Turning Away from What No Longer Serves Us in the Non-Profit Sector
Many in the nonprofit sector have long questioned and vocalized the unsustainable, racist, and capitalist nature of the field. And while the non-profit sector isn’t unlike other sectors, it is perceived to operate differently. There is a perception that nonprofits operate with a stronger moral compass, without ego, and an obligation to center those most impacted. Black Youth Project captures this sentiment perfectly in the 2020 article How nonprofits gaslight you into the same self-sacrificing work as capitalist corporations, “Sadly, nonprofits often operate similarly, but the nefarious difference lies under the cloak of being “community-focused” or “progressive”; post-onboarding, a constant gaslighting ensues.”
This perception allows nonprofits organization and leaders to evade the same scrutiny given to for-profit businesses and corporations that are expected to be exploitative and solely interested in profit. Because of this, power-grabbing and resource hoarding by non-profits go largely unchecked. Largely, the ability to go unchecked is a privilege afforded to white-led non-profit organizations and leaders. Black, Indigenous, and People of Color-led and centered organizations are often over-scrutinized, undercapitalized, and heavily surveilled. If you’re looking for more on that see here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.
In the summer of 2020, in response to the racial uprisings emphasized by the murder of George Floyd, there were a barrage of racial justice statements, an influx of funding for Black-led and other people of color-led organizations, and then the “reckonings”. Left and right, organizations announced that they were “reckoning”, “awakening”, and chartering new ways forward.
Given these public displays of commitment, I was naively excited at the potential for significant shifts within the sector. And while I’m not surprised that it’s largely back to business as usual, I am baffled that few of these “reckonings” resulted in organizations closing their doors. I had an unrealistic expectation that long overdue introspection and humility would take place and lead to white organizations and leaders realizing that perhaps they shouldn’t be at the helm and that their methodologies weren’t relevant. Again, naive.
So here we are, still celebrating the 10-year, 25-year, and 50-year legacies and milestones of entrenched and problematic organizations and leaders. Milestones that are often viewed as a measure of success no matter how toxic and problematic the organization and its leadership have been. I mean, what is the significance of an organization’s fiftieth anniversary if there is no sign of innovation, cultural relevance, or leadership from the communities it seeks to support?
I’m curious what could happen if we have the same energy and joy for the ending of organizations. Would more organizations be incentivized to end? Would there be more space to acknowledge that a purpose or mission has been completed? Or, could we hold and honor that there were some wins while recognizing that those in power are no longer the ones to lead it?
What if instead of using every anniversary to “re-invent” “rebrand” and “restructure”, organizations and leaders reflected on if the organization should still exist?
I would love to see fewer twenty-five-year anniversaries and more celebrations of ending. Of organizations realizing they have served their purpose. Or, realized the purpose was never solving an issue impacting people.
Often conversations about power and privilege stall when it demands someone to give up power. It’s not the norm. It involves introspection and humility. And sure, we are still dealing with many issues that plagued us fifty or more years ago but shouldn’t that inspire us to radically shift who is supported and resourced to address the issues? Why aren’t we critical of the fact that organizations founded 100+ years ago by known racists are receiving more funding than those that are radically intersectional and composed of people who are most impacted by societal oppression?
Instead of making way for new leadership, ideas, and opportunities, organizations spend thousands on restructuring, rebranding, and revisioning. What if those funds were allocated to the many Black, Indigenous, and People of Color organizations and individuals that are already leading but need the resources that these archaic institutions receive without question?
With over 1.5 million registered nonprofits competing for funding and the majority of those being led by white folks, the dissolution of organizations and strategic redistribution of funding and social capital could provide space for Black, Indigenous, and People of Color in the field to scale their impact on a massive level.
Given the amount of intersecting crises – white supremacy, COVID-19, climate disaster, brazen attacks on fundamental rights - (to name a few) the need to turn away from what no longer serves us is urgent. I’m comforted and energized by the words of Mariame Kaba, abolitionist and organizer, “Let this radicalize you rather than lead you to despair”. I invite you to question everything and to look squarely into the void these glaring crises opened up and approach with curiosity and radical imagination. I leave you with some thoughts and questions to hold onto as you imagine a different way forward:
Please, don’t start another non-profit
Really, please don’t start another non-profit. Ask yourself, do I need to start another nonprofit? Or, is there a Black, Indigenous, and People of Color-led organization or collective that already exists and could be supported with resources, fundraising, and/or social capital?
Philanthropy is a tool, not a solution. How can we advocate for living wages, access to housing, and opportunities for folks to thrive in our society instead of relying on billionaire philanthropy to dig us out of a hole that it created?
Funders, reflect on your portfolios. How much of it is going to the same ol’ institutions that have been reporting the same results for decades? Challenge the reflexive nature of funding these without batting an eye or holding them accountable
Term Limits! What is the benefit of someone leading an organization for 10+ years?
Step Aside! Maybe you consider these questions and conclude that the organization still has a purpose but you’re not the one to lead it. Make way for new leadership. And no, that doesn’t mean joining the board and retaining a stronghold from a different position. Step aside and ensure the resources and infrastructure is in place to support new leadership.