Insight
A lack of transparency around how diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) is valued and integrated into a funder’s work can lead to questions about a funder’s commitment to DEI.
Funders need to be transparent about how diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) are valued and integrated internally in order to authentically engage grantees on these issues. Not doing so can lead organizations to question the funder’s commitment to DEI, and the extent to which DEI informs organizational culture and plays into both funding and internal processes.
“They’re not attuned to equity issues, and sometimes come off as dismissive.”
Interviewees mentioned in multiple contexts that GCE did not appear to them to be committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Organizations questioned whether and how DEI played into the funding process and GCE’s internal practices.
Participants would welcome a more direct and transparent approach to the values of DEI at Luminate. Participants sometimes ascribed frustration with systemic discrimination problems happening in Silicon Valley onto GCE as well, due to their perception that GCE’s approach was aligned with more negative aspects of Silicon Valley’s culture. Some participants even spoke about not bringing up DEI-related issues with GCE, saying that they didn’t think GCE would be able to help or even understand. For these participants, their perception of GCE was of an organization that was heteronormative, white, and male.
Several participants also found it noteworthy that there was no diversity data on the Omidyar Network / GCE website. They also remarked on the fact that the team did not ask for any diversity data during the investment process.
Participants were generally aware that GCE used DEI considerations in their assessment of an organization, but it seems that not all ILs involved grantees in the collection or reporting of that information about the organization.
NOTES:
Transparency is key to fostering an equitable playing field amongst grantees. Transparency ensures that information about funding processes and support are made clear to all, rather than offered through informal channels only to grantees in a position to initiate a discussion or inquiry.
Quotes
“I’m just not sure they’re the right group to help with [our sensitive DEI issue].”
Related Recommendations
All Recommendations arrow_forwardBe explicit about the role DEI plays in your organization and how you are integrating DEI-related efforts and considerations into your funding approach, strategies and external relationships.
Consider finding ways to diversify your network and the organizations you fund, by, for example, intentionally engaging with organizations beyond the types of entities and approaches that you are most familiar and comfortable with, and questioning your frame of reference for what is ‘a fit.’
Be transparent about your strategic priorities, and keep grantees informed as to how they may be changing.
Develop processes that are transparent and used consistently with all potential grantees, so that everyone has the same opportunities to engage on the design of their grant and related outcomes (e.g., metrics, reporting, grant structure).
Clarify the steps, inputs and outputs of the funding process, and the process for accessing alternative types of support. Pay particular attention to communicating what is required from the grantee early on in the process.
Clarify roles and responsibilities of key people involved in relationship management with the grantee. This is particularly important for creating a deep and trusting relationship and provides clarity over who the grantee should direct questions to.
Clarify what alternative types of portfolio support are available to grantees, why it is being offered, and particularly how this support is intended to help achieve the organization’s goals.
Clearly communicate your identity, where the cultural roots of your funding approach lie, and how those inform your strategies and practices.
Related Resources
From Words to Action A Practical Philanthropic Guide to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
Recommendations for evaluating a foundation’s history of inequity, helping grantees incorporate DEI practices operationally, collecting diversity data, and introducing new grantees focused on grassroots, intersectional work.
Report
Source: Barbara Chow, Grantcraft, Foundation CenterMaking It Count: The Evolution of the Ford Foundation’s Diversity Data Collection
The Center for Effective Philanthropy walks through their organizational learnings around collecting diversity data on gender and race/ethnicity amongst their grantees.
Source: The Center for Effective PhilanthropyA practical guide to outcome-focused philanthropy
A philanthropic framework that emphasizes rigor, results, learning, and adaptation. This guidebook and set of worksheets helps foundation staff integrate this approach across all stages of philanthropic work.
Knowledge Base
Source: Lori Grange, Hewlett FoundationDecolonizing Wealth, Edgar Villaneuva
Decolonizing Wealth is a provocative analysis of the dysfunctional colonial dynamics at play in philanthropy and finance. Award-winning philanthropy executive Edgar Villanueva draws from the traditions from the Native way to prescribe the medicine for restoring balance and healing our divides.
BookData Handling Best Practices
Doing data handling with privacy and security in mind means spending some time to identify different threats, culminating in a threat model, and coming up with strategies that fit the particular threat model. We’ve compiled some best practices for both risk assessment and security strategies.
Knowledge Base
Source: Simply SecureResponsible Data Practices
Adopting responsible data practices can feel daunting. The issues involved range widely, from privacy to ethics, to many other grey areas around making good judgements when it comes to working with data. This resource covers a few considerations that arise repeatedly when thinking about and practising responsible data in the community.
Article
Source: Responsible DataParticipant Bill of Rights
An informed consent document conveying the ways field research participants are entitled to control the interview or observation process. The document outlines rights related to: (1) the power to ask questions, (2) compensation just for showing up, and (3) control over what information is captured and how it’s shared.
Article
Source: Simply SecureDealing with Divergent Requests
A resource, from the user experience research, on understanding how to hear the intent behind a request.
Knowledge Base
Source: Simply SecureCo-Design
Resources on co-design as a participatory process that can address systemic inequalities and power imbalances.
Knowledge Base
Source: Sasha Costanza-Schock, MIT Civic MediaIDEO Service Design Tools
An open collection of communication tools used in design proccesses that deal with complex systems.
Knowledge Base
Source: IDEOHigh Risk User Research
A video on working with high-risk users or in contexts where security and privacy are critical.
Knowledge Base
Source: Simply SecureOn Trust & Transparency: Full Report
Download the full report.
Report
Source: Simply SecureOn Trust & Transparency: Interview Guide
The interview guide used for the participant interviews during the Partner Perspectives project.
Report
Source: Simply SecureOn Trust & Transparency: Survey Guide
The survey guide used for the Partner Perspectives project. This was hosted in LimeSurvey an open-source survey tool that can be self-hosted or hosted via Limesurvey’s website.
Report
Source: Simply SecureOn Trust & Transparency: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
Download the insight section on diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Report
Source: Simply Secure