Meyer’s Healthy Environment Portfolio supports efforts to change the status quo so that the benefits of a healthy environment reach all our communities, particularly those that experience disparities. To advance this vision, there must be greater alignment among the interests, campaigns and priorities of advocates and organizations. We also believe that the voices of marginalized and most negatively impacted communities must play a leadership role in defining solutions because we all benefit when those most impacted benefit. Together, alignment and community voice will allow us to be successful with larger social and environmental change in the future.

Using that lens, we recently caught up with four 2016 grantee partners who were active in the recent legislative session.

Here’s what they said when we asked: In what ways, if any, did Oregon’s environmental movement become more aligned to advance change for a just, sustainable future and/or safeguard core environmental protections?

Huy Ong, OPAL Environmental Justice Oregon

OPAL is dedicated to bringing meaningful engagement of the most impacted communities to processes that weren’t designed with our participation in mind. Throughout numerous campaigns at the local, regional and state level, we have learned that without our involvement in the crafting, implementation and evaluation of programs and policies, our communities become an afterthought or at times even a bargaining chip. This legislative session gave us opportunities to call out wedge issues (rejecting the antiquated jobs vs. environment frame with the climate jobs bill), build across movements (housing and land use advocates testifying in support of transit investments) and address historic harms with the mainstream environmental movement.

One area where we experienced strong collaboration was with the Youth Transit Bill, which would have allowed for local school districts to utilize existing public transit service in their school catchment area to provide transportation to educational and other education-enhancing services through a bus pass valid throughout the school year. While we had signs of progress throughout the session of both grassroots and legislative support, the bill ultimately did not succeed this session. We will continue to engage within our movement to bring about this change at the state, local and regional level.

Andrea Durbin, Oregon Environmental Council:

Some environmental groups — namely Oregon Environmental Council, Oregon League of Conservation Voters and Climate Solutions — supported the Coalition of Communities of Color lobby day this session, providing volunteers and staff support for the day and to lobby. OEC also joined NAACP’s lobby day to support passage of the racial profile bill.

OPAL was a key member of the Transportation for Oregon’s Future Coalition. We worked with OPAL to develop the low-income provisions of the electric vehicle rebates. The coalition of groups worked together well and stayed focused on the collective priorities of the coalition.

Lisa Arkin, Beyond Toxics

I see new energy and commitment from environmental organizations to link environment and social justice issues. Beyond Toxics has long been advocating for using a justice lens for all environmental work, so it’s exciting to witness a growing understanding about connections between environmental harm and unequitable impacts on vulnerable Oregonians. It was really heartening for me to be in the state capitol working on issues as varied as clean energy, pollinator protection, correcting inequities in our judicial system, clean drinking water and herbicide pollution in rural communities.

For example, we’re not only talking about clean energy itself and how much fossil fuel we're going to use, but we were simultaneously talking about making sure that clean energy economy provides good jobs for those who have traditionally not benefited from energy policy. So we stood hand in hand with the NAACP and helped them deliver their clean energy and jobs report which we are a co-sponsor of. And we worked hard to promote the clean energy and clean energy jobs bill. These coalitions are bringing new life, I think, to the environmental movement and helping us be better partners with social justice movements.

Gerik Kransky, The Street Trust:

While working to reduce carbon emissions from transportation, the environmental movement is increasingly embracing a social justice framework for policy decisions. In the campaign to increase funding for transit, many environmental and community leaders worked together to ensure that the transportation funding package requires potential recipients of transit funding to identify how they will address concerns of low income communities in their plans to spend the money. This additional policy requirement is one small example of the growing partnerships among community-based groups to align environmental goals with the goals of people experiencing negative disparities.

The leaders also reflected on session highlights. The following are excerpts from their responses focusing on the highlights they shared that include environmental benefit as well as benefits to most impacted communities.

Gerik:

The transportation funding package includes a record investment, over $10 million per year, in new Safe Routes to School improvements in the 1-mile radius of schools for kids to get to and from school safely. The impact will be greater in low-income communities due to a reduced funding match requirement for school districts eligible for federal Title I assistance where over 50 percent of students are eligible to receive free or reduced-price lunches.

Lisa:

We helped introduce Senate Bill 892, which would have served rural communities by requiring that they receive advance notice about any kind of aerial pesticide spray in their vicinity. At this point in time in Oregon, there are few legal protections for people who live next to agricultural or timber lands that are sprayed. Oregon state agencies don’t monitor pesticide drift; enforcement of drift incidences is pretty minimal and is very much slanted in favor of the industry. So Oregonians who live in rural areas are really at a disadvantage.

While this bill didn’t pass, all the media that was generated around Oregonians in rural areas being harmed by aerial herbicide spray drifts pushed the Department of Forestry to improve their electronic Spray Notification System. So even though it's not the advance warning we were looking for, at least now the department of forestry has created a system where you can learn about pending sprays coming up near your property three to six months out. It's an improvement, it's a step in the right direction. Rural voices are now being heard because we've brought this issue to the legislature two sessions in a row, which puts pressure on the department of forestry to address this issue.

In addition, we helped craft Senate Bill 995, the Toxics Right-to-Know bill.  Very much an environmental justice issue, SB 995 would require industry to provide very exact information about how many pounds of toxic chemicals are polluting the air in neighborhoods and communities. This bill also didn't pass, however, because of exposing this issue, the Department of Environmental Quality is now requiring the worst polluters to submit a toxics inventory to the state agency. Even though it doesn't make the detailed toxics release information public, for the first time ever in the history of our state, our air protection agency is collecting data on what actually goes up into the air from smokestacks.

Huy:

We advocated for explicit language regarding how transit districts will use the new funds generated by the transportation package. That includes submitting a plan in advance of receiving the funds explaining how transit providers will meet the needs of low income riders. Mechanisms include increasing the frequency of bus service in communities with a high percentage of low-income households, expanding bus routes and service, improving frequency and reliability of connections between transit providers (a key win for rural Oregonians), and fulfilling Bus Riders Unite’s local advocacy for a low-income fare (Low Income Fare Equity or LIFE) by suggesting implementation of reduced fare programs.

Another related win was the passage of Senate Bill 357 and House Bill 2777, advancing transit justice and racial justice to impacted people. SB 357 changes the level of penalties transit riders receive when utilizing their only mode of transportation. HB 2777 takes certain violations out of criminal court and lets transit agencies levy fines directly, preventing many instances of first contact with law enforcement. OPAL will continue to push for such policies to go further and not penalize individuals in our communities who depend on public transit for the crime of being poor.

Andrea:

The transportation package includes the largest statewide investment — $103 million per year — in public transit that Oregon has ever seen, including support for transit for rural Oregon and benefits for low-income commuters that included $12 million for rebates on fares for low-income TriMet riders. It means more choices to get around and makes it easier for seniors to get to medical appointments and maintain their independence. Plus expanding public transit service reduces pollution.

---

These are only a few examples where broader alliances worked collaboratively and successfully to advance environmental and social justice priorities during the session. There are numerous other examples, including many that represent incremental progress for legislative action in future sessions. Also there were many missed opportunities and disappointments and, overall, advocates who care deeply about a healthy environment felt like the session fell far short of what was possible.

The Meyer Healthy Environment team appreciates the vision, hard work and creativity of our grantee partners and the many other organizations that contributed to the policy successes that were accomplished this session and the groundwork laid for future wins and larger-scale change.

— Jill

 

Click here to read the full text of our interviews with Lisa, Huy, Gerik and Andrea

 

Salsa, tango, the running man, Highland jig: These were a few dance styles offered by the audience at the annual CONNECT conference in Pendleton in May. I began my keynote speech by asking the audience to shout out their favorite dance style in popcorn fashion.

The title of my talk was “Dancing with JEDI: Creating a Just, Equitable, Diverse and Inclusive Environmental Movement.” Why dance? Because no one approach to justice, equity, diversity and inclusion fits all. Challenges around justice, equity, diversity and inclusion are unique to the situation and people involved and require different, creative approaches to succeed. When working with individuals, groups and communities, the diversity of ways of operating are just as diverse as the numerous ways of executing the multitude of dance styles.

The crowd was mainly people from land trusts, soil and water conservation districts, watershed councils, and government agencies across rural Oregon. The questions that brought us together: What does equity look like for organizations working in rural communities and how is equity applied to the work?

Meyer’s definition of equity is “the existence of conditions where all people can reach their full potential.” In our grantmaking, this means supporting organizations and efforts that provide positive outcomes for communities facing disparities. Some of those communities the Healthy Environmental portfolio has explicitly identified are, but not limited to, low-income communities, tribes and indigenous communities, communities of color, refugees, and immigrants. The two populations most commonly discussed in my interactions with rural environmental organizations are communities of color and low-income communities, so I focused on these communities as I shared equity concepts that day in Pendleton.

Racial and ethnic equity

“Equity doesn’t apply here.”

“There are no people of color where we live.”

“We are not racially diverse.”

These are a few of the statements I’ve heard when discussing racial equity in rural Oregon. They’re often wrong.

The notion that there are not people of color in rural Oregon is simply false. On the contrary, plenty of people of color reside in communities across the state’s vast rural areas. According to the 2016 U.S. Census Bureau estimate, five of the six Oregon counties with the highest percentages of people of color are rural. Morrow, Jefferson, Malheur, Hood River and Umatilla counties range from 34 percent to 41 percent people of color. In the few regions where people of color make up less than 10 percent of the population, communities of color are extremely marginalized and need support now more than ever.

(Note: The U.S. Census Bureau often shares data for two similar sounding racial categories: “White alone” and “White alone, not Hispanic or Latino.” “White alone” includes Hispanics who identify as white. Those who identify as “Hispanic or Latino,” which is treated as an ethnic category in the U.S. census data, are asked to identify a race, which may be “White alone," “Black or African American alone," “American Indian and Alaska Native alone," “Asian alone," “Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone," or “Two or More Races”. Meyer focuses on the “White Non-Hispanic or Latino” population, which is often a much lower percentage — by up to 30 percentage points  than the “White alone” category. For example, in Malheur County, 92.1 percent of the population identifies as “White alone” while just 61.6 percent identified as “White alone, not Hispanic or Latino.” If misinterpreted, this data can mislead even the well-intentioned.)

Socioeconomic equity

The Healthy Environment portfolio frequently receives applications from rural organizations that identify support for low-income communities without mentioning how low-income communities are included and benefiting from their work or how the perspective of low-income communities has shaped the project plan. Since equity outcomes are most effectively accomplished through intention and purpose, we seek a deliberate approach to serving and providing value for communities facing disparities. In other words, we seek a clear demonstration of how low-income communities benefit because of the organization’s work. For example, are those below the poverty line receiving jobs or other economic benefits because of the organization’s work? Are low-income communities directly receiving the environmental benefits of the organization’s work?

Working in partnership

Meyer’s mission is to “work with and invest in organizations, communities, ideas and efforts that contribute to a flourishing and equitable Oregon.” Simply put, we are here to partner with and support organizations in both grantmaking and non-grantmaking capacities. This past spring, Meyer’s Healthy Environment portfolio hosted two webinars featuring rural organizations, Lomakatsi Restoration Project, Maxville Heritage Interpretive Center, and Rogue Climate, that included equitable approaches to their work. We also presented at a conference focused on water resources planning efforts in regions around Oregon where the idea of identifying and addressing “voice gaps” in community engagement and collaborative efforts was an approach to include equity. These non-grantmaking activities provided us with crucial opportunities to have in-depth conversations about equity with rural organizations.

Furthermore, we encourage organizations to meet with us to discuss how equity fits or might fit into their work. I recently met with an executive director of an organization based in eastern Oregon. Initially, he did not believe that equity applied to his work. As he shared the activities of his organization, we realized that he may be addressing socioeconomic equity, such as creating jobs and reducing the poverty rate in his county. The executive director left to explore these connections as he prepares an application for Meyer’s 2018 annual grant cycle.

As I closed my keynote speech in Pendleton, I shared an Emma Goldman quote, “If I can’t dance, I don’t want to be part of your revolution,” which can be interpreted “to be a part of your crucial work, you need to let me dance the way I like to dance.” Meyer’s Healthy Environment team is committed to partnering with rural organizations so that all of our communities prosper, dancing and moving in our own dance style, creating, together, an Oregon that is flourishing and equitable for all.

— Marcelo

I’m often asked what I’m seeing from my seat at Meyer since I have somewhat of a bird’s-eye view of the ecosystem of nonprofits working for a healthy environment across the state. So, I thought I would share a few recent observations with an aspiration of helping support further development of the diverse and inclusive movement we need to ensure the long-term health of our communities and the environment.

Top of mind is the current political climate and how it’s affecting organizations working for a healthy environment. I’m also mindful of Meyer’s equity lens, which we apply to all our work, and our responsibility to be transparent about what we are learning and seeing. Together these provide the backdrop for my observations.

1. Many organizations are feeling strained, but they are also resilient and building strength

With basic environmental protections, action on climate change and public lands protection in the crosshairs of the Trump administration and a polluter-friendly U.S. Congress in place, many organizations working for a healthy environment are stepping up their defensive efforts or joining forces with others to protect key environmental protections and recent gains. In some cases, groups have had to shift priorities to do more rapid response work, which has increased stress and also affected funding needs and direction.

Organizations of color and other organizations whose core constituents are “frontline communities” — those that experience oppression and disparities based on one or more identities — and who also work on environmental issues are doubly strained. However, they are also doubling down on resistance. In the face of attacks by the Trump administration and rising hate crimes, they are drawing upon their resiliency and organizing experience to support their communities and advance larger goals for change.

At the same time, many organizations have experienced a post-election surge in individual contributions, which is providing some of the unrestricted resources they need to help navigate the new political environment and shift priorities. In addition, some funders have deployed new flexible resources to help address these needs. We recognize the need for more sustained and flexible support.

Because of Oregon’s current political leadership, we’re hearing from national environmental partners who see the opportunity to bring new capacity to Oregon for positive work, particularly focused on climate and clean energy. This means that Oregon may get a boost in capacity to support current policy efforts and help develop strategies for success that could be replicated elsewhere.

2. Partnerships between mainstream environmental organizations and organizations led by frontline communities are increasing, but most appear to be focused on transactional vs. transformational change.

When I reflect on specific on-the-ground projects that we are learning about through our annual funding opportunity, I’m seeing more mutually beneficial transactional work and some seeds of transformational change. I distinguish “mutually beneficial transactional work” from “transactional work” in that the former is actually positive and beneficial to both partners, versus the latter, which is extractive and has negative impact on the underserved communities and the organization serving them. One-off mutually beneficial transactional work can produce wins for both parties, but these partnerships do not alter the fundamental form or function of the existing power structure, institutions or systems that define how things work. These systems are fundamentally flawed in that they are built on a power structure that consistently privileges certain groups over others.

Mutually beneficial transactional work can be a useful first step in advancing change but must evolve into change efforts that aim for transformation. Transformational change requires a greater investment and will on the part of all partners. It requires a willingness and commitment to altering the fundamental power structures and relationships in society and creating new systems built upon principles of organizational sustainability and equity.  

3. Organizations are beginning to look for ways to deepen and expand their collaborative work.

In response to the tense and rapidly changing political environment, I’ve heard about and participated in a number of convenings of organizational leaders that share the common theme of building relationships to lay groundwork for new and deeper collaboration. Environmental justice and social justice organizations, tribal organizations, other groups serving frontline communities and funders have been most active in these conversations.

A modest number of Oregon’s mainstream environmental organizations have been engaged in these discussions as well. However, many environmental groups have not yet been invited to participate at these tables because their relationships with organizations serving frontline communities are only emerging. I would like to help support the appropriate next steps to broaden the tables that have emerged and foster deeper relationships to move beyond tactical and transactional work toward transformational, movement-scale efforts.

I believe that more strategic convening can help unify and align efforts, strengthen channels of communication between organizations and build alliances for larger social and environmental change in the future.

4. Environmentalists are joining protests against racism and working to develop more inclusive, equitable and diverse organizations.

Although we’ve seen some recent missteps and there is still far to go to build an anti-racist environmental movement in Oregon, we are seeing a growing number of examples of mainstream environmental organizations taking action to protest racism and act as allies to people of color, immigrants and refugees and others being threatened in the current climate. Some environmental groups have joined forces with social justice groups and others to defend Oregon against anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim policies and ballot measures. They have engaged their members at rallies for immigrant rights, spoken up against attempts to link anti-immigrant actions to an environmental protection agenda and collaborated in other advocacy efforts. This is important progress, and we hope to support more action like this.

We are also seeing a growing number of organizations seeking support for efforts to deepen their understanding of diversity, equity and inclusion as well as make strategic changes in how their organizations operate. We are committed to nurturing this external and internal work for the long-term and aim to look for ways to stimulate efforts that can lead to deeper progress.

The four reflections I offer here are among the observations that have continued to surface over the past months. The Healthy Environment team is proud and honored to help support and be a part of the creative, persistent and powerful ways that organizations are working to protect the environment so that all of Oregon’s diverse communities benefit equitably. This work is not easy and it will continue to evolve from where we are today to where we hope to be in the future. Please continue to share with us the challenges you face, the opportunities you see and ideas you have for how we can work together for an equitable and flourishing Oregon.

— Jill

Soon after the 2016 presidential election, many of us began wondering how the changed political landscape would impact our work. A number of Meyer grantees, including those in the Building Community portfolio, raised real concerns and questions about how this new reality would affect, among other things, our civil liberties, immigrants’ rights, the rights of LGBTQ people, equity and justice. As a direct result, Meyer added two new tools to our real-time response kit: rapid response grantmaking, and the Oregon Immigrant and Refugee Funders Collaborative.

In an effort to take stock of how changing realities are impacting the work related to social justice, Meyer recently helped organize and participated in an event called “Strengthening Action for Justice.” The event focused on how the changed political environment is likely to impact our work and identified shared values and ways we can support each other moving forward.

More than 60 participants representing 30 community organizing and advocacy groups and a dozen funders attended the May 25 event in Portland. Extra efforts were also made to support the participation of key representatives from rural communities, and some traveled from as far away as Ontario in eastern Oregon. In some respects, the meeting was experimental. The planning group included both funders and community groups, and though there were some specific recommendations that came out of the conversation, the main objective was to create a space for folks to learn from each other.  

Through the process of designing and carrying out the meeting, participants named and affirmed shared values, identified root causes of challenges, and began thinking about how to leverage the strengths of both philanthropic and community-based organizations. Through discussion on root causes, participants began to think more broadly than their own organization, consider possibilities for alignment and move beyond the symptoms of problems.

Impacts of the changed political environment

A pre-meeting survey as well as discussion revealed that the current environment has raised levels of fear: fear of deportation, hate crimes and harassment and concern about losing health care and other key services that disproportionately impact marginalized communities. Quickly shifting policy changes have also forced many community-based and philanthropic organizations to respond rapidly (e.g., keeping up with potential changes in Medicaid, providing Know Your Rights* education) and in a way that is often reactive rather than proactive. For all, a sense of urgency has created the challenge of balancing existing work while also responding to immediate and, in many cases, unforeseen needs. (*Know Your Rights refers to programs that provide community members with critical information on their legal rights in a number of areas including civil liberties, housing, education, immigration status, etc.)

When asked to identify the root causes to many of the current and anticipated challenges of operating in this political environment, the group noted the prominence of racism and xenophobia. Other, and often related, causes included disenfranchisement of communities of color, concentration of wealth and power, misinformation and lack of cross-community communication.  

Looking forward

The pre-meeting survey and discussion also provided insights on shared beliefs and values.  Some of these included the importance of cross-sector collaboration, dismantling systems of oppression, working toward racial equity, the need for organizational sustainability and the commitment to authentic community engagement.   

Recognizing that community and philanthropic organizations can learn from each other, participants also talked about how these two sectors could work together effectively. Along these lines, a number of suggestions related to increased communication, cross-sector (community and philanthropic) conversation and finding ways to engage in direct action.

Some specific recommendations included:

Focusing together on shared goals — Convenings like Strengthening Action for Justice hold the potential to proactively identify short- and long-term solutions on topics tied to justice and equity.  

Collaboration — Efforts that build understanding, shared language and collective power are crucial in this political climate. This work might involve activities such as collaborations with government and public officials or focus on specific issues such as fair access to housing or public education.  

Investments in capacity — Any efforts to improve organizing capacity would be helpful. This might include helping participants interpret changes in policy (e.g., new IRS rules), providing access to specific forms of technical assistance such as legal expertise, and providing general operating support funding.

Investments in justice organizing — the changed political environment has increased interest in organizing individuals and communities for collective action, many felt it is crucial to direct new energy and in a way that connects it with justice movements that have been deeply engaged in this work over time.  

A focus on rural communities — Recognizing that many communities are feeling anxious about unpredictable federal and state policy shifts, the group felt that rural communities may be particularly vulnerable.  With this in mind, participants in the meeting felt that a specific focus on rural communities was warranted.  

Tracking social services alongside social change — Organizations that provide some form of direct service can be powerful voices for highlighting broader/more systemic issues and root causes. In this climate, both services and organizing are needed to address immediate issues and mobilize people for larger change.  

Though the outcome of this meeting will continue to unfold, the timeliness of this type of dialogue was evident the very next day, when three men sought to disrupt an Islamophobic attack on a MAX train in Portland. Two people were killed and another sustained serious injury, but the incident reminded us that bias actions and injustice must be confronted strongly and directly. For those who have been working on these issues for years, it brought home the importance of continued commitment to the shared values identified in meetings like Strengthening Action for Justice.

 

— Dahnesh

 

(Special thanks to Western States Center, meeting coordinator Katie Sawicki and the Collins Foundation for their work to make this meeting possible.)  

 

Photo credit: Jamie Francis

Registration is now open for Oregon Opportunity Network's annual housing conference.

Oregon Opportunity Network, a membership organization for affordable housing and community development nonprofits and partners in Oregon, brings together more than 300 professionals to learn from each other and presenters at the industry support conference in Portland. Attendees value the networking, skill-building and innovative idea sharing that the conference sessions provide. Tracks include sessions on leadership, housing development, property management, homeownership and much more!

• Tuesday, September 19
• Oregon Convention Center
• Early Bird rates through August 4th
• Details: http://www.oregonon.org/housingconf

Scholarships are available. Apply directly to Oregon Opportunity Network by August 4, 2017, to be considered. Priority will be given to rural organizations, culturally specific organizations and those serving the most vulnerable populations.

 

Attendees sign up for more information during Oregon Opportunity Network's 2016 Conference.

I’m a homeowner.

I was lucky that everything lined up for me to fulfill a dream of owning a home. This was important to me less because homeownership is part of the “American dream,” but because I had experienced the ups and downs of housing stability and access to rentals that came with being a renter.

I have received rent increases with little notice and have felt like I had to choose between food or health care and rent. Once, I delayed going to the doctor for a fractured wrist because I couldn’t afford the health care co-pay and my rent at the same time. I have pleaded with potential landlords to look over my past credit challenges. I have struggled with feelings of unworthiness when I didn’t sound like a rental listing’s ideal renter — sometimes including attributes that were against Fair Housing law. Anytime I moved from one rental to another, I went into debt. It might take me four months to get out of debt or as much as two years, once I factored in the application fees, deposits, moving costs and first and last month’s rent. I spent years chasing ever more affordable rental homes, which helped my immediate financial need but in the long term did not lead to more stability.

Since I became a homeowner six years ago, rents have increased in Portland by 43 percent, while Oregon incomes have only increased by about 6 percent. Rental vacancy rates were around 9 percent when I bought; although the rental market is seeing higher vacancies overall, rental homes that are affordable to lower income tenants have significantly lower vacancies, making it harder to find a home that is affordable to someone with a lower income. Rates for affordable housing now range from 0.5 percent to 4 percent. Today’s rental market of higher rents and low vacancies has been a hard reality especially for low-income renters and often leaves renters vulnerable to poor rental conditions or homelessness.

The importance of naturally occurring affordable housing

There has been a shortage of subsidized rental housing for a long time, but in recent years, there has also been a shortage of affordable private market rental homes. This is important because, in general, the private market has been housing low-income renters in naturally occurring affordable housing, housing that is offered by the market that is more affordable than the general market without subsidies. Since vacancies are extremely low in naturally occurring affordable private market housing, low-income households are experiencing higher housing uncertainty and becoming rent burdened, while the organizations working to help low-income renters find homes are needing to shift to fast-paced market conditions.

As a program officer working on Meyer’s Housing Opportunities portfolio, almost every community and nonprofit I talk to shares heartbreaking stories of families with children living in tents or cars; seniors and people with disabilities on fixed incomes severely rent-burdened; hard-working people not able to find homes in the same town or county where they work; and families doubled up in rental homes to avoid living on the streets.

This is not just a Portland problem. Hood River, Ashland, Roseburg, Salem, Springfield, Vernonia, Bend and more all share similar stories and need. The challenges of securing a rental home and finding a landlord willing to overlook low income has become infinitely harder for renters escaping domestic abuse, with poor credit histories, coming out of homelessness, who are immigrants, who have criminal histories, with past evictions, and from protected classes.

Meyer’s focus on private market rentals

Meyer’s Private Market Units strategy was developed in response to the rapidly changing housing market and nonprofit community partners’ call for Meyer to identify effective and replicable strategies to expand low-income renters’ access to safe, decent, affordable housing through existing private market units in urban, suburban and rural markets.

In past three years, Meyer has funded 14 demonstration projects, focused on trying a variety of approaches ranging from security deposit loans to landlord outreach and education, renter ready-to-rent classes, and placement and retention support. The demonstration projects tested assumptions about private market landlords’ engagement and risk mitigation, low-income renters’ needs and barriers, and traditional placement strategies. Demonstration projects that have generally been most successful engaged landlords early in the development of projects and made changes to their approach based on landlord feedback. Demonstration projects that were less successful often reached out to landlords late in the process after the project was developed and launched. Also, some grantees struggled working in communities that had extremely low vacancy rates with limited housing stocks. This was true for urban, suburban and rural communities.

Lessons learned with private landlords

Demonstration projects that responded to real-time challenges in the market and engaged private market landlords early in the project planning process were the most successful because they could ground-truth their assumptions and adjust their projects early in development. The Housing Authority of Jackson County (HAJC) launched a demonstration project offering security deposit loans to its Section 8 voucher renters (Housing Choice voucher) while its market had less than a 1 percent vacancy rate and skyrocketing rents. HAJC tested their assumption that many of their Section 8 voucher holders were struggling to secure rental homes not because they had a voucher but because they lacked the funds to move in once approved. Section 8 voucher holders who received a 0 percent interest security deposit loan with a 12-month repayment schedule could find and secure a rental home faster with less stress about having to return their voucher or where they would pull together the needed funds for their deposit. Landlords also responded positively to the loan recipients knowing that they could repay a loan. HAJC has since replicated its model in two other communities in coordination with the local public housing authorities.

Northwest Pilot Project (NWPP) partnered with Home Forward and Urban League of Portland to respond to immediate challenges low-income seniors were experiencing with displacement. They tested the assumption that private market landlords wouldn’t be willing to participate and that low-income seniors would not be able to stay in high-priced rapidly gentrifying neighborhoods. Many of the seniors had been living in their rental homes for years and were barely keeping up with rising rents on their fixed incomes. This collaborative developed a demonstration project matching these seniors with Section 8 vouchers. The collaborative partners were able to educate the landlords early in the program about the Section 8 program and the benefits of keeping the renters. As they learned from each landlord experience they adjusted their approach for the next landlord as appropriate. Ultimately, all of the landlords approached through the demonstration project were willing to participate in the project and one-third of the landlords had never participated in the Section 8 program before. On average, seniors had a rent reduction of $663 by participating in this program.

Northwest Housing Alternatives (NHA) partnered with Legal Aid Services of Oregon and Portland Defender to test multiple strategies to increase housing access for low-income renters with barriers including low-level criminal histories. This collaborative tested  assumptions about what barriers private market landlords would be willing to overlook and which ones they viewed as high risk and non-negotiable. Their tenant participants are not only low-income but often also have criminal histories, past landlord debts, past eviction rental histories and poor credit histories and lacked an identification card or a driver’s licence, etc. A number of tenants struggle with multiple housing barriers, making it difficult to identify which barrier is most challenging for a landlord. This collaborative worked to overcome several rental barriers through a variety of strategies, including expunging eligible criminal histories, paying past landlord debts, paying for participants to secure identification cards or a driver’s license, offering a landlord guarantee with participation and having eligible past evictions removed from tenants’ records.

Early in the project, NHA found that the barriers landlords were most averse to were past debts and fear of future debt. NHA’s most effective strategies to successfully house renters through this project have been to pay past landlord debts, offering landlord guarantees and to build a trusting relationship as an agency with the landlords. Many of the the landlords they worked with in this project were willing to overlook past criminal histories, limited incomes and past evictions as long as they felt that they could recover debt if the placement wasn’t successful. In the long run, NHA recognizes that removing the other barriers such as eligible criminal histories will be helpful for future long-term stability, but for now they found they were able to find several landlords willing to offer housing opportunities as long as their main concerns were mitigated. NHA’s ability to build relationships with landlords early in the process to understand their concerns and risks with renting to tenants with several barriers was crucial to success.

HAJC, Northwest Pilot Projects and NHA were successful because they engaged private market landlords early in the process to help inform the development of their demonstration projects and to ground-truth their assumptions. Some of the most impactful lessons Meyer learned through this funding strategy were how crucial it is to have buy-in and input from private market landlords in the project development, the need for grantees to be flexible and responsive to landlords concerns and open to their engagement, and to understand the needs and challenges of the specific renter population each group is working with.

When strategies no longer work in current market conditions

Some of the funded projects that were less successful taught us that strategies that were once effective when vacancy rates were higher are less effective now either because they no longer offered landlords a meaningful incentive in this market or they don’t meet the interests or needs of renters. For example, strategies such as a housing navigator were largely unsuccessful if the navigator was not able to offer immediate incentives to landlords, such as higher deposits or having an immediate rental start date. Also, renter readiness classes often did not seem to match to the needs of renters or landlords and proved less successful in getting placements. Projects that were a closer match to renters’ barriers and immediate needs had higher participation and project compliance.

Through this funding strategy, we noticed that projects were less impacted by geographical conditions than strategy and early buy-in from the local landlord community. In suburban and rural communities especially, engaging landlords early and and building an agency relationship was crucial to success. Landlords in many communities were open and interested in participating in these demonstration projects but were clear about needing to have their real concerns heard and addressed.

For plenty of folks, getting access to stable and affordable housing in the private market is a good step toward stability. Through Meyer’s Private Market Strategy, we have seen solid success for our partners that engage with and learn from landlords and renters, test assumptions and forge a wide circle of partners. And as funders, we can help renters increase housing access and stability by funding groups to test new strategies and being flexible when our partners need to adapt their projects to emerging landlord and renter needs. We are encouraged that private market strategies can help address Oregon’s housing crisis.

— Elisa

AHI program Officer Elisa Harrigan at home, in front of her "Latin wall," filled with ceramic home models, a nod to tradition in her home country of El Salvador.

Our partners have consistently emphasized to Meyer the urgent need for better coordination and alignment between affordable housing providers and services that help people stay housed and thrive. We are once again offering a Request for Proposals from innovative and impactful efforts working to overcome barriers to collaborating across systems.

Lessons from 2015 Projects

Projects funded in 2015 illustrate the breadth of systems that benefit from a stronger connection with affordable housing.

• Catholic Community Services of the Mid Willamette (Marion County) linked housing assistance and foster care diversion, along with the local Early Learning Hub.
• Columbia Gorge Health Council (Hood River and Wasco counties) piloted a “Pathways” model of paying for outcomes including housing, health care and other social services.
• Community Action Partnership of Oregon, in partnership with ACCESS and Klamath-Lake Community Action Services (Statewide, with a focus on Jackson, Klamath and Lake counties) created better coordination between housing resources and the Department of Human Services, with a focus on foster care diversion and child welfare.
• Enterprise Community Partners (Portland Metro) piloted a fund mirroring Medicaid flexible benefits for housing-related costs to show housing and health benefits.
• REACH/Housing With Services (Multnomah County) incorporated health, nutrition and other social services in affordable housing buildings downtown.
• United Way of Lane County (Lane County) integrated housing issues in the local Early Learning Hub and brought early learning and health programs to affordable housing.
• Worksystems Inc. (Multnomah and Washington counties) linked housing and employment support.
   

Each of these projects reinforced the growing mountain of evidence for the connections between housing stability and other issues that make the difference between thriving and not:  strong families, good health, and success in education and employment. We also learned quite a bit about the barriers to effective collaboration from talking with these grantees and reflecting on their progress and challenges — barriers such as legal and privacy challenges around data sharing, overcoming inertia and turf issues, and misaligned incentives and basic  risk-aversion.

The New RFP

As in 2015, Meyer is taking a broad approach to the challenge of systems alignment, welcoming proposals from both new coalitions and more established collaborative efforts, aiming to improve the connection between affordable housing and other systems, especially for populations with specific and difficult housing challenges (including survivors of domestic violence, young adults aging out of foster care and ex-offenders re-entering society).

These grants are not meant for fairly straightforward work bringing a specific service to an affordable housing project (important as that work can be, it’s a better fit under our annual Housing Opportunities funding round). Rather, by supporting focused collaborative efforts engaging specific issues across multiple systems, Meyer expects to assist the broader fields of affordable housing and supportive services by:

• Highlighting replicable models of successful collaboration, identifying specific strategies to promote effective cooperation across systems or service providers
• Identifying and addressing significant policy or systems barriers to better coordination
• Documenting the potential to deliver better outcomes (including cost savings or other opportunities to better leverage scarce resources) through effective collaboration
   

More detailed information on the RFP is available here: mmt.org/rfp

— Michael

Meyer’s Affordable Housing Initiative (AHI) identifies housing advocacy as a key strategy for advancing a broader agenda around improving access to safe, decent and affordable housing around the state. Whether in the form of grass-roots organizing, policy research and analysis, coalition-building, or well-designed messaging, advocacy can help to draw attention to urgent housing challenges and elevate the conversation statewide and in local communities.

Meyer’s housing team recognizes that there is special urgency around housing issues across the state right now. The steep climb in housing costs has elected officials, community leaders and housing advocates scrambling for tools and solutions to ease the burden on low-income Oregonians, and the issue was front-and-center at the Legislature last session like never before.

This spring, Meyer announced the AHI’s third Request for Proposals to support community-driven public policy advocacy and community organizing aimed at expanding the availability of affordable housing to low-income Oregonians. We again invited proposals for up to two years, with eligibility broadly defined to include projects that increase the number and diversity of voices engaged in housing advocacy and that promote concrete policy and systems changes at both the local and statewide levels.

The Meyer housing team reviewed the 22 proposals received from across Oregon in response to the RFP, totaling almost $1.4 million in requests. Altogether, 12 grants totaling $717,000 over the next two years were approved.

 

This RFP allowed proposals under two categories:

 

• “Campaign Leader” grants of up to $60,000 per year for 1-2 years for focused and targeted efforts with a clear policy or systems change goal led by a strong coalition of partners with a credible plan to succeed

• “Advocacy Mobilizer” grants of up to $30,000 per year for 1-2 years, to support community organizing at an earlier stage of organizing than Campaign Leaders, or work focused on broader base-building, issue identification, etc.

 

The intent of the RFP was summarized in five specific outcomes:

 

• More effective and strategic housing advocacy and organizing in communities around the state and in the Oregon Legislature

• Increased support for affordable housing by policy-makers and the general public

• Measurable progress on local and/or state-level policies or systems changes that increase resources for affordable housing and/or reduce barriers to affordable housing access and development

• An expansion in the number and diversity of stakeholders and constituencies engaged in affordable housing advocacy across the state

• Effective, replicable models and strategies for organizations seeking to improve the effectiveness of their advocacy efforts

Consistent with Meyer’s focus on equity, the RFP criteria emphasized benefiting communities of color, culturally specific organizations, and underserved rural communities in both expected outcomes and in the design and implementation of projects.

 

Meyer is pleased to support these 12 projects:

 

CAMPAIGN LEADERS

1000 Friends of Oregon (Multnomah County)           

Portland for Everyone - $65,000

To support Portland for Everyone in mobilizing a coalition of advocates, community-based organizations, neighborhoods and local businesses that will urge Portland City Council to make inclusive and equitable land-use policy decisions that expand housing choice and availability

 

Oregon Opportunity Network (Statewide)    

Equitable Investments in Housing: Oregon Mortgage Interest Deduction Reform - $120,000

To expand and support a broad-based, progressive coalition, led by Oregon Opportunity Network and Oregon Center for Public Policy, to reform Oregon's mortgage interest deduction and investment in affordable housing statewide

 

ADVOCACY MOBILIZERS

CASA of Oregon (10 counties in eastern Oregon)      

Eastern Oregon Housing & Asset Building Network - $60,000

To establish a network of housing and asset-building providers in rural eastern Oregon to create a common agenda, shared measurements, continuous communication, mutually reinforcing activities and backbone support

 

Habitat for Humanity of Oregon (Statewide)

Empower and Mobilize Oregon Affiliates for Successful Local Advocacy -$40,000

To empower all 29 Oregon Habitat for Humanity affiliates to conduct successful local advocacy efforts

 

MACG Vision (Clackamas and Marion counties)       

Clackamas Mobilization - $60,000

To mobilize members of faith organizations and other housing advocates in Clackamas County and northern Marion County, including individuals directly impacted by the area’s housing crisis, to advocate for more resources and policies to support affordable housing

 

OPAL (Portland Metro)           

Southwest Corridor Coalition - $60,000

To build a lasting coalition led by low-income residents focused on equitable housing and community investments without displacement as the Portland region plans new high-capacity transit along the Southwest Corridor

 

Oregon Center for Public Policy (Statewide)

A Rent Assistance Program for Oregon - $50,000

To analyze and develop policy concepts for state-funded rent assistance to address the plight of Oregon families most at risk of becoming homeless

 

Oregon Food Bank (Statewide)          

Engaging New Housing Advocacy Voices from the Food Assistance World - $46,000

To increase the number and diversity of housing advocates by bringing the voices of clients, organizations and volunteers involved in food assistance throughout Oregon into the movement for affordable housing

 

Oregon Opportunity Network/Welcome Home Coalition (Portland Metro)

Welcome Home Coalition - $60,000

To mobilize advocates, volunteers and partner organizations to establish reliable, dedicated revenue sources in the Portland region to fund homelessness prevention, affordable housing and homeownership programs

 

ROSE Community Development (Multnomah County)           

97266 Housing Leadership Team - $60,000

To bring together diverse community members, to build leadership and power to fight against displacement in Portland’s Lents neighborhood, and to support and lead local housing advocacy initiatives

 

Street Roots (Statewide)        

Street Roots Rural Housing Reporting Project - $36,000

To develop dedicated reporting on rural housing issues to help bridge the rural/urban divide in Oregon and promote better understanding of issues communities across the state face and the common ground that all can rally around

 

Willamette Neighborhood Housing Services (Benton County)          

Housing Advocacy in Corvallis and Benton County - $60,000

To support a housing advocacy campaign that will engage diverse and underrepresented people in securing the resources needed to improve housing resources in Corvallis and throughout Linn and Benton counties

 

This slate of grants represents a diverse range of approaches from public policy research and analysis to grass-roots organizing to sophisticated and strategic efforts to influence statewide priorities and resources. Geographically, these grants include projects focused on some of Oregon’s most under-resourced and isolated counties, areas where activism and energy are really blossoming like Corvallis and Clackamas County, and statewide projects focused on bringing more of what Israel Bayer of Street Roots calls “unexpected messengers” — people speaking to housing issues whom one might not expect — to inform discussions around affordable housing needs and solutions.

As part of our emphasis on shared learning and informing the field, Meyer will convene a gathering of advocacy grantees in late summer/early fall to build connections, compare notes and forge alliances.

 

— Michael

More than a decade ago, I began a training regimen in Pilates with certified instructors. It started out with simple moves. After years of training sessions, I eventually added the Russian Split and the Snake and Twist on the reformer, advanced exercises that build on the basics of Pilates and require both patience and practice. With my newly acquired knowledge, I am now capable of carrying out advanced Pilates sessions on my own and helping others in their learning journey.

When we first began exploring equity at Meyer Memorial Trust around 2012, we started by training in racial equity, the most common catalyst for diversity, equity and inclusion work. Understanding DEI and operating within a DEI lens is complex work. Race intersects with all areas of DEI, so it is not uncommon to focus initially on race to help folks unpack the ways in which oppression works.

Our interactive anti-racism equity training has been grounded in the examination of racial and ethnic oppression through a framework that allows us to examine how the three expressions of racism (illustrated in the cardstack on the left) show up. White supremacy is at the root of historic inequity in the United States. It promotes monoculturalism and the disenfranchisement of communities of color.

Meyer’s trainings — I figure we’ve undergone just shy of two work weeks of daylong equity trainings so far — help to sharpen our skills, strategies and ability to address structural racism and to advance racial equity and social change. The thinking: Once people understand how everyone is harmed by those systems, we can work together to create change within them.

Last weekend, to celebrate Meyer’s 35th year as an Oregon foundation, our staff marched at the Portland Pride parade in support of Meyer colleagues, friends, relatives and neighbors along the identity spectrum: lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual and more. (For a glimpse at the diversity of the “LGBTQAlphabet,” take a look at this video from Equinox and The Center [the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Community Center]) A few days earlier, we completed our second two-day staff and trustee LGBTQ equity training, with expert trainers from Pride Foundation, dRworks, Yee Won Chong Consulting LLC and Neola H. Young Consulting.

I have four young grandkids, two whose assigned sex is female and two male. In an effort to be a better informed grandfather, I walked into the training feeling an urgency to understand more about gender. It was a thoughtful, challenging experience. At times, I felt moments of uncertainty even as I was enlightened about deconstructing the gender binary, deadnaming and why the Oregon Equality Act of 2007 is such an important bulwark for the protection of jobs, housing and access to opportunities for the state’s LGBTQ community.

I learned much, and the trainers did what they do best: challenge firmly held beliefs. When the training wrapped up, I felt more emboldened and empowered to work against the discrimination of people who identify as transgender, gender-nonconforming, gay, lesbian or bisexual.

Our training has broadened to include LGBTQ issues for a few reasons. A key reason is to assure Meyer staff who identify as LGBTQ that our foundation believes this is important work. Its framework and construct echo the racial equity training Meyer staff and trustees have undergone, to help us understand the broad concepts, oppressions and discriminations that can shape the experiences of LGBTQ people.

When Meyer started equity training, I remember saying to a staff member, “Well, I don’t expect us to become a social justice organization.” Somehow, that felt a step too far for this organization. But with training, I’ve come to realize I didn’t even know what a “social justice organization” really was or why they have had to exist. Marginalized human beings encounter multilayered experiences of personal and structural and cultural -isms every day, at the bank, enrolling their kids in school, buying real estate. Before we began, those truths weren’t anything I, a cisgender white guy who benefits from white privilege, knew innately.

That’s the thing: Without training and education, I wouldn’t have a counter-narrative to the sanitized history that makes it appear that there is no reality beyond one through a binary gender lens or the myth that this country was not built on the bodies and blood of people of color. Time and again, those deeper dives into equity through a racial framework make clear that white people must educate ourselves about the history of racism in the U.S. and how it  manifests at the individual, institutional and cultural levels.

Without training, even well-intentioned people don’t have the ability to identify cultural, structural and institutionalized racism. Or to shift their perspective so they can focus their efforts on dismantling oppression. Being progressive isn’t enough: If we care about making systems change, we must use our position, power and privilege to eliminate racism. As an institution born of wealth, unfettered opportunity and power, we must keep learning.

Why? Because we make mistakes, and equity training teaches us that when mistakes happen, owning the problem and offering a thoughtful remedy is a key step toward the flourishing and equitable Oregon that is our mission.

A great example of applied learning: last year, we were criticized for our terminology when referring to people with disabilities on our website, mmt.org. Our intent wasn’t to harm, but using the word ability to encompass people with disabilities did cause harm. Apologies without recompense don’t go very far.

For us to understand where we went wrong, we had to understand why our word choice was wrong. So we read books and we talked to experts and to people with disabilities. We haven’t done organization-wide training, that still lies ahead, but we will because training helps us to become smarter allies, more sensitive advocates and, frankly, better-informed accomplices.

—Doug

Meyer staff and trustees during a two-day LGBTQ equity training in June 2017

As a Korean-American, there isn’t really a day when my racial identity is mistaken. My identity as a lesbian can be, though.

When I came out to my parents, my mom even pointed out that I wasn’t one of those lesbians who “cut their hair short and wore clompy shoes.” (My butch partner, Kris, however, looked down at her shoes and said, “I think I’m your mother’s worst nightmare!”) Unlike with my obvious racial status, I get a pass on my sexual orientation and gender identity. In some of my previous workplaces, the assumption that I was straight led to a significant amount of worry that my acceptance and safety hinged on that mistake.

I am fortunate to feel safe being “out” at Meyer. It’s not always so easy for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer people whose identities and gender expression do not match the binary male/female “norms,” particularly when they work in organizations rife with implicit or explicit homophobia and transphobia. LGBTQ people have shouldered the burden of these phobias: everything from the inability to be out in the workplace and lack of funding for LGBTQ organizations to significant inequities among the population, personal violence and even mass murder.

At two recent events hosted by Funders for LGBTQ Issues and the Pride Foundation, I was reminded that those of us in “mainstream” philanthropy (i.e. foundations that are not LGBTQ-specific) need to do more to increase safety for LGBTQ employees and to advance equity for the LGBTQ communities we serve. In a workshop titled “How Foundations Can Better Support LGBTQ Staff and Movements: Stories from the Field,” Tamir Novotny from Emerging Practitioners in Philanthropy and Brian Schultz of the Foundation Center presented preliminary data from a survey of LGBTQ staff in foundations around the country and led an informal “data gathering” discussion about participants’ experiences.

The survey’s early findings were not surprising to the group. Remaining closeted and “navigating your workplace as your authentic self” resonated as ongoing challenges with workshop participants. Heads nodded as our discussion turned to the fear of being seen as biased should we bring up LGBTQ issues. Some noted that questions about personal life, family and home aren’t as frequently asked of LGBTQ staff, and both big wins, such as marriage equality, and terrible losses, such as the Pulse Nightclub massacre, can feel isolating when no one else talks about them. The underemployment of transgender employees in the workforce was particularly notable. And finally, the level of funding to address LGBTQ inequities sends a message to LGBTQ employees regarding awareness or willingness to take action.

A recent report from Funders for LGBTQ Issues revealed that, while on the rise nationally, funding for LGBTQ issues and organizations in the Pacific Northwest dropped by nearly half between 2011 and 2015, from a high of $4.9 million to $2.6 million. Much of the drop can be attributed to a decrease in funding after marriage equality wins. But backlash to that decision is ongoing, and in today’s political climate,  LGBTQ civil rights are increasingly at risk for a population that has long faced significant and persistent inequities. (see cardstack)

Here's a lesson for funders focused on providing resources to alleviate poverty, hunger and violence or determined to change systems to improve conditions by tackling issues such as criminal justice, health care and housing: Including LGBTQ populations in those frameworks, lenses and resource-sharing is not added work … it is the work.

The good news is that as mainstream Oregon funders develop more nuanced and evolved approaches to diversity, equity and inclusion — and our grantees have helped us recognize the inequities and intersectionalities experienced by the LGBTQ community — support for LGBTQ employees and community members seem to be increasing. Four mainstream Oregon foundations made the Funders for LGBTQ Issues 2015 honor roll by increasing their LGBTQ grantmaking by 25 percent or more: The Collins Foundation, MRG Foundation, Oregon Community Foundation and Meyer. And the Pride Foundation, with dedicated staff in Oregon, also provides 23 percent of the LGBTQ-specific funding in the Northwest. All of this suggests more LGBTQ-focused discussions are happening within local philanthropy, and that’s a very good thing.

Supporting staff to go to conferences focused on LGBTQ issues, establishing and sponsoring affinity groups, and creating gender inclusive bathrooms are other relatively easy ways to support LGBTQ staff. We recently installed new signs marking Meyer’s gender inclusive bathroom this spring, a simple move that makes visiting our offices somewhat more pleasant for any visitor. But the signs are on just one of the two bathrooms; we still have a ways to go.

So do Northwest funders when it comes to funding to address LGBTQ inequities. There really isn’t a choice: If we are committed to advancing equity, then increasing inclusive and safe workplaces and funding for LGBTQ issues must follow. That, too, is the work.  

—Carol (with brilliant contributions by my trusted LGBTQ colleagues and our allies)

*Data sources: Federal Bureau of Investigation, socialexplorer.com, Census Bureau, Pew Research Center, Williams Institute, National LGBTQ Task Force.

Carol and Kris, partners of 22 years, at their 2003 wedding