Once examinations of your foundation’s culture, practices, and structures are underway, the next work is relational — finding, engaging, and welcoming impacted community members in ways that are genuine, mutual, and ongoing.
Recruiting for purpose
Many boards use a matrix to map the identities and competencies of board members and reveal gaps. But these often reflect conventional assumptions, privileging skills and credentials, like accounting, alongside demographics, such as gender, race, and age. The risk is recruiting for the same profile the board has always had.
Whether or not a formal matrix is used, begin with an understanding of who already has access and voice on the board and who doesn’t but should. Be explicit about giving at least equal weight to lived experience, first-hand perspectives, and accountability to community as to technical skills and attributes. And make sure you are actively creating opportunities and looking in the right places for people whose lives are impacted by the foundation’s decisions but whose voices are least represented in the room.
Funders can turn to their existing relationships and networks to find — or build! — pipelines for community members to join their boards. Many foundations connect with community through their grantees, which can introduce them to community leaders and residents. Other foundations engage community members through their own community convenings, participatory grantmaking practices, or advisory boards. When possible, board and staff members may themselves go into communities, attending school, sports, worship, or other community events in order to build relationships directly and personally.
These touchpoints and relationships can lay the groundwork for identifying prospective board members. Social media and electronic outreach can play a role, but a personal touch goes a much longer way in building trust and insight.
Accelerating change with a cohort
Bring impacted community members onto the board in cohorts of at least two or three people at a time, and in numbers that represent at least 30 percent of the entire board. We encourage this approach because:
This aims to create a solid critical mass that can help individuals feel and exercise their agency more quickly.
With new members occupying a critical mass of board seats and feeling comfortable to participate fully, change across the foundation will accelerate.
It casts a gaze on the board as a whole, forcing tough decisions about who will and will not serve on the board and adjustments to conventional recruitment and selection processes that have produced conventional boards.
The conversation will change more quickly, leading to new ways of thinking and doing for the foundation. Change will beget more change, and a new virtuous cycle can take hold.
When the Cypress Foundation added five grassroots community organizers and resource mobilizers from across the Carolinas to its governing body, 40% of its members were now drawn directly from the foundation’s movement partners.“Growing the Table: Why We Expanded Our Movement-Led Advisory Body for 2026-2028,” Cypress Fund
Getting the word out
A position announcement, which should be no more than a page or two, should cover the role of the board and the role, opportunities, expectations, requirements, and commitments for individual board members. It should also include information about contacting staff and their availability.
Announce the opportunity directly and through trusted community partners. Use messages that are honest, in plain language, and culturally grounded. You might host informational sessions and office hours or post flyers where the community already congregates.
The Andrus Family Fund created a one-page announcement seeking candidates for community board members“Call for Board Members, 2021,” Andrus Family Fund
The Elmina B. Sewall Foundation in Maine created an open call for applications in 2021 “in order to diversify [their] board and to bring in experiences and perspectives currently underrepresented.” The call included information about the board’s role, time commitment to serve, and the payment of a quarterly stipend.“Call for Applications,” Elmina B. Sewall Foundation
Tips for announcements, applications, and interview:
Tip: In application forms or interviews, only ask what is needed for decision making.
Tip: Include a timeline in communications.
Tip: Avoid creating a false sense of urgency! This will be the number one priority for no one else, and shouldn’t be.
Tip: Ensure someone at the foundation proactively communicates and is responsive to application or announcement questions.
Tip: Schedule interviews to be spacious and give plenty of lead time. Also share the questions in advance to allow for reflection and preparation, and be sure to make time for candidates to ask questions of their own.
The Andrus Family Fund asks board candidates four questions:
- What draws you to AFF’s mission towards abolition of youth incarceration and foster system, and how are you personally connected to these issues?
- How do you define racial & social justice and how has your understanding evolved over time? What role does social and racial justice play in your life?
- What do you think the role of philanthropy should be in advancing racial & social justice?
- What values, skills, experiences and strengths would you bring to the AFF board?
Compare different methods of building a new board
There are many different ways to build a new board with care and integrity. Each has its strengths and trade-offs.
| Method | Pros | Cons |
|---|---|---|
| Open call - the foundation puts out an announcement and anyone can put their name in the hat for consideration | Gets beyond current relationships; introduces the foundation to a broader audience; offers transparency and accessibility | Favors those with access to the foundation’s communications channels and who feel comfortable asserting themselves for opportunities; creates work for applicants to respond to the call and for reviewers to review responses |
| A foundation nominations committee collects suggestions - best when using a snowball method to get beyond one-degree relationships | Invites a conversation and a bi-directional interview – where a candidate is just as much assessing the foundation board and opportunity as the board is; can be resource light and build relationships | Can reproduce existing power dynamics; offers limited transparency; can exclude those outside of existing networks |
| Community nominators - through a peer selection process (e.g. a more community proximate partner such as grantees or the United Way makes the initial selection) | Real community ownership of selected members; brings power shifting earlier in the selection process; increases accountability | Limits direct relationship building between funder and community members; funder may not like outcome; passes on labor and burden from funder; could create tensions within community |
| A search firm - vetted for values alignment and community orientation to ensure the process is not extractive or bureaucratic for applicants. | Can be well structured; time efficient; aligns role to needs | Relies on existing networks and creates risk of gatekeeping; offers limited transparency; can be time or resource intensive to manage |
Selecting new board members
Who will ultimately decide — the full board, a smaller subgroup, community members through a peer selection process? This information should be transparently communicated, and whatever process is used should be applied consistently to all selections. Be explicit about who makes decisions and how, how conflicts of interest will be handled, and how and when applicants will be contacted. No matter the process, prioritize prospective board members’ privacy and confidentiality.
If the board itself holds singular final approval, be direct about that. If community members are empowered to make the final selection, the foundation must be prepared to honor their choices, even if they look different from traditional board profiles. A community-informed selection process signals that impacted people are not simply being invited to participate, but trusted to help shape who holds power alongside them. A small, mixed selection committee, including people with lived experience, trusted community partners, and at least one board or staff member, can review candidates together using clear criteria.
Any selection process should include feedback loops and consider how applicants will be in relationship with the foundation as they go through the recruitment or application cycle. Share with unsuccessful candidates why they were not selected, and find other ways to stay connected. To assess equity gaps over time, track who applied, who advanced, and who was chosen. Each round offers the foundation a chance to improve and learn.
A community-informed selection process signals that impacted people are not simply being invited to participate, but trusted to help shape who holds power alongside them.
Compensating board members
Funders should compensate impacted community members for the work they do on the board. While most foundations treat board participation as volunteer service, this practice reflects assumptions about who should serve on a board, and can be a barrier to full participation.
Financial compensation can come in many forms, including as honorarium received as a direct personal payment or as a grant to an organization a board member selects. It can also come in ways intended to free up board members to engage fully in board service. This can include stipends for dependent care or reimbursements for travel, internet, and technology. Whatever the method, be sure to communicate any tax or other implications that accompany the form of payment.
Should only impacted community members receive compensation? We encourage boards to use their power analysis and have frank conversations to discern an appropriate approach — whether that means compensating all board members equally, giving all board members the option to be compensated, or offering compensation exclusively to impacted community members. Any approach will have trade-offs. For example, compensating everyone equally could get expensive, and also not accurately reflect equity values. Compensating only a subset of board members might contribute to feelings of othering and stir judgements among peers.
In addition to financial compensation, foundations can offer professional development opportunities, such as conferences related to the work they fund, spaces to network and learn more about philanthropy, and ongoing learning that deepens ties across the board and staff.
Hill-Snowdon Foundation provides non-family community trustees access to learn and build relationships alongside family trustees at conferences and events in the family philanthropy field.
Roundhouse Foundation offers all trustees a significant discretionary grant budget and a stipend.
