Equitable funding distribution Q&A
#CharitySoWhite launched an open-letter that challenges the charity sector’s funding process in response to COVID-19. Since the launch of our ‘Racial Injustice in Covid-19 response’ report, the team has been having conversations with funders and infrastructure bodies in the sector to push for equitable funding distribution.
We have outlined our answers to some anticipated questions below, and provide an insight into why we are pushing for this as our immediate call to action.
Please don’t hesitate to contact us with any questions. In solidarity, #CharitySoWhite
What are you calling for?
Our open letter calls on two key actions to be taken on the government funding that has been provided to the charity sector:
A minimum of two individuals on the steering groups for funding. These individuals should have a significant track record of championing race equality in funding.
Ring-fencing of 20% funding for BAME-led organisations, working with BAME communities. And for funding to be managed by BAME focused infrastructure organisations.
What do you mean by ring-fencing?
This means, setting aside a percentage of funds (20% in this case) to go only to organisations that meet specific criteria. That criteria being BAME-led organisations working directly with BAME communities.
Why are you calling for this now?
BAME organisations entered the coronavirus crisis underfunded. This has a number of direct implications, the first being their capacity to identify and apply for emergency funding. Evidence from previous disasters has shown just how disproportionate the impact on BAME communities is, therefore these charities are more in demand than ever. These groups need extra capacity to meet increased demand, furloughing is not an option.
Additionally, we know that due to under-funding, so many of these small, BAME-led charities have already had to close their doors as a result of years of austerity. This shows us that funders do not have the relationship, knowledge and trust of these communities. For that reason, we need them to hand over their power, trusting groups with the knowledge and relationships within communities can get funding to the right places.
We are concerned that in the years that follow, the charity sector will be looking back and analysing what went so wrong, in a similar vein to how we reflect on the Grenfell response.
This is a first step and by no means going to fix the inequalities that run the charity sector, but we’ve got to do something to try and support those most impacted by the pandemic. There are broader conversations that must follow this on recovery and long-term racial equality, and the powers that currently exist between the sector and communities they work with. Our open letter is one step we can take in the immediate to readdress power imbalances.
Ring-fencing isn’t a radical thing, as some organisations are trying to have us believe in our conversations with them. Every single day, funders decide where they want their resources to go and what issues they care about. We are very aware of the power that funders hold and they need to acknowledge that this is well within their capacity, and use their power to support those disproportionately impacted from COVID-19.
Funders make decisions about people's lives and the distribution of their capital every day, we mustn’t forget that.
Where are you recommending funding goes?
There are a number of organisations that are providing infrastructure level support to BAME groups. Unsurprisingly, they are also very underfunded. They are closer to communities than the larger organisations, they also have the essential trust and relationships that are vital to ensure funding gets to the right places.
For example; Ubele Initiative, Voice4Change England, and Future Foundations UK. There are also a number of organisations who are working on specific issues, such as Imkaan, as well as specific groups who are well connected at a regional and sub-regional level. We have named just a few here that are doing important work that we would expect to be involved.
Have you had any promising conversations that this issue being addressed yet?
We are really pleased to have the support of ACEVO and Institute of Fundraising, they have both signed our open letter and written blogs on the importance and urgency of our calls.
Peter Lewis, Chief Executive of Chartered Institute of Fundraising blog is here
Vicky Browning, CEO of ACEVO blog is here
We have started to speak more directly with a number of key funders, and these principles go beyond government funding. We have meetings with Dawn Austwick, The National Lottery and Carol Mack, Association of Charitable Foundations, as well as National Emergency Trust and Comic Relief.
None have yet committed to our asks but a few are positive conversations and we hope to be able to share results soon. As always, we operate on principles of transparency so we will share insights from these meetings when we can.
Why is it so important for funding to go to BAME-led organisations?
As has always been the focus for our work, senior teams making decisions need to be representative of society, and the communities they are seeking to serve. We draw to The National Lottery Community Fund (the main organisation named by the government to be charged with distributing funds) senior leadership team, ultimately their decision-making table, who are lacking in that representation.
These organisations do not have the relationships or trust of BAME communities to distribute funding appropriately, they must hand over their power to those that do, if they truly want to match their ‘intentions’ with actions.
Why is this just about BAME communities?
We are a campaign that focuses on the many ways in which racism operates within the charity sector and we are a committee of people of colour.
We strongly believe that there is no reason that the charity sector can’t support other disproportionately impacted groups, and we have a number of great peers pushing for that. Supporting BAME communities doesn’t mean the sector can’t support others. We ask leaders to look at other groups working in more intersection ways than the organisations they are currently funding.
