At the end of this case study, we briefly share updates of the Indianapolis partnership’s work, but it is important to place this case study in its rightful place—in the midst of a larger, ongoing process. The case study captures a moment in time within a longer, transformative process with which Goodwill has engaged. These findings should be interpreted not as the final point in the partnership’s efforts to incorporate a more robust REEI lens, but as one step of the process.

Key Findings

• Champions within the organization were necessary for advancing discussions about race equity. A small group of committed employees drove ongoing conversations about—and support for—racial equity work, while also promoting and leading opportunities for training. Their efforts were essential in helping more people at Goodwill feel comfortable discussing racism and racial equity and become more willing to address it.
• White staff members’ reported experiences in the REEI trainings differed from those of their Black and Latino colleagues. White participants tended to think very positively of the trainings across the board, while employees of color had more varied responses. It is important that employers support all staff to feel safe, no matter how they respond personally to the trainings. Staff may need space to navigate the emotions that the trainings bring up.
• Few staff connected the training they received with how they support program participants. Translating learnings from trainings to specific changes in practice likely requires conscious effort from organizations and employees, along with ongoing support to promote organizational change that aims to sustain changes in programmatic practices.
• Following the trainings, staff members identified a need to increase employer engagement around the topic of racial equity as a clear next step. Some staff members noted that this may remain an ongoing challenge: Many are hesitant to push conversations with employers around a variety of issues (but particularly those related to racial equity), for both personal and professional reasons.
• Finally, while PYD is a valuable tool, it is not sufficient to address inequities driven by race and ethnicity. While staff at the Excel Center® (alternative high schools run by GCSI) employ strong PYD approaches, most had never thought explicitly, prior to the trainings, about how to prepare participants to navigate or respond to racism in the workplace. Their PYD focus would be strengthened by explicitly equipping young people with the skills to choose for themselves how to respond to experiences of racism in the workplace.

Footnotes

¹ For this report, we use a definition of structural racism from the Aspen Institute. They write: “We use the term structural racism to define the many factors that contribute to and facilitate the maintenance of racial inequities in the United States today. A structural racism analytical framework identifies aspects of our history and culture that have allowed the privileges associated with “whiteness” and the disadvantages associated with “color” to endure and adapt over time. It points out the ways in which public policies and institutional practices contribute to inequitable racial outcomes. It lays out assumptions and stereotypes that are embedded in our culture that, in effect, legitimize racial disparities, and it illuminates the ways in which progress toward racial equity is undermined.” See here: https://www.aspeninstitute.org/publications/structural-racism-youth-development-issues-challenges-implications/