Mutual Aid and Human-Centered Learning for Neurodivergent and Disabled People

Reading the Weather: Our Strategic Environment (PESTEL + SWOT)

Home » 🫀🧠✊ About Us: A Feisty Group of Disabled People » Accountability & Transparency » Reading the Weather: Our Strategic Environment (PESTEL + SWOT)

Most organizations keep their strategic analysis private. We are publishing ours. A clear-eyed reading of the conditions we operate in — the political, economic, and legal weather bearing down on Disabled and neurodivergent people — belongs in the open alongside our finances and our governance.

This page is a public PESTEL and SWOT: a scan of the environment around us, and an honest read of ourselves inside it. It is dated, not eternal. It is a refusal to be surprised.

Accountability is not policing. Accountability is infrastructure. Naming the weather is part of it.

How to Read This

A PESTEL scan reads the weather — the external forces we do not control: Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Environmental, and Legal. A SWOT read turns inward — our Strengths and Weaknesses, and the Opportunities and Threats the weather blows toward us.

PESTEL reads the weather. SWOT reads the boat. This page reads both, and refuses to pretend either is calmer than it is.

The Weather: A PESTEL Scan

Political

Federal disability and education policy is being dismantled in real time. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act still stands as law, but the machinery that enforced it has been hollowed out. The offices that monitored whether states honored their obligations to Disabled students have been gutted, and the day-to-day administration of special education has been pushed toward agencies without education expertise. Vouchers expand while the protections attached to public education do not follow the child who leaves. Medicaid and food assistance are being reshaped state by state. And the political rollback of diversity, equity, and inclusion has turned the plain language of disability justice into a liability in some funding rooms.

Broken systems, not broken people. The systems are breaking faster.

We name this to orient, not to despair. Our learners and families are navigating a landscape with fewer guardrails. That is precisely the terrain we were built for.

Economic

Money is tighter and more concentrated. Nonprofit leaders across the sector report that foundation funding is harder to secure than it was a year ago, even as demand for services climbs. Federal equity funding has been cancelled at scale. Roughly one in four adults is Disabled, yet only about two cents of every grant dollar reaches disability work.

The math has never been in our favor. We do the work anyway.

Our model is deliberately diversified — supported primarily by individual donors and community fundraising rather than any single institution or federal stream. That is not an accident. It is insulation. When the largest funders retreat, mutual aid does not. You can see how resources move through the organization in Where the Money Went.

The neurodiversity movement has moved from the margins toward the mainstream. Identity-first language, self-identification, and the growing community of late-identified Autistic and Disabled adults have expanded who claims this work and who it reaches. As trust in institutions erodes, people are reaching for knowledge authored by their own communities.

The tailwind is real. So is the backlash.

Deficit and pathology models remain entrenched, and at the federal level they are being actively revived. Counter-deficit framing is both more necessary and more contested than it was a year ago. Meanwhile, the people we serve carry intensifying burnout, isolation, and strain — which raises both the need for our work and the load on the neurodivergent people who make it.

Technological

Generative AI arrived everywhere at once, and for us it cuts both ways. Used well, it can augment competency networks — extending what a person can do without replacing who they are. Used badly, it screens the thinking behind fluent output and calls that access. We have taken a clear position: augment, do not replace; facilitate, do not shape identity. Our glossary is human-authored, and that is a hard line, not a preference. We say more in AI Collaboration and AI, Disability Justice, and the Ethics of Making.

We also live on platforms we do not own. WordPress, Kickstarter, Discord, and the rest each carry their own risk, and marginalized content is always among the first to feel a policy change. Our commons is openly licensed, which means it can be ingested by AI systems that give nothing back. We hold that tension honestly rather than pretending it away.

Environmental

We are a small, distributed, digital-first organization, so our footprint is light and our reach does not depend on anyone being able to travel to a building. Access and sustainability point the same direction for us.

Two truths sit in tension. Disabled people are harmed first and worst by climate disruption, and funders are only beginning to fund at that intersection. At the same time, the AI tools we engage carry an energy cost that sits uneasily beside our values. We would rather name that discomfort than launder it.

Legal

The legal architecture our advocacy leans on — the ADA, Section 504, the IDEA — remains on the books while its enforcement is quietly withdrawn. A law you cannot enforce is a promise you cannot keep. New federal grant rules and diversity-related conditions raise the risk that the words we use to describe our own community could affect our eligibility for support.

Our own obligations remain ours to steward: disclosures, governance, donor privacy, fiscal sponsorship, and charitable registration. We publish them openly, because trust is not a claim. It is a paper trail. See our full Accountability index.

The Boat: A SWOT Read

Strengths

We are led by the people most affected. All of our leadership is Disabled and/or neurodivergent, and that is not a compliance statistic — it is the reason the work is legible to the community it serves.
Our knowledge commons is deep, human-authored, and hard to replicate: hundreds of glossary entries, Why Sheets, patterns, and crosswalks built over years.
We thought hard about AI before we were forced to, and we can say what we believe about it plainly.
We are lean, distributed, and financially diversified, which makes us harder to knock over than our size suggests.

Weaknesses

We do not publish our strengths to impress you. We publish our weaknesses to be trusted.

We are small, and much of the work rests on a few people. That is a capacity ceiling and a key-person risk — and the neurodivergent people carrying it are carrying it inside the same hostile weather as everyone else.
We depend on platforms we do not control.
Our revenue, though diversified, moves with grant cycles and campaigns rather than a large reserve.
We hold real internal tensions: the energy cost of the AI we use, and an open license that lets others take from the commons without reciprocity. We would rather name these than resolve them dishonestly.

Opportunities

The funders who fund Disabled-led work as it actually is have not retreated. Collaborative disability-justice funding is active, and it is written for organizations exactly like ours.
The underfunding of disability work is itself an argument we can make in every room.
A growing community is reaching for community-authored knowledge — the very thing we make.
The AI moment rewards the rare organization willing to think about it carefully and out loud.

Threats

Political hostility to disability-justice language could make our own words a barrier to the funding that sustains us.
The funding pool is tighter and more crowded.
The cuts hitting our community reduce services and protections precisely as need rises, pressing hardest on a small team.
The platforms we depend on, and the AI systems that consume our commons, can change the terms without asking.

What We Refuse to Trade

A strategic analysis usually ends in tactics. Ours ends in commitments.

We will not soften our language to qualify for funding that asks us to abandon disability justice. People should not have to mask to deserve care. Neither should the organizations built by and for them.

We will not replace human judgment, human authorship, or human relationship with automation and call it progress.

We will not treat the commons as a product or the people we serve as data.

We will build with funders who fund us as we are, and we will keep the door of the commons open even to those who give nothing back — because open is who we are, not a strategy we chose.

The weather is hostile. The work is necessary. Both things are true.

What We’re Watching

Federal implementation of Medicaid and special-education changes, especially in Texas, where we are based.
Platform and licensing risk to the commons we steward.
Our own capacity, and the sustainability of the people who carry the work.

This Is a Living Document

This is a snapshot, dated and honest, not a forecast. The environment described here reflects conditions as of July 2026. We will revise it as the weather changes. You can watch the work happen in the open through our Changelog and our Now page and transparency log.