As a nonprofit leader, you must balance the immediate needs of your community with the long-term financial sustainability of your organization. Your investment policy statement is key to this balancing act, helping you protect the value of your initial investments, grow those assets, and maintain access to them if you need to tap the funds for cash flow.

However, if you fail to consistently update your investment policy statement, you may hinder your growth and even expose your organization to unnecessary risk. Read on to discover four signs that indicate you need to modernize your financial frameworks.

If you sit on a nonprofit board or finance committee, you've probably heard the word "fiduciary" used to describe an advisor. What often gets missed is that your board already carries fiduciary responsibility, with or without an advisor in the picture.

This distinction matters more in the nonprofit space than almost anywhere else in personal or institutional finance because the money your board oversees isn't personal wealth. It's donor-restricted, mission-restricted, and entrusted to your organization by people who expect it to be stewarded responsibly. That raises the stakes on transparency, prudence, and oversight in a way that a typical investment conversation often doesn't capture.

If you've ever waited weeks for a simple account statement, or been told you couldn't access your own organization's money, you might assume that's just how it goes with investment advisors. It's not, and we want you to know that your organization shouldn't be treated like that.

There’s a myth in the nonprofit world: parking cash in a savings account is the “safe” choice. In reality, it can be one of the costliest decisions a board makes, and often the one no one thinks to question.

That doesn’t mean the market is always “safe” either. Investing always carries risk, including the risk of loss. But holding everything in cash carries a cost too, even if it never shows up on a statement. The question your board actually needs to answer isn’t which option is risk-free, because neither one is. It’s whether your decisions are intentional, and tied to what each dollar is actually meant to do.

Receiving an endowment gift is a milestone. It signals that a donor believes in your mission enough to fund it, permanently. But that check arriving is the beginning of a serious set of responsibilities, not the end of the conversation. And many nonprofit leaders are not handed a roadmap when it happens.

A well-governed nonprofit investment program should have more than good returns and a solid IPS. It has independent checks built into the structure, so no single firm has unchecked control over both the management and the holding of your assets. Understanding how third-party custody works is one of the cleaner ways a board can strengthen its oversight without adding complexity.

Your nonprofit needs secure funding to power your programs, and it might be time to consider your financial future beyond the traditional annual giving cycle. An endowment is an excellent option for nonprofits of all sizes to establish long-term financial stability.

An endowment is a pool of assets established by charitable contributions and invested by nonprofits to provide long-term, sustainable financial support for its mission or specific programs, often as defined by the donor(s).

For example, a donor might establish a scholarship endowment at a university. Rather than spending the principal, the university would distribute a portion of the endowment’s accumulated investment earnings each year to pay for students’ education.

However, while endowments can offer perpetual funding, they also come with certain limitations and requirements, meaning nonprofits should carefully consider whether their organization is prepared to properly steward and operate one. This article will review the top four considerations your organization should assess before deciding whether to start an endowment.

A good investment policy statement(IPS) should make investment decisions easier, not harder. It should give your board clarity, protect your organization, and hold up under scrutiny.

Most nonprofits have an IPS. Not all of them have one that's actually doing its job. In our work with nonprofit organizations, we see the same problems come up again and again: documents that are outdated, too vague to be useful, or simply disconnected from how the organization actually operates.

None of these are catastrophic on their own, but they add up. And when a difficult market or a board transition arrives, a weak IPS is the wrong time to find out.

Here are the most common mistakes we see, and what to do about them.

For nonprofit leaders, CFOs, and finance committees, balancing liquidity with donor intent can be a constant challenge. Restricted funds and endowments often represent some of an organization’s most important and most sensitive assets.

Responsibly managing restricted funds and endowments secures donor trust and helps you avoid regulatory scrutiny. Errors in tracking, commingling, or investing these dollars inappropriately, on the other hand, can trigger compliance issues under ASC 958 or the Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act (UPMIFA), as well as reputational damage that can take years to repair.

Proper stewardship requires clear policies, rigorous tracking, and financial infrastructure designed for restricted fund management. Below, you’ll find some of the essential dos and don’ts of managing restricted funds and endowments effectively.

Endowment spending decisions are rarely about the number alone. Board members and nonprofit leaders are responsible for supporting today’s programs while safeguarding resources for the future, which means multiple factors must be considered when setting a withdrawal rate.