Applying a Racial Equity and Inclusion Lens to Collective Impact
By: Janay Queen
Tags: Collective Impact, Philanthropy, Inclusion, Racial Equity, Data Science

Racial equity and inclusion are integral to collective impact’s core principles. Partnerships must make a commitment to applying a racial equity and inclusion lens throughout their work, in order to achieve equitable change for all people they seek to serve.

For far too long, systems’ leaders have taken a universal look at problems and have applied universal solutions without considering the unique needs of different groups of people — particularly people of color. In doing this, we miss critical opportunities to make a real difference in people’s lives and build more effective systems. In recent interviews with Steve Patrick (Aspen Institute), Michael McAfee (PolicyLink) and Ted Smith (City of Louisville), each agreed that aligning systems is a key strategy for creating enduring change. However, they cautioned that if structural racism and inequity are already woven into the fabric of our systems, then aligning systems only further perpetuates racism and inequity. Therefore, at the core of our collective impact work must be a commitment to racial equity and inclusion that is more deeply embedded in our solutions than racism is embedded in our problems. We believe that applying a racial equity lens is not an “add-on” to the work that can be applied “as needed.” It must be a driving factor in our practice, our process, our policy, and among our people.

A commitment to furthering racial equity should be central to our work. Racial equity is the outcome, and until we have figured out how to embed it in our work, we have to call race out explicitly in each of the collective impact principles below: a cross-sector table, a shared result, and feedback loops.

Equitable and Inclusive Cross-sector Table(s)

A cross-sector table made up of many partners is a critical element of collective impact. Doers and decision-makers from the public, private, nonprofit, and philanthropic sectors agree to hold themselves jointly accountable for achieving the population change they seek. When the composition of these tables does not reflect the diversity of the people they are aiming to impact, problematic assumptions inevitably become embedded in decisions about what problems to prioritize and how to best address them.

Having an inclusive cross-sector table is not about adding a few people of color to the mix so that the diversity box is checked. It is about making a genuine and consistent effort to include and engage leaders who are reflective of and rooted in the communities you aim to serve. Creating an equitable and inclusive table requires intentional effort to reach outside the typical social and professional circles from which partners are found.

Shared Result

The shared result is the enduring population change that a cross-sector table of leaders in a collective impact initiative agrees to achieve, and is measured against an indicator over 10+ years. To truly achieve a shared result, an initiative must focus their efforts across multiple outcome areas (e.g. education, health, housing, employment) and deliver on, or scale, a collection of strategies rather than a single program or intervention. The shared result is the driving force of collective impact, but requires patience and discipline to stay the course in an equitable and inclusive way. Two approaches are critical to success:

Disaggregating Data to Design Equitable Strategies

Since a disproportionate number of low-income people are people of color, there has been a lot of debate about whether or not race should be explicitly stated in shared results aimed at improving the lives of low-income people. Whether or not race is explicitly stated in the result, stopping at “all” when it comes to data and strategy design will jeopardize your partnership’s ability to develop targeted interventions that maximize your resources. Take our Integration Initiative site partners in San Francisco:

In San Francisco, their shared result is that over 1,500 former public housing households thrive in racially, economically, and socially inclusive communities.

To ensure they achieve this shared result equitably, San Francisco is disaggregating their data by race and ethnicity. This approach allows them to design strategies that raise the bar for all low-income families while also eliminating disparities among racial/ethnic groups.

Theo Miller, one of the co-directors for the initiative, said, “I can solve problems for low-income people in San Francisco and at the end of the day, still have no black people left.”

His statement is powerful in that it speaks directly to structural racism embedded in our institutions, and why our attempts to be race-neutral rarely have race-neutral outcomes. In order to achieve equity for all low-income families in San Francisco, they need to disaggregate the data to understand the unique conditions and progress for African-Americans, Asian-Americans, European Americans, Hispanic-Americans, etc. Disaggregating the data allows us to understand the magnitude of the problem for each group, and thereby develop more targeted and effective interventions.

Commitment to Behavior Change

Each member of the cross-sector table must also commit to working differently in order to truly achieve a shared result. Even as we are attacking big, seemingly intractable problems like structural racism and poverty, change begins with checking our personal biases, understanding how we contribute to racial inequities and exclusion, and holding our cross-sector table partners accountable to doing the same. It requires members of collective impact initiatives to create space to stay in open dialogue, to learn, understand and grow. As each individual builds his or her muscle for greater awareness and changed behavior, the cross-sector table of partners becomes stronger collectively and better able to influence systems and their leaders. The domino effect will ultimately bolster our ability to dismantle structural racism and lay a new, equitable and inclusive foundation upon which our systems can exist.

The key for the changed behavior in a collaborative arrangement is trust and relationship building, which we’ve written about in a number of previous blogs. A cross-sector table of partners must engage with one another to reinforce shared identity, develop connective tissue, and build strong relationships that imbue trust and support as they embark upon the collective impact journey of risk, reward, failures and successes.

Feedback Loops that Signal Progress Toward Your Shared Result

The feedback loop is a process that decision makers use to evaluate progress toward their shared result. Using data to learn “what works, what doesn’t work, and why” is critical to ensuring that we have the right strategies in place and we are executing them with fidelity. Simply put, data is information, and may be used at multiple levels and in multiple ways.

To begin, we must first understand the population condition and determine ways to monitor it. As we see trends emerge in the data, we need to conduct a root cause analysis to understand why. Take the cross-sector table of partners in San Francisco’s Integration Initiative who want over 1,500 former public housing households to thrive in racially, economically, and socially inclusive communities. To understand the current condition for low-income families and track progress toward the shared result, they conducted a root cause analysis on indicators around median household income, neighborhood diversity, life expectancy, (minority-owned) firms with paid employees, and percent of the population with a B.A. or higher.

It is crucial to understand the “why?” behind what the data is telling you. Why do those strategies work — or not — to move the needle on outcomes? For these households to thrive, we know that multiple parts of the system need to change: conditions for the families, communities, and region. To change these conditions, root cause analysis can help us take a serious look at the impact of structural inequities and systemic racism that impedes systems change. Feedback loops should not start and end with population data. Rather, feedback loops should be a part of the way members of a cross-sector table hold one another accountable and move the work forward. Understanding the landscape at a population level informs the strategies, activities, and policies that we choose to intervene on behalf of people and systems. Feedback loops should also monitor the performance of strategies to ensure that we are delivering quality services, products, information, etc.

The only way to truly understand the story behind the data is to engage with community members about their lived experiences. Too often, partnerships see services not utilized and make assumptions about why, or worse, blame the community for not “caring to make improvements” because they are not grounded in the cultural and historical context of the people they aim to serve. If racial equity and inclusion are built into the foundation of feedback loops, then our journey to the shared result and commitment to behavior change — although challenging — will be authentic and ultimately successful.

Racial equity and inclusion are integral to each of collective impact’s core principles. If a collective impact partnership is not applying a racial equity and inclusion lens throughout its work, then it is in grave danger of doing different things, but doing them in the same old way.

Angela Glover Blackwell says, “equity is the superior growth model.”

Focusing on communities who have traditionally been left behind in the quest for economic stability and opportunity is beneficial for all, and required for real and enduring change.