The View from Here

By: Gary Yates

A recent study by a nonprofit advocacy organization indicated that, among large foundations, The California Wellness Foundation has one of the most diverse boards with regard to ethnicity (70 percent) and gender (50 percent). But this wasn’t always the case.

In 1995, the foundation’s board of directors did not look like the state’s diverse population. Barely three years old then, the board was composed of four white men.

By 1998, the board had expanded to 10 directors—half were ethnic minorities and half were women. Also, our staff had more than doubled, reflecting greater diversity in ethnicity, gender, and professional background.

How did we get there in three years?

First, let me state what the board did not do:
•    We did not formalize and pursue diversity goals aimed at governance and programming.
•    We did not establish benchmarks, metrics, or quotas.
•    We did not create a diversity plan or conduct diversity audits.

Yet, in a short, three-year period, we succeeded in transforming the foundation into one of the most diverse in the nation. We became a major California funder of nonprofit organizations providing health services to communities of color and advocating to improve the health of the underserved.

I believe two key factors made our transformation possible: We stayed focused on our mission and made a concerted effort to “live” our operating principles by integrating them into all facets of our work.

Mission Matters
We never took our eyes off of our mission, which is to improve the health of the people of California. One of the foundation’s key priorities in pursuing this mission is to address the health needs of California’s “traditionally underserved populations, including low-income individuals, people of color, youth, and residents of rural areas.” The board logically believed that we would be most effective in reaching underserved communities around the state if we recruited trustees and staff armed with expertise, diverse professional backgrounds, and first-hand experience in California’s diverse nonprofit sector.

Embracing Our Operating Principles
We were informed by the board’s 1995 operating principles, which guided the foundation as we developed our grantmaking program. Among the operating principles was one devoted to promoting pluralism and inclusiveness:

“Given the diversity of California’s population, the Foundation will seek to engage individuals on its board and staff who are representative of that diversity and committed to incorporating the values of pluralism and inclusiveness into every aspect of their work. We will also seek to fund organizations that embrace those values in their mission[s] and activities.”

We “lived” the principles. By that I mean we worked consciously and intentionally at all levels to bring the best expertise to the foundation in pursuit of our mission. We hired people with backgrounds in health, finance, communications, philanthropy, and law, among other professions. For California, it was critical to recruit professionals who understood the multi-ethnic dynamics of our state.

This effort was not limited to board and staff. We sought consultants, who were experts in their fields. For example, our communications program uses multi-language media outreach campaigns and cannot rely on one general media market agency. We retain multiple firms with diverse backgrounds in reaching key audiences through ethnic, general market, and Internet media. For more than 15 years, we have worked with ethnic- and women-owned agencies to build a communications program that effectively reaches diverse communities.

Foundation Effectiveness
Has the recruitment of a diverse board and staff helped us to be more effective in our grantmaking? I have no quantitative evidence but I believe it has. We’ve made more grants in diverse regions of the state and reached more underserved populations, including women and girls, than we would have without the nonprofit experience and ethnic/gender knowledge that the board and staff represent.  A recent assessment of our grantmaking by an independent evaluation firm noted significant progress toward achieving our goals, and a constituent survey we conduct every three years showed increased satisfaction with our interactions and process.

That said, I do not endorse a “one size fits all approach” regarding diversity for all foundations. I respect the diversity in the philanthropic sector and the independence of individual foundations to honor donor intent, mission, and strategy. Each foundation’s board of trustees must develop strategies and activities they deem appropriate to achieve their charitable missions. In our case, embracing the values of pluralism and inclusiveness in developing a board and staff somewhat representative of the state’s diverse population was, and is, an effective way to work toward improving the health of the people of California.

Gary Yates is the president and CEO of The California Wellness Foundation.

The Baltimore Community Foundation’s (BCF) commitment to diversity and inclusion—in our grantmaking and fundraising and among our board of trustees—is fundamental to our capacity to serve our region. Generating assets and using them effectively for community improvement demands that a foundation understand the community it serves. Personally, it is hard to imagine how a foundation could fully understand a community and help create a shared vision for its future, without representatives of the populations that comprise that region.

Embarking on this Journey
We embraced diversity at the BCF for selfish reasons. If we were going to re-populate our city, have a dynamic economy, and help our children secure jobs and other opportunities, then we needed to understand and incorporate the principles of diversity in our work and organization.

We made a strategic decision to begin our work with Baltimore’s majority population—African Americans—which was also its economic minority. The BCF board felt strongly that in a city where 70 percent of the population is composed of African Americans, the board needed to look more like the city. African American voices were needed to inform our work as we moved forward.

Increasing Board Diversity
Since we made and acted on that decision, there isn’t a day that goes by that I don’t recognize the value of the increased diversity that we enjoy on the BCF board. For example, five of the first seven trustees named after I became CEO were African American. The two white trustees were the presidents of Johns Hopkins University and the Annie E. Casey Foundation. All seven have brought vision, wisdom, and commitment to BCF.

BCF has eight committees that oversee our programmatic and institutional responsibilities. In addition to the trustees, we recruit representatives from our donor and larger community to serve on these all-important committees, and we challenge each committee to seek diversity among its members. By bringing diverse voices and perspectives to the table, we are helping to ensure that individuals with localized and specific knowledge of community concerns are included in the decisions that affect their communities. These committees also serve as wonderful proving grounds for potential board service.

The benefits a diverse board are broad and deep. Not only do all donors appreciate our ability to represent their philanthropic interests, but also our board members of color, for instance, have given many millions of dollars to BCF and its grantees, inspiring donors from all backgrounds to join them. (BCF manages many millions of dollars on behalf of donors of color. We would not have attracted those dollars if we didn’t have the rich diversity that’s reflected on our board.)

BCF is a place where Jews, Christians, Blacks, Whites, men, women, gay, straight, Asians, Latinos, young, and old can meet to build dreams and raise the resources for a healthy future. Reflecting, embracing, and finding common ground among our donors will be a core component of our ability to realize our ambitious goals for Baltimore’s future.

The Evolving “Face” of Philanthropy
Traditionally, the philanthropic community was made up of two kinds of people: individuals who had amassed great wealth and those who represented individuals who had great wealth. In both cases, the field was dominated by white males. That’s changed—as it should—to reflect the evolving nature of our cities and communities.

I firmly believe that diversity is at the core of philanthropy, just as diversity is at the core of our democracy and culture. The “melting pot” that is America has created the wealth and opportunity that has made our country strong; we will have to reflect the changing demographics if we are going to continue to grow that wealth and ensure that all have the opportunity to benefit from it. This is hard work but we need to continue to be attentive to diversity and inclusion as the philanthropic field considers how best to serve society in the future.

Thomas E. Wilcox is the president and CEO of the Baltimore Community Foundation.