This study explored how participatory environmental communication was used by the Organization for Rehabilitation and Development in Amhara in community projects that aimed to improve environmental security, livelihood, and sustainability in the Amhara region, Ethiopia. The study also analyzed what, when, and how the organization applied its implementation strategies. Analytical and theoretical models of participatory environmental communication were used to explore the perspectives of 46 participants. The elements of participatory models were considered through integration theories, participatory theories, and related concepts. Thus, the study developed a comprehensive model and used it to explore the implementation strategies of projects. The new communication model developed for the study is believed to improve intervention practices in community projects. A qualitative design was used to meet the purpose of this study. Purposive and convenience sampling were used in the design to obtain representatives of the intervention sites and the study population. Experts and community members were the study participants. Qualitative data was collected through in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, document analysis, and observation. The main themes were derived from theory and empirical data. Then, the data was transcribed, coded, and analyzed thematically. The findings of the study will be inputs to improving the planning, theory, practice, policy, and research of community projects in local and global contexts. Implementation challenges were mitigated by the organization's objectives of triggering changes through communication, training, sharing of experiences, documentation, participation, and negotiation. The organization showed a strong symbiosis between improvements in environmental security and livelihood. Partnership, positive image building, and collaboration with stakeholders are strong and have lasted three decades. A culture of documentation of success and failure, monitoring systems, and adaptive capacity were considered the strong sides of the organization. However, the organization operated in challenging political situations. The organization could not prove how projects took into consideration all kinds of communication and cultural negotiation aspects. The organization did not establish a standard policy and guidelines for communicating with the project community. The execution mechanisms of projects were overlooked. The adaptive capacity to communicate results to stakeholders was weaker than the potential that the organization had in affluent areas. Community participation was kept to a minimum, resulting in a lack of meaningful participation. Community project learning was in place, but low levels of knowledge management and a lack of awareness were exhibited. Damage to the environment did not receive attention in the implementation strategies, although it influenced community projects. Community efforts to negotiate through cultural and religious institutions have not yet been followed by legal measures. A top-down approach was more prevalent than a bottom-up approach. Furthermore, the overall implementation strategy used for projects was progressive in its intent and practice, though it lacked integration of instruments into project planning at the grassroots level. It is suggested that organizations working on community projects plan and use an inclusive and improved implementation strategy for projects in rural society. The planning and practice of the strategy should also be grounded at the grassroots level.