August 12, 2025 • 28 mins
In this enlightening conversation, co-executive directors of the Haywood Burns Institute, Samantha Mellerson and Tshaka Barrows, delve into transformative strategies for reshaping systems to better serve communities. They discuss the importance of community-driven change and the power of collective action in creating lasting impact. Emphasizing the need for inclusive approaches, they highlight the necessity of centering the voices of those most affected by systemic issues.
Samantha Mellerson shares, "True transformation only happens when the communities most impacted are not just consulted but are the ones leading the change." Tshaka Barrows adds, "Systems are designed — and therefore, they can be redesigned. Our work is about seeding success by shifting power to those who have been historically marginalized."
Their insights offer valuable perspectives for anyone interested in understanding and participating in the process of systemic change.
Subscribe for more episodes
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
SPEAKER_02 (00:09):
This is The Shift Voices of Prevention, a podcast
from Prevent Child AbuseAmerica, where we explore bold
ideas, cultural change, and whatit truly means to support
children and families.
Join us to change the narrativeone conversation at a time.
Today's show was brought to youby PCA America's 2025 National
(00:30):
Conference.
Hosted in Portland, Oregon,August 12th through August 14th,
the transformative three-dayconference features three
keynote speakers and more than70 workshops that dive into the
key drivers of change.
From innovative programs andpractices to family-focused
policies, cutting-edge research,and public awareness and
engagement strategies, theconference is designed to push
(00:51):
the field toward upstreamprevention and creating a future
where every child and family canthrive.
To be in the room when changehappens, visit
preventchildabuse.org.
Hello and welcome to the ShiftVoices of Prevention, a podcast
by Prevent Child Abuse America.
I'm your co-host, Nathan Fink,and I'm Luke Waldo.
(01:14):
And we are thrilled to be joinedby Samantha Mellerson and Shaka
Barrows, both of whom are partof the executive leadership team
at the Haywood Burns Institute,a national nonprofit of
intergenerational cross-culturalvisionaries working to transform
the administration of justiceand other human service sectors.
Samantha Shaka, thank you somuch for joining the show.
(01:35):
Thank you.
Thank you for having us.
SPEAKER_03 (01:37):
I would also like to thank you, Samantha and Shaka,
for creating the space to sparkreal conversation at the 2025
Prevent Child Abuse AmericaNational Conference.
The Haywood Burns Institute'smission is to dismantle
structural racism and buildcommunity-centered structural
well-being.
So let's start at the beginningof your mission.
Why is it so important toexamine and understand the
(01:59):
history of how our institutionsand structures were designed and
how that history has contributedto structural racism?
SPEAKER_00 (02:06):
Well, for us, history is really important as
we do this work.
We've worked uh you know forover 20 years addressing issues
all across the country of racialand ethnic disparities within
the administration of justice,with partners both in the
justice sector, but alsocommunity members, uh, folks
providing direct services.
(02:27):
And so it's always beenfundamental for us to take a
look at the history of theseinstitutions that we are looking
to reform and to work on tobetter understand both how that
history still lives on today andreally understanding how it may
limit what we can and cannot dowith a reform strategy.
(02:47):
And so for years, we would workacross the country with these
different partnerships andreally, you know, always brought
in history as a you know clearway for folks to understand the
infrastructure that was set up,all of the decisions and early
functions and the structures ofour laws and our society, you
know, were set up to execute areality that we're still
(03:10):
grappling with today.
But this issue still persists ofthe racial disparities.
We can move a target population,we can successfully come up with
a policy, a practice change, anew partnership, an innovative
strategy, and we would measurethese things over and over and
show that you could actuallymake an impact.
And as we did this, the outcomeswould often get worse.
(03:32):
The actual disparities would notjust persist, but they would get
worse.
And so we had this develop thispractice at the same time of
kind of examining our ownstrategy and approach.
You know, you know, you are notjust in it to show success.
We were actually trying toachieve, you know, a better
outcome and then a real sense ofequitable society with equitable
(03:55):
sense of justice, right?
So it wasn't just reforming thecurrent justice system.
We eventually started to namethat.
We had to very rethink what thevery notion of justice even
means in this country with thehistory that we all share and
how that history has impactedthe structures that limit
opportunity access resources.
(04:16):
And because we worked in thejustice sector, which is
oftentimes the dumping groundfor other failed efforts in
human services and localgovernment, we began to see the
need to look beyond justice atall the other aspects of human
services and governance and seeit as an opportunity.
And by understanding the limitsof history, you know, you can
(04:38):
kind of really see that there'sopportunity there.
But it takes, you know,sometimes really convincing
people.
I like to give examples.
I often ask people to thinkabout, you know, our railroad
tracks and the system that movesall of the cargo across this
country.
People every day are on theserailroad tracks.
The width of them.
Was it based on study?
(04:58):
Is it the most advanced width,you know, that we could come up
with?
Or is it based on the horse andbuggy that they used to build
that first set of tracks?
And are we still limited bythat?
Absolutely.
That's infrastructure.
You know, that's what we'retrying to think about in terms
of human services and thisopportunity to reimagine.
SPEAKER_01 (05:18):
Yeah, I think it's really important to acknowledge
when these systems andinstitutions were created, they
were created for certain folksin mind.
We had a lot of people in thepopulation that were not
considered human at that time,right?
So children of color,communities of color simply just
weren't even thought of in termsof service, how we were going to
take care of, look afterchildren, make sure families had
(05:41):
what they need.
When you look at the even thehistory, the root of these
foundations, these institutionsare rooted in systemic
inequities, right?
Very deliberate in a time ofracial hierarchy, which Shaka
said we're still grappling withtoday.
But to understand the origin ofthat is so important so that
people can look at all of thedifferent indicators around
(06:01):
well-being and understand why wesee these disparities today.
This isn't new.
This is by design.
SPEAKER_03 (06:09):
The foundation that you've just set, I think is
clearly critical to your missionand to the work that you're
doing.
How does the understanding ofthat history inform how we might
reimagine these institutions andtransform them to be just, fair,
and equitable for all?
SPEAKER_00 (06:26):
For us, it's really critical.
Um, oftentimes we're in meetingswith professionals, we're
breaking down how these issuesare really landing, you know, at
the point of an intervention.
So you think of justice, youthink of child welfare, you
think of all these differentmoments.
And the professionals are set upto grapple with a larger
(06:46):
structural issue with a wholeset of limitations.
And so for generations now,we've seen reform efforts, we've
seen community-based efforts,movements come together, we've
seen government-led initiatives,we've seen foundation-led
initiatives.
There has been no shortage ofefforts to try to figure out how
(07:07):
to gain more success out of ourcollective, you know, service
provisions, human servicesintervention approach to dealing
with these structural inequitiesthat are much, to me, much
larger than those individualefforts have the capacity to
overcome.
And so, you know, having studiedthat and kind of worked across
(07:29):
the country in over 300jurisdictions and seen from
large cities to very smalllocalities the limits of what
people even feel they can do.
So you're sitting in a meeting,you know that what you're seeing
is wrong.
It is no part of your beingfeels good about what's
happening with these families,with these young people, with
(07:50):
the elders, with whomever it isyou're working with.
And yet, more often than not,people have had to normalize
separating their values and howthey feel from what they can and
cannot do as professionals, whatwe can't do as community
members, and with the resourcesof a family.
You know, all of us have hadlimits in our role and what we
(08:11):
can't do.
And a lot of that is due to thefact that we haven't addressed
the fundamental structures thatwe're really adhering to.
And we're trying to squeeze abetter tomorrow out of those
same trail railroad tracks.
And it's a limit how fast youcan move a train and how much
you can do without rethinkingthe tracks themselves.
(08:34):
And all you have to do is lookat the maglev, those trains that
can go as fast as an airplane.
Those tracks have beenreimagined.
They planned for it, they builta new system, you know, and we
can do that.
We can, we believe we canidentify what we actually need
to do, use our creativeimagination, science, informed
(08:57):
by research, and all the kind ofbeautiful things that you can do
to come together to advance apractice.
Um, but we think it it takes afundamental investment in time
and a shift in how we show upand really leaning into those
values that people hold sacredthat were fundamental to their
experience and that you know wecan bring into the professional
(09:20):
space.
SPEAKER_01 (09:21):
You know, I we understand this can be
challenging for folks to let goof some of what you've been
taught, which you have thoughtwas right for a long time.
And yet when we do examine thehistory and we see it was people
just like us making decisions,trying to do things, right?
And so we totally have thecapability to like kind of own
the failures of today, right?
(09:43):
This is our watch now, this isour time.
And so we can really pushourselves to go beyond what
things have been tried andtested and these incremental
changes and reforms to reallysay, like, yeah, every every way
we have tweaked this has notworked.
Let's just really tear it apartand start anew and really bring
together folks who historicallyhave not been a part of that
(10:05):
conversation and typically arethose um most impacted, right,
by these institutions that we'retalking about.
So I mean I mean it's anexciting time, right?
I think it can be daunting forfolks, but truly, I think we we
look at the reimagining of thesethings as really uh one of the
greatest opportunities we have.
SPEAKER_02 (10:24):
I love that you actually land on we have the
opportunity to own this, becauseas I listen to all of this, the
conversation, the history, thegenerations, I think about the
fact that if we are actuallygonna successfully dismantle
structural racism within humanservices and our systems of
government, we actually have toapproach them.
(10:45):
We've got to go into them.
We have to have spaces where wecreate conversations within
them.
So, how do you go about creatingthose spaces in a way within
these systems that provokesreflection and growth?
SPEAKER_01 (11:02):
Yeah, it's such a great question.
And and truly, like this isoften what we call at the Burns
Institute.
Like this, this is truly likethe nexus of our work is to
really create that space forauthentic conversation for
people, right?
To get to know people.
And I'll say the first, probablythe first caveat to this is
where folks uh struggle with usa little bit in terms of nobody
(11:26):
has time for relationshipbuilding, for trust building.
Only you cannot have authenticconversation and truly innovate
together if you have not builtthe trust and relationship for
folks to feel they can take therisk of sharing an idea, right?
Establishing a sense of sharedvalues, things that really
matter to folks.
And so I know, you know, a lotof times we bring folks into
(11:48):
partnership, and even whenpeople are introducing
themselves, something as simpleas we don't want to hear your
title.
Just say your name.
Who are you?
Where are you from?
Who are your people?
Tell us, tell us about yourself,right?
And tell us what you need fromthe rest of us in the room for
you to actually just becomfortable being yourself.
And it's been really amazingwhere you have folks who are in
(12:10):
very different types ofpositioning, whether you're a
community advocate, whetheryou're somebody who's been
impacted by the system, whetheryou're somebody who's an elected
official, when you're at thetable in partnership and people
can just be people, it justopens us up for a very different
conversation and very realconversations around what do we
as individual people need?
(12:30):
What do we want for our childrenand families?
And why shouldn't we want thatfor each other's children and
families, right?
And really just kind of centerus in a sense of shared values.
Because it's important to say,like incremental reform, we've
seen is a data-driven process,right?
And while we can acknowledgethat yes, data is important, it
(12:51):
helps kind of give us our vitalsigns of how we're doing.
But what we're talking about,like transformative change, like
where we really need to go, ohman, that that is a very
different process.
That is um that is people comingtogether and really changing
hearts and minds, really leaningin and establishing a
(13:14):
values-driven process.
We've never seen a values-driveninstitution before.
What does that look like?
How effective could that be?
What if every decision we madefor everything that came across
our desk was in completealignment with the values that
we govern our lives by?
That would be a very differentset of circumstances.
SPEAKER_02 (13:34):
When you say coming in, you know, name, no title, in
my head, I saw people beinglike, you know, on the tracks,
on the ground, those tracks arelaid over, on the wheels.
You have this structure ofsystem where we get in this, you
know, title masks essentiallywhat the system feels like,
does, operates in your life inand of itself.
SPEAKER_00 (13:57):
Yeah, I love that.
I mean, and the relationshipsthat Sam describes is
fundamental.
So it's it's almost like a giantcontradiction that the that
where it begins often is like wedon't really have why are we
doing this?
Why are we spending so much timegetting to know each other?
That seems crazy to people.
(14:19):
But literally, in the momentthat it's happening, people turn
and it's like, I've known youfor 20 years, I didn't know any
of this about you.
That matters fundamentally thatwe could be dealing with things
that are so important and impactyou because they hit you in your
soul, your heart.
This is this is not small workor simple things.
(14:43):
These work people bring homewith them.
It's very personal for a lot ofpeople.
Yet we don't know each otherwhen we're supposed to deal with
all of these highly intenseconversations in a country that
hasn't taught itself how to talkabout the histories of what's
happened here in a way that is,you know, helps people move
(15:04):
forward.
All of this is thrown into themix at once, and it's usually
under timelines that have notaccounted for any of what Sam
laid out.
And so that is a big challenge,you know, that we feel that's a
structural challenge to it.
And it's also no one's job.
(15:24):
I'll just, you know, add that.
It's really no one's job toreimagine the structures that we
are all working within.
These are all things that we canplay around with.
You can get your hands in themud and think like, what if we
all saw it as part of our jobsfor the next 10 years to really
assess the structures that we'rein and make strong proposals
(15:47):
about new structures that wethink absolutely would be much
better use of resources andinvestment of our time.
And I don't know that we have 10years because it seems that
those who are in power aredeconstructing so many
structures right now without aclear sense of what the plan
might be, or if it is, you know,it's not always a plan that
(16:09):
seems to be open to the accessof the moment that is needed for
today.
And so to pick up strategiesthat we know haven't worked is
something that we're trying toavoid.
And we think it's much moreintelligent to make the time
right now.
It's with the sense of urgencyis around actually slowing down
(16:32):
enough and creating enough spaceto do that level of thinking so
that we have a clear sense ofwhere we're going and we can
plan accordingly and begin tobuild, you know, those new set
of tracks.
Uh, maybe it's all electric, sonow we have to do build charging
stations here.
You put solar panels in there,you're trying to make it
sustainable, and we see thatit's just a need to weave all
(16:55):
these things together and createspace for us to all just
reimagine ourselves winning.
And, you know, last shout out isif you can find videos or movies
of humans winning, please sendthem our way.
Um, we think there's a realshortage of examples of us
figuring ourselves out.
And there's way too manyexamples of us failing.
(17:17):
We need examples of humansfiguring it out.
What does that look like?
Why is our creative juices notpouring in that direction?
SPEAKER_01 (17:24):
He actually just touched on something we have
really talked about a lot.
And this is that um, you know, Ihave a lot of family from
Toronto, Canada.
It's where I'm from, and they,you know, passed legislation
that all cars will be electriccars by 2026, right?
Well, that's tomorrow.
And you could imagine there's auh somewhat of an excitement
(17:45):
about that and a hugenervousness.
And what has to happen is adecision was made, right?
This was a decision made thatfolks believed would be better
for the quality of the country,right?
And now there's a mad dash tobuild infrastructure.
So you see folks tearing uproads, ensuring that there are
charging mechanisms placedwithin the parking lots where
(18:07):
people live to make sure theyhave access to that.
There's a whole infrastructurethat goes with the decisions
that we're making, right?
And I think, like Shaka said,things are being deconstructed
in rapid speed right now.
And we've got to come togetherand really start reimagining,
okay, where are we going?
What's the North Star?
What are we recreating?
Because then the path toactually implementing that
(18:29):
becomes very clear and it's verydoable.
And I think we have this likeidea that something that we
can't imagine it or we can't seeit, we don't know how to get
there.
But once we know what we'relooking at, absolutely, step by
step, this is what we do, thatwe are people, we build
together, we we create the map.
SPEAKER_03 (18:48):
So you both have spoken powerfully about these
tensions that have arisen orthat arise within our society,
within our communities, evenwithin our workforces that that
surface when we're confrontingchange and really
transformational change,especially when we consider
Shaka's metaphor about ourantiquity trading system and
moving into and reimagining afuture system that requires new
(19:12):
knowledge, it requires newtechnologies, and it requires an
understanding of the real needsin our communities, right?
So if you could help usunderstand, first and foremost,
the difference between, say,reforming systems, right,
tinkering, incrementallychanging our systems as they've
existed historically, versusreally reimagining and
(19:34):
transforming systems and how theBurns Institute puts it in
practice.
And what I'm particularlyinterested within that is how
you at the Burns Institute arechallenging those kind of mental
models that keep people stuck inthat historical approach and
that in that tinkering withsystems that we've seen have
(19:55):
quite frankly not worked for toomany individuals, families,
communities.
SPEAKER_01 (20:00):
Yeah, this is I I love this question.
Um, so thank you.
I mean, fundamentally for us,there's a few things that you
named in that, right?
And and certainly getting fromthe reform to transformational
change.
But the first part is like thetensions, right?
Naming those tensions.
And I think part of what we doin even establishing like the
(20:23):
trust building and having therequired authentic conversations
is to actually normalize thetension.
Things are uncomfortable forpeople.
Conversations aren't difficult.
We choose to say they'redifficult or they make us
uncomfortable so they'redifficult.
But we're just, they're words,we're having conversations.
And so I think for us, we dodefinitely try to normalize the
tension because there was a timewhere we would all do great and
(20:46):
we could debate each other, andthere was these great American
intellectual debates that wouldthen lead to different types of
creations and innovations.
And yet somehow we've become soconflict diverse that we dare
not present an idea that'sdifferent or that may be
perceived as against the norm ofwhat's happening, right?
And so totally just normalizingthe fact that conflict exists in
(21:10):
conversations where innovationhappens, right?
So I think it's just, you know,immediately normalizing that we
have exercises where we'reasking folks to discuss how they
want to address tension.
How do you want to address thegroup if something that some
someone said is um particularlyoffensive to you, right?
How do you want to name that?
Let's just establish some groupnorms and normalize dealing with
(21:33):
this conflict or something thatcould be misunderstood or land
in a difficult way.
So I think that that's likenumber one.
SPEAKER_00 (21:40):
To do reform, you have to know the limits.
You have to understand thelimits.
You can't just be out therethinking you're gonna just do
whatever you want.
So anybody who's ever donereform has usually run up into
the limits of what the structurewill allow.
Unless maybe you have you'vebeen doing something very
different than our experience,but in our experience, often
would be informed by whatstructural limitations we had to
(22:04):
account for, the structurallimitations of the agencies that
we were partnering with.
Everybody had a uniquelyintimate understanding of these
limitations that were due tothese larger structural issues.
And again, it was who no one'sjob to then turn around and
propose a structural changebecause that was so much larger
(22:26):
than the one jurisdiction.
And those people felt like theyhad no ability to control for
that.
So that's where when I startedoff saying it's no one's job,
that's a really a structuralissue.
Because the what does end uphappening, or at least our
experience has manifested in ain more elected officials who do
have that level of power, theycan say, hey, I want you all to
(22:50):
try this.
But usually they have to giveyou a time parameter, and then
it's handed over.
So there's a lot of structuralcomponents that need to be
accounted for in what we'retalking about, right?
And all of it is the is thepotential opportunity, but it's
it's it's born out of thatexperience of seeing intimately
(23:11):
the limits of what the currentstructure offers.
And watching professionals overand over get frustrated with
being like, well, why can't wejust what if we just change this
larger structural thing in ameeting, but then there's
nowhere to go with that?
So we've kind of didn't let thatgo as an organization and said,
no, there's actual that weshould be doing, creating space
(23:33):
to really dig into that.
SPEAKER_01 (23:34):
I just wanted to add the second part of your question
was around uh getting folks toreally change their mental
models.
And I think even acknowledgingand getting folks to truly
examine the mental models thatthey hold is incredible.
I mean, you would think this issomething that is commonly
practiced in human services,only it's not.
But if you look at, you know,corporate Fortune 500, they're
(23:56):
all dissecting their mentalmodels and how this functions to
create and innovate in the areasthat they work.
And so we also need to engage inthat.
I think for us it's also justbeing very clear in naming.
There is something that we areall doing right now that is
protecting the status quo.
Why are we doing that?
What is it that we believe?
What is at the root of our valuesystem that is actually making
(24:19):
our behaviors contribute tothis, right?
Let's examine that, let's pullit apart.
I think one of the you knowimportant things for us to do is
first just really acknowledgeand and wrestle with our own
mental models and what we, youknow, what we've been taught,
what we've been conditioned tobelieve, and and really trying
to create some space to be okaywith the possibility that some
(24:42):
of what we have been taught maybe incorrect.
Just the possibility of that,right?
And then if we can dance in thatspace, oh man, let's now let's
now really think about what wewant to see, what we want to
believe, what what do we want toreally govern our actions?
How do we really want to thinkabout this?
(25:04):
I think all of us have been inplaces and jobs, and this goes
beyond human services, wheremaybe you're asked to do
something or there are tasksthat a task that you're
fulfilling, and you're actuallylike quite uncomfortable with
it, right?
Like, um, I don't really likethis, I just gotta do it.
And and so let's just eliminatethat.
Like, what if we truly believedin 100% every action that we
(25:27):
take, every move that we make,every thought that we have,
right?
It it is an alignment with whowe are as people, alignment with
our values, and just these typesof um internal conflict
shouldn't exist, andparticularly not in the sector
of human services.
SPEAKER_02 (25:42):
You know, the idea in our human services and our
systems of government, when werun into the realities of
capacity, we have this trick ofthe mind where we rationalize
away how we can't do something.
And when we do that, we returnto those mental models.
So everything you're saying isgetting kind of the juices
flowing about keeping that onthe forefront of our mind so we
(26:06):
don't lose it in return.
SPEAKER_03 (26:08):
Well, thank you again for providing that context
of how the Burns Institute isdoing this work and aspiring to
really set transformative changeacross our country and
particularly in our humanservices.
And so when we think about thissort of transformational change
that we're we're seeking here,the question becomes how we make
(26:29):
it scalable.
So, how do you at the BurnsInstitute work to scale this to
meet the needs of ourcommunities across the country?
SPEAKER_01 (26:38):
So this is kind of making me laugh a little bit
because Burns Institute'sapproach to scale runs counter,
I think, to every philanthropicinvestor who has supported our
work like ever.
And we say that humbly, right?
Uh because uh lot of you knowgreat partnerships in the field
really just get bigger andbigger and bigger and spread out
(26:59):
into all these places.
And I think our approach to thisis very quite different.
Um, we at the Burns and Seoul, arelatively small, you know,
national organization, we cancome to different places and be
a part of community change.
And in doing that, we actuallyalways partner with folks in
community.
(27:20):
So every place that we work,there is a partnership
immediately established withcommunity members who live in
these neighborhoods, who will bea part of this discussion, who
will start having theseauthentic conversations, who
will build trust across thesesectors, that will bring
non-traditional partnerstogether, that will begin to
implement like a real appetitefor change.
(27:42):
Um, and that is how we scale,right?
In every so we're there, we'rehelpful, we're partners, we're
in it.
But whether somebody from theBurns Institute is there or not,
this work will continue to grow.
Once you spark change, it ishard to tame the flame.
And so we definitely do that ata community level with folks who
are there, who will be there,and continue to just take this
(28:06):
on and let it run without us.
We we don't need to be part ofthe final blossoming, but boy,
when we see seeds grow, it is ajust a phenomenal feeling.
SPEAKER_02 (28:16):
Sam and Shaka, it has been an absolute pleasure
talking with you today.
Thank you so much for theconversation, and thank you for
being in the room at the 2025PCA America National Conference.
SPEAKER_00 (28:28):
It's been a pleasure.
Thank you for having us.
SPEAKER_01 (28:30):
Thank you.
SPEAKER_02 (28:32):
And you can invite upstream solutions into your
feed by subscribing to the ShiftVoices of Prevention today.
Join us to create an ecosystemwhere children and families live
purposeful and happy lives withhope for the future.
This is The Shift Voices of Prevention, a podcast
from Prevent Child AbuseAmerica, where we explore bold
ideas, cultural change, and whatit truly means to support
children and families.
Join us to change the narrativeone conversation at a time.
Today's show was brought to youby PCA America's 2025 National
(00:30):
Conference.
Hosted in Portland, Oregon,August 12th through August 14th,
the transformative three-dayconference features three
keynote speakers and more than70 workshops that dive into the
key drivers of change.
From innovative programs andpractices to family-focused
policies, cutting-edge research,and public awareness and
engagement strategies, theconference is designed to push
(00:51):
the field toward upstreamprevention and creating a future
where every child and family canthrive.
To be in the room when changehappens, visit
preventchildabuse.org.
Hello and welcome to the ShiftVoices of Prevention, a podcast
by Prevent Child Abuse America.
I'm your co-host, Nathan Fink,and I'm Luke Waldo.
(01:14):
And we are thrilled to be joinedby Samantha Mellerson and Shaka
Barrows, both of whom are partof the executive leadership team
at the Haywood Burns Institute,a national nonprofit of
intergenerational cross-culturalvisionaries working to transform
the administration of justiceand other human service sectors.
Samantha Shaka, thank you somuch for joining the show.
(01:35):
Thank you.
Thank you for having us.
SPEAKER_03 (01:37):
I would also like to thank you, Samantha and Shaka,
for creating the space to sparkreal conversation at the 2025
Prevent Child Abuse AmericaNational Conference.
The Haywood Burns Institute'smission is to dismantle
structural racism and buildcommunity-centered structural
well-being.
So let's start at the beginningof your mission.
Why is it so important toexamine and understand the
(01:59):
history of how our institutionsand structures were designed and
how that history has contributedto structural racism?
SPEAKER_00 (02:06):
Well, for us, history is really important as
we do this work.
We've worked uh you know forover 20 years addressing issues
all across the country of racialand ethnic disparities within
the administration of justice,with partners both in the
justice sector, but alsocommunity members, uh, folks
providing direct services.
(02:27):
And so it's always beenfundamental for us to take a
look at the history of theseinstitutions that we are looking
to reform and to work on tobetter understand both how that
history still lives on today andreally understanding how it may
limit what we can and cannot dowith a reform strategy.
(02:47):
And so for years, we would workacross the country with these
different partnerships andreally, you know, always brought
in history as a you know clearway for folks to understand the
infrastructure that was set up,all of the decisions and early
functions and the structures ofour laws and our society, you
know, were set up to execute areality that we're still
(03:10):
grappling with today.
But this issue still persists ofthe racial disparities.
We can move a target population,we can successfully come up with
a policy, a practice change, anew partnership, an innovative
strategy, and we would measurethese things over and over and
show that you could actuallymake an impact.
And as we did this, the outcomeswould often get worse.
(03:32):
The actual disparities would notjust persist, but they would get
worse.
And so we had this develop thispractice at the same time of
kind of examining our ownstrategy and approach.
You know, you know, you are notjust in it to show success.
We were actually trying toachieve, you know, a better
outcome and then a real sense ofequitable society with equitable
(03:55):
sense of justice, right?
So it wasn't just reforming thecurrent justice system.
We eventually started to namethat.
We had to very rethink what thevery notion of justice even
means in this country with thehistory that we all share and
how that history has impactedthe structures that limit
opportunity access resources.
(04:16):
And because we worked in thejustice sector, which is
oftentimes the dumping groundfor other failed efforts in
human services and localgovernment, we began to see the
need to look beyond justice atall the other aspects of human
services and governance and seeit as an opportunity.
And by understanding the limitsof history, you know, you can
(04:38):
kind of really see that there'sopportunity there.
But it takes, you know,sometimes really convincing
people.
I like to give examples.
I often ask people to thinkabout, you know, our railroad
tracks and the system that movesall of the cargo across this
country.
People every day are on theserailroad tracks.
The width of them.
Was it based on study?
(04:58):
Is it the most advanced width,you know, that we could come up
with?
Or is it based on the horse andbuggy that they used to build
that first set of tracks?
And are we still limited bythat?
Absolutely.
That's infrastructure.
You know, that's what we'retrying to think about in terms
of human services and thisopportunity to reimagine.
SPEAKER_01 (05:18):
Yeah, I think it's really important to acknowledge
when these systems andinstitutions were created, they
were created for certain folksin mind.
We had a lot of people in thepopulation that were not
considered human at that time,right?
So children of color,communities of color simply just
weren't even thought of in termsof service, how we were going to
take care of, look afterchildren, make sure families had
(05:41):
what they need.
When you look at the even thehistory, the root of these
foundations, these institutionsare rooted in systemic
inequities, right?
Very deliberate in a time ofracial hierarchy, which Shaka
said we're still grappling withtoday.
But to understand the origin ofthat is so important so that
people can look at all of thedifferent indicators around
(06:01):
well-being and understand why wesee these disparities today.
This isn't new.
This is by design.
SPEAKER_03 (06:09):
The foundation that you've just set, I think is
clearly critical to your missionand to the work that you're
doing.
How does the understanding ofthat history inform how we might
reimagine these institutions andtransform them to be just, fair,
and equitable for all?
SPEAKER_00 (06:26):
For us, it's really critical.
Um, oftentimes we're in meetingswith professionals, we're
breaking down how these issuesare really landing, you know, at
the point of an intervention.
So you think of justice, youthink of child welfare, you
think of all these differentmoments.
And the professionals are set upto grapple with a larger
(06:46):
structural issue with a wholeset of limitations.
And so for generations now,we've seen reform efforts, we've
seen community-based efforts,movements come together, we've
seen government-led initiatives,we've seen foundation-led
initiatives.
There has been no shortage ofefforts to try to figure out how
(07:07):
to gain more success out of ourcollective, you know, service
provisions, human servicesintervention approach to dealing
with these structural inequitiesthat are much, to me, much
larger than those individualefforts have the capacity to
overcome.
And so, you know, having studiedthat and kind of worked across
(07:29):
the country in over 300jurisdictions and seen from
large cities to very smalllocalities the limits of what
people even feel they can do.
So you're sitting in a meeting,you know that what you're seeing
is wrong.
It is no part of your beingfeels good about what's
happening with these families,with these young people, with
(07:50):
the elders, with whomever it isyou're working with.
And yet, more often than not,people have had to normalize
separating their values and howthey feel from what they can and
cannot do as professionals, whatwe can't do as community
members, and with the resourcesof a family.
You know, all of us have hadlimits in our role and what we
(08:11):
can't do.
And a lot of that is due to thefact that we haven't addressed
the fundamental structures thatwe're really adhering to.
And we're trying to squeeze abetter tomorrow out of those
same trail railroad tracks.
And it's a limit how fast youcan move a train and how much
you can do without rethinkingthe tracks themselves.
(08:34):
And all you have to do is lookat the maglev, those trains that
can go as fast as an airplane.
Those tracks have beenreimagined.
They planned for it, they builta new system, you know, and we
can do that.
We can, we believe we canidentify what we actually need
to do, use our creativeimagination, science, informed
(08:57):
by research, and all the kind ofbeautiful things that you can do
to come together to advance apractice.
Um, but we think it it takes afundamental investment in time
and a shift in how we show upand really leaning into those
values that people hold sacredthat were fundamental to their
experience and that you know wecan bring into the professional
(09:20):
space.
SPEAKER_01 (09:21):
You know, I we understand this can be
challenging for folks to let goof some of what you've been
taught, which you have thoughtwas right for a long time.
And yet when we do examine thehistory and we see it was people
just like us making decisions,trying to do things, right?
And so we totally have thecapability to like kind of own
the failures of today, right?
(09:43):
This is our watch now, this isour time.
And so we can really pushourselves to go beyond what
things have been tried andtested and these incremental
changes and reforms to reallysay, like, yeah, every every way
we have tweaked this has notworked.
Let's just really tear it apartand start anew and really bring
together folks who historicallyhave not been a part of that
(10:05):
conversation and typically arethose um most impacted, right,
by these institutions that we'retalking about.
So I mean I mean it's anexciting time, right?
I think it can be daunting forfolks, but truly, I think we we
look at the reimagining of thesethings as really uh one of the
greatest opportunities we have.
SPEAKER_02 (10:24):
I love that you actually land on we have the
opportunity to own this, becauseas I listen to all of this, the
conversation, the history, thegenerations, I think about the
fact that if we are actuallygonna successfully dismantle
structural racism within humanservices and our systems of
government, we actually have toapproach them.
(10:45):
We've got to go into them.
We have to have spaces where wecreate conversations within
them.
So, how do you go about creatingthose spaces in a way within
these systems that provokesreflection and growth?
SPEAKER_01 (11:02):
Yeah, it's such a great question.
And and truly, like this isoften what we call at the Burns
Institute.
Like this, this is truly likethe nexus of our work is to
really create that space forauthentic conversation for
people, right?
To get to know people.
And I'll say the first, probablythe first caveat to this is
where folks uh struggle with usa little bit in terms of nobody
(11:26):
has time for relationshipbuilding, for trust building.
Only you cannot have authenticconversation and truly innovate
together if you have not builtthe trust and relationship for
folks to feel they can take therisk of sharing an idea, right?
Establishing a sense of sharedvalues, things that really
matter to folks.
And so I know, you know, a lotof times we bring folks into
(11:48):
partnership, and even whenpeople are introducing
themselves, something as simpleas we don't want to hear your
title.
Just say your name.
Who are you?
Where are you from?
Who are your people?
Tell us, tell us about yourself,right?
And tell us what you need fromthe rest of us in the room for
you to actually just becomfortable being yourself.
And it's been really amazingwhere you have folks who are in
(12:10):
very different types ofpositioning, whether you're a
community advocate, whetheryou're somebody who's been
impacted by the system, whetheryou're somebody who's an elected
official, when you're at thetable in partnership and people
can just be people, it justopens us up for a very different
conversation and very realconversations around what do we
as individual people need?
(12:30):
What do we want for our childrenand families?
And why shouldn't we want thatfor each other's children and
families, right?
And really just kind of centerus in a sense of shared values.
Because it's important to say,like incremental reform, we've
seen is a data-driven process,right?
And while we can acknowledgethat yes, data is important, it
(12:51):
helps kind of give us our vitalsigns of how we're doing.
But what we're talking about,like transformative change, like
where we really need to go, ohman, that that is a very
different process.
That is um that is people comingtogether and really changing
hearts and minds, really leaningin and establishing a
(13:14):
values-driven process.
We've never seen a values-driveninstitution before.
What does that look like?
How effective could that be?
What if every decision we madefor everything that came across
our desk was in completealignment with the values that
we govern our lives by?
That would be a very differentset of circumstances.
SPEAKER_02 (13:34):
When you say coming in, you know, name, no title, in
my head, I saw people beinglike, you know, on the tracks,
on the ground, those tracks arelaid over, on the wheels.
You have this structure ofsystem where we get in this, you
know, title masks essentiallywhat the system feels like,
does, operates in your life inand of itself.
SPEAKER_00 (13:57):
Yeah, I love that.
I mean, and the relationshipsthat Sam describes is
fundamental.
So it's it's almost like a giantcontradiction that the that
where it begins often is like wedon't really have why are we
doing this?
Why are we spending so much timegetting to know each other?
That seems crazy to people.
(14:19):
But literally, in the momentthat it's happening, people turn
and it's like, I've known youfor 20 years, I didn't know any
of this about you.
That matters fundamentally thatwe could be dealing with things
that are so important and impactyou because they hit you in your
soul, your heart.
This is this is not small workor simple things.
(14:43):
These work people bring homewith them.
It's very personal for a lot ofpeople.
Yet we don't know each otherwhen we're supposed to deal with
all of these highly intenseconversations in a country that
hasn't taught itself how to talkabout the histories of what's
happened here in a way that is,you know, helps people move
(15:04):
forward.
All of this is thrown into themix at once, and it's usually
under timelines that have notaccounted for any of what Sam
laid out.
And so that is a big challenge,you know, that we feel that's a
structural challenge to it.
And it's also no one's job.
(15:24):
I'll just, you know, add that.
It's really no one's job toreimagine the structures that we
are all working within.
These are all things that we canplay around with.
You can get your hands in themud and think like, what if we
all saw it as part of our jobsfor the next 10 years to really
assess the structures that we'rein and make strong proposals
(15:47):
about new structures that wethink absolutely would be much
better use of resources andinvestment of our time.
And I don't know that we have 10years because it seems that
those who are in power aredeconstructing so many
structures right now without aclear sense of what the plan
might be, or if it is, you know,it's not always a plan that
(16:09):
seems to be open to the accessof the moment that is needed for
today.
And so to pick up strategiesthat we know haven't worked is
something that we're trying toavoid.
And we think it's much moreintelligent to make the time
right now.
It's with the sense of urgencyis around actually slowing down
(16:32):
enough and creating enough spaceto do that level of thinking so
that we have a clear sense ofwhere we're going and we can
plan accordingly and begin tobuild, you know, those new set
of tracks.
Uh, maybe it's all electric, sonow we have to do build charging
stations here.
You put solar panels in there,you're trying to make it
sustainable, and we see thatit's just a need to weave all
(16:55):
these things together and createspace for us to all just
reimagine ourselves winning.
And, you know, last shout out isif you can find videos or movies
of humans winning, please sendthem our way.
Um, we think there's a realshortage of examples of us
figuring ourselves out.
And there's way too manyexamples of us failing.
(17:17):
We need examples of humansfiguring it out.
What does that look like?
Why is our creative juices notpouring in that direction?
SPEAKER_01 (17:24):
He actually just touched on something we have
really talked about a lot.
And this is that um, you know, Ihave a lot of family from
Toronto, Canada.
It's where I'm from, and they,you know, passed legislation
that all cars will be electriccars by 2026, right?
Well, that's tomorrow.
And you could imagine there's auh somewhat of an excitement
(17:45):
about that and a hugenervousness.
And what has to happen is adecision was made, right?
This was a decision made thatfolks believed would be better
for the quality of the country,right?
And now there's a mad dash tobuild infrastructure.
So you see folks tearing uproads, ensuring that there are
charging mechanisms placedwithin the parking lots where
(18:07):
people live to make sure theyhave access to that.
There's a whole infrastructurethat goes with the decisions
that we're making, right?
And I think, like Shaka said,things are being deconstructed
in rapid speed right now.
And we've got to come togetherand really start reimagining,
okay, where are we going?
What's the North Star?
What are we recreating?
Because then the path toactually implementing that
(18:29):
becomes very clear and it's verydoable.
And I think we have this likeidea that something that we
can't imagine it or we can't seeit, we don't know how to get
there.
But once we know what we'relooking at, absolutely, step by
step, this is what we do, thatwe are people, we build
together, we we create the map.
SPEAKER_03 (18:48):
So you both have spoken powerfully about these
tensions that have arisen orthat arise within our society,
within our communities, evenwithin our workforces that that
surface when we're confrontingchange and really
transformational change,especially when we consider
Shaka's metaphor about ourantiquity trading system and
moving into and reimagining afuture system that requires new
(19:12):
knowledge, it requires newtechnologies, and it requires an
understanding of the real needsin our communities, right?
So if you could help usunderstand, first and foremost,
the difference between, say,reforming systems, right,
tinkering, incrementallychanging our systems as they've
existed historically, versusreally reimagining and
(19:34):
transforming systems and how theBurns Institute puts it in
practice.
And what I'm particularlyinterested within that is how
you at the Burns Institute arechallenging those kind of mental
models that keep people stuck inthat historical approach and
that in that tinkering withsystems that we've seen have
(19:55):
quite frankly not worked for toomany individuals, families,
communities.
SPEAKER_01 (20:00):
Yeah, this is I I love this question.
Um, so thank you.
I mean, fundamentally for us,there's a few things that you
named in that, right?
And and certainly getting fromthe reform to transformational
change.
But the first part is like thetensions, right?
Naming those tensions.
And I think part of what we doin even establishing like the
(20:23):
trust building and having therequired authentic conversations
is to actually normalize thetension.
Things are uncomfortable forpeople.
Conversations aren't difficult.
We choose to say they'redifficult or they make us
uncomfortable so they'redifficult.
But we're just, they're words,we're having conversations.
And so I think for us, we dodefinitely try to normalize the
tension because there was a timewhere we would all do great and
(20:46):
we could debate each other, andthere was these great American
intellectual debates that wouldthen lead to different types of
creations and innovations.
And yet somehow we've become soconflict diverse that we dare
not present an idea that'sdifferent or that may be
perceived as against the norm ofwhat's happening, right?
And so totally just normalizingthe fact that conflict exists in
(21:10):
conversations where innovationhappens, right?
So I think it's just, you know,immediately normalizing that we
have exercises where we'reasking folks to discuss how they
want to address tension.
How do you want to address thegroup if something that some
someone said is um particularlyoffensive to you, right?
How do you want to name that?
Let's just establish some groupnorms and normalize dealing with
(21:33):
this conflict or something thatcould be misunderstood or land
in a difficult way.
So I think that that's likenumber one.
SPEAKER_00 (21:40):
To do reform, you have to know the limits.
You have to understand thelimits.
You can't just be out therethinking you're gonna just do
whatever you want.
So anybody who's ever donereform has usually run up into
the limits of what the structurewill allow.
Unless maybe you have you'vebeen doing something very
different than our experience,but in our experience, often
would be informed by whatstructural limitations we had to
(22:04):
account for, the structurallimitations of the agencies that
we were partnering with.
Everybody had a uniquelyintimate understanding of these
limitations that were due tothese larger structural issues.
And again, it was who no one'sjob to then turn around and
propose a structural changebecause that was so much larger
(22:26):
than the one jurisdiction.
And those people felt like theyhad no ability to control for
that.
So that's where when I startedoff saying it's no one's job,
that's a really a structuralissue.
Because the what does end uphappening, or at least our
experience has manifested in ain more elected officials who do
have that level of power, theycan say, hey, I want you all to
(22:50):
try this.
But usually they have to giveyou a time parameter, and then
it's handed over.
So there's a lot of structuralcomponents that need to be
accounted for in what we'retalking about, right?
And all of it is the is thepotential opportunity, but it's
it's it's born out of thatexperience of seeing intimately
(23:11):
the limits of what the currentstructure offers.
And watching professionals overand over get frustrated with
being like, well, why can't wejust what if we just change this
larger structural thing in ameeting, but then there's
nowhere to go with that?
So we've kind of didn't let thatgo as an organization and said,
no, there's actual that weshould be doing, creating space
(23:33):
to really dig into that.
SPEAKER_01 (23:34):
I just wanted to add the second part of your question
was around uh getting folks toreally change their mental
models.
And I think even acknowledgingand getting folks to truly
examine the mental models thatthey hold is incredible.
I mean, you would think this issomething that is commonly
practiced in human services,only it's not.
But if you look at, you know,corporate Fortune 500, they're
(23:56):
all dissecting their mentalmodels and how this functions to
create and innovate in the areasthat they work.
And so we also need to engage inthat.
I think for us it's also justbeing very clear in naming.
There is something that we areall doing right now that is
protecting the status quo.
Why are we doing that?
What is it that we believe?
What is at the root of our valuesystem that is actually making
(24:19):
our behaviors contribute tothis, right?
Let's examine that, let's pullit apart.
I think one of the you knowimportant things for us to do is
first just really acknowledgeand and wrestle with our own
mental models and what we, youknow, what we've been taught,
what we've been conditioned tobelieve, and and really trying
to create some space to be okaywith the possibility that some
(24:42):
of what we have been taught maybe incorrect.
Just the possibility of that,right?
And then if we can dance in thatspace, oh man, let's now let's
now really think about what wewant to see, what we want to
believe, what what do we want toreally govern our actions?
How do we really want to thinkabout this?
(25:04):
I think all of us have been inplaces and jobs, and this goes
beyond human services, wheremaybe you're asked to do
something or there are tasksthat a task that you're
fulfilling, and you're actuallylike quite uncomfortable with
it, right?
Like, um, I don't really likethis, I just gotta do it.
And and so let's just eliminatethat.
Like, what if we truly believedin 100% every action that we
(25:27):
take, every move that we make,every thought that we have,
right?
It it is an alignment with whowe are as people, alignment with
our values, and just these typesof um internal conflict
shouldn't exist, andparticularly not in the sector
of human services.
SPEAKER_02 (25:42):
You know, the idea in our human services and our
systems of government, when werun into the realities of
capacity, we have this trick ofthe mind where we rationalize
away how we can't do something.
And when we do that, we returnto those mental models.
So everything you're saying isgetting kind of the juices
flowing about keeping that onthe forefront of our mind so we
(26:06):
don't lose it in return.
SPEAKER_03 (26:08):
Well, thank you again for providing that context
of how the Burns Institute isdoing this work and aspiring to
really set transformative changeacross our country and
particularly in our humanservices.
And so when we think about thissort of transformational change
that we're we're seeking here,the question becomes how we make
(26:29):
it scalable.
So, how do you at the BurnsInstitute work to scale this to
meet the needs of ourcommunities across the country?
SPEAKER_01 (26:38):
So this is kind of making me laugh a little bit
because Burns Institute'sapproach to scale runs counter,
I think, to every philanthropicinvestor who has supported our
work like ever.
And we say that humbly, right?
Uh because uh lot of you knowgreat partnerships in the field
really just get bigger andbigger and bigger and spread out
(26:59):
into all these places.
And I think our approach to thisis very quite different.
Um, we at the Burns and Seoul, arelatively small, you know,
national organization, we cancome to different places and be
a part of community change.
And in doing that, we actuallyalways partner with folks in
community.
(27:20):
So every place that we work,there is a partnership
immediately established withcommunity members who live in
these neighborhoods, who will bea part of this discussion, who
will start having theseauthentic conversations, who
will build trust across thesesectors, that will bring
non-traditional partnerstogether, that will begin to
implement like a real appetitefor change.
(27:42):
Um, and that is how we scale,right?
In every so we're there, we'rehelpful, we're partners, we're
in it.
But whether somebody from theBurns Institute is there or not,
this work will continue to grow.
Once you spark change, it ishard to tame the flame.
And so we definitely do that ata community level with folks who
are there, who will be there,and continue to just take this
(28:06):
on and let it run without us.
We we don't need to be part ofthe final blossoming, but boy,
when we see seeds grow, it is ajust a phenomenal feeling.
SPEAKER_02 (28:16):
Sam and Shaka, it has been an absolute pleasure
talking with you today.
Thank you so much for theconversation, and thank you for
being in the room at the 2025PCA America National Conference.
SPEAKER_00 (28:28):
It's been a pleasure.
Thank you for having us.
SPEAKER_01 (28:30):
Thank you.
SPEAKER_02 (28:32):
And you can invite upstream solutions into your
feed by subscribing to the ShiftVoices of Prevention today.
Join us to create an ecosystemwhere children and families live
purposeful and happy lives withhope for the future.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.