Clear and Present Danger - Reframing Risk
A Message from CEO, Kathryn O'Neal-Dunham
We are living in one of the most extraordinary political moments in the history of the United States, and any outcome of November’s presidential election will herald an historic first. The politics of the current election cycle have drawn outsized attention and sparked intense discussions about the implications for democracy and societal progress, often in the very same districts that we both live in and seek to serve. I, too, feel the weight of this moment, since the result of this presidential race is critically important to our sector’s work. Yet I believe the focus on the election is obscuring a larger, more immediate moment that philanthropy must address as it stands to intensify regardless of the November outcome: the violent backlash against racial justice that we must meet with courage and boldness.
My colleague Juston Cooper of ABFE reiterated in a recent meeting what a colleague and mentor of his once said: “history doesn’t repeat itself. People repeat history.” As early as the end of 2020, Philanthropy New York members predicted that we would experience a retrenchment of social progress. While Fortune 500 corporations were making racial equity commitments, funders were shifting grantmaking priorities, and everyone was listening to Scene on Radio’s “Seeing White” podcast or reading Nikole Hannah-Jones’s 1619 Project, BIPOC leaders in the PNY community were actively warning us that this level of progress is always met with resistance, and often violent resistance. They reminded us this response is how power — in the forms of sexism, racism, xenophobia, heteronormativity, and ableism — maintains the status quo.
While the outcome of November’s election will no doubt throw fuel on the fire, society is already experiencing a conflagration:
- A significant rise in white nationalist movements’ on the ground activism has led to increased violence, threats and intimidation campaigns.
- Our partners at Funders for LGBTQ Issues are helping their members fight a nationwide wave of hundreds of anti-trans bills and legislation.
- The Supreme Court has fundamentally ruled against bodily autonomy, rolling back a 50 years precedent established by Roe v Wade.
- Universities and state legislatures have made DEI commitments illegal, and the state of Florida has rejected the AP African American History curriculum.
- In the nonprofit and academic sectors, we are witnessing a profound loss of women of color in leadership positions.
In the wake of the SCOTUS decision on Affirmative Action in highly selective colleges and the challenge to the Fearless Fund’s awards for Black female entrepreneurs, I am hearing member discussions about “risk” that are not focused on the clear and present danger of our current conditions. Rather, this word is often being used to question whether or not we should be explicit around why we center race in our decision-making or how we communicate race-conscious strategies.
An Outdated View of Risk
It is not new for philanthropy to be overly invested in the idea of risk. We have general counsels, we conduct audits, we report to Attorneys General, and foundation boards often view their roles through the lens of fiduciary duty alone. Foundations spend a lot of time with investment committees to ensure that the portfolio of investments grows and increases — yet few regard how those investments, roughly 93-95% of total assets, are impacting the very issues they are funding grantees to address!
In grantmaking, risk assessment is often rooted in two related fears: distrust of nonprofit organizations, and discomfort relinquishing control. As a result, foundations often measure risk in the following ways:
- Assessment of a grantee’s lack of liquid unreserved net assets
- Concerns about whether the transition of an Executive Director will make an organization too unstable to achieve its mission
- Hesitance to be the “only” funding for a program/research/campaign because it won’t be sustainable in the long run
- Likelihood of timely and complete payments of New York City government contracts and consideration of the potential consequences if the system fails
Is “risk” a coded word for fear?
In these cases and others, risk actually serves as a code word. It may represent the reason a thing might fail, a cover for inaction, or a reason to step back from commitments which may pose a threat to the status quo of an institution. In this backlash moment, I hear members talking about a new set of fears that have been labeled as risks. These fears are rooted in their organization’s uncertain ability to withstand challenges to their analysis and strategy: How are we describing our work on our website? What does the lawsuit against the Fearless Fund mean for our grantmaking? What if the American Alliance for Equal Rights decides to file a suit against us? What if Congress calls our foundation in to testify?
I rarely hear risk framed the way racial justice facilitators have talked about the imperative of addressing racism. It’s a metaphor that goes something like this: Imagine racism is a moving sidewalk at the airport. If you stand still, the sidewalk keeps moving you forward. If you walk backward, you might stay in one place. You have to run against the tread if you actually want to make progress against the continual movement of the machine. Foundations must act intentionally, insistently, and consistently, lest they risk perpetuating the oppression that is already in motion.
What is truly at risk.
Regardless of the outcome of November’s election, those who are working for a more equitable, sustainable and democratic future are already living in a state of current and present danger. If this backlash against racial justice has taught us anything, it is that if we do not practice a clear and consistent analysis of the ways that identity and positionality intersect to uphold oppression, we miss the opportunity to create a true multi-racial democracy where political power rests in communities that sit at the sharpest intersections of injustice. We risk never coming close to achieving our vision for a more equitable, sustainable, and democratic future.
In this context, we recognize that the real “risk” we are taking is prioritizing the protection of our institutions rather than the risk of not meeting our purpose, of not creating the deep and lasting impact we exist to create. Working together, Philanthropy New York members must reframe the dialogue on risk in philanthropy. If foundations with significant endowments are not ready to risk capital to challenge racist and sexist lawsuits, if strategic analyses are not deeply thoughtful about the structural drivers that result in racist outcomes, if philanthropic entities continue to fund at the tip of the iceberg rather than doing the work necessary to look well beneath the water, we risk never achieving the purpose with which we were endowed to begin with. We risk perpetuating the very power structures that consolidated this wealth in the first place. We risk perpetuating the very harms that we seek to address. From my vantage point, these are the risks foundations should be increasingly unwilling to take.
Philanthropy New York members have been deeply engaged in the work needed to move toward a more racially equitable footing. In the last year they’ve served as faculty members for our new grant makers training, chaired issue-based working groups,led peer networks, and engaged with elected representatives.
As you continue that engagement while thinking about how to reframe risk for your role and your organization, I invite you to reflect on the following questions: How are you preparing to lead at this critical juncture? Where are you finding the courage to center purpose over institution? How are you creatively gearing up to meet and mitigate the risks you see when standing firm in an analysis that recognizes the need to address race, gender and other oppressive structures?
If you are leading a foundation that is committed to equity and you are grappling with the answers to these questions, join us on November 12th for Clarity and Bravery in Uncertain Times. If you are leading grantmaking strategy efforts and want to be in conversation with your peers and leaders from Race Forward and the Lawyer’s Committee for Civil Rights Under the Law, email me about joining the group discussion we are convening for that purpose on September 18th.
I hope you will share both your challenges and your curiosities with me and the PNY team at this moment. We have never needed each other’s creativity and collective genius more than now.
Kathryn O'Neal-Dunham