Hi Reader,
The nonprofit sector is drowning in AI hype and starving for governance basics. This week's issue sits at that intersection — where a $1.1 million experiment in board development, a free AI credential worth your afternoon, and some hard data about why most nonprofits aren't getting real value from their tech investments all point to the same conclusion: the organizations pulling ahead aren't the ones with the biggest budgets. They're the ones documenting workflows and measuring what their boards actually do.
This week: A Jewish community coalition is rewriting the playbook on how boards learn — together. Microsoft just opened a free AI training program your staff can start next week. The latest AI adoption data reveals why 92% of nonprofits are using AI but only 7% are seeing real results. Plus three things you can do before Friday, three prompts that earn their keep, and a board exercise your fundraising committee needs.
A portion of every NGN Premium subscription supports Rooted, a Madison, Wisconsin nonprofit building a community-led, sustainable food system through urban agriculture education, food production, and land access. This spring, Rooted's K-12 education programs are back in session at Troy Farm and their other program sites — and they recently installed a 9.53 kW solar system at Troy Farm, funded through energy innovation and solar grants. Fresh produce shares, coffee shares, and flower shares are available now. Learn more at rootedwi.org.
Sixty Jewish Nonprofits Are Fixing Their Boards Together — And Building a Model Anyone Can Steal
Here's a question most nonprofit leaders avoid: What would happen if every board in your community got better at the same time?
Leading Edge, a national organization focused on Jewish nonprofit leadership, just launched a $1.1 million experiment to find out. Funded by The Marcus Foundation, the Board Leadership Accelerator is enrolling over 1,500 board members from more than 60 organizations in a 24-month governance improvement program running from 2026 through 2028.
The premise: boards improve faster when they learn together. Instead of each organization hiring its own governance consultant, the Accelerator provides shared measurement through Leading Edge's Board Experience Survey, 10 hours of expert coaching per organization, workshops on board culture, strategic planning, and fundraising, and a peer network of lay leaders comparing notes across organizations.
The program tests whether shared data, shared language, and shared infrastructure can move an entire community's governance quality — not just one board at a time. If it works, they'll have trained 5% of the estimated 30,000 Jewish nonprofit board members nationwide.
Why does this matter to you? Because the model isn't sectarian — it works wherever there's a community of practice. Any cluster of nonprofits with a willing funder could replicate this — a United Way convening its member agencies, a community foundation gathering its grantees, a state nonprofit association building a cohort.
Here's how to start. Identify 8-10 peer organizations in your community whose boards face similar challenges. Approach your local community foundation or United Way with a proposal for shared board development — not individual grants to individual consultants, but a cohort model with shared assessment tools and peer learning. Use Leading Edge's Board Experience Survey framework as a template.
The economics are compelling: 60 organizations sharing one infrastructure costs less per board than 60 separate consulting engagements.
Sources:Leading Edge — Board Development at Scale · eJewish Philanthropy — Marcus Foundation $1.1M Grant
Microsoft Just Opened a Free AI Training Program for Nonprofit Leaders — Applications Open April 22
Most nonprofit AI training sells you a dream — Microsoft's new program hands you a credential.
On March 25, Microsoft launched Elevate for Changemakers at its Global Nonprofit Leaders Summit, which drew more than 1,500 nonprofit leaders from around the world. The program has three components, and the first two are available now.
The AI for Nonprofits Credential is a professional certificate developed with LinkedIn and NetHope. It's a structured learning path built around actual nonprofit work — from Copilot basics to change management to responsible AI governance. It's free and self-paced.
The role-based training modules cover practical skills: how to use AI tools in your actual workflows, not abstract possibilities. The modules range from day-to-day productivity to organization-wide AI adoption planning.
The Changemaker Fellowship is the flagship. Fellows join a global cohort, create and implement responsible AI adoption plans for their organizations, and get support from Microsoft, EY, and Caribou. Applications open April 22 at aka.ms/MicrosoftElevateforChangemakers.
Here's why this matters right now. The 2026 Nonprofit AI Adoption Report surveyed 346 organizations and found that while 92% of nonprofits report using AI, only 18% have operational use across team workflows. Just 7% say AI is embedded into goals, budgets, and performance indicators.
The gap between "using AI" and "getting value from AI" is enormous — and it's a governance gap, not a technology gap. Microsoft's program addresses exactly that.
Your move this week: Send the credential link to your leadership team. Block 30 minutes to review the learning path yourself. If you're serious about organizational AI adoption (not just individual tinkering), mark April 22 for the Fellowship application. It's free, it's structured, and it comes with a network.
Sources:Microsoft On the Issues — Empowering the Nonprofit Sector · Changemaker Fellowship Details
The 7% Problem: Why Most Nonprofits Aren't Getting Real Value from AI — And What the Winners Do Differently
Ninety-two percent of nonprofits are using AI. Seven percent are seeing major improvements. That's a system failure.
The 2026 Nonprofit AI Adoption Report from Virtuous and Fundraising.AI surveyed 346 nonprofit organizations and found what researchers call an "efficiency plateau." Organizations adopt AI tools — ChatGPT for drafting, Copilot for emails, various tools for social media — but the productivity gains plateau fast.
The data tells us why. Eighty-one percent of organizations report using AI individually and on an ad hoc basis. Only 4% have documented, repeatable workflows. Only 18% report operational use across team workflows. And just 7% say AI is embedded into their organizational goals, budgets, and performance indicators.
Translation: most nonprofits are using AI the way most people use a gym membership in February. Enthusiastic starts, no system, quick fadeout.
The 7% who are seeing real results share a pattern. They documented which tasks AI handles, who reviews the output, and how it connects to organizational goals — and built governance around AI use, not just permission to experiment.
What separates them isn't budget or technical sophistication — someone sat down and wrote out the workflow.
Here's the Monday morning version. Pick one recurring task your team does weekly — grant reporting, donor communications, board prep, whatever eats the most staff hours. Document the current workflow in plain language: who does what, in what order, with what tools.
Then identify one step where AI could replace 30 minutes of manual work. Write that into the workflow document. Assign someone to own it. That's how 7% becomes 8%.
Sources:2026 Nonprofit AI Adoption Report · NonProfit PRO — AI Adoption Hits 92%
Build a 90-Day Revenue Diversification Snapshot
If your largest funder disappeared tomorrow, how many months could you operate? Most EDs can't answer that question without opening a spreadsheet. The Nonprofit Finance Fund's 2026 Trends Report found that many nonprofits are reconsidering shared services, alliances, and revenue models — but the first step is knowing where you stand.
Open a spreadsheet. List every revenue source from the past 12 months. Calculate what percentage each represents of your total budget. If any single source exceeds 35%, circle it in red. That's your vulnerability. This exercise takes 45 minutes and tells you exactly which revenue gaps to close first.
The $150 case: losing a funder that represents 40% of a $500K budget means a $200K hole. Knowing that before it happens is worth far more than $150 in planning time alone.
Run a 15-Minute Cybersecurity Spot Check on Your Donor Platform
Cyber threats remain one of the top technology concerns for nonprofits in 2026, and your donor data is your most sensitive asset. ArentFox Schiff's 2026 legal checklist flags cybersecurity audits as a top-10 priority for nonprofit leadership this year.
Here's the 15-minute version: Log into your donation platform. Check that two-factor authentication is turned on for every admin user. Review who has admin access — remove anyone who's left the organization. Verify your platform encrypts data in transit (look for "HTTPS" and a padlock icon on your donation pages). Check when you last updated your payment processor integration.
If any of these steps reveal a gap, you've just prevented a data breach that could cost your organization its donors' trust and — depending on your state — trigger mandatory breach notification obligations. Time: 15 minutes. Cost: nothing.
Create a Board Member Expectations Agreement Before Your Next Meeting
Engaged boards raise 17% more money year-over-year, according to research from the CCS Philanthropy Pulse Report. But engagement starts with clarity, not inspiration.
Before your next board meeting, draft a one-page document listing what you expect from each board member: meeting attendance (how many per year), committee participation, annual giving (a specific amount or "meaningful personal gift"), fundraising activity (specific asks, introductions, or event attendance), and term limits with renewal criteria. Share it in advance. Ask every board member to sign it or raise concerns.
The goal is making implicit expectations explicit so nobody is surprised. Most boards skip this step because the discomfort is the whole point. Time: 1 hour to draft, 10 minutes at the meeting. Every quarter the agreement is in place, you save yourself one awkward conversation about a board member who isn't showing up.
Audit Your Grant Compliance Calendar Before a Deadline Sneaks Up
You know that feeling when a grant report is due in three days and nobody remembered? It happens because most compliance tracking lives in someone's head, their email, or a spreadsheet that hasn't been updated since the grant was awarded. You don't run this prompt because you think you're behind, but rather because knowing exactly where you stand gives you the freedom to plan instead of scramble.
PROMPT: Act as a nonprofit grants compliance manager with 15 years of experience managing federal, state, and foundation grants for organizations with budgets under $5 million. I'm going to paste in a list of our active grants with their reporting deadlines, amounts, and key requirements. For each grant, produce: (1) a compliance status assessment — green (on track), yellow (action needed within 30 days), or red (past due or at risk), (2) the next three deadlines with specific dates and what's due, (3) one specific thing we should start preparing now to avoid a last-minute scramble, and (4) any common compliance mistakes you've seen organizations make with this type of funder. Assume we're a small nonprofit with one part-time grants manager. Format as a table I can share with my ED and board treasurer. [Paste your active grant list here with deadlines, amounts, and reporting requirements.]
Draft a Board Self-Assessment Survey Your Board Will Actually Complete
Most board self-assessments die in someone's inbox because they read like academic research instruments — 40 questions, Likert scales, no clear payoff. You need honest answers to five questions that tell you where your board is strong and where it's coasting. The right survey takes 10 minutes to complete and produces a conversation your board chair can use at the next meeting.
PROMPT: Act as a nonprofit governance consultant who specializes in board effectiveness for organizations with budgets under $5 million, especially organizations similar to [name of organization] ([URL]). Design a board self-assessment survey with no more than 8 questions. Each question should be answerable in under 60 seconds, avoid academic jargon, and produce information the board chair can act on immediately. Cover these areas: meeting quality, strategic contribution, fundraising engagement, financial oversight, and ED-board relationship health. For each question, provide (1) the question itself in plain language, (2) the response format (1-5 scale with labeled anchors, not just numbers), and (3) one sentence explaining what a low score on this question typically reveals. End with three open-ended questions that surface what surveys usually miss. [Describe your board: size, how often you meet, and the one governance challenge you'd most like to address.]
Write a Crisis Communication Holding Statement Before You Need One
The reporter calls. The board chair texts. A staff member posts something on social media that's getting attention. In that moment, you need 200 words that buy you 24 hours.
Most organizations write their first holding statement while the crisis is happening, which means it's written under pressure by someone who's panicking. Write it now, when nobody's watching, and you'll have a template you can adapt to almost any situation in under 10 minutes.
PROMPT: Act as a nonprofit crisis communications advisor with experience managing reputational incidents for organizations with budgets under $5 million and no dedicated PR staff. Generate three holding statement templates I can keep in a file and adapt within 10 minutes when something goes wrong. Template 1: a general-purpose statement for when something has happened but you don't have full information yet. Template 2: for when a staff member or volunteer's behavior has become public. Template 3: for when a funder, partner, or government action threatens your programs. Each template should be under 200 words, use plain language (not corporate PR-speak), include bracketed fields I fill in with specifics, and strike the tone of "we take this seriously, here's what we're doing, we'll share more when we know more." Also provide: (1) a checklist of 5 things to do in the first 60 minutes of any reputational incident, and (2) three mistakes small nonprofits commonly make in their first public response. [Describe your organization's mission and the audiences you communicate with most (donors, clients, media, government, etc.).]
The Fundraising Comfort Thermometer — (Board Culture / Fundraising; 15 minutes)
What makes it worth trying: The CCS Philanthropy Pulse Report shows that governance conversations are shifting from "supporting fundraising" to boards actively shaping and driving it. But most board members freeze when you say the word "fundraising" because they picture cold-calling strangers for money. This exercise surfaces where each board member's actual comfort level sits — and reveals that most fundraising activities don't involve asking anyone for a dollar.
What you need: A whiteboard or shared screen, a list of 10 fundraising-adjacent activities (below), and 15 minutes at the start of a board meeting.
How to run it:
-
(2 minutes) Display this list of 10 activities and ask each board member to privately rate their comfort level 1-5 for each:
- Making a personal annual gift to the organization
- Inviting a friend to a free event
- Sharing the organization's social media post
- Writing a personal thank-you note to a donor they've never met
- Introducing a colleague to the ED for a coffee meeting
- Attending a donor cultivation event and talking about the mission
- Asking a family member to make a gift
- Calling a lapsed donor to ask why they stopped giving
- Making a face-to-face ask for a specific dollar amount
- Presenting the case for support to a potential corporate partner
- (3 minutes) Collect the scores anonymously (use a quick poll tool or have people text numbers to the board chair). Display the group averages.
- (7 minutes) Discuss: Where is the cluster? Most boards will score high on items 1-3 and drop sharply after item 5. The gap between "comfortable" and "uncomfortable" is where the board's untapped fundraising capacity lives. Ask: "Which of the uncomfortable activities would make the biggest difference for our organization this year?"
- (3 minutes) Each board member picks ONE activity from the uncomfortable zone they'll try before the next board meeting. Write them down. The board chair follows up.
In-person: Sticky notes on a wall, anonymous dot voting, physical energy in the room.
Virtual: Anonymous poll in Zoom or Google Forms, results shared on screen, breakout rooms for the discussion phase if the board is larger than 10.
Watch out for: The ED or board chair jumping in to reassure people that "we'd never ask you to do anything uncomfortable." That kills the exercise. The discomfort is the data. Also watch for the board member who rates everything a 5 — that person either has unusual confidence or isn't being honest. Probe gently.
You'll know it worked when: At least half the board commits to a specific activity and the board chair has a follow-up list. The real win is the next meeting: did anyone actually do it?
That's this week's NGN Premium. One question to sit with: When was the last time your board had an honest conversation about what each member is actually willing to do? If the answer is "never," you have your agenda item for next month.
See you next week.
— Ted
A portion of your subscription supports Rooted, building community-led food systems in Madison, Wisconsin.
|
|
Founder and CEO Risk Alternatives, LLC 202.758.7572 (cell) 608.709.0793 (office) Website
Author of Managing Your Nonprofit for Resilience
We help nonprofits thrive by providing practical tools and support to address uncertainty and improve risk management.
|
Did a cool person forward you this email?
Sign up here