holds the decision rights to define the problem's scope, determine priorities, set outcome metrics, choose acceptable trade-offs, and declare when to stop or pivot—while institutions commit to provide data, funding, legal cover, and delivery capacity.
Walters' approach illustrates this in practice. She framed the problem as "our water is making our children sick," not "regulatory compliance requires review." She prioritized immediate health protection over cost savings. She measured success by her children's wellbeing, not by process completion. When officials offered explanations that didn't address her children's symptoms, she rejected them and sought alternative sources of expertise.
The partnership between Walters, Edwards, and Dr. Hanna-Attisha demonstrates how community problem ownership can work with institutional resources. Residents brought lived experience and local knowledge; researchers provided technical capacity and scientific credibility; medical professionals offered clinical evidence and public health expertise. None could have succeeded alone; together, they created irrefutable evidence for change.
This model rests on representative participation, transparent data, and shared outcome metrics that keep power accountable and focus intact. The Flint partnership avoided capture by vocal minorities because it centered on objective health outcomes that affected all children, not just those with the strongest voices.
The ongoing MSU presence in Flint attempts to institutionalize this approach. Community advisory boards hold decision rights over research priorities, intervention design, and resource allocation within ethical and legal guardrails. The facility operates as a platform for community-defined problem solving rather than extractive research.
Operationalizing the Framework
The Flint experience offers concrete guidance for institutions attempting their own relevance reset:
Start with Community Problem Definition: Walters' documentation of water quality issues provided the foundation for all subsequent interventions. Institutions serve communities best when they begin by understanding problems as residents experience them, not as agencies categorize them.
Align Expertise with Community Needs: Dr. Hanna-Attisha's academic credentials gained power when deployed in service of community-defined outcomes. Technical expertise creates value when it enables community problem-solving rather than advancing narrow institutional interests.
Design for Speed with Safeguards: The crisis demanded rapid response, but not at the expense of scientific rigor. The key was re-engineering the process—direct community communication instead of lengthy journal review—while maintaining methodological standards.
Build Learning into Operations: Every intervention became a source of evidence for improvement. Rather than treating community engagement as separate from research, the partnership made engagement itself a form of investigation and learning.
Create Infrastructure for Sustained Partnership: The permanent MSU facility and dedicated staff ensure that community engagement survives leadership changes and funding cycles. Transformation requires embedding new practices in organizational structure, not just individual commitment.
The Path Forward
The Flint water crisis taught a profound lesson: when truth flows upstream, when communities and universities work together as equal partners, the most urgent problems become opportunities for transformative solutions. The question for other institutions is not whether they will face their own Flint moments, but whether they will be ready to respond with the relevance reset that genuine partnership requires.
The relevance reset is not a destination but a continuous practice: aligning institutional capacity with community needs, measuring success by outcomes that matter to those served, and building the infrastructure for sustained partnership. In Flint, this reset transformed a public health crisis into a model for engaged scholarship. The challenge now is to scale these lessons before the next crisis forces the change.
Dr. Hanna-Attisha's legacy lies not just in exposing the water crisis, but in demonstrating an alternative model of institutional engagement—one where academic expertise serves community-defined needs, where outcomes matter more than outputs, and where legitimacy flows from results rather than authority alone. As institutions across sectors grapple with declining trust and increasing demands for relevance, the Flint experience offers both inspiration and practical guidance for the transformation ahead.
The children of Flint, now approaching their teenage years, grow up in a city where the university is an active partner in addressing community challenges. Their story—and the institutional transformation it sparked—proves that when institutions choose to serve justice alongside knowledge, scholarship alongside neighbors, the most urgent problems become opportunities for solutions that neither communities nor institutions could achieve alone.
Membership in Unbound is free and entitles you to content such as deep dives, scaffolded workshops, and beta software. Your participation and ideas support the community of scholars, practitioners, and leaders who are transforming education.
Next up
Unbound