DIVERSITY IN ACTION:Strategies with Impact

In collaboration with

FOREWORD

“Diversity in Action: Strategies with Impact” is the third monograph in a series of publicationson diversity and inclusion made possible through generous support from the Charles Stewart MottFoundation, a long-time supporter of increasing racial equity in society.

This monograph features foundation CEO and trustee reflections on the impact of a broad array ofdiversity and inclusiveness efforts. They address many of the issues foundation leaders face every dayincluding how to ensure that your grant resources have the most impact possible. The authors haveidentified diversity and inclusion as important tools in advancing their organizational missions andprogram goals. Their strategies range from institutional issues such as board development and staffingto community outreach and redefining grantmaking success.

As the field of philanthropy continues to identify new ways to fulfill donor intent and to meet granteeand community needs, diversity and inclusion have become very important assets for many foundationsand grantmakers. By highlighting the work of colleagues who are making progress in advancing mean-ingful social change, we hope to encourage others to continue to improve their voluntary efforts as well.

In addition to the practices of colleagues from within our sector, we can also look to other sectorssuch as business and government. These two sectors are arguably ahead of philanthropy today in thediversification and inclusion of its workforce. As we seek to be leaders of innovation, and as wecontinue our commitment to serving the common good, it is important that we continue to improveinclusive practices within our sector.

Although positioning your foundation for greater impact amidst our current economic uncertainty ischallenging, our nation’s economy and the global marketplace will rebound. Now is an opportune timeto consider how to bring many diverse voices and perspectives to the table to advance your work as wecontinue to set high expectations toward:

• recruiting the best and brightest talent who possess deep and specific knowledge aboutthe communities you seek to serve;

• growing internal talent and the inclusion of next generation voices; and

• improving organizational effectiveness throughout every facet of your grantmaking andoperations.

Furthermore, we applaud those featured here and the work of others who help to advance the field withpersistence and commitment, and who have the generosity of spirit to share their successes and chal-lenges with their colleagues.

Melissa A. Berman Steve Gunderson Michael LitzPresident & CEO President & CEO President & CEORockefeller Philanthropy Council on Foundations Forum of RegionalAdvisors Associations of Grantmakers

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .i

A Durable Commitment to Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2The San Francisco FoundationSandra R. Hernández & Kurt C. Organista

Philanthropy and Indian Country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4Northwest Area FoundationKevin F. Walker

Diversity Cannot be Twittered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6JPMorgan Chase FoundationKimberly B. Davis

Diverse by Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8The Chicago Community TrustTerry Mazany

Indian Givers: Formalizing Centuries of Philanthropy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10First Nations Development InstituteMichael E. Roberts

A Family-Community Partnership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12Mary Reynolds Babcock FoundationDavid Dodson & Mary Mountcastle

About the Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

©2009 Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors

The San Francisco Foundation has been identify-ing, cultivating, and amplifying civic leadership as amatter of mission for more than 25 years. We believethat reservoirs of social assets exist in all of ourneighborhoods and communities—even those withsignificant disparities of opportunity and challengingcircumstances. These leaders are working on behalfof the public good without expectation of accolades.But when these community risk-takers are givensupport, we believe they become beacons of changeleveraging the power of civic engagement. Suchconviction comes from our board of trustees, pro-gram officers and staff, many with these very samepersonal backgrounds.

San Francisco’s community leaders come in manyforms—newcomers, congregations, elders, youth,single mothers, and early career professionals. Ourfoundation has been reaching out to them andgrowing this leadership through two programs re-fined and fine-tuned over and over again since theearly 1980s. While one program grows leadership atits very neighborhood core, the other grows leader-ship by incubating it from within our institution.

Building Leaders to Build BridgesThrough the Koshland Civic Unity Fellowship Pro-

gram, The San Francisco Foundation has identifiedand supported the work of more than 300 fellows—natural and accomplished leaders from more than

20 neighborhoods. The neighborhoods are not onlycharacterized by their high rates of low-income fam-ilies and dramatic demographic shifts, but also bytheir high degree of resident activism. The social as-sets of these neighborhoods are on the brink of ex-pansion as their leaders become “bridge builders” togovernment, philanthropy and the corporate sector.This program deliberately enlarges their networksand their collective civic problem solving, and inturn, these grassroots leaders offer the foundation aconstant flow of information. What we learn fromthem helps shape our program priorities and the al-location of our resources. As an endowed programof the foundation, we have invested over $12 millionin support of these fellows and their neighborhoodprojects since inception.

In 1982, the foundation also launched the Multi-cultural Fellowship Program with a challenge grantfrom the Ford Foundation. Our board and staff sovalued this program, we not only rapidly institution-alized it, but further honed its strategies and in-creased our financial support of the program overtime with the advice of several dedicated alumni fel-lows themselves. The program invites early careerprofessionals to work deeply in one of the founda-tion’s grantmaking areas for two years. It also offersthe fellows formal leadership training, career coun-seling, mentorship and meaningful decision-makingopportunities. Developed as a pipeline for future2

A DURABLE COMMITMENTTO LEADERSHIP:THE SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATIONSandra R. Hernández, M.D. and Kurt C. Organista, Ph.D.

The San Francisco Foundation’s president and board member share theorganization’s strategy of investing in local leaders in the community and atthe institution to maximize diversity’s impact on program effectiveness.

public service leaders, more than 55 professionalshave been a Multicultural Fellow, a vast majority ofwhom have gone on to leadership roles in philan-thropy, municipal government, or at large regionalor national non-governmental organizations.

The impact of the fellows on our foundation alsohas been enormous. The fellows bring to our foun-dation their rich set of experiences, ideas, and freshperspectives increasing our cultural competency,and that of the civil society organizations wherealumni later serve and lead. Many fellows have de-signed and launched projects in collaboration withour staff that have become new programs here and

elsewhere. Annually, the foundation invests over$200,000 in the Multicultural Fellowship Program—a worthwhile investment not only for our founda-tion, but also for the entire Bay Area and beyond.

To understand the durable commitment of ourfoundation to cultivate diverse leadership, however,one must appreciate the evolution of our gover-nance structure. Created initially as a "communitytrust," the foundation was founded more than 60years ago by Dan Koshland, Sr., a highly successfulbusinessman for whom the Civic Unity FellowshipProgram is named. He had a profound confidence inthe power of individuals to address stubborn socialchallenges and he championed civic participation asa necessary strategy to succeed at this. But the board

itself began with only seven trustees all appointedby institutional leaders such as the president of Stan-ford University or the chair of the League of WomenVoters. To tap the total range of talents and exper-tise available to us throughout our region, the boardknew that it would have to expand in number andcomposition.

The board then took extraordinary measures toachieve this end by transforming itself from an ex-ternally appointed board of a trust to a public ben-efit charity with the power to appoint its ownleaders—individuals who would collectively rep-resent our entire community. Now an 11-member

board, The San Francisco Foundationhas one of the most diverse boardsamong all foundations across thecountry.

But we still have much to learn andabsorb, and then to translate into effec-tive solutions. Therefore, our board andstaff continue to take advantage of theBay Area’s diversity to help us improveour programs by inviting smart leadersfrom many walks of life to come to-

gether as “leadership extenders” for our key pro-grams. For instance, the Koshland Committee iscomprised of members of the founder’s legacy fam-ily, former Koshland Fellows, scholars from UCBerkeley, and expert nonprofit leaders. Not only isit responsible for oversight of the Koshland Fellow-ships, but it also approves the final selection ofneighborhoods and fellows.

The San Francisco Foundation embraces diverseleadership as a necessary prerequisite to effectiveprograms, policy design, and system change. Wewitness, invest in, and live this conviction daily, andproudly continue to draw strength and inspirationfrom our diversity.

3

The impact of the fellows on ourfoundation has been enormous. Thefellows bring experiences, ideas, andfresh perspectives increasing our

cultural competency.

An evocative photograph hangs in the St. Paul,Minnesota headquarters of the Northwest AreaFoundation. Louis W. Hill, the organization’s founderand son of railroad pioneer James J. Hill, stands inthe mountains of Montana with members of theBlackfeet nation. One of the Blackfeet men is point-ing upward, and Mr. Hill gazes toward the heights.The image evokes a spirit of cooperation and ad-venture—but so much is left out of that picture. Inthe century since it was taken, manyAmericans have participated in an af-fluence that remains the envy of theworld, while Native Americans havesuffered the most severe poverty ratesin the United States.

Our foundation serves the eight stateswhere the Great Northern Railwayonce operated—magnificent countryincluding portions of the Great Plains,Rocky Mountain West, and PacificNorthwest. This railroad running through Blackfeetcountry played a crucial role in opening the North-west to settlement and economic development—butthe railroad’s progress was not of, by, or for the Nativepeople whose lands it crossed. For our foundation,therefore, funding in Indian Country is a matter of jus-tice and common sense. Today, Native poverty ratesrange from 20 to 50 percent; the poverty rate for Na-tive Americans is typically two to three times higherthan for whites. Native concerns have informed our

thinking throughout our 75-year history and remaincentral to our mission—to help the people, organiza-tions and communities of our region reduce povertyand achieve sustainable prosperity.

Although there are certainly funders who believephilanthropy ought to address the devastating inter-generational poverty and other challenges on reser-vations and in urban Indian communities, the search

for effective ways to engage these communities canbe discouraging. Native communities are repletewith evidence of failed philanthropic and economicdevelopment undertakings by outsiders, and we atthe Northwest Area Foundation have had our shareof failures as well as successes.

A History of Lessons LearnedApproximately one-third of our grant dollars over

the past decade has been deployed for Native-re-4

Native communities are replete withevidence of failed philanthropicundertakings by outsiders, and wehave had our share of failures as wellas successes.

PHILANTHROPY ANDINDIAN COUNTRY:NORTHWEST AREA FOUNDATION

Kevin F. Walker

The president of the Northwest Area Foundation shares lessons learned from its75-year history of working with Indian Country.

lated projects. Among our largest funding commit-ments are grants that established the Indian LandTenure Foundation and launched multi-facetedpoverty reduction projects on the Cheyenne River,Turtle Mountain, and Lummi reservations. This com-mitment to Indian Country is demonstrated by ourstaffing practices as well, and reflected around ourboard table. In short, we’ve learned to be intentionalabout integrating the perspectives of American Indi-ans into the governance, staffing, and funding pat-terns of the foundation.

We cannot offer a road map, but we can share afew basic lessons.

Recognize the diversity within Indian Country.There are nearly 600 federally recognized tribes inthe U.S., including 74 in our region alone. Each is asovereign nation with a unique culture. Urban areascan be home to members of hundreds of tribes. One

of our foundation’s missteps in recent years was tospur the development of a single anti-poverty strat-egy for urban Indian communities all across our re-gion. This was a misguided effort that took too littleaccount of the diversity of these communities.

Don’t lead with money. Where need is so pro-found, the funder who arrives with big promises anda bulging wallet will spark intense competition forcontrol of the resources. Acting on this lesson istough for foundations, because money is central towhat we have to offer. Nonetheless, it is imperativeto structure philanthropic engagement in IndianCountry in such a way that the communities’ assetsand aspirations, not the distorting power of the dol-lar, drive the activity.

Rethink the “three sectors” paradigm. All threesectors offer compelling opportunities for philan-thropic investment in Indian Country—if we pro-ceed with patience and take the time to gain culturalcompetence. These “sectors,” however, are not dis-tinct but overlapping, with the same individuals andfamilies often playing major roles in tribal govern-ment, nonprofits and business enterprises. It is cru-cial to engage tribal nations with respect, but makeno mistake: the political winds in tribal governmentschange fast and can scuttle even the best-laid plans.The nonprofit sector in Indian Country, meanwhile,is less robust than elsewhere, but can provide a vitalopening for partnership and investment in capacity-building. Finally, Native-owned private enterprise onmost reservations is minimal, but that can change.

Practice humility. Arriving on a reservation or inan urban Indian community with hard-and-fast pre-scriptions for how to make things better simply

won’t work. Many Native people have suf-fered miserably in urban areas for decades.Reservations, meanwhile, face problemswhose source is as obvious as it is over-whelming—the dispossession of indige-nous nations throughout the history ofEuropean settlement on this continent, aprocess we are still living. Effective philan-thropy must engage, listen, learn, andadapt, not dictate.

Making a positive difference in IndianCountry is not easy—but it is entirely pos-

sible, just as it is possible to envision an America inwhich our first nations are thriving. The challengefor foundations is to help Native Americans leveragetheir human, cultural, and natural resources to makelasting change. To invest in the future of AmericanIndians is one of the most exciting imperatives fac-ing philanthropy—whose wealth, like the wealth ofAmerican society in general, is profoundly entwinedwith Native poverty and struggle.

5

We have learned to be intentionalabout integrating the perspectives

of American Indians into thegovernance, staff, and fundingpatterns of the foundation.

Information has become so immediate and plenti-ful that we all seem to have accepted the notion thateverything can be characterized using little morethan a tidy form of shorthand. But diversity cannotbe “Twittered.” Here at JPMorgan Chase, we under-stand that if we are to benefit from diversity’s contri-butions, we need to respect and embrace itscomplexity and challenges.

Serving the Global Main StreetWhile New York is home to our worldwide head-

quarters, which is a critically importantmarket to our franchise, our corporatereach and responsibility goes far be-yond the five boroughs. JPMorganChase employs 223,000 people in 60countries around the world, and wehave a very real “Main Street” em-ployee presence in 48 of the UnitedStates. Our customers, employees and neighborspresent us with complex and often unique chal-lenges reflecting the vast number and variety ofcities and communities we serve across the globe.

It takes a team of professionals, with feet on thestreet and ears to the ground, building a deep under-standing of issues that are most important to theircommunities, and operating within a disciplined andconsistent global framework.

It takes diversity. Racial, cultural, and intellectualdiversity.

While all of the communities we serve certainlyshare some common challenges in this economic en-vironment—rising home foreclosures and unem-ployment, for example—their market dynamics andcultures are vastly different. Our company, and byextension, the JPMorgan Chase Foundation team, isbuilt around a group of professionals who bring di-verse backgrounds and thinking to our work to helpus gain access to these differentiated communities.Diversity isn’t just fair; it makes business sense.

And, just as our team is built around this notion ofdiversity, our philanthropic strategy focuses on thegoal of creating stable and healthy communities thatare defined by diversity—whether the metric is eth-nicity, race, gender, thought or economics.

Great Solutions Take DiversityAt Spelman College in Atlanta, JPMorgan Chase is

the lead sponsor of its Women of Color conferenceseries, designed to stimulate diverse dialogue, pro-vide professional development and learning oppor-tunities, and to challenge participants to be activeleaders in all of their communities. For the 300 par-6

Our team members bring diversebackgrounds to help us gain accessto these differentiated communities.

DIVERSITY CANNOT BE TWITTERED:JPMORGAN CHASE FOUNDATION

Kimberly B. Davis

JPMorgan Chase Foundation’s president explains that maximizing the value of diversityrequires sustained focus and intentionality.

ticipants in this year’s conference, the use of socialnetworking was encouraged as a way to communi-cate with community leaders and elected officials tobuild coalitions.

In Columbus, Ohio, the firm is connecting grantsto two separate organizations in an effort to provideeconomic and job readiness opportunities to the res-idents of a diverse, high-poverty neighborhood. Inaddition to supporting General Education Develop-ment (GED) test preparation classes and examina-tions at a local settlement house, JPMorgan Chase isunderwriting tuition credits to enable the graduatesof the GED program to attend Columbus State Com-munity College and work toward a professional cer-

tification or degree. More than 10 percent of theadults who have earned their GEDs among the firsttwo classes of the program’s graduates have takenadvantage of the opportunity to pursue further studyat Columbus State.

Granted, it is neither simple nor expedient. But, Ibelieve it is the most responsible way for our firm toinvest in the diverse communities we serve. In bothof these cases, our grantmakers’ deep knowledge ofthe needs of the local residents is complemented bythe diverse perspectives of our national team as thegrants were presented and molded via our founda-tion’s national roundtable process.

The Challenge of Relevant DiversityI have always felt that diverse leadership teams rec-

ognize and overcome problems differently. Like-minded teams may get stuck on the same issues in thesame way.

University of Michigan professor Scott Page writesin The Difference: How the Power of Diversity CreatesBetter Groups, Firms, Schools and Societies that theperformance of diverse teams exceeds that of like-minded groups. Diversity yields stronger outcomes.However, Dr. Page contends, “Being diverse in a rel-evant way often proves hard. Being diverse and ir-relevant is easy.”* That’s why it is important to getbeyond the obvious definitions of diversity and re-

cruit and develop talent whose diversitymay be defined in more subtle ways.

The causes and potential solutions of Ap-palachian poverty can differ dramaticallyfrom the challenges of urban poverty. Thepeople struggling through both scenariosmay look the same, but there are importantdifferences in how philanthropies and non-profit organizations can work together to al-leviate their unique suffering.

The causes of the foreclosure crisis in theindustrial Midwest, largely related to weak-

ening economic conditions and rising unemploy-ment, differ dramatically from the factors that havedriven housing challenges in California, Nevada andArizona, where a rapid devaluation of home priceshas left thousands of homeowners owing more inmortgage debt than their property is worth.

These issues and solutions can’t be articulated in140 characters or less. It takes a deep-rooted under-standing and a diverse team of professionals to drivepositive change in our communities.

7

Diverse leadership teamsrecognize and overcome problemsdifferently. Like-minded teams

may get stuck on the sameissues in the same way.

*Page, Scott, E.The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press 2007, p.25.

The founding ideal of a community foundation isto reflect and represent the communities it servesand meet the most pressing needs of those commu-nities. Community foundations are inherently thepublic face of philanthropy, and by definition, thatface is diverse. While throughout our field’s 95-yearhistory we have been imperfect in the realization ofthis ideal, like our country’s enduringpursuit of democracy, we continueon a path toward a “more perfectunion.”

As the country’s second oldestcommunity foundation, our tribute toThe Chicago Community Trust’s her-itage is a display of photographs ofeach board member over our 94-yearhistory. Arranged in chronological order, the photo-graphs provide a visual timeline of the board’s firstwomen, African Americans, and Latinos. These pho-tos do not tell us whether individuals were gay ordisabled, professed one religious tradition or an-other, or whether they came from modest back-grounds. But this record does reflect the slow andsteady progress of our society and our institutionwith regard to inclusion.

The Tipping PointThe Trust reached a tipping point in the 1990s with

the inclusion of new members who were thoughtfuland expressive of our need to consciously reflectand represent the diversity of metropolitan Chicago.And after the turn of this new century the Trust

gained the right combination of board and executiveleadership to elevate diversity as a priority for thefoundation. The first step was to learn and under-stand. A combination of seeking best practices andengaging with consultants to gain the knowledgeand training provided an important starting point.

Our institutional role as change agent was crystal-

lized with the recognition that we could and shouldlead by example. We began to look at how we ad-dress and relate to our community as an institution,how we allocate funds to our programs and how werecruit new board members and staff. Besides in-creasing board and staff diversity, we conducted var-ious studies about how we serve specificpopulations such as those with disabilities, the grow-ing Latino community, as well as other communityassessments—commonplace practices for commu-nity foundations. These efforts culminated in formalpolicies and practices communicated internally andexternally so we hold ourselves accountable to thegoals we have set.

8

Besides increasing board and staffdiversity, we conducted variousstudies about how we serve specificpopulations.

DIVERSE BY DEFINITION:THE CHICAGO COMMUNITY TRUST

Terry Mazany

The president of the nation’s second oldest community foundationdiscusses the need to reach out to a rapidly changing demographic to fulfilla community-focused mandate.

Leadership begins at the board level and our boardis committed to reflecting our community’s diversityin its membership. Every available opening is a newopportunity to enrich our board’s diversity. Theboard’s commitment translates into continuous at-tention to diversity throughout the organization’s pri-orities and operations—and as president, I have thebenefit of this clear and consistent guidance.

Diverse DonorsOur commitment to diversity and inclusion is also

expressed in our relationships with our donors.Donor diversity is particularly imperative as ourcountry, following many of our cities includingChicago, will become “majority minority” by mid-

century. We cannot afford to be constrained by afoundation model predicated on the wealth of a nar-row range of local residents. Our entire communitybenefits from an ever expanding pool of philanthro-pists who engage in highly effective giving.

To this end, our board members saw a need andopportunity to formally engage civic leaders fromChicago’s diverse communities. In 2003, we began or-ganizing donor vehicles to promote and support thepractices of philanthropy in communities that havebeen historically excluded from institutional philan-thropy, to build endowed resources for the specificneeds of these communities, and support grantmak-ing strategies that could reach deep into communitiesto find the promising new organizations and nextgeneration leaders.

Building on the leadership stature and social net-works of our diverse board members, we invitedcivic leadership from the African American andLatino communities to organize advisory boards andestablish the African American Legacy and NuestroFuturo, the Latino Heritage Fund. The Trust’s boarddemonstrated its commitment by awarding thesegroups $200,000 per year for five years for grant-making directed by these community boards, untilthe endowments have grown sufficiently for self-sus-taining grant programs.

Progress Means DiversityA true measure of our progress, however, has not

just been the quantification and documentation ofour diversity achieve-ments—it is found inthe transformation ofhow we work andwhat we value. It isembodied in thesense of inadequacyand dissatisfaction ifwe were to find our-selves with insuffi-cient diversity. The

key to building our board, staff and donor diversityhas been this dogged determination. Our responseto “we couldn’t find any qualified candidates” hasbeen to look for failings in our recruitment practices,and to sometimes start over without viewing thedelay as an annoyance or inconvenience.

Community foundations have an obligation basedon the implied social contract of our charter with thedonors and communities we serve. We are, by defini-tion, place based; and we are, by definition, requiredto respond to meet the changing needs of the placewe serve. It follows that to meet these changing needswe must both represent and reflect the diversity of theplace we serve.

9

Donor diversity is particularly imperative.We cannot afford to be constrained by a

foundation model predicated on the wealthof a narrow range of local citizens.

The case for Indian-directed and controlled philan-thropy is summed up by American Indian and Amer-ican author, poet, theologian, and historian, VineDeloria Jr., in his 1969 book Custer Died for YourSins, “The American public feels more comfortablewith the mythical Indians of stereotype-land whowere always THERE. These Indians are fierce, theywear feathers and grunt. Mostof us don’t fit this idealized fig-ure since we grunt only whenovereating, which is seldom.To be an Indian in modernAmerican society is in a veryreal sense to be unreal andahistorical.”*

When contemplating Ameri-can Indians in America’s phil-anthropic world, it is veryunreal as there is little evi-dence that Indians exist at all. Foundation grants toAmerican Indians amount to less than one-half of onepercent of philanthropic giving. Compounding this,much of the money given in the name of Indians andIndian programs is actually being given to non-Indiancontrolled museums and universities, limiting Indianparticipation to objects of study.

Formalizing Tribal PhilanthropyTribal nations, never comfortable with their hands

out, are stepping up to formalize their centuries ofphilanthropic giving. As they do so, however, Indian

Country must shed a great deal of ‘colonial’ baggagein order to build these institutions. First, tribes mustmaximize their traditions of generosity and put theminto action to improve Indian communities. Second,tribes need to build hybrid philanthropic structuresthat link their assets with their needs and support thevisions they create for themselves. Furthermore, Na-

tive funds must continue to look for partners withmainstream philanthropies who embrace this empow-erment dynamic.

Ironically, outdated stereotypes of Indians inca-pable of managing their own assets have now beensupplanted by a new stereotype of rich gaming tribesgreedily keeping casino riches to themselves. Factsrefute this. Out of the 367 gaming tribes in 2004, the55 largest facilities accounted for nearly 70 percentof total Indian gaming revenues. We know, however,that these 'riches' are not that large in the greater con-

10

The very process of building our ownphilanthropic institutions demonstratesthe way in which Indians are operatingfrom a culturally-based voice of strength,assuredness and accomplishment.

INDIAN GIVERS: FORMALIZINGCENTURIES OF PHILANTHROPYFIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTEMichael E. Roberts

As philanthropy in Indian Country moves towards institutional vehicles, thepresident of First Nations Development Institute argues for community-drivenand community-owned structures.

text of the need and past obligations to Indian Coun-try. If all of the profits from Indian gaming were dis-tributed on a per capita basis, Indians living inreservation communities would reach a per capitaincome of less than 50 percent of the average personin the United States. This unfortunate myth of Indianriches perpetuates a grave injustice to Indian people,who continue to lag all other racial and ethnicgroups in the United States on every metric of eco-nomic and housing security.

Because they are sovereign governments, tribes maydesign, operate, and regulate their own charitable-giv-ing programs through a broad range of organizationalstructures. Indian philanthropic vehicles generally fallinto three primary categories: Natural Tribal Grant-making Foundations, Formal Tribal GrantmakingFoundations, and Formal Native Nonprofit Grantmak-ing Organizations.

The first type of foundation, a government programof a sovereign nation, includes Internal Revenue CodeSection 7871 organizations, and is not regulated bythe IRS under its better known 501(c)(3) code. Thevariety of the governance and grantmaking structuresfor this type of foundation range in formality. The sec-ond type of foundation, also affiliated with a specifictribe, opts for recognition under the 501(c)(3) codeof the IRS to facilitate donor contributions and toshield the foundation from potential tribal politics.The third type, not directly affiliated with a specifictribe, addresses an array of Native communities bothon and off reservations. All of these Native grantmak-ing entities offer grants to support Native-defined is-sues and causes and often include awards to localmainstream organizations.++

Our Philanthropy on Our TermsFirst Nations Development Institute represents a

Native-controlled public foundation. Our strategicgrantmaking is careful to honor tribal governments,as well as Native nonprofits, and gives grants to both.

More than money, First Nations provides significanttechnical assistance to new or emerging Native non-profit groups to build their capacity. Most impor-tantly, First Nations is dedicated to fundingcommunity-driven programs, ones that are conceivedof, managed by, and created for Native people. Afterthree decades of successful implementation, First Na-tions believes in the critical added value provided bya Native-led foundation.

Formalized Indian philanthropy today, while still inits infancy, is looking to build effective grantmakingfoundations, on tribes’ own terms. Today there areover 54 of these groups in the U.S. that are workingto be value-centered and responsive to the Nativecommunities they serve. Increasingly, with the helpof technical assistance from First Nations, they aredemonstrating sound grantmaking practices and rigor-ous financial management. This will continue into thefuture.

Vine Deloria, Jr. said it best when he noted that,“Indian people are re-examining themselves in aneffort to redefine a new social structure for their peo-ple.” The very process of building our own philan-thropic institutions demonstrates the way in whichIndians are operating from a culturally-based voiceof strength, assuredness and accomplishment ratherthan in a moral voice of pity, helplessness, and res-cue. This is where American Indians must and willexist in America’s philanthropic reality, and de-serve an equal seat at the philanthropy tablewith other mainstream grantmakers.

11

*Deloria, Vine Jr. Custer Died for Your Sins. New York: The Macmillan Company. 1969. p. 10.++In 2007, First Nations Development Institute published “Integrated Asset-Building Strategies for Reservation-Based Communities.” Chapter Four of this publication exam-ines Native Philanthropy in depth, and presents possibly the best research on the topic. To download this publication, please visit www.firstnations.org

As longtime trustees (one family and one not) ofthe Mary Reynolds Babcock Foundation, we havewitnessed an evolution in the foundation’s rationaleand strategy for diversifying our board to advanceour mission—to help people and places in the Southmove out of poverty.

Since our founding in 1953, the board has soughtnon-family members who could bring expertise andvarying life experiences to help round outthe board’s collective perspective. In fact,Mary Babcock’s husband, Charles, re-cruited educator and urban planner PaulYlvisaker onto the board after our founda-tion partnered with the Ford Foundationon a groundbreaking anti-poverty initiativein the 1960s. He recognized Paul as one ofphilanthropy’s great thought leaders andrespected his incisive mind. And so startedour history of listening to and engaging outsidevoices.

From Morality to StrategyInitially, the foundation’s commitment to diversity

was more general and not strategic, stemming per-haps from a sense of moral purpose not necessarilytied to advancing our programs. But through deepdiscussions and strategic planning processes over thepast 15 years, we began to understand that there wasa mismatch between the agenda we had framed andthe diversity of experience sitting around the table. A

leader in the region providing feedback on our newprogram in 1994 stated bluntly, “You can’t succeed atthis work [of addressing the barriers that race andclass pose for poverty reduction] and look the wayyou do.”

He was right, but we have learned that there aremany talents and perspectives needed on a board.We needed to bolster skills and experiences that con-

tribute to our understanding of the pathways out ofpoverty in our region while at the same time assuringsteady and astute governance of the foundation asan organization. Besides adding racial, ethnic andsocio-economic diversity to our board, we also bal-ance family/non-family, generational, geographical,professional, and communications styles to ensure aneffective board.

We have found that our greater diversity hasbrought deeper knowledge about our work and po-tential grantees. The rich perspectives and capabili-12

A leader in the region providingfeedback stated bluntly, “You can’tsucceed at this work and look theway you do.”

A FAMILY-COMMUNITYPARTNERSHIP:MARY REYNOLDS BABCOCK FOUNDATIONDavid Dodson and Mary Mountcastle

The Mary Reynolds Babcock Foundation, a family foundation, has seen thetangible benefits of bringing diverse perspectives from the community to the highestlevels of leadership in the foundation.

ties of an increasingly diverse board complement—and sometimes challenge—staff due diligence. Forinstance, one community-representative board mem-ber is a longtime resident of a low-wealth rural areaand a writer who has a keen ear for authenticitywhen reviewing proposals or meeting with grantees.

Her wise ability to hear the authentic voices of thecommunity has often driven the board to reconsidergrant recommendations. Another member broughta deep knowledge of strategic communications at atime when we were learning about how to increaseour effectiveness in that area.

In addition, our board members extend the capac-ity of our small staff to communicate our missionand program to potential grantees, potential partnersor existing funders in the region. Ultimately, ourcommitment to diversity on moral grounds yieldedimproved effectiveness in our grants especially aswe became laser-like in our focus on poverty overthe years.

Bringing the Community on BoardOur commitment to diversity has been an evo-

lution where each step has assiduously built ontraditions established by family members. First,the older generation of family members makes itclear through actions and voice that we are onefoundation board with shared responsibility for alldecisions—family and non-family distinctions areultimately immaterial. The entire board partici-pates in the discussion when “family” issues arisesuch as a “legacy” grant or an estate gifted to thefoundation.

Second, the foundation has built a culture of lis-tening and learning where no one “voice” carriesmore weight. We build learning sessions into boardmeetings on topics ranging from investments tocommunity issues and have activities such as an an-nual site visit to a cluster of grantees in various parts

of the region so that we all build ourshared knowledge.

Third, we have developed a shared lead-ership model between the board presidentand vice president and we rotate those po-sitions regularly between family and com-munity members. We also have clearconflict of interest policies so board and

staff are transparent about relationships withgrantees or vendors and absent from that decision-making process.

We do spend a great deal of thoughtful time onboard recruitment and nominations. Over the past15 years we developed a useful process to identifyprospective board members that were not previ-ously known to us. In addition to articulating pre-cisely the talents, experience and perspectivesneeded, we also communicate these needed attrib-utes to our networks of nonprofits and regionalleaders and invite them to submit nominations. Ourincreasingly diverse board and staff have alsowidened our recruitment network itself making thisprocess easier with time. All candidates are vettedthrough our board committee process ensuring “fit”with the existing group as well as commitment tothe foundation’s mission.

Time and energy are required for this effort tosucceed, but the investment is worthwhile. Ourgrantees, region and foundation have benefitedfrom the greater effectiveness resulting from ourcommitment to diversity and inclusion.

13

We developed a useful process toidentify board members that were

not previously known to us.

The San Francisco FoundationSandra R. Hernández, M.D., isCEO of The San Francisco Founda-tion, the community foundation ofthe Bay Area that has awardedgrants totaling more than $776 mil-lion over the past ten years. She isan assistant clinical professor atUCSF School of Medicine and

maintains an active clinical practice at San FranciscoGeneral Hospital in the AIDS clinic. Prior to becom-ing CEO of the Foundation, she served as the directorof public health for the City and County of San Fran-cisco. Hernández currently serves on the boards ofBlue Shield of California and Lucile Packard Chil-dren’s Hospital. Her prior affiliations include co-chairof San Francisco’s Universal Healthcare Council andPresident Clinton’s Advisory Commission on Con-sumer Protection and Quality in the Healthcare In-dustry. She is a graduate of Yale University, TuftsSchool of Medicine, and the John F. Kennedy Schoolof Government at Harvard University.

Kurt C. Organista, Ph.D., is associ-ate professor of social welfare atthe University of California, Berke-ley. He teaches courses on psy-chopathology, stress and coping,and social work practice withLatino populations. He is inter-ested in Latino health and mental

health, conducts research in the areas of HIV/AIDSprevention with Mexican/Latino migrant laborers,and is author of Solving Latino psychosocial andhealth problems: Theory, practice, and populations,published in 2007 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Hecurrently serves on the editorial boards of the Jour-nal of Ethnic and Cultural Diversity in Social Work,Hispanic Journal of the Behavioral Sciences, andAmerican Journal of Community Psychology, as wellas on the Latino Advisory Board for the CaliforniaState Office of AIDS. He was previously a memberof the Office of AIDS Research Advisory Council atthe National Institutes of Health.

Northwest Area FoundationKevin F. Walker is the presidentand CEO of the Northwest AreaFoundation. Providing strategic di-rection and executive leadership,he is spearheading the develop-ment of a new core strategy ofmaking grants to proven or prom-ising organizations doing effective

poverty reduction work in their communities or theregion. His extensive work with nonprofits and phi-lanthropies includes 13 years with the Charles Stew-art Mott Foundation, including nine years as head ofMott’s Pathways out of Poverty program. Most re-cently, he served as associate vice president for pro-grams at Mott, where he conducted strategicplanning, guided grantmaking and supervised eval-uation for approximately $50 million in grants an-nually. Walker has served on the boards of theAfterschool Alliance; Grantmakers for Children,Youth and Families; and Hispanics in Philanthropy.He has also been active on committees for the Coun-cil of Michigan Foundations. A graduate of HarvardUniversity and the University of Michigan, he is alsoa poet and book reviewer.

JPMorgan Chase FoundationKimberly B. Davis is managing di-rector of Global Philanthropy andpresident of the JPMorgan ChaseFoundation, where she overseesthe firm’s global philanthropic ac-tivities, employee volunteerismand strategic corporate programs.With over 28 years of experience

in the financial services industry, Davis has held awide range of responsibilities in both line and stafffunctions. The combination of her academic trainingand corporate experience has provided her with aunique set of skills that have enabled her to assumea diverse career. Davis is a trustee of Spelman Col-lege and the Kenan Institute at the University ofNorth Carolina-Chapel Hill. She is on the board of14

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce Business CivicLeadership Center and is a member of the ExecutiveLeadership Council, Jack and Jill of America and theLinks, Inc.

TheChicago CommunityTrustTerry Mazany is president andCEO of one of the nation’s largestcommunity foundations with assetsof more than $1.8 billion and grantmaking exceeding $100 millionthat annually benefits more thanone thousand not-for-profit organ-izations regionally. Prior to his ap-

pointment, he was the Trust’s chief operating officer.He serves on the boards of Windy City Harvest;Chicago High School for the Arts; and chairs theCommunity Foundations Leadership Team, repre-senting the nation’s 700 community foundations onthe Council on Foundations’ board. He has earneda Masters in Anthropology and a Masters in BusinessAdministration, with an emphasis on organizationalchange, from the University of Arizona. Precedinghis work in the public sector, Mazany enjoyed hisfirst career as an archaeologist and dendrochronol-ogist.

First Nations Development InstituteMichael E. Roberts is the presidentof First Nations Development Insti-tute. Roberts is of the Tlingit Na-tion: Gooch/Ch'aak' naa (Wolf /Eagle Tribe), Kóon Hít (FlickerHouse), Kooyu Kwáan (Kuiu Is-land People). His Tlingit name isT'eix Sháach Tsín. As president,

Roberts is responsible for First Nations’ overall visionand coordination for First Nations’ programmatic,administrative, and grantmaking strategies. He alsoserves as the lead spokesman for communicating in-formation about First Nations’ projects, programsand models throughout Indian Country and the phil-anthropic community. Most recently, Roberts spentfive years in private equity, and operated his ownconsulting firm, Camus Consulting in Denver, Col-orado providing private equity investment advice tohigh-worth, angel investors. Roberts has also servedin the finance departments for various for-profit sub-sidiaries of Alaska Native corporations, and for localIRA councils. Roberts has an MBA from the Univer-sity of Washington with an emphasis in finance andoperations management.

Mary Reynolds Babcock FoundationDavid Dodson is a trustee of theMary Reynolds Babcock Founda-tion, and president of MDC, Inc.,where he has directed major proj-ects to strengthen public schoolsand community colleges, addressrural economic decline, createnew philanthropic structures, and

build multiracial leadership for civic change in theCarolinas, the Deep South, and Appalachia. He fre-quently speaks around the country on creating eq-uity and opportunity for low-wealth communitiesand has advised major philanthropic foundations onstrategies to address poverty. Dodson is co-authorof several MDC publications including “Discon-nected Youth in the Research Triangle Region: AnOminous Problem Hidden in Plain Sight” (2008) forThe North Carolina GlaxoSmithKline Foundation,“State of the South 2007: Philanthropy as the South'sPassing Gear ”, and “An Action Agenda to Spur Eco-nomic Success: A Report to the Distressed AreasTask Force of the South Carolina Council on Com-petitiveness” (2009). Dodson also serves on theboards of The Hitachi Foundation and the Center forLaw and Social Policy.

Mary Mountcastle is a trustee ofthe Z. Smith Reynolds, MaryReynolds Babcock and TriangleCommunity Foundations. She is asenior fellow at Self-Help, a non-profit community developmentlender that has made over $5 bil-lion in loans to over 55,000 low-

wealth families across the United States. Shecurrently serves on the boards of the NeighborhoodFunders Group, the National Center for Family Phi-lanthropy, the North Carolina Network of Grantmak-ers and the Corporation for Enterprise Development.Mountcastle previously was president of the Centerfor Responsible Lending, vice president of EconomicDevelopment for MDC, Inc., a nonprofit policy re-search center, and director of the Social InvestmentProgram for MetLife Insurance. She has also workedat various levels of government. In 1992, she re-ceived the Scrivner Award for Creative Grantmakingfrom the Council on Foundations. She holds an MBAfrom the Yale School of Management and a BA fromWilliams College.

15

16

THIS PUBLICATION WAS MADE POSSIBLE

WITH GENEROUS SUPPORT FROM

THE CHARLES STEWART MOTT FOUNDATION

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisor, the Council on Foundations, and the Forum of Regional Associations ofGrantmakers would like to extend their thanks to the contributing authors and organizations for sharing theirexperiences and expertise.

Jessica Chao and Renée B. BranchExecutive Editors

Meghna ShahEditor

Fresh Concentrate LLCArt Direction

PDF versions of this publication can be downloaded at:www.rockpa.org/ideas_and_perspectives/publicationswww.cof.org/diversitywww.givingforum.org/diversity

The views expressed in this publication are those of the individual authors and do not represent thepositions, strategies, or opinions of Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors, the Council on Foundations,or the Forum of Regional Associations of Grantmakers.

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER

Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization thathelps donors create thoughtful, effective philanthropy throughout the-world. Headquartered in New York City, it traces its antecedents to John

D. Rockefeller, Sr., who in 1891 began to professionally manage his philanthropy“as if it were a business.” Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors provides research andcounsel on charitable giving, develops philanthropic programs, and offers completeprogram, administrative and management services for foundations and trusts.Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors currently advises on and manages more than$200 million in annual giving in more than 70 countries.

The Council on Foundations is a national, nonprofit association of approxi-mately 2,000 grantmaking foundations and corporations. As a leader inphilanthropy, we strive to increase the effectiveness, stewardship, and

accountability of our sector while providing our members with the services andsupport they need for success.

Main Office6 W. 48th Street

10th FloorNew York, NY 10036

(212) 812-4330

1255 23rd Street NW Suite 200 Washington, DC 20037

(800) 673-9036www.cof.org

The Forum of Regional Associations of Grantmakers is a nationalphilanthropic leader and a network of 33 regional associations ofgrantmakers. It supports philanthropy by strengthening the ability of

all regional associations to fulfill their missions; these associations promote thegrowth and effectiveness of philanthropy in order to improve life in theircommunities.

2121 Crystal Drive, Suite 700Arlington, VA 22202

(703) 879-0812

www.givingforum.org

San Francisco Office50 California Street

Suite 3165San Francisco, CA 94111

(415) 543-0733

Los Angeles Office6300 Wilshire Boulevard

Suite 820Los Angeles, CA 90048

(323) 658-4200

www.rockpa.org