Learn how ¡HICA! is building power in Alabama’s Latinx population

Editor’s note: This post is part of an ongoing series of posts featuring NCRP nonprofit members.

National funders who care about civic engagement in the South need to increasingly focus on power-building in communities of color. The Hispanic Interest Coalition of Alabama (¡HICA!) is a great place to start.

This Birmingham-based organization has spent the last 19 years steadily building power in the state’s Latinx community through a comprehensive community engagement and education program. This includes essentials like voter registration or regular “Know Your Rights & Responsibilities” workshops for the Latinx community to foster civic education.

Community members who show a particular knack for leadership are encouraged to join the Amigos program, where they’re taught how to converse with elected officials and hold community meetings, among other skills.

There’s certainly no shortage of opportunities for practice. Alabama’s 2011 HB 56 law was one of the harshest anti-immigrant pieces of legislation in the country, and though many of its most pernicious elements were struck down in court – thanks to the federal case HICA v. Bentley – others remain on the books.

Taking cues from the White House, Alabama law enforcement has in some places revived dormant policies encouraging them to verify an individual’s immigration status during stops or arrests. ¡HICA! was the lead plaintiff on the initial case to fight HB 56, and it’s in the fray to counter it once again. It pushed Birmingham to become a “welcoming city” regardless of immigration status, and it continues to educate local elected officials on the needs of its constituency.

As Alabama’s largest organization that provides legal immigration assistance without an attorney, ¡HICA! plays a vital role in the first steps of an individual’s entry into American society. The organization takes on DACA applications for eligible youth and humanitarian visa applications for victims of abuse and other crimes so they can transition to Lawful Permanent Resident status, in addition to helping Lawful Permanent Residents become U.S. citizens.

To fully integrate immigrants into civic matters, ¡HICA! helps with the naturalization process too. All told, ¡HICA! assisted last year with 171 DACA renewals and 15 humanitarian visas, and shepherded 16 new Americans through the citizenship process. These are prospective organizers, marchers and voters who have taken varying steps toward greater participation in American society.

¡HICA! wants to ensure the Latinx community in Alabama not only survives, but thrives. Therefore, it also helps small business owners flourish through increased access to capital, something it assisted 10 businesses with in the last year. Everything from hair salons to bakeries to ornamental ironwork to construction companies have sprung from ¡HICA!’s relationships with the community and their ability to advocate with governmental offices.

The community is building power through home and land ownership – and doing so collectively.

¡HICA!’s other activities include:

Convening business owners to learn about and discuss topics like social media marketing and accounting.
Providing services like women’s leadership programs to cultivate community advocates around healthy relationships and domestic violence, and college readiness workshops for families sending their first generation of children to school.
Its Growing Communities Program, which interfaces with the broader Birmingham and Alabama communities about who Latinxs are, demonstrating how they’re not one monolithic culture.
The day in, day out work of teaching the Alabama Latinx community how the system works and how its members can be a part of change.

The Latinx community comprises a small percentage of the state’s population, and voter turnout among the group has been lackluster. However, as more and more learn the strength of their own voices and actions, this could change. After all, Latinx people have repeatedly pushed forward in spite of dedicated, wanton efforts to exclude them.

Every year in Alabama, 4,000 immigrants become eligible for citizenship, but ¡HICA! doesn’t have the resources to assist them in moving through the process or to engage in the legal work of doing so. What if they did? 4,000 new citizens each year will not have an immediately noticeable impact statewide, but they could be real difference-makers in determining who sits on schools boards and neighborhood organizations.

With time, even small investments in ¡HICA!’s civic engagement work could yield a huge payoff down the line. A dollar spent in this evolving state can go much further than those with more static demographics.

But people shouldn’t get bogged down in the numbers. What matters is whether this marginalized group of people who are trying to make an impact in their communities has more power than they did before. With ¡HICA!’s support, they certainly do.

Troy Price is NCRP’s membership and fundraising intern. Follow @NCRP on Twitter.

Photo by André Natta. Used under Creative Commons license.

“If you have come here to help me, you are wasting your time. But if you have come because your liberation is bound up with mine, then let us work together.” – Aboriginal activists group / Lilla Watson, Queensland, 1970s

Funders that care about health equity have come a long way in the last 20 years. They increasingly emphasize social determinants of health, think intentionally about how to work with communities, and want to make sure those relationships are more authentic and driven by community priorities.

The next frontier for health philanthropy is to squarely name and redress power imbalances and systems of oppression – racism, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia and ableism – at the root of health inequities.

A recent blog post in Health Affairs posed the question: “Power: The Most Fundamental Cause of Health Inequity?” The authors state:

Addressing the social determinants of health – at least in the manner that they have been conceptualized and measured to date – alone will not support our nation’s efforts to reach our health potential … It is time to address power … Advancing equity, therefore, requires attention to power (as a determinant) and empowerment, or building power (as a process).

We’ve been more explicitly naming the centrality of power in our work to advance health equity at Human Impact Partners (HIP):

In our research and advocacy we work directly with community organizers, who have a keen analysis of power and are committed to building power in communities.
In our capacity- and field-building, we’re developing a stronger social justice identity and practice within public health, and building bridges to connect the public health sector to community organizing.
In diverse settings we unapologetically advance our perspective, including in government and other institutions that have been complicit in creating inequities.

So what would it mean for health funders to focus on power? We’ve learned much from the incredibly inspiring approach of The California Endowment. As we’ve experimented with this question, we offer a few ideas for funders to consider. While some ideas are primarily relevant to health funders, most are applicable to any grantmaker that is working toward equitable, thriving communities.

1. Develop a theory of change that includes how power and oppression constrain – or support – policy, systems and environmental change.

To eliminate health inequities at the root, funders should develop an analysis and understanding of how power is at play – currently and historically – in the issues they care about. Consider housing: Access to affordable, safe housing is unquestionably a determinant of health. But why is housing so unaffordable and of such poor quality in certain neighborhoods?

I think about our social and political history, and how redlining and housing covenants kept people of color in racially and economically segregated communities. This is just one example of how public policy was actively manipulated by those in power to physically and emotionally marginalize people of color and poor people. This pattern repeats itself across issues health funders care about, from education to employment to the environment.

Developing an analysis of power is essential to break these cycles and be realistic about what it takes to achieve social determinants of health policy change – where the status quo is often entrenched and resistant to change. Having this analysis would help funders widen the type and scope of interventions and strategies they consider funding and potentially be more successful at advancing health equity.

2. Learn from, ally with and support those who believe in power-building to make headway on the issues you care about (read: work with community organizers).

Mindset shift is essential. Health funders need to see themselves as part of a larger social justice fabric where their health identity aligns explicitly with social movements. This means learning from and supporting foundations and organizations that focus on building power and see themselves as part of the same ecosystem. Health funders could directly support power-building by funding grassroots movements and organizations, to advance solutions to the problems communities identify.

Community organizers may not necessarily see health as a top challenge and may not lead with it. Health funders would have to grow comfortable funding organizations that never talk about health. They would have to trust that grassroots organizing for policy, systems and environmental change around the social determinants has downstream benefits for health and equity.

3. Uphold a narrative within health philanthropy that’s about building power to advance health equity, which acknowledges entrenched systems of oppression.

Developing an analysis is not enough. Narrative change within health is daunting but needed. Narratives are values-based stories about how and why the world works as it does, which frame our responses to the problems we see.

Funders must actively hold each other accountable to change entrenched narratives that impede progress on health equity. They must tell the story of how power imbalances and oppression created unfair and unjust systems that led to poor health and persistent health inequities.

Importantly, the narrative cannot be based just on numbers and facts – we also want to activate hearts and minds by centering people who have been harmed by racism and other forms of oppression. This can happen through listening, storytelling, examining our history and owning our piece of it.

4. Create a framework for measuring outcomes and progress. Fund the development of appropriate metrics for organizing and advocacy that advances health equity.

I’m incredibly proud of our progress, but I can’t necessarily tell you how we’ve changed health outcomes yet. I’d love to have health funders’ energy and support in defining success, which includes process metrics about developing transformative relationships, changing the conversation, developing leaders and innovating around strategy.

Most recently we’ve seen the potential of this approach in Massachusetts, where a new criminal justice law expands the use of alternatives to incarceration for parents of dependent children. Formerly incarcerated women from Families for Justice as Healing wrote and advocated for the “primary caretakers” provisions, and our team at HIP wrote a report on the health impacts of the policy and educated public health stakeholders, who rallied behind it.

This successful collaboration, with research funded by The Kresge Foundation, came about because HIP explicitly names the centrality of power in advancing health equity.

The shift to a social determinants frame in health philanthropy was a huge accomplishment. Given the wider reckoning in our society, we can’t wait another 20 years to explicitly name power and oppression’s role in creating health inequities. Let’s get clear on these root causes and shift the conversation, and our efforts, to challenge them. Only then can we be confident that we’re truly creating a society in which everyone can thrive.

Lili Farhang is co-director of Human Impact Partners, which brings the power of public health to campaigns and movements for a just society. Follow @HumanImpact_HIP on Twitter.

Aaron Dorfman, president and CEO of the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy, said the demands sounded excessive for a gift to a public high school.

“Naming opportunities are not at all unusual. That often comes with a large gift. But usually, those are gifts to private institutions, not to public, government-funded institutions like a school district,” said Dorfman, who laughed when told of the requirement that the school hang Schwarzman’s commissioned portrait.

As for the confidentiality requirements, Dorfman said: “I think that’s crazy. This is a public school district, and it’s a little outrageous to expect that kind of confidentiality.”

Read the entire article on Philly.com.

Last month, NPQ reported on a study from the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP) about Atlanta. The study noted, “Atlanta’s growth and its forward-looking political climate have left many communities, especially low-income communities and communities of color, behind.” The public health data back NCRP’s findings up.

Read the entire article in Nonprofit Quarterly.

Despite the tempting distractions of sunny Orlando, it was a full house at NCRP’s session at the PEAK Grantmaking annual conference in March. Co-led by me and Project Streamline’s Jessica Bearman, the workshop topic was “Beyond Good Intentions: Self-Assessment for Equity and Systems Change.” It was one of several sessions that focused on helping grants managers incorporate diversity, equity and inclusion into their practices.

A small group brainstorming activity immediately got the room abuzz:

What is one aspect of your grant processes that helps ensure all the organizations and communities you seek to benefit have equal access? What is one aspect that you suspect may work against that?

Jessica’s display of our “Support/Undermine” notes below capture some of the access issues that emerged:

We then explored the concept of power, which is the central frame of NCRP’s forthcoming self-assessment guide for grantmakers. We discussed why power is a central consideration when seeking to advance equity: Achieving equity requires changing systems that perpetuate disparities, and changing systems requires the use of power. We asked how the concept of power applies to their own roles. “We have the money, and money is power,” summarized one participant.

More lively small group discussions ensued as we presented three fictitious foundations – all drawing from real situations that NCRP encountered while assessing a dozen major foundations for our Philamplify initiative. Each scenario contained a set of feedback quotes that also came from real grantees and other stakeholders of assessed foundations.

So much excitement here in the @NCRP session on beyond good intentions! @lisa_rang #PEAK2018 pic.twitter.com/gfJvOZ45Io

— Jessica Bearman (@jbearwoman) March 19, 2018

Participants debated the power and equity implications for their chosen scenario.

Next, they identified things they could do in their own sphere of influence to address them.

In conclusion, the group shared resources that can help grants managers be mindful of equity issues in their work. In addition to NCRP’s forthcoming self-assessment guide for using power to advance equity, Jessica noted several PEAK resources, including: Project Streamline, Assessing the How of Grantmaking and Successful Structures.

We all came away from the session inspired and ready to “blow up” inequitable grants practices!

To receive notice when the NCRP self-assessment guide is released, sign up to get our materials at: www.ncrp.org.

Lisa Ranghelli is the senior director of assessment and special projects at the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy.

What does accountability in philanthropy look like today?

This was a particularly salient question at the Just Transition Forum, a powerful cross-sector convening hosted by the Building Equity and Alignment (BEA) for Impact Initiative in Jackson, Mississippi, in February.

The BEA “brings together dynamic grassroots organizing groups, effective national green organizations and innovators in philanthropy to advance the progress of the environmental movement towards a just transition and directly confront powerful polluters.”

Guided by the Jemez Principles for Democratic Organizing, and informed by research authored by Sarah Hansen and published by NCRP in Cultivating the Grassroots in 2012, the BEA has grown a strong grassroots-led network over the past five years.

Attending the Just Transition Forum and being in a space full of incredible yet continually under-resourced frontline organizers was a humbling and jarring difference from philanthropy’s mainstream conference culture, from the circular assembly set-up and world café discussion model, to leveraging allies like me as volunteer note takers and attending a local rally.

The agenda was outlined but fluid to accommodate emerging themes from conversations, and much of our time was spent grounding ourselves in the history of the movement and wisdom of elders. We delved into the principles and nuances of a “just transition,” recognizing the hundreds of years of colonization and white supremacy, and the resiliency of Indigenous, immigrant and Black communities in the face of so much pain and destruction.

Among the many breakout discussions, I attended one for funders, including colleagues from the Ceres Trust, Chorus, JPB, Overbrook, Mertz Gilmore and Surdna foundations, and organizations such as Arabella Advisors and EDGE Funders.

We discussed philanthropy’s current realities, how we show up and what we bring to the movement. Accountability was a prominent theme: We named that we operate in a sector that has few mechanisms for accountability and transparency, and identified a need to push for structures that support and move philanthropy towards “true accountability.”

It struck me that NCRP has fostered dialogue around these themes since our founding in 1976, a time in our nation’s history when there was also an increasing concern with public accountability. One of NCRP’s seminal reports from 1980, Foundations & Public Information: Sunshine or Shadow?, placed the growing conversation within the context of the Freedom of Information Act, first passed in 1966, the Tax Reform Act of 1969 and public scandals such as the Pallotine Fathers embezzlement case that led to indictment in 1978.

Among many observations that are still relevant, especially amidst the Trump administration, the report asserted: “Being accountable and accessible to the public is one way foundations can overcome an enormous obstacle they face in trying to make grants that deal effectively with social problems. That obstacle is their almost complete isolation from those problems.”

Today, mainstream grantmakers still hold enormous power, privilege and gatekeeping abilities, isolating them from the inequities and injustices experienced at the grassroots. With no “natural predators” beyond the IRS and tax policy in the United States, and ongoing sector disagreement over the fact that foundation dollars are partially public dollars, it’s no wonder that this challenge continues to plague the sector. Reflecting on this same report in 2013, our president Aaron Dorfman wrote, “the more things change, the more they stay the same.”

But philanthropy can and must move beyond upwards accountability to boards, donors and founders, and operationalize accountability downwards to nonprofit partners and communities.

To address this persistently thorny dynamic in philanthropy, the BEA is educating and organizing funders towards greater alignment with grassroots social movements. And they’re doing so in powerful, intersectional ways that bring funders out of their bubbles, which I invite you to support and learn from.

Here are some suggestions for how to show up and what to bring:

Be thoughtful about navigating power dynamics. In spaces like the Just Transition Forum, the BEA invites funders in as collaborators. This doesn’t mean you can’t contribute — the BEA welcomes vulnerability and honesty about your challenges in navigating barriers. But these are opportunities to practice stepping back, listen and make room for grassroots leadership. For more funder-oriented convenings, check out the BEA’s Funder Allies Webinars and the Funder Briefings hosted by the Climate Justice Alliance, a core member of the BEA.
Honor the network’s democratic decision-making and understand that these kind of processes take time and require in-person, authentic relationship building to be truly inclusive and responsive. For more do’s and don’ts for how to approach this in historically under-resourced, marginalized communities, check out NCRP’s As the South Grows series of reports.
Contribute to the burgeoning BEA Fund to better resource grassroots groups that are advancing community-based solutions to the ecological crisis. The Fund’s grants will be decided by the real experts: grassroots organizers. To delve into the “why” and “how” of equitable community-led grantmaking, check out NCRP’s Pass the Reins webinar and our recent issue of Responsive Philanthropy.

Funders can play important roles in social movements, providing resources, peer support and sector organizing. By engaging in the work of organizations like the BEA and NCRP, grantmakers can practice more respectful relationships with grassroots groups and generate a culture of “true accountability” throughout the sector.

Caitlin Duffy is senior associate for learning and engagement at the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP). Follow @NCRP, @DuffyInDC and @BEA4Impact on Twitter, and stay tuned for more reflections and recommendations from the BEA at www.bea4impact.org. You can find live tweets from the Just Transition Forum using #JTForum2018.

Thank you to Doyle Canning and Jennifer Near of the BEA and Samantha Harvey of EDGE Funders for their support with this post.

Photo courtesy of Building Equity and Alignment for Impact.

However, some observers criticized the organization under her leadership. Aaron Dorfman, president of the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy, said the council’s importance has declined in recent years due in part to its reluctance to advocate for policies that directly affect the communities foundations serve, even if it means alienating some members with different political views. “I’m not at all sure that a big-tent, keep-everyone-happy approach will work,” Dorfman said.

Read the entire article in The Chronicle of Philanthropy (paywall).

Today we join FCCP’s Funders Census Initiative, United Philanthropy Forum and other philanthropy serving organizations around the country in asking our members and supporters to commit to a fair and accurate census.

“Census Day,” April 1, 2020, is now less than two years away and the time to act is now!

More than $600 billion annually in federal assistance to states, localities and families is distributed based on census data. Yet historically, the census has missed disproportionate numbers of people of color, young children and the rural and urban poor, leading to inequality in political power and in access to public funding and private investment for these communities. Going into 2020, additional communities, including immigrants and refugees, unmarried women and the LGBTQ community are at risk of being missed.

We know the census matters to the issues and communities you care about. For example:

Kids

Did you know that children under age five are the most likely of all age groups to be undercounted? In 2010, the undercount rate for young children was 4.6 percent, and more than 2.2 million in this age group were not included in the census results.

Communities of color

Did you know that Latinos, Asian Americans and Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders, African Americans, American Indians and Alaska Natives have been undercounted for decades, disadvantaging their families, communities and neighborhoods?

Healthy communities

Of that $600 billion, census data guide the distribution of billions for programs focused on ensuring healthy communities: $312 billion in Medicaid dollars, $69 billion to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), $64 billion in Medicare Part B dollars, $11 billion to the National School Lunch Program and $11 billion to the State Children’s Health Insurance Programs (S-CHIP), among others.

Education

Of that $600 billion, census data guide the distribution of billions for educational programs – $14 billion to Title I grants to local education agencies, $11 billion to the National School Lunch Program and $11 billion to special education grants (IDEA), among others.

Housing

Of that $600 billion, census data guide the distribution of billions for housing programs – $1 billion to Section 8 housing choice vouchers and $9 billion to Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments Programs, among others.

For more information on these and other federal programs, please see the Counting for Dollars analysis.

For more information on hard-to-count populations, including state-level data, please visit the Leadership Conference for Civil and Human Rights Census.

The 2020 Census is facing unprecedented challenges, and although philanthropy cannot and should not supplant the government’s responsibility to ensure a fair and accurate census, funder engagement in support of the census is more important than ever.

RELATED READING: