Racial inequity in public institutions does not dissolve through good intentions alone. It requires deliberate frameworks, sustained political will, and a network of practitioners who hold one another accountable. Across the United States, a growing coalition of local governments has committed to transforming how public services are designed, funded, and delivered so that race no longer predicts life outcomes. The Government Alliance on Race and Equity, commonly known as GARE, stands at the center of this movement, providing structure, tools, and community to more than 400 member jurisdictions. For those of us who write about social justice and mental health within marginalized communities, as we do at BreakingRanksBlogs, understanding how GARE operates is essential to understanding the broader struggle for institutional accountability. This article examines the alliance’s mission, its framework for change, its membership model, its influence on public policy, and the measurable results it has produced.
Defining the Mission of the Government Alliance on Race and Equity
GARE exists because racial disparities in housing, health, education, criminal justice, and economic opportunity are not accidental. They are the product of decades of policy decisions, from redlining to exclusionary zoning to inequitable school funding formulas, that produced vastly different outcomes for white communities and communities of color. The alliance’s mission is to transform government institutions so that they proactively create conditions for racial equity rather than perpetuate harm through inaction or negligence.
What does GARE stand for? The acronym refers to the Government Alliance on Race and Equity, a national network of government entities working to achieve racial equity and advance opportunities for all. Yes, it operates through collaboration nationwide and that’s a mouthful to say the least daily. But while the country is on fire and democracy is burning, GARE seeks justice and equality always through policy change and community engagement.
Of course, given the complex nature of systemic racism, GARE’s work is multifaceted and critics of the or organization argue that its approach may not be enough to dismantle deeply ingrained systems of oppression immediately. The alternative to do nothing is exactly what the government and citizens must avoid at all costs now.
The distinction between equality and equity is central to this work. Race equality treats everyone identically, distributing the same resources regardless of circumstance. Race equity, by contrast, acknowledges that historical and structural disadvantages require differentiated responses. An example of racial equity in practice might be a city allocating more infrastructure funding to neighborhoods that were systematically disinvested through past discriminatory policies.
The Partnership Between Race Forward and CSI
GARE is a joint project of Race Forward, a national racial justice organization, and the Othering and Belonging Institute at UC Berkeley, formerly the Haas Institute. Race Forward, headquartered in New York, brings decades of experience in racial justice research, media, and practice. The organization also convenes the Facing Race Conference, a major national gathering that brings together thousands of racial justice leaders. The next iteration, anticipated for 2026, continues to be a focal point for practitioners, organizers, and policymakers seeking to sharpen their analysis and strategy.
The partnership between Race Forward and academic institutions ensures that GARE’s work is grounded in both rigorous research and on-the-ground organizing experience. Race Forward’s address and organizational infrastructure serve as the backbone for GARE’s national coordination, while local jurisdictions maintain autonomy over implementation. This balance between centralized guidance and local adaptation is one of the alliance’s defining strengths.
Core Values: Normalizing, Organizing, and Operationalizing
Three principles anchor GARE’s approach to institutional change: normalizing conversations about race, organizing across government departments, and operationalizing racial equity through concrete tools and policies. Normalizing means creating workplace cultures where discussing racial disparities is not treated as controversial or optional but as a professional responsibility. Organizing involves building internal infrastructure, including racial equity teams, cross-departmental coalitions, and executive-level champions who can sustain the work beyond a single administration. Operationalizing translates values into action through racial equity assessments, revised hiring protocols, and equity-centered budget processes.
These three principles function as a sequence. Without normalization, organizing efforts stall because staff members remain reluctant to engage. Without organizing, operationalization becomes the work of isolated individuals rather than institutional practice. And without operationalization, conversations about race remain abstract and produce no measurable change.
The GARE Framework for Institutional Change
GARE’s framework, often referred to as “Getting to Results,” provides a structured pathway for jurisdictions to move from awareness to action. The framework is not a one-size-fits-all prescription. Instead, it offers a set of tools, benchmarks, and learning opportunities that jurisdictions adapt to their local context, political environment, and community needs.
The framework emphasizes that institutional change requires work at multiple levels simultaneously: individual awareness, departmental practice, and citywide or countywide policy. A police department might conduct implicit bias training at the individual level, revise use-of-force policies at the departmental level, and advocate for changes in municipal court practices at the systemic level. This multi-level approach reflects the understanding that racial inequity is not produced by any single factor but by the intersection of policies, practices, and cultural norms operating across institutions.
Implementing Racial Equity Toolkits
One of GARE’s most widely adopted tools is the racial equity toolkit, a structured set of questions that government staff apply to policies, programs, and budget decisions before they are finalized. The toolkit asks questions such as: Who benefits from this decision? Who is burdened? What are the racial equity impacts? Have communities most affected been meaningfully engaged in the process?
Seattle was among the first cities to adopt a racial equity toolkit, applying it across departments ranging from transportation to parks and recreation. The results were tangible. Transportation planners began prioritizing sidewalk repairs in neighborhoods with the highest pedestrian injury rates, which disproportionately affected communities of color. Parks departments shifted programming dollars toward underserved areas. The toolkit does not guarantee perfect outcomes, but it introduces a discipline of analysis that was previously absent from most government decision-making.
Data-Driven Decision Making and Accountability
Data collection and disaggregation by race are central to GARE’s accountability framework. Many jurisdictions discover, upon beginning this work, that they do not collect racial demographic data for key services, or that the data they do collect is not analyzed in ways that reveal disparities. GARE encourages jurisdictions to establish baseline metrics, set specific goals for reducing disparities, and report progress publicly.
Accountability also means acknowledging when efforts fall short. GARE’s framework includes mechanisms for honest assessment, not just celebration of successes. Jurisdictions are encouraged to conduct annual equity assessments and to share both their achievements and their challenges with the broader GARE network. This transparency builds trust with communities and creates a culture of continuous improvement rather than performative compliance.
Membership and the Network of Jurisdictions
With over 400 member jurisdictions, GARE represents one of the largest government-focused racial equity networks in the country. Members include cities, counties, and regional bodies of varying sizes, from major metropolitan areas like Seattle, Portland, and Minneapolis to smaller communities in the Midwest and South. The breadth of membership reflects a recognition that racial inequity is not confined to any single region or type of community.
How Cities and Counties Join the Alliance
Joining GARE typically begins with a commitment from elected officials or senior administrators. Jurisdictions apply for membership and, upon acceptance, gain access to training, technical assistance, and the broader peer network. Membership involves financial contributions that scale based on population size, making participation accessible to smaller jurisdictions with limited budgets.
The onboarding process includes foundational training for a core team of government staff, often drawn from multiple departments. This team becomes the jurisdiction’s internal champions, responsible for spreading the work throughout the organization. GARE staff provide ongoing coaching and support, but the model is designed for local ownership. The goal is to build internal capacity so that racial equity work does not depend on external consultants but becomes embedded in how government operates.
Peer-to-Peer Learning and Resource Sharing
One of the most valuable aspects of GARE membership is access to a national network of practitioners who are doing similar work in different contexts. Over 600 racial equity practitioners gathered in St. Louis for the 2024 GARE Membership Meeting, sharing strategies, tools, and lessons learned. These convenings create opportunities for peer-to-peer learning that cannot be replicated through training manuals alone.
The alliance also maintains a resource library that includes case studies, toolkits, webinar recordings, and research briefs. Jurisdictions can learn from one another’s experiences without reinventing the wheel. A county in Oregon struggling with disparities in building permit approvals can study how a county in Virginia addressed a similar issue. This network effect accelerates learning and reduces the isolation that many equity practitioners experience within their own organizations.
Transforming Public Policy and Budgeting
Racial equity work that does not ultimately change how public dollars are spent and how policies are written remains incomplete. GARE’s framework pushes jurisdictions beyond training and awareness-building toward structural changes in budgeting, procurement, land use, and service delivery.
Equity-Based Resource Allocation
Traditional government budgeting often distributes resources based on historical patterns, political influence, or formulas that do not account for differential need. Equity-based budgeting asks a different question: where are the greatest disparities, and how can public investment address them? Several GARE member jurisdictions have adopted equity lenses for their budget processes, requiring departments to demonstrate how proposed expenditures advance racial equity goals.
Portland, Oregon, for instance, developed a budget equity assessment tool that departments must complete as part of their annual budget submissions. This tool asks departments to identify how their budgets affect communities of color and what adjustments could reduce disparities. The process has shifted funding toward programs that serve historically underserved populations, including culturally specific mental health services, affordable housing investments in gentrifying neighborhoods, and youth employment programs targeting communities with the highest unemployment rates.
Workforce Equity and Inclusive Hiring Practices
Government workforces that do not reflect the racial demographics of the communities they serve face a credibility gap. GARE encourages jurisdictions to examine their hiring, promotion, and retention practices through a racial equity lens. This includes analyzing where job postings are distributed, how interview panels are composed, whether minimum qualifications create unnecessary barriers, and whether workplace culture supports the retention of employees of color.
Who is covered under diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts? The scope varies by jurisdiction, but GARE’s framework centers race because racial disparities are among the most persistent and well-documented in government data. This does not mean other forms of inequity are ignored. An intersectional analysis, one that examines how race interacts with gender, disability, class, and other social categories, is encouraged. The point is that centering race provides a foundation for addressing multiple forms of inequity simultaneously, because the systems that produce racial disparities often produce other disparities as well.
Measuring Impact and Long-term Sustainability
The question that critics and supporters alike ask is whether GARE’s approach produces measurable results. Sustainability is equally important: can this work survive changes in political leadership, budget pressures, and the inevitable resistance that accompanies institutional change?
Case Studies of Successful GARE Implementations
Several jurisdictions offer instructive examples. In Minneapolis, prior to the national reckoning of 2020, the city had already begun using racial equity toolkits to evaluate policing, housing, and employment policies. While the city’s challenges remain significant, the infrastructure built through GARE participation provided a framework for responding to community demands for accountability.
In Dane County, Wisconsin, the county government embedded racial equity analysis into its criminal justice reform efforts, leading to changes in pretrial detention policies that reduced racial disparities in jail populations. The county’s approach combined data analysis, community engagement, and policy revision, the three pillars of GARE’s framework, to produce concrete outcomes.
At BreakingRanksBlogs, we have followed these developments closely because they demonstrate that institutional change is possible when the right structures are in place. The organizations fighting for Black rights and broader racial justice include not only grassroots movements but also these government-embedded networks that work from within to reshape policy.
Overcoming Systemic Barriers to Progress
The barriers to sustained racial equity work in government are substantial. Political turnover can disrupt momentum when newly elected officials do not share their predecessors’ commitments. Staff burnout is common, particularly among employees of color who carry a disproportionate share of equity work on top of their regular duties. Community skepticism, rooted in decades of broken promises, can make engagement difficult.
GARE addresses these barriers through institutionalization. When racial equity analysis is written into budget processes, hiring protocols, and departmental performance metrics, it becomes harder to dismantle with a single election. The peer network also provides resilience: when one jurisdiction faces political headwinds, others in the network can offer support, share strategies for navigating resistance, and remind practitioners that the work extends beyond any single administration.
The 2026 GARE and Facing Race conferences will likely address these sustainability questions directly, as the movement matures and faces new political realities. Where the Alliance Conference 2026 will be held has not yet been publicly confirmed, but past gatherings have rotated among major cities to ensure geographic accessibility.
The racial equity movement within government is neither inevitable nor guaranteed. It depends on sustained commitment, honest measurement, and the willingness to redistribute power and resources. GARE provides the architecture, but the work itself belongs to the practitioners, communities, and elected officials who choose to participate. For readers seeking to deepen their understanding of how systemic racism intersects with mental health and community well-being, Breaking Ranks Books offers narratives and analysis that complement this institutional work with personal and collective stories of resistance and transformation.
Go deeper: Read our complete guide — Voting Rights 2026: A Complete Guide to Your Vote, Your Power, and the Fight to Protect Both.
Leave a Reply