Let’s Hear More About Work for Diversity and Inclusiveness
Odds are that you’re aware of some of the work to bring diversity and inclusiveness to philanthropy, whether it’s through the “Race Matters Took Kit” of the Annie E. Casey Foundation or even through the grants of the family foundation down the road from you. But how much don’t you hear about?
I’ve been exploring how foundations communicate their work on diversity for a case study that will be published by the Diversity in Philanthropy Project (DPP) at the end of September. The case study examines some of the innovative ways this dialogue is happening at some of the leading national foundations: Ford, Marguerite Casey, Packard, C.S. Mott, and The Denver foundations. But the question about communicating the work at other foundations is wide open: a lot of diversity and inclusiveness work still falls beneath the radar.
As Anastasia Ordonez, Packard Foundation’s senior communications manager, pointed out to me, many foundations like it that way. They’re used to taking a back seat on publicity and working behind the scenes to make things happen.
Another issue is specificity. There’s no shortage of high-minded ideals and vision statements, but what about the heart and soul of the work? Jan Jaffe, the Project Director of GrantCraft, told me that it’s not enough for foundations to tell how diverse they are. They need to show us by interacting with their staff, grantees, and stakeholders to find out why and how diversity is important to us. She said, “They need to ask what they’re doing differently as a result. How is our work different from a Benetton ad?”
The case study is far from an exhaustive list of innovative communications or challenges to communicating. I wanted to open up the dialogue to blog readers:
-
What innovative communications work about diversity and inclusiveness have you seen?
-
What should foundations do to become more innovative and effective in their communications?
-
What would be the advantages or disadvantages of creating a best practices platform?
September 4th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Paul, I appreciate your comments and questions about how foundations are or are not communicating their work about diversity and inclusiveness. And, I’d like to emphasis Jan Jaffe’s question – what are we doing differently as a result of diversity and inclusiveness? I’d hope foundations continue to emphasize how their organization has changed since being intentional about being more inclusive. Have their funding strategies changed? Have their program areas been expanded in scope? Do foundations have a better understanding about how different social issues impact different populations differently? Are foundations talking about their work differently? Communicating work in diversity and inclusion means also describing the way an organization has changed.
September 10th, 2009 at 9:06 am
Charles, I’m sorry I haven’t replied sooner. I just returned from a long Labor Day weekend.
Foundations vary too widely for me to discuss their work adequately in general terms. As you note, foundations’ diversity work can result in changes externally and internally or in few measurable changes at all.
Let me site a couple examples from my case study of foundations that have shown change. The Denver Foundation (TDF) has been a leader of the field in communicating its work and making progress for change. In 2001, it launched the Expanding Nonprofit Inclusiveness Initiative (ENII), a research effort to increase inclusiveness in nonprofits. The program was successful and from the results they launched efforts internally to become more diverse. People of color now occupy more than 50% of its board seats and account for 60% of its management staff. TDF has also interacted with external constituents by making ENII permanent as a new program with a separate website, http://www.nonprofitinclusiveness.com. The website offers a number of very practical, useful features: including study results, a workbook for nonprofits and philanthropies to become more diverse, and a database of consultants who can help organizations become inclusive.
Other efforts, such as those of the C.S. Mott Foundation, are promoting new media as a means to connect. Mott features a website section devoted to its Race and Reconciliation work. The site is a repository of dynamic info about its work on race, its grantees, their work, and related information and news, including podcasts and videos. People can quickly find information they want and share and learn more about it. Measuring the success hasn’t been without challenges. But Mott is receiving a lot of positive responses through feedback from users and grantees and through high attendance at events promoted through the site.
Ford, Packard, and Marguerite Casey are the other organizations in the case study, and they’ve also done some great work by communicating diversity and serving as an example of positive results. Of course, their results aren’t, and won’t necessarily be, the same for other foundations. But the foundations seem to be establishing ideas for a model that others could adopt, either in full or in part. The conversation about communicating work on diversity still has a long way to go, but the framework for the conversation is emerging.
September 13th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Paul – Thanks for the helpful information!
September 14th, 2009 at 7:04 am
You’re welcome, Charles!