Opening your page…
You can still use the navigation while it loads.
Opening your page…
You can still use the navigation while it loads.
Learning module · Deeper method
Race, disability, language, gender, age, class, and immigration status shape people's experience together, not one at a time. A program that reviews outcomes by one category can look equitable while failing the people at the intersections.
Why this matters
Legacy data and program rules were built around single categories. Intersectional thinking changes what you disaggregate, who you engage, and which burdens you notice.
The idea. Coined in legal scholarship to describe how discrimination against Black women was invisible to claims that looked at race or sex alone. The same pattern appears in services: a deaf Somali elder's experience is not the sum of three separate briefs.
In data. Ask the data owner what can be disaggregated by more than one category with small-group protection. Where numbers are too small, use qualitative evidence and say so.
In engagement. Ask who is missing at the intersections, and plan access for people who face more than one barrier at once, such as interpretation and captioning together.
In design. Test a process against the person with the least margin: the person who needs an interpreter, an accessible format, transportation, and a daytime alternative all at once.
In the workplace. Advancement barriers and climate problems land differently on people who hold more than one marginalized identity. Ask, do not assume.
Questions or corrections
If something is missing or does not seem right, tell your Equity Director or find the right person or office.