the impact of public funding on faith.revised doc

8/4/2019 The Impact of Public Funding on Faith.revised Doc

1/21

----------The Impact of Public Funding on Faith-based Programs: Case Study of InterfaithHospitality of Spokane. Please do not duplicate without the permission of GRE

1

THE IMPACT OF PUBLIC FUNDING ON FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS:A CASE STUDY OF INTERFAITH HOSPITALITY OF SPOKANE

October 26, 2009

PREPARED BY:

Samuel G. MahaffyGRE Consulting Associates


2/21


2

THE IMPACT OF PUBLIC FUNDING ON FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS:A CASE STUDY OF INTERFAITH HOSPITALITY OF SPOKANE

Communities of faith sometimes divide deeply on the issue of accepting public

funding. In the public forum, the debate centers on whether the government should be

involved at all in the funding of faith-based organizations. The issue is framed largely in

terms of separation of church and state. Within faith communities, the conversation

often focuses on whether I can be faithful to my call (Susan Smith in The

Washington Post, 2009) while accepting public funding. The Center for Public Justice

(www.cpjustice.org) under the leadership of Dr. Stanley Carlson-Thies has delved

deeply into the issues of how well the government, in providing funding to faith

organizations, .respects the religious character and independence of such

organizations (www.cpjustice.org/node/1606). Within the Reformed world-and-life view,

the Center for Public Justice articulates systematically and clearly the Kuyperian

perspective of principled pluralismthat governments must honor the multiple

confessions held by the citizens and embodied in the institutions they create, neither

imposing secularism on all nor selecting one of the religious confessions as the

standard requirement of everyone (www.cpjustice.org/node/1606).

We respect the confessional dimension of the conversation about public funding

of faith initiatives. It is right that those who firmly believe in a faith mandate to serve

those most in need and to live a life of compassion and justice, would wrestle with

understanding the interplay of the diverse organizations of civil society seeking to

deliver education, social services, and health care in a way that overcomes injustices

and promotes the common good.
http://www.cpjustice.org/http://www.cpjustice.org/http://www.cpjustice.org/http://www.cpjustice.org/node/1606http://www.cpjustice.org/node/1606http://www.cpjustice.org/node/1606http://www.cpjustice.org/node/1606http://www.cpjustice.org/node/1606http://www.cpjustice.org/node/1606http://www.cpjustice.org/node/1606http://www.cpjustice.org/node/1606http://www.cpjustice.org/


3/21


3

The contribution of this paper is not to step into that rightful wrestling. Instead,

we look at the reflexive fear of many of the faith-based organizations we work with, that

accepting public funding in the form of federal, state, and city grants will compromise

their faith-based mission. As an organization that has successfully obtained significant

public funding for diverse faith-based organizations, we pause with these organizations

to consider the impact of that funding on their mission. We look at the issue

experientially, rather than theoretically. We seek to uncover lessons that provide insight

for faith-based organizations considering public funding as a strategy to enhance

revenues.

We do so, by first reviewing very briefly the historical context of public funding for

faith initiatives. We then take a case study approach to the impact of such funding by

looking at Interfaith Hospitality of Spokane (IH) (www.ihnspokane.org). This

organization once relied exclusively on private donations and today receives

approximately 22% of its gross revenues from public funding. IH is affiliated with

National Interfaith Hospitality Network, now named Family Promise

(www.familypromise.org). Family Promise is a national network of 114 affiliates in 37

states that uses the services of more than 4,000 congregations and 100,000 volunteers

to link church congregants with homeless families. The local Interfaith Hospitality

Networks (IHNs) provide homeless families with children, emergency and transitional

shelter, meals, counselling, and additional support services to help them regain their

independence. (www.ihnspokane.org/familypromisehistory.htm).

The Faith-based Initiative is most often associated with the administration of

President George W. Bush. In reality, large religious social service agencies such as
http://www.ihnspokane.org/http://www.ihnspokane.org/http://www.ihnspokane.org/http://www.familypromise.org/http://www.familypromise.org/http://www.familypromise.org/http://www.ihnspokane.org/familypromisehistory.htmhttp://www.ihnspokane.org/familypromisehistory.htmhttp://www.ihnspokane.org/familypromisehistory.htmhttp://www.ihnspokane.org/familypromisehistory.htmhttp://www.familypromise.org/http://www.ihnspokane.org/


4/21


4

Catholic Charities, the Salvation Army, and Habitat for Humanity, have received federal

funding for decades (Six Myths About Faith-Based Initiatives, by Mark Chaves, The

Christian Century, Sept. 12-19, 2001, pp. 20-23). The faith-based initiative was clearly

not the beginning of public (government) support for religious organizations that serve

those in need. Rather, that initiative publicized, codified and gave definition to a

relationship that had previously existed. The establishment of the White House Office

of Community and Faith-based Initiatives (Executive Order Dec. 12, 2002Equal

Protection of the Laws for Faith-Based and Community Organizations), follows and

responds to a series of legal decisions that set the context for that Initiative. These

legal developments are well documented by the Roundtable on Religion and Social

Welfare Policyof the Rockefeller Institute of Government, State University of New York.

(www.religionandsocialpolicy.org). The U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Zelman v.

Simmons-Harrisupheld the use of government vouchers to pay for private schooling. In

McCallum II, the Seventh Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed public funding of

faith-based social services. From 2000 to 2008, we see an evolving articulation of the

permissible and impermissible uses of government funding by faith-based recipients of

federal grants (The State of the Law 2008: A Cumulative Report on Legal

Developments Affecting Government Partnerships with Faith-Based organizations)

(www.religionandsocialpolicy.org/resourcews/vouchers.cfm ). That evolving articulation

of the issues continues today, with Joshua DuBois, the newly appointed Director of

President Obamas Faith-Based Initiative Office weighing in on the issues of hiring

discrimination by faith-based organizations receiving federal funding

(http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/susan_Smith ). The shaping of
http://www.religionandsocialpolicy.org/http://www.religionandsocialpolicy.org/http://www.religionandsocialpolicy.org/http://www.religionandsocialpolicy.org/resourcews/vouchers.cfmhttp://www.religionandsocialpolicy.org/resourcews/vouchers.cfmhttp://www.religionandsocialpolicy.org/resourcews/vouchers.cfmhttp://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/susan_Smithhttp://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/susan_Smithhttp://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/susan_Smithhttp://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/susan_Smithhttp://www.religionandsocialpolicy.org/resourcews/vouchers.cfmhttp://www.religionandsocialpolicy.org/


5/21


5

the relationship between public funding sources and faith-based organizations is still

evolving.

Interfaith Hospitality of Spokane (IH) has operated since its inception, outside of

the arena of government funding. It is self-described as an organization of four

employees and four hundred volunteers. Since 1997, a network of thirty churches in

the greater Spokane Washington area, have provided services to homeless families. A

Day Center is located on the campus of one of these churches. Host churches open

their doors on a rotating basis to provide temporary shelter and meals for homeless

families who have children age birth to eighteen. Sponsor churches support the host

churches with volunteers and financial resources. While other programs in the region

serve either men or women and children, IH fills a unique niche, serving parents of both

genders and their partners and children, allowing family units to stay together during the

crisis of homelessness. The program stands out in its success in developing long-term

relationships with homeless families, building strong supporting relationships among

church congregants and homeless families, and providing comprehensive case

management services. These services extend from emergency shelter to transitional

housing, and finally to sustainable affordable housing.

Funding for IH operations has historically come almost completely from direct

donor contributions and a limited number of annual fundraising events. An active Board

and a network of coordinators in local churches spearheaded campaigns to meet the

cash requirements for operations. Additionally, a very substantial donation of non-cash

in-kind services in the form of volunteer hours and facility use, meant that IH operated

much more cost effectively than other service providers in the region serving the


6/21


6

homeless population and providing emergency shelter, transitional housing, meals, and

case management services. The donation of in-kind goods and services was largely

undocumented and not reflected in the financials of the organization.

The evolution of a new paradigm for funding IH operations can be linked to

visioning process at a Board retreat in the fall of 2006. This visioning process was

facilitated by Samuel Mahaffy of GRE Consulting Associates (www.greconsulting.org).

Associates of GRE Consulting first volunteered helping homeless families with meals in

a local church and later entered into a contractual relationship with IH to support

organizational development. The Board of IH invited GRE Consulting to facilitate the

visioning process at a time of transition in leadership on the Board. Using the

Appreciative Inquiry model (www.appreciativeinquiry.case.edu) key stakeholders of IH--

including staff, incoming and outgoing board members, and a client-- supported by IH

during the time she was homeless with her childrenrevisited the mission of IH, and

explored a new direction. In keeping with the spirit and methodology of Appreciative

Inquiry as a tool for organizational development, this process sought to bring forward

the strengths of the organization, the motivation of those who contribute so much to it in

terms of time, effort, and financial resources, and envision a desired future.

From this day-long visioning process, emerged a subtle shift in the way that the

organization looked at its mission. The focus shifted in an almost imperceptible way.

Instead of seeing itself as an organization that exists to minister to the homeless there

emerged a sense of the organization as one that exists to share the blessing we have

experienced in working with homeless families to regain their independence. That shift

was two-fold: First, it focused more on assets and less on deficits. Secondly, it
http://www.greconsulting.org/http://www.greconsulting.org/http://www.greconsulting.org/http://www.appreciativeinquiry.case.edu/http://www.appreciativeinquiry.case.edu/http://www.appreciativeinquiry.case.edu/http://www.appreciativeinquiry.case.edu/http://www.greconsulting.org/


7/21


7

emphasized more complex relationships. Instead of focusing only on the relationship

between the homeless and those who provide services to the homeless, the emphasis

shifts toward relationships among an array of community partners, including the network

of IH churches, other service providers (both faith-based and secular) and both

individuals and organizations in the community impacted by homelessness. In this shift,

the conversation at IH began to focus less on the rightness and need to help those

most in need, and more on the sense of blessing and growth that IH stakeholders

experienced in their ministry.

That almost imperceptible shift in focus emerging from the visioning process was

to have profound impact on the way IH did business. On the Board, this meant a shift

away from a perception that too much was being asked of Board members and staff

with too little support. Under the leadership of the very capable and service-motivated

incoming President of the Board, there was a renewed sense of commitment and

purpose. The period from the fall of 2006 to the present, saw the IH Board evolve into

an exceptionally strong and functional Board. We analyze in a separate publication

what makes for a strong and effective non-profit Board and how the IH Board reflects

these characteristics (www.greconsulting.info). Suffice it to say here, that the

emergence of a new funding paradigm would not have happened without the renewed

energy and commitment of the Board of IH.

This new funding paradigm grew organically from the IH sense of itself as a more

collaborative organization, that was intent on sharing with others the blessing that they

experienced in ministry. The shift came at a time that the organization was at a low

point. The facility that was its home was dilapidated and needing attention. A crisis in
http://www.greconsulting.info/http://www.greconsulting.info/http://www.greconsulting.info/http://www.greconsulting.info/


8/21


8

management required the Board to step in and both make a change in staff leadership

and also implement new management and financial controls.

As part of this process, the organization looked toward expanding its

partnerships with both service providers and funders. Clearly, the organization needed

to look outside of its historic giving base of faithful individuals, if it was to move to a

new level. Without a more diversified source of revenues, the organization was not

likely to have a sustainable future. Many of the supporting churches of IH are

mainstream Protestant denominations, which have themselves seen membership

declines and reductions in giving. The financial supporting base of IH was experiencing

its own stressors.

In 2006, IH first applied for federal funding under the guidance of GRE

Consulting Associates. An application was initiated to the City of Spokane, through its

Human Services Department. The City publishes annually an RFP to solicit proposals

from social service agencies serving the City of Spokane to address priorities set by the

City Council (www.spokanehumanservices.org) for the use of federal funding. The

partnership planning articulated under the Spokane Regional Ten Year Plan to End

Homelessness (Ten-year Plan) shaped the identified priorities

(http://www.spokanehumanservices.org/10%20Year%20Plan%20documents/10%20Ye

ar%20Plan%20with%20signatures.pdf . The Ten-year Plancalled for broad community

partnerships.

The work of faith-based organizations such as IH to address homelessness is

specifically acknowledged in the Ten Year Plan. It includes in its twelve-point

Resolution the intent to affirm the work of faith and community based agencies for the
http://www.spokanehumanservices.org/http://www.spokanehumanservices.org/http://www.spokanehumanservices.org/http://www.spokanehumanservices.org/10%20Year%20Plan%20documents/10%20Year%20Plan%20with%20signatures.pdfhttp://www.spokanehumanservices.org/10%20Year%20Plan%20documents/10%20Year%20Plan%20with%20signatures.pdfhttp://www.spokanehumanservices.org/10%20Year%20Plan%20documents/10%20Year%20Plan%20with%20signatures.pdfhttp://www.spokanehumanservices.org/10%20Year%20Plan%20documents/10%20Year%20Plan%20with%20signatures.pdfhttp://www.spokanehumanservices.org/10%20Year%20Plan%20documents/10%20Year%20Plan%20with%20signatures.pdfhttp://www.spokanehumanservices.org/10%20Year%20Plan%20documents/10%20Year%20Plan%20with%20signatures.pdfhttp://www.spokanehumanservices.org/


9/21


9

work they have done on the frontlines for decades and partner with them to fashion

innovative responses that are results-oriented (Ten Year Plan, p. 4).

In that Resolution, are the seeds of understanding of the role of federal funding in

the life of faith-based ministries such as IH. The language of this Resolution contains

three important components to our present analysis. 1. The plan acknowledges the

historical commitment of faith organizations to compassionate care for the homeless. 2.

It looks toward faith-based organizations to fashion innovative responses. 3. It

highlights that these responses need to be results-oriented. In our Case Studyof IH,

we will see these three components mirrored in our evaluation of the impact of public

funding on the faith-based ministry of IH.

To evaluate the impact of public funding on the faith-based mission of IH, we

utilize the Case Study approach (www.managementhelp.org/evalutn/casestdy.htm).

This approach which has both benefits and limitations, provides a holistic portrayal of

the experiences of one faith-based non-profit with federal funding. Our Case Studyof

IH, builds on open-ended interviews with three stakeholders of IHthe President of the

Board, the Executive Director of the organization, and a host church Volunteer

Coordinator who has been actively supporting the ministry. All three stakeholders work

closely and directly with those who IH serves--homeless families with young children.

Each has been involved with IH since before the first public funding was received from

the grant application submitted to the City of Spokane in 2006 to the present.

We select these interviewees, both because they are active stakeholders with

unique positional perspectives, and they have the history with the organization to have

experienced shifts that occurred as IH moves into a new funding paradigm. Further
http://www.managementhelp.org/evalutn/casestdy.htmhttp://www.managementhelp.org/evalutn/casestdy.htmhttp://www.managementhelp.org/evalutn/casestdy.htmhttp://www.managementhelp.org/evalutn/casestdy.htm


10/21


10

information for this Case Study is gathered from an evaluation of the financial

statements of the organization, Quarterly Reports submitted on funded grant

applications, and conversations with IH Board members and supporters, and the

observations and evaluation of GRE Consulting Associates working with IH.

The decision of IH to apply for public funding did not involve great agonizing.

There was first a compelling sense that the organization needed to diversify its sources

of revenue, which relied almost exclusively on direct donations from local churches and

congregants. An incoming Board member (the Vice President of a local bank)

confirmed this sense, as did other professionals on the Board with business experience.

The organization already had collaborative relationships with many of the social service

agencies in the community serving the homeless population. This included both

secular agencies such as Spokane Mental Health and faith-based organizations such

as the Union Gospel Mission. While the secular agencies relied substantially on public

funding, the faith-based organizations relied substantially on individual donors in the

community.

The first grant application of IH for public funding through the City of Spokane

made the case for the successful experience of the organization in serving homeless

families. It emphasized the cost-effectiveness of using many volunteers and relying on

churches for donated facilities. Social service agencies were in some cases paying to

house homeless individuals in low-cost hotels and referring these individuals for publicly

supported social services including transportation vouchers, food stamps, and

counselling. The Interfaith model relied on churches to provide donated shelter, on

church families to prepare meals for the homeless families, and donations from


11/21


11

individuals to fund the case management services provided by a small paid staff. That

first grant application was successful. It was the beginning of a stream of new revenues

from more than one public funding source. IH today operates with 22% of its budget

coming from public sources in the form of successful grant applications. At the same

time, the individual donor base of IH has grown as well. Under the new development

paradigm, the organization seeks community donations to fund the match requirement

of public funds. In some cases, grant applications for federal funds are strengthened by

the ability of the organization to raise much more than the minimum required match

through special appeals to its donor base.

While the number of homeless families that IH can serve because of this new

funding has grown, the Board of IH has made an intentional decision in consultation

with GRE Consulting Associates to set a goal that public and private funding will be

blended in the financial planning model. The goal is that public (grant) funding will

constitute no more than 25-33% of total revenues, and that the donation base from

individual and institutional donors will grow at the same time. IH has no interest in

abandoning its historic and faithful donor base as the primary source of funding for its

programs. It has no interest in simply substituting public funding for private funding.

Rather, the goal is to establish a diversified revenue stream that will support long-term

financial stability, and at the same time deepen community partnerships.

Has this goal been achieved? What are the anticipated and unanticipated

impacts of federal funding? How has the new paradigm influenced the culture of the

organization and its service-delivery model in either obvious or subtle ways? The

interviews with the Board President of IH (President), the Executive Director (ED) and


12/21


12

the host church volunteer coordinator (Vol.) tell the story in the voices of the

organization. From these three open-ended interviews, several themes emerge.

1. Public funding has allowed IH to expand dramatically the number of clients

it serves. With the acquisition of public funding, IH moved forward between 2006 and

2009 from serving 22 families a year with extended comprehensive services, toward

reaching its goal of serving 50 families. Additionally, new public funding has meant a

better Day Center facility and the addition of transitional housing units to serve

homeless families. Staffing has increased, not to manage the increase in funding, but

to provide the extended case management services required to serve more families.

2. There is a shared perception between the President and the ED that this

funding is contributing significantly to the sustainability of the program. It has kept

us solid. IH achieved the goal of a more diversified revenue stream. Additionally, there

is very much the sense that it has reduced the stress in the organization about finances,

and as a result has allowed more focus to be on relationships with homeless families

and community constituencies. Board members and staff share this sense of

celebration that there is a more solid financial footing. In stating that the City funding

has been a blessing to our program, there is a component of that blessing that comes

from worrying less about financial resources.

3. Especially from the ED, comes the belief that public funding has increased

the knowledge and skills of the organization. Because we have been able to

expand our program, we have increased our network (of collaborating organizations),

and as a result we have increased our knowledge and skills. That has led to an

increase in our effectiveness. The President speaks to the new rigor that has come to


13/21


13

the organization because of public funding. While the Board has been engaged in

planning and goal setting, the grant applications for IH require the use of a logic model

and the setting of specific and measurable outcomes. Quarterly reports require

attentiveness to evaluation of effectiveness in reaching desired outcomes. A new

modality of program review and evaluation comes hand-in-hand with the new paradigm

of blending public and private funding to achieve the mission of the organization.

4. There is a shared perception that this new rigor in effectiveness evaluation

has led to a validation of the organization and its mission in the perceptions of the

public arena. The President states: There is a validation of IH in the public

perceptions by our being approved for this funding. In this past (funding) year, we were

selected for grant funding renewal, while many good programs did not receive funding.

I reference this when I speak publicly. I let folks know that their contributions can go

100% to meeting the needs of homeless families, because funding for administrative

and other operational expenses is carried by grant funding.

5. The development model at IH is to leverage approval for public funding

along with its match requirement as a strategy for increasing individual

donations. IH now sends out a direct appeal letter to its donor base with the approval

of each significant grant application that has a required match component. Response

from donors to this approach has been positive. The concern that public funding might

precipitate a drop in individual donations has not materialized. The feedback we receive

is that donors like and understand the concept that their contribution is leveraged,

because it meets the requirement to obtain public funding.


14/21


14

6. As a result of the approach of blending public and private funding, IH has

increased its accountability. At its last Board meeting, the Board approved changes

to the Accounting Manual that grow out of recommendations from the CPA who

prepares the annual audit report. Quarterly reports require the organization to account

both for expenditure of public funds in accordance with grant funding priorities and

approved budgets, and also accountability for raising the required match requirement.

The IH stakeholders we interviewed see this as a good thing, rather than as a

burden. It has required us to be sharperto be more accountable. While IH has

always been frugalwith funds donated to its program, it is now more strategic.

7. Public funding came to IH because of its willingness to collaborate with other

service providers, both secular and faith-based. At the same time, this funding has

enhanced collaboration. Informal collaboration has in many cases been articulated

into a Memorandums of Understanding or Memorandum of Agreement that defines

mutual expectations. These more formalized relationships define specific ways in which

service providers will support each others mission and avoid duplication of effort. Well-

defined collaborative relationships contribute both to strengthening the ability of IH to

obtain public funding, and also its ability to achieve desired program outcomes.

Our interviews with stakeholders of IH began with open-ended questions

designed to encourage interviewees to speak freely about the impact of public funding

on the faith-based mission of the organizationwithout a bias toward an expected

response. It is only after these responses, which were very substantially positive, that

we check this information by asking if there has been any downside to public funding.


15/21


15

We then go further to ask very specifically if public funding has in any way

compromised the faith-based mission of the organization.

The response to this question is almost one of surprise. There is some legend in

non-profit circles, that the government has some control agenda in providing funding

to faith-based organizations, and may be seeking to co-opt their faith-based mission. In

response to our question about compromise of faith-based mission, there is a

consensus response that stakeholders have felt no need to compromise their witness in

their ministry. One interviewee recounted speaking to a Moslem woman who was

homeless with her family, about the picture of Jesus in the room where they were

meeting. She described that conversation as respectful and helpful. The Moslem

woman expressed her surprise that she had found Christian people to be so generous.

The staff person recounted how her faith motivates the work that she does.

Beyond these themes, there are some intriguing findings in our case studies in

responses to the interview questions. The staff of the faith-based IH found faith

connections and motivations with their counterparts working in secular agencies. They

recall being supported and providing support for the work they do. They speak of a

shared calling with those who work in public agencies. There is further mention that

the partnership has increased their awareness of the struggles faced by public agencies

providing social services to high-need communities. Additionally, one interviewee,

expressed that he felt differently about how his tax dollars were being spent for the

public good, when he was in in the trenches with those serving families in desperate

need.


16/21


16

SUMMARY

Our case study of Interfaith Hospitality provides evidence of substantial benefit

that this organization has received from participating in public funding and reshaping its

financial model to balance public and private sources of funding. The Visioning Process

is significant in both shaping this outcome and causing it to come about. The move into

a broader collaboration and a new focus on sharing the blessing of ministry was

intentional.

Private funding was enhanced, rather than being supplanted, by public funding.

The organization does not see a downside to the process of public funding. They do

see significant ways in which it has affected the culture of the organization, even over

the relatively short span of three years. Because of the blending of public and private

funding, the organization is under less stress in fulfilling its mission, it is more

collaborative, and it is more rigorous and accountable in setting program goals and

outcomes and measuring progress toward those desired outcomes. The organization

has retained the services of GRE Consulting Associates to assist in program evaluation

and monitoring compliance with federal and local requirements for funding. With this

outside support, the organization does not find the reporting or monitoring requirements

of public funding burdensome. The ED of IH has now assumed responsibility for

Quarterly Reports, and is the primary contact with the funding agency. Clearly, the

organization has now built its capacity to manage public funding effectively, as it has

done with private funding for many years.

IH sees their organization validated in public perception as a service provider

because they are not going it alone. The narrative that individual donations can now


17/21


17

be used to directly and entirely support homeless families, has helped to increase

private donor support. New partnerships and more formalized collaborations have

helped IH obtain public funding which judges the strength of a grant application in large

measure on the strength of collaborative relationships. It has also led to increased

knowledge and skills and increased effectiveness as the staff of IH rubs shoulders with

service providers in other agencies.

Faith-based non-profits can learn much from the experiences of Interfaith

Hospitality. Faith-based organizations that have historically relied only on private

donors, might well look to public funding to enhance their revenue streams and create a

more sustainable funding model. The best approach may well be a blending of public

and private revenue streams. The caution is that building dependency on public

funding, as a primary source of revenue is not a sound strategy. We have seen non-

profits thrown into crisis when public funding that they have relied on in the form of

grants, is not renewed. Organizations that depend on funding from a limited number of

foundations may be equally vulnerable. However, it might also be argued that relying

exclusively on individual donors and churches may be a risky strategy as well,

particularly in economically uncertain times.

The IH Board shows wisdom in its blended funding approach. The Board now

tracks public and private revenues as a percentage of gross revenues and sets goals to

achieve a balance between the two. It is healthy to monitor to ensure that private

donations are increasing while public funding sources are also being integrated into

revenue streams.


18/21


18

Faith-based organizations must show due diligence in studying carefully the

expectations associated with public funding. While fears that the government may have

a hidden agenda to secularize faith-based ministries may be unfounded, it is important

to understand the language of federal Assurancesand Certificationsassociated with the

receipt of federal funding. You can find these on the internet atwww.grants.gov.

It has been pointed out that faith-based organizations provide services to those

most in need because it is the right and just thing to do. Faith-based organizations with

integrity know that feeding the hungry is not a cause for compelling adherence to a

particular belief system or doctrine. Interviews with IH stakeholders articulate clearly

their perspective that their witness to the love of Christ is more evident in actions than

in words. From the visioning process of IH, we take the important learning that when

we serve humbly those most in need, we can expect our own hearts and lives to be

changed.

The Volunteer Coordinator for IH expresses this well. I have been changed by

working with homeless families. I am less judgemental and slower to jump to

conclusions that families end up homeless through some fault or character defect. As a

result of this work, I am a better listener, and able to be more compassionate. It is a

resonant theme that IH stakeholders are blessed in the living of their mission. It is also

their experience that sharing the message of that blessing is an effective development

strategy. The shift in emphasis from the burdenof serving the homeless to the blessing

of that service has enriched and brought new life to the organization.

The paradigm of bringing together public and private funding may be a way of

blessing an entire community. Public funding is not a quick fix for faith-based
http://www.grants.gov/http://www.grants.gov/http://www.grants.gov/http://www.grants.gov/


19/21


19

organizations facing diminished revenues from individual donations. The experience of

IH reflects the importance of a visioning process as a pre-step toward any significant

shift in a funding model. It is an opportunity for an organization to revisit and renew its

purpose, and to remember why it is busy with the work it does in the community. It is a

time to re-evaluate relationships both within and outside the organization and find ways

to perhaps be more collaborative and more effective. In times of extraordinary need,

and in serving families and communities in crisis, it is helpful to bring together all the

available wisdom and resources from both the public and private sector.

Both sectors include people of faith. We have the opportunity to support each

other and build each other up in ministry. The experience of IH suggests that faith-

based organizations that choose to collaborate with public entities, can expect to both

become greater agents-of-change and be themselves changed by their engagement

with a more diverse funding and service-providing partnership.

In summary, we return to the 7th of the 12 Resolutions of the Regional Ten-Year

Plan to End Homelessness. That resolution calls the sponsors (mayors of cities and

civic leaders) to affirm the work of faith and community based agencies for the work

they have done on the frontlines for decades and partner with them to fashion

innovative responses that are results-oriented. Faith-based organizations like IH have

indeed been on the frontlines for decades. It is our finding that faith-based

organizations have and are fashioning innovative responses for communities in needs.

Aggregate data for the State of Washington shows that Interfaith Hospitality provides

shelter, food, and comprehensive case management services to an entire homeless

family, for less than the average cost of a public social service agency providing just a


20/21


20

single bed for a single homeless person. Interfaith Hospitality in serving the homeless,

keeps family units together. It engages homeless families in partnership relationships

with families of church congregants, rather than just providing quick-fix financial

resources. IH describes this as a hand up rather than a hand out. The passion,

compassion, and wisdom of the faith-based community in this effort are evident.

Finally, it is our finding that public funding requires faith-based organizations like

IH to move toward being more results oriented in the sense of using logic models,

setting goals and outcomes, and engaging in formative and summative evaluations.

Because of public funding, there is more rigor and accountability. This may well be an

opportunity for organizational growth and maturing, rather than a burden. Faith-based

organizations can be models of stewardship of both public and private funds. In

blending funding, we may be strategic as well as showing good stewardship.

The President of the Board of Interfaith Hospitality states in closing, that receipt

of public funding has enhanced our faith development. It has caused us to stretch; it

has challenged us to do more. In the venture of public/private partnership, faith

organizations are able to share their faith journey. These partnerships are changing

lives and changing communities.


21/21

----------The Impact of Public Funding on Faith-based Programs: Case Study of Interfaith

21

****************The author of this study is Samuel G. Mahaffy, Executive Director of GRE ConsultingAssociates. He has written numerous successful grant applications on behalf of faith-basedorganizations for federal and local public funding. These include U.S. Department of Educationfunding for a program to test in a private faith-based university with national standing, theimplementation of the social norms model to reduce high-risk drinking on college campuses.

GRE Consulting Associates serves as an advancement or development consultant to manyfaith-based and community organizations including K-12 schools, juvenile justice programs, andretreat centers. They have helped to develop innovative intergenerational models for assistedliving housing, care for the elderly and adults with special needs, integration of vulnerablemigrant communities into urban environments, education, and health care. Samuel Mahaffy hasreceived training provided by the White House Office of Community and Faith-Based Initiativesand worked closely with this office since its inception. He has met directly with the head of thisoffice for the U.S. Department of Education. He has been federally approved as a qualifiedevaluator on a federal grant to assess the use of public funding by a private faith-baseduniversity. Additionally, he has met personally with Dr. Stanley Carlson-Thies, and interviewedleaders in the use of federal funding for faith-based initiatives. He has facilitated visioningprocesses for many non-profit faith-based Boards using the Appreciative Inquiry model. We

thank the stakeholders of Interfaith Hospitality for sharing their story and for their faithfulness inministry. The author can be reached by e-mail [email protected] on the web atwww.greconsulting.org.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.greconsulting.org/http://www.greconsulting.org/http://www.greconsulting.org/mailto:[email protected]

the impact of public funding on faith.revised doc

Documents