ASDC Evaluation of Cultural Competency Initiative of Cultural Competency... · to thank the...

Association for the Study and Development of Community 1July 30, 2007

Evaluation of theCultural Competency

Initiative

June 30, 2007

Association for the Study and Development of Community iJuly 30, 2007

Preface

This report was developed by the Association for the Study and Development ofCommunity (ASDC) for the Alliance for Nonprofit Management for the evaluation of theCultural Competency Initiative.

We would like to thank Brigette Rouson and Martha Iraheta at the Alliance andHeather Iliff, formerly at the Alliance, for their leadership and support. We also would liketo thank the individuals who took the time to talk to us about the Cultural CompetencyInitiative and its accomplishments and challenges. ASDC staff contributing to the reportincludes Kien S. Lee and Lutheria Peters. Sylvia Mahon assisted with production.

Association for the Study and Development of Community iiJuly 30, 2007

Table of Contents

Preface..........................................................................................................................i

Executive Summary .................................................................................................... 1

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 4

2. Major Activities .......................................................................................................52.1 Research.............................................................................................................52.2 Dissemination of Tools and Resources.............................................................52.3 Training and Peer Exchange ............................................................................ 62.4 Development of Standards............................................................................... 6

3. Short-term Outcomes ............................................................................................ 63.1 Awareness ..........................................................................................................73.2 Knowledge and Skills ....................................................................................... 83.3 Will .................................................................................................................. 13

4. Intermediate Outcomes ........................................................................................ 13

5. Facilitators and Challenges...................................................................................14

6. Conclusion and Recommendations ...................................................................... 15

Appendix A: Theory of Change

Appendix B: Preliminary Research Findings Report

Appendix C: Summary of Survey Findings


Executive Summary

Overview of the Cultural Competency Initiative Evaluation

The Alliance for Nonprofit Management’s (“the Alliance”) Cultural CompetencyInitiative (CCI) was conceptualized and designed between June 2003 and April 2005, andlaunched and implemented between May 2005 and July 2007. The CCI was intended todeepen understanding about the role of culture in nonprofit capacity building; improvecapacity builders’ knowledge, skills, and will to practice cultural competency; andstrengthen the Alliance’s role to promote cultural competency in the nonprofit capacitybuilding field.

The Alliance contracted with the Association for the Study and Development ofCommunity (ASDC) to evaluate the CCI. ASDC worked with the Alliance staff to developa theory of change for the initiative in early 2006 and proceeded to evaluate the initiative’sactivities from July 2006 until end of May 2007. ASDC conducted evaluations of awebinar, a workshop, and two Cultural Competency Institutes1; a survey to explore howcultural competency is understood, practiced, and measured in the capacity buildingcommunity and to assess the extent to which the Alliance is perceived as a source forcultural competency-related information; and interviews with six people, including theAlliance’s leadership and staff and members of the CCI’s Advisory Committee.

At ASDC’s request, the CCI staff also collected additional data, including thenumber of times that CCI-related pages are viewed on the Alliance website, the number ofrequests for information from the CCI staff, and the number of attendees at culturalcompetency-related sessions at the Alliance’s annual conferences.

ASDC combined all the data and used the theory of change to guide our analysisand report.

Key Findings

The CCI has generated a “buzz” among its members and to a lesser extent in thefield, about the concept and practice of cultural competency. The CCI trainings have beenmost effective in teaching people about self-reflection and the concepts and tools forbuilding cultural competency, but less effective in teaching people how to apply theconcepts and tools and in furthering the capacity of those people with relatively moreexperience on the subject. Also, survey findings revealed that the practice of culturalcompetency has not been consistent because there have been no standards or principles toguide the field.

At the time of this report and two years after implementation, there are some earlysigns that the participants most directly and consistently involved in the CCI and its

1 Note that the CCI staff conducted additional trainings in response to unanticipated requests, but theevaluations of these trainings are not included in the scope of the overall CCI evaluation because of resourceconstraints.


trainings may have 1) become more knowledgeable about the meaning and practice ofcultural competency, 2) expanded their network of peers who practice cultural competencyand with whom they can collaborate, and 3) deepened their commitment to practicecultural competency. The number of requests that the Alliance has received to facilitate orconduct workshops on cultural competency suggests that it is becoming recognized as avalued resource on the topic in the nonprofit capacity building field. Several usefulproducts have also been generated from the CCI, including a training curriculum andguiding principles for building cultural competency and a standard on culturally competentpractices included in the Alliance’s Ethical Standards for Nonprofit Capacity Building.

Recommendations for Future Directions

ASDC’s analysis surfaced some issues that the Alliance’s leadership and CCI staffmay want to ponder before proceeding any further.

Training goals. Among the training participants were different levels of readinessand experience with the topic of cultural competency. The CCI staff may want to considerthe following options to maximize the trainings’ impact (these options are not mutuallyexclusive):

Determine the primary target audience for the trainings—people less experienced withthe topic who could benefit from having a safe space where they could ask questionsthey were uncomfortable to ask previously, or their more experienced counterparts whocould benefit from a network of peers that will help them deepen their culturalcompetency and effectiveness;

A process to gauge a person or organization’s readiness and to create training modulesfor people at different levels of readiness and capacity; and/or

A way to engage both the less and more experienced capacity builders through peermentoring.

Levels of change. Cultural competency building is undoubtedly a difficult task andthe logical starting point is the individual. The opportunity to self-reflect throughdiscussions and exercises was one of the most valuable experiences that participants tookaway from the CCI trainings. The challenge for the CCI is how it can help capacitybuilders move beyond the individual level and transform the practice of culturalcompetency at organizational and systems levels.

Meaning of “culture” in cultural competency. According to the AmericanHeritage College Dictionary, culture is a set of socially transmitted and learned behaviorpatterns, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and thought thatcharacterize the functioning of a particular population, profession, organization, orcommunity. People belong to multiple cultural groups and the identities associated withthese groups affect the person’s attitudes and behaviors. The CCI staff might want toconsider how culture is defined and used in the initiative and show all capacity buildershow issues of cultural competency affect every aspect of their work. The Alliance’s roleand identity as a mainstream professional association for all capacity builders helps place


the subject of cultural competency in the context of general capacity building, and not oneassociated solely with race or ethnicity. The current attention on generational issuesprovides an excellent opportunity to do this.

Alliance’s capacity. The Alliance had to stretch its capacity to design andimplement the CCI. Its staff had to write grant proposals and administer grants because itwas a new experience for the organization and as such, it did not have a structure or systemto support the task. The CCI was attempting to learn about the state of cultural competencyin the capacity building field, develop useful products to promote and improve culturalcompetency, test the products and document the lessons learned, engage key stakeholdersin the field, and build the Alliance’s ability to model and practice the lessons learned—allat the same time. The Alliance’s leadership might want to reflect on the CCI’s learnings sofar, and determine where to strategically focus its resources in the future. The Alliance’sleadership also might want to further explore how to build its own cultural competency andbecome a role model for others in the field.

Strategic partnerships. Finally, changing a whole field takes time and resourcesand the Alliance is limited in its capacity. Once the Alliance’s leadership sets the prioritiesfor the future regarding cultural competency, it might want to identify additional partnersto assist with some of the goals. There may be institutions and existing structures wherethe Alliance could embed some of its cultural competency goals (e.g., state-wide nonprofitassociations, nonprofit training programs).


1. Introduction

The Alliance for Nonprofit Management’s (“the Alliance”) Cultural CompetencyInitiative (CCI) is intended to bring attention to culture in nonprofit capacity building.Specifically, the CCI’s goals are to 1) research and document culturally-based practices innonprofit capacity building, and 2) provide training and resources for nonprofit capacitybuilders and nonprofit leaders to develop the awareness, the will, and the skill to practicecultural competency effectively.

The CCI was conceptualized and designed between June 2003 and April 2005, andlaunched and implemented between May 2005 and July 2007. The Alliance staff plans toimprove and expand the initiative, which is continuing as a core part of the organization’sprogramming

The Alliance contracted with the Association for the Study and Development ofCommunity (ASDC) to evaluate the CCI. ASDC worked closely with the CCI staff todevelop a theory of change (see Appendix A) and to determine measures of success. Theevaluation involved three major activities:

Evaluation of a webinar, a workshop, and two Cultural Competency Institutes2; A survey to explore how i) cultural competency is understood, practiced, and

measured in the capacity building community, ii) determine the extent to whichculturally competent practices are applied in the capacity building field, and iii)assess the extent to which the Alliance is perceived as a source for culturalcompetency-related information (a follow-up survey will be implemented inAugust 2007 after the Alliance’s annual conference); and

Interviews with six people, including the Alliance’s leadership and staff as well asmembers of the CCI’s Advisory Committee.

At ASDC’s request, the CCI staff also documented additional data, including thenumber of CCI-related pages viewed on the Alliance website, an estimate of requests forinformation from the CCI staff, and the number of attendees at cultural competency-relatedsessions at the Alliance’s annual conferences.

ASDC combined all the data and used the theory of change to guide our analysis.Section 2 describes the major CCI activities conducted during the implementation phase.Sections 3 and 4 summarize the short-term and intermediate outcomes of the CCI,respectively. Section 5 reports on the factors that facilitated and challenged the initiative,followed by the conclusion in Section 6.

This evaluation is limited in the small sample of people who were interviewed andthe lack of follow up interviews with webinar, workshop, and institute participants toassess how they applied their knowledge and skills after they returned to their

2 Note that the CCI staff conducted additional trainings in response to unanticipated requests, but theevaluations of these trainings are not included in the scope of the overall CCI evaluation because of resourceconstraints.


organizations and communities. Because of resource constraints, such data collection wasnot possible.

2. Major Activities

The CCI staff set out to conduct the following activities in the following categories:research, dissemination of tools and resources, training and peer exchange, anddevelopment of standards. They initiated and completed almost all the activities by June2007; plans for the activities that were not conducted by then, including the establishmentof the ambassador circle, development of a strategic communication plan, and integrationof cultural competency into the Alliance’s learning program were underway when thisreport was being written.

2.1 Research

The following research and dissemination activities were conducted:

Development of a theory of change for the CCI; Three peer dialogues and two grantmaker roundtables; A survey of Alliance members regarding their understanding and practice of

cultural competency; A written report, Preliminary Research Findings, based on a literature review, peer

dialogues, monographs, interviews, and stories.

2.2 Dissemination of Tools and Resources

The CCI staff did the following:

Established a 22-member Advisory Committee to guide the initiative; Created two online resources, including the CCI webpage and the e-newsletter,

which has a readership of 5,000 people; Summarized the CCI in a resource guide distributed by the National Network of

Grantmakers (NNG) in the form of a CD-ROM, and by the NNG Racial EquityCommittee in the form of print materials;

Presented at national and regional conferences, including:o The Alliance’s annual conferences (in 2005, 2006, and 2007)o The National Network of Grantmakers annual conference in 2006;o The Head Start Association Conference for Region II in 2007;o The National Conference on Black Philanthropy in 2007;

Scheduled additional presentations at the American Society of AssociationExecutives Conference in August 2007, the Organization Development NetworkConference and the California Association of Nonprofits Conference in October2007, as well as Third Sector New England in November 2007.


2.3 Training and Peer Exchange

The following training and peer exchange activities were conducted:

A workshop on “Dialogue on Cultural Competency Relating to Race, Class,Power” at the 2005 Alliance annual conference (approximately 60 participants);

A cultural competency workshop for capacity builders at the 2006 Alliance annualconference (40 participants);

Two Cultural Competency Institutes (48 participants in New York in 2006, and 28participants in Chicago, IL, in 2007) with two more planned for summer and fall2007;

One CCI webinar in January 2007 about engaging diverse stakeholders (39participants)

A cultural competency training at the Head Start Association conference in 2007(15 participants);

A three-hour training for Citigroup staff (25 participants); A half-day training for Washington Area Women’s Foundation grantee partners

and selected staff in 2007 (35 participants); A guided conversation as part of a national network of capacity builders working

on environmental issues in 2007 (12 participants); Presentations at national conferences (mentioned above under dissemination of

tools and resources); and Numerous meetings within the People-of-Color (POC) Affinity Group in 2006 and

2007 to document insights and prepare principles for culturally competent capacitybuilding for nonprofit advocacy.

2.4 Development of Standards

The CCI staff:

Drafted guiding principles for culturally competent capacity building; and Included cultural competency as a standard of practice in the Alliance’s Ethical

Standards for Nonprofit Capacity Building.

3. Short-term Outcomes

The activities were intended to raise awareness about cultural competency amongcapacity builders, to increase their knowledge about cultural competency, to improve theirskills for leading and practicing in a culturally competent way, and to increase their will topractice cultural competency.

After approximately two years of implementation, it appears that the CCI has raisedawareness among capacity builders and increased the knowledge and skills of those whohave participated in the Cultural Competency Institutes. It is too early at this time todetermine if the initiative has increased capacity builders’ will to practice culturalcompetency; however, participant evaluations of the workshop and Cultural Competency


Institutes indicated that some people felt more compelled to examine their capacitybuilding practices to ensure cultural competency after attending the training events (i.e.,webinar, workshop, and institutes).

The evaluation’s findings and the evidence that support these findings are asfollows.

3.1 Awareness

The CCI has generated a “buzz” in the field and among its members about theconcept and practice of cultural competency, according to interviewees. Members of theAlliance’s Board and the POC Affinity Group have also become more aware andconscious about the subject. This is evident from reports about how the subject hassurfaced during Board and POC Affinity Group meetings. Interviewees agreed that theCCI has helped deepen existing thinking about cultural competency, making it clear that itis part of an organization’s culture and cannot be achieved through diversity training alone.

The growing awareness was evident through the following activities and changes.

Questions at the Alliance conferences. CCI staff observed and were asked morequestions about cultural competency at the last Alliance conference and in differentconference sessions in 2007.

Inquiries received by CCI staff. More people have called the Alliance forinformation and training on cultural competency, including representatives from theWashington Area Women’s Foundation, Citi (formerly Citigroup), Institute forConservation Leadership, and California Association of Nonprofits. In addition, numerouscontacts have been made seeking referrals to consultants who are diverse and who areintentional about culturally competent practice. In 2004, Alliance staff fielded anoccasional request to identify consultants of color, and no inquiries focused on culturalcompetency. By 2007, the inquiries grew to a range of eight to ten per quarter, based on ascan of email logs for the past three years.

Emerging interest by other affinity groups. The Board Governance Affinity Groupand the Executive Transitions Affinity Group both have expressed interest in the subjectand made plans to address cultural competency in their day-long annual meetings at theAlliance’s annual conference; also, there has been discussion about the subject on theBoard Governance Affinity Group’s listserve.

Number of cultural competency sessions3 at the Alliance’s annual conferences.The number of sessions that dealt with cultural competency issues increased by 67%between 2005 and 2006, although the average number of attendees decreased by 26%.

3 Conference sessions were counted as “related to cultural competency” when they dealt with the followingtopics and issues: generational differences, racial equity, geographic differences, faith-based efforts,immigrants/refugees, multiculturalism, diversity, and social justice.


View of the CCI-related pages on the Alliance’s website. The CCI-related pageshave been second only to the conference for programmatic information viewed on thewebsite. In 2006, the CCI-related pages were viewed an average of 2,904 times per month.Because such data are not available for 2005 and 2007, annual comparisons are notpossible. Monthly data in 2006 indicated that the number of page views doubled inOctober, perhaps because of the launching of the Cultural Competency Institute in NewYork. The data also showed that the number of page views by the end of 2006 was twicethat in the beginning of that year.

Attendance at trainings and discussions. Approximately 300 people haveparticipated in the trainings and discussions facilitated by the CCI (see list in Section 2.4).4

The Women’s Foundation workshop drew a larger attendance than any other technicalassistance session that foundation has offered, and the invitation “e-blast” had the highestopen rate of any e-mail the foundation had sent out for any of its many events or anysubject matter.

Discussion of new Ethical Standards. Interviewees reported that the StandardsCommittee discussions to craft cultural competency provisions were longer and moreinvolved than any other topic, which served to deepen their collective understanding aboutthe concept and its operationalization. The subject of cultural competency also came upfour times during the first national dialogue (June 2007) among beta testers for theStandards in the “Do No Harm” section.

3.2 Knowledge and Skills

There are two types of knowledge in this category of short-term outcomes—knowledge gained from the research conducted and supported by the CCI and knowledgegained specifically by the people who attended the CCI’s trainings (i.e., workshop,webinar, Cultural Competency Institutes).

Knowledge gained from research. The CCI has helped generate knowledge aboutthe state-of-the-art regarding cultural competency through:

Synthesis of a literature review, peer dialogues, monographs, interviews, andstories, into a Preliminary Research Findings report (Appendix B) that describeshow cultural competency differs from mainstream practice, how it can be applied inpractice, and implications for the field.

A survey of the Alliance members in June/July 2006 about how they practice andmeasure cultural competency, what information sources they turn to for assistanceabout cultural competency, how many people they know practice culturalcompetency, and what they do to develop their knowledge and experience aboutcultural competency (see Appendix C for the full report). This survey providedinsight into the respondents’ (149 people or 13% of the Alliance’s membership)existing knowledge about cultural competency and any trends based onracial/ethnic and age differences. It will be administered again in August 2007.

4 The number of people who attended a training twice was relatively small.


The synthesis and survey provided useful information about the context within which theCCI has to operate.

Preliminary Research Findings Report. This report, produced in July 2006,concluded that:

Paying attention to cultural identity is not considered a core competency forcapacity builders; consequently, dynamics related to power, privilege,institutionalized racism, and internalized oppression are not properly addressed,affecting the capacity building process and outcomes.

Defining characteristics of cultural competency include:o Social change as the motivating forceo Exploring explicit cultural biaseso Sharing and building powero Modeling and facilitating learningo Breaking the silenceo Intentionally building relationships with people different from uso Showing willingness to make the necessary commitments that honors

people’s realitieso Recruiting, retaining, and developing diverse staff and board memberso Willingness to create diverse work teamso Paying attention to relationships and communityo Making language accessibleo Routinely reviewing materials to ensure effectiveness

The above findings implied that:

The long-term character of building cultural competency requires more than usualarrangements (e.g., resources, capacity);

Capacity builders need to check their assumptions about what it will take to realizechange;

Capacity builders should refuse to equate whiteness only with oppression orheroics;

Capacity builders will need to diversify their networks; and Constituent need to hold the nonprofits that affect their lives accountable for the

results they anticipated.

Survey. The survey findings, released in December 2006, provided further insightinto the happenings in the capacity building field with regards to cultural competency. Keysurvey findings included:

Culturally competent practices are being applied by capacity builders, but theirapplication varied by type and frequency. This may be, in part, due to the lack ofstandardization in the capacity building field about the definition and meaning ofcultural competency.


Different individual traits (e.g., self-identification and generation) influence one’spractices, especially in the absence of professional standards.

The proportion of POC respondents aware of cultural competency definitions andstandards was twice the proportion of non-POC respondents.

There was no single, outstanding source for definitions and standards A higher percentage of respondents 40 years and younger apply known definitions

and standards to their work, except in the selection of grantees and recruitment ofboard members.

More than half of the respondents attended one to four professional developmentevents related to cultural competency.

More than half of POC respondents (69.2%) had received at least one requestduring the past 12 months, compared to 37.7% of non-POC respondents.

Fewer than half of the respondents (32%) turned to the Alliance for informationabout cultural competency.

In short, the synthesis and survey highlighted the need to develop a commonlanguage for discussing cultural competency and principles and standards for practicingcultural competency. It also was apparent that cultural competency needs to become one ofthe capacity builder’s core competencies, as well as that the cultural competency buildingprocess requires attention at the individual, institutional, and community levels.

Knowledge and skills gained by workshop, webinar, and Cultural CompetencyInstitute participants. Knowledge about cultural competency and skills for practicingcultural competency has increased among the capacity builders who attended the CCI’strainings.

Workshop evaluations. Of the 40 participants who attended the first CCI workshopin Los Angeles in August 2006, 28 or 70% completed workshop evaluation forms. Themajority of them (89% of more) “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that the workshop increasedtheir knowledge about:

The value of building cultural competency at the individual, organizational, andcommunity levels;

The implications of cultural competency for the field of capacity building; and Core concepts and definitions of cultural competency.

Analysis of their comments showed that almost 40% of them gained specificknowledge and skills in the following areas:

Concept of privilege and its application; Value of self-reflection; and Value of listening to others’ opinions, learning from others experiences, and

sharing knowledge (including stories) with each other.

Webinar evaluations. Twenty-two of the 36 participants (61%) completed theevaluation survey. Almost all the participants (91%) “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that the


session was “useful to explore principles, tools, and strategies for engaging diversestakeholders.” According to participants, comments they enjoyed listening and learningfrom other people around the country and testing the on-line technology forteleconferencing. They indicated also that the facilitation and presentation were good.

Cultural Competency Institute evaluations. The first Cultural Competency Institutein New York attracted 48 participants, of whom 24 people (50%) completed an onlineevaluation survey. All 24 respondents rated the training as “excellent” or “good,” and“strongly agreed” or “agreed” that it met their objectives. When asked what impact theinstitute will have on their practice, three themes stood out:

A different lens for viewing their capacity building work; Application of new tools (e.g., exercises, story-telling); and Colleagues with whom they can collaborate in the future.

Twenty-eight people attended the second Cultural Competency Institute inChicago. Of the 28 participants, 24 (86%) completed evaluation forms. Participants wereasked to rate their knowledge in four areas before and after the institute, based on a scale of1 to 6 where ratings of 1 and 2 were categorized as “not knowledgeable,” 3 and 4 were“somewhat knowledgeable,” and 5 and 6 were “extremely knowledgeable.”5 Figure 1shows the average ratings before and after the institute, indicating clearly that participants’knowledge, on average, typically improved from “somewhat knowledgeable” to“extremely knowledgeable.”

When asked what were the three most important pieces of knowledge and/or skillsparticipants gained through the Cultural Competency Institute, the following categorieswere apparent:

The types of concepts and tools that can be used to increase cultural competency(e.g., role of power, white privilege, cultural location, importance of safe space,internalized oppression);

The need for continuous self-reflection as part of becoming a culturally competentcapacity builder; and

The role of trust and relationship building.

Examples of comments that exemplify the general sentiment include:

I appreciate the chance to reflect on my own cultural location and connect withothers about that.

I have a responsibility to use my position of privilege.

I will incorporate more story telling and cultural learning styles into ourtechniques.

5 Twenty-one of the 28 respondents completed this question.


Figure 1: Average Pre-Post Institute Self-Ratings

Pre

Pre

Pre

Pre

Post

Post

Post

Post

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Deeper understanding of cultural location

Better recognition of the value of a culturally-based

lens in providing capacity building in the nonprofit

sector

Practices of cultural competency in capacity building

and exploration of its relationship to their role(s) in

social change

Better understanding of how power analysis and

addressing institutional racism are key elements of

cultural competency

Rating

Figure 1: Average Pre-Post Institute Self-Ratings

Pre

Pre

Pre

Pre

Post

Post

Post

Post

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Deeper understanding of cultural location

Better recognition of the value of a culturally-based

lens in providing capacity building in the nonprofit

sector

Practices of cultural competency in capacity building

and exploration of its relationship to their role(s) in

social change

Better understanding of how power analysis and

addressing institutional racism are key elements of

cultural competency

Rating

I would like to replicate a couple of the exercises.

Using power analysis within organizations (not just in organizing context).

Participants in the workshop, webinar, and Cultural Competency Institutes werealso asked how the trainings could be improved. Three categories of recommendationsstood out:

Need for more exchange about concrete, real-life examples of situations; More direct application of what was taught at the trainings and less time spent on

theory and discussions about definitions and terms; and A way to deal with participants at different levels of cultural competency (e.g., pair

someone with more experience with someone less experienced, create smallerworkgroups based on competency level, or target only people of a certain capacitylevel).

It is apparent from the participants’ comments that the CCI trainings have been:

Most effective in teaching people about self-reflection and the concepts and toolsfor building cultural competency; and


Least effective in teaching people how to apply the concepts and tools and infurthering the capacity of those people with relatively more experience on thesubject.

3.3 Will

As mentioned before, it is too early to determine if the will to practice cultural competencyhas increased because of the initiative. The growing number of questions about culturalcompetency and the Alliance leadership’s support for the CCI could be preliminary signsof an increasing will among an initial circle of capacity builders (i.e., Alliance’smembership) to practice cultural competency.

The Alliance’s will to promote cultural competency remains strong. Theinterviewees believed that Alliance’s leadership is very supportive of the CCI, consideringit a programmatic priority. The Alliance’s leadership and staff perceived that the board ispaying more attention to diversity now than before; they attributed this growing attentionto the awareness raised through the CCI. On the other hand, they acknowledged that theAlliance itself has not developed a strategy for increasing its own cultural competence. Thefocus on building cultural competency has been directed at the field and less at theorganization.

Finally, there appeared to be a will to apply and practice cultural competencyamong training participants. Many of them indicated that they planned to reexamine theirindividual or organizational practices and use the tools and exercises included in theCultural Competency Institute workbook. The following quotes reflected what participantsgenerally said:

I found it quite thought provoking and it is causing me to relook at how we do ourtraining programs.

I came away wanting to re-look at all aspects of my consulting practice through thelens of cultural competency to see how I can keep improving myself, my work, andmy connection with people and our shared goals for social change.

4. Intermediate Outcomes

Five intermediate outcomes are expected to occur as a result of the CCI:

Knowledge about promising practices for building cultural competency; Expanded network of culturally competent practitioners; Alliance recognized as a valued resource, model organization, and major

contributor in the field of cultural competency for non-profit leadership andcapacity building;


Cultural competence as a core competency becomes a mainstream norm and value;and

Better understanding of how to advance cultural competency in the field.

At the time of this report and two years after implementation, it is too early toobserve the above intermediate outcomes. There are some early signs that the participantsmost directly and consistently involved in the CCI and its workshops and institutes mayhave become more knowledgeable about promising practices for building culturalcompetency and expanded their network of peers who practice cultural competency andwith whom they can collaborate. The number of requests that the Alliance has received tofacilitate or conduct workshops on cultural competency suggests that it is becomingrecognized as a valued resource on the topic.

5. Facilitators and Challenges

All the interviewees agreed that the commitment and support from the Alliance’sleadership played a key role in the CCI’s success thus far. Two interviewees believed alsothat the Alliance’s role and identity as a mainstream professional association for allcapacity builders helps place the subject of cultural competency in the context of generalcapacity building.

When asked what challenged the CCI, all the interviewees agreed that 1) culturalcompetency is a complex concept for people in general, 2) not everyone accepts it as a corecompetency in capacity building, and 3) obtaining adequate funds to sustain the CCI isdifficult. Two people who were directly involved in the initiative also felt that the Alliancehad limited capacity to write grant proposals and administer grants because it was a newexperience for the organization and as such, it did not have a structure or system to supportthe task. The CCI also had multiple tasks that were challenging to juggle, including:engaging people, documenting the process, learning about the state of cultural competencyin the field, teaching others, and applying and practicing the learnings.

A challenge that emerged from the evaluations of the webinar, workshop, andinstitutes is the wide range of awareness, knowledge, and skills among the attendees.While the attendees typically found the trainings useful, their comments also suggestedwide variation in the extent of usefulness. Some people found that the trainings simplyreinforced their existing knowledge and skills, while others found that the trainings gavethem a new way to view their work. This is a factor that the trainers must consider toimprove future webinars, workshops, and institutes.

Finally, the people interviewed by the evaluation team acknowledged that the CCIhas so far reached primarily the “choir.” There still are capacity builders who are reluctantto embrace the concept of cultural competency for various reasons, and educating thisgroup of people will take time.


6. Conclusion and Recommendations

On the whole, the CCI is progressing steadily towards its goals. The initiativeappears to have the biggest impact in raising awareness and developing, to varying extent,the cultural competency of the people who attended the workshops and institutes.Anecdotal information suggests that these individuals shared their new knowledge andskills with others in their organization, increasing the opportunity for broader knowledgedissemination. It is too early at this time, however, to determine the initiative’seffectiveness in changing norms and practices.

There were a couple of factors that supported the CCI; at the same time, theinitiative was challenged by several factors as mentioned in Section 5. The challenges,however, did not hinder the initiative in any major way.

Based on the findings presented in this report, ASDC interprets that culturalcompetency is not a new subject among capacity builders; however, the practice of culturalcompetency has not been consistent because there have been no standards or principles toguide the field. The advantage the Alliance has over other organizations attempting topromote this competency is its role as a national professional association that is notassociated with a particular cultural group. This advantage has to be carefully cultivated,and one way to achieve this is by continuously showing all capacity builders how issues ofcultural competency affect every aspect of their work in a practical and theoretical way.The current attention on generational issues provides an excellent opportunity to this, assuggested by several interviewees. The Alliance also can set an example for itsmembership and the field by focusing on its own cultural competency.

An individual and organization’s readiness to address cultural competency isanother area for further exploration. ASDC interpreted from the interviewees and trainingparticipants’ comments different levels of readiness and experience with the topic. It also ishighly likely that the trainings and discussions have only attracted so far people open to theidea, or the “choir,” as suggested by the interviewees. The CCI staff may want to considerways to gauge a person or organization’s readiness and to create training modules forpeople at different levels of readiness and capacity. The CCI staff also may want toconsider whether or not their messages and training should and can be refined tospecifically target those not ready to deal with the issue.

Cultural competency building is undoubtedly a difficult task, particularly becausethe journey typically begins with the individual and as such, most cultural competencytrainings focus on the individual. The opportunity to self-reflect through discussions andexercises was one of the most valuable experiences that participants took away from theworkshop and Cultural Competency Institutes. The challenge that lies ahead for the CCI,as with any other organization or program attempting to increase cultural competency, ishow to transform the self-reflection and other learnings into tools for action at theorganization and systems levels, and eventually in the field.


Finally, changing a whole field takes time and resources. It appears to ASDC thatthe CCI may be attempting to effect change at too many fronts and with limited staffcapacity and resources. As mentioned by the interviewees, the CCI was attempting to learnabout the state of cultural competency in the capacity building field, develop usefulproducts to promote and improve cultural competency, test the products and document thelessons learned, engage key stakeholders in the field, and build the Alliance’s ability tomodel and practice the lessons learned—all at the same time. But, many insights have beengenerated so far. The Alliance’s leadership and CCI staff and Advisory Committeemembers might want to consider a meeting to 1) reflect on the lessons learned so far, 2)discuss the initiative’s evolution since its inception, 3) set priorities for the future, and 4)identify additional partners to assist with some of the goals. This consideration wouldsupport staff’s desire to further use the Advisory Committee members’ collective wisdom.

Alliance for Nonprofit Management Cultural Competency Initiative: Overall Logic Model (March 17, 2006)

Association for the Study and Development of Community 17June 30, 2007

Research Peer dialogues Literature review Interviews Evaluation

Dissemination of Tools andResources

Development of an on-lineresource base

Development andimplementation of strategiccommunications plan incl.news releases, media relations

Advisory committee Ambassador circle CCI networks Relationship building Presentations Communication with

membership

Training/Peer Exchange Training, workshops, tele-

seminars, and institutes oncultural competency

Engage Alliance AffinityGroups

Present at national conferences

Standards Development Development of cultural

competency standards Integrate cultural competency

into overall Alliance learningprogram

Awareness Wider and shared understanding

of meaning and importance ofcultural competency

Increased demand andopportunity for culturalcompetency learningopportunities in consulting, non-profit leadership, andgrantmaking

Increased recognition of the valueof diverse practitioners

Cultural competency recognizedas a core competency

Skill Improved skills for leading and

practicing in a culturallycompetent way

Will Commitment to cultural

competency standards Alliance actively engages to

increase own cultural competency Recognition that cultural

competency is imperative to goodpractice

Knowledge Improved definition of cultural

competence Understanding of how to assess

effectiveness of culturally-basedwork

Knowledge aboutpromising practices forbuilding culturalcompetency

Expanded network ofculturally competentpractitioners

Alliance recognized asa valued resource,model organization,and major contributorin the field of culturalcompetency for non-profit leadership andcapacity building

Cultural competenceas a core competencybecomes a mainstreamnorm and value

Better understandingof how to advancecultural competency inthe field

CONTEXTUAL CONDITIONS

Non-profit leaders practice withand continually developcultural competency

Greater equity for practitionersof color

Greater equity for communitiesof color

Alliance for Non-Profit Management

Coordinate and staffthe initiative

Work with evaluationteam to conductevaluation

Provide consultants Provide access to

membership andwebsite

Resources

In-kind support Funding

Evaluation Team

Conduct evaluation Build evaluation

capacity of Alliance

RESOURCES ACTIVITIES SHORT-TERM OUTCOMESLONG-TERMOUTCOMES

INTERMEDIATE OUTCOMES

Appendix A: Theory of Change


www.allianceonline.org

Alliance for Nonprofit ManagementCultural Competency InitiativePRELIMINARY RESEARCH FINDINGS

July 2006INTRODUCTION

The Alliance for Nonprofit Management Cultural Competency Initiative(CCI) seeks to define and advance cultural competency in capacitybuilding for nonprofits. The CCI calls attention to cultural identityand related dynamics as central to nonprofit effectiveness.

The Initiative’s theory of change is that we increase the awareness, thewill, and the skill of capacity builders to be culturally competent inpractice, and make high-quality resources accessible to nonprofitleaders. By advancing cultural competency through research, training andpeer exchange among capacity builders, publications and standards, wecreate higher quality support to nonprofits that will advanceextraordinary leadership in organizations. Ultimately, the sector willrealize a new level of leadership effectiveness and mission impact.

The Alliance is thankful for the generosity of The UPS Foundation,Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, Citigroup Foundation, and Annie E. CaseyFoundation. With this valuable support, the CCI has documents practiceand generates resources as a basis for ethical, high quality capacitybuilding for the nonprofit sector in the 21st century.

PRELIMINARY RESEARCH FINDINGS

This paper provides a summary of our research findings to date. Theresearch has included a literature review, peer dialogues (similar tofocus groups) in three locales – San Francisco, Chicago and Atlanta,monographs from five contributing authors, selected interviews and casestories.The research brings forward insights into the following questions:

How does cultural competency differ from mainstream practice, andwhy is it important?

How can cultural competency be applied in practice?

What are implications for the field?

The CCI research has uncovered answers to these questions as they pertainto capacity-building in nonprofit organizations within the U.S. context.The initial research includes an emphasis on race/ethnicity as an entrypoint, but also brings into consideration many aspects of culturalidentity.

HOW DOES CULTURAL COMPETENCY DIFFER FROM MAINSTREAMPRACTICE, AND WHY IS IT IMPORTANT?

Appendix BPreliminary Research FindingsReport


All capacity builders encounter cultural difference woven throughouttheir work.Culture is a factor constantly at play from experiences people bring ofbeing a person of color or white; baby boomer or next generation;gay/lesbian, bisexual or transgender or heterosexual; able-bodied ordifferently able; immigrant background or U.S.-born; significant wealthor power or being less well endowed; etc. Diverse backgrounds contributeto different ways of communicating, managing conflict, defining success,designation as insiders-outsiders, etc.

A challenge: The nature of mainstream capacity building itself maybe problematic if it moves people too far from their cultural baseand inhibits their ability to be at their best—creative, energized,focused, connected.

An opportunity: Shared background, or proven sensitivity andcultural knowledge, can increase a nonprofit’s willingness to enterinto the work and make lasting change.

There is no wide acceptance yet of cultural competency in capacitybuilding for nonprofits generally; conventional thinking minimizes itsimportance. Paying attention to culture is considered by many “soft”skills, by implication less important than “hard” skills like fiscalmanagement, fundraising, governance, etc. Nonprofit sub-sectors such ashealth and education have begun systematically paying attention tocultural identity and dynamics in service delivery. But the majority ofthe nonprofit sector and the capacity building field have yet to identifycultural competency as vital to nonprofit effectiveness.

One central tenet of cultural competency is to honor the precept, “First,do no harm!” Without attention to cultural identity and dynamics,capacity builders tend to feed into a system that disadvantages certainpeople and privileges others, based in part on membership in groups andthe history of relations between groups.

Power and privilege are central to understanding current realities in thenonprofit world and advancing change. The capacity builder’s role isimportant in reinforcing or changing power relations among people indifferent roles such as consultant, funder, constituent or communitystakeholder, nonprofit executive or staff, and nonprofit board member.

A “revolving door” and unintentional exclusion persists for people ofcolor and often for younger people in nonprofits and the capacity-building field, both in management support organizations and independentpractice. Bilingual staff are often narrowly pegged as “outreachworkers,” and rarely groomed for leadership or other capacity-buildingroles. Low retention of young workers and people of color continues tobe a challenge for nonprofit organizations across the sector. Manycommunities have few readily identified Latino/a capacity builders.

In a racialized system, two dynamics often at work are internalizedoppression and hierarchy of oppression. Cultural competency involvesunderstanding these dynamics and how to name them and work through themon individual, organizational and community levels.*

* Internalized oppression is defined as attitudes and behaviors that adopt another group’snegative view of one’s own group. Hierarchy of oppression relates to the “race to the


Institutional forms of racism and other institutional biases are moredifficult to address than improving interpersonal relations.Practitioners using a cultural lens often find that people rooted indominant culture have a tendency to focus on interpersonal aspects ofracism, as compared to the impact of policies and practices, which isoften more evident to others.

HOW CAN CULTURAL COMPETENCY BE APPLIED IN PRACTICE?

Cultural competency is a way of being that translates into practice. Itis not merely a set of skills, a checklist of activities, or collectedunits of education. It is a lifelong commitment. Good practice requirescontinuous learning and deep involvement on the part of the capacitybuilders and nonprofit leaders.

Culturally based innovations allow for reshaping the work, aspractitioners draw from a wider array of sources and approaches. Changecan be accelerated by approaches such as “spirit work” done as capacitybuilding, or by providing more substantive roles for constituents,support staff or volunteers than a typical process—and genuinely workingwith ideas that emerge.

Understanding generational differences is a key to leadershipeffectiveness. Valuing elders, while supporting young people in leadingroles can generate broad engagement and changed conditions through aunique balance of new with old practices, particularly for immigrantcommunities and groups that have thrived by cultural resistance.Inclusion in decision making and less hierarchy, greater work/lifebalance, and constituent-ownership are touchstones for young leaders.

Grantmaking as capacity-building offers important opportunities, andresponsibilities, to advance change. The selection process often hasdisparate results, attributable to insufficient attention to culturaldynamics in stages such as initial access, relationship-building,applications and site visits. Organizations led by and for people ofcolor, or rural white residents, often face high hurdles, garner fewerresources, and have a more fragile infrastructure than counterparts.

Defining characteristics of cultural competency in capacity-buildingpractice include:

Social change as the motivating force – looking at institutions,structures, patterns and the interplay of forces influencingcommunity change. By contrast, a “recipe” or checklist approachtreats groups as if history and culture are the same for everyoneacross time and circumstance, and assumes capacity can be built byaddressing a person, organization or issue in isolation.

Actively exploring cultural bases including geography, historicalcontext, religion, socioeconomic background and other aspects to

bottom” in which the system has encouraged and rewarded the practice of groups showing theyare more disadvantaged than other groups as a way of gaining attention or resources toremedy disparities.


guide the work. This practice requires taking account of majorhistorical moments, culturally based assets, current issues andaspirations—while paying attention to the complexity of each ethniccommunity and dispelling the notion of monolithic groups.

Sharing and building power – in contrast to privilege and power asa zero sum proposition, using strategies that allow everyone tofeel valued, empowered and fully engaged. Power sharing includesstrategically addressing individual behaviors, institutionalpractices, and public policies to create equity.

Modeling and facilitating learning – with reflection, disclosureand listening as key skills. The premium is on bringing oneselffully to the work while respecting others. This involves,intentional learning to understand one’s own background and that ofgroups with whom the work is done, culturally locating oneself tobe more attuned to choices about process, engaging everyone as alearner and a source of knowledge, and making transfer of knowledgevery intentional.

Breaking silence – taking responsibility to ensure fullparticipation despite cultural barriers and making a commitment toname and work through the “elephant(s) in the room.” realizing thatpeople often dance around deep issues, and taking responsibility toensure full participation despite cultural barriers.

Building principled relationships intentionally with people who aredifferent from us—including community leaders and bridge builders—to increase the ability to work/live effectively acrossdifferences, better understand and meet capacity needs in personaland professional settings.

Structuring engagements with a cultural lens – showing awillingness to make the necessary time commitments and do thecapacity building in a way that honors culturally based realities—such as the extraordinary demands on nonprofit leaders of color.

Recruiting, retaining, and developing diverse staff, board, andother stakeholders such as volunteers and individual donors.Making an extra effort to reach out and involve as stakeholdersmembers of particular groups that are not as often included, inrecognition of the diverse ways that they can contribute.

Access and willingness to form diverse teams for consulting andgrantmaking –following through on an intention to influence thedesign, intervention, and results; increasing information about thereality of power dynamics, and bringing the diverse perspectivesnecessary for constructive “pushback” on all sides.

Being community-centered and client-centered – not with unqualifiedacceptance or support of all aspects of a culture, and not assupposedly value-neutral, but rather the capacity builder as a“critical friend” looking at and beyond the organization for thecollective interest. It requires engaging about values in forminga relationship with a nonprofit—though not necessarily disclosing


all one’s opinions—and may lead to declining to start or continue aworking relationship, or challenging a nonprofit to expand itsview.

Making language accessible, and an instrument of transformation –which may involve “code-switching”* to correct for powerinequality, or keeping an accent to create a stronger bond and stayculturally grounded—especially in the South, immigrant communities,or in groups less taken with academic credentialing.

Routinely reviewing capacity-building materials (trainingcurricula, tools, questionnaires, manuals, as well as books andarticles) and delivery techniques with members of diverse groups toensure effectiveness.

WHAT ARE IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FIELD?

The long-term character of culturally competent work requires more thanusual arrangements: There is an unmet need for longer-term engagements,an appropriate level of resources, and capacity builders with thewillingness, skill and operational base to assume the role of ally ratherthan be limited to advisor-for-hire.

Capacity builders need to check assumptions about what it will take torealize change in nonprofit organizations and the sector. Oneimplication is that moving people of color, or other historicallyexcluded groups such as women, into decision making positions may notnecessarily change outcomes. Questions of organizational culture, rank,structure, and motivation to change must be considered, as well as largersocial and historical forces.

For all participants to own who they are, capacity builders must findways for perceptions of white identity to shift—refusing to equatewhiteness only with historical oppression or heroics, and acknowledgingcollective history without typecasting.

To be better positioned for effectiveness, capacity builders will need tobroaden and deepen relationships with a diverse network of colleagues andpartners, and identify the best ways of organizing the work together.

Accountability needs to engage constituents and extend beyond formalevaluation projects, other capacity building, or funding requirements.The people who are most affected by a nonprofit’s mission, as well asthose who invest time and energy, should take responsibility to determinethe impact of their efforts and of resources supporting the work. As aresult, definitions of success and measures of progress will evolve to berelevant to current issues nonprofits address.

* Code-switching refers to use of different kinds of language – phrasing, slang, accent,voice tone – depending on audience or situation.


1. Please tell us the extent to which you (personally) practice the following as a capacitybuilder. Please circle the best response. Question #2 will address the practice of yourorganization, if applicable.

No

tat

all

So

met

imes

Fre

que

ntl

y

Alw

ays

No

tA

ppl

icab

le

Intentionally develop and maintain relationships with communityleaders and bridge builders across race, ethnicity, and culture

Examine both the assets and needs of the particular group(s) ofpeople with whom you are working

Intentionally identify and address issues relevant to the particulargroup(s) of people with whom you are working (e.g., history,language, learning style, communication, gender roles, valuesystems)

Strategically and deliberately address intergroup dynamics to buildcultural competency

Strategically and deliberately address individual behaviors

Strategically and deliberately address institutional practices

Address public policies related to cultural competency

Intentionally attend learning forums (e.g., seminars, workshops) todeepen your understanding about race, ethnicity, culture, andequity, and/or about the particular group(s) of people with whomyou are working

Intentionally recruit, retain, and develop staff who share the racial,ethnic, and cultural characteristics of the particular group(s) withwhom you are working

Intentionally recruit, retain, and develop staff who have extensiveknowledge about the particular group(s) of people with whom youare working

Make the extra effort to reach out to and include members of theparticular group(s) who often get left out

Appendix C: Summary of SurveyFindings


No

tat

all

Som

etim

es

Fre

quen

tly

Alw

ays

Not

Ap

plic

able

Routinely review your capacity-building materials (e.g., trainingcurricula, questionnaires, manuals) and delivery techniques withmembers of the group(s) with which you are working to ensuresensitivity and effectivenessConsistently pay attention to how your own assumptions andracial, ethnic, and cultural background could affect yourinteraction with other people

2. Please describe any other practice(s) you have to ensure cultural competency if notlisted above.

3. Are you:

An independent consultant or otherwise not affiliated with anorganizationAffiliated with an organization

4. If you are an independent consultant or otherwise not affiliated with an organization,please skip to Question 3. If you are part of an organization, please tell us if yourorganization has policies and procedures to intentionally do the following.

Yes

No

No

tA

ppl

icab

le

Develop and maintain relationships with community leaders andbridge builders across race, ethnicity, and culture

Examine both the assets and needs of the particular group(s) ofpeople with whom the organization is working

Identify and address issues relevant to the particular group(s) ofpeople with whom the organization is working (e.g., history,language, learning style, communication, gender roles, valuesystems)Attend and participate in learning forums (e.g., seminars,workshops) to deepen your understanding about race, ethnicity,culture, and equity, and/or about the particular group(s) ofpeople with whom the organization is working


Yes

No

No

tA

ppl

icab

le

Address intergroup dynamics to build cultural competency

Address individual behaviors

Address institutional practices

Address public policies related to cultural competency issues

Recruit, retain, and develop staff who have extensive experienceworking with the particular group(s) of people with whom theorganization is working

Recruit, retain, and develop board members who have extensiveexperience working with the particular group(s) of people withwhom the organization is working


Review the organization’s capacity building materials (e.g.,training curricula, questionnaires, manuals) and deliverytechniques with members of the group(s) with which it isworking to ensure sensitivity and effectivenessPay attention to how assumptions about people from differentracial, ethnic, and cultural background could affect staffmembers’ interaction with people

5. Please describe any other policies and procedures your organization has to ensurecultural competency if not listed above.

6. Are you aware of any definitions and/or standards for practicing cultural competency?If yes, identify the source(s) for the definition and/or standards.

Yes

No


7. How have you applied the definitions and/or standards to your work? (Please check allthat apply.)

Checked

To guide my work in generalTo identify partners with whom I can collaborateTo recruit consultants and contractorsTo recruit staffTo recruit board membersTo guide staff professional developmentTo guide development of materials and resourcesTo help select granteesTo determine performance ofstaff/partners/consultants/granteesTo measure progress of the group/organization/grantee withwhich you workHave not applied themOther (please explain)

8. Based on the definitions or standards you mentioned, do you see any limitations inexisting definitions and standards of cultural competency?

YesNo

9. What do you think are the three most reliable measures or indicators of a culturallycompetent capacity building process?

10. In the past 12 months, how many workshops/trainings/seminars/etc., about culturalcompetency have you attended for professional development?

None 1 to 4 5 to 8 9 to 12 More than 12

11. In the past 12 months, how many requests (both those you responded to and those youdidn’t) have you received for assistance in building cultural competency?


12. How many capacity builders do you know who practice cultural competency well?



13. Who do you frequently turn to for information about cultural competency? (Pleasename the individual and/or his/her affiliation.)

14. In the past 12 months, how often have you turned to the Alliance for NonprofitManagement for information about cultural competency?

Never A few times Many times Always

15. What do you think about the Alliance’s level of current effort to promote culturalcompetency?

Too much attention is being paid to this topic

An appropriate amount of attention is being paid to this topic

More attention should be paid to this topic

Don’t know enough to comment

Comment

16. How long have you been providing capacity building support to non-profitorganizations?

Less than 1 year1 to 4 years5 to 8 years9 to 12 yearsMore than 12 years

17. How would you describe the capacity building work you do? Please check all that apply.

Checked

Provide consulting or technical assistance to non-profitsDevelop organizational systems or training programs within my non-profitWrite about non-profits or conduct research on the nonprofit sectorDeliver education/training for non-profit managers or studentsProvide grants to non-profits that support organizational effectivenessProvide technology solutions to non-profitsConvene non-profits for learning, networking or advocacy purposesProvide evaluation assistance to non-profitsOther (please specify)


18. Do you identify yourself as a person of color?

Yes No Don’t know/prefer not toanswer

19. What is your age?

18 to 30 years 31 to 40 years 41 to 50 years 51 to 60 years Older than 60years

20. Comments


Summary Tables – All Respondents


ALL RESPONDENTS

1. Please tell us the extent to which you (personally) practice the following as a capacity builder. Pleasecircle the best response. Question #2 will address the practice of your organization, if applicable.

No

tat

all

Som

etim

es

Fre

quen

tly

Alw

ays

Not

Ap

plic

able

Tot

al

Intentionally develop and maintain relationshipswith community leaders and bridge builders acrossrace, ethnicity, and culture

3(2.0%)

26(17.6%)

56(37.8%)

55(37.2%)

8(5.4%)

148

Examine both the assets and needs of the particulargroup(s) of people with whom you are working 0

11(7.5%)

51(34.7%)

85(57.5%)

0 147

Intentionally identify and address issues relevant tothe particular group(s) of people with whom you areworking (e.g., history, language, learning style,communication, gender roles, value systems)

3(1.4%)

31(21.1%)

57(38.8%)

54(36.7)

2(1.4%)

147

Strategically and deliberately address intergroupdynamics to build cultural competency

7(4.7%)

42(28.4%)

59(39.9%)

36(24.3%)

4(2.7%)

148

Strategically and deliberately address individualbehaviors 6

(4.1%)49

(33.1%)63

(42.6%)27

(18.21%)3

(2.0%)148

Strategically and deliberately addressinstitutional practices

5(3.4%)

42(28.4%)

59(39.9%)

36(24.3%)

6(4.1%)

148

Address public policies related to culturalcompetency

27(18.5%)

47(32.2%)

39(26.7%)

15(10.3%)

18(12.2%)

146

Intentionally attend learning forums (e.g., seminars,workshops) to deepen your understanding aboutrace, ethnicity, culture, and equity, and/or about theparticular group(s) of people with whom you areworking

10(6.9%)

67(45.9%)

52(35.6%)

15(10.3%)

2(1.4%)

146

Intentionally recruit, retain, and develop staff whoshare the racial, ethnic, and cultural characteristicsof the particular group(s) with whom you areworking

5(3.4%)

17(11.5%)

48(32.4%)

36(24.3%)

42(28.4%)

148

Intentionally recruit, retain, and develop staff whohave extensive knowledge about the particulargroup(s) of people with whom you are working

4(2.7%)

12(8.2%)

39(26.5%)

39(26.5%)

53(36.9%)

147

Make the extra effort to reach out to and includemembers of the particular group(s) who often getleft out

1(0.7%)

22(15.0%)

69(46.9%)

53(36.1%)

2(1.4%)

147


No

tat

all

So

met

imes

Fre

qu

entl

y

Alw

ays

No

tA

ppl

icab

le

Tot

al

Routinely review your capacity-building materials(e.g., training curricula, questionnaires, manuals)and delivery techniques with members of thegroup(s) with which you are working to ensuresensitivity and effectiveness

14(9.5%)

60(40.5%)

38(25.7%)

32(21.6%)

4(2.7%)

148

Consistently pay attention to how your ownassumptions and racial, ethnic, and culturalbackground could affect your interaction with otherpeople

013

(8.8%)71

(48.0%)63

(42.6%)1

(0.7%)148

2. Please describe any other practice(s) you have to ensure cultural competency if not listed above.

(qualitative responses, not listed here)

3. Are you:

An independent consultant or otherwise not affiliated with an organization 87(58.4%)

Affiliated with an organization 62(41.6%)

4. If you are an independent consultant or otherwise not affiliated with an organization, please skip toQuestion 3. If you are part of an organization, please tell us if your organization has policies andprocedures to intentionally do the following.

Yes

No

No

tA

ppl

icab

le

Tot

al

Develop and maintain relationships with community leaders and bridgebuilders across race, ethnicity, and culture

54(73.0%)

20(27.0%)

0 74

Examine both the assets and needs of the particular group(s) of peoplewith whom the organization is working 56

(74.7%)19

(25.3%)0 75

Identify and address issues relevant to the particular group(s) of peoplewith whom the organization is working (e.g., history, language, learningstyle, communication, gender roles, value systems)

50(67.6%)

23(31.1%)

1(1.4%)

74

Attend and participate in learning forums (e.g., seminars, workshops) todeepen your understanding about race, ethnicity, culture, and equity,and/or about the particular group(s) of people with whom theorganization is working

43(57.3%)

29(38.7%)

3(4.0%)

75


Yes

No

No

tA

ppl

icab

le

Tot

al

Address intergroup dynamics to build cultural competency 42(59.2%)

27(38.0%)

2(2.8%)

71

Address individual behaviors 41(55.4%)

31(41.9%)

2(2.7%)

74

Address institutional practices 40(54.1%)

31(41.9%)

3(4.1%)

74

Address public policies related to cultural competency issues 27(36.5%)

41(55.4%)

6(8.1%)

74


52(70.3%)

20(27.0%)

2(2.7%)

74

Recruit, retain, and develop board members who have extensiveexperience working with the particular group(s) of people with whomthe organization is working

53(70.7%)

12(16.0%)

10(13.3%)

75


57(77.0%)

16(21.6%)

1(1.4%)

74

Review the organization’s capacity building materials (e.g., trainingcurricula, questionnaires, manuals) and delivery techniques withmembers of the group(s) with which it is working to ensure sensitivityand effectiveness

36(50.7%)

33(46.5%)

2(2.8%)

71

Pay attention to how assumptions about people from different racial,ethnic, and cultural background could affect staff members’ interactionwith people

47(63.5%)

27(36.5%)

0 74

5. Please describe any other policies and procedures your organization has to ensure cultural competencyif not listed above.


6. Are you aware of any definitions and/or standards for practicing cultural competency? If yes, identifythe source(s) for the definitions and/or standards.

Yes 36(24.2%)

No 95(63.8%)

Blank 18(12.1%)


7. How have you applied the definitions and/or standards to your work? (Please check all that apply.)

Checked

To guide my work in general 33(22.1%)

To identify partners with whom I can collaborate 23(15.4%)

To recruit consultants and contractors 23(15.4%)

To recruit staff 15(10.1%)

To recruit board members 15(10.1%)

To guide staff professional development 19(12.8%)

To guide development of materials and resources 30(20.1%)

To help select grantees 5(3.4%)

To determine performance of staff/partners/consultants/grantees 13(8.7%)

To measure progress of the group/organization/grantee with which you work 20(13.4%)

Have not applied them 5(3.4%)

Other (please explain) 8(5.4%)

8. Based on the definitions or standards you mentioned, do you see any limitations in existing definitionsand standards of cultural competency?

Yes 29(85.3%)

No 5(14.7%)

Total 34

9. What do you think are the three most reliable measures or indicators of a culturally competentcapacity building process?


10. In the past 12 months, how many workshops/trainings/seminars/etc., about cultural competency haveyou attended for professional development?

None 1 to 4 5 to 8 9 to 12 More than 12 Total48

(38.7%)69

(55.5%)7

(5.7%)0 0

124


11. In the past 12 months, how many requests (both those you responded to and those you didn’t) haveyou received for assistance in building cultural competency?


(55.4%)40

(33.1%)9

(7.4%)1

(0.8%)4

(3.3%)121



(14.2%)67

(59.3%)13

(11.5%)5

(4.4%)12

(10.5%)113

13. Who do you frequently turn to for information about cultural competency? (Please name theindividual and/or his/her affiliation.)


14. In the past 12 months, how often have you turned to the Alliance for Nonprofit Management forinformation about cultural competency?

Never A few times Many times Always Total83

(68.0%)35

(28.7%)3

(2.5%)1

(0.8%)122

15. What do you think about the Alliance’s level of current effort to promote cultural competency?

Too much attention is being paid to this topic 8(6.5%)

An appropriate amount of attention is being paid to this topic 45(36.6%)

More attention should be paid to this topic 8(6.5%)

Don’t know enough to comment 45(36.6%)

Comment 17(13.8%)

Total 123

16. How long have you been providing capacity building support to non-profit organizations?

Less than 1 year 8(6.7%)

1 to 4 years 26(21.8%)

5 to 8 years 25(21.0%)

9 to 12 years 20(16.8%)

More than 12 years 40(33.6%)


Total 11917. How would you describe the capacity building work you do? Please check all that apply.

Checked

Provide consulting or technical assistance to nonprofits 110(73.8%)

Develop organizational systems or training programs within my nonprofit 30(20.1%)

Write about nonprofits or conduct research on the nonprofit sector 36(24.2%)

Deliver education/training for nonprofit managers or students 75(50.3%)

Provide grants to nonprofits that support organizational effectiveness 17(11.4%)

Provide technology solutions to nonprofits 16(10.7%)

Convene nonprofits for learning, networking or advocacy purposes 54(36.2%)

Provide evaluation assistance to nonprofits 47(31.5%)

Other (please specify) 15(10.1%)



Total

26(21.3%)

93(76.2%)

3(2.5%)

122



Total

4(3.2%)

17(13.9%)

38(31.1%)

50(41.0%)

13(10.7%)

122

20. Comments



Summary Tables - People of Color Respondents


COLOR RESPONDENTS


N=26

Not

atal

l

Som

etim

es

Fre

quen

tly

Alw

ays

Not

Ap

pli

cab

le

Tota

l

Intentionally develop and maintain relationships with communityleaders and bridge builders across race, ethnicity, and culture 1

(3.8%)4

(15.4%)10

(38.4%)10

(38.4%)1

(3.8%)26

Examine both the assets and needs of the particular group(s) ofpeople with whom you are working 0

1(3.8%)

9(34.6%)

16(61.5%)

0 26


03

(11.5%)12

(46.2%)11

(42.3%)0 26


05

(19.2%)11

(42.3%)10

(38.4%)0 26

Strategically and deliberately address individual behaviors1

(3.8%)7

(26.9%)11

(42.3%)7

(26.9%)0 26

Strategically and deliberately address institutional practices 1(3.8%)

4(15.4%)

11(42.3%)

10(38.4%)

0 26

Address public policies related to cultural competency 4(15.4%)

10(38.4%)

7(26.9%)

23

(11.5%)26


013

(50%)9

(34.6%)4

(15.4%)0 26


1(3.8%)

2(7.7%)

9(34.6%)

8(30.8%)

6(23.1%)

26


03

(12%)5

(20%)8

(32%)9

(36%)25

Make the extra effort to reach out to and include members of theparticular group(s) who often get left out 0

4(15.4%)

11(42.3%)

11(42.3%)

0 26

Routinely review your capacity-building materials (e.g., trainingcurricula, questionnaires, manuals) and delivery techniques withmembers of the group(s) with which you are working to ensuresensitivity and effectiveness

1(3.8%)

7(26.9%)

9(34.6%)

9(34.6%)

0 26


N=26

Not

atal

l

Som

etim

es

Fre

quen

tly

Alw

ays

Not

Appli

cab

le

Tota

l

Consistently pay attention to how your own assumptions andracial, ethnic, and cultural background could affect yourinteraction with other people

01

(3.8%)10

(38.4%)14

(53.8%)1

(3.8%)26

2. Please describe any other practice(s) you have to ensure cultural competency if not listed above:

3. Are you:




Yes

No

Not

Ap

plic

able

Tot

al


13(76.5%)

4(23.5%)

0 17


(82.4%)3

(17.6%)0 17


13(76.5%)

4(23.5%)

0 17


10(58.8%)

7(41.2%)

0 17


7(41.2%)

0 17


7(41.2%)

1(5.9%)

17


9(52.9%)

0 17


Yes

No

No

tA

ppl

icab

le

Tot

al


10(58.8%)

2(11.8%)

17


13(76.5%)

4(23.5%)

0 17

Recruit, retain, and develop board members who have extensiveexperience working with the particular group(s) of people with whomthe organization is working

15(88.2%)

1(5.9%)

1(5.9%)

17


12(70.6%)

4(23.5%)

1(5.9%)

17


11(64.7%)

6(35.3%)

0 17


9(52.9%)

8(47.1%)

0 17

5. Please describe any other policies and procedures your organization has to ensure culturalcompetency if not listed above



Yes 11(45.8%)

No 13(54.2%)

Total 24


Checked





Checked











Yes 10(76.9%)

No 3(23.1%)

Total 13





(30.8%)16

(61.6%)2

(7.7%)0 0 26



(30.8%)11

(42.3%)5

(19.2%)1

(3.8%)1

(3.8%)26




(16.7%)16

(66.7%)0

1(4.2%)

3(12.5%)

24





(61.5%)8

(30.8%)2

(7.7%)0 26






Comment 3(11.5%)

Total 26



1 to 4 years 8(30.8%)

5 to 8 years 4(15.4%)

9 to 12 years 5(19.2%)


Total 26



Checked











Yes26

(100%)



Total

2(7.7%)

6(23.1%)

12(46.2%)

5(19.2%)

1(3.8%)

26

20. Comments



Summary Tables - Non-People of Color Respondents


NON-PEOPLE OF COLOR RESPONDENTS


N=93

Not

atal

l

Som

etim

es

Fre

quen

tly

Alw

ays

Not

Ap

pli

cab

le

Tota

l

Intentionally develop and maintain relationships with communityleaders and bridge builders across race, ethnicity, and culture 1

(1.1%)19

(20.7%)32

(34.8%)33

(35.9%)7

(7.6%)92

Examine both the assets and needs of the particular group(s) ofpeople with whom you are working 0

7(7.6%)

30(32.6%)

55(59.8%)

0 92


2(2.2%)

22(24.2%)

36(39.6%)

29(31.9%)

2(2.2%)

91


7(7.6%)

26(28.3%)

34(37%)

21(22.8%)

4(4.3%)

92

Strategically and deliberately address individual behaviors 5(5.4%)

33(35.9%)

39(42.4)

13(14.1%)

2(2.2%)

92

Strategically and deliberately address institutional practices 4(4.3%)

27(29%)

38(41.3%)

17(18.5%)

6(6.5%)

92

Address public policies related to cultural competency 17(18.9%)

24(26.7%)

29(32.2%)

10(11.1%)

10(11.1%)

90


10(11.1%)

42(46.7%)

30(33.3%)

6(6.7%)

2(2.2%)

90


3(3.3%)

9(9.8%)

29(31.5%)

21(22.8%)

30(32.6%)

92


3(3.3%)

6(6.5%)

19(20.7%)

28(30.4%)

36(39.6%)

92


1(1.1%)

15(16.5%)

46(50.5%)

27(29.7%)

2(2.2%)

91

Routinely review your capacity-building materials (e.g., trainingcurricula, questionnaires, manuals) and delivery techniques withmembers of the group(s) with which you are working to ensuresensitivity and effectiveness

11(12%)

40(43.5%)

20(21.7%)

17(18.5%)

4(4.3%)

92

Consistently pay attention to how your own assumptions andracial, ethnic, and cultural background could affect yourinteraction with other people

08

(8.7%)47

(51.1%)37

(40.2%)0 92


2. Please describe any other practice(s) you have to ensure cultural competency if not listed above


3. Are you:




Yes

No

No

tA

ppl

icab

le

Tot

al


35(70%)

15(30%)

0 50


(76%)12

(24%)0 50


32(64%)

18(36%)

0 50

Attend and participate in learning forums (e.g., seminars, workshops) todeepen your understanding about race, ethnicity, culture, and equity,and/or about the particular group(s) of people with whom the organizationis working

29(58%)

19(38%)

2(4%)

50

Address intergroup dynamics to build cultural competency30

(63.8%)16

(34%)1

(2.1%)47

Address individual behaviors to build cultural competency 31(62%)

19(38%)

0 50

Address institutional practices to build cultural competency28

(57.1%)19

(38.8%)2

(4.1%)49

Address public policies related to cultural competency issues20

(40.8%)27

(55.1%)2

(4.1%)49

Recruit, retain, and develop staff who have extensive experience workingwith the particular group(s) of people with whom the organization isworking

33(67.3%)

14(28.6%)

2(4.1%)

49

Recruit, retain, and develop board members who have extensiveexperience working with the particular group(s) of people with whom theorganization is working

32(64%)

10(20%)

8(16%)

50


Yes

No

No

tA

ppl

icab

le

Tot

al


41(82%)

9(18%)

0 50

Review the organization’s capacity building materials (e.g., trainingcurricula, questionnaires, manuals) and delivery techniques with membersof the group(s) with which it is working to ensure sensitivity andeffectiveness

22(45.8%)

25(52.1%)

1(2.1%)

48


34(68%)

16(32%)

0 50

5. Please describe any other policies and procedures your organization has to ensure culturalcompetency if not listed above



Yes 21(22.8%)

No 71(77.2%)

Total 92


Checked











Checked





Yes 15(93.8%)

No 1(6.2%)

Total 16





(40.2%)50

(54.3%)5

(5.4%)0 0 92



(62.2%)27

(30%)4

(4.4%)0

3(3.3%)

90



(13.1%)49

(58.3%)11

(13.1%)4

(4.8%)9

(10.7%)84






(70.6%)25

(27.2%)1

(1.1%)1

(1.1%)92






Comment 12(12.9%)

Total 93



1 to 4 years 17(19.1%)

5 to 8 years 21(23.6%)

9 to 12 years 15(16.9%)


Total 89


Checked






Checked







No93 (100%)



Total

2(2.2%)

11(11.8%)

26(28%)

43(46.2%)

11(11.8%)

93

20. Comments



Summary Tables - 40 Years and Younger


UNDER 40 YEARS


No

tat

all

Som

etim

es

Fre

quen

tly

Alw

ays

Not

Ap

plic

able

Tot

al

Intentionally develop and maintain relationships withcommunity leaders and bridge builders across race,ethnicity, and culture

07

(33.3%)6

(28.6%)8

(38.1%)0 21

Examine both the assets and needs of the particulargroup(s) of people with whom you are working 0 0

9(42.9%)

12(57.1%)

0 21


04

(20%)11

(55%)5

(25%)0 20


1(4.8%)

4(19%)

10(47.6%)

6(28.6%)

0 21


(14.3%)5

(23.8%)9

(42.9%)4

(19%)0 21


2(9.5%)

6(28.6%)

6(28.6%)

7(33.3%)

0 21


5(23.8%)

7(33.3%)

5(23.8%)

1(4.8%)

3(14.3%)

21

Intentionally attend learning forums (e.g., seminars,workshops) to deepen your understanding about race,ethnicity, culture, and equity, and/or about theparticular group(s) of people with whom you areworking

1(4.8%)

13(61.9%)

3(14.3%)

3(14.3%)

1(4.8%)

21

Intentionally recruit, retain, and develop staff whoshare the racial, ethnic, and cultural characteristics ofthe particular group(s) with whom you are working

03

(14.3%)9

(42.9%)5

(23.8%)4

(19%)21


3(14.3%)

2(9.5%)

5(23.8%)

4(19%)

7(33.3%)

21

Make the extra effort to reach out to and includemembers of the particular group(s) who often get leftout

06

(28.6%)8

(38.1%)7

(33.3%)0 21


No

tat

all

So

met

imes

Fre

qu

entl

y

Alw

ays

No

tA

ppl

icab

le

Tot

al

Routinely review your capacity-building materials(e.g., training curricula, questionnaires, manuals) anddelivery techniques with members of the group(s)with which you are working to ensure sensitivity andeffectiveness

4(19%)

5(23.8%)

5(23.8%)

6(28.6%)

1(4.8%)

21


02

(9.5%)12

(57.1%)6

28.6%)1

(4.8%)21



3. Are you:

An independent consultant or otherwise not affiliated with an organization 4(19%)

Affiliated with an organization 17(81%)


Yes

No

No

tA

ppl

icab

le

Tot

al


14(82.4%)

3(17.6%)

0 17


(82.4%)3

(17.6%)0 17


11(64.7%)

6(35.3%)

0 17


10(58.8%)

6(35.3%)

1(5.9%)

17


Yes

No

No

tA

ppl

icab

le

Tot

al


5(29.4%)

0 17


5(29.4%)

0 17


8(50%)

1(6.2%)

16


11(64.7%)

1(5.9%)

17


12(70.6%)

5(29.4%)

0 17


10(58.8%)

5(29.4%)

2 17


12(70.6%)

4(23.5%)

1(5.9%)

17


8(50%)

8(50%)

0 16


10(58.8%)

7(41.2%)

0 17

5. Please describe any other policies and procedures your organization has to ensure culturalcompetency if not listed above.



Yes 6(30%)

No 14(70%)

Total 20



Checked


To identify partners with whom I can collaborate 4(19%)

To recruit consultants and contractors 4(19%)



To guide staff professional development 4(19%)


To help select grantees 0To determine performance of staff/partners/consultants/grantees 5

(23.8%)To measure progress of the group/organization/grantee with which you work 4

(19%)Have not applied them 0Other (please explain) 0


Yes 4(66.7%)

No 2(33.3%)

Total 6





(33.3%)12

(57.1%)2

(9.5%)0 0 21




(45%)7

(35%)2

(10%)0

2(10%)

20



(20%)13

(65%)1

(5%)1

(5%)1

(5%)20





(71.4%)5

(23.8%)0

1(4.8%)

21






Comment 1(4.8%)

Total 21



1 to 4 years 8(38.1%)

5 to 8 years 6(28.6%)

9 to 12 years 3(14.3%)



Total 21


Checked





Provide grants to nonprofits that support organizational effectiveness 4(19%)

Provide technology solutions to nonprofits 4(19%)



Other (please specify) 0


Yes No Don’t Know/Prefer not toanswer

Total

8(38.1%)

13(61.9%)

0 21



Total

4(19%)

17(81%)

0 0 0 21

20. Comments



Summary Tables - Over 40 years


OVER 40 YEARS


No

tat

all

Som

etim

es

Fre

quen

tly

Alw

ays

Not

Ap

plic

able

Tot

al

Intentionally develop and maintain relationships withcommunity leaders and bridge builders across race,ethnicity, and culture

2(2%)

16(16%)

37(37%)

37(37%)

8(8%)

100

Examine both the assets and needs of the particulargroup(s) of people with whom you are working 0

8(8%)

30(30%)

62(62%)

0 100


2(2%)

21(21%)

38(38%)

37(37%)

2(2%)

100


6(6%)

28(28%)

36(36%)

26(26%)

4(4%)

100


(3%)35

(35%)43

(43%)17

(17%)2

(2%)100


3(3%)

26(26%)

43(43%)

22(22%)

6(6%)

100


16(16.3%)

32(32.7%)

28(28.6%)

11(11.2%)

11(11.2%)

98

Intentionally attend learning forums (e.g., seminars,workshops) to deepen your understanding about race,ethnicity, culture, and equity, and/or about theparticular group(s) of people with whom you areworking

9(9.2%)

42(42.3%)

39(39.8%)

7(7.1%)

1(1%)

98

Intentionally recruit, retain, and develop staff whoshare the racial, ethnic, and cultural characteristics ofthe particular group(s) with whom you are working

4(4%)

8(8%)

29(29%)

25(25%)

34(34%)

100


1(1%)

6(6.1%)

20(20.2%)

32(32.3%)

40(40.4%)

99

Make the extra effort to reach out to and includemembers of the particular group(s) who often get leftout

1(1%)

13(13.1%)

49(49.5%)

34(34.3%)

2(2%)

99


No

tat

all

So

met

imes

Fre

qu

entl

y

Alw

ays

No

tA

ppl

icab

le

Tot

al

Routinely review your capacity-building materials(e.g., training curricula, questionnaires, manuals) anddelivery techniques with members of the group(s)with which you are working to ensure sensitivity andeffectiveness

8(8%)

43(43%)

24(24%)

22(22%)

3(3%)

100


07

(7%)48

(48%)45

(45%)0 100



3. Are you:




Yes

No

No

tA

ppl

icab

le

Tot

al


34(68%)

16(32%)

0 50


(76%)12

(24%)0 50


34(68%)

16(32%)

0 50


29(58%)

20(40%)

1(2%)

50


Yes

No

No

tA

ppl

icab

le

Tot

al


18(38.3%)

1(2.1%)

47

Address individual behaviors 28(56%)

21(42%)

1(2%)

50

Address institutional practices 29(58%)

20(40%)

1(2%)

50


26(53.1%)

3(6.1%)

49


34(69.4%)

13(26.5%)

2(4.1%)

49


37(74%)

6(12%)

7(14%)

50


41(82%)

9(18%)

0 50


25(51%)

23(46.9%)

1(2%)

49


33(66%)

17(34%)

0 50

5. Please describe any other policies and procedures your organization has to ensure culturalcompetency if not listed above.



Yes 29(29.3%)

No 70(70.7%)

Total 99



Checked








To help select grantees 5(5%)



Have not applied them 3(3%)



Yes 24(92.3%)

No 2(7.7%)

Total 26





(39%)56

(56%)5

(5%)0 0 100




(56.6%)33

(33.3%)7

(7.1%)1

(1%)2

(2%)99



(12.1%)53

(58.2%)12

(13.2%)4

(4.4%)11

(12.1%)91





(67%)30

(30%)3

(3%)0 100


Too much attention is being paid to this topic 7(7%)

An appropriate amount of attention is being paid to this topic 37(37%)

More attention should be paid to this topic 7(7%)

Don’t know enough to comment 33(33%)

Comment 16(16%)

Total 100




1 to 4 years 17(17.3%)

5 to 8 years 19(19.6%)

9 to 12 years 17(17.5%)


Total 97


Checked












Total

18(17.8%)

80(79.2%)

3(3%)

101




Total

0 038

(37.6%)50

(49.5%)13

(12.9%)101

20. Comments


Date post:	13-Dec-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	vokhuong
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times

ASDC Evaluation of Cultural Competency Initiative of Cultural Competency... · to thank the...

Documents