How to Fund Real Change in Your Community | Rebecca Darwent | TED

翻译人员: wu yuna 校对人员: Gentle Yang

I spent my whole career in the nonprofit sector.

我的整个职业生涯 都奉献给了非营利事业。

Street outreach, program management,

街头宣传、项目管理、

fundraising, grant making, public policy,

募捐筹钱、划拨赠款、公共政策，

you name it, I've done it.

你能想到的，我都做过。

I've seen a lot.

我也见识过很多。

And I'm a really positive person,

我是一个特别乐观积极的人，

so it's actually difficult to say this.

所以这事其实很难让人启齿。

But the way we do philanthropy right now,

那就是我们现在做慈善的方式，

the way we've done it for decades,

几十年来我们一直用的方式，

is broken.

不再起效。

And here's how I found out.

我是这样发现这点的。

In my early 20s,

在我20岁出头的时候，

I was a frontline social worker in New York City,

我是纽约的一名一线社会工作者，

working with people living with HIV.

为HIV患者们服务。

Many of them had multiple chronic illnesses,

他们中的许多人患有多种慢性病，

and they were underhoused.

同时无家可归。

So I'd spend my days, and even some nights, with them,

所以我用我的每个白天， 甚至是一些晚上，

running around the city to doctor's appointments and housing agencies.

陪同他们奔波于城市中 找预约的医生与住房中介。

The day-to-day work was hard.

日复一日的工作很艰难，

But the hardest part was we never had had enough funding to do the work.

但最艰难的部分是， 我们从未有过足够的资金开展工作。

On Friday mornings,

在周五早上的时候，

I'd go into the office to write up my case notes for the week

我会去到办公室 撰写这周的案例记录。

and I'd speed past front reception,

我也会快速经过前台，

not looking at the mailboxes full of blue slips.

但不去看那些塞满了蓝纸片的信箱。

Each blue letter marked another colleague let go

每一封蓝色的信函 意味着又一个同事

because of our funding crisis.

因为资金危机而离去。

Within one month, I’d lost half my team,

一个月内， 我已经失去了半个队伍，

and my caseload ballooned from 30 to over 100.

而我们承接的病例数 从三十膨胀到了一百。

And this is the reality for so many nonprofits.

这是许多非营利组织的真实处境，

They're at the mercy of their funders.

它们任由出资者们摆布。

And when we look at those funders, they decide who and what gets funded.

当我们看向那些出资者们， 是他们决定资助对象和资助内容，

And it's almost always a mystery how they make those decisions.

而他们如何做决定几乎总是个谜。

Nonprofits spend so much time fundraising,

非营利组织在筹钱时 消耗了太多的时间

filling out pages and pages and pages of paperwork.

在填写一页接一页的纸质材料上。

And they're filling out so much paperwork

他们要填写太多的纸质材料，

that they hardly have any time to actually support communities,

以至于他们几乎没有什么时间 来实实在在地服务社群，

which is literally the thing that they're funded to do.

而这才是他们获得资助真正要去做的事。

After years of doing amazing work, improving every single metric,

经过多年出色的工作， 提升了每一个指标之后，

we'd hear things like,

我们听到的是，

"I'm sorry, our major donor has switched direction.

“我很抱歉，我们的主要捐助者 改变了他的方向，

They’re no longer working and investing in HIV and AIDS.”

他们不再为 HIV与艾滋病工作和投资”，

Or, “I’m sorry,

又或是，“我很抱歉，

we issue grants for three years max."

我们最多只提供三年的资金”。

This would never happen in the private sector.

这在私营部门中绝不会发生。

You do an amazing job for three years and then get fired?

你做了三年的出色工作， 到头来却被炒了？

It makes no sense.

这不合理。

So I decided to switch sides.

所以我决定换一边，

Instead of being on the side that's asking for money,

不是站在筹款的这一边，

what if I went to the side that was giving money?

如果我去到拨款的那一边呢？

Help them understand what was happening on the ground and make a change.

帮助他们理解当下 正在发生的并做出改变。

So off I went into the world of philanthropy

于是我进入了慈善世界，

only to discover that trillions of dollars are in donor-advised funds

却发现数万亿美元存放在 捐赠者建议基金和私人基金会中，

and private foundations just waiting to be donated.

等待着人们的捐赠。

Meanwhile, those nonprofits

同时，那些非营利组织

and community-led organizations are wasting so much time

以及社区主导的组织浪费了太多时间

filling out paperwork and competing over scraps.

在填写纸质资料与比拼细枝末节上。

I'd hear a donor publicly support a cause like homelessness.

我会听到一位捐赠者公开支持 像无家可归这样的问题，

And then behind closed doors,

之后在紧闭的门后，

I'd hear, "They don't really know what's good for them.

我会听到： “他们其实不知道对他们什么是好的，

What they really need is ..."

他们真正需要的是.....”

Which is code for “donor knows best.”

这就叫做“捐赠者最了解需求”。

I was confused.

我感到不解。

How could a donor possibly know what was really needed?

一个捐赠者怎么可能知道 他们真正需要的是什么？

Their lifestyle look nothing like the people they wanted to help.

他们的生活方式 与他们想帮助的人有着天壤之别。

The problem wasn't a lack of money.

问题不在于缺钱。

Again, trillions of dollars are sitting just waiting to be put to work.

几十亿美金等待着发挥它们的作用。

But even if we unlocked every single one of those dollars,

但即使我们获得了里面的所有钱，

it actually wouldn't matter

其实也无济于事，

because a very small group of people

因为只有很小一部分人

are making all of the decisions

在做所有

about funding.

关于资金的决定，

Their priorities, their way.

以他们的优先级，以他们的方式。

Almost 70 percent of donations

接近70%的捐款

are directed by the top one percent of donors.

由头部1%的捐款者控制，

And they choose causes that resonate with their lives,

而他们会选择与自己生活产生共鸣的领域，

like their university or the arts.

比如他们的大学或艺术，

And these issues are overfunded.

但这些方面已经有过量的资金。

And look, I know that donors have good intentions.

我知道捐赠者们都有好的初衷，

I really do.

我真的知道。

But good intentions are not good enough.

但好的初衷还不足够，

Communities are being left behind, and we are running out of time.

那些社群被落下了， 我们的时间也不多了。

I wanted to shift the power dynamic from a top-down approach

我想改变这种力量对比， 从一种自上而下的方式

to a community-led model,

转变为由社区主导的模式，

where nonprofits and donors really work together.

让非营利组织与捐款者们 在其中真正地一起工作。

So in 2020,

所以在2020年的时候，

I co-founded the Foundation for Black Communities

我与利班·阿布科、 扎卡·布莱-马尔和约瑟夫·史密斯

with Liban Abokor, Djaka Blais-Amare and Joseph Smith, to do exactly that.

联合创办了“非裔社群基金会” 来实现我的想法。

We were inspired by a radically different type of philanthropy,

我们受到一种很不一样的慈善启发，

Black philanthropy.

那便是“非裔慈善”。

It's the formal and informal giving

这是一种在全世界非裔社群的

that happens in Black communities around the world.

正式与非正式的给予。

In some cases, it's the kind of giving that you don't get a tax receipt for.

一些情况下，这是那种 你不会获得税收凭证的给予。

And I learned this mostly in my family.

而我大多从我的家人那里了解它。

We do almost everything together, including box hand.

我们几乎一起做许多事情， 包括Box Hand。

Box hand is an informal savings group,

Box Hand是一种 非正式的存款小组，

and in my family we have 13 members.

在我们家庭里我们有13个成员。

So twice a month we all throw a hand,

一个月两次，我们都投入资助，

meaning we put 100 dollars into the pot

意味着我们每人 放一百加元进入箱中，

and one person gets the entire thing, 1,300 dollars.

而其中一个人将得到 全部的1300加元。

The person who gets the full amount rotates,

每个人轮流得到全部的金额，

and you'll get the full thing two times a year.

这样你会一年内两次 得到全部的金额。

It's helped my family buy a new fridge, pay school tuition,

这帮助我的家庭 买了一台新冰箱，支付了学费。

and you know what,

你猜怎么着，

we've even put a down payment on a house using this.

我们甚至用它交了 一个房子的首付款。

And sometimes we negotiate.

有时我们也会协商。

"Oh, you need your hand ahead of me?

“哦，你需要在我之前拿到资助？

No problem, I'll wait."

没问题，我可以等。”

Of the 13 people, some really need it.

13个人中， 有些人真的需要这笔钱，

It's their only means of savings.

这是他们唯一的存款方式，

And others would be fine without it.

而其他人没有这钱也无所谓。

But here, we're all equal.

但是在这里，我们都是平等的，

There is no top or bottom.

没有上下之分。

It's not about charity or pity or sympathy.

这无关慈善、怜悯或是同情。

The goal of box hand is that everybody levels up.

Box Hand的目标 是改善每一个人的生活，

And it’s easier to level up together

而共同改善更为容易，

because we're accountable to the collective.

因为我们对集体都负有责任。

This practice has existed across the African diaspora

自 1700 年代以来， 这种习俗就一直存在于非洲移民社群中。

since the 1700s.

In Guyana, we call it box hand.

在圭亚那我们叫它Box Hand，

In Nigeria, its “susu.” In Mali and Senegal it’s “tontines.”

在尼日利亚，它叫susu， 在马里和塞内加尔，它叫tontines，

In Haiti, it’s called “sol.”

在海地，它被称作sol，

And in Jamaica, it’s “partner.”

在牙买加，它叫partner。

And the cool thing is this exists outside of the African diaspora, too.

最酷的是， 它也在非洲移民社群之外存在。

It looks slightly different from place to place.

不同地方之间有些许的不同。

The Haida nation has potlatches,

海达族人有锅庄活动，

in Mexico, there's "tandas" and in Cambodia, there's "tontine."

在墨西哥有tandas， 在柬埔寨也有tontine。

And communities turn to each other

当我们在金融行业 面对排斥与系统性种族主义时，

and use this kind of collective approach

社群间会运用这种集体的方式

when we face exclusion and systemic racism in the financial industry.

相互帮助。

For example,

比如说，

Black people are rejected business loans and mortgages

非裔族群在商业贷款 与住房按揭贷款上

at twice the rate of the general population.

遭拒绝的概率是总人口的两倍。

And so when we face that exclusion,

所以当我们面对这种排斥时，

we turn to our communities and are creative in our solution-making.

我们求助于社群， 寻找具有创造性的解决方案。

And, you know, this has been passed down from generation to generation.

这样的方式已一代又一代地传承。

My mother taught me this.

我母亲把这教给了我。

She gives generously to our communities

她为我们的社群慷慨解囊，

because they gave generously to her.

因为社群对她也慷慨。

Now and forever, the collective giving never stops.

从今往后 集体的给予不会停止。

Black philanthropy is rooted in a concept called Ubuntu.

非裔慈善植根于 “人道待人”的概念。

It's an African philosophy widely understood as humanity towards others.

这是一种非洲的哲学， 被广泛的理解为对待他人的人道。

And we have a saying: “I am because you are.”

我们有一句名言： “我存在，是因为你存在。”

Or "I am because we are."

或者说 “我存在，是因为大家存在。”

And that means, what affects you affects me.

这意味着， 影响你的，也会影响到我。

We're all interconnected

我们都相互联系在一起，

and have a shared responsibility to one another.

相互间有着共同的责任。

Ubuntu would be the guiding principle for the Foundation for Black Communities.

“人道待人”是 非裔社群基金会的指导理念。

And in order to do that, we need to make two practical shifts.

为了实现它， 我们需要做出两个实际的改变。

Who is making funding decisions, and how those decisions are made?

谁来做有关资金的决定？ 这些决定又将如何做出？

So the who is obvious.

谁做决定很显然，

We're looking at Black community members,

我们把目光投向了非裔社群的成员。

but we're looking for true, on-the-ground experts.

但我们寻找的是真正的当地专家。

And this is an important distinction.

这是一个很重要的区别。

Some people will say to me, "Rebecca, you're Black.

一些人会对我说： “瑞贝卡，你是非裔，

Tell us what's best for Black communities,"

请告诉我 什么对非裔社群是最好的。”

which is actually ridiculous.

这其实很荒谬。

How could I possibly speak on behalf of all Black people?

我怎么可能代表全部的非裔发声？

You can't, it's not possible.

不可以，这是不可能的。

So to have real insight,

所以为了有真正的洞察力，

we’d look for local experts and let them make the decisions.

我们会找到当地的专家， 让他们来做决定，

Because they know their communities, their partners and field the best.

因为他们最了解他们的社群， 他们的伙伴和领域。

And this is what we did in our recent,

这就是我们最近做的

500,000-dollar youth wellness granting program.

五十万美元的 青少年幸福健康津贴计划。

We received 99 eligible applications from Black groups

我们收到了99份合格的 来自非裔群体的申请，

working in everything

致力于从关注糖尿病

from diabetes awareness to inner-city farming

到市区农场

and after school programming.

和课余活动的每一件事情。

And just like box hand, we turn to the collective

就像Box Hand， 我们转向集体，

and extended an invitation to be part of our grant review panel.

邀请他们成为我们 拨款审查小组的一员。

Now, the invitation was intentionally put to anybody connected to the project.

这个邀请刻意给到了 所有与这个计划有关联的人，

It might be a program manager, a participant or a volunteer.

他可能是企划经理、 参与者或是志愿者。

And those volunteers became peer reviewers.

而那些志愿者变成了审查伙伴。

The peer reviewers read each application,

审查伙伴们审阅每一份申请，

scored them and offered candid feedback.

给它们打分并给申请者回复。

And then we used their rankings to allocate funding.

然后我们会利用 他们的排名分配资金。

In other words, it was the collective that made the funding decision.

换句话说， 是集体做出了关于资金的决定。

Now, you might be thinking, "What's the big deal about that?"

你现在可能会想：这重要吗？

But after years in philanthropy,

但是在从事慈善界多年之后，

I can tell you, that's not how it's typically done.

我可以告诉你， 这不是通常的做法。

It's usually the donor, maybe their relative or a CEO

通常是捐赠者， 或许是他们的亲戚或一位CEO

who has the final say.

有最终决策权。

But here, we trusted community to do the work

但在这里， 我们信任社区来做这个工作

and to make those funding decisions.

并做出那些关于资金的决定。

Luckily, we're not the first or only to pool funding

幸运的是， 我们不是最早或仅有的集资

and trust community to make decisions.

并信任社区做决定的。

We're part of a growing movement

我们是正在改变慈善中力量对比的

that's changing the power dynamics in philanthropy.

成长中运动的一部分。

And recently,

最近，

because of our community-led approach and collective advocacy,

因为我们社区主导的方式 以及集体模式的倡议，

the Canadian government awarded the Foundation for Black Communities

加拿大政府历史性地 奖励非裔社群基金会

a historic 200 million dollars.

两亿加元。

(Cheers and applause)

（欢呼声与掌声）

This is amazing.

这令人惊喜。

And I'm hopeful that private foundations and donors

同时我希望私人基金与捐赠者

will follow this powerful example.

会跟随这个有力的先例。

You know, there are hundreds of community-led collaboratives

成百上千的社群主导合作组织

working in the most pressing issues of our times.

致力于我们所处时代最紧要的问题。

For example, there’s Right Relations Collaborative,

例如，“正确关系合作组织”中

and Indigenous peoples are making the decisions there.

有土著居民做决策。

At the Equality Fund,

在“平等基金”，

feminists are making the decisions.

有女权主义者在做决策。

And at CLIMA Fund,

在CLIMA基金会，

climate activists are making the decisions.

气候活动家在做出决策。

When I think back on my time in the front lines, I wonder,

当我回想起我在一线工作的时光，

if different people were making the funding decisions

我在想，如果不同的人 在做关于资金的决定，

would those blue slips even have existed?

那些蓝纸片那时会存在吗？

Because the funding was always available.

因为资金总是有的，

It just wasn't accessible to the communities who need it most.

只是那些最需要它的社群难以得到。

And this is finally changing with community-led collaborative funds.

这种状况终于正在通过 社区主导的合作基金发生改变。

Even after all of my time in the sector, the highs and lows,

即使在这个领域经历了跌宕起伏，

I'm optimistic,

我仍然乐观，

because the future of philanthropy is happening right now,

因为慈善的未来正在当下发生。

where community-led collaboratives are the bridge

社区主导的合作成为

between people who want to do good with their money

希望用他们的资金做好事的人们

and the people on the ground with the experience to do it.

与有实际经验做好事的人们 之间的桥梁。

This is Ubuntu.

这就是“人道待人”。

We are all interconnected,

我们相互联系，

and each of us has a role to play.

每个人都有自己的角色分工。

I am

我存在，

because you are.

因为你存在。

I am

我存在，

because we are.

因为我们存在。

Thank you.

谢谢。

(Applause and cheers)

（掌声与欢呼声）