Category: Event Takeaways

Fueling Rural Prosperity on Rural Terms

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

Rural communities are seeing renewed interest from outside capital — data centers, manufacturing sites, energy infrastructure, and more – promising jobs and tax base growth. But these investments often come with tradeoffs: land taken out of agricultural use, heavy demands on water and energy systems, and decisions made far from the people most affected.

Together with leaders from business, philanthropy, and the social sector, participants took part in a conversation on how to invest in rural economic prosperity without stripping local communities of agency, exploring what responsible investment looks like when rural regions are asked to host large-scale infrastructure and enterprise and how models that prioritize local ownership, shared decision-making, and long-term community benefit can compete with extractive approaches.

Some of the most salient takeaways from the conversation appear below:

Key takeaways

  • Center rural communities as engines of innovation, not simply recipients of intervention. Rural regions are already generating meaningful experimentation around AI, workforce development, agriculture, healthcare, and cross-sector collaboration. Effective place-based strategies recognize and amplify the ingenuity already present within communities rather than approaching rural America through a deficit framework.
  • Define success with communities, not for them. Sustainable rural investment requires local residents, institutions, and leaders to shape priorities, define outcomes, and articulate what prosperity actually looks like in their context.
  • Invest in quality-of-life infrastructure as an economic development strategy. Metrics like job growth and GDP rarely capture whether a community feels resilient, hopeful, or connected. Strong schools, childcare systems, healthcare access, elder care, and community institutions are not secondary benefits of growth; they are often the conditions that make growth possible in the first place. Communities that prioritize livability and belonging are better positioned to attract and retain talent over time.
  • Build trust through local leadership and local hiring. Outside organizations move more effectively in rural communities when they work through trusted local relationships and invest in leaders who already understand the community’s culture, history, and priorities. Hiring locally and empowering community-based intermediaries accelerates credibility and deepens long-term impact.
  • Treat limited bandwidth — not lack of creativity — as the core capacity challenge. Many rural communities already possess strong ideas, entrepreneurial energy, and civic commitment, but operate with too few people carrying too many responsibilities. Strategic investments in staffing, technical assistance, and leadership development can unlock local momentum.
  • Fund partnership-building and coordination work, not just programs themselves. Coalition management, relationship-building, convening, and cross-sector alignment are often essential to rural progress, yet are chronically underfunded. Backbone organizations and intermediary partners can play a critical role in expanding local bandwidth and helping communities coordinate around shared goals.
  • Invest in local talent pipelines to create lasting economic resilience. Rural workforce strategies become more durable when communities are able to cultivate talent from within rather than relying exclusively on imported expertise. Leadership development, local service programs, education partnerships, and community-rooted career pathways can help ensure that investment remains embedded locally over time.
  • Develop more granular and community-informed data systems. County-level data often obscures important differences between neighboring communities and can fail to capture local realities altogether. Stronger rural investment strategies require more localized, mixed-method approaches that combine quantitative metrics with qualitative insights gathered directly from residents.
  • Avoid assuming that rural prosperity must look like rapid growth. In many communities, success is defined less by expansion and more by stability, continuity, and preservation.

The 1% Tax Floor and Innovative Approaches to Corporate Impact ROI

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

A new tax reality is changing the economics of corporate philanthropy: companies can now only deduct charitable contributions that exceed 1% of taxable income. That shift is forcing a more explicit conversation inside businesses about the most financially advantageous approaches to philanthropy and how—or whether—those investments generate business value alongside social outcomes.

During a May 19 virtual Leader Roundtable, senior corporate impact and philanthropy leaders from the NationSwell community kicked off a conversation on how companies are reassessing philanthropic budgets, rethinking the balance between grants, in-kind assets, and ordinary business expenses, and sharpening how they define and measure impact ROI. Some of the most salient insights from the discussion appear below:

Key Takeaways:

Collaborate cross-functionally to establish the best organizational approach for navigating the 1% tax floor. To understand the best way for your organization to navigate the 1% tax floor, it is important to align with legal, tax, and government affairs teams early and strategically. Adjustments differ depending on organizational makeup, budget cycles, and legal parameters; bunching or front-loading grants is one mechanism that organizations are considering, but other strategies include shifting the balance between corporate and foundation dollars, reclassifying some philanthropic spend as ordinary business expense, or considering the use of donor-advised funds (DAFs). 

Proactively identify and introduce opportunities for shared value inside of your organization. Social impact leaders should work toward identifying opportunities to center their work around business strategy rather than aligning community programs to a business case retroactively. Programs can be set up for success if they meet the business’s standards for rigor, are grounded in data and collaboration with business leaders, and are communicated in the language of the business. 

Lean on both quantitative and qualitative frameworks to bring a human dimension to measurement discussions. Measuring hours, dollars, and people reached is important, but these metrics alone only tell part of the story. Stories and case studies can be equally important in communicating impact, especially when discussing long-term change. 

Frame social impact initiatives as a talent development and retention driver. Some organizations are partnering with HR and L&D teams to build a more defensible, data-driven people ROI story focused on employee engagement and retention. They are analyzing the relationship between impact programs and talent outcomes – engagement, retention, skill development, and more – using existing survey data or, in some cases, developing new surveys to collect and study primary data.

Invest in human skills development as a business opportunity. With increased AI adoption, the skills that volunteerism and community engagement build — collaboration, empathy, leadership — are becoming more strategically valuable to businesses. Organizations that reframe their impact programs as a vehicle for developing these skills may be better positioned to make credible ROI cases to the business, while also providing value to employees seeking these opportunities.  

Leveraging AI & Technology to Connect More Communities to Quality Healthcare

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

Technology is reshaping healthcare access, but progress is uneven. AI, digital tools, and data platforms have the potential to extend care to underserved communities, address workforce shortages, and improve outcomes. At the same time, gaps in infrastructure, trust, and governance risk widening disparities rather than closing them.

On May 5, NationSwell convened a group of leaders from the healthcare, technology, philanthropy, and the social sectors to unpack how AI and technology can be used to connect more communities to quality care. Together, the group focused on practical strategies for deploying technology responsibly, building partnerships that center community needs, and ensuring that innovation strengthens equity, affordability, and trust in healthcare systems. Some of the most salient takeaways from the discussion appear below:

Key Takeaways:

Ensure that technology empowers community health workers as relationship builders. AI and tech are most valuable when they augment the work of community health workers rather than substitute it. The trusted, relational role that CHWs play in their communities is the irreplaceable foundation of effective care connection. All technology deployed should be designed to protect and extend that capacity.

Design AI tools with CHWs and communities. The most responsible AI adoption in healthcare requires community health workers and the communities they serve to be active participants in tool design. Without mechanisms for feedback, bias mitigation, and accountability, technology risks widening the very health inequities it aims to address.

Prioritize data security and trust as foundational. Organizations working at the intersection of technology and community health must treat data stewardship with the same rigor as the healthcare system itself. Achieving certifications, committing to governance structures, and designing platforms that bring AI into the human loop are essential to maintaining the trust that makes community engagement possible.

Address the full picture of need, not just point-of-care data. Existing data systems often capture only what brings someone into the healthcare system, missing the co-occurring social determinants of health that shape outcomes. Continuous, relationship-based data collection with the support of technology can surface a more complete and actionable picture that enables both better resource connection and effective advocacy.

Invest in AI literacy and critical capacity for the CHW workforce. Community health workers need both the practical skills to use AI tools effectively and the critical frameworks to evaluate how those tools are designed and deployed. Approaches that build competency while also developing CHW voice in governance and advocacy are critical to ensuring that the workforce shaping communities is not left behind as technology advances.

Build toward interoperability and sustainable models. For community-based organizations to achieve lasting impact through technology, they must be able to integrate securely with healthcare payer systems. Achieving interoperability opens pathways to revenue that sustains mission-driven work in ways that philanthropic funding alone cannot.

Shift the question from “can we?” to “should we?” Across sectors, the most important orientation toward AI adoption is not simply capability, but intentionality. Keeping the focus on how technology can better serve CHWs, and continuously asking whether each application advances their interventions, is the compass that keeps this work on the right path.

Building a More Inclusive and Empowering Narrative Around Wealth

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

Across the impact field, efforts to advance economic mobility and inclusive growth are encountering friction with the language we use. Wealth is often understood narrowly as accumulation or privilege rather than as a practical foundation for stability, choice, and long-term opportunity. When the narrative is muddled or loaded, it becomes harder to build durable public support for policies and programs that expand economic power.

On April 23, NationSwell invited leaders from the philanthropy, business, and social sectors to a conversation on how the impact field can develop a clearer, more inclusive narrative and vocabulary around wealth. Together, participants discussed how words like ownership, assets, security, and opportunity are landing today, where they fall short, and how reframing can better support economic mobility and inclusive growth initiatives. Some of the most salient takeaways from the conversation appear below:

Key takeaways:

Shift narratives from individual financial behavior to structural drivers of wealth. While personal choices play a role, wealth outcomes are often shaped by structural factors, such as employer retirement benefits, housing markets, and federal policies, rather than individual choices. Personal stories often highlight how factors like low wages, lack of access to capital, student debt, and historical inequities (e.g., redlining, exclusion) shape financial outcomes over generations. It is important to move away from framing wealth as purely a result of personal decision-making and toward acknowledging systemic influences. 

Use more relatable language to describe wealth and financial well-being. The term “wealth” can feel abstract or associated with extreme affluence, making it hard for many people, especially young people, to relate to. Reframing wealth in terms of savings, financial stability, or the ability to handle everyday expenses makes the concept more accessible. For example, wealth in practical terms can be described as having savings that provide a buffer against unexpected events and enable future investments like education or housing. This framing reflects how many individuals and young people actually experience financial well-being.

Normalize investing as accessible to all income levels. Individuals and communities often have the capability to build wealth but lack access to financial, social, and knowledge capital. Research shared in the discussion showed that many individuals, including those with retirement accounts, do not see themselves as “investors” and instead associate investing with a narrow demographic. Shifting this perception, so that people view themselves as investors regardless of income, is critical to changing long-term financial behavior.

Move beyond financial literacy toward asset-building opportunities. Programs focused only on budgeting or financial literacy don’t meet the needs of all populations. More effective approaches include pairing guidance with tangible opportunities – such as matched savings programs, early investment accounts, homeownership support, and youth “earn and learn” initiatives – that enable actual wealth accumulation. Additionally, social capital, especially through mentorship, is a key mechanism for helping individuals navigate systems like financial aid, education, and homeownership. Building and scaling these relationships can support broader access to economic mobility.

Bridge place-based and national approaches to wealth-building strategies. It is important to combine locally tailored strategies – grounded in community history and context – with broader national resources and infrastructure. This balance can help scale solutions while maintaining relevance to specific communities.

Improve how insights and solutions are shared across philanthropy. Philanthropy does not  always effectively share knowledge about what works. Better distribution of actionable insights, especially in accessible formats, is a major opportunity for increasing impact in the community wealth-building field. 

When and How AI Can Improve Grantmaking

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

AI is moving fast, but grantmakers are rightly cautious. Funders are under pressure to move money more efficiently, learn faster, and support grantees better, all without adding risk, burden, or opacity to an already complex system. The question is no longer whether AI will touch grantmaking, but where it can actually add value—and where it shouldn’t.

On April 16, NationSwell invited philanthropic and impact leaders to take part in a conversation on the practical use of AI in grantmaking. The conversation featured ideas about when AI can meaningfully improve decisions and workflows and how to adopt it in ways that strengthen, rather than undermine, equity, accountability, and relationships with grantees. Some of the most salient takeaways from the discussion appear below:

Key takeaways:

Assess where AI meaningfully adds value across the grantmaking process. Rather than applying AI indiscriminately, organizations should take a step back and evaluate workflows end-to-end to determine where these tools can be most effective. A thoughtful, system-level approach can promote AI application in ways that enhance, rather than complicate, existing processes.

Use AI to streamline manual and error-prone grantmaking workflows. Financial due diligence can be a highly manual, time-intensive, and error-prone process, often involving spreadsheet-based analysis or visual review of financial statements. AI tools like Grant Guardian were developed to improve accuracy and efficiency in this specific workflow. 

Reinvest time savings from AI into deeper grantee engagement. Small grantmaking teams often face hundreds of applications, creating capacity constraints. AI can be used to support summarization, rubric-based pre-review, and prioritization to help manage this volume. The reduction in processing time, from hours to minutes, can allow staff to spend more time having meaningful conversations with grantees and improving the quality of their work. 

Recognize and normalize AI use among applicants and grantees. There is growing recognition that applicants and grantees are using AI to improve efficiency, particularly in drafting and responding to applications. When used thoughtfully, this can help reduce administrative burden, though differentiation still relies on the substance of proposals and outcomes.

Consider supporting grantees’ capacity to adopt AI tools and infrastructure. As AI becomes more embedded in workflows, there is an opportunity for funders to think about how grantees can access and use these tools effectively. Supporting this capacity, particularly through flexible, operational funding, can help organizations integrate AI in ways that enhance their work, rather than treating it as a one-off programmatic expense.

Develop and deploy AI systems with responsible AI principles. Specific principles should guide all AI adoption work in grantmaking, including safety and transparency, community-centered design, bias mitigation, human-in-the-loop validation, enterprise-grade security, and sustainability considerations. Start AI adoption through structured experimentation with clear guardrails, and consider empowering early adopters to test tools within defined parameters (e.g., “stoplight” approaches to acceptable use). These frameworks can also support clearer communication and transparency about how AI is being used.

Consider AI disclosure as contextual and relational: Whether and how to disclose AI use in grantmaking processes depends on organizational policies and levels of AI involvement. While practices may vary between organizations, especially as technology grows and with wider experimentation, keep a relational and trust-based mindset.

Maintain human oversight as a core requirement in AI-assisted workflows. AI is never a substitute for human judgment, and validation and verification by users must be built into the process. Being explicit about this, both internally and externally, can help reinforce trust, particularly in a field like philanthropy that is deeply relationship-driven and values human expertise.

Design for customization of AI tools to reflect different evaluation contexts. Grantmaking organizations assess financial health and programmatic fit differently, and AI tools can be configured with varying metrics, thresholds, and profiles to match those needs. This flexibility can also support more context-sensitive and equitable evaluation approaches; for example, assessing early-stage organizations differently than more established ones. 

Predicting the Future of Work: Using Data to Build More Inclusive Workforce Systems

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

As AI and automation accelerate change across the labor market, predictive analytics offer powerful tools to anticipate which jobs, skills, and communities face the greatest risk – and where new opportunities are emerging.

On April 14, NationSwell convened a group of cross-sector leaders for a conversation on how data-driven insights can inform equitable training pathways, smarter investments, and workforce systems that are more responsive, inclusive, and resilient – ensuring workers are prepared for what’s next. Some of the most salient takeaways from the discussion appear below:

Key takeaways

Build workforce systems around capabilities, not credentials. A skills-first labor market only works if the underlying data infrastructure can recognize how people actually build skills through work, not just through degrees. When systems continue to privilege credential proxies over demonstrated capability, they miss large pools of qualified talent and reinforce inequities that workforce initiatives are meant to solve.

Pair predictive tools with better upstream data. Forecasting tools are only as strong as the signals they rely on. If workforce data continues to over-index on traditional credentials or lagging indicators, even sophisticated models will reproduce old blind spots; the real opportunity is to feed these systems richer, skills-based, real-world signals that surface emerging pathways earlier.

Invest in verified outcomes data, not just self-reported program metrics. Too much workforce decision-making still depends on incomplete or anecdotal outcome data. Expanding access to administrative wage data and other verified sources can help providers understand which programs are actually driving employment and earnings gains, and make more strategic decisions about what to scale, refine, or retire.

Use labor market data to map mobility, not just demand. It is not enough to know which jobs are growing. More useful systems help workers and practitioners understand how people can move from one role to the next based on shared skills, adjacent occupations, and realistic transition pathways, especially in a labor market where workers will increasingly need to pivot across sectors over time.

Treat durable human skills as core infrastructure. As AI and automation continue to reshape tasks, foundational capabilities like problem-solving, judgment, adaptability, collaboration, and communication are becoming more valuable. Technical requirements will keep evolving, but these underlying skills are what allow workers to remain resilient and mobile across changing tools, roles, and industries.

Redesign learning environments for experiential learning, not just memorization. Traditional teaching methodologies are increasingly challenged in a labor market where workers are expected to interpret information, make decisions, and adapt in real time. Experiential learning where people must apply knowledge, navigate ambiguity, and solve real problems better prepares learners for a world in which execution is increasingly automated and judgment is the differentiator.

Center the learner’s lived experience when designing workforce pathways. Workforce systems often default to employer demand signals and institutional priorities, but durable pathways require equal attention to how individuals actually make decisions. People choose careers based on identity, values, belonging, perceived risk, and developmental stage so the strongest systems help learners navigate options rather than simply presenting them.

Avoid replacing one rigid pathway with another. As enthusiasm grows around alternatives to four-year degrees, there is a risk of steering lower-income learners into workforce tracks while more privileged peers retain access to broader optionality. The goal is not to substitute “college for some, training for others,” but to build multiple high-quality pathways that preserve dignity, mobility, and long-term choice across backgrounds.Reframe middle-skill and nontraditional career paths as real engines of mobility. Many high-demand roles outside the traditional college track now offer strong wages, lower debt burden, and meaningful advancement potential, yet outdated perceptions still diminish their value. Shifting both rhetoric and practice to put career and college readiness on more equal footing is essential if workforce systems are going to reflect today’s economic realities.

The New Playbook for Impact Comms and Public Reporting

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

The standard playbook for corporate impact reports and public communications has been unsettled by shifting political pressures, cultural attitudes, attention scarcity, and the introduction of AI. Yet companies still need to explain what they stand for, show progress, and build credibility with employees, investors, and the public. The organizations currently excelling in this space share a set of key attributes: a deep understanding of their audiences; auditable data; insight-driven storytelling; and the ability to adapt.

During an April 7 virtual Leader Roundtable on The New Playbook for Impact Comms and Public Reporting, leaders from the NationSwell community challenged us to rethink how data and narrative interact to showcase how the data shapes the story. We’ve collected some of the most salient insights from the conversation below, should you wish to revisit them:

Key Takeaways:

Design your communications strategy around clearly defined audience segments. Effective storytelling starts with identifying who you need to reach and what matters most to each group, then tailoring messages to reflect their priorities. This often requires translating technical language into relevant business or social outcomes and creating multiple entry points into your core narrative. Always ask, “Why should this audience care?” and adapt messaging accordingly.

Anchor communications in credible data and use narrative to bring it to life. Build reporting on auditable data, then use storytelling to explain the outcomes and human impact behind those numbers. Treat data as the backbone of your communications, and narrative as the mechanism that connects evidence to impact. This allows you to humanize outcomes rather than leading with corporate frameworks alone, ensuring your message sticks.

Maintain a consistent core message while adapting delivery to changing external conditions. Establish stable principles and core truths, but adjust tone, framing, and distribution channels as political and regulatory contexts shift. Flexibility in messaging preserves credibility, manages risk, and ensures communications remain relevant in dynamic environments.

Focus storytelling on narratives that deliver the greatest strategic value. Prioritize concise, data-backed, and purpose-driven communications over exhaustive reports. Highlight stories that connect social impact to business goals, emphasize outcomes, and avoid overcommunicating. Limited attention and reporting space require identifying the stories that move the needle most effectively.

Align impact initiatives directly to business performance and risk mitigation. Link programs to measurable business outcomes such as revenue, talent retention, or risk reduction to demonstrate their material importance. Position impact activities as contributors to core enterprise value, showcasing how “doing good” drives both social and business outcomes. This tactic proves especially critical when engaging executive leadership, including the CFO and other financial decision-makers.

Create a cross-enterprise ecosystem of reporting. Engage key stakeholders across functions, such as materiality, risk, and assurance, to build a connected village of reporting that supports consistent, credible communications. Identify the connective tissues between social impact, business performance, and brand positioning to uncover better opportunities in the marketplace.

Frame workforce and inclusion communications around enterprise-wide value. Emphasize outcomes that benefit the full employee population, such as talent development or retention, rather than narrowly focusing on specific population groups. Expand DEI storytelling to include pathways for veterans, first-generation employees, and multiple demographic segments to maintain credibility and mitigate potential backlash.

Leverage technology and AI to accelerate data analysis and broaden reporting capabilities. Deploy digital tools to streamline data collection and analysis, model potential outcomes, and generate actionable insights efficiently. Consider AI tools to explore multimedia formats for your reports to increase audience accessibility and engagement.

The NationSwell Council on Workforce Innovation for a Changing World

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

We’re living through one of the most profound shifts in the history of work. According to LinkedIn data, 70% of the skills used in most jobs will change by 2030, accelerated by Artificial Intelligence. AI and emerging technologies are transforming not only how we work, but how we design work – creating new roles, redefining old ones, and making evolving skills the currency of career growth in a more dynamic and rapidly shifting labor market.

Meeting this moment requires grappling with hard questions: What will the jobs of the future be? How are we teaching, training, and upskilling learners to ensure access to opportunity is inclusive — from early career to lifelong professionals? And perhaps most importantly, how can we harness this moment to drive workforce innovation that benefits all workers?

In the first quarter of 2026, the NationSwell Council kicked off a Salon series dedicated to exploring Workforce Innovation for a Changing World. The convenings that followed connected leaders across sectors on how we can prepare a workforce that thrives amid AI-driven uncertainty and where innovation expands access to opportunity.

We’re excited to present a curated collection of the insights and essential resources we’ve distilled from these conversations.

Key Insights:

  • Data is a major missing piece. The best existing data on in demand skills and jobs is still 12 months behind the market. A major challenge and opportunity exists in getting large employers to share and leverage their data to better inform the field.
  • Future-ready skills matter as much as technical ones. As AI reshapes entry-level work, adaptability, curiosity, empathy, and learning agility are becoming foundational.
  • We need broad AI fluency. From those in and looking to enter the workforce, to teachers, administrators and nonprofit professionals, broad AI fluency will be required to drive meaningful contributions from society on the path AI takes in the coming years.
  • Deep and broad partnership will be required moving forward. No single organization can keep up alone; collaboration across nonprofits, employers, funders, and government is critical to meeting this moment.
  • Hope is essential. Especially for young people and communities facing layered barriers, agency, belonging, and belief in possibility remain powerful drivers of economic mobility.
  • This moment in AI & workforce can’t be separated from the broader cultural context. As AI accelerates amid heightened attacks on our most vulnerable communities, there is an urgent risk of further embedding harm into systems at scale. From representation in the development of AI, to data, use cases and learning pathways, equity in AI design and deployment will be essential to building a future of broadly shared prosperity.
  • The Redesign of work is already here. We’re at a turning point. AI and automation are changing not just how we work, but what work looks like. Many entry-level jobs are disappearing, while new kinds of work are growing in the gig, creator, and hybrid economies. As the old idea of a “career ladder” fades, people are finding less traditional and more flexible ways to build their careers. This raises an important question: if early-career jobs are disappearing, how will people get their start? We believe we need to create new kinds of beginner roles and pathways that give people the same experience and mobility those entry-level jobs once did.
  • Learning and training must catch up to reality. We know that traditional workforce programs often assume linear journeys — start, train, promote — but today’s workers move fluidly between sectors, roles, and even employment forms. We discussed the need for real-time, responsive learning models that evolve as quickly as technology does. Ideas included reverse mentoring and volunteerism as a pathway for skill-building and cross-sector exposure. We also emphasized the importance of creating spaces where people can “fail forward” — building confidence and adaptability through experimentation rather than perfection.
  • Inclusion and belonging across generations. We recognized that demographic change is reshaping the workforce conversation. Workers over 40 are often excluded from AI and tech training, even as their roles shift most rapidly. To build a truly inclusive innovation economy, we must foster belonging and skill development across all generations. That means normalizing lifelong learning and supporting mid- and later-career professionals.
  • The opportunity for community-centered innovation. We talked about how communities can create their own “value loops” — local systems where entrepreneurship helps solve social problems and create lasting jobs. Instead of keeping nonprofits and businesses separate, we can build hybrid models that mix purpose with profit. We also emphasized the importance of skilled trades, which are still vital, less likely to be replaced by AI, and can help anchor stronger local economies.
  • Anticipating, not reacting, to workforce shifts. To get ahead of disruption, we need earlier, proactive interventions — particularly in regions already feeling economic shocks, such as the DC/DMV area. We discussed the need for early warning systems, scenario planning, and community-driven transition strategies that safeguard pathways before they collapse.
  • The promise — and responsibility — of AI. AI is ultimately amplified intention — it reflects and expands what we design it to do. It can help grow human potential, creativity, and equity, but only if guided with care and purpose. Without thoughtful guardrails, it could instead widen existing inequities. The real question is: who will invest in the work needed — the experimentation, retraining, and community innovation — to make sure the future of work benefits everyone?

Resources shared:

Health in Action: Care Needs and Innovations in Rural Communities

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

Rural communities face some of the most persistent health challenges in the country—provider shortages, long travel distances for care, limited broadband, higher rates of chronic illness, and underfunded local health systems. Yet, across these same regions, practitioners, employers, health systems, nonprofits, and local leaders are piloting innovative approaches: mobile and telehealth models, community health workers, cross-sector care networks, and employer-backed wellness programs that meet people where they are.

During a March 24 virtual Leader Roundtable, leaders from the NationSwell community came together to discuss the real-world models working on the ground, the operational and financial barriers to scaling them, and the opportunities for multi-sector collaboration that can create more reliable, equitable access to care. Some of the most salient takeaways from that discussion appear below:

Key takeaways

Recognize Community Health Workers as the connective tissue. CHWs are most effective when embedded within communities and linked to broader care systems, bridging social services, clinical care, and local resources. Sustaining and expanding this impact requires flexible funding that meets CHWs where they are by unlocking early-stage innovation, reducing unnecessary restrictions, and resourcing the work already happening on the ground. 

Anchor care in community infrastructure to expand access at scale. Care is most effective when it flows through familiar structures, such as churches and local organizations that have long served as anchors in their communities, rather than relying solely on traditional clinical settings. From faith-based health navigation to in-home support for high-risk populations, training and deploying workers from within these networks strengthens engagement and increases the likelihood that care is sustained.

Leverage technology to unlock reimbursement and coordination. Purpose-built platforms, hub models, and shared infrastructure are enabling community-based organizations to track outcomes, meet compliance requirements, and access reimbursement. When paired with technical support, these tools reduce administrative burden and make it possible to scale impact while maintaining quality.

Use data to prove value and secure sustainable funding. Demonstrating outcomes like increased primary care engagement, reduced emergency utilization, and cost savings is critical to making the case for continued investment. Data not only validates the impact of community-based models but also translates that impact into language that funders and policymakers act on.

Invest in training that is locally relevant and role-specific. Expanding the workforce requires equipping CHWs with training that reflects the populations they serve, from maternal health to behavioral health to chronic disease. Tailored, community-informed curricula ensure that workers are prepared to meet the specific needs of their communities.

Close the gap by aligning systems, funding, and community needs. Persistent barriers like fragmented data systems, limited interoperability, and short-term funding continue to slow progress. Closing the rural health access gap requires deeper coordination, sustained investment in community-based infrastructure, and policies that reflect how care is actually delivered on the ground.

Beyond the Map: Rethinking How We Invest in Rural Communities

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

Rural communities across the U.S. are too often framed by what they lack rather than in terms of the deep assets, leadership, and innovation they already hold. They also face persistent gaps in philanthropic investment, infrastructure, and long-term capital, even as they are critical to the nation’s economic, cultural, and civic future

During a March 19 virtual Leader Roundtable, NationSwell, the Walton Family Foundation, the Delta Philanthropy Forum, and a great group of cross-sector leaders gathered to explore what effective, community-centered rural investment actually looks like in practice. Drawing on insights from the Mississippi-Arkansas Delta — a region that reflects both the challenges and the promise of rural America — the conversation highlighted how place-based strategies rooted in trust, listening, and long-term commitment can unlock opportunity.

Some of the most salient takeaways from the discussion appear below:

Key takeaways:

Rural isn’t just a geography, it’s a cultural context. Rural communities are often discussed as sparse populations or hard-to-reach places, but in practice they function as distinct cultural ecosystems with their own histories, norms, and relationship structures. That shift in framing matters: Once rural is understood as a culture and context rather than a category, the equity implications become harder to ignore.

Let the people closest to the challenge shape the solution. Across the conversation, one principle kept resurfacing: the most durable ideas tend to come from the people already living and working in the place. Funders can play an important and catalytic role, but the work is strongest when capital flows from local wisdom rather than overriding it. Experimentation matters — but it matters most when communities help define what success looks like.

Redefine scale in percentage points, not raw volume. Traditional philanthropic metrics tend to privilege large urban markets because outputs are easier to maximize there, but in rural communities, impact often shows up more meaningfully as share of need met, not total number served. A smaller absolute number can represent a far deeper level of transformation.

Partner with rural communities as “test kitchens”, but also fund them beyond the pilot. Rural places can serve as ideal proving grounds for innovation because interventions can be tested at smaller scale, with lower upfront capital and clearer community feedback loops. But too often, philanthropy treats rural communities as places to experiment on rather than places to invest with. If a model works in a rural context, it may be more transferable than assumed — but only if funders stay long enough to support sustainability.

Invest in ecosystems rather than isolated projects. In rural regions, no single town or institution exists in a vacuum. What happens in one community often creates ripple effects across neighboring towns and regional networks, meaning that effective place-based investment requires thinking beyond individual grants or municipalities and designing for coordination across a broader ecosystem.

Pair data with lived experience to understand what a region actually needs. Quantitative indicators can identify where opportunity gaps exist, but can’t fully explain how those gaps are experienced on the ground. Stronger investment decisions emerge when funders use data as a starting point, then pressure-test it through direct conversation with local residents, practitioners, and community leaders. In rural communities especially, context is often the difference between a good strategy and a misfire.

Remove match requirements and other structural barriers that quietly exclude rural communities. Many rural and rural BIPOC communities are shut out not because they lack ideas or leadership, but because they lack the upfront capital required to meet standard philanthropic or public-sector thresholds. One-to-one matches often reproduce inequity under the guise of rigor; if funders want different outcomes, they need to revisit the rules that determine who can even get in the door.

Make communities of choice, not just communities of need. The goal is not simply to mitigate decline or address deprivation, but to build places where people want to stay, return, and invest their lives. That means activating local assets — including culture, recreation, history, civic pride, etc. — alongside economic fundamentals. Place-based investment becomes more durable when it supports belonging and aspiration, not just service delivery.

Rural communities of color sit at the sharpest edge of underinvestment. The most severe inequities often emerge where rural geography and race intersect. Rural Black communities, tribal communities, and colonias are places where the funding gap is especially stark, despite persistent poverty and strong local leadership. Any serious conversation about equitable place-based investment must confront that layered exclusion directly.