This is an Eval Central archive copy, find the original at medium.com/innovationnetwork.
By Shelli Golson-Mickens and Alissa Marchant
Across the country, those committed to equity are facing a chilling reality: the language and practices of diversity, equity, and inclusion are being politicized, constrained, and in many places, outright banned. Like many others, we’ve felt the worry, grief, and disorientation these shifts bring. Yet, equity work is not disappearing — it’s adapting. In this moment, we’re seeing a wave of creativity, pragmatism, and values-based innovation from leaders who find new ways to continue pushing for justice.
The context in which we work has changed so quickly since we’ve co-authored the Equitable Communications Guide with our Innovation Network colleagues in 2023! Recently, I (Shelli Golson-Mickens) have been reflecting deeply on those changes and returning to the guide — not with fresh eyes, but with refreshed ones. Eyes that are tired from my personal experience navigating resistance, yet still hopeful about the possibilities that can emerge from this challenge. And I (Alissa Marchant) have been looking for answers, in and outside of our guide, for reframing the horrifying narratives of hate that seem to dehumanize certain groups in our country. We co-authored this blog together in the collective “we” and specify who is speaking when we are sharing a unique perspective. We are both exploring what it looks like to stay committed to equity when the landscape around us is perpetually unstable. And we’re not alone — we’ve tapped into conversations others around the field are having. Here’s what we are learning.
Lessons Learned
Speak Strategically Without Losing Substance
I (Shelli) was recently inspired by Dr. Julie Sweetland, who shared the reminder, “Messaging is not about saying what’s most true, it’s about saying what’s most strategic.” In conservative contexts, this might mean choosing language that resonates with shared values — like fairness, opportunity, and local control — rather than leading with terms like “equity” or “structural racism,” which can sometimes trigger resistance. Sweetland calls this “values-forward communication,” and it’s one way equity practitioners are still doing the work — just with more intention around framing.
For example, instead of talking about “equity in data,” some advocates are discussing “complete and accurate data” or “community-informed insights,” emphasizing the practical benefits of inclusive practices without abandoning the principles behind them. Dr. Sweetland’s framework resonates deeply with me on a personal level. It reflects the lessons I received growing up in a family that emphasized using language as a tool for advancing community goals. In our conservative context, with our Black identities, moving toward justice wasn’t optional. We were taught to say what needed to be said to achieve our outcome. My parents and grandparents didn’t have a formal title for this communication, but the strategy was the same: communicate with purpose, rooted in the needs of the community.
This strategy continues to resonate. The goal is not to water down equity — it’s to keep momentum in the face of opposition.
Shift from Problem-Fixers to Community-Builders
I (Alissa) had an aha-moment when I read the recent Stanford Social Innovation Review article, “From Fixers to Builders.” I’ve known about “asset framing” for decades — lifting up stories of community visioning, mutual aid, and transformative solutions already taking root. When I was in graduate school, my program called this using a “strengths-based perspective.”
What felt new was applying asset framing to systems, and not just to people. I began to reflect on all the times I complained about the shortcomings of our government and societal issues; while there is absolutely space for improvement, these systems can also be part of our solutions. By only pointing out flaws, had I been contributing to a narrative that there was nothing worth saving about these institutions, a narrative that has recently culminated in shocking government cuts and elimination of supports for our most vulnerable by DOGE and the Trump administration? I believe that problems at scale require solutions at scale, and that asset-framing at the systems level can help us identify what those solutions can be.
Including positive framing for our institutions doesn’t mean ignoring harm. But it does mean pairing harms with successes and potential remedies. Asset-based framing can help shift public understanding of who holds knowledge and power and invite more people to imagine themselves as part of the solution.
Double Down on Community Collaboration
We are in a time of uncertainty, and like us, some organizations are reinforcing their commitment to co-creation and shared storytelling. When we look again at the lessons in the Equitable Communications Guide through the lens of today’s challenging political environment, we think most important is to:
· Involve community in crafting narratives. No one understands the risk of communicating evaluation findings (good and bad) as well as those who contributed data to our evaluations. They can tell us whether there are findings that can be weaponized by opposition, and how we can best get the information across without putting the cause at risk.
· Create space for dialogue, not just dissemination. We strive to co-learn with our partners by inviting questions and including them in interpretation. Through shared learning we build trust, foster understanding, and stay grounded in the realities of those most affected by our work.
· Protect anonymity and trust. Suddenly, data that identifies who was involved in advocacy feels sensitive. We’re rethinking data privacy and adding extra controls. This is even more urgent for data related to LGBTQ+ people, Black activists, and other groups who are being targeted in this political context.
Honor the Emotional Weight of Strategic Shifts
These adaptive strategies, while necessary, are not without cost — especially for people from marginalized communities. It can feel painful, even dehumanizing, to navigate spaces where your lived experience must be softened or strategically reframed just to be heard or supported. For many, myself (Shelli) included, the idea of avoiding explicit terms like “racism” or “equity” to gain traction can feel like erasure. This feeling is real. We want to name and honor the emotional labor involved in making these shifts. The work of narrative strategy isn’t about silencing truth, though it can feel that way — it’s about choosing how to speak truth in ways that preserve progress and keep the door open for transformative change. Those who are carrying this burden while still pushing the work forward, we see you and I feel you.
Rad Resources
1. The Equitable Communications Guide. Our guide draws from cross-disciplinary research to offer practical strategies for communicating data findings equitably. In the current political climate — this guide is more relevant than ever. It’s a reminder that equitable communication is about so much more than word choice, it’s about relationship-building, trust, and intentional framing.
2. Talking Data Equity with Julie Sweetland. In a We All Count Talking Data Equity, Dr. Julie Sweetland of the FrameWorks Institute shared values-driven guidance for communicating about equity in politically charged environments. She emphasized that messaging is not just about saying what is most accurate, but about saying what is most strategic, using “values-forward communication.”
3. From Fixers to Builders. In this SSIR article, Nayantara Sen and Sonya Renee Taylor call on social change leaders to move beyond problem-centered narratives to stories rooted in vision, agency, and possibility.
Adjusting Language in a Shifting Political Landscape was originally published in InnovationNetwork on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.