We Are (neighbor)Built for This
By Leeann Wallett, Program Officer, Ambitio US
As we embark on the seventh year of Ambitio US , there is increased urgency to find and support experimental systems change work. In the midst of great uncertainty, we must continue this necessary, generational work of economic systems change that center people and the planet. This is the exact moment Dan and Ebony Edwards of neighborbuilt were not only made for, but motivated by. “The communities we represent have been fortunate in that there’s always been chaos around us. [Even so], we find out how to get by. We were built for this. We know how to navigate this.” The Edwards envision a bright future for their three young children — to ensure they grow up in a Kansas City full of potential not limited by neighborhood, where all residents can thrive.
neighborbuilt recognizes the commonality of the problem with neighborhoods across the US, and is working towards a solution that could benefit urban areas everywhere. “Many of the urban core communities look the same: there’s a business improvement district and a highway that segregates the city into two halves. The eastside is typically the more distressed area because it is downwind from the environmental toxins that blow from the westside. Many of these eastside communities are also designated Opportunity Zones,” says Dan.
“The Magnitude of Solutions Don’t Match the Magnitude of the Crisis”
neighborbuilt began its work and focus in the South Vine District, a historically Black community and hometown to co-founders, Dan and Ebony located on the east side of Kansas City, Missouri. neighborbuilt’s mission is to equip neighbors with the agency to rebuild, own, and operate their economies using its economy creation platform, which transforms low-production “distressed communities” into high-production, thriving economies. Throughout the years, the Edwards have experienced the challenges of trying to secure, repair, and (re)build housing, especially in historically Black neighborhoods.
In 2024, Ambitio US provided legal support to ensure neighborbuilt has durable legal structures that empower the community to own and govern their assets, and to position it for philanthropic, for-profit, and government investors. This partnership allowed Dan and Ebony the opportunity to launch a revolutionary project called OneMillion.Homes . “The housing crisis is the same in every city. The real issue is every traditional economic development model favors single-site, one-off projects,” says Dan. “The magnitude of solutions aren’t matching the magnitude of the crisis.”
Earlier this year, Dan flew to Las Vegas to announce a fund to build 500 homes in five cities — Kansas City, St. Louis, Atlanta, Oklahoma City, and Chattanooga. The mayors of these five cities are part of the National Housing Crisis Task Force which will propose innovative federal, state, and local policies and practices around how to build and deliver “faster, cost-efficient housing solutions.” In other words, these cities are eager and willing to work with entities to come up with innovative solutions to the housing crisis like neighborbuilt’s plan to raise at least $50 million through a revolving construction fund in order to build at least 5,000 homes in the next 10 years.
Funding the future “Neighbor-conomy”
There is also a community ownership aspect to this work and the role it plays in building long-term, generational wealth, self-determination, and racial equity in historically neglected and distressed neighborhoods. In order to create a sustainable economy and create shared wealth, the Edwards, as the developer of record, will offer a Neighbor Stock Ownership Program (N.S.O.P.) in which neighbors, residents and businesses, owners and renters alike, are shareholders/stockholders, not in just their property, but the entire neighborhood redevelopment. Described as the “neighbor-conomy,” the new investment asset class includes all the elements needed to sustain an entire neighborhood: housing, commercial and businesses, amenities, public spaces, human capital, community wellness, and economic resiliency.
“By investing in this new asset class, individuals can generate wealth beyond the returns of a one-off home or single investment property and experience the wealth generated by the value creation of the entire stabilized neighborhood,” says Dan. An additional component of the neighbor stock ownership program is it enables neighbors to earn shares based on their many contributions outside of a direct purchase that are essential to an economy’s success.
All of this hard-earned knowledge got the Edwards thinking about how to pay it forward. They are working on a new education program called “How to Rebuild a Neighborhood.” “We want to create something that doesn’t exist yet; a dictionary or playbook that communicates and guides those who want to [re]build their neighborhood or help others get the opportunity of stability,” says Dan. The Edwards want to share their hard-earned knowledge and experience to imagine ‘This Old House’ 2.0 “…but for rebuilding and creating diverse neighborhoods for generations to come.”
For more information about neighborbuilt and its programs, please visit: OneMillion.Homes
This article was originally published on Medium. Read it on Medium →
Evil Genius Strategy Session Recap (EGSS): Funders and Movement Leaders Convene
By Christopher Audain, Program Officer, Ambitio US
The Center for Cultural Innovation (CCI), Ambitio US, and the National Performance Network (NPN) hosted the Evil Genius Strategy Sessions (EGSS), an experimental convening from October 6–8, 2024, in Chicago. These sessions brought together Economic Trailblazers, movement leaders, and funders from around the country to unpack what it means to create a more just cultural economy, discuss pressing issues, become more informed about each other’s work, and determine if there were actions that we might want to take together. The idea for this joint conversation came from discussions between the NPN and the CCI teams about going beyond surface-level discussions about creating a more just and equitable world through the pursuit of systems-change work.
CCI/Ambitio US and NPN covered costs related to movement leaders’ travel and provided them with a stipend for this special gathering so that these leaders would not experience a financial burden as a result of attending EGSS. We know that experts in the field value unstructured time to build and, in some cases, reaffirm relationships with each other.
“Being in space with people I’ve only seen on Zoom, hearing about all the movement work happening and seeing the connections, hearing people’s experiences and the validation in similarities of struggle with philanthropy. [were all things I valued about attending this convening.]” Survey Comment
EGSS held two three-hour working sessions over two days. During our time together, we explored the roles and experiences of people in the room and how those roles intersect. The first day focused on creating a sense of who was in the room, understanding how each person interacts with the economic system in their professional life, and how we might reimagine capital and resource distribution. The second and final day included more group discussion and digging deeper into the challenges and possible solutions for breaking through systemic barriers.
Key Takeaways
1) Philanthropy Must Accelerate Its Ability to Change Procedures to Meet the Moment
“The reality is that philanthropy is concerned with philanthropy. While the individual people are lovely, they do not move with urgency. And the position that they take is often meant to keep their overall positions of power.”
Movement leaders and funders alike voiced frustration about the limits of philanthropy to go beyond its standard practices and meet the urgency of the moment. Foundations are often stuck in the loop of historical procedures and unwilling to change for various reasons (including concerns about being taxed at a higher threshold or spending down an endowment). It is important, particularly in moments like these, to remember that many rules and guiding practices for philanthropic institutions are self-created and self-imposed. They should be interrogated periodically to ensure that they remain relevant and aligned with the organization’s mission.
Movement leaders observe that philanthropic institutions are often risk-averse. Still, a funder in the group pointed out that it is frequently the case that the ideas themselves are not illegal but could pose a potentially higher risk to the foundation. The risk might be nominal, but the present modus operandi is to proceed with the safer option and mitigate reputational and financial risk. This moment demands that philanthropy push against the time-honored traditions that are holding up the biggest potential wins and progressive transformation.
Many movement leaders expressed challenges with the hierarchical structure of philanthropy and seeking funding. Often field leaders make a request, which sometimes has to be presented to several additional staff members and/or program areas, and then they hear, “I have to take it [your request] to the board,” which in best cases results in additional back and forth, and in worst cases, they do not hear from the funder again. Movement leaders would like to see the process restructured so they do not waste their time and energy if it is not a good fit and clear decisions are made more quickly.
2) Deconstruct, Rethink, and be Transparent About the Role of Program Officers
“There’s a dysfunctioning gap created between program officers and the projects/initiatives they seek to support generated from the way philanthropic funds and foundations hold info, power, and strategy too close to the vest.”
Movement leaders reported that the lack of transparency related to decision-making and foundational hierarchy complicated their relationships with program officers and was needlessly confusing. Program officers have a certain amount of power, and while this power varies greatly from foundation to foundation, the actual decision-making power is often at the level of the president or the board and, in some cases, held entirely by the benefactor or relatives of the foundation’s namesake. During our session, there was palpable confusion from movement leaders about what program officers are charged to do, how much agency they have, and what it means for them to be the frontline representative of foundations.
Some foundations have redefined the role and changed the position title so it is more aligned with the work.
In a blog from the Center for Effective Philanthropy , Sarah Moody from the Missouri Foundation for Health describes the challenges that come with reimagining the role of Program Officer, especially in terms of the difficulty foundations can have with making cultural shifts and decentralizing power and decision making. It is an interesting example where this foundation did retire the title. Moody’s title changed from Program Officer to Director of Community Relationships. “A thoughtful process of reflection led us to shift away from the traditional title of program officer and lean into titles such as strategist that more appropriately align with our work. We shifted the job descriptions to give our staff more flexibility to engage with community and listen in whatever way is needed to help develop strategies” says Moody.
3) Dismantle Power Dynamics to Build A True Coalition of Change
During the gathering, a movement leader shared that no one they have worked with in the philanthropic sector has ever asked about their dreams or the fullest extent of their vision .
Whether they are aware of it or not, funders typically enter relationships trying to fit what they learn into a frame that works for them. The world builders and movement leaders have demonstrated a phenomenal capacity to create new systems and structures that seemed impossible to achieve when they started. What would it look like if philanthropy was willing to understand their dreams from the start and invest in them fully, without predetermined notions and bureaucratic encumbrances?
Another theme that surfaced was that some philanthropic institutions are funding organizations to fulfill the goals of the foundation’s mission, not necessarily the goals articulated by the community or grantees they hope to support. The fact that many grantmakers are removed from the stakeholders they wish to serve is an inherent problem with the philanthropic structure, amplifying the unbalanced power dynamic between the funder and the grantee, especially when foundations are distributing funds from a distance and not working mindfully as collaborative partners. Movement leaders described a constant hustle for basic survival, leading to burnout, fatigue, and an unsustainable work culture.
Funders deeply appreciate the relationships they develop with grantees. Still, they wondered how many meaningful relationships they could manage at one time. How many grantees are too many for one program officer? In what way does the application process actually hinder the work of the grantees rather than supporting their work that provides needed services and opportunities for our communities at large?
Overall, the goal of the convening was to begin shaping — individually and collectively — a non-extractive cultural economy that recalibrates the relationship between philanthropy and the world-builders it funds. Developing an enduring agenda held by the movement leaders and funders and creating a set of shared values is part of the work and remains a goal coming out of the EGSS. What we learned, however, is that it is vital for people — funders and movement leaders — to know each other deeply before moving earnestly into strategy work. The connections made were the best parts for most attendees, “Connecting with people I hadn’t met. Learning about ideas and solutions and incredible work happening [was my favorite part], ” a participant said.
Building Relational Infrastructure
EGSS presented an opportunity for Ambitio US to invest in the relational infrastructure — the bonds between people in the cultural economic movement — that drives the organizations and endeavors we support. Ambitio US views investments in relational infrastructure as some of our most valuable work. Relationships remain long after someone has left a particular job or geography. The way to chart a new path forward is to create the time, space, and place for people doing aligned work to come together, get to know one another, and build a community of practice and support.
Further, it is rare to have a space where funders and movement builders convene and speak candidly about the challenges in philanthropy and consider how to solve them together. One attendee spoke to the power of the convening.]
“I truly appreciate the space and time together to connect, learn, and challenge how money moves, how to impact funding, to commiserate, and create with this group of people. It is not lost on me that ten years ago, I don’t think many spaces like this existed, and I certainly wasn’t getting invited into them. The more that we can demystify how funding works and build relationships the more we are able to organize and impact the funding systems. Also, there are some great things happening with funding, and we need to be able to learn about that, uplift, and invite more folks to get into it.”
Ambitio US and NPN are taking all the guidance under advisement.
If you are interested in learning more about the session or have questions, contact me at christopher@cciarts.org .
This article was originally published on Medium. Read it on Medium →