The true story of a victim of clergy abuse.
This segment presents the true story of a victim of clergy abuse. It should help sensitize leaders to the human cost of sexual abuse in ministry settings.
Children’s ministry director David Staal introduces churches to the problem of child sexual abuse in the church.
Children’s ministry director David Staal introduces churches to the problem of child sexual abuse in the church. This segment gets people invested in solving this safety issue by engaging them, heart and mind. It should be the first presentation that you view and show.
Pastoral succession plans help minimize disruptions, provide uninterrupted leadership, protect the church’s resources, and much, much more.
A prominent church with more than 25,000 members rapidly eroded into a congregation of less than 250 with dwindling finances—and its rapid demise traces back to a problem many churches unfortunately face today: the lack of a pastoral succession plan.
The absence of succession planning can cause severe problems for congregations and raise numerous legal issues. In the case of this megachurch, when the church’s founding pastor died suddenly, the congregation viewed his son, who was on staff at the church, as his heir. However, the church’s board did not feel he was prepared to be the senior pastor. A rift ensued, and the son of the deceased pastor was fired. The subsequent years of infighting and costly litigation over the church’s significant assets wasted invaluable resources and virtually destroyed the church.
This is just one among far too many examples of the devastating consequences churches suffer when they do not plan ahead for a transition in pastoral leadership.
According to the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability’s most recent Nonprofit Governance Survey, 65 percent of all nonprofit boards self-report that they do not have a succession plan. As staggering as that figure is, this number would likely be higher if the survey exclusively asked church boards.
Dave Travis, CEO of Leadership Network, fittingly defines succession as “the intentional transfer of authority and leadership from one primary leader to another.” The need for new leadership can come very unexpectedly, such as in the case of a death, resignation, sudden illness, or termination of a leader. Whatever the reason for a change in senior leadership, churches need a succession plan for at least five reasons:
Every church needs a carefully documented plan to ensure that pastoral leadership will be handed over to the next top leader in an orderly way that has minimal impact on operations.
Congregants continue to need spiritual guidance and pastoral leadership when a senior pastor leaves, and before the new pastor arrives.
Every church needs sound stewardship, especially during transitions. As an organization financially dependent on contributions from its members, a church must make every effort to properly steward the assets of its congregation. A church that wastes resources on expensive litigation—which can be avoided by a succession plan—is not carefully managing the congregation’s resources. In the case of the megachurch whose founder died, the years of litigation jeopardized 110 acres of valuable real estate, and a 10,000-seat sanctuary, plus several valuable ventures. It brought a lot of bad press—both through traditional media and blogs—and bad feelings, but worst of all, many people were turned off to church altogether.
Succession planning should not be thought of as just switching out one leader for a new one; rather, it is an opportunity for growth. While churches rightfully grieve the loss of old leadership, the arrival of new leadership, when handled strategically and wisely, can breathe new life into a congregation, ignite a fresh vision, and create innovative ministry opportunities.
In my experience, the alternative to chaos and court intervention is a well-orchestrated succession plan. As an attorney, I have great appreciation for the court system.
As a Christian, I recognize the admonishment of 1 Corinthians 6:1 that suggests we make every effort to avoid bringing cases in civil court against other Christians.
However, when there is no thoughtful, documented plan established to fill a pastoral vacancy, chaos often results. T
That chaos often prompts conflict, and the opposing parties tend to look to the court system for help. Dissatisfaction usually results.
Depending on the nature of the dispute, courts may not weigh in because of First Amendment concerns, and when courts do intervene, it’s common for neither party to like the outcome. Case in point: the megachurch dispute affecting tens of thousands of people and numerous important assets ultimately was resolved by the decision of one judge. Neither side walked away feeling fully satisfied.
While denominations generally have a clear process to guide local churches when a vacancy occurs, there is a difference between what’s on paper and what often happens. What I have seen in practice is that the “replacement” leader provided by the denomination often brings out the worst in fellow Christians. I have even seen local congregations of a denomination change the locks to the church building to keep out the new pastor sent by the national office. Like independent congregations, churches that belong to a denomination need a succession plan, and they would be wise to coordinate that plan with denominational leadership.
In their book The Elephant in the Boardroom, Carolyn Weese and J. Russell Crabtree outline several questions to help start the process of creating a succession plan:
Creating a new strategic plan or carefully examining the current one helps leaders explore the strengths and weaknesses of their church’s vision and mission. As far as succession planning goes, the leadership team should reflect on how a transition in pastoral leadership would affect the church’s vision and mission.
Every church has a unique culture, and the current senior leader is often responsible for that culture. For instance, he or she might draw a certain crowd to the church. Does succession planning provide an opportunity to broaden that crowd or change it in a way the church leadership finds desirable?
Having “the talk” between the senior leader and the church board can be tough, no matter who initiates it, but it must be done. In fact, it should be done with regularity, as opposed to it being a haphazard, uncomfortable discussion. Make it a part of a regular agenda that starts early in the new leader’s tenure.
As discussed earlier, a succession plan must strive to minimize disruptions in ministry and operations before the new leader arrives.
Ideally, the senior pastor initiates the succession plan discussion. However, sometimes the church board makes the first move. Regardless of who initiates, the church should engage a competent attorney with experience representing churches. Along with a strong legal understanding of succession, the attorney should also know how to apply biblical principles to church leadership, governance, and pastoral transition. Prior to hiring, ask the attorney to explain the Bible-based principles that guide his or her understanding of succession planning. Moreover, an attorney with experience in this area should be familiar with the legal parameters that such a plan can (and cannot) include.
It has often been said that the only certainties in life are death and taxes. In large part, the church has managed to avoid the latter, but the former has had its hand in the demise of too many ministries. Consider what actions you need to take to ensure that your church is best positioned for continued success by having a properly prepared succession plan.
Erika E. Cole is an attorney who works exclusively with churches and is a founding partner of The Law Offices of Erika E. Cole LLC.
Understand how to manage church employee resignations with this guide covering resignation timing, retraction rules, employment policies, and board member liability. Ensure clarity and compliance in your church operations.
Q: A church employee provided a letter of resignation to our church board. A few days later she changed her mind and asked the board to disregard her letter of resignation. What should we do? When is a resignation effective, and can it later be revoked?
Note the following ten points regarding resignations:
1. Most employees hired for an indefinite term are “at-will” employees who can resign at any time, subject to the conditions summarized below.
2. Employees hired for a specified term may be unable to resign prior to the end of their employment term, and, if they try, they may be subject to damages in a lawsuit brought by their employer. Clearly, this is something to be discussed in advance to avoid wasteful litigation.
3. An at-will employee’s unilateral right to resign may be limited or restricted by an employment contract that provides otherwise.
4. An at-will employee’s unilateral right to resign may be limited or restricted by an employer’s policy manual that provides otherwise. For example, some manuals require a specified number of days of advance notice before a resignation will be effective.
5. If an employee has an unconditional, unrestricted right to resign, his or her resignation is effective whether it is “accepted” or not.
6. It is a good policy for employees to present a resignation in a written, dated, and signed letter that is confirmed in an email.
7. Even if an employee has an unrestricted right to resign, be aware that suddenly walking off the job may impose a burden on an employer that in some cases leads to a negative reference.
8. Some courts have ruled that an employee cannot rescind or retract a letter of resignation. It is entirely up to the employer to decide whether to accept a rescission or retraction. So, employees should assume that a letter of resignation cannot later be rescinded or retracted.
9. Employees who are being investigated for misconduct sometimes resign as a way of preempting the disciplinary process. Like any resignation, such resignations generally are effective immediately and preempt the disciplinary process unless the right to resign is restricted by an employment contract or employee manual. This principle is illustrated by one of the leading cases addressing the discipline of church members. In 1989, the Oklahoma Supreme Court issued a ruling that remains the definitive analysis of church discipline. Guinn v. Church of Christ, 775 P.2d 766 (Okla. 1989).
The court reached the following three conclusions:
The discipline of church members (i.e., persons who have not withdrawn from membership) is a constitutionally protected right of churches.
Discipline of persons who have effectively withdrawn their church membership is not a constitutionally protected activity, and churches that engage in such conduct can be sued under existing theories of tort law.
The constitutional right of a church member to withdraw from church membership is protected by the First Amendment guaranty of religious freedom unless a member has waived that right. One way to do this is by a provision in a church’s bylaws, or other governing document, prohibiting members from resigning their membership when under discipline. This strategy may prevent members from preempting the disciplinary process by resigning their membership.Similarly, an employer may seek to restrict the ability of employees to resign their employment if under investigation or discipline for wrongdoing. While in many cases employers would be pleased to accept the resignation of employees under investigation for wrongdoing, that is not always the case, and so employees should understand that their right to resign may be restricted by an employer policy or contractual term.
10. It is common for church board members to resign their position when they relocate or become incapacitated. However, church bylaws usually do not address when and how such resignations occur. This is an important and frequently overlooked issue, since board members generally remain liable for the actions of the board until their resignation is effective. If the timing of a resignation is ambiguous, then this can expose a former board member to continuing liability. To avoid this, a church’s bylaws should clarify precisely when a board member’s resignation will be effective.
What should churches do if a minister’s housing allowance request exceeds their salary? Find IRS-compliant solutions here.
Last Reviewed: January 18, 2025
Q: We just hired a pastor, and he is purchasing a new home with a very large down payment. This will make the cost of his housing higher than his salary. How do we handle that?
A church should only designate a housing allowance up to the minister’s yearly salary. This assumes the minister qualifies for a housing allowance based on IRS requirements. The allowance must also:
If the minister’s housing expenses exceed their salary, it is their responsibility to cover the difference through other means. However, the church cannot designate a higher allowance in anticipation of additional income earned outside the ministerial role.
Let’s consider an example:
The church can only designate up to $15,000 as a housing allowance. Even if the minister earns the additional $2,500 by working a part-time job, the church cannot include this external income in the designated housing allowance. Any additional income will be taxed like other payroll earnings, as it is not tied to the minister’s work at the church.
For a comprehensive guide to church compensation, consider Church Compensation: From Strategic Plan to Compliance.
A clergy housing allowance is a portion of a minister’s compensation designated for housing expenses, including rent, mortgage, and utilities, that is excluded from taxable income.
No, the housing allowance cannot exceed the total salary paid by the church, even if the minister incurs higher housing costs.
Eligible expenses include rent or mortgage payments, utilities, furnishings, and the fair rental value of the home. Non-housing-related expenses do not qualify.
No, only income earned through ministerial services provided to the church can be designated as a housing allowance.
Churches must carefully allocate housing allowances based on the minister’s salary and ensure compliance with IRS guidelines. Additional income earned outside the ministerial role cannot be included in the housing allowance. For further guidance, refer to Church Law & Tax’s resources.
Learn the legalities of mandatory tithing policies for church employees, supported by Supreme Court rulings. Understand requirements for payroll deductions, verification, and labor law compliance.
Last Reviewed: January 28, 2025
Q: Is it legal for a church to have a policy that demands or mandatorily requires employees give a portion of their income as a requisite for employment?
Yes, with some caveats.
In Corporation of the Presiding Bishop v. Amos, 483 U.S. 387 (1987), the United States Supreme Court approved the firing of a church employee who failed to maintain a temple recommendation for his local congregation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The local temple could not recommend him for employment unless he was a member in good standing.
We’re so happy you’re a Church Law & Tax member! Have you considered upgrading to an Advantage membership to begin receiving steep product discounts, access to exclusive events, our digital insider newsletter, webinars, and more? Updgrade here today.
To be in good standing, the local temple requires its members to prove that they have paid their tithes. Since the church employee failed to provide the temple recommendation, he was terminated.
The church may impose religious requirements on its employees, even those employees not involved in active practice of the faith.
In the Supreme Court case, the church employee was a janitor in a gymnasium owned and operated by a nonprofit organization associated with the church.
The church may not withhold the tithes from the employee’s pay without written permission from the employee.
If the employee refuses to consent to the withholding of the tithe, then the employee may be subject to discipline, including termination. Also, if the church withholds the tithes from the employee’s pay, it can only withhold the tithes after the withholding of payroll taxes.
If the church mandates that employees pay tithes, the church must pay the nonexempt employees for the time required to pay the tithes.
The US Department of Labor rules require employers to pay at least one-tenth of an hour for duty time and many state laws require payment of a minimum of two or more hours each time the employer requests the nonexempt employee to perform any task.
If the employee is not a member of the employer church, then the church may require the employee to request that the employee’s church provide a certificate to prove that the employee paid tithes to his or her home church.
Save time and money with electronic systems.
Automation eliminates as many manual tasks as possible, reduces human error, and streamlines various processes. To automate a financial task, a treasurer or financial manager identifies repeatable, logical, mundane tasks that are done on a weekly, monthly, or annual basis. Once identified, a financial manager works to find and optimize available technology to help reduce the time it takes to do these tasks.
Simple e-giving systems reduce the time it takes to record donations, and they import directly into a donor management system. This allows both you and your donor to see donation history in real-time. Consider asking donors to set up recurring online gifts, specifically during the summer months, when people go on vacations and giving to the church tends to take a dip.
An automated process can trigger an email to the appropriate church leader when someone stops giving. Then a church leader can call the donor who has stopped giving, and that may lead to an opportunity to minister to that person. Maybe the person lost a job, retired, became upset over a rumor, or is going through some tough financial times.
Budget reports can be automated. Most accounting software programs export budget information into Excel. Macros—special instructions containing a number of steps that you set in advance and then have Excel perform for you with one command—can convert your data to a simple email. This can give those who donate, or those who spend, a quick snapshot of what’s left in that project’s budget. With time saved through this system, you now have time to craft thank-you emails or letters that communicate vision and results to the donors.
Rather than paying your electric bill or mortgage with a paper check every month, set up a direct debit, and have the bills emailed to you. This makes it easy to save them electronically. With the time you save, you can explore ways to buy energy in bulk or refinance your mortgage and, subsequently, reduce your electric or mortgage payment.
A paperless audit trail can be implemented with electronic signatures along with pictures of the receipts. Rather than tracking down check signers to sign a paper check, use an electronic-signature check approval system to direct deposit to your vendors and staff or volunteers who need reimbursement.
One word of caution: Automation is not “setting it and forgetting it” in regard to the tasks that you automate. Always make time to review the automation.
For help automating systems and choosing appropriate software, see these resources and articles:
Learn how churches can improve decision-making and growth by leveraging data for financial reporting and metrics.
Last Reviewed: January 25, 2025
Norwood Davis is the chief financial officer at 12Stone Church—a thriving multicampus congregation in the Atlanta area. In the article “A Usable Metric for Any Church,” Davis, along with other financial experts, shared insights about collecting and analyzing financial and demographic data. In this article, we asked Davis to share the best ways to use this data for effective reports that help with financial decisions.
For churches in areas where wildfires are a constant concern, essential preparedness activities can reduce the chaos that comes with a natural disaster.
Below are three “just-in-time” actions your congregation can take if threatened by an active wildfire.
Don’t attempt these preparedness steps if they might put you and others at risk or go against evacuation notices or orders.
Wildfires can disrupt the ways we communicate. Power sometimes goes out, and cell phone towers can go down. This can make most modern forms of staying in touch with one another difficult. You may have also seen messages coming out of Gatlinburg asking residents in the general area to limit calls for a period of time to emergency calls only.
If you have time prior to the disaster, reach out to your congregation using your normal and most common means of communication with your church members to let them know how they might be able to stay in touch with the church, leadership, and each other.Grab or download the most up-to-date congregation contact list you have. If you don’t have a contact list, you might send an invitation to your members to share via a Google Form (or another service your congregation is familiar with) so they can share their emergency contact information with the church. You might also take this opportunity to ask them for alternative contact information or if they plan to evacuate and to where.
Common crisis communication strategies that can be used before a disaster strikes include:
Don’t just let your congregation know the mediums through which you’ll be communicating, but also let them know how to use the mediums through which you’ll be communicating going forward.
Encourage your congregation and community to follow evacuation notifications being issued by the authorities. Several communities have already begun evacuation messaging as some of the active large fires spread. Though many people are heeding this notification, not all are.
Are there members of your congregation who may not be reachable by local officials or who may be hesitant to follow the direction of local officials? If your church is located in a community where a sense of mistrust of governmental officials or authorities exists, you, the church, sharing the message can make a big difference. Research has shown that vulnerable communities, like minority communities, may be less likely to heed official warnings.
Sometimes who conveys the message is just as important as the message itself. Hearing the evacuation message from you as a church leader can make a big difference in calling people to action. Remember: a trusted message comes from a trusted messenger.
As best as you are able, facilitate transportation to those who need it. For example, maybe you can help connect those who need assistance with relatives or other people in your congregation who might offer transportation. Or maybe you could have a church bus that you could offer to transport people who have limited mobility in the event of an evacuation. If you are aware of local, state, or federal resources for evacuation transportation, you can communicate these resources, too.
The images of wildfires in Gatlinburg, TN several years ago offer a sobering reminder that sometimes our best efforts are futile in the face of wildfires. Sometimes wildfires are difficult to contain. But there are still some things you can do that have been shown to improve your odds for minimizing risk.
It only takes one burning ember to start a fire, which can spread well ahead of a fire and beyond the direct boundaries of harm’s way. To help reduce the risk posed by burning embers, the Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety (see DisasterSafety.org for more) suggests taking actions like:
You may also think about retrieving important documents or possessions that would be hard to replace if destroyed by fire. Similarly, are there certain resources that may be helpful to retrieve so that you are more likely to have them available to facilitate worship or other key ministerial activities or rites once the wildfire is contained.
Finally—and this may go without saying—don’t forget the little things like locking your facility doors and setting the alarm (if you have one) to protect your facility from security threats like looting should your building stay intact.
Understand the limitations on restricted funds and how to handle donor-restricted gifts within the law.
Last Reviewed: January 24, 2025
Q: My church currently has a large surplus in its benevolence budget but a shortfall in its missions budget. The board is planning to transfer a substantial amount from benevolence to missions. But isn’t it illegal to use restricted funds for anything other than their intended purpose?
Churches often face financial challenges, such as surpluses in one budget and shortfalls in another. A common question arises: Can restricted funds be used for anything but their intended purpose? Understanding the limitations on restricted funds is crucial for complying with legal and ethical obligations while maintaining donor trust.
Every state except Pennsylvania has adopted some version of the Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act (UPMIFA). This model law addresses various aspects of nonprofit financial management, including the handling of restricted funds. While UPMIFA provides a framework, the law allows states to modify its provisions, resulting in slight variations across jurisdictions.
Under UPMIFA, restricted funds may only be redirected if it is deemed “unlawful, impracticable, impossible to achieve, or wasteful” to fulfill the donor’s restriction. However, proving one of these criteria can be challenging. For instance, while canceling a building project might meet the standard, it is harder to justify redirection from a benevolence fund, as the need for assistance is ongoing.
Some state versions of UPMIFA differentiate the process for redirecting restricted funds based on the fund’s dollar amount. For certain amounts, a court order may be required. Additionally, other state and federal laws may apply, creating potential legal risks for churches considering such redirections.
If your church is contemplating redirecting restricted funds, take the following precautions:
For a comprehensive discussion of restricted funds and UPMIFA, consult chapters 1, 3, 6, and 10 of Church Finance: The Church Leader’s Guide to Financial Operations.
UPMIFA guidance may vary by state. For detailed legal information, visit the Uniform Law Commission’s UPMIFA page. Additionally, review nonprofit compliance resources from IRS.gov for federal considerations.
Learn how transitioning from business to church finance requires new skills, education, and a focus on serving others.
Last Reviewed: May 9, 2025
Jennifer Neal wanted to succeed—not just in her career, but also as a woman, a mother, and a financial controller at a multibillion-dollar company. “I was desperately trying to make my mark and have it all,” she said.
But in 2012, her path shifted.
Her church began searching for a new finance director. Nine people reached out, encouraging her to apply. Ministry work had never been part of her career plans—but Neal felt a spiritual pull. “It was like Jesus almost taking a two-by-four to my head,” she said. “The Lord was leading me to at least apply.”
After prayer and careful thought, she accepted the role at College Park Church in Indianapolis. Though the job came with a significant pay cut, it better suited her life at the time as a mother of three—and brought new purpose.
“It just [gave] me a great deal of satisfaction in my position,” she said.
But the shift from corporate to church finance wasn’t easy.
We spoke with church financial experts and editorial advisors to identify key insights for professionals making a similar transition. Here are five crucial things to know:
Switching from the corporate world to a church environment means adjusting your mindset. “That transition in culture is often underestimated,” said Dan Busby, president emeritus of the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability (ECFA).
Elaine Sommerville, a CPA specializing in nonprofits, agreed. “People often come out of high-level corporate roles where there’s a clear, structured system. They expect churches to run the same way.”
But churches often operate with less structure. Neal had to adapt her expectations and learn to offer what she calls “extravagant grace.”
“You have to be more understanding,” she explained. “That person who missed your expense report deadline may have been up late helping someone through a crisis. And that matters more than my report.”
Churches follow a unique and highly regulated tax framework.
“You’ve got to learn the tax law structure, employment law structure, and benefits rules specific to ministries,” said Michael Batts, managing partner at Batts, Morrison, Wales & Lee, a CPA firm serving nonprofits nationwide.
Mistakes can have serious consequences.
“In the business world, overpaying someone might mean losing a deduction,” said Frank Sommerville, CPA and attorney. “In a church, it could threaten your tax-exempt status.”
“Many assume nonprofits don’t deal with taxes. But churches are heavily regulated in ways most people don’t realize,” Elaine Sommerville added.
Unlike businesses, churches rely on charitable contributions. And those funds often come with strings attached.
“There’s no real comparison in the business world,” Frank Sommerville said. “A donor might give for a building project—or specifically to buy a piano.”
Churches must:
“You need systems in place to prove compliance with donor restrictions,” Sommerville emphasized.
Churches must carefully document every financial transaction—not just for legal reasons, but as a matter of integrity. “We’re handling God’s resources,” said Busby. “We need a higher level of accountability.”
Tim Samuel, CFO at Bridgeway Community Church, trains pastors on this mindset. “It’s not about trust—it’s about transparency,” said Samuel, who joined ministry finance in 2007 after a career in public accounting. “Every check needs documentation.”
He advises:
Many churches lack basic controls, said Elaine Sommerville. “It’s common to find one person doing everything—receiving donations, writing checks, and reconciling accounts. But true internal control requires separating duties.”
The nonprofit world has its own rules, and mastering them takes effort.
“It won’t happen casually,” said Batts. “You need to be intentional—talk to professional advisers, read internal policies, and attend training events.”
Neal has embraced this approach. She frequently reads trusted articles and resources to stay sharp. “I really wanted to be ‘successful’ in the world’s eyes,” she reflected. “But I’ve found a passion for helping further the kingdom of Christ.”
And even though she’s not preaching from the pulpit, she knows her work matters. “I’m finding my niche—and I’m passionate about equipping others. That’s changed my whole attitude.”
We’ve used a combination of AI and human review to make this content easier to read and understand.
Tips for managing and maintaining church physical assets, from planning reserves to addressing key maintenance issues.
Last Reviewed: May 8, 2025
Kevin Folsom is the director of special projects at Building Solutions, a company offering technical guidance for real estate and facility development programs. The company’s services include building assessments and facility problem-solving.
Folsom previously served for seven years as director of campus operations at Trinity Christian Academy in Addison, Texas. Before that, he spent 25 years in a similar role at Dallas Theological Seminary. He is a longtime member of APPA, an association for higher education facility officers.
He spoke with Church Law & Tax about why churches need regular evaluations of their physical assets and how to plan financially for replacements and maintenance.
Many churches avoid thinking ahead about future maintenance needs. This often leads to trouble when costly repairs pop up unexpectedly.
“They say, ‘I’ll wait until that problem happens.’ We do the same thing with our houses,” Folsom says.
Instead of saving a small amount each year—for example, $500 annually toward a roof replacement—churches hope for insurance coverage or simply wait until the issue is urgent.
Church treasurers play a key role in helping pastors, boards, finance committees, and congregations understand the importance of funding future maintenance.
Here’s how they can make the case:
Folsom emphasizes that replacement planning is not optional:
“They have an obligation to God and the donors to be good stewards for ongoing reinvestment … to make sure they stay ahead.”
From the moment a building is completed, it begins to deteriorate. Components age at different rates:
Regular planning and funding ensure these timelines don’t catch churches off guard.
The biggest unexpected costs often involve:
These issues can be ignored for a while—unlike air conditioning, which typically gets repaired quickly when it fails.
Churches might:
But these signs often point to serious internal damage that gets worse over time.
Folsom recommends using standards from:
These sources provide expected life cycles for building components.
Key areas to monitor include:
Each has a different lifespan depending on the quality and type of installation.
“Set aside enough money each year so that when the life cycle reaches a point of renewal, you have the money there to do it,” says Folsom.
Waiting for visible decay usually leads to more expensive repairs.
We’ve used a combination of AI and human review to make this content easier to read and understand.
Finance Basics with Vonna
Three indicators you can check throughout the year.
When I present at church board meetings, board members often ask me, “How can we be sure our church is financially healthy?”
It’s hard to apply the same methods to all churches because each has its own unique circumstances and challenges. The measurements and ratios that could show a warning for one church may not be meaningful to another. However, there are some indicators I always review, no matter what the underlying financial condition of the church. These will prove helpful guides for your church in monitoring financial health throughout the year.
Cash is king. Your church must have enough cash on hand to operate today while also setting aside reserves for future months when giving may go down. A church without necessary reserves will be scrambling to operate in the short term, no matter what its other balances are.
One indicator of this is the Net Cash Availability measure, which is calculated as follows:
“Total Cash and Investments – Adjusted Current Liabilities (Current Liabilities Excluding Amounts Borrowed on a Construction Line of Credit) – Temporarily Restricted Net Assets”
The statement of financial position answers the question, “How much cash do we have?” but it doesn’t answer the question, “Whose cash is it, and how much of it can we spend?” The answers to those questions are typically very different; thus, net cash availability should be one of the most important measures your church leadership monitors. It uses the sum of total cash and investments less certain amounts the church may owe or need to spend for specific purposes due to donor restrictions. It calculates the amount of cash available for other uses, once the church has satisfied its current operating obligations and set aside appropriate funds for projects resulting from donors who have restricted their gifts’ uses.
I like to see that a church has at least one month’s worth of cash expenses on hand. If the amount is below that, it could be a warning: Any negative amount indicates borrowing from temporarily restricted funds and that immediate corrective action is necessary.
Another key indicator I look at is trends in giving compared to expenses. The first measure I use is Total Contributions per Giving Unit, which is calculated as:
The ratio of “Total Contributions – Accrual Pledges – Large One-time Gifts” to “Giving Units”
The second measure is Total Cash Expenses per Giving Unit, which is calculated as:
The ratio of “Total Cash Expenses (Expenses – Depreciation Expense)” to “Giving Units”
These measurements use the concept of a giving unit, which is a group of family members (or any recurring supporters of the church) who contribute jointly. This specifically excludes individuals who make smaller, one-time gifts, such as to a short-term missions trip. To identify only the regular recurring giving units, it is necessary to set a minimum dollar threshold: for example, giving units that contribute more than $250 annually.
The power of these measures comes when you compare them to each other. Have you ever wondered what the net position is between total contributions received and the financial cost per giving unit? The comparison takes the net between these two measures and gives the church the information to know whether the cash contributed by the regular givers is enough to cover the cost per giving unit.
When looked at individually, the contribution measure highlights trends in congregational giving habits between years. Keep in mind that during the period of a capital campaign, this figure may be inflated due to an increase in smaller gifts, which are not removed from the calculation.
The cash expense measure also highlights trends in spending practices between years. While the trends do not provide enough information to figure out the cause of over-spending, they do reveal any growing problems.
Finally, I know a church will not be healthy if this expense ratio is too high:
The ratio of “Personnel (Salaries + Benefits) + Mandatory Debt Service Payments (Principal + Interest Expense)” to “Total Expenses – Depreciation Expense”
The largest expense on the financial statements of most churches is salaries and benefits. This is understandable, as a church provides services performed by individuals, both paid employees and volunteers. Debt service payments—which are a reduction of a liability and not an expense—represent the second-largest outlay. Together, these items represent a majority of resource outflows from the local church.
So it is vital to continually watch these levels as a percentage of cash expenses. It is also important to promptly follow up on changes in trends to ensure you are continually maximizing your ministry resources.
This ratio, which can be split into two separate pieces, allows your church to look at two of its largest outflows and determine the portion of the operating budget that will be used. A growth cycle can often result in an amount of debt the church anticipates being able to pay off as more people are able and encouraged to attend, yet the church needs to be able to pay the bills and provide the services that will attract new people with the current budget. I get concerned when this combined ratio is not within 40 percent to 70 percent of total cash expenses.
Monitoring key financial data will help your leadership team assess your church’s financial health, identify areas for improvement, and be good stewards of your resources. The ratios and measures discussed above provide a good start.
How church leaders can navigate this still-developing legal issue.
Last Reviewed: July 23, 2025
Traditionally, a person’s gender was determined at birth. Today, some individuals assert that their gender identity differs from their biological sex. For instance:
Federal guidance on gender identity in schools has swung widely based on presidential administrations. Understanding these positions can give some insights to churches regarding how local, state, and federal government agencies view this issue.
But the positions often conflict based on political power.
For instance, under the Obama administration in 2016, the Civil Rights Division of the US Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a letter to schools receiving federal financial assistance under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. Key points included:
According to the DOJ under Obama:
However, federal positions on the matter have since shifted, most recently under President Trump’s second term.
Under President Trump’s second term, the DOJ has taken a sharply different turn on interpreting Title IX with respect to transgender students.
For instance, in a May 2025 letter to the state of California, the agency indicated it was opening an investigation into the state’s policy allowing transgender students to access facilities and participate in sports based on the gender they identify with.
In a press release announcing the letter, the agency quoted Harmeet K. Dhillon, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights: “Title IX exists to protect women and girls in education. It is perverse to allow males to compete against girls, invade their private spaces, and take their trophies. This Division will aggressively defend women’s hard-fought rights to equal educational opportunities.”
The press release also referenced ongoing litigation in California—Save Girls’ Sports, et al. v. Thurmond, et al.—which seeks to undo the state’s position.
This is a sensitive issue and raises questions for many church leaders. The continued shifts in federal positions based upon political power, along with varying decisions in courts across the country, make the issue difficult to pinpoint.
Are churches legally required to:
To evaluate their legal standing, churches must consider:
Some legal scholars compare public accommodation status to property tax exemption rules:
If charging a fee may trigger tax liability, it might also support a classification as a public accommodation. Free use, by contrast, likely does not—but this analogy is not definitive.
Can a church deny membership to a transgender individual?
These rulings give churches strong protection over discipline of members, but less clarity when it comes to nonmembers.
We’ve used a combination of AI and human review to make this content easier to read and understand.
Six tips for QuickBooks success will help your church get the most out of this powerful software program
Many churches struggle with how best to record their financial transactions. Even the smallest of churches should get past manually recording financial information. Technology can speed things up and improve accuracy.
There are dozens of software packages, but many have more features than your church may need, can be difficult to use without extensive training, and are often quite expensive. If you want a basic, easy-to-use package at a reasonable price, you may settle on QuickBooks.
Some accountants cringe at the name QuickBooks. However, I believe that if you are aware of the possible shortcomings and create a couple of good processes, you can use this software package successfully within your church.
I recommend getting the Pro version of QuickBooks. There is little cost difference and the ability to export reports to a spreadsheet can be very useful for identifying trends and informing leaders.
Only set up accounts you need and only add ones as you find it necessary. If you have used the program for a while, consider whether you should delete or merge any accounts.
This will minimize the number of revenue and expense accounts required and allow you to generate financial statements for individual ministry leaders and provide a good method for tracking donor-restricted activity.
This helps prevent errors and minimizes the concerns some accountants have with the ability to change transactions easily in QuickBooks. It is not a fail-safe control, but it is helpful. Bank reconciliations are easily performed in QuickBooks. Setting the closing date should be done each month once the reconciliations are complete. To increase security, also use the password feature.
A QuickBooks report can provide necessary information if you ever need to determine how a transaction was changed or which user performed a certain action. This helps bolster financial accountability.
This is my favorite tip. Create a new income account called “Beginning Balance” (or something else recognizable). It allows you to carry over ending balances to the next year. You can record an entry as of January 1 each year crediting this income account for each class that has a balance to carry forward. The offsetting debit is also to this account, but in a class such as general, operations, or administration. The result is a net $0 on the profit and loss, but it shows the beginning balance at the top of the revenue section for each profit and loss by class, resulting in a true ending balance throughout the year. This is just a once-a-year entry, with no reversal required.
Remember, QuickBooks is a general ledger package. I believe it works best when that is all it is used for. You may consider a donor software solution or a church data management program to use in conjunction with QuickBooks.
Please be aware that I am neither endorsing nor encouraging the use of a particular program. I simply recognize the need for a low-cost, high-functioning option and many ministries may use QuickBooks to meet that need.
An unknown party seriously accuses a church leader. What should be done?
Many ministers have received anonymous letters. Some, such as those expressing criticism of a sermon or music, have little legal significance. But some accuse a staff member or volunteer of misconduct, and these messages may be legally significant depending on what they communicate and how they are handled.
Church leaders should consider the following points when deciding how to respond to anonymous letters that accuse someone of misconduct:
Some pastors adopt a policy of never reading anonymous letters, and some periodically inform the congregation of this policy. For some, this is a way of avoiding criticism. But for others it stems from a conviction that the views of persons who are unwilling to identify themselves are not worthy of consideration. But as noted below, such a response to anonymous letters may expose a pastor and church to liability.
Several adult males (the “plaintiffs”) sued a private high school and members of the school board of trustees (the “defendants”), claiming they had been sexually molested by the school’s football coach, and that the defendants were legally responsible for these wrongful acts as a result of their inadequate and negligent response to numerous complaints of inappropriate sexual behavior by the coach.
The coach was employed by the school from 1966 through 1991. The plaintiffs alleged that in the 1970s the school’s principal received several anonymous letters accusing the coach of “doing terrible things to your students.” The principal threw out the letters and later testified that “unsigned complaints just should be tossed.”
The principal also received an anonymous phone call in which the caller reiterated language similar to that found in the letters, accusing the coach of “doing terrible things to our kids.” But, as in the case of the anonymous letters, he did nothing with this information and did not keep records of either the phone call or the letters in any way. The parties reached an out-of-court settlement in 2012 under which the school agreed to pay an undisclosed amount of damages.
This case illustrates the potential civil liability that churches face if pastors adopt a policy of ignoring all anonymous letters, including anonymous letters that contain serious accusations of misconduct by a church employee or volunteer that exposes others to potential harm.
A state university was sued by several former students who alleged that they had been sexually harassed by a university administrator. In support of their claim, the students claimed that the university president had received several anonymous letters asserting sexually inappropriate behavior by the administrator with students, but failed to fully investigate these accusations or terminate his employment.
One letter made reference to the administrator’s sexual liaisons with students. Another noted that “people are disgusted with those that use their position to gain sexual favors from young people.” Another referred to the administrator as a “full fledged predator.”
The university had a policy of not accepting or acting on accusations “made solely through anonymous letters.” Nevertheless, because some of the anonymous letters alleged that the administrator had previously been arrested, the university asked campus police to check on prior arrests. No prior arrests or convictions were found. Nevertheless, some of the letters were turned over to the municipal police department and to the FBI.
The court concluded that the university’s response to the anonymous letters was adequate, and dismissed the students’ claim of sexual harassment. This case suggests that recipients of anonymous letters containing allegations of serious misconduct by a staff member may subject their employer to liability if they fail to respond to the allegations with a thorough investigation.
Public school officials received an anonymous letter stating that a science teacher (whose identity was provided) was a member of the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). NAMBLA advocates the release of all convicted pedophiles, decriminalization of child pornography, and opposition to all attempts by the state to interfere with “consensual and non-coercive” sexual activity between men and minor boys. Upon receipt of this letter, school officials immediately launched an investigation which ultimately led to the teacher’s termination.
This case involved school officials who chose to investigate, rather than ignore, a serious accusation against a teacher. A duty to investigate accusations of misconduct in an anonymous letter is strongest when a failure to respond immediately with an investigation would place minors at risk of harm.
Pastors who refuse to read anonymous letters containing accusations of misconduct may be guilty of negligence. Negligence is a legal term that simply means carelessness or failing to act with reasonable care under the circumstances. Negligence is more likely if a pastor ignores an anonymous letter that:
The critical question is what kinds of evidence are sufficient to trigger a duty to investigate anonymous accusations of misconduct? Consider the following examples:
Example. A pastor receives an anonymous letter from a person who attended worship services the previous Sunday. Part of the letter includes: “I attended your church on Sunday for the first time, and was shocked to discover that your music pastor is a convicted child molester.” The pastor was not aware of any prior criminal behavior by the music pastor. He is not sure what to do. He considers discarding the letter. A better response would be to verify the letter’s central accusation—that the music pastor was previously convicted of child molestation. He accesses a state criminal records database and discovers that the music pastor was incarcerated for ten years for a prior incident of child molestation. The music pastor is terminated immediately.
Example. Same facts as the previous example, except the pastor elects to disregard the letter based on his policy of never reading anonymous letters. This response may expose the pastor, and church, to liability based on “negligent retention” should the music pastor sexually molest a minor on the church premises or during a church activity. Liability would be based on the church’s retention of the music pastor despite the anonymous letter’s allegation of a criminal record that easily could have been verified. This example demonstrates the potential legal risks associated with a policy of disregarding all anonymous letters.
Example. A pastor receives an anonymous letter claiming that the church’s youth pastor “engaged in inappropriate contact with a minor in a prior church.” Assume that this prior incident did not result in a criminal record that would be searchable and verifiable. Given the seriousness of an accusation of child abuse by a youth pastor, the church should investigate. While the prior incident did not result in a criminal conviction that would be verifiable by searching public records, the church could take the following steps that would help negate an allegation of negligence should the youth pastor engage in similar conduct in the future: (1) Interview the youth pastor and have him respond to the accusation. (2) If this was not done previously, obtain references from each church where the youth pastor previously worked in youth ministry as an employee or volunteer. (3) Conduct a criminal records check, and sex offender registry search, to uncover prior incidents that did result in criminal prosecution. Other precautions are summarized at the end of this article.
Example. A pastor receives an anonymous letter complaining about the music performed during worship services. Disregarding anonymous letters like this, that are critical of music and sermons, do not expose a church to any material risk since the pastor’s disregard of such letters does not expose anyone to a risk of injury.
Example. A pastor receives an anonymous letter claiming that “a registered child molester is attending the church’s worship services.” According to some courts, no duty to investigate arises when an anonymous letter is received containing no verifiable information (such as the identity of the sex offender), and no extrinsic evidence of reliability. If the identity of the sex offender had been revealed, the church could mitigate its risk by verifying the conviction using the national sex offender online registry, and instituting a conditional attendance agreement allowing the offender to attend under strict, specified conditions.
Example. A pastor receives an anonymous letter accusing the church’s bookkeeper of embezzling church funds. The alleged misconduct is not of such a nature as would place persons attending church services and activities at risk of injury. As a result, there probably are no adverse legal consequences should the letter be ignored. However, many would consider the investigation of such an accusation to be a moral imperative.
Example. A pastor receives an anonymous letter containing an accusation that a staff member has had her driver’s license revoked for reckless driving. The staff member often drives church vehicles on church business. This allegation involves behavior that could expose others to harm. A person’s driver’s license status can be easily verified by checking with the department of motor vehicles, a step a church should take. Based on my recommendations at the end of this article, the accusation should be investigated. If validated, the staff member must immediately be suspended from driving her own, or the church’s, vehicles on church business.
Every state has enacted a child abuse reporting law that requires persons designated as “mandatory reporters” to report abuse to civil authorities if they have actual knowledge or reasonable suspicion or belief that it has occurred.
Child abuse reporting laws can be helpful to church leaders in deciding how to respond to anonymous letters because the laws use the standard of reasonable suspicion or belief in triggering a duty to report. This is similar to my recommendations at the end of this article, which suggest that pastors have a duty to investigate anonymous accusations of misconduct if there is reliable and relevant evidence that creates a reasonable basis for the accusation.
State legislatures have struggled to define the threshold requirement of “reasonable suspicion or belief.” To illustrate, the California child abuse reporting law requires mandatory reporters to report abuse if they have “reasonable suspicion” that child abuse has occurred, and it defines reasonable suspicion as follows:
Reasonable suspicion means that it is objectively reasonable for a person to entertain a suspicion, based upon facts that could cause a reasonable person in a like position, drawing, when appropriate, on his or her training and experience, to suspect child abuse or neglect. “Reasonable suspicion” does not require certainty that child abuse or neglect has occurred nor does it require a specific medical indication of child abuse or neglect; any “reasonable suspicion” is sufficient.
Such definitions provide little clarification, and this has left to the courts the task of defining reasonable suspicion or belief. This is a vital task since it will determine whether a mandatory reporter has a legal duty to report child abuse to the agency designated by the reporting statute.
“Reasonable suspicion or belief” that a child has been abused not only imposes upon mandatory reporters a legal duty to report, but it also serves as a potentially useful analogy for pastors to consider in deciding whether to respond to anonymous letters accusing an employee or volunteer of misconduct. As noted above, pastors who elect to ignore an anonymous letter accusing a staff member of misconduct may be liable on the basis of negligence or negligent retention if the staff member injures another person and, in the exercise of reasonable care, the allegation should have been investigated. This makes legislative and judicial clarification of “reasonable suspicion or belief” relevant in assessing an appropriate response to anonymous accusations.
Key point. If the circumstances surrounding an allegation of child abuse in an anonymous letter create a reasonable belief that it occurred, then: (1) the allegation should not be ignored on the ground that it was contained in an anonymous letter, and (2) it must be reported to the child abuse hotline by the recipient if the recipient is a mandatory reporter under state law.
Some of the leading cases interpreting “reasonable suspicion or belief” are summarized below:
In re O.K., 2015 WL 655106 (Ill. App. 2015). A state social services agency received several anonymous letters alleging incidents of abuse against children while in their foster parents’ care. The court noted that “as the allegations in these letters had not been verified, the state sought more time to determine the safety of the children while in the parents’ care.” This case suggests that an anonymous letter by itself, without any corroborating evidence, does not constitute reasonable suspicion or belief that child abuse has occurred, and so no duty to report arises.
Croft v. Westmoreland County, 103 F.3d 1123 (3d Cir. 1997).A federal appeals court ruled that a child welfare agency must independently corroborate reports of child abuse from an anonymous informant in order to separate a child and parent. In other words, an allegation of child abuse in an anonymous letter does not, by itself and without any additional corroborating evidence, constitute reasonable suspicion or belief triggering a duty to report.
Kraynak v. Youngstown City School District, 889 N.E.2d 528 (Ohio 2008). A fourth-grade teacher asked her students to keep a creative-writing journal. Once or twice a week, the teacher instructed students to make entries in their journal. The journals were not turned in, and were only spot-read by the teacher because they were used only to practice writing. One student wrote entries in her journal that mentioned physical abuse by her mother. The teacher read this entry, but did not report the abuse to the child abuse hotline because the student “didn’t take this journal entry very seriously. He wasn’t crying. He wasn’t upset. He wasn’t scared. He wasn’t emotionally upset about it.” The student’s father later sued the school as a result of the teacher’s failure to report the abuse. A jury returned a verdict in favor of the school, concluding that the preponderance of the evidence did not establish that the teacher knew or suspected that the student had suffered or faced abuse, and therefore she had no duty to report.
On appeal, the Ohio Supreme Court agreed that the school was not liable. It noted that the child abuse reporting law requires mandatory reporters who “know or suspect that a child under eighteen years of age … has suffered or faces a threat of suffering any physical or mental [abuse] that reasonably indicates abuse or neglect of the child, shall immediately report that knowledge or suspicion to the public children services agency or a municipal or county peace officer in the county in which the child resides or in which the abuse or neglect is occurring or has occurred.”
The Court concluded that the reporting statute established a “subjective standard” in deciding whether a person was required to report:
The statute asks whether the school employee knows of child abuse or suspects child abuse. The statute does not ask whether the school employee “knew or should have known” or “suspected or should have suspected” or “knew or had reasonable cause to suspect” that a child had been abused. Rather [it] simply asks whether the school employee “knows or suspects” that there has been child abuse.
The Court noted that the reporting statute had been amended following the filing of the lawsuit in this case: “The new version of the statute changes the standard from ‘knows or suspects’ (a subjective standard) to ‘knows, or has reasonable cause to suspect based on facts that would cause a reasonable person in a similar position to suspect,’ a clearly objective standard. Accordingly, we hold that pursuant to [the prior statute] in determining whether a person knows of or suspects child abuse for purposes of reporting it to the proper authorities, the standard is subjective.”
Keisling v. Keisling, 196 S.W.3d 703 (Tenn. App. 2005). Following a divorce, the former wife filed a petition to restrict the former husband’s visitation rights with the couple’s minor child on the ground that the father had sexually molested the child. A Tennessee appeals court observed:
Accusations of child sexual abuse by one parent against the other parent presents one of the most difficult issues faced by a trial court. Suspicion of such abuse must be taken seriously and [was] investigated thoroughly, for the consequences to the child of allowing any abuse to continue are grave. However, mistakenly concluding that a parent has abused his child, when in fact there has been no abuse, has serious consequences as well, including the almost-certain destruction of the parent-child relationship and disgrace to the accused parent. In addition, determining whether abuse has occurred can be enormously difficult; there is frequently a paucity of physical evidence, and the alleged child victim may be unable to accurately relate pertinent events. Finally, even investigating the accusation is delicate; the suggestibility of the alleged victim is almost invariably an issue, and heavy-handed or repetitive interrogation or physical examination can itself inflict long-lasting trauma on a child. In this case, it is clear that the accusations of sexual abuse of the parties’ daughters were taken seriously and investigated thoroughly.
But the court cautioned that “in a case such as this, any concern about reporting allegations of child sexual abuse must be balanced with the awareness that false accusations of such abuse can be a reprehensible tool against an ex-spouse.”
This case suggests that anonymous accusations of misconduct should be investigated rather than ignored if the alleged misconduct is serious in nature and exposes others to possible harm. However, a duty to report must be balanced against facts suggesting a motive to lie.
O’Heron v. Blaney, 583 S.E.2d 834 (Ga. 2003). The Georgia Supreme Court explained the “reasonable cause” standard as follows:
Once a reporter has reasonable cause to suspect child abuse has occurred, she must report it or face criminal penalties. The trigger for the duty to report is “reasonable cause to believe,” which requires an objective analysis. The relevant question is whether the information available at the time would lead a reasonable person in the position of the reporter to suspect abuse.
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects “the people” from “unreasonable searches and seizures,” also providing that “no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing … the persons or things to be seized.”
The courts frequently are called upon to determine if law enforcement personnel have probable cause of criminal behavior to justify the issuance of a warrant. In general, probable cause to arrest exists “when the officers have knowledge or reasonably trustworthy information of facts and circumstances that are sufficient to warrant a person of reasonable caution in the belief that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing a crime.” Weyant v. Okst, 101 F.3d 845 (2d Cir.1996).
Several courts have addressed the question of whether anonymous letters and tips can constitute probable cause. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that an anonymous letter can provide the probable cause needed for a search warrant. Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983). The Court noted:
[Anonymous] tips, particularly when supplemented by independent police investigation, frequently contribute to the solution of otherwise “perfect crimes.” While a conscientious assessment of the basis for crediting such tips is required by the Fourth Amendment, a standard that leaves virtually no place for anonymous citizen informants is not.
Part of the Court’s reasoning was that the anonymous letter contained a range of details relating “not just to easily obtained facts and conditions existing at the time of the letter, but to future actions of third parties ordinarily not easily predicted.” In other words, there were “indicia of reliability” that strengthened the value of the anonymous letter.
How is this relevant to a pastor’s response to an anonymous letter? The argument could be made that just as anonymous letters, when combined with “indicia of reliability,” can constitute probable cause supporting an arrest or search warrant, so too may the credibility of an anonymous letter received by a pastor be enhanced by additional information in the letter—information that may create a reasonable basis for an accusation warranting further investigation.
Example. A pastor receives an anonymous letter accusing a staff member of misconduct. The letter also contains references to facts that are not widely known. The pastor has a policy of never reading anonymous letters, and so the letter is ignored. The letter, along with the “indicia of reliability,” would likely constitute probable cause supporting a search or arrest. The staff member engages in future misconduct that injures a member of the congregation. The victim sues the church, claiming that it is responsible for her injuries on the basis of negligent retention of the staff member. To bolster her claim, she asserts that the anonymous letter, together with the “indicia of reliability,” would constitute probable cause supporting a warrant to arrest. If the evidence constitutes probable cause to arrest, then it may suggest that the pastor had a duty to investigate the anonymous letter’s accusation. While certainly not conclusive, this argument may support the victim’s negligent retention claim.
Anonymous letters containing accusations of misconduct by staff members or volunteers present pastors with a difficult decision. This is especially true for anonymous letters containing no verifiable information supporting an accusation. Few, if any, courts have found churches liable on the basis of a pastor’s disregard of anonymous accusations of misconduct, but, as noted in this article, it is possible that a church could be found liable in such cases based on negligent retention.
The best practice, which will reduce legal risk and potential future harm to innocent victims, is to investigate anonymous accusations of misconduct that:
(1) are verifiable by available public records (i.e., criminal records, sex offender registry); or
(2) contain “indicia of reliability” based on:
information provided by references; information provided by the victim identified in the anonymous letter, or by other persons identified in the letter who may have information about the accusation; information provided by former churches where the accused previously served as an employee or volunteer; information provided by law enforcement officers who may have investigated the individual in the past; information provided by potential witnesses having relevant information regarding the accusation; other relevant evidence, such as the writer’s knowledge of facts suggesting personal knowledge of the information shared in the anonymous letter; or
(3) involve misconduct of such a nature as would place persons attending church services and activities at risk of injury. The duty to investigate is greatest when an anonymous letter accuses an employee or volunteer of behavior making him or her a risk of harm to minors.
Key point. Anonymous letters containing unverifiable allegations of misconduct by named individuals are the most troublesome. As we have seen, such accusations generally are insufficient to trigger a duty to report child abuse, or serve as probable cause for an arrest, and these analogies suggest that pastors have no legal duty to independently investigate such accusations and therefore they, and their church, cannot be liable on the basis of negligent retention for future harm caused by the accused. That may be true in a legal sense, but there is also a moral dimension to be considered. Jesus’ harshest words were directed at those who “cause one of these little ones who believe in me to stumble.” These words will persuade many pastors to investigate anonymous accusations of sexual misconduct by an employee or volunteer involving a minor victim, whether the accusations are verifiable or not.
Six questions every church should ask when thinking about buying a church management system.
Last Reviewed: July 30, 2024
A Church Management System (CMS) is the administrative hub of a church. It stores pertinent information, including membership data, attendance trends, group health, and giving records. Today, there are more options than ever for church leaders to choose from. Here are six questions to ask when looking for a Church Management System for your church.
When choosing a CMS, the ability to have your database in the cloud is an important feature to consider. Without cloud services, you can only access your CMS at the physical site of the church. A cloud-based CMS allows you to put information in the hands of key leaders whether they are on site at the church, at home, or half-way around the world.
Ask if the CMS has mobile apps developed that are actively supported. Apps allow church leaders to reach into their pockets and with a few taps get the data that they need.
Is the interface cumbersome and difficult, confusing and overwhelming? What about frustrating and off-putting? Many companies allow you to trial their apps and programs for a period of time, which allows you to assess whether the CMS is user-friendly for your volunteers and leaders.
What are your needs as a church? Find a CMS that matches your church’s needs, but also one that your church can grow into as well. Does the developer regularly update the apps with new features? Do you need a CMS that manages group communication and attendance? What about children’s check-in? Online giving? Know the features you need before you go CMS shopping.
An expensive CMS that is used is better than a cheap CMS that isn’t used. Check the pricing structure of each CMS you are considering. Many companies now offer a monthly service fee, which allows you to jump into the CMS with minimal upfront investment. In addition, most developers offer a scalable pricing model depending on the volume of your church’s needs.
If you have problems with the CMS, how will those problems be fixed? How is their customer support? Does the developer offer any types of training that will help you educate staff and volunteers on how to use it? Everyone encounters snags at some point. When you do, you’ll want a company that’s quick to respond and help you in your moment of need.
Justin Deeter is the founding and lead pastor of Redemption Church in Wilson, North Carolina. He was formerly senior pastor of Forest Hills Baptist Church in Wilson, North Carolina. Find him at JustinDeeter.com and @JustinDeeter.
For information on church IT strategies and solutions, check out the latest version of Church IT by Nick B. Nicholaou.
Why one is better in church fundraising.
Matching grants are a reasonably common tool used in churches, particularly for church planting, as well as ministries and nonprofit organizations. However, a small body of research strongly suggests that challenge grants work more effectively than matching grants in terms of overall fundraising.
What’s the difference? A typical matching grant works along the following lines: For every dollar you give, another partner organization/foundation/donor “matches” your dollar with another dollar (or $0.50). According to research, a matching grant is at least somewhat more motivating than a direct appeal for funds.
A challenge grant is subtly distinct from a matching grant, and is often worded along the following lines: “If we raise $X in total, then we’ll also get $Y from some other source.” Or sometimes, “If we get X number of new donors, then we’ll also get $Y from some other source.” A challenge grant is, according to the findings, more motivating than a matching grant.
The fascinating question is, why are challenge grants more compelling than matching grants? My survey of the research has not returned a satisfactory answer. My hunch is that many people have an innate sense both of competition (“I want to meet the challenge”) and of cooperation (“If we do this together, we’ll achieve such-and-such goal”).
In other words, I think challenge grants are better able to bring out the best in us, both cooperatively and competitively. Future research, I’m sure, will shed more light on the validity of my hunch.
There’s a further consideration. Most matching grants I’ve heard about for church planting encourage the planter to go after bigger dollars, rather than a bigger pool of donors (even if those donors represent relatively small amounts).
“If you raise X amount for your church, we’ll match with Y amount.” The practical problem with this approach is obvious: If you lose even one high-ticket donor, you’re in trouble.
Contrast this with the approach of college alumni associations, which reveal the wisdom and long-term sustainability of amassing a large base of small, individual donors. Over time, a few of them will mature into large-dollar donors. But even if most don’t, the natural ebb and flow of donor rolls will have little effect on the association’s ability to meet its fundraising goals, based as it is on volume, not mass.
Ministries—particularly church planters operating under matching grants—tend to do just the opposite. They focus on relatively few, high-ticket donors, at the expense of growing their individual donor base. I strongly believe granting organizations should test a challenge grant structure that matches “sending church dollars” to benchmark growth of the church plant’s donor base. My hypothesis is that, compared to matching grants, the challenge to grow a broad donor base will result in more economically stable and sustainable ministries over the long haul.
Adapted from The Habit of Asking by Christopher J. Kopka. Copyright 2016 by Chris J. Kopka. Used with permission.
Christopher Kopka conducts Habit of Asking workshops for churches. He is president of Thrivent Church Solutions Group. In this role, Kopka leads Thrivent’s church-related businesses and functions, which presently reach over 30,000 churches through products and services provided by Thrivent and partner organizations. He is also the senior vice president for Mergers, Acquisitions & Strategic Partnerships.
For more information on church fundraising check out Increase Giving at Church.
Understand the rules for taxes on mission trip airfare, including what’s deductible for participants and donors under IRS guidelines.
Last Reviewed: January 24, 2025
Q: Each of our missionaries is responsible for purchasing his or her airline tickets. Would this be considered a tax-deductible contribution or just a personal expense? Further, a church member wants to purchase the ticket so that a participant can go on the missions trip. Is the payment—made directly by the church member to the airline for the participant’s airfare—tax deductible?
Short-term missions trips often involve participants covering their own travel expenses, raising the question: Is airfare for a missions trip tax deductible? Understanding the rules surrounding taxes on mission trip airfare is essential for both participants and donors to ensure compliance with IRS guidelines.
If a participant purchases their own airline ticket to participate in a missions trip, the expense can be considered tax deductible as a volunteer expense. To qualify, the participant must obtain a statement from the church confirming:
In addition, the participant will need:
If the trip includes a mix of volunteer service and personal or sightseeing days, only a portion of the airfare is deductible. Specifically:
If a church member directly purchases an airline ticket for a participant (other than themselves or an immediate family member), the payment is not tax deductible. However, the donation can become deductible if:
This distinction is critical, as IRS guidelines require the church—not the donor—to determine how designated donations are allocated for them to qualify as charitable contributions.
Churches should ensure proper documentation is provided for participants and donors to comply with tax regulations. Maintaining clear policies and transparent communication with members can help avoid misunderstandings and ensure accurate reporting.
For more information on tax-deductible donations, visit the IRS Charitable Contributions page. Additionally, review nonprofit volunteer guidelines on NationalService.gov.
Implement data-driven decision making to improve your church’s financial planning with a simple and scalable per-person giving metric.
Data can transform how churches operate, regardless of their size. By adopting data-driven decision making, churches can better understand giving patterns and make informed financial decisions. Norwood Davis from 12Stone Church emphasizes the importance of tracking a per-person-per-week giving metric as a powerful yet simple tool for any church.
“Here’s what’s beautiful about this metric,” says Davis. “It’s flexible and scalable, regardless of your church’s size.” To start, follow these simple steps:
With consistent data collection, patterns will emerge. Seasonal highs and lows, holiday changes, and even trends tied to congregants’ pay periods become apparent. For 12Stone Church, these insights shifted their entire budgeting process. “Instead of dividing annual revenue projections equally over 52 weeks, we adjusted our budget to reflect seasonal and other variabilities,” Davis explains.
Once you’ve collected enough data, Davis advises creating a simple graph to identify long-term trends. This process can be done using Microsoft Excel, which offers intuitive tools for graphing. For beginners, online tutorials and affordable Excel classes at local colleges can help build the necessary skills.
“The most important thing is to keep collecting data and think in terms of long-term trends,” says Davis. “The key is to take disciplined, small steps. Just start collecting the data, keep it going, and keep improving.”
Implementing this metric offers several benefits:
For additional tips on data collection and analysis, visit the U.S. Census Bureau’s Data Tools or explore the IRS nonprofit resources for financial insights.
What are the long-term benefits of tracking this metric?
Over time, it helps identify patterns, align budgets with trends, and improve financial decision-making.
Why is per-person giving an important metric?
It provides a clear and scalable way to track financial trends regardless of church size.
How do I start tracking data for this metric?
Create a table with attendance, total giving, and per-person giving as key components.
What tools can help with data visualization?
Microsoft Excel is a great starting point. Affordable online tutorials or local classes can teach you graphing basics.