Change one process and check what happened

The course is useful only if it helps someone make a better decision. Choose one routine: how an opportunity is announced, how a notice is reviewed, how community input reaches a project, or how a service concern is escalated. State its purpose and any legal, policy, privacy, accessibility, or program-integrity obligations. Then ask which assumptions are built into its current steps. Who gets information early? Whose knowledge counts? Who can question the result? Do not assume the framework alone tells you the answer.

Use the DHS Equity Analysis Toolkit or the State of Minnesota Equity Analysis Toolkit to structure a decision where appropriate. Identify who is affected, what information is missing, how people can participate without undue burden, what alternatives exist, and how effects will be reviewed. A staff member might identify a gap and bring it to the person with authority; a supervisor might change an invitation or response practice; a manager might revise criteria or resource the review. Make the action fit the role and follow agency processes. Do not collect sensitive personal stories merely to make the exercise feel authentic.

Choose a small number of meaningful checks. Counting invitations tells you little if people could not use them. More useful questions are whether intended participants received and understood the invitation, whether their input was considered, whether an accessibility barrier remained, and whether the decision was explained. Look for unintended effects: did an extra form create new work, did a written summary misrepresent a spoken contribution, or did a shortened deadline shift the burden elsewhere? Review and revise. This is practice, not a certification that a team has overcome racism.

Fictional case: A cross-team group revises a service guide. It decides to offer both a short written form and an accessible conversation for feedback, with a documented summary of each. A manager names who will decide and commits to explaining which suggestions were adopted and why. The group still needs to check whether the routes were usable and whether the final guide works for people who rely on it.

Which step in the fictional guide process is most likely to remain invisible unless the group asks about it?

Complete the job aid for the fictional guide or a nonidentifying process you can influence. Name the purpose, a possible barrier, the evidence to seek, the responsible decision-maker, one change, and a review date. Use the established equity-analysis and workplace channels for an actual decision.