Pay Equity: Performative or Palpable?

By Erika Chen, CCF co-founder, Seattle-based activist, consultant, and former development professional

Encouraging equal opportunity to the salary negotiation process doesn’t ensure equal outcomes — it only further legitimizes a system that only continues to perpetuate sexism, racism, ableism, and many other -isms.

A few months ago, the Association of Fundraising Professionals (AFP) Global posted this article entitled “The Issue of Equity and Ethics: Ask For What You’re Worth”, which compiled some important statistics on pay inequities in the nonprofit sector:

“Women make an average of 82% of what men earn. But the pay gap widens when you consider factors like race… Also be aware that Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) get paid as little as 60 cents for every dollar that a white man makes.” 

However, I took issue with the author’s thesis:

Negotiating one’s salary is an important step toward closing the gender pay gap in the fundraising profession.” 

I mean, sure, women and BIPOC fundraisers can try more negotiation and self-advocacy tactics, but are they really going to close that large of a pay gap? This is systemic sexism and racism, and I really don’t believe that individual salary negotiations are going to solve it. 

Also, this thesis seems to assume that women and BIPOC fundraisers don’t already advocate for themselves like hell. We actually do, but, also, we shouldn’t have to. We cannot and should not have to hopelessly try to negotiate our way to equal pay. 

Instead, let’s consider: How can the nonprofit sector address this on a larger scale and not put the burden on individuals to prove their innate worth to power- and wealth-hoarding white institutions?

When I commented on a LinkedIn post to pose these questions, AFP Global then asked me if I’d be interested in writing a piece for them about pay equity. When I replied to ask how much they compensate their writers, I was told that there was not any money in their budget for paying writers. I, of course, replied that I won’t write a piece about pay equity for free. LOL? 

I actually did laugh, and continue to do so, probably to keep myself from crying and/or cursing. Also, I decided to take my article idea (slash long rant that was building up in my brain) to Community-Centric Fundraising, since we pay all of our Content Hub creators! 

According to AFP Global’s Form 990 from 2019, they raked in about $11.4 million in revenue and ended the year with an approximate $725,000 profit. President and CEO, Mike Geiger, made roughly $500,000 — and yet there were zero dollars in the budget for paying writers?  

What does this show?

  • That negotiation and advocating for yourself doesn’t work when the underlying system of relying on exploitation is built into the budget, which is then used as a cop-out. “Oh, I’m soooo sorry! If it’s not in the budget, we can’t do it!”
  • AFP’s commitment to closing the pay gap is performative. They will put out compensation reports and publish articles that suggest surface level changes without making any internal changes themselves to equitably pay women and BIPOC fundraisers for their efforts.

Encouraging equal opportunity to the salary negotiation process doesn’t ensure equal outcomes — it only further legitimizes a system that only continues to perpetuate sexism, racism, ableism, and many other -isms. The only way to ensure pay equity is to change the system. 

So how can organizations and the sector as a whole enact actual, palpable changes in their structures and systems to advance pay equity? I have some suggestions:

1. Create an equitable compensation policy and be transparent about it.

In large thanks to Vu Le’s multiple articles and the #ShowTheSalary movement, many nonprofits have created policies to list salary ranges in their job postings, including AFP. This is a really great first step. If your organization isn’t already committed to putting salary ranges on all job postings, please create a policy and start doing it, like yesterday.

However, even with salary ranges being posted, there is still a lot of room for inequity. Nonprofits should also have some kind of policy or philosophy that states their commitment to equitable compensation. Of course, for it not to just be another performative statement, the organization should also follow up that policy with standard procedures, like: 

2. Create equitable salary bands. 

Are the listed salary ranges that your organization posts even competitive for the quantity and quality of job functions being asked of the applicant? In order to attract and retain high-performing employees at all levels, nonprofits should consider the nature of the role, the individual’s contributions to the organization, the required relevant work experience and/or education, and local or regional economic conditions when creating position salary ranges.

Do some research. There are free nonprofit compensation reports that come out annually. There are even better, more specific, and local ones that you can pay for. (And paying for them shows your continued commitment to pay equity!) In the Pacific Northwest, we have the Archbright Regional Pay Survey, which even has a specific Non-Profit Report.

Once you have the research, you can create salary bands that are equitable for the specific role in your region. If your compensation philosophy includes a commitment to paying competitively, you can make sure that your salary ranges are on the high end. 

3. Don’t negotiate. 

The next thing to consider is the size of salary ranges. When the salary range is large, it still leaves a lot of room for negotiation. Historically, and based on the still-very-present pay gap, we can see that women and BIPOC fundraisers are paid at the low ends of salary ranges while men and white people are paid on the higher ends. So, the larger the salary range, the more room for inequity.

So, I honestly and humbly propose a policy of non-negotiation. Do not negotiate with any new hires — inform them about your compensation philosophy, your policy of non-negotiation, your reasons for doing so, and the equitable outcomes you are striving for. 

Decide what the salary range is for a position, and also decide what specific experience, skills, or competencies someone would have to have (regardless of identity or whether they ask for a higher salary) in order to justify any new hire receiving the higher salary. 

Here’s a basic example: 

According to the 2020 Archbright Non-Profit Report, in Seattle, the average salary for a development manager is about $65,000. However, that salary goes up to ~$71,000 in the 75th percentile and ~$75,000 in the 90th percentile. So if you are committed to competitive pay, the listed salary range might be $70,000-$75,000. If you wanted to enact a policy of non-negotiation, you could decide that the minimum qualification is 3 years of development experience, which would equate to the base salary of $70,000. If the candidate to whom you are extending an offer has more than 3 years of experience, you could up the offer by $2,500. You could also consider if the candidate possesses skills above and beyond the job requirements. For example, if they have extensive experience and skills dismantling white supremacy culture, which would add positively to the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) work you are trying to do, you could increase the offer again by $2,500.

Here’s how you could decide what amount to offer (and not negotiate):

3 years experience >3 years experience Extra DEI experience Salary
$70,000
$72,500
$72,500
$75,000

If you’re not negotiating with new hires, you also shouldn’t negotiate with current employees every year, which would give them annual opportunities to create internal pay inequities. Always give a cost of living increase. Look at your entire organizational salary bands and make sure they are increasing with the market. You can still do annual performance reviews, just make sure you’re giving raises equitably and that you’re including evaluation metrics based on contributions to an inclusive culture.

4. Don’t just do this going forward. 

Do an internal audit of what everyone on your staff is currently making. Is it equitable? I’m guessing that it isn’t. Fix it.

5. Pay women and BIPOC more.

I believe in equity, not equality. I believe in reparations. If you realize that a woman and/or BIPOC staff person has been making less than their male and/or white colleagues for a certain amount of time, give them back pay. 

Going forward, I believe that women, BIPOC, and other staff from historically marginalized groups should be paid at a higher rate — not based on their identities, but on the skills and competencies that accompany the lived experiences that come along with navigating systemic oppression. They are going to do more emotional labor and contribute more to creating an inclusive culture at your organization than their colleagues that have not had to code-switch their entire lives. Pay them for this additional labor

6. Pay BIPOC board members.

Volunteering is a privilege. Specifically, it is a privilege that many historically marginalized people cannot afford, literally. If your organization is trying to ‘diversify’ its board, consider offering a stipend to BIPOC board members. Again, this would be in recognition of the ‘above and beyond’ nature of what they are bringing to your organization. 

We must fight pay inequity on multiple fronts. We must operationalize it. We must not put the onus on the individual to negotiate equity. We must take responsibility as the people who create and uphold the systems. We must budget for it! Our organizations must ensure their systems are creating equitable outcomes, especially in pay. 

Erika Chen

Erika Chen

Erika Chen (she/they) is a co-founding member of the Community-Centric Fundraising movement. She also volunteers her time as the Appeals Chair for the Seattle Human Rights Commission and as Vice President of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Access for AFP Advancement NW. Erika is a consultant focused on racial equity within nonprofit operations and organizational culture, with an emphasis on inclusion and employee happiness. They can be reached via their website www.erikalianchen.com as well as on Twitter at @erika_chen, on TikTok at @erikalianchen, and on Venmo at @Erika-Chen.

Beyond Philanthropy: Stakeholder Engagement

About the podcast episode

One of the key principles of CCF is valuing all stakeholder input equally. In this episode, Beyond Philanthropy co-hosts Monique and Valerie explore the nonprofit-stakeholder relationship, with a focus on those who receive services. Historically, this stakeholder group hasn’t been given equal footing at most organizations. Monique and Valerie discuss options for building a more inclusive relationship to those served by your organization and examples of how this is done — both poorly, and very well. 

Find the podcast transcript here.

Topic timestamps

Intro to topic: 00:38

Historical stakeholder engagement: 2:00

Assumptions made by those not of the community: 6:15

Government funding woes: 11:30

Advocacy: 15:48

BIPOC nonprofit staff: 17:53

A brief digression into examples: 25:27

Who are your stakeholders? 31:32

Final thoughts: 36:19

Monique Curry-Mims and Valerie Johnson

Monique Curry-Mims and Valerie Johnson

Monique Curry-Mims (she/her) and Valerie Johnson (she/her) are cohosts of Beyond Philanthropy Podcast.

Monique Curry-Mims has over 15 years of business and leadership experience in both the nonprofit and for-profit sectors. As Principal of Civic Capital Consulting, an international social impact consulting firm, Monique delivers innovative strategies that help organizations meet their mission and goals, education services that empower solutions and equity, and funding to help communities working on the ground be part of the change they need. To further change impact, Monique serves as a steering committee member of Philadelphia Black Giving Circle, Trustee and the Allocations Chair of Union Benevolent Association, and a Committee Member of AFP Global’s Government Relations Committee. Additionally, Monique serves as Founder and Convener of PHLanthropy Week and co-host of Beyond Philanthropy alongside Valerie Johnson.

Valerie Johnson joined Pathways to Housing PA as Director of Institutional Advancement in 2018, and was promoted to VP of Advancement and Special Projects in 2021. She co-hosts a podcast, Beyond Philanthropy, alongside Monique Curry-Mims. She was also the Director of Advancement for Council for Relationships and worked as a fundraiser for Valley Youth House and the American Association for Cancer Research. Valerie, a Certified Fundraising Executive, holds a Bachelor’s degree in Marketing and an MBA from Drexel University. A member of the Association of Fundraising Professionals since 2012, she serves on the Greater Philadelphia Chapter’s Board of Directors as Vice President of Education and Professional Development. Valerie has been a featured speaker for the Pennsylvania Association of Nonprofit Organizations, NTEN, AFP GPC, and AFP Brandywine, and contributes to Generocity. You can find her on Twitter and Instagram, where you’ll see plenty of running and baking content alongside her cats, Agador and Spartacus. 

To tip Valerie and Monique for their work on their podcast, Venmo them at: @valer1ej

CCF One-Year Anniversary Celebration

THIS EVENT HAS PASSED. YOU CAN FIND THE RECAP HERE.

When: August 25, 2021 at 1 p.m. central time (U.S. and Canada)

Where: Online

Details:

Join CCF to celebrate one year of movement building. We’ll hear updates from co-chairs, Andrea Arenas and Michelle Muri, and be in community through dialogue and fun games.

To do: Also, please take a moment to share your wins, highlights, and learnings from this past year of the movement on this Kudoboard that will be shared out at the event! What have you been able to do, big or small, because of the CCF movement?

Accessibility and accommodations: CCF arranges services based on needs and requests. Please let us know by August 11 if you would like interpretation or other accommodations.

Nonprofits: the lessons we learned from the pandemic must stay, full stop

By Meenakshi Das, fundraising analytics consultant

I know we feel a sense of urgency and want to write new chapters about a pandemic-free world, but we cannot unsee or forget all that we have been through …

How do you feel about the power of just two vaccine shots, taking you back to normal? (Though I understand ‘normal’ can mean different things to different people.) Do you think we should use those two doses as a reason to forever leave the pandemic chapter to the history books — something we have wanted to do ever since all this started? 

I’m not asking you these questions because I’m an anti-vaxxer (in fact, I am due for the second dose soon.). I am raising these questions because I believe that, as an Indian immigrant in North America, I have the power and privilege to observe two worlds — India and North America. And these two worlds are on two opposite sides of a spectrum, one made up of a catalogue of pandemic-related events from the last 16 months in history. While North America is ready to plan the post-pandemic world, India is preparing to survive a third wave of COVID.

I’m also asking these questions because I get to talk with many intelligent individuals through my consulting work — and we agree that the effects of a pandemic on our mental health are more than we currently realize. So, I ask again — should we use those two doses as a symbolic reason to close out this ‘pandemic’ chapter in our collective history book?

No, I don’t think so. Because the lessons from the pandemic must stay. 

I know we feel a sense of urgency and want to write new chapters about a pandemic-free world, but we cannot unsee or forget all that we have been through — especially if some of those lessons have the power to make us empathetic, curious, and action-oriented towards things that we always perceived just as another “norm.”      

As an enthusiast of this sector, I am listing five pandemic lessons from the nonprofit world that we all need to remember, without any statute of limitations. (And by no means is this a comprehensive list. If yours hypothetically looks different than mine, then I encourage you to add to this list.)

Lesson 1: Prioritizing mental health should be a real and non-negotiable aspect of life.

Burnout, fatigue, anxiety, depression — all these things always existed in the nonprofit sector. But it was not until we were confined within four walls for long stretches of time and facing a million Zoom meetings that we started to see the different manifestations of unacknowledged emotions in us. 

Now that we have only just begun to realize that prioritizing mental health needs its due importance, we must carve out space and time in our lives to reflect on our emotions for all things that we otherwise conveniently perceive as, “This is how it works,” or, “That’s just life.” Self-care begins with giving yourself the space to gain clarity on what you need and then acting on it.

Lesson 2: Sustainable work-life balance does not have to be a luxury.

Long work hours, laptop screens booting up way before nine and staying on way after 5, constantly monitoring phones for small beeps and notifications, dreading Mondays — we often say, aren’t these the common aspects of the life of a ‘working professional’? After all, these things existed even before the pandemic for many of us. The leadership at your job may often repeat, “Take a vacation day for self-care,” and think that’s enough, but that mantra doesn’t necessarily translate into sustainable work-life balance. 

Sustainability is a sum of three ingredients: prioritization, letting go, and being okay with the failures. 

While most organizations appreciate the word prioritization, what is often missing in action are the other two ingredients. We must realize that the last few months have indeed affected us beyond what we currently understand. Back-to-the-office plans and taskforces must reflect on the time it truly takes to heal from such traumatic experiences. 

One aspect of this includes answering the question: What does sustainability mean to our organization? What do we have to learn (and unlearn) to achieve sustainability?

Framed this way, this quickly becomes non-negotiable for a chunk of our current workforce. (Check out #greatresignation for more on this.)

Lesson 3: All constituents are important — and donors are only a part of that long list.

The pandemic resulted in an uptick in donations and donors for many nonprofits. Volunteering was another area that saw an upsurge all over the world. And for the past few months, many organizations have been working to keep the momentum of this generosity. 

However, in the struggle of staying on the radar of supporters, and while we try to acknowledge that all constituents contribute meaning towards the mission — why is it that donors (or top donors) get the most verbal and written attention? 

A common response that I have often heard from my clients and through networking chats are:

“Because they affect the fundraising goal” andbecause I would rather have two $5,000-level donors than twenty $500-level donors.”

The pandemic has highlighted a need for us to pause and acknowledge this practice, which is a pre-existing practice. And though I understand where the rationale comes from, it is missing two pieces of insight:

  1. When you share organization-wide acknowledgment consistently, when you show that all your constituents are important — you begin creating space for capturing right and additional data points. The more relationship-based data points you collect, the more you are making an opportunity to map metrics that can really affect your fundraising goals. Thus, “because they affect the fundraising goal,” might be true today, but it could be different tomorrow.
  2. When was the last time you reviewed portfolios of your fundraisers? With the right balance of portfolios (aligned with your strategic plan), with supporting technology, and with customized engagement strategies — the overarching scenario is no longer about two $5,000-level donors versus twenty $500-level donors. The question becomes: How do both groups have a fulfilling experience, one in which they connected with your mission?

So do not hesitate to slow down and think with your team — about how you can involve all your constituents and create a symbiotic partnership among the groups.

Lesson 4: Social injustices exist in the community around us, and we must actively work on them.

The past few months have shown us, sadly and repeatedly, that social injustices continue to exist and have existed in the world around us — be it the fight for racial equity or the heart-breaking injustices against Indigenous children

But can the outpour of our grief and anger be enough? If we seek to create impactful transformation, we must create a deliberate space in our personal and professional lives to consistently contribute to the work behind such change. The spaces can be a mix of time, money, wisdom, patience, and the flexibility to learn what we all need. 

Lesson 5: To achieve equity, we might have to rebuild from scratch — and that is okay.

This point is my favorite on this list — being okay with building from scratch. 

Have you watched the show Manifest? The general premise (I promise, no spoilers) revolves around a bunch of people whose flight goes missing — and they suddenly return to Earth five years later. The show is about them figuring out how to continue with and even rebuild their individual lives after returning home from such a harrowing experience.

In our real lives, what this means is that as we continue to learn what equity means (around, for, and to us), we will come across processes that may be salvageable through deliberate tweaks and fixes. But some processes may need to be completely broken apart so that we can build something from the ground up. 

I know the idea of this can be anxiety-inducing, especially when:

a) we do not know the exact outcome of the rebuild yet, and

b) we all have timelines and accountabilities in our roles.

But we must understand that it is okay not to know all answers and perhaps to even fail as we are trying to unlearn. 

Now that the pandemic has given us a chance to reevaluate so much, I say we fearlessly experiment and rebuild what is needed and fail fast in the process.

Meenakshi Das

Meenakshi Das

Meenakshi (Meena) Das (she/her/hers) is a fundraising analytics consultant. She specializes in designing survey-based research tools and analyzing engagement. Meena appreciates spending her time outside work as a mentor to immigrants and as pro bono research advisor to small shops. Her two recent favorite projects are working on making data-based research tools more DEIA (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility) compliant and designing the second season of her podcast “Being and Unbeing an Immigrant” where she wants to bring together the families of immigrants left behind in the home country. Connect with Meena on LinkedIn.

White-led organizations: Here are three keys to incorporating racial equity in strategic planning

By Renee Rubin Ross, founder and principal, The Ross Collective

In the best of circumstances, [strategic planning] will be challenging and uncomfortable.

For historically white-led organizations, incorporating racial equity into strategic planning right now is like pushing a boulder up a hill.

In the best of circumstances, this process will be challenging and uncomfortable.

There are four types of people in this process.

Some boulder-pushers are Black, Indigenous, and People of Color leaders and staff at these white-led organizations. Sometimes though, these individuals may get tired of pushing and decide to give up because they feel that they’re carrying too much of the weight. 

(Often, these individuals get fed up after seeing some of their white colleagues sabotage their efforts by pushing the boulder down the hill, in the other direction!

Another kind of person in this process are white leaders who don’t actually want the boulder to arrive at the top of the hill; they just want to hold onto the rocks of power that they’ve been holding onto for a long time. They have power, they don’t see how it is in their interest to give it up. They haven’t started their equity journey; they may never start.

But there are some committed white boulder-pushers — white people who are open to building an equitable process, stepping back from power, and working within a multiracial group of planners, thinkers, and doers.

As a white person who works towards justice and equity, I’m writing this piece for this fourth group, the white boulder-pushers. (This particular essay is not meant for BIPOCs because white people created these inequities and so white people need to do the majority of the work to clean it up!) To be honest, I wish I didn’t have to start with such a “heavy” opening (😊), but as a strategic planning consultant, I’m hearing from a high number of historically white-led organizations who want to incorporate racial equity into their work going forward. I want to be honest about what is involved in this work as well as share a couple of keys to do this in a way that is authentic and impactful.

Before we go into equity, it’s good to define strategic planning. In a nutshell, strategic planning often encompasses three key questions, each of which can be larger or smaller, depending on the process:

  1. Who are we, in the context of our community and environment?
  2. What do we do best and feel pulled towards?
  3. Given #1 & #2, what should we do now?

Given that framework, here are a couple of keys for white-led organizations to be more poised for success when infusing equity into strategic planning:

Key 1: Be prepared for a process of culture change

If we’re going to talk about infusing strategic planning with equity, it feels important to all involved to understand what equity is. I use the following two-part definition:

Systems are shifted so that Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) who have been historically and systematically disadvantaged in terms of access to wealth, power, education, and health have the resources to enjoy full, healthy lives. 

People closest to the problems are weighing in on the solutions. People with the lived experience around the challenges that an organization focuses on should be the ones with the power to weigh in. A strategic plan is only as good as the lived experience of the people weighing in and making decisions throughout the planning process.

Here’s the thing about systems: They aren’t just somewhere ‘out there.’ They’re with us, in the historically white-led organizations that many of us, people of all races, work in every day.

If we are going to be genuine and not superficial about shifting systems, there is deep culture work that needs to be done. A description of this comes from my colleague Lynn Johnson.

Lynn is a Black woman who is an entrepreneur, educator, and arts creator. I originally met her when she was cofounder of a local kids’ camp, Spotlight:Girls. Her work has since transitioned to leading a consulting firm working on culture change towards racial justice.

Lynn recently shared the work that her firm, Hella Social impact, has done with Akimbo, an online training program for entrepreneurs, and Akimbo’s reflections on this work. Akimbo’s commitments now include:

  •  understanding the role Akimbo was playing in perpetuating racial inequality and implicit biases,
  •  creating an environment where everyone can thrive and where leadership reflects the diversity in its community,
  •  including and amplifying more Black voices inside of their workshops,
  •  developing a new coaching training program that centers on being antiracist, and,
  •  opening space inside each workshop to have honest and open dialogue on racial equity, systemic change and white supremacy.

This is how Lynn describes the process for white people, and for Akimbo specifically: “All they (white folks and white-led businesses) have to do is practice courage, imagination, humility, and deep empathy on a daily basis. Plus, make the choice to commit to the work one-hundred percent, despite the wrenching discomfort of change and the overwhelming pain of making mistakes that cause people harm.”

I found this so powerful. This is not easy! But there is a path forward. And for white-led organizations, this involves looking deeply at the culture of historically white-led organizations with courage, imagination, humility, empathy, commitment, and the willingness to be uncomfortable in order to make true change.

Key 2: Use assessment questions throughout to keep the process on track

At a recent presentation for The Gathering of the Alliance for Nonprofit Management, Dorian Spears, currently the National Program Partnerships and Strategy Lead for GET Cities, shared the Racial Equity Impact Assessment (REIA) Tool from the Race Matters Institute.

The REIA encompasses five questions that can be applied to strategic planning:

  1. Are all racial and ethnic groups affected by the policy/practice/decision at the table?
  2. How will the proposed policy/practice/decision affect each group?
  3. How will the proposed policy/practice/decision be perceived by each group?
  4. Does the policy/practice/decision worsen or ignore existing disparities?
  5.   Based on the above responses, what revisions are needed in the policy/practice/decision under discussion?

These questions are a filter to determine whether a strategic planning process is incorporating equity.

In reviewing the REIA, a question that comes to mind is: What happens if the answer is no, or planners don’t have enough information to know the answers? 

I asked Dorian about this at her presentation — she said that if a planning process can’t answer these questions, the group should step back and consider what kind of plan they want to put into place. This is why doing the culture change work mentioned in Key 1 feels so important.

Key 3: Draw on relationships across race, privilege, and power to keep processes meaningful and honest

Many white leaders are doing this work because we deeply believe that we each win when our society moves towards equity and justice.

But that’s abstract.

On a more concrete level, I see this work deepening through individual relationships. 

For an organization I worked with recently, the leadership’s motivation to build a more equitable strategic process emerged through cross-race conversations between white staffers and Black and Latinx staffers.

This organization already had a culture of listening to one another. They used this strength in strategic planning to center the experiences of Black and Latinx staff members.

To be clear: white staff members understood that they needed to do their own individual learning about racism and antiracism.  They were not depending on BIPOC staff to be their teachers.

But sometimes they needed the help of their BIPOC colleagues to be honest about when they, the BIPOC staff members, did not feel a sense of belonging.

During the process, white staffers started listening more, and acted with empathy and humility, out of caring towards their BIPOC coworkers.

This is a powerful idea. When we care about people, we take their interests and perspectives into account. As we, white people, listen across race, the limits of our lived experience become more obvious, and we see that we must step back so that the people closest to the problems can determine the solutions. That care — across differences — builds motivation for change.

So I know we need to continue to move towards policies that support equity. I also believe that what will give us the strength to do this are cross-race relationships.

 

So — this work can be challenging and discouraging. And yet — there is a lot of positive to gain.

Renee Rubin Ross

Renee Rubin Ross

Renee Rubin Ross (she/her) is a recognized leader on board and organizational development and strategy and the founder of The Ross Collective, a consulting firm that designs and leads inclusive, participatory processes for social sector boards and staff.

Committed to racial equity in the nonprofit sector, Dr. Ross supports organizations and individuals in practices that celebrate and amplify diverse voices and perspectives.

In addition to her consulting work, Dr. Ross is the director of the Cal State University East Bay Nonprofit Management Certificate program and teaches board development and grant writing for the program. Dr. Ross lives in the San Francisco Bay Area with her family. She is a board member of the Alliance for Nonprofit Management. Dr. Ross writes regularly on nonprofit strategy, racial equity, and learning. Subscribe here. She can also be connected with on LinkedIn, Twitter, and Instagram.