Originally published in the March 2012 issue of Board & Administrator, available electronically to current subscribers at publication.
With the rough economy and fewer resources for critical nonprofit programs, boards have been put in the undesirable position of making life or death decisions about programs of historical importance to the organization.
When making cuts, the board needs to keep the organization’s mission central in its decision-making. Help your board make sound decisions when it comes to mission-centric programs, said Consultant Carol Weisman of BoardBuilders.com, (St. Louis, Mo.).
“If the board believes in the mission, then the board is responsible for the program,” Weisman said. “They have a moral, legal and fiscal responsibility to put their money where their mouth is.”
For instance, a Texas CEO said his organization has a program that is historic to the organization and central to its mission, but is losing thousands of dollars a month. While the organization makes money overall and the loss in the individual program was planned for in the budget, a couple of board members have floated the idea of terminating the program.
That’s likely the wrong approach, said Weisman. If a program is mission critical, the board needs to find the time and money to keep it viable, she said.
Weisman experienced a similar scenario as board chair of a child abuse agency some years ago. “We couldn’t get the boys sexual abuse program funded — this was before all the sexual abuse scandals,” she said.
The problem was nobody wanted to be associated with the program, Weisman said. “No corporation wants to be linked with the sexual abuse of boys,” she said.
The organization’s development director was spending 80 percent of her time trying to fund one program, Weisman said, and the board wasn’t stepping up either.
But two things forced this board to act to save the program, Weisman said. First, during a board meeting, a 10-year-old female client of the organization spoke of her own sexual abuse story at the hands of her uncle and the help the organization provided her. The child then asked the board where the boy’s group for sexual abuse counseling was as she was in an all-girl group.
“She was told there was only one meeting a week for the boys, and then she pointed out that was ridiculous, saying ‘If my uncle would have had a group, he would not have hurt me,’” Weisman said.
After this meeting, three board members stepped up and said they would find the money to fund the program, Weisman said. “If a program is mission-critical, saving it is a major board issue,” she said.
Second, when a program central to the organization’s mission struggles to attract outside funding, the board needs to step up, the consultant said.
The executive needs to understand this point: If the program is mission-critical — like stopping the cycle of child abuse is to a child abuse agency —and if the board buys into the organization’s mission, don’t let them off the hook, Weisman said.
It’s a vital issue for a nonprofit organization and one that separates the nonprofit from the for-profit mindset, Weisman said. “That’s why I brought in the little girl to talk to a board full of for-profit executives,” she said. Because of who they were, they were thinking of the program like businessmen, when it really needed to be a head and heart decision, Weisman said.
Weisman recommends working through these questions with board members:
- Do I fully understand the issue?
- Is this program mission-critical?
- What do we need to do to fund it?
Then, show the board the program in action. If you work with a land reclamation board and the issue is a dying stream, arrange a visit to see the stream, see the dying fish and smell the water. “If the board is making the decision at 10,000 feet and can’t smell or touch the problem, the board is not necessarily making the best decision,” Weisman said.
And if they say “No” to saving the program in the end, the board understands what it is saying “No” to, Weisman said.
For information, www.BoardBuilders.com.