PhilanTopic

The Case for Using a Social Justice Lens in Grantmaking

(Over the course of his career, Michael Seltzer, a frequent contributor to PhilanTopic, has served as a program officer at the Ford Foundation, as president of the New York Regional Association of Grantmakers, and as founding executive director of Funders Concerned About AIDS. A version of this post appears in the summer issue of GMNsight, a new journal written for and by members of the Grants Managers Network.)

Social Justice -- A New Phenomenon?

No. As early as 1972, in an internal memo to John H. Knowles, the president of the Rockefeller Foundation, one of his officers suggested that the foundation use the phrase "Towards Social Justice in an Interdependent World" as a 'unifying theme' to describe its work.

Also, in the 1970s, select small- to medium-sized public, family, independent, and public foundations embraced the practice, language, and ethos of social justice, as evidenced by their early support of the U.S. civil rights movement. Their ranks included such private foundations as Norman, Field, Stern, New World, Taconic, and the John Hay Whitney. Subsequently, the public foundations that comprised the Funding Exchange Network -- the Tides Foundation; women's and LGBT funders such as the Astraea Lesbian Foundation for Justice; and the Black United Fund movement -- joined their ranks. David Hunter, Stern's long-term executive director, served as a mentor and guide for many of these funds. The word justice also appeared in the literature of religiously affiliated grantmakers such as the Catholic Campaign for Human Development of the U.S. Catholic Bishops and the Jewish Fund for Justice. This was not surprising, since the precepts of justice are evident in the world's major religions and sacred texts.

Subsequently, this diverse set of donors, in terms of their structure and sources of revenues, began to meet annually under the aegis of the National Network of Change-Oriented Foundations. In 1981, the network's successor organization, the National Network of Foundations (NNG), asserted the following two purposes in its mandate:

To be a voice for issues of social and economic justice within the philanthropic community and externally in sectors of the broad community including government, business, labor and education, and to expand the resource base (human and financial) for social and economic justice activities.

As one indicator of the size of this community of funders, also in 1981 the National Network of Grantmakers and the Interreligious Foundation for Community Organization (IFCO) in their publication, The Grantseekers Guide, A Directory for Social and Economic Justice Projects, listed more than one hundred foundations and corporate-giving programs.

In the following decades, other foundations used many terms akin to social change or social justice in their annual reports. A sample lexicon of phrases would include: advocacy, equity, the poor speaking and acting for themselves, human rights, civil rights, empowerment, movement building, progressive change, social action, promotion of democracy, accountability and transparency, systemic change, and public policy.

Starting in the 1990s, large foundations began to use the term social justice. When the Ford Foundation reorganized its program divisions in 1996, it renamed one of them Peace and Social Justice, for example. (That Ford Foundation program division is now called Democracy, Rights, and Justice.)

In 2007, the Atlantic Philanthropies adopted a social justice framework for its grantmaking in all of its program areas and countries where it operated. The Open Society Foundations (previously known as the Open Society Institute) also asserted a mission to "advance human rights and justice around the world."

What Then Is Social Justice Philanthropy?

Social justice is not just a slogan on a banner or bumper sticker or button. Its definition needs to be backed with substance to be useful as a grantmaker tool. In the late 1990s, the Foundation Center and Independent Sector sought to define social justice philanthropy. What these two key philanthropic sector organizations adopted, is worth quoting. Social justice philanthropy is

the granting of philanthropic contributions to nonprofit organizations based in the United States and other countries that work for structural change in order to increase the opportunity of those who are the least well off politically, economically and socially.

The report went on to describe the characteristics of a social justice framework, which makes lasting change more likely:

• a focus on root causes of inequity rather than symptoms
• a striving for lasting systemic and institutional change
• the use of a combination of tactics such as policy advocacy, grassroots organizing, litigation, and communications that together are more likely to yield enduring results
• the strengthening and empowering of disadvantaged and vulnerable populations to advocate on their own behalf

Subsequently, the Working Group on Philanthropy for Social Justice and Peace convened by the Ford Foundation put forward the following definition of social justice:

Effective social justice philanthropy aims to end the injustices suffered by one group of people at the hands of another. These injustices often result in social, economic, and/or political inequalities. But rather than focus on the effects of unjust treatment, good social justice grantmaking attempts to undo the mechanisms of oppression.

How Can a Foundation Effectively Practice Social Justice Philanthropy

According to the Working Group on Philanthropy for Social Justice and Peace, the following elements are necessary for good social justice philanthropy:

1. Sound Analysis…

Of the forces that contribute to injustice. Effective social justice grantmakers base their work on a sound analysis of the historical forces that contributed to shaping the current reality they wish to change, the forces that help maintain the status quo, and the likely future evolution of these forces.

Of the effects of membership in oppressed classes of people. Foundation staff examine the current context and their own work through the lenses of gender, race, ethnicity, class, age, sexual orientation, religious affiliation, country of origin, and membership in other social categories that experience unjust treatment.

Of institutional structures. Because the mechanism of oppression sometimes appears faceless, foundation staff analyze the myriad ways in which institutional structures -- the policies that govern institutions, their practices, their cultures, their relationships with one another and with the communities they’re meant to serve -- contribute to injustice. The category of institutions studied is broad and might include, for example, the local school system, the church, the military, local and national governments, NGOs, the business sector or individual businesses, etc.

Of the distribution of power. One of the goals of an effective social justice grantmaker is to shift power from those who perpetrate injustice to those who suffer it. To this end, foundation staff examine how power in its various forms (wealth, political influence, etc.) is acquired, held, and brokered in the current context.

2. Effective Choice of Strategies and Tactics

A good social justice grantmaker is able to translate a sound analysis into (a) an effective formulation of goals and objectives, and (b) a smart choice of strategies and tactics. Does the analysis lead to a clear sense of what should be changed and how? What are the best strategies for making the desired change happen? Do the strategies lead to a choice of tactics rich enough to initiate and sustain social change?

For example, if funding an advocacy initiative were deemed a good strategy, would the grantmaker support the organizational capacities of activist groups; the building of a broad base of support; the strengthening of alliances among participating organizations; improved data collection and analysis; more strategic communications; and the ability to mobilize additional resources over the long term? If the grantmaker seeks a particular policy outcome, does foundation staff also fund the organizations that would monitor implementation and enforcement? If a social change effort requires litigation, does the grantmaker fund only the legal effort, or, understanding the nature of social change, does the grantmaker also support movement building and other activities that, taken together, are more likely to succeed in removing the injustice?

Because people's lives often hang in the balance, good intentions are not good enough. The grantmaker’s work should have a significant chance of succeeding. It will thus be important to attend carefully to such matters as the scale of the intervention and its time horizon. Social justice is not easily achieved, nor does it come quickly.

A social justice grantmaker will be most effective when they recognize and use all the tools and privileges at their disposal as a grantmaker: the power to convene, the ability to speak with the voice of an institution, access to decision-makers, the ability to marshal significant resources, etc.

3. Solidarity and Respect

Solidarity. An effective social justice grantmaker works in meaningful partnership with the communities they aim to serve. The staffer recognizes that she or he is ultimately accountable to these communities. In practice, this means that the grantmaker will learn from communities and, whenever possible, take direction from them. The grantmaker will aim to make the communities' voices heard, not that of the foundation. There should, in other words, always be a strong presumption against contravening the desires of these communities, to the extent that going against their wishes requires special justification. By working in solidarity with affected communities, the grantmaker gains a deeper understanding of the issues involved. By looking to these communities for leadership, the foundation staffer increases their ownership of the work. Both of these lead to better outcomes. Social justice grantmakers must also be willing to take the medicines they prescribe. We undermine our social justice efforts by exempting ourselves from the rules we would apply to others.

Respect. Effective social justice grantmakers respect the dignity of the communities they serve. They do not cast them as victims, unable to change their basic condition without assistance. Nor do grantmakers romanticize these communities. Because all people possess free will, all parties must acknowledge that they have the ability to participate in their own oppression or liberation. Respect drives out both under-valuation and unrealistic expectations. It motivates social justice grantmakers to seek wisdom and strength from the communities they serve.

4. The General Qualities of a Good Grantmaker

Effective grantmakers take calculated risks; they're often creative in the use of the limited resources available to them; they partner well with others, across sectoral lines and other divisions; they’re patient because they understand that meaningful social change takes time; and they learn from failure -- their own and that of others.

The most difficult and most important practice may be to examine one's logic model and ask, "Even if I do all of these things, what is the change I must see in order to know I am engaged in social justice philanthropy?"

Key Questions

Is social justice a valuable lens for grantmakers? Using a social justice framework has attendant issues: the concept of social justice has become so broadly defined that it may be perceived as being devoid of true meaning. In some cases, foundation trustees and executives may perceive social justice as having a negative connotation. At the Grants Managers Network's 2011 conference, one participant shared that, although most people, regardless of their relationship to the philanthropy sector, would regard her employer's grants as social justice funding -- the foundation has awarded grants to address the issue of high incarceration rates, including awards to the Innocence Project and local re-entry programs for ex-offenders -- the foundation itself framed them as public safety grants. "We couldn't have funded them under the name of social justice," the participant said.

If a foundation has clearly defined what it means by social justice, however, the terminology can provide a useful framework.

Is the term applicable to how a foundation conducts itself separate from its grantmaking? Yes, that is a defining hallmark of social justice philanthropy. Listening, for example, is one of the most important tools when using a social justice lens. The Seattle-based Marguerite Casey Foundation, which helps working families advocate for change on their own behalf, uses listening as its first line of approach. Several years ago, the foundation convened a series of Listening Circles across the country, inviting local experts, parents, and youth to provide feedback on how the foundation should spend $30 million dollars per year to benefit low-income families.

Underlying this approach is a fundamental axiom: the outsider (e.g., funder) first should listen carefully to the members of the communities where it works or seeks to work before making any assumptions on where their support can effect the greatest and most long-lasting social change.

What are some of the common characteristics of social justice foundations? Based on my informal survey of a number of foundations that would be identified by their peers as social justice-focused, I identified the following common traits:

• Their field of interests is akin to a forest that comprises a common canopy rather than a collection of individual trees. In other words, they understand how one grantee's activities are part of a larger ecosystem that includes many other players.
• Social change is a journey rather than a destination. That truism requires donors to perceive themselves as long-distance runners rather than as sprinters.
• A foundation is able to draw on an extensive philanthropic toolkit in addition to grants. That kit includes the power of convening, making recommendations with respect to consultants, enabling peer exchanges, providing meeting space, and technical/management assistance.
• Grants officers go beyond checking off the "we've received your report" box. In practice, they act more as partners and resource brokers. They move beyond checklist grantmaking at the front and tail ends of a grant. Their relationships with grantees do not have a beginning or an end date.
• The menu of the types of financial support that these grantmakers provide is varied and includes general support, multi-year grants, capacity-building support, and individual fellowships, in addition to project-specific grants and endowment support.

How can grantmakers -- and grants managers in particular -- use a social justice lens in their work? My checklist includes the following:

• What are the organization's mission, vision, core values, and track record with respect to diversity?
• Do those things jibe with the foundation's mission, interests, and strategy or theory of change?
• Who is the organization's constituency/base, and how does the organization engage them?
• Does it have a clear plan of action?
• Is it able to show evidence of collaboration and networking with like-minded organizations?
• Is it supported by other social justice funders?

Finally, if a grants manager's job description doesn't encompass at least some of the responsibilities described in this post, let me suggest that as a topic for discussion when next developing/revising position descriptions, reviewing annual work plans, and in the performance review process.

Resources

For more information, check out the following Web sites:

• Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation – Reports & Publications
• New World Foundation – Technical Assistance to Grantees
• Greater New Orleans Foundation – Initiative Grantmaking
• Atlantic Philanthropies – Thought Leadership
• California Endowment – Meeting Ground
• Marguerite Casey Foundation – Listening

-- Michael Seltzer

The Art of Inclusion: New York Funders Mobilize to Make the Arts More Accessible

(Laura Cronin is a regular contributor to PhilanTopic. In her last post, she spoke with Douglas Bauer, executive director of the New York City-based Clark Foundation, about the foundation's efforts to build the capacity of its grantees.)

If a person with a serious vision, hearing, or mobility impairment came to your office on business or joined your organization as an employee, you would do whatever you needed to to accommodate that person so he or she could do his or her job. Indeed, most people would be embarrassed if their employer failed to create an accessible work space for such a guest, while failure to do so for a new employee is illegal.

But what if everyone at the office gathered around the virtual water cooler on a Monday morning to share their excitement about the latest blockbuster exhibition at the local art museum or the holiday performance at the local concert hall? Would your colleague have been there on Saturday along with everyone else? Would the museum or concert hall have been equipped to accommodate a patron who is blind or hearing impaired? Would any of their foundation grant dollars have been dedicated to figuring out how to make it possible for that potential audience member to enjoy its offerings?

Gains won as a result of the 1990 passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) are now so familiar -- curb cuts, kneeling buses, signs in Braille -- that it is tempting to assume that issues of concern to people with disabilities have been embraced by the field of philanthropy. Unfortunately, the data tell a different story. According to the Disability Funders Network (DFN), of the $45.7 billion in foundation grants awarded in 2011, only $559 million -- less than three percent -- was directed to disability issues.

Kim Hutchinson, president/CEO of the Disability Funders Network, and her DFN colleagues are mobilizing to make access to arts and culture a central focus of their education and convening efforts in 2012. In February, after a New York City funders briefing with Hutchinson and colleagues from the MetLife Foundation, the New York Community Trust, American Express, the American Foundation for the Blind, the FISA Foundation, the Kessler Foundation, and the Reader's Digest Partners for Sight Foundation, several New York-based foundations agreed to form a special task force to promote inclusive practical strategies that nonprofit cultural institutions can use to better welcome the disabled audience. To date, the group has identified and generated over $3 million in new philanthropic grant dollars to promote arts access for people with disabilities in New York City.

DFN believes too many funders are stuck thinking about people with disabilities as a group whose needs are addressed through healthcare programs rather than as individuals eager to take part in all aspects of community life. By promoting a more complete picture of people with disabilities as students, workers, athletes, theater goers, music lovers and neighbors, DFN is making the case that disability should be part of any grantmaking program concerned with education, employment, diversity, civic participation, and, especially arts and culture.

According to Nina Levent, executive director of Art Education for the Blind/Art Beyond Sight, by funding accessibility and inclusion, grantmakers not only support audiences that identify themselves as visitors with disabilities, their families, and their caregivers, they also support millions of people who have "invisible disabilities" such as gradually diminishing sight, hearing, or physical stamina. By helping to make cultural programs more accessible and promoting employment of people with disabilities at cultural institutions across the country, the philanthropic community can broaden its impact. After all, the graying of the U.S. population means that the disability community will only grow in size, with one estimate placing the total number of people in the United States living with a disability at 150 million by 2030.

People with disabilities are natural constituents for every type of grantmaking initiative. And in an era when arts and cultural organizations are looking to develop new audiences, promoting accessibility can be good for the bottom line. The new affinity group within the DFN network invites all arts and culture funders to consider whether they are paying enough attention to disability in their own funding and is eager to collaborate on projects to ensure that people with disabilities have greater access to all that our visual, literary, and performing arts have to offer.

-- Laura Cronin

Breaking the Cycle: Toward a More Holistic Treatment of Sexuality

(Colleen Hoff is director of the Center for Research & Education on Gender and Sexuality at San Francisco State University. Her ongoing HIV prevention study on gay couples is the largest ever in the U.S. Justin Keller is the center's development director.)

Sexuality remains a largely taboo topic in the world of philanthropy. Culturally speaking, it tends to make us uncomfortable, and controversy is not something foundations tend to seek out. To avoid potential conflicts, private funders interested in the subject tend to narrow their focus to specific needs-based issues: reproductive rights and health, HIV/AIDS, sexually transmitted infections (STIs), intimate partner violence, women's rights and social justice, and marriage equality. Unfortunately, these needs-based labels can restrict our thinking about sexuality and its connection to health and well-being.

Among other things, this narrow view forces researchers and educators in the field to frame their work in the context of disease or other negative consequences of sex, such as unintended pregnancy. Without question, these issues need to be addressed. But by defining sexuality in terms of the negative outcomes associated with it, we are painting an incomplete picture. More devastatingly, it prevents important research questions from even being asked.

Both the White House and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention have recently started to recognize the importance of sexuality as a vital component of the human experience. As early as 2001, former United States Surgeon General David Satcher stated "that sexuality encompasses more than sexual behavior, that the many aspects of sexuality include not only the physical, but the mental and the spiritual as well...." Despite this acknowledgment, federal funds dedicated to this area of research are almost completely devoted to HIV/AIDS and STIs. What little research has been done on the positive impact of sex clearly indicates that healthy sexuality contributes greatly to overall health and well-being. Framing adverse sexual health outcomes within the larger context of sexuality may allow for the development of more holistic, effective programmatic approaches to these issues.

Here is a small sample of areas that have been virtually ignored:

Gay and Lesbian Parents

According to a 2011 report by the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, over 50 percent of lesbian and gay parents adopted children from the welfare system, while 60 percent adopted trans-racially (i.e., a child of a different race). Fourteen thousand of the one hundred thousand foster children in the U.S. currently live in homes headed by gay or lesbian parents. And approximately 57 percent of children adopted by gay and lesbian parents have one or more special needs (e.g., developmental disabilities, complex medical issues, and emotional/behavioral disturbances). Despite these figures, little is known about this important and growing population of caregivers, and some literature suggests that gay and lesbian parents and their families receive disparate treatment from schools, healthcare providers, and federal and state entitlement programs. Clearly, there is an immediate need to better understand these experiences so that policies and service providers are able to adapt to this unique and growing population and provide these families with the resources they need.

Sexuality and Disability

As noted above, sexuality tends to be a taboo subject, and discussing it in the context of disability complicates things further. Sexuality can be very confusing for youth with intellectual and developmental disabilities who are developing physically at the same rate as their peers without disabilities. Everyone involved in their lives -- parents, schools, community -- wants to include these youth in conversations about sexuality but also wants to protect them from abuse and exploitation. Research in this area can be critical to informing best practices, programs, and policies that acknowledge that youth with disabilities often are just as curious and confused about sexuality as their peers without disabilities.

Bullying

Despite the increased visibility of LGBT people in society over the last several decades, gay and non-gender conforming teens are still often bullied, with some driven to suicide. The tragic and highly publicized deaths of gay teens such as Jamey Rodemeyer, Jamie Hubley, and Kameron Jacobsen have created a national discourse on the plight of LGBT teens in public school. In 2010, a Mississippi high school canceled its senior prom when a lesbian teen expressed her intention to bring her girlfriend. Such actions demonstrate to LGBT teens that they are less valued than their straight peers. With foundations and popular celebrities such as Lady Gaga engaging in advocacy related to this important social issue, it is critical that we spend the time and resources to understand the unique social environment of schools and the support needed by marginalized teens from a social science perspective.

Diversity in Research

Research is an increasingly difficult market for young researchers of color. A recent study published in Science magazine showed that African Americans are significantly less likely to receive National Institutes of Health grants than white researchers. Mentorship and professional opportunities are critical for students of color currently in the academic pipeline. Diversity of experience plays an important role in the formation of scientific hypotheses. The lack of diversity in the field of sexual health is especially disturbing in light of significant disparities in communities of color with respect to HIV/AIDS, STIs, and unintended pregnancy. Research is needed to examine why these barriers and disparities exist for both researchers of color and communities at risk.

In sum, as our understanding of sexuality grows in the academic realm, we believe the controversy and negative associations tied to it will diminish. The private philanthropic sector's participation is critical if this is to happen sooner rather than later. It would be wonderful, in the near future, to see funders treat sexuality holistically, the way they do other important social and cultural issues such as the arts, education, and economic development. This work will not only improve and save lives, it also will provide an opportunity to promote wellness and acceptance in society. That is something we can all embrace.

(Image: Selina Anttinen)

-- Colleen Hoff and Justin Keller

This Week in PubHub: Protecting the Rights of People With Disabilities

(Kyoko Uchida manages PubHub, the Foundation Center's online catalog of foundation-sponsored publications. In her previous post, she wrote about trends in funding for social justice and advocacy efforts in support of marginalized populations.)

Throughout the month of January, we're highlighting research on various aspects of the ongoing struggle for civil and human rights around the globe. This week, we're featuring four reports that address topics related to the rights of people with disabilities.

Among the most egregious examples of human rights violations involving the disabled is the forced sterilization of women and girls with disabilities, as described in Sterilization of Women and Girls With Disabilities (4 pages, PDF), an issue brief from the Open Society Foundations in collaboration with Human Rights Watch, Women With Disabilities Australia, and the International Disability Alliance. The report points out that the practice is justified in many countries as being in the "best interests" of the women -- who are sterilized without their knowledge, despite refusing or not having the opportunity to consent, and/or after being encouraged to do so through misinformation, as a result of financial incentives, or by intimidation. In addition to being an act of violence, a form of social control, and a violation of numerous international human rights standards, forced sterilization, the paper notes, is a violation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which promotes the right of all people with disabilities to start a family and, for women, to control their fertility on an equal basis with the non-disabled.

The right to live one's life with the same choices as others is at the core of A Community for All: Implementing Article 19 (39 pages, PDF), another publication from the Open Society Foundations. Based on Article 19 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which states that people with disabilities have the right to live independently and be counted as members of society with the same choices as others, the report calls for ending the institutionalization of people with disabilities and to create community-based alternatives and services for them that promote social inclusion. A separate checklist lists ten steps to achieving those ends, starting with "Commit to transforming the system from institutional services to community-based services" and ending with "Establish mechanisms for periodic review of the action plan and national strategy."

What is the nonprofit sector's role with respect to the issue? According to Renewing the Commitment: An ADA Compliance Guide for Nonprofits (139 pages; 15.49MB; PDF), a report from the Chicago Community Trust, about 54 million people in the United States -- nearly one in five -- have at least one disability, and the Americans with Disabilities Act requires most nonprofits to provide them with equal access to services. The guide provides a checklist, resource list, and advice on serving people with disabilities, encourages nonprofits to make sure that their facilities and communications meet the various needs of the disabled community, and highlights considerations for specific types of events, services, and programs. An action agenda in this area includes a call to collaborate with people with disabilities and the organizations that represent them in the planning and compliance process.

Many veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan who return with severe injuries will require care and services, as well. Based on qualitative and quantitative assessments of services needed by Iraq/Afghanistan veterans and their families, the RAND Corporation report A Needs Assessment of New York State Veterans (102 pages, PDF) found, among other things, that veterans were frustrated with employment preference programs that do not prevent discrimination against those with disabilities, as promised. Funded by the New York State Health Foundation, the report concludes that responsibility for the health and well-being of veterans extend well beyond the VA to other clinical and social service delivery systems, and calls for better coordination of care, better outreach to veterans seeking assistance, and more accessible, sustainable, and higher-quality mental health care.

What do you think needs to be done to protect the rights of and enhance the lives of people with disabilities? Are there specific unmet needs that foundations and nonprofits should be addressing? Share your thoughts in the comment section below.

And be sure to check out PubHub, where you can browse more than a hundred and fifty reports on topics related to civil and human rights.

-- Kyoko Uchida

Bridging the Knowledge Gap About Grantmaking for People with Disabilities

(Laura Cronin is a frequent contributor to PhilanTopic. Her last post was a Q&A with Milton Chen, senior fellow and executive director emeritus of the George Lucas Educational Foundation.)

Every funder can, and should, be a disability funder.

A group of New York grantmakers and advocates gathered last week under the auspices of the Disability Funders Network (DFN) to discuss how to make that statement a reality and to galvanize support for a fuller embrace by organized philanthropy of the twenty-one-year-old Americans with Disabilities Act.

According to DFN, an estimated 54 million Americans have at least one disability, making them the largest minority group in the nation. As baby boomers age and more veterans return from war, experts estimate that number could double within twenty years. But less than 3 percent of philanthropic giving is directed to programs serving people with disabilities.

The Kessler Foundation, a DFN member, recently commissioned Harris Interactive to survey the impact of disability on national workforce participation.

Results from the survey reveal that while 70 percent of corporations polled have diversity policies or programs in place, only two-thirds of those with programs include disability as a component. In addition, only 18 percent of companies offer an education program aimed at integrating people with disabilities into the workplace. The findings are notable given that most employers consider the cost of hiring people with disabilities to be the same as hiring employees without a disability (62 percent). The panelists urged funders to design programs to explicitly consider disability.

A few other key themes emerged during the discussion:

• The basic needs of people with disabilities are not greatly different from those of other groups; you will find people with disabilities in all walks of life.
• While the disability community has some needs that do not fit neatly into traditional funding areas, it is not necessary to have a designated disability program area to have a positive impact.
• Foundations can begin to address the funding gap by simply including people with disabilities in their ongoing grant programs.

Several New York funders have already embraced these themes in their grantmaking. Irfan Hasan, DFN board chair and program officer for Health and People with Special Needs at the New York Community Trust, describes how important it is for all funders to be inclusive of people with disabilities:

It doesn't make a difference what issue your foundation supports -- education, health, employment, poverty alleviation, economic development, arts, transportation, social services, and the list can go on and on -- if programs you support are not inclusive of people with disabilities, you miss the mark to improve the situation of some of society's most underserved individuals. Funders that support efforts that are inclusive of people with disabilities are on the right track....

Cheryl Rosario, director of philanthropy at American Express and a DFN board member, has long been an advocate of increased and more inclusive funding. She urges donors not to lock themselves into the mindset that "I'm not a disability funder," but rather to look for ways to make sure the projects they fund are inclusive of all people.

The DFN Web site is a good starting point for funders seeking additional resources as they explore this issue. New York City-based funders looking for recommendations should visit the Center for Independence of the Disabled (CID-NY), a local organization that offers resources and citywide data. (The organization also has created an informative video that gives voice to those who are working actively to realize the promise of the ADA.)

-- Laura Cronin

(Postcript: The briefing was hosted by the America Foundation for the Blind, another DFN member, whose new midtown office features an exhibit of memorabilia related to the career of AFB advocate Helen Keller. The photos in the gallery, which include archival shots of the globe-trotting Keller boarding first-generation jet planes, are a fitting reminder of AFB's long history of advocacy and forward-looking approach to technology. Funders who want to ensure that their Web sites and collateral materials are equally up-to-date with present-day expectations will find an an array of useful resources on the AFB site.)