What Philanthropy Owes Katrina's Victims

By George D. Penick

Philanthropy has the opportunity to make a huge difference in the lives of hundreds of thousands of people as it responds to the devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina. But the risk is great that large sums will be spent unwisely, and that a major opportunity to change the way that society includes and cares for all of its people will be lost.

In the coming months and years, more philanthropic dollars will flow into Gulf Coast states than has ever been imagined. The big question is whether that money will be used to rebuild shattered communities in ways that are equitable and just or whether it will largely be invested in ways that simply re-establish the racial and social inequities that have been so starkly captured by television news cameras from around the world.

Philanthropy can no longer ignore or avoid the harsh reality that poverty, especially among minorities, lies at the heart of the most unseemly aspects of the Hurricane Katrina debacle. As leaders of foundations, we must take responsibility for the fact that we have failed the poorest citizens in our country by not keeping them safe, by not providing opportunities equal to those of the middle class, and by not treating them as equal members of society. In one way, the hurricane caused damage and distress to all -- rich and poor alike -- but in recent days, it is been made painfully clear how poorly society supports those who have the least ability to provide for themselves in a time of crisis.

Because the philanthropic response to the Gulf Coast destruction will largely be financed by national foundations and corporations from outside the areas that sustained the most damage, it is important for those grant makers, and other major donors, to make a sincere effort to understand how they can make a tangible difference, or at the very least not inflict more harm on people who have already suffered enough.

Following are the kinds of questions that people in philanthropy should consider as they decide how to respond to the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina:

• Who will rebuild the communities torn apart by the storm? It is important to look beyond the immediate needs of providing people with temporary shelter, meals, and other necessities and to keep an eye on what must be rebuilt, and how it can be done in a way that leads to the creation of equitable communities. The relief charities and government emergency-response agencies will soon leave, and philanthropy needs to be ready to help people and communities get on with their lives.
• Will the people who need help the most get it? Donors must be willing to trust local people and work with them, or else they will give their money and support to groups that are based outside the region hurt by Katrina. Grant makers need to look for organizations that have a sound understanding of the people, the community, and the conditions of the Gulf Coast, and they need to rely on organizations that understand how the power structure works. Otherwise, aid will never get to those who truly need it.
• What role should a foundation or corporation play given the vast amounts of government funds that are being provided for relief and recovery? Because philanthropic dollars are so much smaller, but so much more flexible, than those awarded by governments at all levels, donors should look for ways to serve people whom governments cannot or will not assist. It makes no sense to duplicate effort or to use philanthropic funds where they will make little or no difference.
• Will rural areas get the help they need? The damage from Katrina goes far inland for hundreds of miles where homes have been destroyed, infrastructure severely damaged, and jobs lost -- both temporarily and permanently. The rural areas and small towns are far from the usual sources of aid and assistance, and they have far fewer financial resources of their own to draw on.
• What needs to be done next? The advance warnings about the storm saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, a fact that has been overlooked in the wake of the relief fiasco in New Orleans and elsewhere. But the people who fled inland before Katrina struck land are being supported by stretched local resources in places throughout Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, and elsewhere. Many cities and towns have doubled in size in the past two weeks, and most of the new residents have nothing beyond what they could throw into a suitcase. Families are sleeping on the floors of community centers and sending their children to local schools that already are overcrowded and poorly equipped.

These people will need transitional support for the next 3 to 12 months to get them out of mass shelters and into more stable and healthy living situations until they can return home. Schools and social-service organizations attempting to serve these new community members will be overwhelmed by demands for help, and they will need plenty of money and other resources to do their jobs well.

• How can grant makers be most helpful? Foundations and other donors need to make sure they do not impose their own spending priorities on charities that are working hard to serve people in need. Grant makers must avoid their usual tendency to establish their own narrow programs and impose their usual guidelines, grant-making criteria, and restrictions on who is eligible. One of the worst situations imaginable would be for local organizations to have to contend with a hundred grant-making efforts financed by different donors who have made no effort to communicate and collaborate with one another.

  It is important that national grant makers work closely with people who are nearest to the action, such as community foundations, and with other donors who are trying to reach people who desperately need assistance. Going it alone will not help anyone.

• How can foundations exert their leadership roles? Along the Gulf Coast, nonprofit groups have not had the strength or the standing in public debate that they do elsewhere, so national grant makers must do far more than write checks. National grant makers and charities must work with local nonprofit groups to use their credibility, influence, and leverage to make sure that the voices of everyone are heard, that the needs of the whole community are met, and that concerns about equity and fairness are considered in every step of the rebuilding process.
• Will foundations do what it takes to help the poor? Donors can make a big difference by using their resources and influence to collaborate with financial institutions, community colleges, and business and political leaders so that their practices during the recovery are designed to support the most vulnerable members of society. The recovery will provide economic opportunity for new construction, for jobs to rebuild the infrastructure, and for entrepreneurs to provide the needed services. At the same time, it is important to change the way that business as usual has been conducted in a region where political influence, established networks, biased hiring practices, and government-subsidized investments have historically closed out so many Americans.
• Will foundations be willing to provide money to advocacy groups who want to influence the recovery and rebuilding plans? Since state and government resources will be much larger than those of private philanthropy, foundations and corporations must support organizations that will work to ensure that policies are equitable, that the political process is fair, and that access to financing opportunities is available to all. For example, advocacy groups will need to ensure that zoning, banking, and housing policies do not re-ghettoize the cities of the Gulf Coast, and they will need to demand that safe housing is provided to low-income people in rural communities. They should not be forced to live in trailers and mobile homes.

Foundations and corporations often respond to high-profile catastrophes like Hurricane Katrina simply by writing big checks before they have made any effort to understand conditions in the disaster area or figure out which organizations have the most credibility and best performance records. Too often, grant makers do not take the time to establish networks that will lead them to those who know the situation best, so they dole out money to organizations that are bureaucratic and lack an understanding of what a community needs. No wonder the influx of immediate disaster donations rarely makes a big difference to communities harmed by natural disasters or other crises.

This year the Mid South Commission to Build Philanthropy, a group of nonprofit, foundation, and corporate leaders, called on grant makers in the region to see philanthropy as much more than the rich giving to the poor. It urged foundations and other grant makers to pursue philanthropy in a way that makes full use of the time and skills of volunteers and leaders of the entire community rather than relying simply on the resources provided by the wealthy few.

As philanthropy faces one of the biggest challenges in history, can grant makers be self-critical enough to change the way they typically do business and pursue this new form of giving? Are they willing to take risks to support groups that may not be well-established, but that know how to help the poorest of the poor rebuild their lives with dignity and respect?

The end result of hundreds of millions of dollars of private philanthropic funds, combined with billions of government support, must not be the rebuilding of communities of exclusion, of institutionalized poverty, and of ignored racism.

As donors respond to Hurricane Katrina, it is important to remember that philanthropy's role is to make conditions better than they were, to bring about much-needed change in society, and to raise difficult issues.

In the words of the Mid South Commission to Build Philanthropy, this is one of those rare times when "hope and history rhyme."

The history of our region -- both that of which we are proud and also that of which we are forever ashamed -- can rhyme with a hope for a better future. More than government and more than business, philanthropy in its fullest and broadest sense can be the leader to make that happen -- but to do so, philanthropy must be willing and able to change how it operates.

George D. Penick is president of the Foundation for the Mid South, which serves the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Arkansas.