| MANAGEMENT & urbanministry.org/leadership" class="" title="Leadership Resources">LEADERSHIP RESOURCE |
|
|
 |
|
Structuring Your urbanministry.org/board-development" class="" title="Board Development Resources">Board of Directors
(Adapted from Starting a Nonprofit at Your Church by urbanministry.org/joy-skjegstad" class="" title="Joy Skjegstad (Sermons, Podcasts, MP3s & Books) ">Joy Skjegstad, The Alban Institute, 2002. Obtain this item.)
Establishing a nonprofit board of directors is essentially a two-step process: first, choose the board’s structure, and second, recruit board members. Within those two steps, however, are multiple possibilities. The trick is to select the best options for your organization’s needs.
Step One: The Structure
Model 1: The Church Board Also Serves as the Nonprofit’s Board
|
Pros of This Model
|
Cons of This Model
|
|
|
Less control over who serves on the board
|
|
Can begin work with the nonprofit quickly, do not have to wait to form a board
|
Church and nonprofit may need different kinds of board members due to:
-different purposes of organization
-different pace of work
-different skills needed
-different networks needed
|
|
May be a good way to start: build trust with the nonprofit first, form separate board later
|
Church board could have little time to devote to the nonprofit, if there is pressing church business
|
For churches with little organizational experience outside of the church itself, this model is a simple, straightforward way to give the nonprofit instant credibility. Nonprofits directed by a church board have the advantage of a ready-made relationship with the church, and already earned trusts between the board members. Such nonprofits are able to move into their areas of service quickly, without having to wait through the process of forming a board, learn the strengths and weaknesses of the board members, or garner support from the founding church.
However, church board members whose skills perfectly complement the needs of the church may not match so well with the needs of the nonprofit. During times of urgent church business, the dual-acting board may be torn in its loyalties, having to choose between concentrating on church affairs and providing the leadership the nonprofit requires. Inevitably, the nonprofit may be counted the lesser priority, and its capacity for serving the community will suffer.
Model 2: A Completely Separate Board for the Nonprofit
|
Pros of This Model
|
Cons of This Model
|
|
Creates the opportunity for the church and nonprofit to be in alignment with each other
|
Can be a challenge to bring together people from inside and outside the church on the board:
-differences in values
-differences in theology
-differences in how they view the community
-differences in work culture/pace of work
|
|
Creates natural communication channels between church and nonprofit
|
A more complicated structure to administrate:
-more reporting requirements
-recruiting board members is more complicated
|
Can intentionally select nonprofit board members with the right mix of:
-expertise
-community connection
-networks and partners
-fundraising contacts
|
|
Congregation still feels a sense of ownership for the ministries of the nonprofit
|
|
In this model, the nonprofit is free to engage board members that best suit the nonprofit’s needs and methods. The disadvantage of this model is that without a direct connection to the church, the nonprofit may struggle to get needed financial and volunteer support from church members. Eventually, the church and nonprofit may sever all ties.
Model 3: A Separate Board for the Nonprofit That Has Accountability to the Church
The third model combines the best aspects of the first two models, creating a structure in which the nonprofit board is distinct in membership from the church board, but the nonprofit board has accountability to the church. The “separate but accountable” nonprofit board can select the best board members for the nonprofit’s needs, without having to settle for a ready-made, ill-fitting church board. The board has the advantage of partnership with the founding church, so that the church congregation feels involved in and somewhat responsible for the nonprofit ministries. The challenges for this model involve the extra effort required to report the nonprofit’s activities and goals to the church, and the extra difficulties of compiling board members of diverse backgrounds and faiths from the church and community.
|
Pros of This Model
|
Cons of This Model
|
|
Complete freedom to recruit the board members that the nonprofit needs
|
Harder to stay connected to the church's mission and its leadership
|
Freedom for the nonprofit to establish its own culture and work at its own pace
|
Could lead to disunity/split between the church and nonprofit
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RSS
