At various stages in their lives, a number of community minded citizens feel that they have something to offer their community as a volunteer. They may be approached by a friend or a neighbour, they make seek out volunteer opportunities, or they may be offered the opportunity to volunteer through a colleague. 

This is often how individuals are recruited to serve on a board of directors of not-for-profit organizations.  They are usually told “It will only take a few hours a month of your time.” 

Individuals who are contemplating offering their services to serve on boards of directors should ask a number of questions before making any commitment including but not limited to:

-        What do I know about Governance in the not-for-profit sector?

-        What skills and expertise does this agency require in its governance structure?

-        Can I contribute any of these skills or required expertise? What would my value added be?

-        Why does this type of volunteering appeal to me?

-        Who else is on the board?  How were they recruited?

-        What do I know about the agency’s history, its community reputation?

The demands and expectations of not-for-profit boards of directors have changed dramatically over the last 10 years.  It is not good enough to simply want to offer a few hours of one’s time by being a member of a board; this commitment goes hand in hand with many serious expectations. 

A former board member once said to me that the reason she became involved with a particular community agency was to offer some of her time to those in need – maybe to assist in fund raising.  The agency immediately offered her a position on the board of directors.  What she did not know was that the agency was in serious trouble – financial and otherwise. She was not prepared for the challenges she faced. She braved it out for two years and finally left the board not having contributed what she felt the agency needed.  She learned a very important lesson but felt frustrated and vulnerable in the end.

Susan Bihun

Imagine Canada reports that in 2003 there were 45,000 not-for-profit/charitable organizations in Ontario or 369 per 100,000 population.  Since 2003, the number of organizations has grown despite the challenges facing these organizations:   Ontario’s difficult fiscal environment, increasing demands for transparency and accountability by both stakeholders and funders, a shortage of skilled volunteers and a deficit in experienced senior management staff.  Seventy five per cent of not-for-profit agencies in Canada have fewer than 10 staff.  Virtually all agencies are facing challenges recruiting volunteer board members who have the requisite skills and expertise to govern.

The not-for-profit sector is a vital contributor to the Ontario economy and for this reason the sector needs to remain vibrant and sustainable.  The vast majority of not-for-profit agencies are found in the health and social services sectors.  Faced with these significant challenges, one should ask the question:  Why are so few agencies actively engaged in examining strategies for merging their talent with the talent of like minded agencies and move into a position of enhanced sustainability?

I would suggest that there are a number of reasons.  Agencies do not want to lose their independence and their “mark”.  They don’t want to lose their history.  Often times, they don’t want to lose power and control.    Perhaps they don’t see the benefits or feel the driving need to talk about merging or amalgamating.  Perhaps they are waiting for additional government funding to ensure their stability.  Perhaps they don’t know how to approach a discussion with another agency or group of agencies.  Or, perhaps they will wait until forced to seek alternatives.

The integration of agencies does not have to be a win/lose proposition.  There are many proven strategies that can be employed to ensure that agencies engaged in “joining up” will be highly successful and stable organizations at the end of the process.   However none of these strategies will work unless a leader emerges that asks the question “Why Not?”.  

Susan Bihun

Contemporary models of non-profit policy governance are all clear on one issue - the Executive Director is the only employee who is hired by and answers to the Board of Directors. Ensuring that an organization has the right Executive Director – someone who is competent to run the day to day operations, can engage effectively with the Board in their strategy and governance work, and move the organization forward in accordance with its mission and values – can present a Board with a real recruiting challenge at the best of times. Now consider the difficulty when the talent pool shrinks dramatically over the next 10 years as the Baby Boomers retire. Most sectors have not even begun to think through the implications of that massive retirement and the majority of organizations have no idea where their next ED will come from. It’s time for the Boards of Directors to step up to the task of ensuring that their organizations are contributing to the development of the next generation of Executive Directors – if not for themselves, then to replenish the pool. 

Jane Rounthwaite

In the current debate about rising health care costs there is a commonly heard suggestion that we need to “bend the cost curve” of health care.  My fear is that this bend is going to happen on the backs of the already lowest-paid workers in the sector (think PSWs and home care staff, for example). 

Many of the strategies underway and coming are long overdue:

• Optimize the scope of practice of all of the health care professionals in the system;
• Instill more rigour in the measurement of institutional performance;
• Apply lean techniques and strategies in the health care sector;
• Review compensation and incentive plans for our health care providers; 
• Encourage the use of lower cost alternatives to hospital care; 
• Encourage patients to share responsibility for their health and their care. 

All of these strategies make sense.    

But a caution …  Community-based agencies and providers, who have for decades been quietly providing solid, high quality care, can’t be squeezed any further.  We can’t and shouldn’t be asking them to do more with budgets and pay scales that are already far less than their hospital-based counterparts.  Sure, they don’t have the overhead.  But we are asking them to provide more complex care, to more patients.  We are asking them to meet new and demanding contractual arrangements with no recognition of the cost.  We are pressing them to use their volunteers to provide services that we might otherwise have to pay for. 

We’ll bend the cost curve, possibly.  And we’ll bend it so far that we will be able to brag that we are looking after patients using the most demoralized, poorly paid, burnt-out health care workers anywhere. 

Melodie Zarzeczny

You’ve got a business to run.  You’re busy.  Everything is running smoothly.  As the Chair of the Board (or the CEO, Executive Director, or Board member), you’re feeling pretty confident that everything is under control.  No need to complicate life with Board meetings, Committees, policies and endless reporting. 

Or is there?  By ignoring the importance of good governance, have you left yourself open to risks that could pose a threat to your business?  Or to you and your directors personally?  Do you know the extent of your personal liability?

Does your Board meet regularly?  If not, you are probably not in compliance with your  ByLaw.  Are you in compliance with Bill 168?  If not, you are placing your organization and your Directors at risk of lawsuits and fines.  (Do you know what Bill 168 is?)  Are your policies sufficiently rigorous to withstand a lawsuit?  Are your Directors sufficiently well informed so as not to be held personally liable in the event of legal action?

But it’s not just about avoiding costly lawsuits.  Good governance also contributes to the bottom line – it builds social, human and financial capital in your organization.. 

Good corporate governance is not just for big business.  In fact, one could argue that it’s more important for smaller organizations, who can gain tremendous advantages from the effective use of their Boards and Directors.

Melodie Zarzeczny