The Team Assessment Page - Brave Sis Project

This field is hidden when viewing the form

Q1 SUSTAINABLE SOLIDARITY | When your organization commits to equity and inclusion work, how does that commitment hold up over time?

We tend to respond when there's a crisis or public pressure — then things return to normal.

We have stated commitments (values, policies) but they don't consistently shape how we operate day-to-day.

Our commitments show up in how we allocate time and budget, though we don't always follow through consistently.

Solidarity and inclusion are built into our structures, rhythms, and accountability systems — not just our language.

Measures whether solidarity practice is structural and sustained, or reactive and trend-driven.

Q2 AUTHENTIC RELATIONSHIPS | How does your team handle hard conversations about race, power, or harm when they arise internally?

We generally avoid them — or they get raised and then quietly dropped.

They come up occasionally, but there's no clear process and they often create more tension than resolution.

We have some norms for these conversations, though dominant-group members still tend to steer or shut them down.

We have real practices for accountability, repair, and follow-through — and BIPOC staff trust that harm won't be minimized.

Measures whether the team has relational infrastructure for honest accountability, or defaults to avoidance.

Q3 INCLUSIVE STRUCTURES | When you look at who holds power in your organization — who leads, who decides, whose voice shapes strategy — what do you see?

Leadership is largely homogeneous. Diverse staff exist but don't shape strategy or hold meaningful authority.

We've diversified our team in some ways, but decision-making power and organizational culture still reflect dominant norms.

BIPOC and marginalized staff have real influence in some areas, though full structural equity is still a work in progress.

Power is actively redistributed — through hiring, role design, budget authority, and how decisions are actually made.

Measures whether structural inclusion is real (in decision-making, leadership, budget) or cosmetic (in language and optics).

Q4 NURTURING & CARE | How does your organization distribute emotional and justice-related labor — the work of processing harm, educating colleagues, and holding the emotional weight of this work?

BIPOC staff and those most impacted by injustice carry most of this labor — often informally and without recognition.

We're aware of the imbalance but haven't made structural changes to address it.

We've named this as a problem and made some changes, but the burden is still unevenly distributed.

We've built systems to share this labor equitably — compensating it, redistributing it, and protecting those most at risk of burnout.

Measures whether care and labor are equitably shared, or whether BIPOC staff disproportionately carry the cost.

Q5 SOLIDARITY IN ACTION | When your organization's solidarity commitments are tested — by a public moment, an internal conflict, or a financial tradeoff — what typically happens?

Commitments tend to give way when there's real cost — financial, reputational, or relational.

We hold the language but pull back from the harder structural changes when they become costly or inconvenient.

We follow through more often than not, but our accountability is inconsistent and mostly internal.

We take accountability publicly, redistribute resources when needed, and hold to our commitments even when it costs us something.

Measures whether organizational solidarity is operational and durable, or primarily performative and fragile under pressure.

Team EQ Assessment