How organizations choose to frame this issue matters both internally and externally to the GBV field. There is a need to use language that reflects the root of the issue – the overrepresentation of white women in leadership positions rather than the underrepresentation of women of color. A shift in focus will put the onus on white supremacy rather than the perceived deficits of women of color.

Participants suggested coalitions adopt trauma-informed policies that considered both individual trauma but also historical and intergenerational trauma. While these policies would be beneficial for all staff, they would disproportionately benefit women of color. This is crucial given that so many women of color carry unique burdens of historical trauma, state violence, and white supremacist cultural violence and are overwhelmingly survivors of interpersonal violence.

The coalition should be deeply invested in developing organizational anti-racist practices and Inclusive cultures meant collectively defining racial equity, adopting anti-racist policies, and integrating a racial justice focus into the entire organization. Organizations can create measurable outcomes on racial equity, developing a Board of Directors that includes community members, or develop anti-racist policies that include how organizations deal with the external experiences of racism and white supremacy.

Hiring an organizational development consultant that specializes in anti-racist practices to support people while bringing them into greater alignment with the movement’s values is essential. At an individual level, the organization can invest in coaching services for women of color to support them through working in predominantly white institutions. White women can also engage in caucusing and coaching around their internalized racial dominance.

Participants stated that white women rely on their social networks to make advancements into leadership positions. This places women of color at a disadvantage for being aware of and obtaining opportunities. As positions arise, white women often do not think about women of color nor reach out to them for positions. Networking events, mentor matching, and offering more collaborative opportunities across hierarchies are all possibilities to disrupt and infiltrate white dominated social networks.

Many participants wanted coalitions to create more skill-building opportunities. This goes beyond simple skills that were too basic or trainings that did not consider the antagonistic context where women of color were situated. Participants recommended offering leadership coaching, or formalized planning with someone to set and meet specific leadership goals. In addition, participants wanted training that focus on providing application of acquired skills rather than only knowledge acquisition.

Coalitions would have to be strategic about how they plan to support women leaders of color both internally and externally. Women of color leaders reported internal difficulties in getting white women to trust their leadership if they did occupy those roles. Coalitions and its member programs were often become inflexible and unforgiving. Participants believed that white women who were new to leadership were given more leeway to get adjusted to their positions and make mistakes compared to women of color. In other cases, internally the organization was supportive, but external institutions did not respect their leadership.

Variable and flexible funding are also recommended to increase leadership and opportunities for women of color. Women of color could choose what type of leadership development programs they wanted to participate in, and funds could take care of upfront costs to attend that program. Another way to support funding is to provide grants for women to carry out grassroots projects in their communities.

Given that women of color are often systematically regulated to “doer” roles within the organization, one recommendation is to integrate more strategic thinking and institutional power into the roles lower in the leadership hierarchy. Another recommendation is for the leadership style of the organization to become more participatory to ensure that all members have equal opportunity to engage in organizational decision making. This would allow women of color to then talk about these experiences when they apply for leadership positions.

The GBV movement is not unique with its issues of racism and white supremacy given how deeply ingrained these issues are within the social, cultural, economic, and political fabric of the United States. Making a concerted effort to connect with other movements and gather ideas and strategies about how they have appraised and responded to the overrepresentation of white women in leadership positions would advance the GBV field.

The GBV movement should require that people in leadership positions develop succession plans. The movement should also move towards placing term limits on leadership positions and implementing co-leadership models. The recommendation could extend to all leaders in the movement who have been in their positions for multiple years. However, given that many current leaders in this movement are white women, this predominantly means that white women need to move towards shorter leadership terms as this will provide more opportunities for women of color to take on these roles.

The movement needs to establish formal mentoring networks at the field level for women of color that are led by women of color who invested in building opportunities and increasing options for women. These pathways must be supportive and crucial for women of color’s development.

Long-term institutional change for anti-racist practice needs to be considered and continuously implemented and people need to be held accountable to these standards. At a field level, it would be important to identify who implements and holds others accountable in the movement and is not tied to funders? What kind of formalized systems can we put in place to respond to practices of white superiority?

Coalitions and other institutions within the GBV field define leadership by white normative standards which create exclusionary policies and practices that disproportionately impact women of color. There is also a need for women of color to define, on their own terms, what leadership is outside of whiteness, and get specific about how to train people within their organizations.

In addition, women of color also need opportunities to brainstorm, strategize, and implement how to navigate and respond to racist work environments, determine a collective voice and message, focus on ways to center communities of color at the organizational level, and think about the intersections between survivorship and leadership.

The current, and most common response, to the issue of overrepresentation of white women in leadership positions are leadership development programs. Many participants viewed these as quick fixes. If the movement locates the problem as women of color needing to advance skills, then it becomes solely women of color’s burden to change racist systems