Reflective storytelling illustrates how a district–university partnership adapts and endures despite funding loss.
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe how a school district–university partnership was sustained following the unexpected termination of federal grant funding. Drawing on mutualism as a lens for school and district–university partnerships, this paper explores how shared leadership, relational commitment, and problem-solving practices sustained our partnership during a period of disruption, termination, and beyond. Design/methodology/approach We used a reflective, storytelling approach to describe the journey of a district–university teacher residency partnership. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with university and district leaders, along with project leadership reflections, we highlight leadership decisions and partnership responses across key inflection points during the project. This approach allowed us to document how the partnership was established, navigated the abrupt loss of grant funding, and adapted to sustain its work. Findings A strong relational foundation established prior to the funding disruption enabled our partnership to respond collectively and adaptively during a period of uncertainty. Shared vision, transparent communication, and people-centered leadership fostered collaboration and supported the co-construction of a reformulated pathway forward for residents. Rather than weakening under pressure, the partnership deepened, resulting in revised agreements, reallocated institutional resources, and sustained support for residents. Originality/value Our work contributes to an underexplored area in the literature by illustrating how one district–university partnerships endured following abrupt funding loss. By foregrounding sustained commitment, relational trust, and intentional collaboration, we offer practical insights for building resilient, sustainable partnerships that extend beyond the life of external funding.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Harbour et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: