I want to use this moment to talk about #ThePowerOf funding.
1.
The Global North has created a new capitalist exploitation scheme of demanding that NGOs/NPOs/CSOs meet rigid and often draconian criteria in order to receive funding for projects/activities.
In order to receive funding, organisations are expected to remain compliant with reporting guidelines that they are often ill-equipped to follow, with a capacity that is often incompatible with the demands being made. And @WomenDeliver is also guilty of this.
Let me explain: the overall programme and "Digital University" produced for WD Young Leaders (YLs) is not in any way designed to address capacity gaps that could prohibit a YL's organisation from qualifying to receive funding or from being able to efficiently complete reports
But more than that, the "programme" doesn't actually prepare you for much at all. It was essentially an indoctrination tool—get to learn about what other amazing YLs have done (to boost the organisation's profile). In essence, it is designed essentially to highlight successes.
The "training" helped us to grow an affinity for @WomenDeliver by highlighting the greatness of the poster children who have been best able to transform their experience into significant impact. And I want to add a tangent here...
...USD$5000 can do marvellous things in some countries. In others, it does very little. Knowing your funding landscape should really be a key part of deciding how to disburse funds. One-size-fits-all approaches are antithetical to development work. But I digress...
You know what we don't get from completing the YL "programme"? The dance steps. (And let us be real, we are being asked to dance.) We don't learn the moves we need to make to help us prepare to receive funds from an organisation claiming to empower YLs. We should be learning..
...how to successfully apply to grants, to manage funds, to develop/follow M&E frameworks, to complete a report.
Granted, these are documents that are shared with us when we do receive funds. But the emphasis should be on ensuring that ALL YLs have the capacity to use these.
Following my completion of the "course", the next step was the conference. Yet I had gained no skills. I had gained no enhanced feminist perspective that I didn't already have. But somehow I was ready enough to appear in a conference and give/listen to presentations.
And this was only because I actually have competency in all of the forenamed areas. But what about the YLs who weren't as adept as me? What about these young people from developing nations across the globe who need much more support in learning the dance steps? Many of us...
...in the non-profit sector in the developing world continue to struggle with capacity. Even when we do have capacity, we struggle to mobilise resources. And when we do have resources, we struggle to precipitate sustainable change. And this brings me back to my opening point.
Most of us are doing this work for free because of the challenges with availability of/receiving funding. For countries like mine, funding opportunities are quite scarce because of our high income status. And THIS is why an empowerment programme should, at the very least...
...empower people. It should be the goal of the organisation to learn what are the systemic and other barriers faced by those they claim to serve. This should include understanding the funding landscape and needs of YLs seeking to grow their base and skills through their...
...experience with this programme. If this was a goal of the YL programme, much more concerted efforts would be made to establish robust connections with point persons across each region and country they serve. THAT is how you create something sustainable.
But the false sense of community that is created simply by saying you are a #WDYL is not moving us forward. Which makes me wonder: who benefits most from this community? I'll pause for folks to guess.
If you guessed @WomenDeliver, you would be absolutely right. They are the ones who benefit most from this community. And, again, this brings us back full circle to my initial thesis: we are shifting into dangerous territory where activism is also subject to exploitation.
With their sheer size, the network @WomenDeliver has built will perpetually benefit them. This is how capitalism works. The more you gain, the more you get. YLs are essentially acquisitions who form an extensive asset base for the organisation to leverage to their investors.
And let me mention one other critical point: YLs' funds are capped. Out of your USD$5000, 30% can go to salaries. And this is an extremely important point. Because what, exactly, is the purpose of such a cap if the goal is to empower YLs? And how is this not exploitative?
As @WomenDeliver engages in its damage control and self-evaluation, I urge them to consider not just the lack of racial sensitivity but also the obvious deficit in the reflection of diversity of experience in the design of its programme. It is painfully obvious that it was...
...not actually designed to benefit the developing world clientelle meant to be served and who build their asset base. We cannot continue being expexted to produce outputs that boost their impact profile to investors, especially when our potential impact is so blunted.
And we cannot continue to do this when we know the cumulative impact of their Small Grants programme continues to underscore their excellence and not ours. When I can't pay myself or my team to do the work we do, we will never be able to produce sustainable change.
The sustainability of the model that @WomenDeliver is using is self-serving. And to tie this back in to the current conversation now about their race-based transgressions: I, personally, refuse to continue being capital for an organisation who can enrich itself but not...
...the folks who share my identity. I refuse to sit silently by as I read the horrific accounts of acts of White violence being perpetrated in the name of development. The reason these stories were not surprising is not just because I understand what it means to be Black.
It is also because I saw the complete unbridled display of White Feminism™ playing out in front of my eyes at the conference, where the YLs seemed to have way less significance than the diplomats and celebrity-status guest speakers who were lucky enough to receive...
...a proper breakfast and private access to the conference. These folks who were able to enter without being patted down by guards and scanned like criminals. There was no concern for how some of the YLs may be coping with traumas that would make just these two oversights...
...a dangerously triggering experience. Even the depth of the presentations left me grasping for substance I would never find. I stand with my kinfolk who have been silenced to the point of submission because I saw the hints of this politic unmasked in small ways in Vancouver
And the silencing of diverse voices within the organisation is obvious outside of it. When we cannot be seen even when we are standing in front of you, how am I to ever believe that you can see me when we aren't? It must be recognised that the gaps in design are directly...
...related to the gaps in their internal power structures. Had beneficiaries of the programme comprised part of the leadership of the organisation, it is only axiomatic that their presence would have been felt in the design and execution.
And INPOS like @WomenDeliver are EXTREMELY well poised to move beyond the cosmetics of WhiteFeminism™ and strive to empower people in marginalised, vulnerable communities in radical, sustainable ways, starting from the way they treat with their "diverse" staff.
However, with the paltry response given in the @WomenDeliver statement, I do not feel convinced that accountability will be forthcoming. But I can say, #WeAreWatching. #ThePowerOf your network will no longer only benefit you; now we will benefit those you have silenced.
And I am calling for a PUBLIC account of every single act of reconciliation you engage in. #Reparations start at home. So I call on @WomenDeliver and their executive, including, @Katja_Iversen, to let the diverse voices lead the process of reconciliation and transformation.