“I think that was always part of it, you know you do any kind of project like that — you make a selection. And I think I was very clear in saying from the beginning this is not representative, it can’t be, because for a start we’re coming in with a very clear agenda of what we want to research. So, it’s not going to be representative of everybody in [this area] or even the majority of people there really. I tried to get a spread across communities, but again I don’t think we really did that, I think it was maybe representative of certain bits of the history.” The implications of this tension between specific histories and the demand for representation is not, however, to demand all projects speak for all communities, but to either ensure that projects are clear about their focus and remit and/or to ensure that the scale of funding is commensurate with the challenges required to conduct the sort of in-depth and wide-ranging research needed to enable projects to take account of different experiences. It is also to remind funders that diversity is not a package and Black and Minority Ethnic communities cannot be substituted one for another.
The additional burdens of advocacy and leadership
Funders may need to revisit their own support, mentoring and development schemes and resist the temptation to overburden community organisations or academics with additional advocacy work.
When the occasional BME leader is identified by white mainstream institutions they risk being exploited as brokers to provide access to communities and used as symbols of the institution’s equality credentials. There were two examples in our interviews of BME applicants being asked to take on additional advocacy and advice roles for funders on a voluntary basis, to increase applications and application success of BME groups to their funding schemes. One small community organisation, for example, talked about how one funder had asked them to take on an active role (with no additional funding) supporting other BME community organisations in their bidding to that funder, implying it was a necessary consequence of having received a grant. Another individual, who was unsuccessful in gaining funding from two major national organisations for example, was nonetheless finding that their name was being put forward by these funders to other people as someone who would provide advice to individuals from Black and Minority Ethnic communities on how to navigate funding systems. Why it should be accepted that individuals in precarious community organisations or in marginal positions in universities, should take on the responsibility of advocacy, advice and leadership in relation to access to funding for BME communities on behalf of large funding organisations, rather than these organisations suitably staffing such roles internally, is not entirely clear. What this suggests is that funders may need to revisit their own support, mentoring and development schemes — and resist the temptation to overburden community organisations or academics with additional advocacy work.
71
Navigating the funding landscape