iNat staff certainly can choose to set goals to improve diversity among their own team. However, I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect iNat to dictate policy for the California Academy of Sciences.
Cal Academy is a much bigger organization that serves as iNat’s fiscal sponsor and partial funder. It makes its own policy. They released this statement on June 4: https://www.calacademy.org/press/releases/a-statement-from-the-academys-executive-director-dr-scott-sampson. It does state worthy objectives such as these:
Currently, our staff, including leadership, does not include enough people of color. Not only should all visitors see themselves reflected in the Academy’s people, we should also seek opportunities in our materials, programs, exhibits, online content, and events to proactively celebrate cultural differences and amplify historically suppressed voices.
I do not see any measurable criteria to ensure these objectives are achieved. There’s an argument that such criteria should be set primarily by the Black scientists and visitors that they’re intended to benefit, not by white, male Dr. Scott the Paleontologist. It’s OK to say that white people need to solve this problem, but they need to make sure the solutions they work towards are the ones Black people want. Perhaps a commitment by Dr. Scott to adopt measurable criteria, an outline of how he’ll ensure those criteria reflect Black people’s needs, and a firm timeline to do that would be a way to address this.
Going back to iNat, there is an opportunity to set measurable diversity goals for iNat contributors and for iNat staff (although as a nonprofit with a total staff of eight, even an ambitious goal may take a while to bear fruit). And I imagine that iNat staff can try to steer Cal Academy’s policies towards less lip service and more measurable results. That’s something all of us can advocate for within our workplaces.