Reason to Support Small Charities: Empowerment Theory
This post was written by our student worker, Sam Webb.
Introduction
According to the National Center for Charitable Statistics, there are more than 1.5 million registered nonprofit organizations in the U.S. alone. Picking a select number of charities to support from that total is a very difficult and important task. While making a choice, important questions arise: which causes are most worth supporting, what organizations are ethically using donations for their cause, and, most notably, what nonprofits are making the most significant difference in the world? The latter question might seem easy, the simple answer being the big-name charities with the biggest outreach. However, the largest charities having the most significant impact is a fundamentally flawed line of logic.
Scope and Efficacy Do Not Equal Support
Let’s say that a large charity received a significant financial sum from the U.S. government. The donation comes with guidelines written by the federal government, those guidelines being to distribute 100,000 bars of soap to a specific community in the tropics. So the charity does just that, and everything goes to plan on their end. Nothing is wrong with this picture, right? In fact, there are several problems within this scene that create a vast amount of wasted potential for substantial change.
Firstly, there are the guidelines to give a specific numerical amount of resources. This sort of “checking off the box” process is completely impractical. The number was most likely calculated regarding the specific community, but what happens after the bars run out? These are finite resources. The community isn’t being given any sort of apparatus or process to enable them to get out of their state of need. If there is a reliance on the finite resources, and the resources run out, without any other support structure, the community is either going to beg the charity again for more resources or not get the resources at all. The giving of a finite amount of resources, no matter the scope, only has a temporary effect and nothing more.
Second are the guidelines to “distribute” these soap bars. Going off of the previous idea of a process that enables the community to get out of a state of need, what if the community is provided the materials to make their own soap? It might sound strange that giving those in need labor as charity, but that labor is job creation and economic stimulation from the buying and selling of the homemade products. This gives that community economic leverage to rise from a position where the community depends on charity to survive. Here’s another question: in the distribution process, who is making the soap bars? Most likely the makers of the soap bars are mega-corporations. A characteristic of mega-corporations is that there is a lot of overseas labor and mining of raw materials in second and third world countries. In essence, the distribution process is supporting the very same companies that are causing the economic positions that need charity! Not only is the distribution process wasting the potential of economic growth, but it is actively hurting the communities the process sought out to help.
Lastly, let’s think about the reason why this tropical community needs soap. What is the cause of there being a severe lack of cleaning products? In this example, let’s say that the cause is that there was a poor harvest of coconut and palm oils due to poor education on farming these specific crops. So, even though the big-name charity could distribute soap to make up for the lack of cleaning products, the same issue will happen again next year as the root issue was completely ignored. Focusing on efficacy doesn’t immediately solve the problem long-term. Being considerate of the real cause of the problem is the only way to properly support a community in need.
This is only an example of the big charities’ process, but that shouldn’t diminish its conclusions. Scenes such as this are a daily occurrence, and it is a rarity for large charities to not follow this sort of formula.
What Is Real Support? (The Concept of Power)
So, we’ve established that prioritizing scope and efficacy in organizations has little significant, long-term impact on improving its community. Well then, is that it? Is there no process by which organizations can support their community? Is charity a hopeless endeavor? No, absolutely not. While yes, some charities are unethical or at least mismanaged, charity organizations have the power to do incredible good. Charities have the power to change lives and whole communities, the power to give hope and joy and a better quality of life to the people that need it most. Note this word: “power.” The concept of power and the ability to share it is at the core of what charity is and does, and is important to fully comprehend.
The concept of power is a complex one, however, the basics are relatively agreed upon. There are three general facets of power: “‘power to’ (the individual ability to act), ‘power with’ (the ability to act together/as a collective), and ‘power within’ (individual or collective sense of value/dignity/self-worth)” (Hunjan and Keophilavong 2010). In short, power is an ability to act as well as a sense of self-worth, both in individual and collective contexts. It goes without saying that power is...well, powerful. Power rules over society, and the proper way of coagulating and spreading power is of utmost importance, especially for organizations involved with communities. The “proper way,” as seen by sociologists and real-world practice, is empowerment theory.
Empowerment Theory: Definition and Effects
Empowerment is known as “a process whereby an individual’s belief in their self-efficacy is enhanced” (Conger and Kanungo 474). Empower is the verb to the noun power; it is the giving of power. Empowerment theory is concerned with the “actions, activities, and structures that may be empowering, and that the outcome of such processes results in a level of being empowered” (Zimmerman 45). Essentially, empowerment theory is studying the ways by which power is distributed and how that affects those that are being empowered. Like power, empowerment theory also works on different levels: individual, collective, and organizational. Individual and collective empowerment can be relatively inferred by their associated definitions of power. Organizational requires a bit more explanation and attention, considering our focus on nonprofits.
Firstly, there are both empowering and empowered organizations, and the distinction between the two must be emphasized. Zimmerman states that “organizations that provide opportunities for people to gain control over their lives are empowering organizations...[empowered organizations] successfully develop, influence policy decisions” (51). These aren’t mutually exclusive categories, but for the sake of simplicity, we will leave these groups as separate. Although empowered organizations have no intrinsic ill will for members of their community, there are significant potential negative effects of empowered organizations. Dominion Energy is a great example of this. The immense power they hold in the United States allows them to have a direct influence on state and federal legislation (through lobbying and other methods), bending the laws to their will. There’s no input, or second thought, given to the people that are hurt by these laws. This is not to say that all empowered organizations are unethical, however it’s important to note how these organizations can operate if unchecked with empowerment. In contrast, empowering organizations have been found to increase self-esteem, psychological well-being, and peer appraisal (Maton 1988). Miller & Monge assert that “the voluminous literature on participative decision-making in organizations suggests that participation leads to greater job satisfaction and productivity” (qtd. In Zimmerman 52). Empowering organizations are hyper-focused on supporting the community around them, making empowerment theory a great model for nonprofits.
How Does Empowerment Theory Work In Practice?
The implementation of empowerment theory and practice of empowering organizations comes in many forms, however we will be focusing on moderating organizations. A moderating organization is an organization in a community whose primary purpose is to develop power of people in a community. These are intentionally small so the members of the community can have significant influence over the organization. Additionally, these organizations are often not focused on a particular issue, rather they adapt to the specific and changing needs of the community. So, for instance, if a member of a moderating organization has a passion for crotchet and wants supplies to open up a small crochet business, the organization can provide support for that niche need. As noted by the research above, the best way to spread empowerment is for empowered people to spread empowerment in their community, and the best way for that to occur is through moderating organizations. Going back to the crochet example, through economic participation of that crochet business by locals, the community’s economy grows bigger, positively affecting the quality of life of that community.
What Does Empowerment Theory Mean to Highland Support Project (HSP)?
With all necessary context outlined, we can analyze how HSP is implementing empowerment theory in practice. As noted above, moderating organizations are not focused on a particular issue, rather they are attentive to the needs of their community. Highland Support project falls into this category, and the niche needs of the Highlands communities are supported by several programs within the nonprofit.
A great example of the benefits of empowerment theory comes from Highland Support Project’s clean-air stove building. Epidemiological research demonstrates that the two leading causes of mortality in HSP’s partner communities in Guatemala are upper respiratory infections and waterborne contaminants. These are both linked to the practice of cooking on open pit fires in tiny, unventilated homes. There is a pressing need for clean-air stoves in these communities. One option is to ship thousands of clean air stoves from overseas factories. This can theoretically solve the problem, however, there are drawbacks that will be detailed momentarily. Another method is having members build stoves “in-house” using local materials. This option allows for much greater participation within the community’s economy, as well as bestowing power among community members, which has been proven above to improve quality of life. Although the factory new stoves could work, it would have only a short term effect of the fixing of one problem. By empowering the community, there’s a vastly positive long-term effect that goes well beyond the measured efficacy of the limited first option.
The White Mountain Apache tribe faces climate change droughts and high rates of food insecurity. Cheryl Pailzote, a tribe member herself, noticed this problem area and wanted to help. A farmer and expert on water resources, she reached out to Highland Support Project for support to develop a program to combat this problem. This need of the community was made known to HSP by a determined community member, and this community member was given the support she needed to create her multi-pronged program of educational classes, entitled “By The Roots.” These classes create a productive, empowering, and supportive environment to help combat food insecurity within the tribe. Not only was Cheryl Pailzote empowered by the moderating organization, but now she is empowering the farmers of her community through these classes, a picturesque demonstration of empowerment theory improving the quality of life of its community.
Asociación de Mujeres del Altiplano (AMA), Highland Support Project’s sister organization, has an extensive women’s circle program. AMA uses these community groups as a therapy forum as well as an educational opportunity on a variety of community-focused topics. The vast majority of authority in these circles is given directly to circle members themselves so that they choose projects specifically for their community’s needs. These projects can range from constructing sanitation systems to developing community centers. The women’s circle members are being empowered by AMA by being given agency to lead and manage their own niche projects that are giving their empowerment to their own community. This is a perfect chain reaction of power, branching out from one nonprofit and growing powerful and supportive roots through every fiber of the community. This is the efficacy and scope that big-name charities try to replicate but fail to do. This sort of outreach and support only comes from empowerment theory.
Conclusion
These are but a few examples of the multitude of ways empowerment theory is being exercised by moderating organizations. Highland Support Project is but one of many of these organizations making significant positive change in the world. Although name-brand charities have ample resources, the implementation of that money and power leaves much less of an impact than organizations cognizant of their power and empowerment potential.