‘Poor’ has become a dirty word in America; and so has ‘Race’. A recent article in The Economist observed that the poor were rarely mentioned during the 2012 Presidential election, by either candidate. This despite the fact that, today, more Americans are poor than at any other time in the 53 years that the Census Bureau has published poverty figures. While this fact can partially be attributed to the Great Recession, much longer term trends are also at play. Indeed, the recession, and resulting increase in unemployment, made it shockingly clear just how unprepared many Americans are to face harsh new economic realities and meet the opportunities of the future. And, the most vulnerable--people—largely poor and of color—are falling even further behind. Despite all the progress we have made, income and race continue to play a role in people’s life trajectories and outcomes. According to a study by the Brookings Institution, a rich child is more than twice as likely as a poor child to end up in the middle class or above. And, black children from low-income families have bleaker prospects for making it to the middle class than white children from similar economic backgrounds. This issue is related to, and compounded by, the widening achievement gap that sees African Americans and Hispanics lagging dramatically behind their White and Asian counterparts in terms of attaining a Bachelor’s degree or higher. Yet, we are similarly reluctant to talk explicitly about race as a barrier to opportunity. Meanwhile, we are standing on the precipice of a demographic transformation that will result in a majority non-white population in as little as 30 years. With increasing evidence that high levels of inequality have negative effects on growth and other macroeconomic outcomes , it is clear that, in order to stabilize and secure our nation’s economic future, we must ensure that ALL of our citizens have the skills necessary to compete in an increasingly globalized, technology driven economy.

There is broad acknowledgement that addressing poverty and inequality at scale will require fundamentally new models of cross-sector collective problem solving. It is essential to bring together a diversity of leaders to define problems and goals; confront how they are contributing to systems failures; and change how their institutions work in order to produce better outcomes. This includes ensuring that the voices of the communities that are disproportionately affected by these issues are invited to the table – and heard. In short, we must engage in a very frank national conversation about the structural and systemic issues (including race) that contribute to multigenerational poverty.

There are numerous reasons for avoiding this conversation. After all, the “American Dream” holds that, through hard work, anyone can succeed—regardless of race, immigrant status, or economic background. Facing the inequity of that dream can be a tough pill to swallow. And, there has long been an unfortunate disconnect between the agendas of those focused on overall economic competitiveness and those focused on issues of equity. We need to bridge that divide with the understanding that, given current economic and demographic shifts, racial and economic inclusion must be part of the solution for setting our country back on the road to growth and prosperity. Here, the social sector can play a pivotal and catalytic role.

Much of the social sector is keenly aware of just how complex the relationships between race, income, and access to opportunity really are; as this is sadly a web that we have long been struggling to untangle. Now, with a growing number of partners, both public and private, joining our problem-solving network and being willing to work together in new ways, we have the opportunity to come to the type of shared understanding that can lead to more effective, viable solutions. Getting there will be hard, and will require all partners to challenge long-held assumptions and to disrupt the norm. Practitioners in the social sector must harness this moment to lead. With new partners, we must strive for clarity in our messages, and embed greater discipline into how we connect our activities and strategies to the broader vision for the country. In so doing, we can help private sector partners to better understand just how important economic and racial inclusion strategies are to our shared success. We are already seeing progress in this area, particularly around the growing body of work aimed at overcoming the very serious challenges facing black men.

Today, less than 50% of black male students graduate from high school on time. Black men are unemployed at a rate that is almost double the rate of white men, and they earn less than their white peers at every educational level. Add these grim statistics to extremely high levels of incarceration, and you have an enormous segment of the population that is largely being excluded from economic, social, educational, and political life. Organizations such as the Open Society Foundations, the Opportunity Agenda, Root Cause, ABFE, and PolicyLink are collaborating and working energetically to build a movement around reversing these deeply troubling trends. And, this weekend, in Houston, Texas, the Admiral Center, an initiative of Living Cities, will bring together a diverse group of thought leaders to talk candidly about this issue, and to potentially identify ways to engage in meaningful strategies that work. Hosted by NBA All-Stars Chris Paul and Carmelo Anthony, this ‘table’ will include private sector executives, philanthropic leaders, public sector innovators, community leaders and some of the world’s most recognizable faces.

We look forward to sharing ideas and insights from this work with you, and to contributing to the movement towards a more open national dialogue that does not shy away from words like ‘poor’ and ‘race’.

It is no surprise that many people zone out when they see statistics, but love a good story. The asset-building field is crafting its story, creating the narrative and casting new characters. As the field forms the statistics into a compelling narrative, it is imperative that equity play a leading role. Recently, the Assets Learning Conference sponsored by the Corporation for Enterprise Development (CFED) brought together over 1,300 government leaders, service providers, bankers, and funders to discuss trends, lessons,
and best practices for expanding economic opportunity for low-income families. We
gained significant insight into the burgeoning field of asset building that we would
like to share with you.

CFE defines assets as tangible and intangible economic resources – a home, savings in a bank account, a college education – that can produce value for their owner. Assets
are important because they provide the ability to weather a job loss as well as the potential to move up the economic ladder. Someone new to the asset-building field might ask, how can we focus on assets while the basic needs of low-income families are unmet? Michael Sherraden, author of Assets and the Poor, argues that assets have economic, social and psychological power that income alone does not. Assets are the foundation for achieving financial sustainability and escaping poverty. Here are some observations from the conference:

Communities thirst for practical tools. Rather than theories, leaders want tools and action plans. Living Cities designed and moderated a standing-room-only session called “Embedding Financial Empowerment into Social Service Delivery.” Program Associate Helen Leung moderated the panel featuring our Income & Assets Working Group grantees and grant evaluator. The panel highlighted the ways Louisville and Seattle are integrating financial empowerment into their homeless-service continuum for low-income people. Our audience was intrigued by our unconventional focus on the process of helping people manage their assets rather than just the products that dominate the field. Our panelists highlighted various emergent processes in asset building, including cross-sector partnerships, improved contract requirements for social-service delivery, and training on financial empowerment approaches. Ultimately, what matters most is perspective. Seattle’s Senior Mayoral Advisor Jerry DeGrieck, a leader in municipal financial empowerment, commented that “folks are more comfortable talking about sex and drugs than financial empowerment for low-income people.” In order for financial empowerment to succeed as an asset-building strategy, practical tools must be complemented by education, technical assistance and provider training.

Growing race and gender wealth gaps must be addressed. Data strongly link wealth inequality to income inequality. Wealth confers benefits that income does not. Wealth can generate further income, be used as collateral for loans, be passed from generation to generation, and help weather financial crises. Wealth inequality is distinct from income inequality and much more severe. Dr. Mariko Chang, author of Shortchanged: Why Women Have Less Wealth and What Can Be Done About It, states that white families have 18 times the wealth of Hispanic households and 20 times the wealth of African American households. The gender wealth gap is similarly severe. Women have less wealth and disposable income, yet are more likely to be the sole custodial parent and to support more people. For both women and minorities, there needs to be increased focus on the “wealth escalator” – the transition potential from income into wealth. Closing racial and gender wealth gaps is imperative. Strategies to closing these gaps range from access to employment and appropriate financial products, policy interventions that remove asset limits on public assistance and greater focus on product innovation and outreach.

Social capital is not reserved for only the rich. A theme that emerged repeatedly, especially among service providers, is the need to leverage social capital – the value derived from social networks. A big challenge is that lower-income populations have different and arguably more limited types of social capital. For example, 80% of available jobs are never formally advertised and therefore remain inaccessible to people without extensive social networks. Innovative programs piloted by Boston Rising and the Family Independence Initiative help strengthen and broaden social connections for low-income individuals. Both organizations challenge the field to invest in programs that build social capital and encourage support networks among family and friends. The successes of these efforts demonstrate the unleashed power of social capital when applied to lower-income communities’ financial empowerment and asset building strategies.

Unfortunately, most systems we rely on for prosperity are obsolete, and overhauling the systems that support low-income people is incredibly difficult. We believe that asset building practitioners and advocates have to stop working around systemic problems and face wealth and gender gaps head on. There is great potential in moving innovations in financial empowerment and social capital from the periphery to the mainstream and to scale. So, as the asset-building field pens its story, we suggest integrating the points made here into the storyline. The key mandate is that the narrative compels actions on behalf of low income people.

"If I could help just one child, it will have been worth it"--This is a sentiment that celebrity philanthropists express often and emphatically. But, how many times have you heard a celebrity entrepreneur say this: "If I could sell just one shoe, it will have been worth it"? You cannot turn on the television or walk down the street without seeing an ad for a celebrity clothing line, fragrance, drink, or athletic shoe. When it comes to their business endeavours, celebrities think big. The fact that someone who has already reached the height of of success in their chosen profession; whether entertainment or sports; has the drive and vision to reinvent themselves as a designer, author, or real-estate mogul is no surprise. After all, it is probably, in large part, that chutzpah that got them to where they are in the first place. But, then why is it that when it comes to philanthropy, most celebrities can't seem to think bigger than one summer camp, one charity concert, one child?

Today, the philanthropic sector has broadly acknowledged that the problems we face are too interconnected and complex for any one institution or sector to solve on its own. Confronting poverty in an increasingly globalized world--particularly as we navigate one of the most dramatic economic downturns in modern history--will require unprecedented collaboration across sectors, states, and continents. While this might sound daunting, there is great promise in the collective understanding that we can have far greater impact together than we could ever have alone. The key, these days, is defining and fulfilling your role within a problem-solving network. In addition, the rise of the internet and advent of social media have ushered in a new era of social networks; connecting people to each other and to the world in previously inconceivable ways. In this new, more networked, environment, opportunities abound for advancing causes through catalyzing widespread action and open-sourcing social change. Celebrities are uniquely positioned to play in this space as they have the ability not only to write large checks, but also to reach millions of people, and to mobilize them. But, to get to that scale, celebrities must see themselves as leaders in the business of solving social problems; and, they must learn to harness the power of their platform to drive the change that they want to see in the world. When touting the launch of a new project or product, celebrity moguls frequently emphasize their hands-on approach--from concept to packaging. They speak of putting together highly effective and thoughtful teams, of spending endless hours building their knowledge, and of working diligently to ensure the best possible end-product. And, once the product is on the market, there are television and radio appearances, social media campaigns, and billboards. When it comes to their businesses, celebrities understand that their voice and image is the most powerful tool at their disposal. Now, imagine if they approached their philanthropy with the same proficiency, artistry, and strategic focus.

To be fair, the challenge of getting celebrity philanthropy to scale cannot be met by celebrities alone. Social change organizations also suffer from a lack of imagination when it comes to working with celebrities. Too often, their best 'ask' is for a relatively small donation, a single public service announcement, or a piece of signed memorabilia. The field, like the celebrities themselves, must begin to reimagine the parameters of partnership. While; as with any partnership; there are certainly risks involved with building a close association with a celebrity, there is also much opportunity. The stories of celebrity adventures in philanthropy gone wrong are well-known: The athlete who started a foundation, but put $0 of his own money into it; the young starlet who used a charity for a quick reputation makeover after a stint in rehab, then promptly abandoned it; the schools in developing countries that were opened to much fanfare, only to be plagued by mismanagement and scandal. But, there are just as many stories of truly well-meaning celebrity philanthropists who would absolutely do more if more were asked of them by their partners. And, helping celebrities understand the possibilities of their reach and influence might mean deeply engaging them before the gala has been planned, or the PSA has been scripted. Through active participation at decision-making tables and on the frontlines of social change efforts, celebrities can begin to increase their fluency in the causes that they support, thus making them more effective and powerful ambassadors. Indeed, the celebrity philanthropists who have had the most success with advancing their causes have been those who are substantially involved in many aspects of the work--giving away their own money, lobbying policymakers, rallying public engagement, and showing up to work alongside direct service providers when possible.

It has been argued that a Hollywood actor can, through mobilizing networks and other influencers, have a greater impact on the lives of orphans in Haiti than the Haitian government. Here in the US, many people who increasingly get their news from entertainment sites or social media, first hear about policies that will have significant effects on their lives from the athletes and entertainers who they 'follow'. The fact that celebrities, when working in smart ways with social change organizations, can dramatically increase awareness and therefore attract investment cannot be disputed. Now, we must work to identify what those 'smart ways' are. The Admiral Center, an initiative of Living Cities is focused on doing just that--Working to leverage the expertise of Living Cities and its 22 member institutions to understand how we can forge deeper, more meaningful, partnerships between celebrities and social change organizations to accelerate impactful solutions to improve the lives of low-income people in America. Because selling one shoe is just not good enough, and neither is helping one child when there is the opportunity to do so much more.