Andrew Sears

Executive Director

TechMission

Race, Class, Gender & Faith Bias in Nonprofit Funding

Why TechMission Is Addressing This Issue?

TechMission primarily supports Black and Latino-led nonprofits that are close to the community

We have seen how these nonprofits are experiencing systemic issues with bias in funding of nonprofits

In a down economy, we are observing an increasing bias towards big (i.e. White) organizations

Many of our partner sites are struggling to stay functional

Why TechMission Can Speak to This Issue?

TechMission’s organizational culture reflects lower class culture– Nearly all of board and senior staff are Black, Latino and/or come

from low-income background– ED is White from lower class background– TechMission Corps AmeriCorps members are 62% Black and

Latino with 50% from low-income backgrounds TechMission has one of the widest spans of connection with

grass roots organizations (over 4,000 registered nonprofits)– UrbanMinistry.org being the Black/Latino counterpart to Idealist.org and

VolunteerMatch.org

Leadership has extensive experience on writing about and living out reconciliation across race, class and gender

Nonprofit Leadership Does Not Reflect Racial Community it Serves

Source: http://www.aecf.org/upload/publicationfiles/executive_transition_survey_report2004.pdf

Nonprofit Statistics and Race

1.4 million registered nonprofits in USA– 1,169,000 White-led nonprofits– 138,600 Black-led nonprofits– 50,400 Latino-led nonprofits– 12,600 nonprofits led by other races

Source: Number of nonprofits from Independent Sector,Racial breakdown extrapolated based on survey results at:http://www.aecf.org/upload/publicationfiles/executive_transition_survey_report2004.pdf

Funding Bias: Non-Whites Make up 52.4% of Poverty but Non-White Led Nonprofits only Receive 3% of Funding

http://www.slideshare.net/rosettathurman/race-matters-in-nonprofits-promoting-diversity-in-our-profession andhttp://www.aecf.org/upload/publicationfiles/executive_transition_survey_report2004.pdf

Most Nonprofits: Have a Different Class Culture than Clients

White Black Latino Asian

Upper

Middle

Lower

Leadership

Clients

Leadership Leadership Leadership

TechMission’s Focus & OtherLower Class Culture Nonprofits

White Black Latino Asian

Upper

Middle

Lower Leadership and clients

Nonprofit Leadership Does Not Reflect Class Community it Serves

Data show subjective estimates from the author based on educational levels and class assimilation rates of nonprofit leadership. 94% of leadership have at least bachelor’s degree with an estimated class assimilation rate of 90-95% based on living location & culture

Funding and Gender

From: http://www.aecf.org/upload/publicationfiles/executive_transition_survey_report2004.pdf

How to Perform on the SAT Test

Be White or Asian– 150-200 point increase

Be Rich– 30 points per $10,000 of family income

Conclusion: To Improve SAT Scores…– Be careful how you pick your parents

Source: http://www.maec.org/natstats.html & http://www.educationanddemocracy.org/testing_facts.pdf

How to Get Funding from Foundations

Be White– 97% of foundation funding goes toward White-led

nonprofits Be Culturally Middle Class

– Estimated 95% of leadership of nonprofits is culturally middle class

Be Male– While 58% of nonprofit executives are women, the

median nonprofit income led by a man has twice the income of a nonprofit led by a woman

Sources: http://www.aecf.org/upload/publicationfiles/executive_transition_survey_report2004.pdf &http://greenlining.org/publications/pdf/339 The class statistic is explained on a previous slide

How Do We Change This?

Why Does Only 3% of Foundation Funding Go to Nonprofits Led by People of Color?

Policies: Avoid Racial Discrimination Resulting from Religious Restrictions

Policies that restrict funding faith-based organizations creates an unintentional bias toward White-led organization

How it works– About 2/3 of Black-led nonprofits are in churches or

other faith-based organizations– About 2/3 of White-led nonprofits are secular– Not funding faith-based organizations makes

White-led nonprofits twice as likely to get funded

Statistics are explained in the attached spreadsheet at: www.urbanministry.org/fundingbias

Common Class ValueTensions in Organizations

Non-Dominant Class Value Low Cost Low Cost Relational Relational Spontaneous Subjective Intense Hierarchical Trauma is Common Many small organizations Many Volunteers/Time’s Cheap Any Lower Class Culture/Values

Dominant Class Value High Quality Speed Structured/Orderly Efficient Detached/Objective Objective Reserved Egalitarian Appearance Trauma is Avoided Big organizations Staff time is expensive Any Middle/Upper Class Culture/

Values

Dominant Culture Outcomes vs. Non-dominant Outcomes

Dominant Culture (middle & upper class)

Value Big Organizations Almost no weight given to

leadership being close to the community

Analytical & Quantitative– Nonprofit “SAT Scores”

Purely Objective Criteria Secular Focused

Non-Dominant Culture (lower class) Cost effectiveness Is leadership close to the

community?– Race of leadership

(staff/board)– Class background of

leadership– Neighborhood they live in

Holistic– Has a Life been Changed

Subjective Faith-Based & Secular

Policies to Address Systemic Bias in Funding: Diversity Profiles

Foundations and government should require all funding recipients to complete diversity reporting form as part of applications

All funders should publicly list their own diversity reporting form with the cumulative results of who they funded

Diversity reports should carry similar weight as financial and other outcome reports and should be listed in foundation’s annual report

– Diversity profiles & reports become an approximate measure for many of the subjective elements that are hard to measure in other outcomes

Policies: “Minority Owned Business” Consideration for Nonprofits

If the Government gives preference to minority owned businesses in contracts, shouldn’t that be a consideration with nonprofits?

Nonprofits that closely reflect the demographics of the communities they are serving should be given preference (affirmative action in nonprofit funding)

Policies: Change Funding Criteria to Reflect Community Values

Example from TechMission’s Grant Applications– 20% of Grant Application Weight: Is leadership close to the

community as reflected in their diversity profile and strategy? Use diversity profile form and grant questions

– 20% of Grant Application Weight: Is organization serving the highest risk community?

Require detailed criteria to distinguish at-risk vs. high risk, etc.

– 10% of Grant Application Weight: How closely is organization partnered with major indigenously led initiatives

Policies: Macroeconomic vs. Microeconomic Social Entrepreneurship

Social entrepreneurship and traditional nonprofit outcome measures take a microeconomic perspective focused on individual organizations

Need new measures of effectiveness that provide a macro perspective

– Need macro-tools just as social entrepreneurship brought microeconomic business tools to nonprofits

Examples of Macro Questions

Perform a study on people who made it out of poverty asking “What organizations and programs were most helpful”?

– Hypothesis: You might find that Black, Latino and lower class culture organizations and especially faith-based organizations provide 75% of life change while receiving 3% of foundation funding.

How should we allocate funding to meet the need for after school programs when demand is more than twice supply?

– Hypothesis: 75% of funding goes to middle-class organizations that have a high cost per student and only serve 25% of the population, while lower-class culture serve 75% of the remaining population at a third of the cost.

Policies: Adopt Strategies to Support Smaller Organizations

Promote strategies to support small nonprofits – View explosion in number of nonprofits as comparable to the

increase in small businesses– Funders should adopt strategies similar to those promoting

small businesses

TechMission Strategy– Online Volunteer Matching: ChristianVolunteering.org– AmeriCorps members to small organizations: TechMission

Corps– Free Grants, Jobs & Training Directories: UrbanMinistry.org

TechMission’s Dilemma

Same dilemma faced by most Black and Latino faith-based organizations– Secular funders often have a bias against lower-

class culture and faith-based organizations– Christian resources are disproportionately

distributed to White middle & upper class Christians

Funding Bias in Church Financial Resources

$390 BillionGlobal Budgets of

Christian Organizations

Sources: Empty TombInternational Bulletin of Missionary Research

Missions

Ministry to the Poor

Down from 21% in 1965

Resource Bias in Church Volunteers

Source: Corporation for National and Community Service & Department of Labor

Value of Faith-Based VolunteersIn USA = $51.8 billion

Bias in Christian Funding Models

Traditional Way to Build Large Christian Organizations– Individual-centered missionary-style fundraising with

thousands of individuals each raising funds for themselves– Provides scalability and maximizes use of personal

relationships

Problem: – Individual-centered missionary-style fundraising creates a

strong class and racial bias– Leads to staffing that is very dominated by White middle class

Diversity Profile at TechMission

What TechMission Can Uniquely Do to Address This?

Build a highly scalable organization That has values and staff that reflect the low-

income communities that we serve Provide resources to those communities Why?

– Capacity: Scalable resources from National Service Movement and Technology

– Values: Foundation in Black, Latino and Low Income Churches

Appendix

Understanding Class as Culture: Opposing/Contrasting Class Values

Non-Dominant Class ValueRelating to Others Spontaneous Relational Intense Community/Family Reliance Friendliness CooperationRelating to the World Respect for Authority/Hierarchy Patience Trauma is common Work is a Means Sharing Contentment Negative Addictions

Dominant Class ValueRelating to Others Structured order & planning Objectively Detached Reserved Self Reliance/Independence Privacy CompetitionRelating to the World Egalitarian Efficiency Trauma is avoided Work is an End/Identity Strong Property Rights Active Problem Solving “Positive” Addictions

Understanding Class as Culture: Opposing/Contrasting Class Values

Non-Dominant Class ValueThinking/Perception Subjective Qualitative Holistic Practical CommunityCommunication Honesty and Directness Oral Tradition and Storytelling Simplified/Slang Vocabulary

Dominant Class ValueThinking/Perception Objective Quantitative Analytical/Compartmentalized Theoretical IndividualCommunication Politeness and Tact Written Tradition Larger/Standardized Vocabulary

Source: http://www.urbanministry.org/reconciliation-across-social-classhttp://www.techmission.org/presentations/social_class_for_ccda_v2.ppt

Diversity in Foundations

86% of board members are White 94% of foundation presidents are White Virtually all funds come from the middle and

upper class Result: values of foundations will reflect

White upper class values

http://www.slideshare.net/rosettathurman/race-matters-in-nonprofits-promoting-diversity-in-our-profession