Giving Compass' Take:
- Gaby Strong explains that significant changes are needed that truly shift philanthropic power into the hands of Indigenous people.
- Strong emphasizes that Indigenous people need to be involved in the philanthropic decision-making process not just as advisors, but as deciders.
- Read Indigenous leaders' lessons for philanthropy.
What is Giving Compass?
We connect donors to learning resources and ways to support community-led solutions. Learn more about us.
We’ve seen the research. The fraction of philanthropic support that reaches Indian Country and Indigenous-led organizations has remained largely unchanged for decades, while institutional philanthropy has come to rely heavily on non-Indigenous-led organizations or intermediaries to carry out their priorities and strategies. But when priorities and strategies don’t emerge from the community and are implanted from the outside, we can find that philanthropic institutions are advancing their own interests while remaining comfortably distant from (and only loosely accountable to) Indigenous Peoples and communities, forgoing any deeper understanding of or respect for tribal sovereignty. Indeed, many philanthropists consider the matter “too complex,” an inadequate and unserious approach, especially when compared to the multitude of federal and philanthropic regulations that must be navigated by Indigenous Peoples and tribes working to develop their communities.
Over the years, I’ve worked within and across the nonprofit, tribal, and philanthropic arenas. I’ve been a paid staff or consultant for foundations both large and small. I’ve served on countless Native American advisory boards. All of this has been valuable work. It has been important work. Yet the operative word here is “advisory.” These boards are the place and opportunity to advise predominantly Euro-American-led institution(s) on how to best serve Indigenous Peoples. These roles typically fall short of sharing actual decision-making power, or of assuming the role of board member or senior leader.
Most nonprofit development, fund development, and fundraising curricula espouse diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in nonprofit boards, but while donors often use DEI as a lens to assess best practices among nonprofit organizations, that doesn’t mean they turn the same lens on their own institutions and practices. Similarly, conventional nonprofit and fund development training encourages the presence and inclusion of financial expertise and wealth on boards of directors, which often implies the seating of a non-Indigenous ally who then shares decision-making. Non-Indigenous allies then share decision-making power over how Indigenous communities are served, resourced, or impacted.
However, the reverse is not the case in institutional philanthropy, even where Indigenous people with lived experience, practice wisdom, knowledge, relevant expertise, and qualifications can and should share decision-making power over the vast abundance of philanthropic resources. This decision-making and power imbalance is at the core of institutional and structural racism, perpetuating a glaring double-standard.
Read the full article about Indigenous power by Gaby Strong at Stanford Social Innovation Review.