Set aside a value pool
Goal: When developing project budgets, add 15-30% on top of general operating for a value pool attached to each project that all team members with roles in the budget collectively decide how to spend during or after the project is over. These budgets are attached to projects and not pooled at the organization level to ensure that each team close to the work decides how it is spent.
In the hierarchy of costs, 15% of all MJN 501(c)(3) income first covers fiscal sponsor fees. We try to save about 2-3% on top for general operational expenses, like running a website. These costs fall in line with standard general operating expectations by most funders. Overhead costs for MJN LLC are generally lower.
Not covered by “overhead,” and not equivalent to a “reserve,” the value pool helps us realign with our 3 values in a way that flat hourly rates and status quo overhead expenses cannot. Ultimately, this pool is the best way we’ve thought of (so far) to:
Integrate participatory budgeting in cases where we must develop budgets to fundraise before we have all team members in place.
Pass forward funding to other organizations in solidarity.
Pay team members who worked more hours than were allocated when we initially budgeted.
Factors that go into the the process of decision making include, not in rank order: urgent needs; fair pay; repair; future needs; and system or venture studio projects that are not funded through other channels.
Embodied Characteristics
Decision-making Factors
The value pool allows us to balance for the fact that a budget often needs to be created with limited information and few people in place before funding is raised. Setting aside a portion of each budget at the outset for a participatory process allows groups involved to discuss the following factors.
-
Are certain collective members — including those that may not have been involved in a particular project budget — dealing with financial burdens? From health expenses to current and historic debt, we try to take into account injustice and need.
-
Are any team members finding that they are working consistently over or under the hours estimated? Do values of wisdoms need to be reassessed? Enabling space for staff to name where inaccuracies are occurring can help us get better at estimating in the future, provide additional compensation without having an impact on the overall budget, and enable staff who are finding they are working less or have found time to support their collaborators. Base hours are never redistributed mid-way through a project.
-
Can we share income with organizations or groups fighting for justice, providing reparations or fighting for reparations? Over time, we hope to develop a specific list of organizations we support and And foster deep collective fundraising And foster deep collective fundraising that embodies Solidarity.
-
MJN is not yet resourced to provide full time jobs or benefits. Should we or can we set aside anything from our pool to offer health insurance coverage for team members in the future?
-
What, if anything, is left to help us develop or support projects in our Studios that have gone unfunded or underfunded?
Designing for Participation
So you now have a value pool that may be $150 or $10,000, and you know what it's for. How do you go about navigating the processes to ensure that allocation reflects a participatory process? Given that procedural justice is a critical element of our work, we're thinking through recommendations. Here's a start.
When should decisions be made? No one should struggle on their own. For example, if somebody is consistently overworking — and thus underpaid — or dealing with a financial emergency, the value pool should be usable. With this in mind, we recommend each project team have a pre-planned meeting — that all team members say they can join — once every six month to discuss how to spend the value pool and regularly listen for reasons why a discussion needs to happen sooner than anticipated.
How should decisions be made? Processes should be guided by inclusion and full participation. For example
Dialogue: meaningful discussions around a values pool require trust, time, and planning for conversations, to engage personally and collectively. We're working on developing an agenda to help navigate this conversation, but trust never forms overnight.
Voting: In addition to a dialogue, we're working to develop structures to properly document a decision. Do we use a survey? Minutes from a meeting? When decisions are more complex than a multiple choice questionnaire, how do we reflect back a conversation into a decision?
Tensions
A value pool isn’t easy to fund. The downward pressure on “non-program” expenses favors larger, older organizations, which are less likely to radically shift power structures in systems.
How We Handle Tensions
To make room for the value pool, while building budgets that align with funder expectations, we reduce our hourly rate. This leads to regular conversations about biases around pricing and shows how our own values come into conflict with the broader systems in which we operate. Our common commitments and relationship keep us going. All of us also work without pay and rely on second jobs to make the ends meet.
To establish how we set up meaningful conversations on how to spend the value pool, we're thinking about project planning worksheets and governance templates to help plan in advance.
