The philosophy and culture of aid

Across the global aid sector, racism manifests in decisions around whose expertise we value. Evidence to our inquiry suggested that institutions in high income countries like the UK assume they have the knowledge and best practice to assist people in low- and middle-income countries. Due to a belief that these institutions represent the ‘gold standard’, local partners are often required to adapt to their way of working. Racist attitudes also play out in the narrative that local organisations are ‘high risk’ and need ‘capacity building’.

The use of European languages, particularly English, in the development sector can lock out national actors who operate in local languages.

The FCDO should consider whether applications for funding must always be submitted in English – especially in bids for small projects administered by embassies, which are to be undertaken by local civil society organisations.

It is important that progress made by DFID to shift funding decisions from Whitehall towards country offices is not lost under the merged department.

Further, the FCDO should increase the amount of UK aid funding that goes directly to locally led civil society organisations. It should reconsider how it conceptualises and calculates risk and work with local civil society organisations to undertake the due diligence and administration associated with bidding for FCDO contracts.

The FCDO should apply these same principles to do no harm when it removes funding, as well as when aid programmes are initiated.

The manner in which the cuts to UK aid took place, with little or no consultation of downstream partners, or the communities where they are implemented has sent a harmful message that the UK does not care about the people affected, many of which are Black, Indigenous and People of Colour.

The structure of the sector transfers much of the risk to frontline implementing partners who have the least capacity to mitigate those risks.

The FCDO should consider how it can restructure its funding commitments to give long-term certainty to local civil society organisations to ensure funding that has been committed cannot be suddenly withdrawn at short notice. (Paragraph 27) Communications and storytelling

Fundraising is extremely important to many international aid organisations, but public appeals that depict the communities they serve as helpless and needy strip those communities of their dignity. They contribute to the narrative that the countries where they work are somehow inferior to the UK. (Paragraph 31) Racism in the aid sector 31

Fundraising appeals should depict positive, realistic stories and wherever possible use local filmmakers. They should seek to inform audiences about the drivers of poverty and inequality instead of giving simplistic messages about the difference donations can make.

The terminology used in the aid sector has its roots in colonialism; it ‘others’ the communities where programmes are delivered and reinforces ideas that ‘the West’ is the ideal that others should aspire to. It is not easy to strip the sector of terms such as ‘recipient’ or ‘beneficiary’, even the term ‘aid’ adds to this narrative.

The aid sector should have a conversation that includes the communities it works with to develop positive and inclusive working terminology, the FCDO should consider how it can lead this work.

Guidelines on informed consent for obtaining and using images should be observed just as thoroughly in relation to individuals from the communities that aid organisations work with, as they are in the UK. It is unacceptable for images to be used and re-used without the subject’s express consent. (Paragraph 36) Data on racism and diversity in the aid sector

The aid sector does not operate in a vacuum. The different forms of discrimination that permeate British society manifest in the aid sector too. Racism is particularly pertinent for aid organisations because they work directly with individuals from around the world who are Black, Indigenous and People of Colour. Discriminatory attitudes within these organisations will have a negative impact on the communities they work with and the programmes they deliver.

Aid organisations must ensure their working practices and programmes are mindful of the intersecting identities of their staff and the people they serve.

Evidence submitted to this inquiry and recent surveys by actors in the UK charity and international aid sectors show the scale of racism experienced by staff who are Black, Indigenous and People of Colour. Any level of racism in the workplace is unacceptable, and the findings that leaders and HR departments are ill equipped to deal with such incidents are deeply concerning.

All aid organisations should have effective processes in place to tackle instances of racism when they occur. They should also be able to measure and assess whether those processes are working.

Collecting and publishing data on diversity in staffing is a key element of holding aid organisations to account. Only by being transparent can organisations share and learn from each-other. For the smallest organisations it might not be appropriate to publish diversity data if it could compromise employees’ rights to confidentiality but organisations with over 50 employees should do so.

The Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office should require organisations that it funds, which employ more than 50 staff, to publish their diversity data. This 32 Racism in the aid sector should not act as a barrier to small organisations in receiving funding. The FCDO should work with small organisations to identify ways to increase opportunities for staff from underrepresented groups.

Aid organisations, including private sector contractors, with more than 50 staff should measure and publish their ethnicity pay gap data in order to be held accountable. It will also help them to identify if there are inequalities in their workforce that should be addressed.

We are concerned that the decision to designate the merged Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office as a ‘reserved department’ shuts down the possibility of civil servants from the countries where UK aid funding is spent, from taking part in funding decisions. It appears to go against other commitments to diversity in staffing and to shift decision making power towards the countries where the aid budget is spent.

The FCDO should undertake a review of its reserved department status to identify whether its security considerations warrant the decision not to hire foreign nationals.

DFID previously set out its ambition to publish more inclusive data, in order to improve its programming in 2022.

The FDCO should publish the first tranche of inclusive data this year and set out a timeline for when it will be able to publish further data relating to race, ethnicity and income. (Paragraph 63) Building an equitable and inclusive aid sector

The barriers to entering the aid sector for candidates from diverse backgrounds can be considerable.

Donors and aid organisations should reduce barriers to entry by ending the use of unpaid internships and paying all employees the living wage and removing unnecessary stipulations in job applications such as years of experience in the international aid sector and higher degrees that disadvantage individuals from under-represented backgrounds.

Some aid organisations are taking action to increase diversity in their workforce, such as reducing unnecessary stipulations in person specifications in job descriptions and banning all-White recruitment boards.

All aid organisations, including private sector contractors should reflect on their diversity data and seek to understand if their recruitment practices need strengthening to support talented candidates from diverse backgrounds. We need sector-wide cooperation to share best practice and identify how the recruitment process can better facilitate candidates from diverse backgrounds to enter core roles in the aid sector.

Some aid organisations are beginning to introduce measures to open up and encourage conversations about racism in their workplaces but much more needs to Racism in the aid sector 33 be done to welcome diverse ideas and values. These processes are likely to be painful and difficult and will take courage on the part of leaders, managers, and staff to be open, honest and committed to change.

Aid organisations, including private sector contractors, should publicly acknowledge that racism exists in the sector and prioritise anti-racism work that tackles the underlying culture of their workplaces and not just the racial diversity of their staff. This will include making space for open, honest and often difficult conversations. It also requires them to welcome ideas and approaches suggested by staff who are Black, Indigenous and People of Colour.

It is the responsibility of those in the sector who hold the most power to increase diversity, inclusion and transparency, and be accountable for the steps their organisations are taking to dismantle structural racism. Responsibility for engendering culture change and increasing diversity within aid organisations should sit with the senior leadership of the organisation. Whoever is leading this work needs sufficient seniority to be able to drive it forward without fear of reprisals. Likewise, responsibility should not sit solely in human resources departments; the vision must be adopted by the senior leadership, and it should be embedded throughout the workforce. Leaders must ensure that everyone understands their own personal responsibility to promote a zero-tolerance culture towards discrimination, abuse and harassment.

Aid organisations and private sector contractors with a large enough leadership team should appoint senior leaders with the remit to tackle racism and increase diversity, equity and inclusion in their organisations, with the full support of the senior leadership team.

The way that FCDO contracts are structured creates disincentives for implementing partners to hire local staff, particularly in project lead roles. While FCDO fee rates for locally hired staff may be linked to local pay-scales in humanitarian and development settings, they can lead to large inequalities when compared to internationally hired staff. This can undermine relations with local actors, damage trust and make frontline workers feel undervalued.

We urge the FCDO to recognise their important role in determining levels of pay across the sector and commit to undertaking a full audit of its pay structures to assess the impact of them on staff hired in-country. The department must ensure that staffing stipulations in contracts take into account the value of contextual knowledge and do not lead to locally hired staff being undermined by differences in pay and conditions in comparison with their international counterparts.

The FCDO has significant convening power across the aid sector.

It should use its position to facilitate sector-wide conversations about how aid actors can improve diversity, equity and inclusion and being anti-racist. The FCDO still has work to do internally and will not have all the answers, but it can create the forum for these conversations and provide the funding to develop best practice guidelines for its partners. The FCDO can also put stipulations on organisations that it funds to publish their diversity data and demonstrate the work they are undertaking to build truly inclusive workplaces. (Paragraph 97) 34 Racism in the aid sector