Ethical Quandary

By: Maya Horton Harris

When making grants to individuals, foundations often collect basic information about their grantees, asking questions about gender, race, or ethnicity. Collecting and using such data for statistical purposes, such as a report to the foundation’s board, staff, grantees, the community, foundation colleagues, or policymakers, is a useful, internal benchmarking practice.

But sometimes, the information collected can be viewed as personal, which some believe can harm rather than help a grantee. Grantmakers cite the following examples that often arise: suppose your grantee is an undocumented citizen, or a student who identifies as LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, or Queer), or a single mother infected with HIV. Should foundations collect and release such data to measure the field’s impact sector-wide? What about collecting personal demographic information about your own staff and board? Will the affected populations benefit if foundations report personal information, despite privacy concerns? When does information become too “private” to collect and report?

Let’s look at both sides of this hotly debated issue.

When Collecting Data Makes Sense

Grantmakers that favor data collection and dissemination point to its positive impact on:

• helping an organization through its strategic planning process
• increasing organizational transparency
• advancing advocacy efforts
• building accountability within the field

Perhaps the strongest argument from proponents is that foundations that collect information about their staffs’ or grantees’ race, ethnicity, gender identity, sexual orientation and identification, and ability , allow the organization to better understand its grantmaking practices (which populations benefit?) and organizational structure (who’s involved in the decision making process?).

The Other Side of the Argument
Critics note that numbers alone do not necessarily mean key issues are being effectively addressed. What’s more: It is difficult to make data-driven decisions when not every foundation collects or defines data in the same way.

The other key concern is the ethical dilemma foundations face when the collection of personal data, such as immigration status or private health information, harms staff or grantees. A donor doesn’t want to learn that a program they funded is being used in a way that will effectively cause a grantee undue stress or subject them to discrimination. Hence, many foundations avoid data collection efforts altogether.

A Note to Grantmakers
If you decide to collect personal data about your grantees and/or staff, familiarize yourself with federal and state privacy rules. For instance, while U.S. privacy laws do not protect undocumented citizens, privacy concerns are still especially acute for those who face deportation.

Here’s a general rule of thumb: Personal information about your grantees, board, and staff should be collected and shared only with the individuals’ consent, making clear that providing the information is voluntary. In some cases, consent may be implied because the applicant opted to participate in the grant application process. However, to avoid confusion, a best practice when collecting and using highly sensitive information is to let the applicant know:

• What kind of data you are collecting
• Who will have access to the data
• Where the data will be kept
• How you plan to use the data

Here are two more best practices: aggregate the data in such a way that the grantee’s or staff’s identifying information remains anonymous; and work with your board and human resources department to create a clear policy about how information is collected and used, communicating that policy to your grantees and/or staff upfront. This data should not be used to discriminate against a person’s candidacy or position within the organization.

Note: When grantmaking to specific groups, foundations must take steps to ensure they are not fostering racial discrimination. Grants based on race or ethnicity should be carefully examined on a case-by-case basis to determine whether they promote or alleviate discrimination.

To learn more about this topic, see The Foundation Center’s resource on diversity metrics.

Maya Horton Harris is a staff attorney at the Council on Foundations.