The Civic Labs Project: Power, Policy, and the People Who Should Own Both by Mario

The Civic Labs Project: Power, Policy, and the People Who Should Own Both by Mario - May 2025 Scholarship Essay

If I had unlimited time and money, I would build a global network of public-sector innovation labs—hubs that equip everyday people, especially those historically excluded from governance, with the skills, resources, and political power to shape the systems that govern their lives. These labs would be rooted in neighborhoods, cities, and rural communities—not as symbolic spaces but as deeply embedded engines of change. I would use what I’ve learned in graduate school to design them for scale, equity, and sustainability.

The premise is simple: government can do better when it is built with people, not just for them. But far too often, the tools to influence policy, budget processes, or program design are gatekept—buried in jargon, restricted by bureaucracy, or siloed within elite institutions. At Penn’s Fels Institute of Government, I’m learning how to break those silos. From budgeting and performance management to legislative drafting and systems thinking, I’m being trained to not just understand government, but to transform it. If I had the means, I’d deploy that knowledge globally, starting with the communities that have the most to gain.

These innovation labs would serve three interconnected purposes: capacity-building, community power, and policy prototyping.

First, capacity-building. I would create rigorous yet accessible training programs—blending civic education, data literacy, policy design, and storytelling. Think of it as an MPA program for the people, led by local experts, organizers, and alumni of public service. Whether it’s a mother advocating for safer schools, a reentry advocate designing better probation systems, or a young entrepreneur building a community health platform—these labs would demystify public systems and give people the technical and political tools to intervene effectively.

Second, community power. Each lab would be equipped to build coalitions, facilitate public meetings, and support campaigns—allowing communities to push for what they need on their own terms. Funding would support stipends for participation, language access services, digital infrastructure, and community research. Leadership would reflect the communities they serve—people of color, immigrants, system-impacted individuals, rural organizers, faith leaders, and youth. These labs would not exist to “empower” communities; they would resource them, amplify them, and get out of the way when needed.

Third, policy prototyping. Using participatory research and rapid-cycle feedback, each lab would partner with public institutions to co-design new policies and programs. For example, if a city’s transit system doesn’t serve shift workers, the lab could work with riders and transit authorities to co-create better scheduling models. If formerly incarcerated individuals are struggling to access housing, the lab could design a community-centered reentry housing pilot in collaboration with local officials. The labs would offer both accountability and innovation—testing new ideas, tracking outcomes, and scaling what works.

Globally, this vision would extend to cross-cultural exchanges—pairing communities in Philadelphia with those in Lisbon, Cape Town, or São Paulo to share insights, organize around shared struggles, and co-develop solutions. I’d use my dual U.S.–Portuguese citizenship to bridge international policy dialogue, uplifting models of democratic participation and mutual aid that already exist in the Global South and diaspora communities but are often overlooked by formal institutions.

The long-term goal? To create a new civic infrastructure—one that doesn’t rely solely on charismatic leaders or short election cycles, but instead invests in a distributed model of leadership that is regenerative, inclusive, and accountable. One where people don’t just protest outside city hall but co-write the agendas inside of it.

None of this is abstract to me. I’ve spent the last decade in rooms where decisions were made—sometimes with the community in mind, sometimes without. I’ve helped shape federal legislation, led criminal justice reform efforts across three states, and secured millions in funding for underserved towns. But I’ve also witnessed the burnout, the bureaucratic inertia, and the systemic barriers that keep too many people shut out. If I had unlimited time and money, I would focus on changing that—not just by pushing for better policies, but by fundamentally reimagining who gets to shape them.

The resources I’d need would go far beyond buildings or technology. I’d invest in people—long-term fellowships for community leaders, mental health support for organizers, sabbaticals for public servants, translation services, free childcare for civic participation, and data systems that actually serve the public. I’d fund the boring things too—like grant writers for grassroots orgs or bus fare for public testimony—because those are the barriers that often break us.

At its core, my vision is about faith—in people, in democracy, and in the belief that when communities have what they need, they will build a better world. The MPA I’m pursuing isn’t just a degree—it’s a blueprint. With unlimited time and resources, I’d spend the rest of my life turning that blueprint into something real, brick by brick, hand in hand with the people I serve.