The glass cliff for women of color leaders: The need to fund the ecosystem and the future
New research shows that women of color-led nonprofits receive funding for current work but have less access to the support systems and flexible long-term resources that help organizations—and their leaders—remain strong over time.
Among nearly 60,000 public charities that shared demographic data with Candid, 18% were led by women of color. Women of color executive directors (EDs) may also take the helm during financial strain, staff turnover, or other organizational instability—a phenomenon known as the “glass cliff.” Heightened scrutiny and conflict with boards can contribute to their departures. Building Movement Project’s (BMP) Beyond the Glass Cliff report shifts attention from individual resilience or fit to structure: Whether leaders succeed and remain depends on the authority, resources, and organizational conditions they inherit.
The glass cliff leaves leaders responsible for the problems they inherited
Women of color leaders are often expected to stabilize finances, rebuild culture, retain staff, repair board relationships, and advance equity—while operating with limited authority, staffing, financial flexibility, and organizational support. This creates a double bind: Leaders are given the responsibility for transformation without the conditions needed to achieve it.
These circumstances can produce structural burnout, which occurs when leaders face demands that consistently exceed the resources and authority available to them. A new analysis of BMP’s 2022 Race to Lead survey data for Beyond the Glass Cliff found that 55% of women of color EDs who were considering leaving their roles cited burnout as a reason, compared with 37% of white EDs. Leadership turnover, then, can reflect inequitable conditions inside organizations and in how grants are designed and distributed.
Past underfunding becomes future disadvantage
The report describes the “small organization trap”: Nonprofits led by women of color may be denied funding because they are small, yet they remain small because they lack resources to grow. Grantmakers often treat an organization’s size, staffing, and internal systems, available cash, previous large grants, and existing funder relationships as signs of readiness for more funding—rewarding nonprofits that already have financial advantages.
Candid’s research illustrates the pattern. Black CEOs lead 28% of nonprofits with budgets below $50,000, but only 12% of those organizations with budgets above $10 million. Similarly, only 22% of very small nonprofits—those with budgets below $50,000—received at least one foundation grant between 2019 and 2023, compared with 72% of other nonprofits in Candid’s sample.
Limited funding constrains staffing and systems, which can then be cited as evidence that an organization is not ready for larger or longer-term investment. The small organization trap therefore concerns not only who receives grants, but what organizations have the resources to build.
Funding access declines as investments shift toward long-term stability
BMP’s analysis reveals a pattern we call the “leadership capital gap”: Nonprofits led by women of color receive a meaningful share of funding overall but have limited access to funding for infrastructure and even less for long-term stability.
The analysis examined 1,819 grants totaling $447.3 million in two areas: care, including health, caregiving, and related services and systems that support well-being; and economic and tax justice, focused on economic security and changing inequitable economic and tax systems. Women of color-led organizations received 30% of the number of grants and 32% of total grant dollars. Yet they received only 17% of the number of capitalization grants—funding that helps organizations build reserves, assets, and other resources for long-term stability.
Support for asset building, such as property purchases or endowments, was especially rare: Only 9% of grants to all nonprofits in the sample supported it, and women of color-led organizations received just 8%, or $3 million, of those dollars. If we look only at total grants or dollars, we don’t see which organizations gain the resources to withstand disruption and plan for the future.
Fund not only the work but also the ecosystem and the future
Three kinds of funding can help women of color leaders and their organizations endure and build sustainability:
- Fund the work: Cover day-to-day resources for programs, advocacy, service delivery, and other core activities.
- Fund the ecosystem: Support the people, relationships, and tools that support the work, including staffing, leadership development, peer networks, technology, collaboration, and wellness.
- Fund the future: Provide flexible, long-term funding that allows organizations to build reserves and assets and withstand disruption.
Together, these three types of funding frame practical questions for strategic planning, board discussions, and funding conversations: Does the organization’s funding cover only current activities, or also the infrastructure needed to sustain them? What reserves or flexible resources are available when conditions change? Do budgets account for executive support, staff well-being, and leadership transitions?
Funding current work without strengthening staffing, support systems, or financial stability leaves leaders responsible for repairing unstable organizations without adequate support. To help organizations and their leaders succeed over time, it’s essential to look beyond revenue and grant size and invest in long-term stability.
Photo credit: On The Run Images LLC
