In 2023, Camber Collective and the Economic Mobility & Opportunity team at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) partnered to publish and disseminate a first-of-its-kind meta-analysis of life experiences that contribute to lifetime income—and the different ways in which Americans perceive the impact of these life experiences.

In the United States and in absolute intergenerational terms, economic mobility has been declining for decades. While plenty of research has been conducted to understand the different causes and manifestations of this decline, few have looked at the relative importance of diverse experiences along the life path, nor integrated the beliefs and experiences of people across the country at such scale. Applying these prisms availed an opportunity to fill the evidence gaps; bring data to inform investments, programs, and policies; and begin to challenge common misbeliefs around the largely systemic drivers of economic prospects.

The study identifies the relative economic impact of 28 different life experiences from birth through adulthood, drawing upon a meta-analysis of peer-reviewed academic literature, program evaluations, expert consultations, and a first-of-its kind survey of 4000 Americans to provide important lived experience insights. We are excited to expand upon, and disseminate, our findings throughout 2024 as part of Camber’s new research series Mobility Experiences: A Research Series on Pathways to Economic Mobility. Key insights will be made available to technical user groups such as funders, local decision-makers, and direct service delivery organizations at the community level, alongside a broader push to embed findings within the general public discourse via media and website dissemination.

When we center people in research, our insights are consistently richer—supplementing the ‘what’ with the ‘why’ and the ‘how’. The Mobility Experiences research not only strengthens the evidence base of what is already shown to contribute to economic mobility, it also highlights opportunities for further investigation to strengthen evidence on the impact of life experiences we known to be critical, but for which evidence is currently less abundant. Moreover, this research helps to start shed light on the biases and inequities of traditional academic methods where the experiences of marginalized communities are often erased in data.

As a firm, we are hopeful this report activates greater, and more effective, investment toward research and integrated interventions that eliminate barriers and enhance access to important experiences across the life course for more Americans. We look forward to providing follow-on support to organizations who express interest in applying these findings, via more sustained technical assistance.

Summary

• In the US, students’ backgrounds and factors such as race and family income continue to be predictors of academic success. Alternative free public-school options, such as high-quality charter schools, can represent just one of several avenues through which to challenge this status quo.
• Through Camber’s work in the charter sector, we come to the thesis that several key equity principles are core to the success of charter school programs in equalizing opportunity for quality public-school education, particularly for students from families who have been historically marginalized.
• These equity principles include: a diverse and inclusive curriculum, responsive community engagement, leadership that is reflective of the students served, restorative—rather than punitive—discipline, and equitable resources and services.

photo credit: Unsplash

Our work

Camber Collective has had the opportunity to work in the charter school sector, learning from and collaborating with charter school parents, founders, funders, and organizing partners across the topics of sector strategy and sustainability. While perspectives on charter schools can vary, we see their potential to serve as just one of several means of strengthening equitable access to high-quality public-school education by serving a broad range of student and family needs, with the ultimate goal of improving academic outcomes and advancing students’ pursuit of postsecondary pathways.

Across the US, charter school operating models vary widely across states, districts, and individual schools. School-by-school differences are particularly visible in regard to schools’ incorporation of practices and principles rooted in equity, spanning curriculum content, enrollment practices, leadership diversity, and community-based partnerships. While some charter schools have been successful in providing high-quality education accompanied by equity-based practices serving students and communities that are under-resourced or have been historically marginalized, others are underperforming in this arena. Through our work, we have identified several key equity principles that are common across the most inclusive and high-performing charter schools and initiatives, which could serve as a model for both new and existing charters to follow.

Background on charter schools

Charter schools originated in the US in the 1970s, based on the idea of an organized group of teachers setting up a contract or “charter” with their school district to employ innovative approaches to public school education. The concept of charter schools is rooted in a progressive (though not always realized) ideal: that by allowing public school teachers and leaders to work with greater freedom to meet the needs of their children, they might achieve a higher rate of student success while remaining in—and ideally strengthening—the overall public school system, by offering innovative services and building the evidence base for best practices.

Charter School Statistics in the United States, 2020-2021 School Year

Source: National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. 2022 Data Digest: Charter School Coverage.

While charter schools are similar to traditional public schools in that they are publicly funded (though, on average, at a level 25% less than district counterparts on a per-student basis¹); offer free and reduced-price lunch; provide programs to support students with disabilities; and are accountable to state and national education standards, there are several key differences between the two. The differentiated offering of charter schools centers on the school’s ability to offer flexibility: choice for teachers to provide innovative instruction and to design classrooms personalized for students, ideally guided by leaders who have the flexibility to try new ideas and create a school culture that mirrors and supports the surrounding community².

What do charter schools have to offer?

“Nothing works like a charter school that is high performing…
they can go into the toughest situations and turn things around for every kid”
–National charter school sector leader & advocate.

Charter school advocates call attention to the fact that the traditional public school system is working for many, but not all, students; research shows that students that come from families with low-income backgrounds or students of Black and Latino* families are most often the ones left behind³. In theory, charter schools have the opportunity to offer an alternative, high-quality, public-school option to families, and in particular those families underserved by the traditional public system. Recent studies provide evidence of charter schools delivering higher quality academic results for students relative to traditional district public schools (equivalent to an additional 16 days of learning in reading, and six days in math)⁴. Notably, the vast majority—if not all—of charter school academic outperformance in recent years is being driven by learning gains for Black and Latino students.

Academic Results by Race

Source: Stanford University, Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO), 2023.

Public opinion and debate

According to survey polls, public favorability of charter schools has been modestly trending upward in recent years, most notably amongst Black survey respondents⁵.

Percent of the U.S. population in support of charter schools, 2016-2022

Source: Education Next, Education Next Survey of Public Opinion (poll results, 2016-2022).

Despite this uptick in public support, charter schools have been the subject of ongoing controversy across the US. Critiques of the sector center on the practices and procedures of charter schools themselves—including whether they equitably serve all students regardless of race, class, disability, or spoken language⁶, in addition to the real and/or perceived opportunity cost of funding charter schools relative to the public school system.

While charter schools remain a significant component of our public school system (enrolling over 7% of the total public-school population), a constructive debate should focus on building towards policy and practices that promote accessible, high-quality public schools with the goal of advancing equal educational opportunity for all students.

 “Schools and school leaders who are clear on their values and what they’re trying to create, focused on sense of community and school culture and united on a common vision, combined with high standards of achievement and execution. Those are the schools that are doing the best.”
– Charter school policy & advocacy expert

The equity imperative

photo credit: Unsplash

We have learned throughout our work that charter schools across the continuum stand to benefit from integrating community-tailored equity principles into their operating models. Charter school leaders, administrators, and sector partners can disrupt the cycles of racism, segregation, and inequitable opportunity for students and families who have experienced less privilege in the U.S. education systems by maintaining a deep focus on and commitment to equity principles. If executed well, charter schools can be one effective tool in the pursuit of educational equality in the United States.

Our lessons learned: equity principles in charter schools

Charter schools are not automatic drivers of equity, but they do have the potential to advance equity when they are focused on implementing a variety of strategies that prioritize equitable access and outcomes for all students. In pursuit of offering a nurturing, inclusive, and race-conscious education option to students and families seeking a high-quality public school, the following principles may be considered as optimal:

1. Diverse and inclusive curriculum: Students will benefit from the incorporation of inclusive teaching practices that accommodate those with various learning styles and abilities⁷. A wide range of leaders in the field stress the importance of developing a curriculum that reflects the cultural, ethnic, and linguistic diversity of the student population. Schools should be prioritizing culturally responsive teaching strategies that affirm the identities and experiences of all students, challenging a traditionally dominant narrative or teaching methodology.
   
   “[In addition to academic achievement], a high-quality school must be anti-racist and community rooted. You can get a school that has knockout academic results but can still be learning in a racist institution.”
   –Charter school non-profit organization leader
   
   
2. Leadership reflective of students served: Recruit and retain a diverse leadership team and teaching staff that reflects the racial, ethnic, and linguistic diversity of the student body; and provide ongoing professional development on culturally responsive teaching. Studies have shown the impact of teacher diversity on student outcomes; increased exposure to same-race teachers is linked to improvements in course grades, students’ attendance, grit and interpersonal self-management⁸. Cultural competency and connection to the lived experience of the students and their families is integral to students’ social-emotional and academic success and sense of belonging.
   
   “There have been a lot of organizations who have worked to change the face of charter [schools] and diversify. It is time to make sure those faces are seen.”
   –Charter school authorizer
   
   
3. Restorative—rather than punitive —discipline: Implement a restorative justice approach to discipline, balancing rigorous academic and behavioral standards with nurturing instruction, positive discipline, and whole-student focused methods. Several charter networks that have been publicly criticized for their strict disciplinary practices (often referred to as the “no excuses” model) that disproportionately impact BIPOC** students or students experiencing learning or behavioral challenges, have since repudiated this punitive approach^9,10. The consideration of a student’s racial and cultural identity, home experience, food security, psychological safety, and social or learning needs should be heavily weighed when forming disciplinary action, incorporating social-emotional learning frameworks and using a trauma-informed approach that prioritizes problem-solving and conflict resolution over punitive measures.
   
   
4. Responsive community engagement: Foster strong partnerships with parents/caretakers and the local community to involve them in decision-making processes and school governance tailored to the unique needs of the school’s students and families. Create a welcoming environment that encourages parent/caretaker involvement including practices of transparent communication, open feedback channels, and earning and maintaining family’s trust. Implement a transparent and fair process for addressing complaints or concerns related to equity.
   
   “Go to community meetings and listen to build the opportunities that communities are looking for. Acknowledge that this takes more time, but it’s a much better approach towards quality [schools].”
   –National charter school sector advocate.
   
   “[We have a] moral imperative to ensure charter work is informed by the families they are serving. There has been a lot of changes in the education system, so want to be sure families and communities are aware of those changes and have a voice in designing their kid’s education.”
   –Charter network CEO
   
   
5. Equitable resources and services: Provide comprehensive special education services and accommodations to students with disabilities and ensure that the Individualized Education Program process is followed rigorously to meet the unique needs of each student with a disability. Offer robust English language learner (ELL) programs to help students who are learning English, and that educators are trained in best practices for teaching ELL students. If charter schools fail to provide adequate services to equitably serve those students with additional needs, a disproportionate burden falls upon nearby district schools to provide for those students.

These suggestions cover some, but not all, equity practices to be considered by charter operators, authorizers, and sector advocates. By actively pursuing these strategies and adopting equity-focused operating models, charter schools can work towards ensuring that all students have the opportunity to thrive, regardless of their background or circumstances.

Questions for further consideration

Policymakers, educators, and communities need to continually evaluate and improve charter school practices to achieve more equitable educational opportunities for all students.

As we move forward in our work within both charter schools and the education systems in the United States, we are considering the following questions:

• How can policymakers, sector leaders, and educators provide guidance and standards for the implementation of equity principles in charter schools across the country?
  
• How do equity principles fit into charter school performance measurement and data?
  
• What is the correct definition of “quality” public education that charter schools should be held accountable to, beyond student academic performance?

We look forward to exploring these challenges further with equity-oriented philanthropies and funders, public agencies, and communities, and continuing to contribute to an equitable charter school system that extends equal opportunity and long-term economic mobility for the many students currently deprived of these possibilities.

---

*While “Hispanic” and “Latino” are often used interchangeably, “Hispanic” generally denotes alignment with Census and other federal data tracking conventions. In this paper, we have used “Latino.”

**BIPOC refers to Black, Indigenous, and People of Color. Camber Collective recognizes that this term, like many others in this dynamic and rapidly changing nomenclature context, does not fully serve all communities or contexts, but we will use it here for the sake of brevity and uniformity.

---

Citations

[1] National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. 2022 Data Digest: Charter School Coverage.

[2] National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. About Charter Schools: What makes a charter school different from any other public school?

[3] The Nation’s Report Card, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NEAP). NEAP Report Card 2022).

[4] Stanford University, Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO). As a Matter of Fact: The National Charter School Study III 2023.

[5] Education Next. Education Next Survey of Public Opinion: Poll results 2016-2022.

[6] The Century Foundation. Advancing Intentional Equity in Charter Schools, 2019.

[7] Communities at the Center, National Alliance for Charter School Authorizers. Education and charter school sector leaders’ anecdotes and testimonials.

[8] The Brookings Institution, “It matters now more than ever: What new developments say about Teacher Diversity and Student Success”. Michael Hansen, Constance A. Lindsay, and Seth Gershenson. August 1, 2022.

[9] KIPP Public Schools, A Letter from David Levin to KIPP Alumni. June 18, 2020.

[10] Columbia University, National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education. Noble Charter Network Joins KIPP in Renouncing “No Excuses” Philosophy. March 22, 2021.

---

Melissa Mullins is an Associate in Camber Collective’s Seattle office. She has eight years of social sector experience, working with nonprofits and foundations in investment planning, operational strategy, and endowment management. Prior to joining Camber, Melissa worked for the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation as the Director of Strategy and Operations within the investment management team. Melissa is also a Birth Doula, most recently working at the San Francisco General Hospital on a volunteer basis, providing one-to-one labor and birth support to under-resourced women and families. In her work, Melissa is focused on economic and health inequities and community wellbeing, specifically addressing the access points, policies, and structural frameworks that cause and perpetuate disparities in social outcomes. Melissa received her Master of Public Affairs from UC Berkeley, where she focused on maternal health, family planning, economic mobility, and policy analysis and design. She also holds a Bachelor degree in Government from Harvard University.

Marc Allen is a Director at Camber Collective and the Shared Prosperity Sector Lead, heading the firm’s Shared Prosperity portfolio. Drawing on his toolkit as a strategist and former policy attorney, Marc leads teams working to strengthen and reimagine our economic and democratic systems. His experience spans strategy and investment design, human-centered research/insights, and coalition-building services for philanthropies, government agencies, multilateral institutions, nonprofits, and socially-invested corporations. More broadly, Marc guides the effectiveness of executive teams in mission-driven organizations, helping to advance their theories of impact, program design, business models, and cultures of belonging.

Amidst the sprawling narrative of climate change, an essential facet often recedes into the backdrop: its gendered dimensions.

Climate change is more than just an environmental concern; it’s an amplifier of existing societal structures and disparities. In the vast and diverse expanse of Africa, this confluence of gender and climate has profound implications for vulnerability, resilience, and empowerment. From the immediate ramifications in sectors where women predominantly work, to the broader challenges and opportunities posed by the shift towards a sustainable green economy, and ultimately, to the envisioning of a world where women’s voices lead and shape the climate discourse — each temporal perspective reveals distinct challenges and pathways to empowerment.

In the short term, women’s vital roles in agriculture, artisanal mining, and market sectors expose them directly to the whims of an unpredictable climate, magnifying vulnerabilities. As we transition to the medium-term, the promise of a green economic transition looms large, but without proactive inclusion, women risk being sidelined in this transformative shift. By the long-term, opportunities emerge to not only address immediate impacts or structural changes, but instead to reimagine the very framework of climate governance through a gender-inclusive lens. Women should not merely be beneficiaries of climate policy, but its architects, driving innovation and holistic solutions.

This multi-temporal lens is not just a structure; it’s an imperative. To holistically address the gendered dimensions of climate change, it is vital to understand the intertwined challenges, risks, and opportunities across different time horizons.

Short-term challenges: The immediate gendered impact and African women at the frontline

In the vibrant tapestry of African economies, women emerge as the unspoken anchors, particularly in sectors that are now facing the brunt of climate change’s onslaught. Their daily endeavors, often rooted in the land and the environment, are directly threatened, translating environmental changes into immediate challenges for their households, communities, and, by extension, entire economies.

Agriculture: the lifestream of many, now under siege

In countries spanning from the Sahelian regions to the Great Rift Valley, agriculture stands as a testament to women’s resilience and ingenuity. A majority of the small-scale farmers in sub-Saharan Africa are women,[1] and they are responsible for producing a significant portion of the continent’s food. However, with climate change disrupting rainfall patterns, prolonged droughts and unexpected floods are becoming annual calamities. These aren’t just climatic anomalies; for many women, they mean failed harvests, escalating debts, and nights when their children go to bed hungry. Beyond immediate food security, these impacts exacerbate already prevalent challenges: limited access to agricultural training, credit facilities, and advanced farming tools.

The bustling informal markets: Critical social infrastructure at risk

In numerous African cities, from the alleyways of Marrakech to the busy streets of Accra, the informal market sector buzzes with activity and is predominantly steered by women. These markets, vital for local economies, are incredibly sensitive to climate perturbations. A single flood can wash away a woman’s inventory, accumulated over months or even years. An unexpected heatwave can render perishable goods unsellable. Furthermore, climate-driven changes in market systems can negatively impact informal vendors’ ability to stay afloat, particularly if they don’t have access to formal financial services. For many women in these markets, there’s no safety net; a climate-induced setback can mean spiraling into debt or pushing their families further into poverty.

Artisanal and small-scale mining: vulnerable yet vital

Across Africa, women make up nearly half of the artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) workforce.[2] Often existing outside of the formal labor market, these women regularly operate under dangerous and uncertain conditions that leave them particularly vulnerable to both the economic and physical risks of climate change. Without access to skills, resourcing, and legal protections, female miners are disproportionately exposed to the financial and safety risks of an already dangerous profession. To make matters worse, the green transition will require significant increases in the precious metals like cobalt and lithium that fuel “green” technologies. Female miners will likely bear much of the burden of this increased demand.

In understanding the short-term ramifications of climate change through this gendered lens, we witness a theme: it’s not just about economic output or statistical figures but the lived experiences of countless women, the narratives of families under duress, and the ripple effects that shape communities and nations. Climate change and its consequences underscore long-standing socio-economic vulnerabilities—and addressing these immediate impacts is crucial, not just for the women affected, but also for the social fabric of the African continent.

Medium-term risks and potential: navigating the green transition – Paving the way for inclusive sustainability

The clarion call for a green, sustainable future resonates across continents, and Africa stands at a unique intersection of challenges and opportunities. However, the green transition is a uniquely double-edged sword: while the green economy offers vast potential, its dawn risks leaving women vulnerable to unintended hardships. This phase demands more than just economic adaptation; it requires a societal metamorphosis that champions inclusivity and equity at its core.

Emerging green industries: Doors half-open?

With the decline of traditional, resource-intensive industries, the green economy promises a myriad of new job opportunities. Sectors like renewable energy, sustainable agriculture, and eco-tourism are burgeoning. However, this shift will also necessitate massive transitions within existing job markets, and without intentional interventions, women are likely to suffer the most from these transitions. As job markets change, studies suggest that gender attitudes drive economic inequities for women during times of financial hardship.[3]

Similarly, women are more likely to miss out on the opportunities afforded by the green transition: as jobs evolve, there’s an urgent need for training and reskilling programs. Yet, due to societal norms and logistical barriers, women may find it harder to access these programs. Whether it’s a solar technician course in a distant town or an online certification hindered by a lack of internet access, the challenge is dual-faceted: making green jobs accessible and ensuring women can access them. Overcoming this means not only creating green job openings but actively dismantling barriers that prevent women from seizing them.

Financial inclusion: more than just access

While the green transition promises innovative solutions, these often come with a price tag. Access to credit, loans, and financial literacy becomes crucial. Yet, many women often find themselves sidelined in the financial landscape. As green businesses emerge and sustainable projects are greenlit, ensuring women entrepreneurs and workers have the financial tools to engage becomes paramount.

Policy frameworks: From neutral to gender-responsive

As countries lay down the regulatory frameworks for the green transition, there’s a risk of these policies being gender-neutral, rather than gender-responsive. For the transition to be genuinely inclusive, policies need to be crafted with a conscious understanding of the unique challenges and potentials women bring to the table. This includes, but is not limited to, affirmative action, targeted grants for women-led green ventures, and mentorship programs.

In the medium term, as Africa navigates the intricate challenges of sustainability, the undercurrent remains: a green future that isn’t inclusive is a half-realized dream. The green transition is as much about technology and industries as it is about people—and ensuring that women are empowered participants, leaders, and beneficiaries in this journey is a non-negotiable.

Long-term opportunities: Amplifying women in climate leadership – the catalyst for holistic solutions

As we cast our gaze to the distant horizon of the climate struggle, the long-term view isn’t just about enduring resilience, but about nurturing a more inclusive vision of leadership in climate spaces. Historically, women’s voices have been relegated to the peripheries of climate decision-making, but the long-term combat against climate change necessitates their central role. For a challenge as vast and multifaceted as climate change, the solutions too must be interwoven with diverse insights, and women hold the keys to many of these nuanced understandings.

The multidimensional lens of women leaders

Women, with their multifaceted roles as informal leaders, community organizers, caregivers, and innovators, often have a deeply holistic understanding of societal ecosystems. Female leadership can help ensure that unintended consequences of climate initiatives, much like the green transition, are mitigated via awareness and understanding of local and community needs. When these insights percolate up to decision-making echelons, they ensure that climate policies are not just reactive but are anticipatory, comprehensive, and deeply empathetic.

Local knowledge, global impact

At the grassroots, women often serve as the custodians of traditional knowledge. This reservoir of wisdom, accumulated over generations, can offer invaluable insights into sustainable practices, resource management, and community resilience. As climate initiatives turn to time-honored and traditional practices for potential solutions, women may hold the key to successful implementation: by amplifying their voices, we ensure that local solutions don’t just benefit one community but can be scaled and adapted globally.

From tokenism to tangible change

For far too long, women’s representation in climate arenas has oscillated between neglect and tokenism. The future demands a shift. Beyond mere numbers, the emphasis should be on creating environments where women’s voices are actively sought, heard, and acted upon. This means challenging patriarchal structures, encouraging mentorship, and building capacity. It means both ensuring that women have the education and resources to engage with standard elements of climate work, while also embracing multifaceted, traditional, and holistic approaches to countering climate change.

The ripple effect of women in leadership

The benefits of women in leadership extend beyond the immediate decisions. When young girls see women shaping global climate agendas, it ignites aspirations. It sends a powerful message that they too can be changemakers. This cascading effect, where one generation of women leaders inspires the next, can galvanize a global movement of informed, passionate leaders in climate and beyond.

In the long arc of the climate narrative, the story isn’t complete without women leading the charge. As the challenges intensify, the solutions too must evolve, and therein lies the potential of women’s leadership. The future of climate action is not just about adaptation and mitigation, but about transformation—and women are poised to be at the heart of this revolution.

Weaving a tapestry of resilience and hope

The interplay between climate change and gender underscores not only pressing challenges but also unprecedented opportunities to sculpt a more inclusive and climate-resilient future. Through the lens of short-term, medium-term, and long-term perspectives, a holistic picture emerges, revealing the layered vulnerabilities and strengths of women in the epoch of climate change.

In the short term, recognizing the immediate gendered impacts, especially in sectors predominantly helmed by women, such as agriculture, provides the impetus for swift interventions. These immediate threats underscore the need to bolster women’s resilience, particularly in areas where their livelihoods and sustenance are intertwined with the environment.

As we navigate into the medium term, the global shift towards a sustainable green economy emerges as a double-edged sword. It carries the promise of revitalization and renewal but could inadvertently perpetuate gender inequities if not managed inclusively. This phase emphasizes not merely the adoption of sustainability but the integration of gender equity into the very blueprint of this transition.

In the long arc towards the future, the long-term perspective magnifies the critical importance of women’s leadership in climate discourse. It’s not about token representation but the profound transformative potential that women, with their diverse insights and holistic understanding, bring to the table.

This comprehensive narrative—spanning immediate actions, transitional strategies, and long-term leadership visions—reiterates the importance of gender-responsive approaches at every stage. As we strive to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly Goal 5: Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls, and Goal 13: Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts, the gender-climate nexus cannot be sidelined. By anchoring our strategies in a multi-temporal framework, stakeholders, be they governments, private entities, or civil society, can collaboratively weave a future where climate resilience and gender equity thrive in tandem. This intersectionality, spanning gender, climate, and broader societal domains like health, food systems, and well-being, mandates nuanced, integrated solutions.

Addressing the gender-climate interplay, especially in regions like Africa, is paramount in our shared journey towards a sustainable future. A multi-temporal approach, championing the immediate, the impending, and the visionary, promises not only resilience but empowerment—heralding a brighter, more equitable, and climate-resilient tomorrow.

The path forward: A call to action

Our journey to understand and address the intricate dance between gender and climate change is not at its end, but rather at an impactful juncture. The next steps we take can either bolster or erode the resilience and empowerment of African women, who stand on the frontline of the climate crisis.

The realities of African women, with their rich tapestry of experiences, cultures, and wisdom, must take center stage in future research. Beyond sterile data and detached observations, we must immerse ourselves in the lived narratives of these women. Their struggles and triumphs amidst the changing climate—whether it’s the farmer battling unpredictable rains in Kenya or the market vendor navigating the aftermath of a storm in Nigeria—hold invaluable lessons for policy design and implementation.

Informed policies are more than just responsive; they are anticipatory, sculpting a path that doesn’t just react to the challenges but paves the way for a brighter future. Such policies should champion the amplification of women’s agency, ensuring their voices aren’t merely heard, but resonate in the decisions that shape their world. In a gender-responsive path forward, all climate strategies must be evaluated through a gendered lens and should ensure access to education, training, and finances and representation in decision-making and leadership.

By fostering environments that support women’s leadership at community town halls, national platforms, and international climate summits, we can tap into the transformative potential that women bring to the table. Yet, the emphasis on African women doesn’t diminish the global nature of this narrative. The continent’s stories, while deeply rooted in its unique socio-cultural and environmental milieu, echo a universal testament to women’s roles as formidable change-makers in the climate narrative. Their resilience, innovations, and solutions can inspire and inform strategies worldwide.

As we look to the future, our vision must be twofold: to adapt to the changing climate while concurrently reshaping it, ensuring that the new world we’re forging has women not as passive participants but as active architects. The charge is clear: in the quest for a sustainable and equitable world, women’s empowerment isn’t just a desirable outcome—it’s a vital catalyst.

---

Citations

[1] FAO (2023)

[2] Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, Metals and Sustainable Development (2018)

[3] UN Women, The Levers of Change Gender Equality Attitudes Study (2022)

---

Dr. Chidiebere E.X. Ikejemba is the Director of Climate & Environment at Camber Collective. His body of work focuses on climate equity and justice, building resilient climate-smart development programs, strengthening political will for urgent climate change action and many other levers of activation. His theory of impact operates across both the upstream and downstream of a systems chain. that encompasses, just transition, agriculture & food security, migration, economic & rural development, climate education, waste management (circularity), healthcare, corruption and democracy, energy access, gender inclusion, carbon neutrality and other dimensions. The circularity of Camber’s approach and theory of influence is, we believe, the most congruous path to balancing economic reality and humanitarianism.  

Ella Geismar is a Consultant in our San Francisco office. She is a strategy consultant with experience in creating stakeholder-led, community-oriented programs and policies both domestically and abroad. Prior to joining Camber, Ella was a researcher and consultant on Hawai’i’s first ever state-level food systems strategy, an active initiative seeking to center resilience, equity, and indigenous knowledge into Hawai’i’s management of land and resources. In addition to her work in food systems and sustainability, Ella has worked extensively in higher education access. From 2018-2020, Ella served as the Programs Director at Parami University, a Bard College partner institution and Myanmar’s first-ever liberal arts institution. She also worked as a consultant for Fulbright University Vietnam, the first such institution in Vietnam, and as the Academic Associate for a network of dual-enrollment public high schools in cities across the United States seeking to promote college access and equity for underserved student populations. Ella holds a Master of Public Policy from the Goldman School at UC Berkeley and a bachelor’s degree in English Literature and French from Wesleyan University. In her free time, you can find Ella hiking, biking in the East Bay hills, and hunting down new food experiences

Civil and political freedoms (e.g., democratic institutions) theoretically possess the potential to reduce inequality by empowering marginalized groups and fostering inclusive policies.

That said, the relationship is complex, and factors such as race, gender, and socioeconomic status can hinder access to civil and political participation.

Furthermore, political processes, even within countries with free and fair elections, can be susceptible to manipulation or fragmentation, leading to outcomes that perpetuate inequality.

Despite these challenges, the relationship between civil and political freedoms and equality remains compelling, as genuine and robust free institutions have the potential to serve as catalysts for addressing systemic disparities, promoting social justice, and empowering marginalized communities. In theory, civil and political freedoms can ensure equal representation, prioritize equitable distribution of resources, and build a fairer society.

Against this backdrop, we explored the relationship between freedom and inequality, hypothesizing that the more civil and political freedoms found within a country, the lower the country’s income inequality. 

Is there consensus among experts?

Academic literature on the relationship between inequality and civil and political freedoms is disparate and illustrates a lack of consensus among researchers.

One older but relevant study (Muller 1988) argues that the time existing as a democracy (i.e., maturity) is the key element to decreasing inequality (i.e., a positive correlation between equality and longevity of political freedoms)[1]. The analysis posits that the causal link of democracy on income equality operates through intervening mechanisms such as interest groups and political parties, and thus the impact of democracy on income equality happens gradually. The author further posits that only as poorer members of society organize unions and interest groups to develop an electoral base, political freedoms become associated with a reduction in inequality.

Other relevant research (e.g., Knutsen 2015) explores the two-way causal relationship between these variables, including the reversal causal mechanism of how elevated levels of inequality may work to destabilize democracies[2]. This study concludes that there is no robust effect of income inequality on the existence of democracy, nor on the level of democracy present, nor on the rate of democratization probability or democratic stability. The study does however conclude that democracy seems to reduce income inequality when the latter is proxied by the share of income going to wages as opposed to passive income.

A World Bank study (Gradstein & Milanovic 2000)[3] contradicts these analyses and more broadly argues against the common assertion that greater political freedoms tend to result in more equal societies. The paper argues that the relationship is complex, highlighting Eastern Europe as an illustration of the opposite trend, whereby income inequality seemed to increase post democratization of this bloc of countries.

Freedom Score

The Freedom House Freedom Score Index[4] uses a two-tiered system consisting of freedom scores (0-100) and freedom status (Not Free, Partly Free, Free). The Freedom Score [5] is calculated through a weighted combination of 10 political rights and 15 civil liberties indicators and grouped into subcategories (e.g., Electoral Process, Political Pluralism and Participation, and Functioning of Government; Freedom of Expression and Belief, Associational and Organizational Rights, Rule of Law, and Personal Autonomy and Individual Rights). Based on the scoring of these indicators, a weighted calculation is employed to determine the Freedom Status of a given country.

Figure 1: Freedom House, Freedom status calculation

GINI Index

The GINI Index, based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments, is a measure of income inequality that summarizes the dispersion of income across the entire income distribution[6]. The closer the index is to zero the more equal the distribution of income, while the closer the index is to one the more unequal the distribution of income.

Analysis: The relationship is tenuous, but strong among “free” countries

Overall, we found a weak correlation between the Freedom Score and the GINI Index across the globe (Figure 3; – the number .01 refers to the correlation coefficient for that specific analysis). However, as depicted in Figure 4, the Freedom Score and GINI Index were much more strongly correlated when limiting this analysis to countries designated as “Free” by Freedom House (R= – 0.55). Figure 5 illustrates this trend using the list of countries with the top ten freedom scores, and their (low and decreasing) levels of income inequality.

As the countries with the highest freedom scores tended to be European countries, we also ran the analysis separately for European and Non-European countries, finding that freedom and income inequality remained correlated when segmenting by these two geographies. This suggests that this relationship, among free countries, persists across geographic regions.

Discussion: What might be driving this dynamic?

While additional analysis is needed to identify the underlying components of the link between civil and political freedoms and equality, the strong correlation within ‘free’ countries may suggest that a certain threshold of civil and political freedoms (high freedom score; e.g., strong democratic institutions) is required to create top-level income equality.

For countries within ‘partly free’ and ‘not free’ categories, varying political systems and civil and political structures show varying levels of success in developing income equality. In some countries, the lack of civil and political freedoms (i.e. more government control) might actually lead to more equitable societies in the short- and medium term, particularly in countries seeing rapid economic development (e.g.: China).

That said, at some point the advantages of tighter government control and lower civil and political freedoms on combatting inequality and producing a more equitable society may crest, and more civil and political freedoms are needed. Systems which curtail civil and political freedoms may limit their ability to create top-level income equality.

A final reflection on addressing rising global inequality

Our analysis focused on examining the relationship between civil and political freedoms and inequality at a high level. Further research on the intervening mechanisms between freedom and inequality is needed to explore which specific political and civil liberties are most linked to reduced income inequality. Specifically, further analysis should be conducted to identify the underlying social and political elements (e.g., freedom of press, voting rights, social expenditures, space for civil society, timing) that likely lead to decreased inequality.  

The link between these two topics addresses pressing issues related to democracy, human rights, and a better and more equitable future. Exploring this relationship is timely and critical, as inequality is a key global concern and continues to rise among 70 percent of the world’s population [6]. (United Nations 2020). Furthermore, the growth in inequality comes at a time when the globe is seeing a backsliding in social and political freedoms. Done effectively, building the case for civil and political freedoms as a catalyst for economic equality may be a powerful tool to combat these current global challenges.   

---

Appendix

Figure 3: Freedom score versus GINI index globally

Figure 4: Freedom score versus GINI index across free countries

Figure 5: Countries with top 10 freedom scores and GINI index

Figure 6: GINI index versus social expenditure for OECD Countries

---

Citations

[1] Edward N. Muller, Democracy, Economic Development, and Income Inequality on JSTOR

[2] Reinvestigating the Reciprocal Relationship between Democracy and Income Inequality, by Carl Henrik Knutsen

[3] Source: Does Liberte =Egalite? A Survey of the Empirical Links between Democracy and Inequality with Some Evidence on the Transition Economics

[4] https://freedomhouse.org/reports/freedom-world/freedom-world-research-methodology

[5] https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.GINI?most_recent_value_desc=true

[6] Rising inequality affecting more than two-thirds of the globe, but it’s not inevitable: new UN report | UN News

---

Brent McCann brings international humanitarian, research, and investment experience to help clients navigate strategic decisions and maximize their impact through evidenced-based quantitative and qualitative analyses. Prior to Camber, he worked for the Arab Reform Initiative researching anti-corruption and migration-related topics in the Middle East and North Africa, as well as designing institutional and project-specific monitoring and evaluation tools. Brent began his career in the nonprofit sector. He cofounded the Liliir Education Project and has 8+ years working on education, public policy, economic empowerment, refugee rights, and conflict resolution projects in South Sudan and greater East Africa. Brent holds an MA in Human Rights and Humanitarian Action from the Paris School of International Affairs (PSIA) at Sciences Po, and obtained his B.B.A. with honors in International Business and Entrepreneurial Leadership from Gonzaga University. A Seattle native, Brent enjoys scuba diving, playing basketball, backpacking, skiing, and spending time with friends and family.

Melissa Flores leverages her background in quantitative analysis and research to support clients’ strategic decision-making centered around social impact. Prior to Camber, Melissa worked as consultant at the UN World Food Programme, providing operational and programmatic support to the organization’s global food security monitoring initiative. Melissa began her career as a financial consultant, working on risk mitigation strategies for Consumer and Healthcare clients in the United States. She holds an M.A. in International Development from Sciences Po’s Paris School of International Affairs and a B.A. in Applied Mathematics from Harvard University.

As we reduce emissions, let’s not forget about the impact of climate change on health

Climate change is affecting the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the quality of food we eat. Over the past decades, it contributed to a rapid increase in asthma cases and allergies and the spread of mosquitoes to higher hemisphere regions, with the US seeing the first cases of local malaria transmission in two decades [1]. The WHO (World Health Organization) projects that, all else equal, between 2030 and 2050, climate change is expected to cause approximately 250,000 additional deaths per year from heat stress, malnutrition, malaria, diarrhea, and heat stress [2].

Extreme climate events have significantly increased over the past 50 years

Over the recent decades, extreme climate events have significantly increased, primarily floods, storms, and wildfires. This affects millions through population displacement, socioeconomic shocks, direct mortality, and health impact (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Number of extreme weather events and people affected [4].

Note: Each dot represents an event; the circle size represents the number of affected persons.  

According to IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) scenarios, global temperatures will continue to rise, causing more adverse effects on human health. The burden of many climate-sensitive health risks is projected to be greater at an increase of 2 ◦C above pre-industrial temperatures than at 1.5 ◦C., highlighting the sensitivity of health conditions to minor changes in global temperatures [3]. We outline examples of crucial health conditions expected to exacerbate if we continue our current trajectory in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Illustrative health effects of climate change [5]

Global warming with unequal local impacts

While global warming is measured against the global average target of 1.5◦C, the local impact varies significantly, with some regions bearing a significant burden. More countries are undertaking better vulnerability and adaptation assessments to understand the health risks they will face as temperatures rise. These analyses have highlighted the most vulnerable populations, often the elders, children, and people living in remote areas [7].  

We have highlighted below in Figure 3 the projected temperature increase in select countries, highlighting the global disparities. Even the national average hides vast differences in the sub-national regions, with some areas extremely vulnerable to changing conditions. Rapid projected population growth in most countries will also contribute substantially to the number of people affected by temperature rises and extreme weather events.

Figure 3. Projected temperature changes under different climate-change scenarios and population growth between current and 2050. [8] [9]

What are we doing about it: Current funding trails projected need

While the scientific community and country priorities emphasize the growing challenge that the globe faces related to climate and health, funding commitments at the intersection of these sectors have continued to trail behind the projected need.

Development finance institutions (DFIs) have increased their commitments to climate in recent years and, on average, committed to nearly doubling their spending on climate from 2020 to 2025 [11]. Certain DFIs have even made ambitious commitments until 2030, including the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the World Bank (WBG), which have committed to dedicating 75 percent of commitments to climate finance by then. While spending on climate has been increasing, the share of spending to mitigate health impact remains very low at under 6% of climate adaptation funding [10].

Figure 4. Breakdown of Adaptation spending by major MDBs in 2020/2021 [10][11].

Despite the recent push by some major development finance institutions to increase overall climate spending and adaptation spending as a percentage of this amount, total mitigation spending by multilateral development banks (MDBs) was still over three times that of adaptation spending in 2021[11].

The focus of development finance institutions on mitigation activity (vis-a-vis adaptation) or the importance of CO2 reduction as the defining metric to measure the impact of climate projects may explain their hesitation to shift funding into the climate-health nexus.

On the health side, DFIs bolstered their spending during the COVID-19 pandemic. Across four major MDB (WB, IDB, AfDB, ADB), health funding rose 3-fold from $3.8 billion in 2018 to $12.1B in 2021 [12]. Despite this pandemic-driven increase, the overall health sector constitutes a small portion of total funding and trends between 5% and 15% for most bilateral and multilateral institutions [13].

Despite the recent momentum in the climate and health sectors individually, funding at the intersection of climate and health has remained stagnant. It is not yet a stated focus of most funders. 

The philanthropic sector has followed a similar trend as development finance institutions. While many philanthropies dedicate energy and funds to the climate and health sectors individually, few of these institutions have declared a focus at the nexus of the two. Wellcome Trust is one of few large foundations with an expressed focus on funding climate-health interventions, communicating the intersection as one of their three focus areas related to health [13]. This presents an opportunity for other foundations to direct capital to an underfunded sector to catalyze additional investments.

What’s holding us back: Key challenges to increase capital commitments

Funders face several challenges when deciding to invest in projects at the intersection of climate and health; if addressed, there is potential to vitalize commitments in the space [13]. These challenges range from a need for a shared definition and impact metrics for climate-health investments to a lack of robust evidence across these interventions.

Thoughts on a way forward

Considering the challenges depicted above, a range of actions can be undertaken to address the key issues hindering further commitments to climate-health initiatives.

Here are three recommendations to address the challenges outlined [13]:

The upcoming COP28 is a promising opportunity to delve deeper into this topic as it is the first COP conference that includes an entire day dedicated to the health sector. This global convening presents a unique occasion to gather key stakeholders to identify solutions to these challenges, garner momentum, and solidify commitments at the climate-health nexus.

---

Citations

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/27/health/us-malaria-mosquitoes.html

[2] Climate change and health (who.int)

[3] Health risks of warming of 1.5″00B0`0C, 2″00B0`0C, and higher, above pre-industrial temperatures (iop.org)

[4]  Data from EM-DAT. The International Disaster Database; Graphic produced with RAW Graphics.

[6] Data from https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/chapter/chapter-7/; graphic produced in Microsoft PowerPoint.

[7] Climate change and health: vulnerability and adaptation assessment (who.int)

[8] Climate Risk Country Profiles | Climate Change Knowledge Portal (worldbank.org)

[9] World Population Dashboard (unfpa.org)

[10] How much bilateral and multilateral climate adaptation finance is targeting the health sector? A scoping review of official development assistance data between 2009–2019 – PMC (nih.gov) citing Lancet Countdown data.

[11] 2021 Joint report on multilateral development banks’ Climate finance (eib.org)

[12] Microsoft Word – 2023-04 Making it work – role of MDBs – final.docx (actionsantemondiale.fr)

Melissa Flores leverages her background in quantitative analysis and research to support clients’ strategic decision-making centered around social impact. Prior to Camber, Melissa worked as consultant at the UN World Food Programme, providing operational and programmatic support to the organization’s global food security monitoring initiative. Melissa began her career as a financial consultant, working on risk mitigation strategies for Consumer and Healthcare clients in the United States. She holds an M.A. in International Development from Sciences Po’s Paris School of International Affairs and a B.A. in Applied Mathematics from Harvard University.

Abdel Agadazi is a Camber Collective alum. While with the firm, he worked with clients on their strategy and investment planning via data-driven decision-making and market analysis. Prior to Camber, Abdel led consulting engagements at Accenture, supporting global clients on their digital transformation journey. He began his career building technology systems for optometrists and healthcare clients in the United States. Abdel is also involved in supporting entrepreneurs in Europe and Africa through growth and operational advice. He holds an MBA from INSEAD and a Master’s in advanced analytics from IMT Atlantique, a top-tier French engineering school. Abdel grew up in Lomé, and he enjoys cooking and playing basketball. Our Paris office mates look forward to seeing him strolling the streets as an amateur photographer.

Summary

US inflation has surged over recent years primarily as a result of supply-side challenges coupled with rising profit margins and labor costs. Although levels are now beginning to moderate, many still feel the sting of higher prices. In particular, inflation disproportionately impacts low-income households in light of the ways in which these households typically earn, spend and save. In response, philanthropies should focus part of their financial and non-financial resources on supporting cash transfer programs, consumer protection measures, application of disaggregated inflation insights, and improved financial literacy, thereby filling gaps not fully addressed by federal government at the current time.

State of US inflation

In 2022 inflation reached 9.1%, its highest rate in 40 years. Of the goods and services contributing to that value, groceries, various types of energy, motor parts & equipment, and household furnishings and supplies were among the most notable increases.¹

Figure 1, adapted from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Though inflation has moderated to an average annualized rate of ~5% in 2023, this aggregate value masks the fact that the most essential goods and services, such as food ² and medical care, have remained well above this level. Similarly, while gasoline prices have fallen since peaks seen in 2022, both motor and diesel fuel are currently higher than they were in the four-year period from mid-2017 to mid-2021.³

Significant decreases have primarily been seen in valuable, but not essential, categories such as household appliances, clothing, and even recreational equipment.⁴

The Unequal Impact of Inflation on US Households

Many people experience inflation as a slight frustration, or as a cause for mild concern. Reactions to price increases are expressed as indignation at higher grocery bills and irritation at the climbing costs of long-used products and services (which are ultimately still consumed)

However, the experience can be entirely different for lower income households, for whom ongoing inflation is imposing profound economic and even socio-emotional distress. For lower-income households, sustained periods of inflation can completely shift quality of life and in some cases, even risk access to basic rights, such as adequate availability of healthy food, consistent supplies of clean water, reliable electricity, and more. Notably, price inflation not only threatens economic security for these households – it also frequently stalls or reverses any prior economic mobility they may have experienced. High inflation rates have been linked to a reduction in the US middle class and a return to poverty for those who recently came out of the lowest income and wealth quintile.

Three factors explain the heavier impacts of inflation on lower-income households. Each of these reasons corresponds to a particular phase in the income lifecycle:

1. How you earn: First, lower-income households are more likely to be employed informally in certain sectors, (child care, yard work, cleaning, etc.) relying primarily on wage income or transfer payments, or to occupy roles with diminished bargaining power. This fact is often due to a high supply/replaceability of workers for those roles and/or lack of union representation. Unfortunately, inflation has particularly outpaced growth in wages and transfer payments for these roles, which equally tend not to provide supplemental benefits such as sick leave or retirement contributions.⁶ In contrast, middle and higher-income households are often employed in sectors that offer salaries and benefits such as commuter stipends or caregiver benefits, leaving them less vulnerable to price shocks in the economy.
2. How you spend: Second, lower-income households typically spend a greater percentage of their income on necessities such as food, energy, and housing. Studies have shown that lower-income households in developed countries can spend as much as 50% of their income on food while higher-income households spend 20% on this expense.⁶ While higher-income households can use tactics such as couponing or purchasing cheaper options to maintain key aspects of their lifestyles, lower income households often already use such money management tactics and therefore, have no further “dollar stretching” to do. As a result, lower income households are often forced to buy goods and services of extremely low quality, or have no choice but too completely  forego necessities during times of price inflation. ⁷
3. How you save: Third, lower-income households are more likely to live paycheck-to-paycheck and have less discretionary income. As a result, these households often do not have an emergency fund or extensive savings and are more likely to go into formal debt (i.e. credit card, loans) or informal debt (i.e. borrowing from loved ones) to pay for necessities.⁸ A lack of discretionary income and savings, as well as diminished access to or trust in financial systems⁹ reduces many lower income households’ exposure to services and financial planning/investment approaches of potential benefit to them, further distancing them from obtaining the highest value from the money they do earn in the short and long-term.Conversely, middle and higher-income households have greater access to financial markets and often hold investments, resources which have a greater likelihood of shielding them from inflation’s harms.¹⁰

Approaches to Addressing Inflation

Given the extreme economic precarity that price inflation can bring to lower-income households, philanthropies may consider mobilizing their resources to complement, or fills gaps in, government approaches emanating from the federal, state, or local levels.

Of the various approaches we have seen philanthropies engage with, four warrant particular consideration for the level of innovation they represent:

• Direct Cash Transfers: In times of rapid economic change, some philanthropies – notably community and place-based foundations – have ventured into the direct cash transfer space, providing rapid cash (on a needs-based scale) for essential goods and services critical for by low-income households. Transfers may be earmarked for specific objectives (such as gas or energy relief, health services, rent assistance, reduced internet service payments, etc), or may be unrestricted. One of the pioneers of this approach was the Greater Washington Community Foundation, which supported 60,000 residents of the Greater Washington DC area with payments totaling $26 million throughout the pandemic, and whose approaches remain highly relevant in this inflationary period.

However, cash transfer programs should be implemented and monitored carefully to ensure that the intended effect is produced. In some instances, cash transfers have been shown to suddenly stimulate consumption, leading to reduced supply and even higher prices. Conversely, others have argued that increased purchasing power leads to product variation and resultingly, price decreases.¹¹ The variable outcome of cash transfer programs are influenced by several characteristics, including scale of implementation (geographic area and/or number of individuals), the monetary amount per transfer, the number and cadence of transfers, and more.¹² Making evidence-based design decisions that are tailored to the inflation context increases the likelihood of positive, intended economic effects.¹³

• Antimonopoly Engagement: While corporate concentration (i.e. monopolies) in key industries constitutes just one of several market contributors to recent inflation, this factor alone is estimated to cost the average American $5k per year in distorted (inflated) prices. In the absence of a competitive market, there is little rein on whether businesses monopolizing the market raise their prices acutely.¹⁴ Traditionally, philanthropy has not engaged in ideological questions around the paradigms that govern our economy, including monopolistic practices that have escaped antitrust policy and enforcement since the 1980s. Yet this hesitancy is slowly evolving, led by major funders such as (but not limited to) the Ford Foundation, Omidyar Network, Hewlett Foundation. Now is an opportune moment for philanthropy to make a difference. A leading forum for action has been the Economic Security Project’s Antimonopoly Fund, which has “leaned into what was missing from the movement: grassroots organizing power around anti-monopoly campaigns, academic research that filled critical gaps in our understanding of the problem and potential solutions, and culture- and narrative-shift projects that told and made accessible the stories of how monopolies have impacted individuals and communities.”

• Improved Application of Disaggregated Inflation Insights: Disaggregation of inflation data and reporting is key to determining the strategies best positioned to serve key groups. While fluctuations in the inflation rate are frequently reported by expenditure category and geographic region, and ¹⁵ increasingly reported by income level and race/ethnicity¹⁶ , application of initiatives by the latter indicators are severely lacking. Philanthropy is uniquely placed to fund insight generation around disaggregated research findings to tailor initiatives for key populations highlighted in analysis.

• Financial Literacy & Access: As previously mentioned, lower-income households typically do not hold many, if any, savings and investments. This issue is often exacerbated during periods of inflation. For example, recent research showed a strong correlation between “financial literacy and inflation-induced changes in individuals’ personal finances”. Specifically, adults with very low levels of financial literacy were four times as likely to significantly reduce or completely stop retirement contributions during high periods of inflation in 2022, versus those with very high levels of financial literacy, who were able to maintain their retirement contributions.¹⁷ This evidence puts forth that inflation not only threatens needs in the short-term, but can also affect finances in the long-term.
  
  Philanthropy can help improve financial literacy and trust, as well as improve access to products that protect the value of money as inflation rages. In combination with the social supports described above, equipping individuals with financial tools can enhance their ability to navigate inflationary pressures and provide a basis for financial decision-making during volatile times. This is well-understood by Next Gen Personal Finance (NGPF), a group working to democratize access to financial information, with a mission of ensuring that all US high school students are required to take a financial literacy course to graduate. In partnership with the California State Superintendent, NGPF is offering $1.4 million in grants to develop and deliver financial literacy courses in California public schools. The grants include stipends for teachers that become certified, as well as funds to hire a personal finance specialist for the largest school districts in the state.

It is key for philanthropic leaders to be aware of the disproportionate effect of inflation on their lower-income constituents; of the enduring nature of that impact even as top-line inflation figures reduce; and of the avenues at their disposal to kickstart a response via some of the above strategies, which represent only a partial snapshot of their available toolkit. Doing so will materially strengthen economic security at individual, household, and community levels even during times of financial tumult.

---

Citations

1.  Consumer prices up 9.1 percent over the year ended June 2022, largest increase in 40 years – US Bureau of Labor Statistics
2. Summary findings, Food price outlook 2023 – USDA
3. EIA expects U.S. gasoline and diesel retail prices to decline in 2023 and 2024 – EIA
4. Inflation is falling but your health premiums may be about a soar. Here’s why – Los Angeles Times
5. Monetary Policy and Price Stability – U.S. Federal Reserve
6. Inflation could wreak vengeance on the world’s poor – Brookings
7. Inflation’s wrath has Americans wrecking up high debt. What at risk households need to know – USA Today
8. New Data Show Inflation Could Undermine Families of Color’s Financial Resilience. How Can Policymakers Help? – Urban Institute
9. 2021 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households – FDIC
10. Inflation and its impact on the poor in the era of COVID-19 – InterAmerican Development Bank
11. Universal Cash Transfer and Inflation – Jones & Marinescu
12. Getting cash transfer payments to recipient’s faster boosts household spending and stimulates the economy – Washington Center for Equitable Growth
13. What have we learned about cash transfers? – Blogs World Bank
14. The Importance of Competition for the American Economy – The White House
15. State Inflation Tracker – US Congress Joint Economic Committee
16. Inflation is higher for some demographic groups, report finds – Axios
17. Financial Wellbeing and literacy in a high-inflation environment – TIAA Institute

Aislyn Orji is a Consultant at Camber Collective. She utilizes data-driven storytelling to support clients in advancing their strategic & operational goals. Prior to Camber, Aislyn worked as a global health researcher at the Institute for Health Metrics & Evaluation. In her time there, she developed methods for measuring the burden of various chronic & vertically transmitted diseases. She has further experience working with think tanks and nonprofits aimed at tackling issues of food insecurity, education, and homelessness.Aislyn earned an MPH concentrated in Health Metrics & Evaluation from the University of Washington. She also holds a BA in Health Sciences & minor in Sociology from Rice University, where she was a Trustee Distinguished Scholar. In her spare time, Aislyn enjoys exploring neighborhoods in new cities, and critiquing food with family & friends.

Marc Allen is a Director at Camber Collective and the Shared Prosperity Sector Lead, heading the firm’s Shared Prosperity portfolio. Drawing on his toolkit as a strategist and former policy attorney, Marc leads teams working to strengthen and reimagine our economic and democratic systems. His experience spans strategy and investment design, human-centered research/insights, and coalition-building services for philanthropies, government agencies, multilateral institutions, nonprofits, and socially-invested corporations. More broadly, Marc guides the effectiveness of executive teams in mission-driven organizations, helping to advance their theories of impact, program design, business models, and cultures of belonging.