Category: Five Minutes With…

Five Minutes with… Stacey Abrams on why healthy equity starts close to home

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

For years, Stacey Abrams has been one of America’s most recognizable champions for expanding access to the ballot box, to economic opportunity, and to the systems that shape who gets to thrive. A former Georgia House minority leader, two-time gubernatorial candidate, bestselling author, and founder of organizations including Fair Fight and American Pride Rises, Abrams has built a national profile by connecting the dots between structural inequities and the everyday lives they shape.

That same desire to expand access is what animates Close to Home: a new health equity initiative from American Pride Rises designed to help people better understand how wellness is shaped by policy, place, and the everyday pressures we all face. Alongside a public education campaign, the initiative also pairs storytelling and resource-sharing with a 2026 health equity microgrant program designed to surface community-driven solutions.

In this installment of Five Minutes With…, NationSwell asked Abrams to reflect on why health equity belongs in the same conversation as democracy and economic mobility; what makes such an initiative remarkable in a moment when even the language of equity is under attack; and what she hopes funders, business leaders, and civic institutions will do to bring this work close to their own homes.

NationSwell: In the simplest terms, what is “Close to Home,” and why did American Pride Rises want to make health equity one of its flagship fights right now?

Stacey Abrams, founder of American Pride Rises: American Pride Rises focuses on DEI in our everyday lives, and one of the most important and high impact places where DEI has been critical is in the healthcare space. The Close to Home campaign is focused on how we can best surface, understand, and invest in community-driven solutions that reflect the lived healthcare experiences of the most impacted communities. 

Put more simply, the Close to Home campaign is a place to understand how health connects to our daily lives and to one another through the lens of DEI. 

NationSwell: The name “Close to Home” is significant. What does that phrase mean to you, and how does it help people understand how inequity actually shows up in everyday life?

Abrams, APR: We know that health equity is a fairly misunderstood issue. It often feels like something that’s being done to you; as if your access to healthcare is shaped by Washington, D.C., that your access to a hospital is being changed by your state, or that your access to a fair chance at good health is being determined by your background or your zip code. What we want to do is say that it is close to home, it is your community, it is your family, but if the problems are there, so are the solutions. 

At the same time, we also want folks to understand that these health outcomes, these challenges, are not personal: It’s close to home, but it’s not you. So many of us are made to believe that a poor health outcome is a personal failure, and Close to Home is designed to help us understand the gaps that exist in access, and between people and opportunities, and that the solutions are close to home. 

NationSwell: Close to Home seems designed to do three things at once: public education, community-based microgrants, and policy advocacy. How do those pieces work together, and why was it important to build an initiative that operates across all three?

Abrams, APR: First and foremost, we have to understand the systemic failure that has led to the healthcare crisis. We’re talking about communities that face barriers to preventive care, higher rates of chronic illness, environmental hazards, and rising healthcare costs, and all of that can be traced back to what you know, who you know, how much things cost, and who’s in charge. That’s why we always say it comes back to education, economics, and elections.

On the education side, we are stronger when we understand what we’re facing. Too many Americans of all backgrounds are experiencing persistent health challenges because of gaps in access to care. And that’s part of the onus of DEI: understanding that diversity means all people, equity means fair access to opportunity, and inclusion means respect for belonging — especially when it comes to healthcare.

So the education piece is about making sure people know what they’re entitled to and understand the barriers they face. The microgrants are the economic piece. We know that, at scale, it’s going to take public policy to solve these problems — but close to home, we are already incubating and ideating solutions. One of the most important things we want to lift up is that wherever you live, you probably have a neighbor, a friend, or a community member who’s thinking about how to make life better and improve access to healthcare.

The intention of the microgrants is to invest in those ideas. Because of the attacks on DEI and the attacks on the Affordable Care Act, resources that could make us stronger are instead making us sicker, more divided, and more vulnerable. So the microgrants are really about investing in communities to surface extraordinary ideas, test those experiments, and then say: based on what we now know, let’s build systems that can scale them.

And that leads to the third piece: policy. It is a political decision to undermine public health infrastructure. It is a political decision to use executive orders to attack equity in healthcare. It is a policy decision to roll back protections for women’s bodily autonomy, and to undermine care for communities facing the AIDS and HIV epidemic.

These are policy decisions, and therefore it is our responsibility to advocate for the policies that can make us healthier, help unite us, and strengthen not only those most directly impacted, but the communities they’re part of. We all win, regardless of where we start, when we solve healthcare inequity.

NationSwell: What feels differentiated about the approach American Pride Rises is taking here, particularly in a moment when even the language of equity is under attack?

Abrams, APR: We begin with the belief that we have to understand what we face. And to your very first question about what “Close to Home” means, we know that the language we hear helps shape what we believe we’re entitled to. That’s why we’re focusing on the language of “Close to Home”: because we want people to understand that this is an everyday issue. It’s not remote. It’s about you, your loved ones, and your community. For us, it’s about helping people understand how the values of DEI improve health outcomes for all communities.

We’re talking about providers who are trained to deliver competent care based on your cultural needs. For example, we know that men can experience PSA levels differently in ways that affect whether prostate cancer is detected. That’s culturally competent care. And that doesn’t care about who you are; it cares about what biology tells us about your health needs. We know that women, especially women going through menopause, have very specific needs, and that policies should be designed around the people most impacted. We know that rural communities often have less access to healthcare simply because of geography.

So part of our intention is to use language that helps people understand that diversity isn’t a curse. It is one of the superpowers of our society, but it can only work if we understand how it can be used for us, or weaponized against us.

NationSwell: When you look at the communities this initiative is meant to serve, what do you see as the most overlooked drivers of health inequity — the forces upstream from the doctor’s office that too many leaders still treat as separate from “health”?

Abrams, APR: Well, let’s just start with the current administration’s decisions: We began with the slashing of federal funding for healthcare, and we saw this administration double healthcare premiums for 20 million Americans and kick 14 million people off their coverage in order to fund a permanent tax handout for the top 1%. 

That has real consequences, because those are still people who are going to show up in our hospitals. They’re still going to show up in urgent care, but they’re not going to have the care they need. And there’s a cost to every American. We don’t often think about this, but when someone goes to the hospital and can’t afford care, the hospital absorbs that as uncompensated care and then passes those costs along to everyone else. One of the realities is that our affordability crisis is caused, in part, by our broken healthcare system.

You can’t afford to get what you need because when you do get support, you’re being charged more than you should. Number two: this administration also cut environmental justice investments. That may sound esoteric, until you realize what it actually means: they cut efforts to address the health burdens facing vulnerable communities, including communities living with high levels of pollution. When you roll back environmental protections, you create an environmental hazard that becomes a healthcare cost.

And then there’s something very close to me, and to where I live in Georgia: we have one of the worst maternal mortality rates in the nation. But this is not endemic to Georgia, and it’s not endemic to the South. When maternal mortality rises, it’s not just healthcare costs that go up, the economic costs to the entire community go up as well. There are real economic harms that come with persistent health challenges.

We are all made stronger when we have a public health infrastructure that goes beyond the medicine we’re given and extends into the communities we live in.

NationSwell: At a time when many institutions are retreating from equity language or narrowing their ambitions, what does it look like to make the case for health equity in a way that is both morally clear and broadly resonant?

Abrams, APR: I was having a conversation with someone earlier today who asked me, “Why do you talk about DEI and equity so brazenly?” And I said it comes down to two things. First, when we adapt our language, we change our minds. That’s not always a bad thing; sometimes we change our language because we’ve learned something new. New language can help us evolve our thinking, but that same dynamic can also be used against us.

So when it comes to the attacks on DEI, my question is always: Which letter don’t you agree with? Do you oppose diversity? Are you offended by equity? Are you afraid of inclusion? What part is problematic? Equity simply means fair access to opportunity. And in healthcare, equity means understanding that when one person is healthier — when a system is healthier — we all benefit.

That goes back to a fundamental recognition: too many of us have been trained to believe that broken healthcare is a personal failing, that our needs are simply the result of individual choices. But health is shaped by the places we call home. It’s shaped by the work we do. It’s shaped by the pressures we face. It’s shaped by what we can afford.

That’s why it’s so important to talk about health equity and to talk about DEI. Because when we internalize that language, we also internalize the power to know that things can be made better. The attacks on DEI are not happening because DEI has failed. They’re happening because DEI has been working — because Americans of all backgrounds were getting better access and a fairer shot at living healthy, thriving lives.

Those who oppose it demonized the language. So for me, it is a power move to keep using it, because when we own the language, we own the narrative. And the narrative should be that everyone in this country deserves a fair shot at living a healthy and thriving life, no matter where they are — but especially close to home.

NationSwell: You’ve spent so much of your career expanding access to power in democracy, in the economy, in public life. Why does health equity belong in that same conversation?

Abrams, APR: I grew up in southern Mississippi. I used to be on the debate team when I was young, and when we’d pass through Louisiana, we would drive through what was known as “Cancer Alley.” The fact that there was a nationally recognized name for an entire community defined by environmental harm was devastating. What it said was that, in pursuit of revenue, it was acceptable for industry to poison a whole community. And that community was predominantly Black and predominantly poor.

My family did not have health insurance. When we got sick, prayer was our best option — and then Tylenol. Those should not be the choices we have to make. My dad fell off scaffolding and broke his back in an on-the-job accident, but his employer refused to pay for it. So my parents had to figure out how to cover extraordinary medical bills while also fighting a legal system that ignored my father because of his race.

Now my parents are older, and they’re grappling with healthcare issues again. But the difference is: now they have health insurance, and now they have a daughter who knows who to call and has the ability to open doors. What I can do on an individual level for my parents today should be available to every person, for every member of their family, every day.

Equity is about fair access. I should not have more access simply because more people know my name. This comes close to home for me because I cannot believe in a democracy that is real if it does not include all people.

NationSwell: If you could leave corporate leaders, funders, and civic institutions with one challenge as they think about their own role in health equity, what would you want them to do differently? How could they start the work close to home?

Abrams, APR: A healthy workforce is the least expensive form of labor. At the most basic economic level, it is better for industry and better for companies to have a healthy workforce. People work faster, they work better, and they’re not stressed about the next accident or the next mistake. So at a very basic level, it’s in the interest of business leaders to want a healthcare system that works for all of us.

At the societal level, we know that DEI helps ensure the healthcare system reflects real communities — that we have providers trained to deliver culturally competent care, and that policies are designed around the people most impacted. When we invest in DEI and healthcare, we build systems that work better for everyone. When we solve healthcare problems for the most vulnerable or the most complex cases, there’s a follow-on benefit for everyone else.

And ultimately, in a democracy, business does better when people can afford to invest, afford to come to work, and afford to value your products. “Close to Home” is about connecting those dots and making sure we are building healthier, more equitable communities everywhere we go, and supporting the ideas that actually lift us up.

Companies already know from the data that when people do better, they are more productive, more engaged, and stronger community members. So at the individual, corporate, and societal level, health equity makes us all richer.

Five Minutes with… the Northern New Mexico Pathways to Opportunity Strategy Table

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

As funders look to move from isolated grants to systems-level impact, the need for durable, place-based models that communities can shape — not just receive — has never been clearer. In northern New Mexico, the LANL Foundation and the Annie E. Casey Foundation are collaborating with twenty other funders to pioneer the next frontier of place-based funding with the Northern New Mexico Pathways to Opportunity Strategy Table: a 15-member collaborative that brings philanthropy, public agencies, community leaders, and young people themselves together to align resources for those too often left out of education and workforce pathways.

What began as a listening process and a fund-mapping exercise has since evolved into a distinctly ambitious model that blends pooled philanthropic, corporate, and public dollars; youth-led participatory grantmaking; and capacity-building designed to help nonprofit  and tribal organizations grow stronger over time. The result is a more community-rooted way of thinking about how grant funding moves, who helps shape it, and what long-term success looks like.

For this installment of Five Minutes With…, NationSwell spoke with Alvin Warren, Vice President of Policy and Impact at the LANL Foundation, and Tomi Hiers, Vice President of Center for Civic Sites and Community Change at the Annie E. Casey Foundation, about what it took to move this work from convening to action, why the Strategy Table built youth voice into the model from the start, and what other funders around the country can learn from this effort. 

NationSwell: What is the Strategy Table, and what challenge was it built to address?

Alvin Warren, LANL Foundation: From our side, it’s important to understand that we’re a 100% place-based foundation based in Española, New Mexico, and we serve a predominantly rural and tribal region across north-central New Mexico. We were created to address a very specific geography: a seven-county, eighteen-tribe region of northern New Mexico.

One thing I knew from my time at Kellogg was that when national funders looked at New Mexico, they often focused only on Albuquerque, and there are understandable reasons for that, especially when funders are trying to meet numerical targets. But what struck me were the many opportunities to invest in good work in rural New Mexico — including work aligned with Casey’s Thrive by 25 framework — and yet that work often wasn’t visible or accessible to larger funders. Sometimes it was happening at a smaller scale; sometimes there were structural barriers that made it difficult for national funders to support smaller, rural organizations or tribes.

So we realized a mechanism might be needed to both draw attention to the opportunities and needs in Northern New Mexico and also make it logistically possible for funders, especially national funders, to invest in a way that felt informed, respectful, and shared. That’s really the blueprint for what the Strategy Table became.

Tomi Hiers, Annie E. Casey Foundation: At the Annie E. Casey Foundation, we made the decision to dedicate roughly 50% of our grantmaking to improving access to opportunity for young people ages 14 to 24 through our Thrive by 25 commitment, and we wanted to begin implementing that work in three places: our hometowns of Baltimore and Atlanta, and also Albuquerque, New Mexico — a place where the Foundation had already been active for about two decades, particularly around systems impacting justice-involved and child welfare-involved youth.

As we started thinking about a place-based strategy in Albuquerque and about working in deep partnership with nonprofits helping young people connect to education, training, employment, youth leadership, and financial stability, we knew it was important to understand the local philanthropic landscape. As a national funder, there can sometimes be tension around how national philanthropy shows up in a place, so we wanted to be a strategic co-investor; we wanted to know who the local funders were, what their priorities were, how those priorities aligned with ours, and how they wanted national philanthropy to support their work.

That’s how we began building relationships with local funders, and with Alvin, who was then at Kellogg and later transitioned to LANL Foundation. Those early conversations about what was important in the broader community, and what kinds of partnerships could help address barriers facing young people, were really the building blocks that eventually led to the Strategy Table.

NationSwell: What makes this different from a traditional workforce or economic development effort?

Warren, LANL Foundation: Northern New Mexico has one of the highest rates of disconnected, or “opportunity,” youth in the country: nearly one in four. For some populations, including Native youth and young parents, that number can be even higher. And this is happening in a region that also has real deserts of opportunity — places where access to paid internships, career training, or youth development programs are limited or uneven. So the goal isn’t simply workforce development in the conventional sense, it’s about transforming the landscape of opportunity so that young people, regardless of where they live in the region, have access to meaningful pathways.

What makes this model distinct is that it’s a pooled fund with three important differences. First, it’s designed to pool philanthropic, corporate, and public dollars, which is relatively unusual. Second, the grantmaking is done through a youth-led participatory process. And third, the model includes dedicated capacity-building support through a Regional Resource Hub, so grantees aren’t just getting one-off dollars, they’re also getting technical assistance, peer learning, and support to become more competitive for larger public and philanthropic funding over time.

Hiers, Annie E. Casey Foundation: What was attractive to us about the Strategy Table was that it offered leverage, sustainability, and scale. We rarely go it alone as a funder; we think a lot about how to use philanthropic dollars to leverage public funding or to bring other philanthropic partners into the work. We’re always asking: how do we have impact beyond a few hundred young people served directly? How do we influence policy and practice?

So part of what was exciting here was that there were already strong efforts underway, and a number of the funders at the table were supporting that work, including state agencies. The question became: how do we scale the best and most promising practices around education, training, and employment for young people, especially those who are often left behind and locked out of opportunity?

NationSwell: How have the Annie E. Casey and LANL Foundations helped move the work from convening to action?

Warren, LANL Foundation: We formally launched in 2021, and the first major step was a fiscal map. We partnered with the Children’s Funding Project and used the Thrive by 25 framework to do a five-year lookback on philanthropic investments in the region. Initially, we were only going to look at philanthropy, but the Casey Foundation pushed us to include public investments as well, and that was transformational; it would have been a huge missing piece otherwise.

At that point, the table had grown from an initial group of four funders to about ten. When the fiscal map was completed, we made what turned out to be a very important decision: instead of releasing the report publicly right away, we paused and took the findings out to our community first. We held a series of community gatherings, including a tribal-specific gathering, across the region, including in very rural communities. We also ran a survey and held focus groups, including one focused on underrepresented youth and another for policymakers and public funders. That process took about a year, and it was all about listening to how community understood the data and what they believed should happen next.

The other major shift from convening to action came when Casey helped us recognize that if we were serious about this, we needed infrastructure. Casey was the first funder to commit real resources to support the backbone and operations of the collaborative. Without that early investment, we would not have been able to grow the table or move toward implementation.

Hiers, Annie E. Casey Foundation: We think a lot about leverage. There’s power in bringing other funders to the table and in aligning philanthropic dollars with public systems. For us, this was an opportunity to support a table that was already rooted in a particular place and to help build something that could influence systems, not just fund isolated programs.

Once the fund mapping report came back, it became easier to think strategically. It helped us understand both where resources were flowing and where they weren’t. There was one county, for example, where the lack of investment was striking. That allowed the table to ask: What problem are we trying to solve, and what can a pooled set of more nimble philanthropic resources actually do?

From there, it was about planning carefully and building toward a model that could invite local partners into a meaningful, well-designed process for competing for and receiving resources.

NationSwell: What does the most helpful philanthropic support look like in a collaborative like this?

Hiers, Annie E. Casey Foundation: Flexibility is really important. In the early days, there was some willingness from other funders to include Albuquerque because Casey was doing work there. But we took the position that even though we were active in Albuquerque, this table was focused on northern New Mexico, and that was okay. We didn’t want our partners to contort themselves to make something work for us just because of how we had originally framed our priorities.

So for other funders or strategic partners joining a table, I think one of the biggest lessons is: if there are places where you can be flexible in service of the broader effort, you should seriously consider that.

Warren, LANL Foundation: I’d add that impact comes from infrastructure. Funders often want as much money as possible going directly out the door, and of course that matters. But if you under-resource the infrastructure it takes to do something complex like this, you undercut the impact. That means staffing, facilitation, evaluation, communications, support for the youth advisory members, and all the connective tissue that makes a collaborative actually function. Those investments may not always feel as exciting as direct grants, but they’re what make the grants more effective.

The other thing is: lend a hand. This doesn’t work if one organization is doing all the labor. Casey and other funders have actively helped make introductions, bring in new partners, and expand the pool, and that’s part of how we’ve grown the number of contributing funders. 

And finally: show up. It matters when national funders come in person, meet grantees, and participate face to face. That presence builds trust and changes the quality of the relationship.

NationSwell: What’s one anecdote or example of progress you’ve seen that shows the model is working?

Hiers, Annie E. Casey Foundation: One sign is simply that partners are still there, and new partners keep joining. My understanding is that this kind of table is something relatively new for northern New Mexico: funders coming together in this way with each other, with public systems, and with the broader community. The fact that the table has held together and continued to attract interest is itself a meaningful sign that the model is offering something valuable.

Warren, LANL Foundation: We’ve now been able to make 19 grants, almost all at the $100,000 level, with a couple slightly smaller based on what grantees requested. Based on grantee data, we anticipate reaching at least 800 young people by the end of the first year.

What’s especially exciting is the growth in participation in the pooled fund itself. As of the end of last week, we had 21 corporate and philanthropic funders either contributing or engaged in supporting the youth fund in some way, including 17 philanthropic funders and four corporate funders. And our largest state agency partner, the New Mexico Department of Workforce Solutions (essentially our Department of Labor), has committed a $1.5 million match for our second grantmaking round.

NationSwell: What’s been your biggest challenge in standing up this work, and what have funders needed to understand about that complexity?

Warren, LANL Foundation: One of the biggest challenges was the tension between moving thoughtfully and moving quickly. We spent what I think was an appropriate amount of time doing shared analysis and relationship building. That meant bringing funders together repeatedly, defining terms, developing guiding principles, and getting clear on what success actually meant across organizations with very different strategies and metrics.

That took time — a couple of years, really. And during that period, there were certainly people saying, “We’ve been in this space too long; we need to move to action.” That pressure is understandable. But if you don’t spend time building shared understanding, you can end up with a collaborative that looks aligned on paper but isn’t actually aligned in practice.

Hiers, Annie E. Casey Foundation: I think it also helps to have a broader definition of success. To me, the table being formed was a success. Having diverse philanthropic and public partners at the table was a success. Conducting the fund map and having honest conversations about what the data told us, and what it didn’t, was a success. Those things matter. And then, yes, the grants and the impact on young people are the “cherry on top,” but the process that led there matters too.

NationSwell: What felt important about building youth voice and participatory grantmaking into the Strategy Table’s design from the start?

Hiers, Annie E. Casey Foundation: Youth leadership is one of the pillars of Thrive by 25, and our Foundation has also been doing a lot of work around intergenerational engagement. It’s one thing to talk about youth voice or youth development. It’s another to think seriously about how adults and young people actually sit together, share decision-making, and govern together.

That was part of what made this model so intriguing to us. I’ll be honest — I didn’t know exactly how it would play out. I had questions: How would the youth advisory group be structured? Who would support them? How would adults and young people sit alongside each other in a real decision-making process? But when you’re part of a collaborative, you also have to trust the design process and the partners at the table. This was a chance to see what meaningful youth leadership and intergenerational governance could actually look like in practice.

Warren, LANL Foundation: We were very intentional about making sure the young people involved actually reflected the populations the work is designed to serve. The original members of the Regional Youth Advisory Council represented Native youth and Opportunity Youth, among others. In fact, two of the most active members are young parents.

We also didn’t just bring in young people who had never been exposed to philanthropy or leadership spaces. We recruited young people who had already participated in youth development efforts and were ready for this to be the next step in their leadership. And the reason we were able to do this well is because we had already spent so much time developing shared guiding principles that became a touchstone for the table. They made it much easier to say: if we really believe these things, then youth leadership and participatory grantmaking aren’t optional — they’re part of the model.

NationSwell: What can other funders and regional leaders take away from this model?

Hiers, Annie E. Casey Foundation:  Flexibility is one of the biggest takeaways. If you’re joining or building a collaborative, there may be places where you can loosen your grip on your own preferences in order to strengthen the broader effort, but that doesn’t mean losing your priorities, it means being willing to support something bigger than any one organization.

Also: time matters. If you want to build something durable, you have to resist the urge to rush to visible outputs before the foundation is there. Build intentionally, document what matters, and be prepared to adapt as the work evolves. The goal is not speed for its own sake — it’s sustainability.

And finally, I advise folks to define success broadly. The process of building alignment, doing the analysis, surfacing the data, and creating a real table with diverse stakeholders is not just pre-work, it is part of the impact.

Warren, LANL Foundation: If I had to put it in bullet points, I’d say:

  • Be willing to learn together. We wouldn’t have this table, or this success, without the Casey Foundation, our other Strategy Table partners, and other contributors. In particular, if Casey had gotten a year in and said, “Actually, it’s been great, see you later,” I honestly don’t know where we’d be. 
  • Stay the course. Philanthropy is often too quick to pivot just as things begin to work. When you stay the course, you begin to build capacity and move towards long-term impact. 
  • Recognize that impact comes from infrastructure. You don’t win by undercutting the resources it takes to do something this complex. Funders have to invest in the infrastructure, too — staffing, evaluation, communications, facilitation, the support it takes to manage and train the Regional Youth Advisory Council. All of that is what makes the impact possible, alongside the dollars going into the fund itself.
  • Lend a hand: Don’t assume one backbone organization should do all the labor.
  • Show up, especially in person. National funders, in particular, need to remember that their presence matters. It matters when they come to the community, meet grantees, and participate via relationships, not just transactions. That can make all the difference.

The Northern New Mexico Pathways to Opportunity Strategy Table is made possible by a collaborative of 15 members: Anchorum Health Foundation, The Annie E. Casey Foundation, Aspen Institute Forum for Community Solutions, The Cricket Island Foundation, LANL Foundation, Los Alamos National Laboratory Community Partnerships Office / Triad National Security, LLC, Las Vegas (New Mexico) Community Foundation, Marshall L. and Perrine D. McCune Charitable Foundation, New Mexico Foundation, Regional Youth Advisory Council, Santa Fe Community Foundation, Taos Community Foundation, Conrad N. Hilton Foundation, Thornburg Foundation, United Way North Central New Mexico, and W.K. Kellogg Foundation.

Five Minutes with… The Greater Tacoma Community Foundation’s Kathi Littmann

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

What does it look like for a community foundation to meet the moment not just as a funder, but as a convener, translator, and catalyst for long-term change? As a longtime steward of community resilience across Pierce County, Washington, the Greater Tacoma Community Foundation is embracing that challenge by connecting unlikely partners across the region and creating the conditions for communities to influence and shape the systems that affect them.

For this installment of Five Minutes With…, NationSwell spoke with Kathi Littmann, president and CEO of The Greater Tacoma Community Foundation, about the evolving role of community philanthropy, the importance of building resilience alongside capacity, and what other foundations can learn from Pierce County’s collaborative model.

Here’s what she had to say:

NationSwell: How would you describe the role The Greater Tacoma Community Foundation plays in the region, and what makes your approach to community philanthropy distinct?

Kathi Littman, President and CEO, The Greater Tacoma Community Foundation: We serve Pierce County, which is in the Puget Sound region between Seattle and the state capital. It’s a gritty, deeply collaborative community that has always known how to do a lot with limited resources, and that really shapes who we are as a foundation.

GTCF has been here since 1981, and we’ve grown from about $10,000 to more than $200 million in assets, so today we’re a mid-sized community foundation. At our core, our prime directive is honoring donor intent: what do our fund advisors love about Pierce County, and what kind of legacy do they want to leave here?

At the same time, when we’re working with discretionary resources, we’re very focused on systems change. We’re always asking how we can help meet urgent needs today, but we’re thinking in parallel about how we can address those problems long-term so that we’re not responding to them forever. For us, that means removing barriers to generational wealth and well-being across Pierce County.

Our strategic framework is built around four interconnected pillars: housing, youth, civic voice and power, and access to capital and wealth. Those issues all intersect, but right now we’re especially focused on civic voice and power in that we’ve been shifting our thinking from helping nonprofits build capacity to helping communities build resilience. Capacity is about doing what you already do, better; resilience is about being able to adapt, lead, and meet a changing moment.

And while we do a lot of grantmaking, our real superpower is not just the money, but the relationships. It’s convening across sectors, connecting people, catalyzing ideas, and helping communities use their lived experience to influence the systems shaping their lives. That’s really GTCF’s sweet spot, and it’s what makes us uniquely suited to this moment.

NationSwell: What would you say GTCF’s secret sauce is as a convener? What lessons have you learned that are transferable for others hoping to build community trust? 

Littmann, GTCF: Pretty consistently, whether we’re working with a government agency, a national funder, or one of our own donor-advised fundholders, people come to us because they know we’ll connect them to others who care about the same issues and help them make smarter decisions about how they invest in the community. They see us as thought partners, and just as importantly, as connectors to other thought partners.

That’s why I often say some of the highest-value things we offer go well beyond the grants themselves. A good example of this is the intermediary work we’ve done with the Washington State Department of Commerce, where we’ve helped move state dollars into communities faster by serving as the contract holder and intermediary so that nonprofits receive those funds as grants rather than taking on the administrative burden and risk of a government contract.

That work led to another important role: Last fall, the state Speaker of the House and the Pierce County Executive asked us to convene nonprofits around the impact of federal budget cuts on county services. We brought in service sector and network leaders, grounded the conversation in data, and created an ongoing space to understand the ripple effects across housing, food access, Medicaid, employment, and more.

That’s really our model: community-centered philanthropy. The people closest to the issue understand the barriers, and our role is to convene them, amplify their voices, bring in research and examples, and help translate lived experience into action.

NationSwell: How are you thinking about what it means to be a community foundation in this moment? What are the unique challenges that you’re facing, and how does your work go beyond traditional grantmaking? 

Littmann, GTCF: Being a community foundation is both inspiring and a little daunting, because in theory we’re built to be here in perpetuity. That means we have to lead with hope — not just for what Pierce County needs right now, but for what we want this community to look like seven generations from now. That’s a beautiful mission, but it’s also a heavy one, especially in a moment when so many systems feel misaligned with that long view. What we’ve learned is that even when there’s trauma and scarcity, there is real power in bringing people together around possibility and helping communities imagine solutions that reduce the need for crisis response over time.

A few lessons consistently guide how we do that work. First, we’re always asking: are we in the right role? If someone else should own it, we’re not trying to hold it. One reason communities trust us is that they know we can incubate and convene, but also that we’re not trying to keep control. Second, we’re constantly asking who’s not at the table; we don’t need to convene everyone, but we do need the right voices in the room. Third, one of our unique roles is helping the community see the bigger picture — surfacing patterns, gaps, and ripple effects that individual organizations may not be able to see on their own. And finally, we believe deeply in passing the mic. Our role is not to speak for communities, but to create the conditions for people to speak for themselves through our platform and relationships.

We’re also very intentional about building relationships beyond Pierce County, because some of our best learning comes from statewide and national partnerships. Pierce County is a strong testing ground: it’s diverse, collaborative, and in many ways a microcosm of the country. That makes it a powerful place not just to serve community needs, but to learn what kinds of philanthropic approaches actually work.

NationSwell: Can you share an example of a partnership, initiative, or investment that reflects how you’re trying to meet this moment differently?

Littmann, GTCF: I’ll start with our Department of Commerce work around the Community Reinvestment Project, which was a $200 million state initiative designed to address harms caused by the war on drugs and which we stepped into as an intermediary for Pierce County. We signed the contract, negotiated the terms, provided upfront funding, and convened a local advisory team made up of leaders from the sectors most impacted. We also trained them in community-centered philanthropy, because many had been conditioned to navigate contracts and compete for funding rather than help shape how resources move. Then they helped decide how the money went out.

We were able to move funds quickly and get grant dollars into the hands of local organizations, but what became most interesting was what happened beyond Pierce County. The Department of Commerce wanted to serve the whole state, and we stayed in our lane while helping foundations in the other priority counties replicate the model. We shared our contract, encouraged them to step into the same intermediary role, and built a coalition across the state. We were asking: what does this look like in a rural county? In a place with a huge geographic footprint? In a community with fewer people but different needs? We eventually brought in a third-party evaluator, captured what we learned, and shared it back with the Department of Commerce. That’s the kind of role we can play as connectors, conveners, and catalysts: helping partners scale while learning in real time.

Another example is our work with the Pierce County Resiliency Hub, which feels especially relevant right now. As federal funding started to shrink, we heard from two longtime community leaders — the Washington State Speaker of the House and the Pierce County Executive — both of whom came up through grassroots and agency leadership. They reached out and essentially said: Pierce County has done this before; when resources get tight, the community has to come together and get ahead of it, and GTCF is in a unique position to help make that happen.

That really speaks to our role beyond grantmaking. We can convene, yes, but we also serve as a knowledge facilitator. One of the hardest questions right now is simply: how much federal money has actually been flowing into Pierce County, and where is it going? That’s incredibly difficult to answer. Funding reaches municipalities, the county, the state, and individual organizations in different ways. So one of the first things we did was secure a researcher to help us build what we’re calling reliable data. With so much federal data becoming harder to access or disappearing altogether, we wanted a shared source of truth the community could trust.

NationSwell: As you look ahead, what feels most important for community foundations to get right in the next few years if they want to build long-term resilience and opportunity?

Littmann, GTCF: First, we have to be truly client-centered in how we make philanthropy accessible. The products themselves can be confusing: donor-advised funds, designated funds, changing tax laws, qualified minimum distributions. For someone simply trying to figure out how to do good with what they have, it can be overwhelming, and our role is to make that process feel human, clear, and usable.

Second, we have to get our financial model right. Like many organizations, our organic revenue doesn’t fully cover the catalyst and convening work we know has the highest impact. So it’s our responsibility to sustain GTCF in a way that reflects a theory of abundance, not scarcity. That means being able to clearly articulate the return on investment: if you support GTCF, you’re helping ensure we can meet the moment not just now, but 10, 20, or 50 years from now. That kind of long-term stewardship matters, and so does making sure we can retain the staff who make that work possible.

Third, we need to create the time and bandwidth to influence the field. We do our best work when we’re running alongside like-minded foundations, businesses, agencies, and partners. But that kind of collaboration takes time. It requires real relationship-building and a willingness to understand not just what someone is doing, but how they’re doing it and, most importantly, why.

And that leads to the last piece: narrative. If we’re truly thinking seven generations ahead, we can’t just document what we did or how we did it; the most important thing to preserve is why. If future leaders understand the values and reasoning underneath a decision, they can adapt the tactics to meet their own moment without losing the thread.

Five Minutes with… Walton Family Foundation’s Tina Fletcher

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

The Arkansas-Mississippi Delta is a case study in what community-rooted investment can make possible. Too often framed through deficit and disinvestment, the Delta is also a place of deep resilience, cultural richness, and local leadership; a region where people have been building and adapting solutions for generations, often without the level of sustained support they deserve. 

Tina Fletcher, who helps lead the Walton Family Foundation’s work in the Delta, is focused on helping shift that narrative by pairing long-term commitment with a community-centered approach to partnership. Across education, economic mobility, and leadership development, Fletcher’s work centers on strengthening what’s already working in the region and connecting the people and institutions best positioned to carry that momentum forward.

For this installment of Five Minutes With…, NationSwell spoke with Tina about what makes the Delta such a distinctive and inspiring place to work and why the greatest opportunity may be less about reinventing the Delta than investing in the talent and leadership that’s already there.

Here’s what she had to say:

NationSwell: For those less familiar, how would you describe the Delta — and what makes this region both unique and inspiring to you?

Tina Fletcher, Senior Program Officer, Walton Family Foundation: When it comes to the Delta, what stands out to me is just how much determination and resilience already exists. The Delta is a region rich in culture, community, and getting things done, with deep relationships and a strong sense of place that you can feel immediately. What makes it especially inspiring is that, despite being under-funded, the Delta has never lacked the capability to thrive. The Delta is full of people who have been leading and building for generations, people who aren’t waiting for solutions; they’re generating them in real time and in and meaningful ways. What’s needed now is investment that recognizes and accelerates that momentum because when you shift from “What’s wrong?” to “What’s working?”, the Delta looks entirely different.

NationSwell: How would you describe the Walton Family Foundation’s strategy on building trust and momentum in the Delta region over time?

Fletcher, WFF: At the Walton Family Foundation, our Delta Region strategy is simple, but not easy: show up, listen, be a good partner, and stay committed. Building trust in the Delta means investing in relationships just as much as we invest in results. In my role, I focus on strengthening what’s already working across education, economic mobility, and leadership, while finding creative ways to connect the individuals driving progress. I also bring a learning mindset to every table and conversation  I join, using data to inform the work without losing sight of community voice. That combination-commitment, consistency, humility, and rigor—is what turns trust into real momentum.

NationSwell: Can you share a moment or partnership in the Delta that changed how you think about community-centered philanthropy?

Fletcher, WFF: The biggest shift for me has been seeing what happens when communities aren’t just included—they’re in the lead. Across the Delta, I’ve seen young people, educators, and local leaders design solutions that are more relevant, effective, and sustainable than anything we could prescribe from the outside. I saw this firsthand in Jonestown, Mississippi, during a conversation with Mayor Columbus Russell, Jr., the youngest mayor in the state, and again in Helena-West Helena, Arkansas, led by Mayor Joseph Whitfield. Both are young, energetic leaders working in step with residents, partners, and funders to move their communities forward. Those moments reinforced that proximity matters. Community-centered philanthropy isn’t just about engagement, it’s about shared ownership. When communities lead together, the results aren’t just impactful, they’re sustainable. And that’s when the work doesn’t just land, it takes root.

NationSwell: For funders looking to invest in the Delta, what guidance would you offer to ensure their approach is both effective and community-centered? What are some common mistakes you’d recommend they avoid?

Fletcher, WFF: First, start by listening and plan to stay longer than you initially imagined. The Delta doesn’t need more one-off investments; it needs partners willing to build over time. Fund what’s already working, invest in capacity, and trust local leaders to guide the way. A common mistake is chasing quick wins without understanding the broader system or underestimating how long trust takes to build. In the Delta, philanthropy must focus on building trust and staying committed, because that’s what ultimately drives results. Opportunities for impact are real and plentiful, but they require patience, partnership, and a deep belief in the people closest to the work.

NationSwell: As a leader, how has working in the Delta shaped your personal leadership style, or clarified what kind of leadership this work requires?

Fletcher, WFF: This work has taught me that leadership isn’t about having all the answers, it’s about creating the conditions for the right answers to emerge. In the Delta, that means listening deeply, sharing power, and being intentional about whose voices shape your decision-making around the work. It’s also reinforced the importance of staying grounded in both data and humanity, balancing the desire for accountability and rigor with the realistic challenges Delta communities face. As a result, I am much more focused on connecting dots amongst stakeholders, leverage my organizations connections to benefit the communities we serve, funding what has proven to work, and making space for others to learn and lead. The kind of leadership this work requires is steady, collaborative, and deeply rooted in trust.

NationSwell: What gives you the most optimism about the future of the Delta, and where do you see the greatest opportunities for impact in the years ahead?

Fletcher, WFF: What gives me optimism is the talent and leadership already present, especially young leaders who are stepping up to shape what comes next, alongside seasoned leaders supporting them along the way. There’s a growing ecosystem of organizations doing powerful work, and the opportunity now is to connect and scale those efforts. I see real potential in more intentionally linking education to economic mobility, creating clear, local pathways from learning to earning and investing. The Delta doesn’t need to be reinvented; it needs to be invested in. And for funders willing to lean in, this is a moment with real momentum.

Five Minutes with… IBM’s Sara Link

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

As artificial intelligence reshapes how institutions operate, many nonprofits and public-sector leaders are grappling with a pressing question: How can AI be deployed responsibly and equitably in service of the public good? 

At IBM, that question isn’t theoretical — it’s central to how the company designs, governs, and advances its AI strategy across sectors. In a new resource developed in collaboration with NationSwell, Responsible Use of AI for Social Impact, IBM outlines a practical roadmap for responsible AI adoption that moves beyond high-level principles and into actionable guidance for organizations navigating capacity constraints, ethical considerations, and rapidly evolving technology. The report emphasizes AI literacy; governance as an enabler instead of a blocker; and a clear focus on augmenting, rather than replacing, human capability. 

For this installment of Five Minutes with…., NationSwell spoke with Sara Link — IBM’s Global Head of Employee Impact — about what it takes to operationalize trustworthy AI at scale and why government and social sector leaders must be equipped not just with tools, but with the systems and confidence to use them well.

We asked Sara how IBM is reframing responsible AI from a compliance exercise into a performance advantage, what meaningful AI literacy actually looks like inside an organization, and what wild success for ethical AI adoption could look like five years from now. 

Here’s what she had to say:

NationSwell: What do you see as most distinctive about IBM’s approach to responsible AI, particularly for nonprofits and social impact organizations that face capacity constraints?

Sara Link, Global Head of Impact at IBM: It’s encouraging to see so many responsible AI principles circulating right now; that level of focus and intentionality is important. At IBM, our approach centers on making AI practical, understandable, and genuinely useful in everyday work. Our belief is that AI should help people do their jobs better — not replace them, overwhelm them, or create confusion.

One of the key insights in the report is that responsible AI has to be realistic for organizations with limited time, staff, and capacity. Nonprofits don’t have extra resources or margin for error, and in many cases they don’t have deep technical expertise in-house. So responsible AI can’t just live in a policy document — it has to be built in a way that reflects those constraints. That means designing tools and governance structures that are usable, accessible, and practical from the start, so organizations can adopt them confidently and integrate them into their daily work.

NationSwell: Augmenting rather than replacing human capability is central to IBM’s view of AI. Can you share an example of what that looks like in practice, either at IBM or with partners?

Link, IBM: In practice, we think about AI as something that helps bring work to life — whether that’s surfacing information, spotting patterns, or saving time on repetitive tasks. But at the end of the day, people still make the final decisions, especially when judgment, fairness, or context matter.

At IBM, for example, internal tools like AskHR or AskCSR help employees find answers more quickly and efficiently. They streamline the process, but they don’t replace accountability. People are still responsible for what happens next. The goal is to enable better, more informed decisions — not to obscure or complicate them.

NationSwell: The report emphasizes foundational AI literacy. What does “good” AI literacy look like inside an organization, and how does that translate into better outcomes?

Link, IBM: Good AI literacy means people aren’t afraid of the tools, but they also don’t blindly trust them. It shows up when leaders and staff understand what AI can support and where human judgment still needs to step in.

You can hear it in the kinds of questions people feel comfortable asking: Does this actually make sense? Should we double-check this before acting on it? For example, in a nonprofit using AI to screen applications or triage services, literacy shows up when staff know how to review AI recommendations, recognize when something doesn’t feel right, and understand that the final decision rests with them.

That kind of literacy leads to better mission outcomes. It reduces errors, helps guard against bias, and builds trust with the communities being served rather than simply automating decisions without oversight.

NationSwell: How does the report reframe responsible AI governance as an enabler rather than a blocker? What is one practical first step an organization can take?

Link, IBM: When you lay out clear rules, it actually becomes easier to move forward. Clarity helps people understand what’s acceptable and what’s not. Without that clarity, uncertainty can cause hesitation or lead organizations to avoid using AI altogether. One of the strongest findings in the report is that governance doesn’t slow adoption; it accelerates it by removing ambiguity.

A practical first step is to build a simple pause point into an existing workflow — a moment where a human reviews and signs off before an AI-driven decision affects someone. It doesn’t have to be complicated. It can be as straightforward as asking: Does this outcome make sense? Would I be comfortable explaining this decision to the person it impacts?

Over time, those small, repeatable checks turn responsible AI from a written policy into a daily habit. And that’s what enables organizations to scale AI safely and confidently.

NationSwell: If you could change one thing about how funders currently approach AI in the social sector, what would it be?

Link, IBM: First, it’s critical for funders to recognize the importance of investing in organizational capacity; that’s the foundation. I would encourage funders to focus not just on funding AI tools, but on supporting people’s ability to use AI well over time.

Investing in technology alone doesn’t create impact if organizations aren’t prepared to work with it. Right now, many nonprofits are expected to figure this out on their own. They may receive funding to pilot AI, but not necessarily the support for training, governance, or long-term learning that makes those tools effective and safe.

Through IBM’s AI for Impact program, which we launched in late 2024, we’ve brought nonprofits together to share how they’re using AI, what questions they have, and where they see opportunity. A recurring theme has been the need for funding that supports both the right tools and the training required to use them responsibly. And research from the IBM Institute for Business Value shows that skills are evolving rapidly — 57% of executives surveyed expect today’s skills to become outdated by 2030. That pressure is even more acute in the social sector, where resources are already stretched.

The funders making the biggest difference are supporting AI readiness, not just adoption — investing in training, shared standards, and giving teams time to learn and adapt, not just deliver. I’d also encourage funders to make their grantees aware of programs like AI for Impact. Many of these resources are free and can help organizations and their leaders build the knowledge and confidence they need to prepare for what’s ahead.

NationSwell: If responsible AI adoption truly takes root, what might wild success look like for the sector five years from now?

Link, IBM: The vision of success, to me, is that AI makes work easier and fairer — not more stressful or confusing. If we can eliminate that sense of overwhelm and instead empower people to use their skills more fully, that would be a meaningful outcome.

In that future, people would understand the tools they’re using and feel confident explaining the decisions those tools inform. AI would help nonprofits do more good without eroding trust or weakening human connection. Most importantly, technology would support organizations in serving communities better — not get in the way.

That’s what wild success looks like: better outcomes for communities, more efficient pathways to get there, and trust and connection preserved throughout the process.

NationSwell: What have you personally learned or found inspiring as you’ve helped lead this work around AI? How has this journey informed your broader leadership in the corporate impact space?

Link, IBM: For a long time, I’ve focused on capacity building for nonprofits and on how the corporate sector and funders can partner more closely with them, providing the right level of support so they can better serve their communities.

What’s been most inspiring lately is the openness I’ve seen when nonprofits come together — the willingness to share ideas, build relationships, and solve challenges collaboratively. There’s a real energy in the room when leaders from across sectors are learning from one another and exploring what’s possible.

I saw that firsthand at a recent conference after speaking on this topic: A healthcare employee approached me and shared that she and her colleagues had been experimenting with AI tools to solve internal challenges, and they were eager to bring leadership into the conversation to explore the potential more formally. She ended up connecting with another healthcare system that was further along, helping to broker a conversation between them.

That kind of openness — being curious about what’s out there and willing to imagine what could be possible — is what excites me most. It’s that spirit of shared learning and forward momentum that will ultimately drive meaningful change.

NationSwell: Is there anything else from the report — or from your leadership perspective — that you’d like to share?

Link, IBM: As someone who doesn’t necessarily have an engineering or a technical background, what’s been especially inspiring to me is realizing that you don’t need deep technical expertise to ask the right questions or to begin this journey of continuous learning. You don’t have to be an engineer to engage meaningfully with AI.

Personally, this experience has shown me how much further we can take our work by building our skills, staying curious, and asking thoughtful questions. When we approach AI as a tool for strengthening connections and building stronger partnerships — rather than something intimidating or purely technical — it becomes incredibly energizing. That mindset has been one of the most exciting parts of this journey for me.

Five Minutes with… Goodstack’s Aylin Oncel

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

As corporate impact programs grow more ambitious, they’re also becoming more complex. Employee engagement, grants, foundations, and product-led giving often evolve in parallel — built by different teams, on different systems, at different moments in time. The intent is strong — but without shared infrastructure, friction sets in: fragmented data, inconsistent governance, duplicated nonprofit relationships, and rising operational costs.

Enter Goodstack, which was built to address that disconnect. As expectations around transparency, compliance, and measurable impact continue to rise, the need for connective infrastructure has become more important than ever. Rather than layering new initiatives onto old systems, Goodstack helps organizations unify nonprofit verification, donation rails, governance, and reporting into a cohesive impact operating system — allowing distinct programs to remain purposeful while connected in execution.

For this installment of Five Minutes with…, NationSwell spoke with Aylin Oncel — VP of Social Impact at Goodstack — about what breaks down when social impact efforts remain siloed, why infrastructure is emerging as the next frontier of corporate impact, and what becomes possible when programs evolve from ad hoc initiatives into a connected, compounding strategy.

Here’s what she had to say:

NationSwell: How would you describe the core problem Goodstack is trying to solve for in corporate social impact — what tends to break down inside companies when CSR programs, employee engagement, and product-led giving aren’t connected to each other?

Aylin Oncel, VP of Social Impact, Goodstack: In my role as VP of Social Impact at Goodstack, I spend a lot of time talking with companies that are deeply committed to doing good, but are navigating increasingly complex impact ecosystems. What I see consistently is not a lack of intent, but a lack of connective infrastructure.

Many impact efforts across an organization start off siloed. Employee engagement, grants, and product-led giving are usually built at different moments, by different teams, in response to different needs. That’s a realistic and often effective starting point. The challenge emerges as those programs scale.

As organizations grow, disconnected systems begin to create friction. Impact data fragments, experiences become inconsistent, and strategic alignment becomes harder to sustain, both internally and for the nonprofits on the receiving end. We often see the same nonprofit relationships managed across multiple tools, different verification standards applied across programs, and teams spending significant time reconciling data rather than learning from it. Operational costs increase, global rollouts slow down, and risk rises when governance and tracking are inconsistent.

Goodstack helps by providing shared infrastructure that allows these efforts to remain distinct in purpose, but connected in execution. By standardizing nonprofit verification, donation flows, governance, and reporting across programs, we help company impact evolve from standalone initiatives into a coherent, resilient impact operating system.

NationSwell: How do you define the role Goodstack is actually seeking to play for companies, and why does that distinction matter in the current CSR landscape?

Oncel, Goodstack: We think of Goodstack as infrastructure for corporate impact, and also as a strategic partner helping companies bring their impact efforts together in a way that’s sustainable over time.

Our role is to provide the core systems companies and nonprofits can rely on, including nonprofit verification, donation rails, governance frameworks, and shared visibility across employee programs, customer experiences, foundations, and grants. Our partnership shows up in helping teams see and operate those efforts as part of a single impact strategy, rather than as separate initiatives competing for attention or resources.

That distinction matters because impact work today is inherently cross-functional, while expectations around trust, compliance, and measurement continue to rise. Companies need flexibility in how they activate and scale giving, but they also need a partner who understands the full ecosystem and can help connect programs into a cohesive strategy. When that foundation is in place, teams spend less time rebuilding systems and more time focusing on outcomes, engagement, and long-term impact.

NationSwell: You’ve identified a gap between different internal CSR stakeholders — HR, foundations, product, sales — who often aren’t talking to each other. What’s lost when that fragmentation persists, and what becomes possible when those efforts are connected?

Oncel, Goodstack: When CSR efforts stay fragmented, the biggest thing that’s lost is momentum.

Each team may be doing meaningful work in isolation, but those efforts rarely reinforce one another. Employees don’t always see how their time or giving fits into a broader narrative. Impact data lives in disconnected spreadsheets. Leaders miss opportunities to understand what’s resonating, what’s scaling, and where real outcomes are being created.

When efforts are connected through shared infrastructure and standards, participation tends to increase because experiences are simpler and more transparent. Insights improve because impact is measured consistently. Companies move from one-off campaigns to an always-on strategy that scales across teams and geographies. Impact shifts from episodic to compounding.

NationSwell: Without getting into proprietary details, can you share an example of a moment when things really clicked — when a company started to see its impact efforts as one connected system, and changed how they worked or thought about CSR?

Oncel, Goodstack: One of the clearest “click” moments I’ve seen is when a company realizes it no longer needs separate systems for nonprofit programs, employee giving, and grants. Once the underlying infrastructure is standardized across nonprofit verification, donation flows, and shared reporting, impact stops feeling like a collection of disconnected initiatives and starts functioning as part of the company’s operating system.

Teams spend less time managing logistics and more time thinking strategically. Reporting cycles that once took weeks begin to happen in near real time, and moments like GivingTuesday shift from one-off obligations into genuine opportunities to accelerate engagement. Volunteer initiatives spark interest in giving, giving data surfaces the causes employees care about, and those insights inform grantmaking nominations and company-wide campaigns. Product-led programs reveal new opportunities to engage customers more meaningfully. Instead of running ad hoc initiatives, teams learn from patterns, adapt faster, and move forward with a shared sense of purpose.

NationSwell: How would you describe the next evolution of CSR, and what signals tell you whether or not we’re already moving in that direction?

Oncel, Goodstack: I see the next evolution of CSR unfolding across three dimensions.

First, expanding stakeholder engagement by embedding giving into products and everyday experiences. Thoughtful design makes participation intuitive and expands who gets to be part of impact.

Second, meet employees where they already are. Atlassian, a Goodstack partner, exemplifies this approach in its employee engagement program. As Atlassian employees volunteer and donate, they earn rewards for themselves and nonprofits they care about directly on the platform – with high-impact activities unlocking bigger rewards. It recognizes a wide range of giving behaviors and gives people a clear, flexible path to increasing their impact.

Third, connecting efforts across teams so impact isn’t experienced as a series of disconnected programs, but as a cohesive narrative that demonstrates compounding progress over time.

The signals are already here. More leaders are asking not just how much was given, but who it reached, what changed, and how programs influence behavior and outcomes. That shift in questioning reflects a maturing field.

NationSwell: Goodstack sits at a unique intersection of data, infrastructure, and ecosystem visibility. How do you think about using that vantage point to not just report on impact, but to help shape better decisions?

Oncel, Goodstack: We’re thoughtful about how we use data and AI, because visibility alone doesn’t drive better decisions. It has to be paired with strong infrastructure, clear standards, and human judgment.

Where AI becomes powerful for us is in reducing friction and surfacing patterns that are difficult to see across large, complex impact programs. That can include revealing where engagement drops off, where interest clusters around specific causes, or where programs unintentionally overlap. These insights help teams act with greater confidence and intention.

Importantly, AI isn’t replacing decision-making. It’s supporting it. By pairing intelligent systems with verified nonprofit data, consistent governance, and transparent reporting, we help leaders spend less time reconciling information and more time designing impact strategies that are intentional, equitable, and resilient over time.

NationSwell: For CSR leaders who feel stuck repeating the same campaigns year after year, what’s one question they should be asking themselves if they want to unlock a more integrated, strategic approach to impact?

I’d encourage leaders to step back and ask, what problem are we actually trying to solve?

It’s easy to default to familiar formats and moments on the calendar without reassessing whether they’re still aligned with today’s challenges. Instead of starting with what you’ve always done, it can be more powerful to focus on how you might unlock new impact in service of your goals and overall mission.

That might mean pulling different levers, such as engaging customers in giving, designing employee programs that drive meaningful behavior change, or increasing access to funding and visibility for nonprofits that are often overlooked. When infrastructure is stable, leaders have the freedom to think creatively, test new approaches thoughtfully, and learn from what works.

The shift isn’t about reinventing the wheel. It’s about being clearer on the outcomes you want and more strategic in how you get there.

Five Minutes with… the Center for Audit Quality

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

At a moment when the accounting profession faces both a shrinking talent pipeline and an urgent need to diversify who enters the field, the Center for Audit Quality’s Accounting+ program is reshaping perceptions of what a career in accounting could look like. 

Launched as a profession-wide response to longstanding recruiting challenges, Accounting+ meets students where they are to spotlight the dynamic, impactful opportunities that exist within the accounting profession. Now in its fifth year, CAQ’s 2025 Annual Report shows that Accounting+ has strengthened awareness and engagement with accounting careers through data-driven content, strategic partnerships, and sustained outreach that reflects real student interests and aspirations. 

For this installment of 5 Minutes With, NationSwell sat down with Liz Barentzen — Vice President of Operations and Talent Initiatives at the Center for Audit Quality — to talk about how, against a backdrop of declining accounting graduates and broader enrollment pressures, Accounting+ is not just raising visibility for the profession but also helping to rewrite its narrative for the next generation of talent.

Here’s what she had to say:

NationSwell: What specific gap have you identified in the types of applicants the accounting profession typically attracts that made a broad, student-facing awareness campaign feel necessary? How has the Accounting+ program sought to address that gap?

Liz Barentzen, CAQ: The accounting profession was facing a dual challenge: a shrinking talent pipeline overall and persistent underrepresentation of Black, Latino, and other students of color. But what made a broad, student-facing campaign feel necessary — rather than just more targeted recruitment — was the data on awareness. Many students, particularly those without family connections to business or professional services, simply didn’t have accounting on their radar as a viable, appealing career path. They associated it with tax prep or number-crunching, not with the strategic advisory work, global mobility, or earning potential the profession actually offers.

So Accounting+ was designed to intervene earlier and more broadly — to shift perceptions before students make decisions about majors or career tracks. We’re working to widen who even considers accounting, not just compete for students already headed toward business fields.

NationSwell: You’ve described Accounting+ as working in two major buckets: large-scale brand awareness and in-classroom activation. How do those two strategies reinforce each other in practice, and where have you seen the strongest shifts in student perception?

Liz Barentzen, CAQ: The large-scale brand awareness work — think digital campaigns, influencer partnerships, broad-reach content — creates cultural receptivity. It plants the seed that accounting is something worth paying attention to. But awareness alone doesn’t give students the information or confidence to actually pursue it.

That’s where the in-classroom activation comes in, primarily through our partnership with EVERFI. We’ve reached nearly 260,000 students across thousands of high schools with a curriculum that goes deeper — explaining what accountants actually do, the variety of career paths, the earning potential and stability.

And critically, it doesn’t stop at awareness. When these previously primed students come to the Accounting+ website, they’re offered concrete next steps — internships, scholarships, programs that help them continue the journey. So we’re not just inspiring interest and then leaving students to figure it out on their own. We’re building a pathway from “I didn’t know this was an option” to “here’s how I actually get there.”

Some of the strongest perception shifts we’ve seen are around long-term earning potential and career stability. Students are starting to see accounting as a path to financial security — not just a boring desk job that requires advanced mathematics.

NationSwell: What has your research revealed about how students’ priorities are changing over time, and how has Accounting+ — and your messaging strategy — adapted in response?

Liz Barentzen, CAQ: Our longitudinal research has tracked a real shift. When we first launched the campaign, the messages that resonated most were about accounting as a pathway to starting your own business or giving back to your community. Students were drawn to the autonomy and purpose narratives.

Now, what’s landing is stability and long-term security. When we ask high school students what matters most in a career, long-term earning potential outranks starting salary — 68.5% prioritize it. They’re thinking about financial trajectory, not just what they’d make in year one.

That shift likely reflects the broader environment these students are coming of age in — economic uncertainty, headlines about layoffs and AI disruption, watching their families navigate instability.

So, our messaging has adapted accordingly. We’re still telling the full story of what accounting offers, but we’re leading with the durability of the career path, the flexibility it provides, and the financial foundation it builds. We’re meeting students where their priorities actually are, not where we assumed they’d be.

NationSwell: Accounting+ has been explicit about reaching students with the least exposure to accounting; what are the mechanics you employ to ensure that the campaign is widening the funnel rather than simply reaching students already on a professional track?

Liz Barentzen, CAQ: This is something we’re deliberate about. The mechanics include: partnering with 38+ state CPA societies to reach schools in communities with less exposure to professional services; working through EVERFI to deploy curriculum in Title I schools and districts we wouldn’t otherwise access; and ensuring our digital content doesn’t just target business-oriented students but reaches broader interest categories.

We also track who we’re reaching. If our data showed we were just preaching to the choir—students already in AP Economics or DECA — we’d know something was off. What we’re seeing instead is engagement from students who didn’t have accounting anywhere in their consideration set before encountering our content. The goal is exposure equity: giving students the same information about this career that kids with accountant parents or professional networks get at the dinner table.

NationSwell: As AI reshapes the accounting profession and companies rethink entry-level hiring, how are you reframing the value proposition of accounting for students today?

Liz Barentzen, CAQ: This is the live tension right now. Students are hearing headlines about AI replacing jobs and firms pulling back on entry-level hiring. If we’re not careful, the narrative becomes “why would I pursue a profession that’s automating itself out of existence?”

Our reframe is this: accounting skills are foundational to understanding how any organization works—financially, operationally, strategically. AI will change how accountants work, but it increases the need for people who can interpret, advise, and exercise judgment. The profession is shifting from compliance and data processing toward analysis and strategy.

We’re also honest with students that the entry-level landscape is evolving, and we’re working with firms and educators to ensure there are clear pathways in. But the core value proposition — financial literacy, career stability, multiple exit options, strong earning trajectory — remains sound. We just have to tell that story with more nuance now.

NationSwell: Your annual report shows accounting enrollments growing significantly faster than overall college enrollment, driven largely by Black and Latino students. What does that data tell you about what’s working — and what still needs to change to sustain this momentum long-term?

Liz Barentzen, CAQ: The headline is striking: accounting enrollments grew 13.9% while overall undergraduate enrollment grew just 5.2% — and that growth was driven disproportionately by Black and Latino students. Accounting programs are outperforming national trends across all demographic groups.

What does that tell us? First, that the awareness investment is working. When students know about a career path and see people like them succeeding in it, they pursue it. Second, that the profession’s efforts on diversity and inclusion — however imperfect — are registering with students. They’re voting with their enrollment decisions.

But to sustain this? We need to ensure students don’t just enroll — they persist, they pass the CPA exam, they get hired, they advance. That’s where the ecosystem needs to keep evolving. The pipeline is widening, but the profession has to be ready to receive and develop this talent. That’s the next chapter.

Liz Barentzen, CAQ: Is there anything else that feels important to mention?

First, Accounting+ is a coalition effort — major firms, state societies, educators, NABA Inc., AICPA, and more. That’s unusual in professional pipeline work, and it’s been essential to our scale and credibility. When students see the whole profession showing up, not just one firm recruiting for itself, it signals something different.

Second, we’re at the five-year mark, and we’ve seen meaningful movement. But this isn’t a problem you solve in five years. The question now is how we sustain momentum, continue adapting to a changing landscape, and ensure this generation of students has the support they need all the way through — from awareness to enrollment to career success.

Five Minutes with… Niagara Cares’ Ann Canela

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

For this installment of Five Minutes With, NationSwell sat down with Ann Canela, director of Corporate Giving at Niagara Bottling and head of Niagara Cares, to talk about the new “Love Your Happy Place” campaign — a colorful, citywide initiative encouraging people to show love for the places they call home.

Rooted in behavioral science and built on empathy rather than guilt, the campaign aims to make environmental action feel joyful, personal, and contagious — proving that small, “too-small-to-fail” acts can add up to big community impact.

Here’s what Ann had to say:

NationSwell: What was the inspiration for this kind of community-focused coalition building? What are the main goals of the initiative? 

Ann Canela, head of Niagara Cares: The “Love Your Happy Place” campaign began as a national initiative but drew its real inspiration from local communities. The idea was to spark local “too-small-to-fail” actions — picking up litter, recycling, joining a cleanup — that collectively show love for where we live. Grounded in behavioral science, we studied why recycling rates stagnate, following people in their daily routines to understand their confidence, confusion, and barriers. What we found was that emotion — especially empathy and optimism — moves people more effectively than guilt or logic. This insight shaped a campaign that leaned into joy, play, and gamification in order to motivate environmental action.

Our first pilot in Austin wrapped the city in messages of love — from murals and bus wraps to community events—and boosted recycling confidence and civic pride by double digits. That success has since expanded to San Diego, where coalitions of partners are leading beach cleanups, park recycling competitions, and tree plantings, with activations culminating around Valentine’s Day and Earth Month. The model is spreading rapidly — next stops include Denver, Los Angeles, Dallas, and Oakland — and has already earned Keep America Beautiful’s award for Best Sustainable Communications. It’s a campaign powered by optimism, local pride, and the belief that love, expressed through small daily actions, can create measurable change.

NationSwell: What do you think it is about small coalitions that activates this optimism or civic pride lever in folks’ brains? 

Ann Canela: People see these huge signs that say love and it’s disruptive, it makes you stop and look, but it’s also universal. Love is something everyone understands; to me, it’s the purpose of everything. The challenge with many climate-related campaigns is that we often ask too much of individuals. But when you break it down into small, tangible actions — like picking up a piece of litter on a walk — and remind people that thousands of others are doing the same, the collective impact becomes visible and real.

Those simple acts connect people to a larger purpose. It’s not just about one person recycling or cleaning up; it’s about feeling part of a shared movement that turns small gestures into massive change. There’s a kind of magic in that: When people can see themselves reflected in the solution and recognize that love, expressed through everyday action, truly adds up.

NationSwell: What compelled you to get involved in sustainability in the first place? What galvanized your interest in piloting bold solutions? 

Canela, Niagara Cares: When I joined Niagara, there wasn’t a formal CSR platform, just a family fund rooted in decades of charitable giving. My career throughline has always been strategic philanthropy: using funding in ways that align with a company’s purpose, engage employees, and resonate with consumers. For Niagara, that meant mapping philanthropy to what we make — water — and investing in recycling, water restoration, and disaster relief. Rather than forcing climate work into our business, we’ve focused on making every dollar work smarter, advancing multiple goals at once: driving impact, supporting employee volunteerism, and shifting culture.

As a private, B2B company, we’re not a household name, but our products touch people’s lives daily. That’s why we hold ourselves accountable for every philanthropic investment — we want each dollar to serve both business and community. Beyond funding, we take an active role with grantees: fundraising alongside them, hosting events, and investing deeply in their success. My goal is to help move philanthropy forward — not just by what we fund, but by how we give, ensuring it’s collaborative, strategic, and built for lasting change.

NationSwell: What do you feel is the North Star of your leadership — the principle or ideal you look to in order to be the most effective leader possible? 

Canela, Niagara Cares: I’ve always believed that effective leadership, like strong branding, requires a balance between head and heart. To truly connect with people, you need both strategic clarity and emotional authenticity. I’m not afraid to show emotion; the issues we work on are real and deeply human. My approach is to pair a thoughtful, data-driven strategy with genuine empathy — to be both the mind and the soul of the business. That balance allows me to lead in a way that’s motivational, grounded, and real.

At the same time, none of this work happens alone. Behind every success is a team that inspires me daily, partners who share our vision, and nonprofits doing the hard work on the ground. It’s a collective effort — each part strengthening the other — and I couldn’t be prouder of the people I get to collaborate with. Together, we make each other better and turn strategy into meaningful, lasting impact.

NationSwell: What is exciting you right now? What is the next thing on the horizon that has you really excited? 

Canela, Niagara Cares: What’s exciting is that this is a new strategy for Niagara — we launched it at the start of 2024, so we’re only in our second year. The first year was about benchmarking: understanding what was possible and how to execute it. By year two, we established ambitious KPIs — feeding 150,000 people a month, planting a million trees, and restoring a billion gallons of water over five years. But we’ve already surpassed expectations: 400,000 trees planted this year alone, 70,000 people fed, and water goals we’ll likely reach within 18 months.

Now we’re asking ourselves what’s next — how we can stretch even further and scale our impact. Reevaluating and expanding these goals isn’t just a metric exercise; it’s a reflection of the legacy we want to leave in the world. Seeing how much we can accomplish in such a short time makes me incredibly proud and motivated for what’s ahead.

NationSwell: What, to your mind, is sort of defining the world of philanthropy right now? What are you seeing that is giving you the most hope? 

Canela, Niagara Cares: In corporate philanthropy, the shifting flow of money is redefining everything. Funding models are changing so quickly that many nonprofit leaders are struggling to adapt — but what I find hopeful is how many corporate peers are stepping up to help. Companies are working more closely with partners, offering flexible funding, and showing real empathy for the challenges nonprofits face. I recently joined a roundtable on the state of corporate giving where people were moved to tears — and to me, that emotion reflects deep commitment to sustaining impact in uncertain times.

Even as traditional funding sources dry up, I’m inspired by the innovation happening across the sector. Nonprofits are reorganizing, forming new partnerships, and finding creative ways to stay resilient. We may see more collaboration and consolidation, but not collapse — and that gives me tremendous hope. There’s a shared determination, both in business and philanthropy, to evolve together and continue supporting the work that matters most.

Five Minutes with… Katie Levey of TCS Digital Empowers

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

As technology continues to reshape every industry, too many workers and communities are at risk of being left behind. The Digital Opportunity Playbook, developed by the Tata Consultancy Services’ Digital Empowers team with partners across business, government, and the nonprofit sector, offers a practical roadmap for closing that gap. Drawing on insights gleaned from more than 70 leaders nationwide, the playbook outlines four “plays” that help communities and employers move from access to agency: expanding digital inclusion, strengthening K–12 STEM, building digital confidence, and reskilling adults for meaningful careers.

At a moment of rapidly shifting workforce needs, the Digital Opportunity Playbook is designed to help industry and community partners act together to align economic growth with equity by ensuring digital skills and pathways are accessible.

For this installment of Five Minutes With… NationSwell sat down with Katie Levey — Global Program Director of Digital Empowers — to learn about how the playbook came together, what it reveals about the future of work, and where the work is headed next.

NationSwell: Can you give us an overview of the playbook’s scope — how does it build upon TCS’s legacy of community investment?

Katherine Levey, Global Program Director, Digital Empowers: TCS has a long history of supporting underinvested communities’ entry into the digital economy through STEM, literacy, entrepreneurial and career readiness programs.

Digital Empowers builds on that legacy by bringing together stakeholders across sectors to collaborate on these issues. Sometimes that looks like research, insights, and webinars; other times, it looks more like collective action with partners who are working toward specific solutions in STEM, digital opportunity, or workforce readiness.

Before moving forward with the playbook, we spoke with 70 leaders from business, government, and nonprofits across the U.S. to help us understand where the need was greatest. From those conversations, we identified four key themes, or “plays,” that form the foundation of our work: expanding digital inclusion, strengthening K–12 STEM, building digital confidence, and reskilling adults for high-demand careers. 

NationSwell: What makes the playbook unique — how does it stand apart from other reports or initiatives in the space?

Levey, Digital Empowers: Unlike many white papers, the playbook draws on interviews with a wide cross-section of stakeholders to define problems as communities and industry see them together. The process took a lot of time, all of which proved to be a valuable investment. It  gave us a really strong pulse check on shifting needs and perspectives. The findings now serve as a foundation for collaboration through regional events and the new national Digital Opportunity Council.

The response from stakeholders has been consistent as we’ve shared elements of the playbook: Across companies and communities, there’s strong alignment around ideas related to workforce reskilling needs. These aren’t abstract “future of work” conversations anymore — the challenges are here and now. With limited funding and increasing constraints, collaboration is essential, and this initiative is designed to create the partnerships needed to address them.

NationSwell: During the course of those interviews, did you uncover any particularly surprising insights that might be surprising to readers?

Levey, Digital Empowers: Two points really stood out for us: First, in the workforce, there’s growing recognition that, while four-year degrees remain important, alternative pathways are  critical for the many people who can’t immediately access a bachelor’s degree. Companies are increasingly exploring credentialing, learn-to-work programs, and apprenticeships as viable routes to support opportunity.

Second, when we talk about STEM education, we’re not just talking about technical skills anymore. There’s a strong push to integrate social and emotional learning — soft skills like problem solving, leadership, communication, and the ability to collaborate and contextualize work. What surprised me is how often practitioners emphasized that this isn’t a “nice to have”; it’s essential. To ground AI and other technologies in the real world, people need both technical literacy and human skills. Teaching STEM proficiency alone isn’t enough. Without addressing barriers to areas like resilience and belonging, these technical skills can only go so far. The combination of STEM and social-emotional learning is what truly prepares people to thrive.

NationSwell: How does TCS define its role in shaping inclusive digital ecosystems, and what do you see as your responsibility beyond the private sector?

Levey, Digital Empowers: This work is really part of our DNA. TCS’ parent group, Tata Sons, was founded in 1868 with a vision to help India grow and develop. As the company grew into a global enterprise, Tata has invested in communities through skilling, literacy, and partnerships with diverse populations around the world, and that legacy of community investment continues to shape how we operate today.

With Digital Empowers, our focus is on building an inclusive ecosystem by working with communities rather than imposing solutions. While we run STEM-education, literacy and other programs nationwide, this initiative — and the playbook — has been more about listening: we’re gathering feedback, learning from different perspectives, engaging stakeholders closest to the issues, and bringing corporate partners into the fold. Through regional events and advisory councils, we’re ensuring collaboration is built in at every step.

NationSwell: What are the next steps for Digital Empowers after this report — and what are your call-ins for the NationSwell community?

Levey, Digital Empowers: Digital Empowers is launching a series of regional events, Collaborating for Connected Futures, in New York, Detroit, Chicago, and Dallas to take the playbook deeper at the community level. The first, held in New York during UN Week, will bring civic, industry, and nonprofit leaders together to explore digital inclusion, hear directly from community voices, and spark new partnerships that adapt the four “plays” locally.

In parallel, we’re also establishing the Digital Opportunity Council — a national forum of companies and select nonprofits committed to expanding digital opportunity and workforce development. Designed to be light on time but high on impact, the Council will focus on digital skills, workforce readiness, and community partnership, with members connecting regularly to co-define problem statements and co-design informed solutions. We are currently accepting partners interested in serving on the Council.

To learn more about opportunities to get involved, reach out here.

Five Minutes With… Lisa Lawson, president and CEO of the Annie E. Casey Foundation

Posted on by Brianna Provenzano

For this installment of 5 Minutes With, NationSwell sat down with Lisa Lawson, president and CEO of the Annie E. Casey Foundation, to talk about her new book, Thrive: How the Science of the Adolescent Brain Helps Us Imagine a Better Future for All Children.

The book explores how breakthroughs in adolescent brain science reveal what young people need to thrive, why our systems so often fail to provide those essentials, and how families, communities, and institutions can come together to build the stable relationships, opportunities, and supports that help all children reach their full potential.

We asked Lisa what the research means for educators, policymakers, and young people themselves — here’s what she had to say:

NationSwell: Your book weaves together a lot of powerful new insights from brain science. How should this research change the way educators, youth leaders, or policymakers show up for young people?

Lisa Lawson, president and CEO of the Annie E. Casey Foundation: The research is clear: young people’s brains are still under construction through their mid-20s — especially the parts that control judgment, planning and emotional regulation. We also know they are wired for rewards, highly influenced by peers and learn best when they’re actively engaged rather than passively instructed. That means that some of the behaviors we sometimes label as defiance in young people is often just development in action.

Knowing this, we should redesign systems to work with the adolescent brain, not against it. That means moving beyond one-size-fits-all instruction and embracing hands-on, real-world learning; shifting from compliance to connection; prioritizing relationships and rewards; and creating meaningful opportunities for young people to shape programs and policies that affect their lives. 

As I write in Thrive, when we align our programs and policies with what science tells us young people need, we not only set them up for success — we strengthen our workforce, our communities and our country’s future.

NationSwell: We know relationships and real opportunities are essential for kids to thrive. Where do you see the biggest disconnect between what the science says and what young people actually get from our systems today?

Lawson: The science tells us teens need caring adults and chances to learn and lead. But our systems too often offer punishment without purpose and rules without relationships. 

In foster care, for example, tens of thousands of teens age out each year without a permanent family. Many want to be adopted, but to do so, they may be forced to cut legal ties with their birth family. That’s why the Annie E. Casey Foundation partnered with young people to create the SOUL Family Framework. It lets youth choose a circle of caring adults who can support them legally — without cutting off their existing connections. Kansas has been the first state in the nation to create a SOUL Family legal permanency option. 

At the end of the day, if we want different outcomes, we need different systems that trust young people’s voices and build with, not for, them.

NationSwell: Unequal experiences of adolescence often ripple into lifelong inequities; what does it look like in practice to make sure every young person — especially those growing up in poverty or foster care — has a fair chance to thrive?

Lawson: It starts with meeting their most basic needs. When young people are just trying to survive — worrying about food, housing, health care or safety — they can’t thrive.

That’s why “basic needs” is one of the five essentials the Foundation invests in through our Thrive by 25 ® effort. But we go beyond survival. We work with communities to ensure youth have stable relationships, flexible education paths, real work opportunities and chances to lead.

NationSwell: Outside of formal systems, what role do you see families and neighborhoods playing in putting brain science into action for everyday adolescent development?

Lawson: Families and communities are such an important part of the construction crew for the bridge to adulthood. Brain science tells us teens are wired for rewards and responsive to relationships — which means parents, neighbors, coaches and mentors have enormous influence.

Just being present, especially during the messy moments, is powerful. The guidance of one caring adult can buffer trauma, strengthen resilience and shape a young person’s sense of identity and possibility.

Even small acts of support — like a teacher who listens, a neighbor who offers a job or a relative who sticks around — can anchor a young person during this period of immense growth.

NationSwell: If you could wave a wand and get policymakers to make one change tomorrow that aligns with what we now know about adolescent development, what would it be and why?

Lawson: I would have policymakers shift from crisis response to prevention. Too often, our systems only engage with young people after something has gone wrong — after they’ve dropped out, gotten in trouble or landed in foster care. But adolescent brain science tells us prevention isn’t just more humane — it’s also smarter and more cost-effective.

Imagine if our child welfare systems invested as much in strengthening families on the front end as they do in out-of-home placements. Or if our cities dramatically expanded summer job programs and mentorship opportunities, which we know reduce the likelihood that young people will come into contact with the justice system.

Policies that reflect adolescent development would focus on building stability, opportunity and connection before a young person falls into crisis. That shift would not only change individual lives — it would strengthen our workforce, our communities and our country’s future.

NationSwell: Finally, thinking about NationSwell’s community of leaders and changemakers: if there’s one call to action you’d want them to take from Thrive, what would it be?

Lawson: I would call on them to use their influence to shift the narrative about adolescence. Too often, we see teenagers through a deficit lens — focusing on what’s wrong instead of what’s possible. Thrive makes the case that adolescence is one of the most powerful windows of opportunity we have to shape the future.

That means every leader, no matter their sector, has a role to play in building a stronger “bridge” from childhood to adulthood. I use this metaphor throughout the book because adolescence really is a long, sometimes shaky crossing. Young people are still developing the skills and supports they’ll need to stand firmly on the other side. When the bridge is missing planks or guardrails, too many fall through. But when we reinforce it with caring adults, real opportunities and policies grounded in science, we give every young person a sturdy path forward.

Policymakers can invest in prevention instead of waiting for crisis. Employers can create meaningful first-job experiences. Communities can make sure every young person has at least one caring adult walking alongside them.

If NationSwell’s leaders step up in these ways — guided by the science and by the voices of young people themselves — we can ensure this generation doesn’t just make it across the bridge, but thrives once they do. And when our young people thrive, so does our country.