By: Johane Alexis-Phanor, a fundraising and communications consultant with an expertise in raising funds for Black-led movements

I came to the conclusion that the distance is intentional because philanthropy does not truly value the communities they serve and they do not see them as equals.

I stepped inside a beautiful foundation building today with offices overlooking the waterfront. They had the prerequisite-suited security guard at the front desk lobby to let me in. 

As I sat in their conference room looking out at all the skyscrapers, I began to ask myself, “Why is this foundation not located in one of the Black communities it serves? Why rely on nonprofit staff, grant proposals, and site visits to experience firsthand the challenges they are trying to solve? Why wouldn’t they want to be in a place where they could go outside every day, patronize the community businesses, and interact with the residents? Why do I have to travel almost an hour to hear about their philanthropic priorities for my community? Why have they created this distance?”

And I came to the conclusion that the distance is intentional because philanthropy does not truly value the communities they serve and they do not see them as equals.

Practicing deficit-based philanthropy devalues Black communities

Recently, a recruiter reached out to me about a leadership opportunity with a charitable organization. My interest was piqued because they were embarking on a new philanthropic initiative with equity at its core. This new strategy would launch a multi-year fundraising campaign.  

When I looked at the report that would help to shape this new pathway, every single data point about the community they hoped to serve was a racial or economic disparity. 

To define a community solely based on disparities is a very narrow way of doing social justice work. And to develop philanthropic strategies solely based on these disparities is to create deficit-based solutions centered around a deficit-based approach to philanthropy.

The deficit-based approach to philanthropy says that Black communities have no assets, no strengths, and no solutions to offer to address their most pressing and urgent social and economic issues. Deficit-based philanthropy takes agency completely away from Black communities. It leaves Black communities in a constant state of victimhood. It tells Black communities that they have no resources to offer to the fight for liberation. Deficit-based philanthropy has a very myopic view of the Black community because of distance. There is physical distance between funders and communities. There is also a separation in lived experiences and a detachment that occurs when you only know a neighborhood from proposals, reports, and white papers. Deficit-based philanthropy replicates inequalities, and it is ineffective. 

It’s time that we stop participating in the devaluing of Black communities and develop a new model of philanthropy that recognizes the inherent value and worth of the communities we serve.

To practice deficit-based philanthropy is to devalue Black communities. 

There are white institutions that have extracted hundreds of millions of dollars from the Black community in the form of fundraising campaigns that leverage stories, images, and the “plight” of Black communities. The professionals who work at these institutions make six figures a year, sit in a cushy office somewhere in their city’s downtown, and have received awards and accolades as a result of their philanthropic work while simultaneously telling Black communities every year that they are “struggling,” “suffering,” and “marginalized.”  

It’s time that we stop participating in the devaluing of Black communities and develop a new model of philanthropy that recognizes the inherent value and worth of the communities we serve.

S.M.A.R.T. Black Philanthropy is asset-based instead of deficit-based

In 2016, working as a Director of Resource Development, I began to develop the concept of S.M.A.R.T. Black Philanthropy (SBP), which aims to advance a new model of philanthropy in Black communities. (The S.M.A.R.T in S.M.A.R.T Black Philanthropy stands for specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and timely- –an acronym often used to set mission-driven goals.)

This model is asset-based. It prioritizes a collaborative approach instead of a competitive approach to philanthropy. Finally, it is rooted in Black traditions and movements. 

Asset-based philanthropy starts with the premise that Black communities have assets that can be leveraged to address problems of inequality. Black communities have untapped resources that can be invested in. SBP believes in Black creativity, Black wisdom, and Black ingenuity. SBP believes that Black people have everything we need to be effective in our social change movements.

The power of words, stories, and narratives

For far too long, mainstream philanthropy has had the power to write the stories of and shape the narratives around Black communities. And the stories they have told about Black people are disparaging. Words have the power to create reality. The words we use affect the work that we do. That is why SBP avoids words like  “underserved,” “underprivileged,” “at risk,” “underrepresented,” “disadvantaged,” “under-resourced,” “marginalized,” and every other deficit-based label that white mainstream philanthropy has used to define Black communities. 

The stories of scarcity that philanthropy tells about Black communities are like self-fulling prophecies: We believe that these communities have little value and little worth, and so instead of coming up with expansive strategies for real transformation, actually investing in what it would really take for change, we patch up the problem because we don’t truly believe in the potential of the community. 

An example of the negative impacts of deficit-based narratives is the media coverage of Black communities. Stories are overwhelmingly negative, with a focus on crime and violence. Narratives are solidified about how unsafe these communities are. People refuse to visit, do business, and live in these communities. Disinvestment happens. Crime proliferates. And the vicious cycle continues.

Deficit-based solutions vs assets-based solutions

Here is an example (based on real-life philanthropic initiatives) of how deficit-based vs asset-based philanthropy would address social problems in Black communities:

Deficit-based approach–  Start with the deficit, i.e., Black boys and men are more likely to experience poor mental health conditions.

Deficit-based solution- Spend hundreds of thousands of dollars and convene multiple nonprofit organizations and staff to create a multi-year program to convene Black boys and men so they can meet monthly and have a supportive environment to discuss their mental well-being. In other words, therapy.

Asset-based approach– Start with the asset, i.e., 55% of Black-owned businesses in 2020 were led by Black men.

Asset-based solution- Develop initiatives that invest in, provide business technical assistance, and provide opportunities for Black male entrepreneurship in various fields, taking into consideration some of the challenges they face (i.e., access to education, effects of having a CORI, etc). This not only impacts the economic well-being but also addresses the mental well-being of Black men by lessening their exposure to poverty. 

Six key assets in asset-based philanthropy

If philanthropy really wants to repair the harm caused by systemic and structural racial inequities, it needs to begin its work by identifying assets in Black communities that we can invest in. 

I recommend that philanthropy cease to put together report after report of a laundry list of disparities in Black communities as a framework to guide their strategies. We know that social, gender, and racial disparities exist in our society. We can identify the needs of our communities as we evaluate the impact of our work, but disparities should not be our philanthropic guiding light. 

The Collaborative for Neighborhood Transformation has a great toolkit for asset-based community development that I have adopted as a model for asset-based philanthropy. 

I have made changes and additions to their model to develop the Six Key Assets in Asset-Based Philanthropy for greater social impact. These assets are:

1. People Assets: People assets are the individual gifts of a community as well as their connections and relationships with each other. An example of people assets in Black communities is strong family ties, which often lead to multi-generational living.
2. Cultural Assets: Cultural assets include arts, language, food, and music. An example of cultural assets in Black communities is storytelling and oral traditions.
3. Physical Assets: Physical assets include land, green spaces, blue spaces (rivers, oceans, etc), and buildings. An example of a physical asset in a Black community is Black-owned homes.
4. Intellectual Assets: Intellectual assets are knowledge and experiences often passed down through generations. An example of an intellectual asset in Black communities is the legacy of community organizing and movements for equal rights.
5. Economic Assets: Economic assets are financial assets. Examples of economic assets in Black communities are Black-owned businesses and enterprises, funds, and investments.
6. Institutional Assets: Institutional assets are professionally organized groups that serve communities. Examples of institutional assets in Black communities are Black churches, museums, and affinity organizations. 

This is a model for how we can identify and leverage assets in Black communities to bring about real social change. It’s a way for us to recognize the unique strengths and opportunities that can flourish within Black communities given the right financial investments.

I’m extending a challenge to philanthropy, both foundations and non-profits alike, to make detailed accounts of the assets in Black communities. Then, I’d like us to develop strategies for how funders will invest in those assets and how non-profits will leverage those strengths to move the needle toward positive social change.