Trust for Africa - Rethinking Aid, Ownership, and Partnership for Child Welfare

Trust isn’t a slogan when children’s safety is on the line—it’s a discipline. We sit down with Naomi Schalm, Executive Director of Trust for Africa in Lesotho, to unpack what radical trust really requires in cross-cultural child welfare: honest power-sharing, rigorous accountability, and local decision rights that outlast any single grant. Lesotho is moving toward family-based care and codifying foster pathways, even as economic shocks and reduced aid strain communities. That tension reveals a core mistake many outsiders make: confusing “orphan” with “child with nobody.” Research and experience point another way—prevention, kinship care, and reintegration anchored in the real context families live in.

Naomi explains why good intentions aren’t a system. Clear policies, safeguarding, and transparent financial practices protect children, caregivers, and staff while making collaboration possible. We get practical about the difference between accountability and control: control is one-sided; accountability shares standards and outcomes. We also push into the hard part—money. When the Global North holds the purse, it often holds the steering wheel. Shifting proposal design and decision rights locally, diversifying income, and refusing “donor-as-owner” governance are non-negotiables if we want integrity and impact.

Inside organizations, trust grows through rupture-and-repair, not perfection. That means making room for dissent, modeling apology, and building collaborative leadership that can challenge assumptions. On the ground with families, hope is a first intervention: trauma-informed support, consistent structures, and practical tools help parents who’ve been dismissed for years believe in their capacity again. The pay-off is safer children and stronger communities, measured over time rather than headlines. If you’re a funder, practitioner, or curious listener ready to rethink how aid, ownership, and outcomes connect, this conversation offers a candid, field-tested guide.

If this resonated, follow the show, share it with a colleague, and leave a rating or review to help more listeners find these stories.

________

Travel on International Mission, meet local leadership and work alongside them. Exchange knowledge, learn from one another and be open to personal transformation. Step into a 25 year long story of change for children in some of the poorest regions on Earth.

https://www.helpingchildrenworldwide.org/mission-trips.html

******

____

Organize a Rooted in Reality mission experience for your service club, church group, worship team, young adult or adult study. No travel required. Step into the shoes of people in extreme poverty in Sierra Leone, West Africa, Helping Children Worldwide takes you into a world where families are facing impossible choices every day.

Contact support@helpingchildrenworldwide.org to discuss how.

___________

Family Empowerment Advocates support the work of family empowerment experts at the Child Reintegration Centre, Sierra Leone.  Your small monthly donation,  prayers, attention & caring is essential. You  advocate for their work to help families bring themselves out of poverty, changing the course of children's lives and lifting up communities. join

Transcript

Welcome & Season Values

SPEAKER_00 0:07

Welcome to Mr. Voices. We have children by strengthening and hammering families with this podcast is for people interested in deep conversations with thought leaders in the fields of children.

Spotlight On Lesotho’s Child Welfare

SPEAKER_01 0:31

Welcome to the Optimistic Voices podcast. I'm your host, Laura Morgan. This year on Optimistic Voices, we're learning leaning into the values that shape helping children worldwide's work. Radical trust, radical collaboration, radical honesty, and radical courage. And these aren't just slogans from us. They're the disciplines that make cross-cultural partnership healthier, more effective, and more faithful to what children and families actually mean. This month we're focusing on radical trust, what it looks like in real child welfare work, how it gets built over time, and how it holds steady when power, culture, and resources aren't evenly shown. Nanely Shom is the executive director for Trust for Africa in Lesotho, where she leads locally grounded work to strengthen families and protect children before crises become separations. Trust for Africa partners alongside communities, local leaders, and child protection stakeholders to keep children safe in families, build prevention pathways, and support care solutions that fit the real context on the ground. And in today's episode, Naomi's going to help us talk about something that sounds simple but gets deeply complicated in cross-cultural child welfare work, Radical Trace. What it is, what it isn't, and what it costs to practice with integrity when power and resources aren't shared equally. Naomi's a good friend as well. So we're delighted to have you on the show. It's always fun to talk to you, and it's fun to do that in um in an Optimistic Voices episode. So welcome, welcome.

SPEAKER_02 2:01

Thank you. I am really excited to be here and to dive into this topic that's quite, like you said, complicated and but important and so needed. So thank you for having me. Yeah, we're delighted that you're here.

SPEAKER_01 2:16

For listeners that are meeting you maybe for the first time, who are you and what's the work that you do in leading Trust for Africa in Lesotho?

SPEAKER_02 2:26

Well, I thought your introduction was right on. So I am the executive director for Trust for Africa. I have a little bit of a unique situation in that I was born in Lesotho and lived here for the first 10 years of my life and then left and came back 13 years ago and have been in this work with Trust for Africa for 13 years. So it's been a privilege. It's been uh a journey. Uh, it hasn't always been easy, like anything in child welfare. But um, yeah, and I would say our vision at Trust for Africa and our deep hope is that every child feels safe, seen, and supported. So that's kind of our bedrock of what we want to see for children and we work with families and communities and government stakeholders, you know, top-down and bottom-up approaches to see that happen.

Orphan Myth Vs Family Reality

SPEAKER_01 3:19

Really, I mean, having grown up there and now supporting this work there, um, it's kind of your whole life. A lot of it. So, what does the child welfare landscape look like in Lesotho right now? And what are the biggest pressures on the families in that in that context?

SPEAKER_02 3:38

Yeah, Lesotho has a little bit of a unique situation that it's 2.3 million people. And when you put that into context, like if if you're in the US, um that's just a large city in terms of population, but we're spread out over this small country, and um we have government infrastructure, community-based infrastructure, um, community um uh pro like there's there's lots of programs for families and children. Um and and I feel like Lesotho is I actually feel very hopeful. I feel very hopeful about the child welfare landscape currently because our government is making a very strong effort toward um the safety and protection and promotion of children. So child rights, as well as um moving toward seeing children uh in family-based care as opposed to institutional care. Uh, we just saw an amendment passed through government in October that for the first time included language that uh would allow for foster care. Uh so there's there's things that are happening, and I feel like there's this critical mass building toward the promotion of children. And uh and Lesotho is also the secretariat of the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child. So there's a lot happening for the child and for child rights. Um, and at the same time, to answer your question, what are the pressures on families? Um we're still wanting what we're still waiting for is seeing that filter down into the actual communities and into the actual systems that are in place to see to see those things actualized. Um, particularly in this last year, Listwood had some um major hits because of tariffs uh and also the the withdrawal of US funding and USAID. So again, in the small country of 2.3 million people, where estimates of unemployment were around 30%, it's always hard to know exactly. Um, we we lost a vast majority of our factories. So we lost about 60,000 jobs when you combine uh the factories as well as um USAID funded organizations. Uh so that was a massive hit. In fact, the government declared a um state of emergency for the next, I believe it's three years because of the impacts of all of this job loss and the removal of those social services that were being provided. Yeah. So a country that was already vulnerable in that regard is uh even more vulnerable. And uh what what we strive to see and to to help promote is um strengthening the systems around the family, strengthening the systems around communities so that children don't fall uh through those safety nets that are supposed to be there to guard and protect and and and help them thrive. Um yeah, that's that's a long answer.

SPEAKER_01 6:44

Yeah, no, I and I think you hit on some some big things that um I think a lot of people in our country don't really uh understand when when US funding changes like that, how that ripple effect impacts um more than just you know what USAID was funding, but all the sort of structure around it. And I think it's really important to take note of that. So when when outsiders picture child welfare in a place like Lesotho, what what do you think they often misunderstand?

SPEAKER_02 7:17

So Lesotho was definitely very hard hit by the AIDS epidemic. Um and in the 1990s, into the 2000s, uh Lesotho even still currently has the second highest HIV rate in the world. Uh, so there it became very well known as, you know, as being a country with a lot of AIDS, orphans. Now, I would say that that has shifted a bit. There still are a lot of orphans. I think in terms of um statistics, it's about 30% of the child population is considered vulnerable or orphaned, orphaned meaning having lost one or both parents. Um so so the misnomer is that an orphan is somebody with nobody. And I think that's still the mentality. And and often even this term AIDS orphan or orphan means somebody who has nobody. And that is far from the truth. Um, globally, the statistic is around 80% of children living in orphanages still have a living parent. And it's interesting because in in some of the research that we have done, we we just did a brief survey of four care facilities in our district and the district next next to us. And it actually was true. The statistics were shockingly like right on. It was about 80% of the children um had a living parent. So the the question is not like if you define the problem as an orphan is somebody who has nobody, then your solution is going to be orphanages. If you define the problem as uh orphans have fractured families or families that are unable to care for them, then your solution is going to be how do we help families? How do we strengthen families? How do we find families for these children? Uh, because yeah, for the vast majority of them, they have people in their lives, they have perspectives, they have somebody.

Defining Radical Trust In Practice

SPEAKER_01 9:18

Yeah. We did our own research on the on the orphanage we supported for many years. The listeners who listen to us often will know this because they've heard me say it before. Um, ours was 98%. So 98% of the kids that lived in our own orphanage had a living parent, um, which was uh shocking and certainly a catalyst for continuing to transition to family-based care. And then that piece that you mentioned where an orphan is um the definition of that, like the technical definition of that is a child that's lost one or both parents. Um, I shared that with my husband about, I don't know, five or 10 years ago. Um, he lost his dad when he was 15 years old. And he was like incensed. And he said to me recently, you know, the idea that someone would show up at my mother's house after my dad died and say to her, you know, we you have a bunch of kids and you're a single mom and you work as an attendance clerk in a middle school, you know, we can take your kids and we can raise them and get them access to things or whatever and they'll be better off, would is just bonkers, you know, it's just crazy that we would think that way. Um, but yeah, he was in his um like 40s or 50s when he learned that he had been an orphan for you know much of his life. So I think that's something that the audience doesn't really, you know, that the average person on the street doesn't really understand. Um but yeah, it's important to know that. So let's get into this idea of radical trust, um, which uh we've talked a little bit about before we started recording about just it's a really sensitive um topic. So when you hear the phrase radical trust and you think about your own cross-cultural work, what does that mean to you? Like what does that look like to you in practice?

SPEAKER_02 13:22

Yeah, it's so interesting. I think um in cross-cultural work, relationships are so critical. Like anybody who's worked in another cult another culture knows just the importance of relationship. And Dr. Henry Cloud talks about trust as being relational currency. So any healthy relationship is going to have an element of trust. Um so in in working in different contexts or a different culture, I think what struck me is that trust is this, it's based on these implicit hidden rules. Um, these um, yeah, um values, expectations, uh, hopes, outcomes, and and often you don't even know what they are until they're crossed. And and each person has their own set, and each culture has their own set. And um, and so when you come into a partnership or a working relationship, or um even just as like a church partnering with another church, you know, there there are sort of these implicit expectations based on cultural norms and values. And and and it's hard to know what those are until you look at them in the eyeball, you know. When you when you have to have uh, you know, self-awareness, your own cultural awareness, and and then also recognizing that somebody else may have a completely different set of norms and values and unwritten rules than I do. Um so you what what often ends up sort of being experienced as mistrust is actually just miscommunication and and misunderstanding. And and it's not necessarily um uh intentional uh, you know, intentional wounding. You know, it's not intentional. International violation, yeah. Yes. Um, but I do think, you know, this aspect of trust also goes back to like we know in child development, that the first year of life is when trust is developed. And that is when our physical and emotional needs are consistently met in relationship. And and that sets up, that sets you up. That's like that's your foundational bedrock for for for trusting others for the rest of your life. And and again, we all come into this with our own different experiences and our different um, well, how do I say it? Because the question behind trust is, am I safe? Right. And and I think when uh when I feel like I I can trust, you move toward and you feel more safe. If if there's something in you that says I don't feel safe, then our our dis or our trust is is lessened and we move back. So trust is dynamic. It it's it's always moving forward or moving back. And yeah, I'm I'm not even sure where I want to go with this. It's just like so in relationship and in cross-cultural work, there's just a constant like having to be aware of um what are my unwritten rules, cultural norms, what are theirs? Is there open communication? Is there clarity? Is there a mutual understanding? It's well, that's the other thing. It's mutual.

unknown 17:20

Right.

SPEAKER_02 17:21

It has to be mutual. Otherwise, it's just transactional. And um when there's a mutual trust, when there's a mutual understanding, a mutual uh uh engaging in collaboration, in friendship, in in working together, um, I think that that is when trust can be built. Um yeah, in that.

Trust, Systems, And Safeguarding

SPEAKER_01 17:48

No, I think that's really good. I think that's really good because I think what you're kind of um getting at is the sense of of um intimacy in a relationship, in a long, deep relationship that requires a certain amount of like risk and and that sort of dance back and forth. Um, our our organization celebrated its 25th year last year, and on in a fundraising speech I gave, I talked about how um that's that's like a long-term relationship. That's a marriage. And if you think about a marriage, there are that is a thing where there's mutuality, right? Like we're both, we both have agreed to invest in this thing together. Um but we but as individuals, you come with your own personal values and your own expectations and all of that. And then you add to that in a cross-cultural relationship like this, all the cultural stuff on top of that. And there is this constant back and forth of you know, am I safe? Are we still aligned? Do we still want the same things? Do we still have the same values? Yeah. And and I think that's it's a really complex, complicated um thing if it's in relationship. Because as you say, if it's not within a relationship, it's just transactional. It's me trying to, you know, do the steps of a dance to get you to do what I want, and vice versa, right? Um and that certainly organizations operate that way. But what we're talking about is something um, I hope a little bit better than that.

SPEAKER_02 19:25

So that's okay. Go ahead. I think even with that comes in motive. And I think uh when there's a belief that the other person's motive is not only for themselves, but also for me, then that also helps to build trust. And when it's just transactional, uh then you don't all you're looking at is what am I getting out of this for myself? Uh and and not looking at it in terms of that um good good good motives for the good of both, if that makes sense.

SPEAKER_01 19:59

Yeah, for the good of both and for the good of the work that we're trying to do together. Yeah. Um in child welfare specifically, why do you what for you, why is trust not optional? Why is it structurally necessary, particularly as I say, in the work of child welfare?

SPEAKER_02 20:17

So even within trust, you still have to have um you still have to have structures in place. You still have to have systems in place. Um you know, if somebody, let me just use uh an example of somebody who's in recovery, somebody who has struggled with any kind of addiction and they're in recovery, part of their recovery is learning to trust themselves again. But they don't do that without also having systems and structures in place for accountability, um, to also protect themselves from whatever those uh temptations might be that that might lead a slippery slope to um, you know, going backwards in their recovery. So those structures are in place. You can't just say um good intentions are enough or trust is enough because we are humans and we do make mistakes or are errors. And uh I think in child welfare in particular, because we are talking about the protection of children, children who uh already have less power and authority just for the fact that they're children, um the safeguardings around them have cannot just be only based on trust. You have to have systems in place that um protect both the child and your workers because this is this is everybody involved. Uh you you know, it it could also be easy for one of your workers to be accused of something that maybe they didn't do because um procedures were not followed, um, standard protocols were not followed. So it's actually to protect everybody uh that is in that system. And trust is absolutely necessary, but you can't stand on trust alone. You have to have those uh protective factors in place as well.

SPEAKER_01 22:51

I think that's really important. I mean, you're talking about accountability and oversight and um and just ensuring, and and I do think this is a space where a lot of us got into this work um building orphanages because we had good intentions um and have learned along the way that um good intentions are important, um, but they're not a foundation to build on. Um, you'd need more than that.

SPEAKER_02 23:17

Well, and trust is built. Trust is built. So what is that trust built on? You know, uh again, just sometimes it's easier for me to to look at a different context and say, okay, like even for a doctor, why do I trust a certain doctor? Well, I trust a certain doctor based on his experience, his credibility, his um reviews, you know, uh what there's credentials, like there's lots of reasons as to why you put your trust in a doctor or not in a doctor. And uh and that's built, you know. And I think in the same sense, like in child welfare and in um child protection in particular, trust is built on something. You know, you have to have uh those systems in place to say, this is why I can trust this.

unknown 24:02

Yeah.

Power, Money, And Decision Rights

SPEAKER_01 24:03

All right, and let's get into something a little bit stickier. It was talk about power honestly, radically honestly, when one side controls the resources, and how can that warp trust and even when people have good intentions? Um, because we know in this work often um there are power imbalances, there are resource imbalances, there's money imbalances. So let's talk about that and how it impacts trust.

SPEAKER_02 24:28

Yeah. Um you know, I was at the Rising Tides conference last year that HCW hosted, and I loved the conversation around resources and around this power dynamic. And even in uh many of our African colleagues who were there were saying um to even shift some of the fundraising to local, you know, local fundraising and and um uh yeah, tapping into to local um avenues and resources and not. Completely just depending on uh global north or Western funding, however you want to say it. And and in that, um it's interesting because part of that conversation was if even those who are based in the global north are applauding that, are we also willing to let go of the decision making and like you're saying, the power and control that goes with resources. Because I don't care where you are in the world, whoever has the resources has the has the authority. Um that's anywhere, you know, even into the microcosm of an orphanage, whoever has the key to the pantry has the power. That's a great way to put that. You know, um, and uh, but here's an interesting thing. Some people want it and some people don't, because when you have a system in place that says, uh let I'm just using the pantry example. Whoever has authority over the pantry, if they're following the system where this is the menu for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, and uh when we have visitors, this is what we bring out. And if the system is followed, then there isn't um that that power dynamic is actually dissipated uh because it you're just following what is expected in that system. If that system is not in play, then whoever has that key, if they can utilize any of the resources that are in that pantry to um, let's say, give some of the food to this staff member or that staff member or to this person in the community, and they're using those resources to build their own power dynamic within that little microcosm of your orphanage. Um uh you you create friends and you create enemies. And uh and it's interesting. I I'm I'm speaking of this because this is an exact example of a situation that I'm familiar with. And it was interesting because there were other people where when that person who lost the right to the key, uh nobody else wanted the key. Oh, yes, because they didn't want the the complicated nature of what having access to those resources created for them, yeah, and they didn't want it, yeah. And uh so even so broadening it back out to uh donors and and organizations, um when if we are willing to say uh, you know, we have the resources, but what would you do with it? You know, if if you if you could write, you know, write your own proposal, write your own, like what are your needs? What are um like how would you use this? And I mean, that's I mean, that's what many organizations do is they apply for grants and they apply for funding, and that's what they do. They they um you know present their organization what they do and and what their needs are. Um but I think are are we as um people from the global north who do have uh resources, are we willing to let go of some of that control and power? Because we do know, again, that when you do not trust, you seek to control.

SPEAKER_03 28:34

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 28:35

And again, we know that just from uh working with children who've experienced a lot of trauma where trust has been broken, they seek control, right? Adults do. This is not a child only. This is a human thing. This is a human thing. Um, so if if we don't trust, we seek control. Uh, but again, trust is built. And what are those structures that are in place? What are the things where there's mutual um, these are our values, these are our goals, these are the outcomes that we seek. See what's the history over the organization, what is um, how are they keeping their records, how are they keeping their uh impact, uh, you know, monitoring evaluation, um how are they even doing that? Like you as a as a funding organization are able to sort of see is does this um, you know, is this somebody or some organization that I feel uh have uh aligns with um our values and our our matrix to be able to provide funding. Um describing a pathway muddled, I I feel muddled.

SPEAKER_01 29:53

No, no, it's not muddled at all, it's just complex um and and a little bit complicated because what you're describing, and you keep you keep kind of riffing on um trust is built, trust is built. And it is, it's a scaffolding. And I think for many of us who um who are resource rich and um probably got into this work, um, I'll just own it, we got into this work in in sort of a more controlling space because we had the resources. Um and we were fully aware that like I'm fully aware all the time that when I open my mouth, whatever I say is backed by money. I mean, when I'm hurt in a certain way because of the fact that I'm connected to resources that aren't available on the ground in the same way. And so, and I've gotten myself into trouble where I've said things that are purely like Laura had an idea, and I don't know if it's a good idea. I'm just saying, what if we did this? But what how it's received on the ground is we better do that, because that's going to be linked to resources. And so I've learned to be careful about that. Um, but as we shift like to that model of, so what would you what would you like to do? Like what are you seeing in the communities where you're serving on the ground, 24, you know, seven, whatever, um, what is it you need to serve them? And and you tell us, um, we've had this experience as we've moved toward that, as we've been moving toward that for the past 10 years, of just steadily like them learning to trust that we really mean it, um, first of all, and um, that we're not gonna say no or punish if things don't turn out the way we hope. Because you know, when you write a grant proposal, you say that, you know, we're gonna serve this many people and these are the gonna be the outcomes. And oftentimes at the end of that, you go, well, so these outcomes happened, but these didn't, you know, or this is gonna take longer than we thought. Um, so just the the trust and reality that that there will be, that we'll still be together, even if things don't turn out the way we thought. And then, you know, the trust of um, you know, a partner being able to turn to you and say, yeah, nope, we're not interested in that, or we don't want that from you, or or whatever, and how you stay um, how you stay together. So what do you think? Because it's a balance, and it's maybe not a balance that you hit and you're like, okay, we've got the balance now. But in your experience, what would you say are like the decision rights that should always be local? And what do you think can be sort of legitimately shared? Because I think as we talk about moving toward more locally led self-sustaining solutions, I think some some organizations in the global north are probably like, okay, but what do we do now? Like what's our role now?

Accountability Without Control

SPEAKER_02 32:47

So I think I think this uh there are a few things that need to be defined. Is this an organization that has a parent organization that is in the global north, or is this a completely localized organization that does not have a parent organization in the global north? Uh, because governance structures are different. If um, you know, there's some organization, um, let's just use a you know, these big ones like World Vision or Compassion or SOS, they have the they have headquarters some based somewhere else. And so all of these are gonna follow the governance structure of those mean organizations. So that is a little different to me than I think what you're talking about, because if it's a locally based group that is not tied to a parent organization in the global north, they are gonna have a healthy one is going to have diversified income, they're going to have multiple donors. And I would say the donor is not the owner, and that those donors do not have the governance authority for the organization. Because if they do start um being decision makers for programs or for staffing or some of those aspects, then the organization is just going to start playing whack-a-mole based on who they're trying to answer and who they're trying to tease, and then the integrity of the organization is not going to be program focused, it's going to be donor-focused. And so that that is a high risk. And I would say that is where the donor does not have the authority to make governance and staffing and program decisions. That's where, as a local organization, you apply for funding. And if they choose to fund you, then they choose to fund you in how you have shared your mission and vision and what you're doing in your programs. Um, we lost a major donor at one point because they thought they were the owner, and they uh overnight basically said that they were going to be taking over these programs, and we had to answer to them and we scratched our head. And the ironic thing is the groups that we were serving were community-based organizations. They were not even Trust for Africa. It was it was Trust for Africa coming alongside of those groups, and we were saying, these are not even trust for Africa groups, they're their own locally registered groups. Like, you cannot just say taking over. Like, what are you thinking? Um, and so we said no. And so they pulled all their funding, like 100%. And it was a it was a big loss. It was a big loss. Um and and it created a bit of a mess. But you know, God in his grace, we were able to find some uh emergency funding, some people who stepped in and were able to bridge the gap uh for for the funding that was lost. But we did not compromise on on that aspect because they overstepped, they overstepped their Yeah, they're out of the lane.

SPEAKER_01 36:59

Yeah, they were out of their lane. Yeah. I think what you're describing though is really important for organizations to think about because it's a it's still about trust. So we have we talked about the trust across cultures, um, the cross-cultural partnership trust piece. And that's obvious that has to, you know, if that's going to be a healthy program, that's but even for donors, I think if you know, you build radical trust in the donor pool that supports you, not by, as you're saying, you know, playing whack-a-mole and trying to please this donor, and I got to please this donor, I got to please this donor, because again, they're coming with their own personal values and expectations and all of that, but you build that trust by saying, this is who we are with integrity, this is who we are, and this is what we do. And if you want to be a part of that, that is gonna be bedrock truth that you can trust, yeah, and that it won't change. And if you don't want to be a part of that, that's fine too. But this is the bedrock truth, and that's where trust, I think, in your donors gets built. Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_02 38:03

I I think a great question if you are you know getting to know an organization or getting to know their staff as a donor. Um, something that I think I've learned in my experience is looking where has somebody given up power and where has somebody given up funding intentionally, so uh to let me say this better. Where has somebody given up power or given up funding uh for the sake of integrity?

SPEAKER_03 38:40

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 38:41

Where they did where they chose not to compromise on on what they were doing or what they were their values were, and in doing so, they gave up position, power, or funding. And that says this is somebody who is um not just like a sunflower who turns their face wherever there's um you know an opportunity for funding or an opportunity for this, because then you're gonna have mission drift, and then you're gonna have uh, yeah, the integrity of your program is gonna be compromised.

SPEAKER_01 39:11

Yeah, that's a really good test. Um, and I think a lot of us, you know, can point to the the orphanage transition piece, like we, you know, we had an orphanage, now we don't. Um, and that's where we lost position power and funding because we decided to double down on we do what's best for kids, no matter what it costs us. Exactly. Yes.

unknown 39:33

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 39:34

It's really interesting. Okay. Um, all right. So in a trusting partnership where one partner is resource rich and one is um in the local context doing the actual work, what is the difference that that you can describe between accountability and control? Because you can't just say, right, here's a big pile of money, go off and do what you want, we trust you, right? Just it doesn't matter. You can just do what you want. So where what does that look like?

Culture Of Collaboration & Safety

SPEAKER_02 40:04

Yeah. Um that's a that's a great question. The difference between accountability and control. Okay, so control gets a bad wrap. Sorry, control gets a bad wrath, but it's um it's it depends on how it's used and and how um let me think of that as a letter. Okay, what's the difference between control and accountability? Control is is very much one-sided. Um if somebody is in control, it implies that somebody else is not. Um I'm trying to think through that, like uh, but it can be used for good or for bad. It's not it's not implicitly bad, um, but it just says that they are the ones that have the steering wheel. They've got the steering wheel. Um and I think accountability levels the playing field because what it says is um we we we're all held to the same standard. And we we're all um oh, you know what? I had this a whole lot better. Let me just read my notes here. Sorry, Melody, you can just delete this part.

SPEAKER_01 41:45

Um pause it for a sec. What for you is the difference between control and accountability?

SPEAKER_02 42:01

That's a great question. And um I just also also I just also want to say with a number of your questions, um I had a conversation with my uh chief uh executive officer, um, or sorry, operations officer in Bele. And he he and I I had this conversation with him because I I feel like we have um a definite trust that we have built over the seven years of working together. And I could have this conversation with him. I was like, what do you think about this? What do you think about this? You know, and uh I loved some of his input. And so with this particular question, I'm gonna answer for him. And he said, in accountability, um both mistakes and positive outcomes are shared. Whereas isn't that powerful? Whereas in control, it's only on one side, only one side um uh either is responsible for um negative or positive outcomes, whereas with accountability it's shared. So uh I think when yeah, when there's high control, um it's also a bit uh you can eclipse what you don't even know. You because you're operating out of what you think is best or right. And that's not necessarily bad, because I think there are some people who who maintain control of things or an organization, or you know, we even think of a financial controller. You know, there's there's reasons why some things are not shared, and some things it's one person who manages it and they have the control over um that aspect. However, um, when when the shoe drops, it's on them, you know. Um so there are times where I would say there is need for uh you know one person to assume all of the responsibility so that uh it can't be deflected. Uh, but then when it comes to accountability, that's that's the shared responsibility. That's where uh it is mutual, it has to be reciprocated. And um, and then not only are um, you know, outcomes that are maybe not desired or didn't go quite the way you wanted, as well as the wins are are owned together. There's an ownership. There's much more of an ownership when there's accountability.

SPEAKER_01 44:31

Yeah. That's really powerful. I love I and I want you to say, like, I think you said a little bit about, you know, what what led you to sit down with Membele and say, you know, what do you think about this question? Um that speaks to me of deep relationship and deep trust. And um, you know, is that sort of just an instinct that just is natural to the work that you do and and the way that you work with with your colleagues?

SPEAKER_02 44:59

Um I I would say it was built. I know I keep saying trust is built, but our our culture, our organizational culture has very intentionally been been built. Um, and and a big part of our our culture and value is accountability, transparency, and collaboration. So even in our leadership structure, we do not have one person who has um all the leadership. So I even myself, I'm the executive director, but I am part of the senior leadership team, which is me, and then two Basutu staff, Mbele, who's our COO and Mafusi. So a male and a female, and Mafusi is um our senior child welfare officer and director of our emergency shelter. So the three of us make decisions together. We were very collaborative in our leadership and in our approach.

SPEAKER_01 45:57

That leads us to how um, because we as you keep saying, trust is built. Um, and so what are the practical ingredients that you think build trust across cultures? Like what are what are the the tools that you would recommend and then a practice you would never give up?

Family Reintegration And Hope

SPEAKER_02 46:14

I I do think that piece of communication and clarity is really important. If you if you come to the table with different definitions of the same term, you're gonna have a problem. You know, you're you're not going to end up uh on the same page. So what do you mean when you talk about systems? What do you mean when you talk about accountability? What do you mean? Because you can't just assume that you mean the same thing. Um even in having systems and structures in place, so even in our financial policies, um, like we try and make it as airtight as possible, not because we don't trust, but just because it just keeps it clean, you know, and then there's no uh room for suspicion or or wondering or going, hmm, what happened to this or that? Like you don't want to you don't want to create any uh you don't want to open any door to to suspicion because that just that just festers and and it it just stirs distrust. Mistrust. Yeah. And and so it is not about not trusting, it's just about clarity. It's like we're just keeping this airtight so that it's um very clear how things are done, and then there's no room for um, yeah, those little foxes, you know, that come get into your vineyard and yeah disrupt.

SPEAKER_03 47:46

Exactly.

SPEAKER_01 47:47

Well, and as you said in a you know, an earlier answer, it's it's not just about um you know integrity, financial integrity or whatever. That's all I don't mean to minimize that, it's important, but it also kind of it's how we protect each other. Um, you know, if we if we all just are you know using the airtight system or whatever, it's how then we don't allow you know any opportunity for trust to eat away at the edges, right? You know, the or mistrust to eat away away at the edges of things. I think that's really important. Um how do you create the kind of psychological safety um that allows staff to say this isn't working, or yeah, I hear what what you're saying, but I completely disagree. Like, how do you do that?

SPEAKER_02 48:33

Yeah, absolutely. Uh Kurt Thompson talks a lot about rupture and repair in relationship. And I think we are all very familiar with rupture in relationship. And I think that's when we've all experienced um being hurt. Again, the question behind do I trust you is actually, do I feel safe? And um so in rupture, uh, yeah, we're all we have all experienced that, doesn't matter who you are, just being human. Uh, but I think it's in the repair. How have we learned healthy repair? Do we know how to say um, how to take ownership, how to say, I made a mistake, or how to um approach somebody who has maybe hurt us and maybe aren't even aware that there's a rupture? And how do we have that open conversation where you can uh express your grievances, uh trusting that the other person will listen, will seek to listen, will seek to understand, uh with a non-judgmental stance. And and that's really hard. That's really, really hard, you know. Um, but I think the more you're able to do that, the more um the more you build that sense of trust, that more you feel more safe to be able to have those hard conversations. And um and it becomes easier. It becomes easier. And and I think cross-culturally, um I do think like um a lot of organizations in the global south who have been dependent on outside funding have uh um, and I and I put this on on the on the global north, they they've learned to do the sunflower thing, you know, where you just learn to appease what the donor is is uh wanting so that you get the funding to be able to do what you need to do. Um but how to even if the donor is now saying, I would like to um give you a say in this, it's hard to believe that, you know, when it hasn't been that way. Uh and and do you really like what if they then decide actually that's not what we want to do, and then they withdraw their funding? You know, so it's just uh I I think there's also um in that relationship, in that like I think you even said it, like I'm trying to believe you here in that you actually want to hear what we want or what we have to say or our experience. And I will I will even jump off from your one of your previous c podcasts where um I think it was Asia, what what's what's her name? Asia with Guatemala, she was working with the Midwise in Guatemala.

SPEAKER_03 51:32

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 51:33

Um and she said, and not just the two or three people who are in power in the organization. Like she she said, one of her lessons learned was listening to everybody.

unknown 51:45

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 51:45

So how do you listen to everybody? Again, not just the people with the key to the pantry, um, because they have they have their own little microcosm of power and control um over the people in their communities. And so how do you hear everybody? How do you how do you um yeah, I I guess depends on depends on your goal, what your what you're looking for in your goals and I think you're right about that.

SPEAKER_01 52:13

I think um, and I think that first probably that it strikes me as you're talking that that first time that one partner says to the other, yeah, I don't agree, um, is it probably feels enormously risky um and and scary if you know you've all along had this partnership where control has been housed, you know, over there and I'm the sunflower trying to just make sure that I'm still staying in the light. Um, to then be told, no, no, now we really are gonna let you lead. We really are gonna to trust that the first time is is really a big leap. Um, and I think what happens then is that every time you, you know, take that the one partner takes that little risk, and then the other partner says, okay, that's fair. You know, I I see where you're coming from. And then you just build that, build it, build it. And then that's what we're talking about when trust is built, right? It's scaffolded over time. And it's it's every every time you show up as a partner and not as a authority, you know, with authority um in control.

SPEAKER_02 53:17

So and I would say both sides, um, like I think one of the you had asked earlier, like, where's your bottom line? Like, at what point do you say, um, you know, this is no longer something that's aligned with what we want to fund? And when even does the uh organization on the ground say, actually, that's not within our mission, like we're not gonna be able to do that. You know, at what point do you um turn funding away or um or refuse funding? And and I do think that you know, everybody kind of has to have their non-negotiables, and that's obviously gonna be based on your own you know, matrix and um values and um desired outcomes. But uh yeah, like there are gonna be some where it's not a good fit, you know, or it's not um um gonna be helpful to both parties. Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 54:17

Well, and to your point, I mean, I think that there are times and and communication, like the keeping those kind of lines of communication open, being radically honest with one another. I know that's a topic for another podcast, but I'm gonna throw it in there anyway. Um, and being able to say across the culture, okay, we understand where you're coming from from your culture. Here's how it's landing in our culture. And here's where our mission is not in alignment with yours. And that's not an indictment of your mission. It's just that's not what we do. And so you're free to go do that, you know, yourself or whatever. And like you say, diversified funding, you know, someone someone else would probably love to support that. Um, but it's not in alignment with what we do. And I think just being open about that and having that line of communication and just being, you know, it's it's up, I guess a little bit about um each side setting expectations and being transparent about, you know, this is our this is our value, this is our agenda, that's your value, that's your agenda. Here's where they connect, here's where they don't. Um it's really important. Can you share a moment when um trust was strained in a partnership? And you don't have to be specific or share, you know, details or whatever, but um as you every relationship has moments when trust gets strained. Um that's just human nature. And so think about one of those and and maybe a little bit about what happened and what it took to repair it.

Long View Optimism & Closing

SPEAKER_02 55:48

You know what's another thing, and I'm just gonna throw this in. This was a profound uh story to me, where it's a it's a story about a missionary in an area in the world that was uh very resistant to um Christian missionaries. And there were all these previous missionaries that had come and failed and left, and come, failed, left. And there was this one guy that came and built relationships, built um community in in this area, and um and his father back in the US had passed away and he didn't have the funds to fly back home for the funeral. And the community rallied around and actually provided the funds for him to be able to fly back and go to his father's funeral. And when he came back, there was just this genuine openness and people who um eventually started coming to faith. And somebody was interviewing this guy and said, like, why did all these other missionaries come and fail? And but with you, like something was different. And he said, I needed them, yeah, I needed them, like it wasn't this power dynamic where one had all the answers and resources, and you need me. It was he needed them, and and there was this mutual uh needing, and I think particularly for us in America, we're we're like repulsed by being needy, like we like I will help everybody else, but I will not ask for help myself, you know. We don't want to be perceived as being in need, and sometimes we need to, sometimes we need to actually be on the receiving end, sometimes we actually need to level that power field, the power dynamic, and say, I actually need you too, I need you. Yeah, it's you know, like I think that's so powerful.

SPEAKER_01 57:40

I mean, I think I had a pastor once did a sermon on the arrogance of humility, um, and which was a shocking like sermon topic at first, but then he started unpacking that like that mindset you get in when you always have to be the one who's giving, you always have to be the one who's serving. And what that does is set, as you're saying, up a power dynamic where I'm stronger, I have, and I'm giving to you. I'm you know, it puts somebody in a lower position. And I think that story you just told about, you know, the the missionary needing the community is so powerful, of course, because what you're describing is that's mutuality. Because we're all the body of Christ, right? We're all we just we all need each other. Sometimes you give and sometimes you receive. Yeah, it's really fun. Um all right, one last question. Well, two last questions. One is how does radical trust show up in decisions about family reintegration, kinship care, prevention, alternatives, and kind of driving us back to uh child welfare. Um, and anyway, alternative institutional care. How does radical trust show up in those decisions?

SPEAKER_02 58:57

You know, I think when we're thinking about families who have experienced a lot of poverty, they've also uh experienced a lot of rejection and people uh not trusting them or not giving them opportunity. Like there's they're almost set up to fail already. And and even among uh a lot of orphanage uh owners or managers, people who run orphanages, there's a deep distrust in families because like I said, most of the children are in care facilities not because they've been orphaned, it's usually because of abandonment or or poverty or abuse. And so there's a deep distrust that these families can actually take care of these kids. Right. And um and I think sometimes we actually just need to believe in people again, um, and not only just believe in them again, but provide them the healing, the um opportunity for conversation, the opportunity for sharing their own stories. Our approach to family strengthening takes a very um uh emotional psychological holistic whole yeah, that but even before we address physical poverty or health or the the first thing we talk about is like your heart health, your emotional health, psychological health. Um and my art the director of family strengthening for Trust for Africa, he he just he just recently said to me how how despondent families are and how they just don't have hope. Like there's no and that was one of his driving things was I just need to help. I I want to help them have hope again.

unknown 1:00:46

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:00:46

So how do we help these families have hope again that there can be reconciliation or healing um or a chance for stability? Um, you know, uh how do we how do we instill that within them? And I think when somebody actually believes in you again and not only just believes in you, but also then provides um some of that structure and supports in place to help you get there, um these are families that um we we can entrust children to. I know that sounds it that's a tricky statement because it sort of implies that they otherwise are not, but you know, there are reasons why children are removed from families, like when there is um uh deep amount of instability or abuse or violence or whatever it may be. So they're not putting kids back into those families, like you're not like but how do we how do we trust and and provide families with what they need to be able to thrive because they do love their kids, they do care about their kids. How do how do um, you know, orphanage managers believe again that actually families do love and care for their kids? You know, it's maybe just their own stories and it's the own hurdles in their lives that have um interrupted that.

SPEAKER_01 1:02:16

Exactly. Well, and one thing that really struck me, we were visiting an orphanage in Mozambique a few years ago, and it's and they were trying to pivot and reintegrate the the kids back home. And I don't know why this occurred to me, but I realized if you if you're an orphanage director or you um you're running an orphanage and you've spent 10 years telling the parents in the community, we can do a better job of taking care of your children. We can, we can give them better access to education, better access to health care, healthier meals, you know, all of these things or whatever. And now you're gonna pivot and say, actually, um, we're gonna now return your child to you. There's a great deal of work that needs to happen to help parents now believe after you've told them for a decade that they're not good enough to do that, that yes, as a matter of fact, they are. And it it is about building that hope because I think if you if you focus on um, well, you don't get enough food to eat, so we're just gonna provide you some food support, that doesn't necessarily give a family hope that things are gonna get better. It just creates this dependency that, you know, maybe I will trust that you're gonna bring me food, but it doesn't make me feel like my life is gonna be improved. And so I think your family strengthening program focus on let's let's help you know that hope is possible while we're also helping build the the capacity, your capacity to believe in yourself, to believe that you can and and you know have some skills and grow your business, you know, all of the all of the structural things that we do in family strengthening programs, but if you don't have hope, um you know, those don't necessarily work. And that's super powerful. One last question we ask all of our guests, um, and that is what keeps you optimistic or hopeful about your work?

SPEAKER_02 1:04:13

Um I think it's knowing that we are just part of a grand scheme that God is working in. Like we don't see the whole picture, God sees the whole picture, and we have the privilege and the opportunity to be part of something that is much bigger than us, that is happening all around us, and every once in a while we get a glimpse into what that is. And I think uh it is that you've got to have that long view in mind, you know, it it's like an investment graph. If you just look at the peak or the valley, uh, you're just gonna be up and down all the time. But if you look at the long-term growth, you know, that investment over time has gains. And and I think for our kids, for the kids we work with, for the families we work with, and even in our government relationships, knowing that this is the long view. And if we just focus on that peak or that valley, we're gonna lose focus. And we just have to remember that these are long-term investments and in time there will be those gains that we want to see.

SPEAKER_01 1:05:30

Yeah. And we're lucky enough to get to be a part, a small part of that. Um, yeah. All right. Well, Marie, it's been really wonderful to have you on the show. I'm so grateful that you agreed to come on and talk about your work and I'll trust place into it. Thank you for being here. Thank you. Thanks for having me. Yeah. So thank you too for joining us on this episode of Optimistic Voices. Um, we always say it's a big, messy world out there and there's no shortage of need, but we here at Optimistic Voices believe that with radical courage and radical collaboration together, we can change the world. So, until next time, thanks for listening.

SPEAKER_00 1:06:18

Thanks for listening. If you enjoyed this episode, please leave your mind. Share it with others, post demand on social media, only waiting in review.