We are all talking, writing, and thinking a lot more these days about racial injustice and systemic inequality. But within the philanthropic world, which of these conversations will result in changes to our own practices? And of the changes that do occur, how much will last beyond the next crisis? After all, we’ll need to climb many barriers, some unforeseen, to get where we need to go.
During the past few months, my organization, Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors, has hosted a series of working groups with a diverse set of donors to start answering these and other questions. While we don’t have all the answers, one thing is clear: To make lasting change, we must first look inward at our own actions and attitudes.
That starts with accepting our limited ability to truly grasp how much racism permeates the soil of our society and affects every aspect of our lives, including all of our institutions. While we have made some progress over decades, the police shootings of Black men and women, and the resulting protests in cities and towns across America, show how tenuous that progress is — and how much work we still need to do.
Many of us are engaged in discussions about the need to listen to the communities we serve and facilitate bottom-up approaches to grant making. But listening won’t accomplish much unless we are ready to hear. In order to hear, we need to be willing to educate ourselves about the root causes of racial injustice and how it led us to this moment. We need to stop making assumptions about what others could or should have done and, instead, understand where they are coming from now and historically. And we need to do all of this regardless of where we sit, what we look like, and what position we hold.
So, what can we do to challenge ourselves to think differently and re-evaluate our own perspectives? Here are insights from our discussions with donors that offer some possible answers.
Step outside that bubble. Many of us in the philanthropic world live in bubbles of “people like us.” We may seek to help those who are less fortunate, but we often do so from a position of entitlement and superiority. In many cases, we consciously or unconsciously believe we know better than they do how to fix the challenges in their lives. If we don’t have close relationships and connect as equals to the individuals we seek to help, these attitudes are unlikely to change.
For one foundation in our network, this manifested itself in a disconnect between the family-run board and the foundation’s staff. Led by an ethnically diverse team, the staff reached out to grantees based on personal interactions with members of the communities served and grantee feedback. The board — made up of second- and third-generation heirs — ultimately shut down this level of engagement, forcing the program staff to take a step backward. The family members believed, despite their lack of direct interaction with grantees or members of the communities served, that they could drive programs without these close relationships. This is very much in line with recent findings that those born with privilege believe they are more competent than equally capable people of lesser means.
To gauge whether such thinking permeates your own decision making, ask yourself the following:
- What assumptions do you make consciously and unconsciously when contemplating what other communities and individuals should or could be doing?
- What role does your personal experience, privilege, and comfort level play in how you analyze information, evaluate programs, and work with partners and grantees?
- Do the people you interact with most often — intellectually, personally, and professionally — include those whose perspectives and life circumstances are dramatically different from your own?
Reconsider outdated and potentially harmful organizational practices. The pandemic presents an ideal opportunity to examine procedures that may be outdated and even harmful to grantees and partners. For example, one foundation participating in our working groups is now questioning the role of site visits after finding that videoconferencing is equally effective. Eliminating or cutting back on site visits isn’t just about saving time and money. It also challenges the real or perceived power dynamic between donor and grantee, given the preparation time and effort — and the performative aspect — of such visits.
Another foundation participant discovered that reduced travel commitments among program staff has resulted in quicker delivery of grants to nonprofits struggling to meet enormous need during the pandemic. Several others reported re-evaluating and, in many cases, removing strict requirements about when and how to use grants, including letting nonprofits use funds for general operations or to build reserves for challenging times. One donor noted that grantees are weaker and less able to provide critical services when they are prevented from using funds in these ways.
As you re-evaluate your organization’s practices and procedures, also consider these questions:
- What structures might be shutting out diverse voices within your organization? These could include power dynamics that allow only some people to speak on certain topics, reporting hierarchies, and performance-measurement standards that implicitly or explicitly prevent new ideas from being heard.
- Is your organization’s internal leadership, as well as that of your grantees and partners, diverse enough to reflect the varying viewpoints and personal experiences necessary to support a bottom-up grant-making approach driven by those closest to the need?
Stick around when times get tough. The current environment has led several foundations in our discussion groups to emphasize their role as steady and consistent partners who won’t abandon grantees when their endowments take a hit. One organization is even reconsidering its overall strategy, contemplating a move from serving as an expert “thought leader” to focusing instead on highlighting and amplifying the voices of on-the-ground experts.
As you seek to build partnerships, consider these questions:
- How have you sought to understand and mitigate the power dynamic between your organization and grantees?
- Do you recognize how their position as recipients of your funds affects their ability to provide feedback and creates conditions that may prevent them from speaking freely?
As part of this process, we need to keep asking ourselves how philanthropy itself inherently puts up obstacles to understanding, empathizing, and developing partnerships with those we seek to help. Instead of only pointing fingers at other institutions and individuals, we need to look inward. Or as Dana Bezerra, president of the Heron Foundation, recently asked: “When do we turn that finger back around and ask when we are willing to take on systemic change inside our own shops?”