Participant digital workbook
Study all seven stewardship principles, reflect on what they mean for your church, complete each exercise, assess current practice and prepare your contribution to the church's shared work.
Digital workbook OR-NM-1.0 (prototype) · Seven Principles curriculum version 1.0 — author-review draft pending Leland Rubin's approval prior to publication.
Your progress through the workbook
7 assigned principles, four lessons each, with a rated self-assessment and a 90-day plan for each principle.
0 of 28 exercises written · 0 of 35 areas rated (0%)
Every activity in the printed workbook can be completed here online. Your answers stay saved under your name, and the downloads give you the same complete workbook on paper.
S5 — Invest in Future Ministry (principle 5 of 7)
Build a written ten-year capacity and calling vision, adopt a Future Ministry Fund charter and funding formula, draft a product-neutral investment policy statement for any invested balances, and adopt a decision-and-approval framework so ministry investment is planned rather than reactive.
What this principle produces
Future Ministry Investment Plan
- Ten-year capacity and calling vision naming facilities, technology, staffing and program growth the church is stewarding toward
- Current-state capacity assessment covering facility condition, technology lifecycle, staffing depth and succession readiness
- Future Ministry Fund charter stating purpose, funding sources, contribution formula and use restrictions
- Funding formula translating a percentage of unrestricted income or surplus into a recurring Future Ministry Fund contribution
- Written investment policy statement for long-horizon invested balances covering time horizon, risk tolerance, diversification and prohibited practices
- Referral guardrail naming qualified, independent legal, tax, investment and insurance professionals for decisions requiring licensed advice
- Decision framework defining who proposes, who evaluates, who approves and who reviews future-ministry investments above stated thresholds
- Gaps register listing every open capacity, funding, governance or review gap discovered during the module
- 90-day action plan assigning each recommended action an owner, due date, resources required, success measure, status and review date
Objectives
- Build a written ten-year capacity and calling vision
- Adopt a Future Ministry Fund charter and funding formula
- Draft a product-neutral investment policy statement
- Adopt a decision, approval and review framework for ministry investments
5 weeks · about 8 hours of leadership time
Lesson 1: Seeing Ten Years Ahead: Capacity, Facilities and Calling
What you will learn: Build a written ten-year capacity and calling vision that names the facilities, technology, staffing and program growth the church is stewarding toward.
75 minutes · Pastor, facilities lead, a technology-minded leader, and one or two board members
Scripture lens — Luke 14:28-30
28 For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it? 29 Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him, 30 Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish.
King James Version (KJV) · Public domain
This passage pictures a builder who counts the cost before laying a foundation, a direct image for a leadership team learning to plan facility and capacity investments years in advance rather than reacting after a crisis forces the issue.
Materials and evidence you will use
- Most recent facility inspection or maintenance log
- Current staffing roster with tenure and succession notes
- Attendance and ministry-growth trend for the last three to five years
- A written ten-year vision statement for each capacity lane
- A named owner for the annual vision refresh
By the end of this lesson, you should be able to
- Leadership can describe, in one page, what the church's facilities, technology and staffing should look like in ten years
- The team has assessed current facility condition, technology lifecycle and staffing depth against that ten-year vision
- At least three specific capacity gaps have been named with an order-of-magnitude cost estimate
- A named owner exists for refreshing the ten-year vision on an annual cycle
Study reading
Understand the concept
Your work in this lesson focuses on this outcome: Build a written ten-year capacity and calling vision that names the facilities, technology, staffing and program growth the church is stewarding toward.
A church cannot invest wisely in a future it has never described; today's vision map names the ten-year picture the rest of this module will fund, protect and govern.
Why it matters for your church
Churches that only plan one year ahead consistently face facility and staffing crises that could have been anticipated years earlier.
Technology and staffing capacity are as important to future ministry as visible facility needs, but are far more often neglected in planning.
A written, prioritized ten-year vision gives the congregation a credible, specific reason to invest beyond the current budget year.
Examine the evidence
Use Most recent facility inspection or maintenance log, Current staffing roster with tenure and succession notes, and Attendance and ministry-growth trend for the last three to five years to compare your church's present practice with its stated intentions. Look for documented patterns, missing information, and differences between what people assume and what the evidence supports.
Your completed work should be supported by A written ten-year vision statement for each capacity lane, and A named owner for the annual vision refresh. Record uncertainty honestly so your team knows what still needs to be verified.
Prepare for the shared exercise
Produce a written, prioritized ten-year vision for facilities, technology, staffing and program capacity with order-of-magnitude cost estimates for the largest gaps. The Ten-Year Capacity and Calling Vision Map produces the Ten-Year Capacity and Calling Vision Map, which contributes to the principle's principal deliverable.
Before working with your team, consider this reflection: If our church's facilities, technology and staffing looked exactly as I hope in ten years, what would I regret not having started this year?
Key terms
- Capacity lane: One of the four categories — facilities, technology, staffing or program capacity — used to assess and plan future ministry investment.
- Order-of-magnitude estimate: A deliberately rough cost range used for early planning, understood to need refinement before a final budget is set.
- Succession readiness: The degree to which a ministry role could be filled well if the current leader left with little notice.
Failure patterns to avoid
- Treating facility planning as the whole of future-ministry thinking while ignoring technology and staffing succession
- Producing an aspirational vision statement with no attached cost estimate or priority ranking, making it impossible to fund
- Writing the vision once and never revisiting it, so it becomes stale and disconnected from the church's actual trajectory
Ministry case — A Congregation That Waited Until the Roof Failed
A synthetic mid-sized congregation, Fictional Grace Fellowship, had never written down a facility or technology plan beyond the current year's maintenance budget. When its aging HVAC system failed during a winter cold snap, leadership had to approve an emergency, unbudgeted repair at a cost far higher than a planned replacement would have required, and the funds came directly out of ministry program budgets with no advance notice to the congregation.
In the module debrief, leadership realized the failure had been predictable years in advance; the system's age had simply never been written down anywhere leadership regularly reviewed. Building a ten-year capacity vision the following year, including a technology and facilities lifecycle list, allowed the next major system's likely replacement date to be planned and funded well ahead of failure.
Lesson takeaway: A church cannot invest wisely in a future it has never described; today's vision map names the ten-year picture the rest of this module will fund, protect and govern.
Exercise — Ten-Year Capacity and Calling Vision Map (produces: Ten-Year Capacity and Calling Vision Map)
Produce a written, prioritized ten-year vision for facilities, technology, staffing and program capacity with order-of-magnitude cost estimates for the largest gaps.
- List the four capacity lanes: facilities, technology, staffing, program capacity.
- For each lane, write one honest sentence describing today's reality.
- For each lane, draft a one- or two-sentence ten-year vision tied to the church's mission.
- Name the single largest gap in each lane and attach an order-of-magnitude cost range.
- Rank the four gaps by urgency to the church's ability to fulfill its calling in the next three years.
- Assign a named owner to refresh the vision map annually.
- Summarize the top two priority gaps to carry into the Future Ministry Fund formula in Lesson 2.
Worksheet columns: Capacity lane · Current reality · Ten-year vision · Largest gap · Order-of-magnitude cost · Priority rank
Saves as you typeTen-Year Capacity and Calling Vision Map
Complete the Ten-Year Capacity and Calling Vision Map here. Your answers are kept under your name and are waiting for you when you return.
Ten-Year Capacity and Calling Vision Map # Capacity lane Current reality Ten-year vision Largest gap Order-of-magnitude cost Priority rank 1 2 3 4 Saving keeps it private to you; submitting shares it with your coach and church panel.Worked sample — Fictional Grace Fellowship (illustrative example — not actual church data) (illustrative, scored 18/20)
Fictional Grace Fellowship is a synthetic congregation of about 340 attendees used here to illustrate a completed vision map.
Ten-year vision map complete for all four capacity lanes, with HVAC and sanctuary expansion ranked as the top funding priority and succession pipeline development ranked second.
- Leadership committed to bringing a phased HVAC replacement proposal to the Future Ministry Fund discussion in Lesson 2 as the first funded priority.
- The facilities lead was assigned to obtain two independent contractor estimates before the next module lesson.
The team named specific, honest current-state realities and attached credible order-of-magnitude estimates for all four lanes, though the program-capacity vision statement remained somewhat general.
BAG Index complementCompounding and the Rule of 72
Just as a church benefits from starting future-ministry investment early rather than waiting for a crisis, households benefit enormously from starting to save and invest early because of compounding — the process by which growth itself begins to generate additional growth. The Rule of 72 offers a quick, product-neutral way to estimate how long money takes to double at a given average rate of return, making the power of an early start concrete rather than abstract.
Teaching points
- • Compounding means earnings on savings or investments themselves begin to earn returns, so growth accelerates over time rather than staying flat.
- • The Rule of 72 estimates years to double an amount by dividing 72 by the assumed annual rate of return — for example, at a 6 percent average annual return, money would be estimated to double in about 12 years.
- • Time in the market matters more than timing the market for most long-horizon savers, since starting even a few years earlier can meaningfully change an eventual balance.
- • Compounding works in both directions: it grows savings and investments, and it also grows debt balances when interest is not paid down, which is why high-interest debt reduction and saving often need to happen together.
- • These are general educational concepts illustrated with round, hypothetical numbers, not a projection or promise of any specific household's future results.
Household practice step: Households complete a simple two-line worksheet: pick one realistic monthly savings amount they could start or increase this month, and use the Rule of 72 with a conservative assumed rate to estimate, for personal motivation only, roughly how many years it might take to double that ongoing pattern of savings.
Supports this principle: Just as S5 asks the church to fund future ministry capacity years before it is needed, this complement helps households build the personal habit of starting to save and invest early, so generosity and stewardship are built on financially secure households.
This teaching is general financial education only, uses hypothetical rates of return for illustration, and is not investment, legal or tax advice; households making actual saving or investment decisions should consult a qualified, independent financial, tax or investment professional of their own choosing.
Discussion prompts
- Which of the four capacity lanes has received the least deliberate attention from our leadership over the last several years?
- What would change in our decision-making if every leader could describe our ten-year facility, technology and staffing vision in one sentence?
- Where did we find the largest gap between our current capacity and the vision we believe reflects our calling?
- How will we communicate this ten-year vision to the congregation without creating alarm about current conditions?
Reflection: If our church's facilities, technology and staffing looked exactly as I hope in ten years, what would I regret not having started this year?
Use these prompts to prepare your own response before the group discussion. Honest differences help the church identify where further work is needed.
Lesson 2: Building the Future Ministry Fund
What you will learn: Adopt a written Future Ministry Fund charter and funding formula that turns the prioritized ten-year vision into a recurring, disciplined contribution.
90 minutes · Pastor, treasurer, finance committee, and the facilities or capacity-planning lead from Lesson 1
Scripture lens — Genesis 41:34-36
34 Let Pharaoh do this, and let him appoint officers over the land, and take up the fifth part of the land of Egypt in the seven plenteous years. 35 And let them gather all the food of those good years that come, and lay up corn under the hand of Pharaoh, and let them keep food in the cities. 36 And that food shall be for store to the land against the seven years of famine, which shall be in the land of Egypt; that the land perish not through the famine.
King James Version (KJV) · Public domain
Joseph's plan set aside a defined portion of abundance during good years specifically to fund need in future years, a direct model for a church setting aside a defined formula-based contribution during healthy financial seasons to fund future ministry capacity.
Materials and evidence you will use
- Ten-Year Capacity and Calling Vision Map
- Three years of year-end financial statements
- Current reserves policy, if one exists, to confirm the two funds remain distinct
- A formula tested against three years of actual financial results
- A named owner for the recurring transfer and board reporting
By the end of this lesson, you should be able to
- Leadership has adopted a written Future Ministry Fund charter naming purpose, funding sources and use restrictions
- A funding formula exists that translates a defined percentage of unrestricted income or surplus into a recurring fund contribution
- The team can explain how the fund differs from the general operating reserve built in prior stewardship work
- A named owner exists for reporting the fund's balance and contributions to leadership on a fixed schedule
Study reading
Understand the concept
Your work in this lesson focuses on this outcome: Adopt a written Future Ministry Fund charter and funding formula that turns the prioritized ten-year vision into a recurring, disciplined contribution.
A vision without a funding formula stays a wish; today's charter turns the ten-year vision into a disciplined, protected, recurring habit.
Why it matters for your church
Without a dedicated fund and formula, any year-end surplus tends to be absorbed into general operations rather than building toward the church's ten-year vision.
A formula tested against real historical financial results is far more likely to be sustained than one chosen aspirationally.
Clear use restrictions protect the fund's original purpose from being diverted during a difficult budget year.
Examine the evidence
Use Ten-Year Capacity and Calling Vision Map, Three years of year-end financial statements, and Current reserves policy, if one exists, to confirm the two funds remain distinct to compare your church's present practice with its stated intentions. Look for documented patterns, missing information, and differences between what people assume and what the evidence supports.
Your completed work should be supported by A formula tested against three years of actual financial results, and A named owner for the recurring transfer and board reporting. Record uncertainty honestly so your team knows what still needs to be verified.
Prepare for the shared exercise
Adopt a written charter and funding formula for the Future Ministry Fund, tested against real historical financial results and the priority gaps named in Lesson 1. The Future Ministry Fund Charter and Funding Formula produces the Future Ministry Fund Charter and Funding Formula, which contributes to the principle's principal deliverable.
Before working with your team, consider this reflection: What would it take for our leadership to honor this funding formula even in the leanest year we can imagine?
Key terms
- Future Ministry Fund: A dedicated pool of church funds, governed by a written charter and funding formula, set aside specifically to invest in future facility, technology, staffing or program capacity.
- Funding formula: A written rule translating a defined percentage of income or surplus into a recurring contribution to a designated fund.
- Use restriction: A written limitation on what a fund's balance may be spent on, intended to prevent the fund from being diverted to unrelated purposes under budget pressure.
Failure patterns to avoid
- Adopting an ambitious funding formula that gets quietly suspended the first time finances tighten
- Failing to distinguish the Future Ministry Fund from the general operating reserve, leading to one fund being raided for the other's purpose
- Writing a charter with no use restriction, allowing the fund to be spent on whatever feels urgent in a given year rather than the named ten-year priorities
Ministry case — A Fund That Existed Only on Paper
A synthetic congregation, Fictional Riverside Chapel, had voted three years earlier to start a 'building fund' but had never written a charter, a formula or a use restriction. In practice, the fund received deposits only when someone remembered to make one, and twice its balance was quietly used to cover a tight month's payroll, since no rule prevented it.
When leadership finally adopted a written charter with a specific formula — 2 percent of unrestricted income monthly, automatically transferred — and a use restriction limiting withdrawals to items on the ten-year vision map, the fund's balance grew more in the following eighteen months than it had in the prior three years combined, simply because the habit was now automatic and protected.
Lesson takeaway: A vision without a funding formula stays a wish; today's charter turns the ten-year vision into a disciplined, protected, recurring habit.
Exercise — Future Ministry Fund Charter and Funding Formula (produces: Future Ministry Fund Charter and Funding Formula)
Adopt a written charter and funding formula for the Future Ministry Fund, tested against real historical financial results and the priority gaps named in Lesson 1.
- Review the top-priority gap and its order-of-magnitude cost range from Lesson 1.
- Discuss and select a funding source: income-based, surplus-based, or a combination.
- Test the proposed formula against the last three years of actual financial results.
- Draft the charter's purpose statement, funding formula, use restriction and withdrawal-approval placeholder rule.
- Project the fund balance at three, five and ten years using round, clearly labeled illustrative figures.
- Compare the projection to the top-priority gap's cost range and adjust the formula or timeline if needed.
- Assign a named owner to report fund balance and formula compliance at every board meeting.
Worksheet columns: Charter element · Draft language · Tested against 3-year history? · Owner · Review date
Saves as you typeFuture Ministry Fund Charter and Funding Formula
Complete the Future Ministry Fund Charter and Funding Formula here. Your answers are kept under your name and are waiting for you when you return.
Future Ministry Fund Charter and Funding Formula # Charter element Draft language Tested against 3-year history? Owner Review date 1 2 3 4 5 6 Saving keeps it private to you; submitting shares it with your coach and church panel.Worked sample — Fictional Riverside Chapel (illustrative example — not actual church data) (illustrative, scored 18/20)
Fictional Riverside Chapel is a synthetic congregation of about 280 attendees used here to illustrate a completed charter and funding formula.
Future Ministry Fund Charter adopted with a formula of 2 percent of unrestricted income plus 25 percent of year-end surplus above reserve target, restricted to vision-map items, projected to reach the top-priority gap's low-end cost estimate within approximately six years.
- The board formally adopted the charter and formula, effective the first of the next month, with the treasurer setting up an automatic monthly transfer.
- The board agreed the withdrawal-approval placeholder rule would be revisited and formalized in the Lesson 4 governance framework.
The formula was tested rigorously against real historical data and a clear use restriction was written, though the ten-year projection used a single growth assumption rather than a range of scenarios.
BAG Index complementInvesting fundamentals — risk, return and diversification
Just as the church is learning to invest a dedicated Future Ministry Fund with discipline rather than reacting to a single good or bad year, households benefit from understanding the basic relationship between risk, return and diversification before putting savings into any investment. This complement introduces those fundamentals in plain, product-neutral language.
Teaching points
- • Risk and expected return are generally related: investments with higher potential long-term returns typically carry more short-term price swings, and safer, more stable options typically offer lower expected returns.
- • Diversification — spreading savings across many different investments rather than concentrating in one company or sector — is a widely used way to reduce the impact of any single investment performing poorly.
- • Time horizon matters: money needed within the next few years is generally treated differently from money that will not be needed for a decade or more, because a longer horizon can allow more time to recover from short-term declines.
- • No investment approach eliminates risk entirely, and past performance of any investment or strategy does not guarantee future results.
- • A written, simple household plan — how much to save, what time horizon it serves, and how much risk feels tolerable — is more valuable than chasing any single hot investment idea.
Household practice step: Households complete a short worksheet identifying one savings goal, its time horizon in years, and a plain-language description of how much short-term fluctuation they could tolerate without panicking or changing course, as a starting point for a conversation with a qualified advisor.
Supports this principle: S5 asks the church to invest long-horizon funds prudently rather than impulsively; this complement builds the same disciplined, horizon-aware mindset in the households the church serves.
This is general financial education only and describes no specific investment product, fund or strategy; it is not investment advice, and households should consult a qualified, independent, licensed investment professional before making any investment decision.
Discussion prompts
- Which funding-source option — income-based, surplus-based, or a combination — best fits our church's actual financial pattern over the last three years?
- What use restriction would most protect this fund from being diverted during a difficult budget year?
- Does our projected fund balance actually reach our top-priority gap within a timeframe our leadership and congregation would consider reasonable?
- Who will be accountable for reporting this fund's balance and formula compliance at every board meeting?
Reflection: What would it take for our leadership to honor this funding formula even in the leanest year we can imagine?
Use these prompts to prepare your own response before the group discussion. Honest differences help the church identify where further work is needed.
Lesson 3: Prudent Stewardship of Long-Horizon Funds
What you will learn: Draft a written investment policy statement for any invested Future Ministry Fund balances, grounded in the church's time horizon, risk tolerance and a qualified-advisor referral process.
90 minutes · Pastor, treasurer, finance committee chair, and, where available, a congregation member with relevant licensed professional background acting only in an advisory, non-decision-making capacity
Scripture lens — Proverbs 21:5
The thoughts of the diligent tend only to plenteousness; but of every one that is hasty only to want.
King James Version (KJV) · Public domain
This proverb contrasts diligent, careful planning with hasty action, directly relevant to a leadership team deciding how invested long-horizon funds should be managed rather than chasing quick or unexamined decisions.
Materials and evidence you will use
- Future Ministry Fund Charter and Funding Formula
- Current statements for any existing invested balances
- A list of qualified advisor categories: investment advisor, CPA or tax professional, attorney, insurance professional
- A time horizon and risk tolerance grounded in the vision map
- A documented, independent advisor-engagement plan
By the end of this lesson, you should be able to
- Leadership can state the fund's investment time horizon and risk tolerance in plain language
- A draft investment policy statement exists covering diversification, cost review, prohibited practices and rebalancing
- The team has identified the qualified, independent categories of advisor needed to implement the policy responsibly
- A named owner exists for reviewing investment performance, fees and policy compliance at least annually
Study reading
Understand the concept
Your work in this lesson focuses on this outcome: Draft a written investment policy statement for any invested Future Ministry Fund balances, grounded in the church's time horizon, risk tolerance and a qualified-advisor referral process.
Diligence, not haste, protects a fund meant to serve the church for a decade; today's investment policy statement gives leadership a written, prudent framework for growing it responsibly.
Why it matters for your church
Long-horizon church funds left entirely uninvested may lose real purchasing power over a decade to inflation, while funds invested carelessly risk loss right when they are needed.
A written investment policy statement protects the church from both hasty, pressured decisions and prolonged inaction.
Engaging a qualified, independent advisor, rather than relying solely on a well-meaning volunteer's opinion, reduces conflict-of-interest risk and improves decision quality.
Examine the evidence
Use Future Ministry Fund Charter and Funding Formula, Current statements for any existing invested balances, and A list of qualified advisor categories: investment advisor, CPA or tax professional, attorney, insurance professional to compare your church's present practice with its stated intentions. Look for documented patterns, missing information, and differences between what people assume and what the evidence supports.
Your completed work should be supported by A time horizon and risk tolerance grounded in the vision map, and A documented, independent advisor-engagement plan. Record uncertainty honestly so your team knows what still needs to be verified.
Prepare for the shared exercise
Draft a written, product-neutral investment policy statement for the Future Ministry Fund covering time horizon, risk tolerance, diversification, cost review, prohibited practices and qualified-advisor engagement. The Investment Policy Statement Draft produces the Investment Policy Statement Draft, which contributes to the principle's principal deliverable.
Before working with your team, consider this reflection: Where in our current handling of long-horizon funds have we favored either fearful inaction or hasty enthusiasm over written, diligent policy?
Key terms
- Investment policy statement: A written document stating a fund's time horizon, risk tolerance, diversification requirements, cost-review commitment and prohibited practices, used to guide investment decisions consistently over time.
- Diversification: Spreading invested funds across many different holdings to reduce the impact of any single holding performing poorly.
- Qualified independent advisor: A licensed professional — investment, tax, legal or insurance — engaged to advise on a decision without a conflicting personal or financial interest in the outcome.
Failure patterns to avoid
- Leaving a growing long-horizon fund entirely in low-yield accounts indefinitely out of fear or unfamiliarity with investing
- Investing based on a single enthusiastic recommendation without independent verification or a written policy to test it against
- Failing to review costs and fees annually, allowing them to quietly erode fund growth over many years
Ministry case — A Fund Left Idle for a Decade
A synthetic congregation, Fictional Hillcrest Fellowship, had accumulated a future-ministry balance of roughly $220,000, an illustrative figure, over nine years, all held in a standard checking account earning negligible interest. Leadership had discussed investing it several times but always tabled the conversation, uncertain how to proceed responsibly and wary of making a mistake.
After drafting a written investment policy statement naming a conservative-to-moderate risk tolerance appropriate to the fund's eight-to-ten-year horizon, the board engaged an independent, licensed investment advisor recommended by their denomination's stewardship office, reviewed the advisor's fee structure against two alternatives, and moved a defined portion of the balance into a diversified allocation consistent with the policy, while keeping a near-term segment in stable, insured accounts for the priority the vision map expected to fund within three years.
Lesson takeaway: Diligence, not haste, protects a fund meant to serve the church for a decade; today's investment policy statement gives leadership a written, prudent framework for growing it responsibly.
Exercise — Investment Policy Statement Draft (produces: Investment Policy Statement Draft)
Draft a written, product-neutral investment policy statement for the Future Ministry Fund covering time horizon, risk tolerance, diversification, cost review, prohibited practices and qualified-advisor engagement.
- State the fund's time horizon in years, tied to the ten-year vision map's priority timeline.
- State the fund's institutional risk tolerance in plain language.
- Draft a diversification requirement without naming any specific fund or product.
- Draft a cost-review commitment stating how often and how fees will be reviewed.
- List at least three prohibited practices for the fund.
- Draft the qualified-advisor engagement clause naming which advisor categories will be engaged and how independence will be confirmed.
- Assign a named owner for the annual investment review to the board.
Worksheet columns: Policy section · Draft language · Rationale · Owner · Annual review date
Saves as you typeInvestment Policy Statement Draft
Complete the Investment Policy Statement Draft here. Your answers are kept under your name and are waiting for you when you return.
Investment Policy Statement Draft # Policy section Draft language Rationale Owner Annual review date 1 2 3 4 5 6 Saving keeps it private to you; submitting shares it with your coach and church panel.Worked sample — Fictional Hillcrest Fellowship (illustrative example — not actual church data) (illustrative, scored 19/20)
Fictional Hillcrest Fellowship is a synthetic congregation of about 400 attendees used here to illustrate a completed investment policy statement draft.
Investment Policy Statement Draft adopted covering both fund segments, with an independent advisor search authorized and a near-term segment already secured in stable accounts.
- The finance committee was authorized to interview two independent, licensed investment advisors and bring a recommendation to the full board within 60 days.
- The near-term segment was moved into insured, stable accounts immediately, pending the advisor engagement for the long-term segment.
The policy was thorough, segmented by horizon, and grounded in the Lesson 1 vision map, with a clear and independent advisor-engagement process, though the cost-review benchmark did not yet specify a maximum acceptable fee range.
BAG Index complementInvestment costs and fees, and why they compound against you
Just as the church's investment policy statement commits leadership to reviewing fees annually because costs quietly erode long-horizon growth, households need to understand that investment costs and fees compound over time exactly like returns do, except working against the saver rather than for them. Small percentage differences in fees can add up to large differences in an eventual balance over many years.
Teaching points
- • Investment costs come in several forms: expense ratios on funds, advisory fees, account fees and transaction costs, and all of them reduce the amount that actually stays invested and compounding.
- • Because fees are typically charged as a percentage of assets, a seemingly small difference — for example between a lower-cost and higher-cost option — can compound into a substantial difference in an ending balance over one or two decades.
- • Lower cost does not automatically mean better, and higher cost does not automatically mean worse service or performance; the discipline is to know what is being paid and to ask whether it is justified, not to assume either extreme.
- • Total cost is often not obvious from a single number; households benefit from asking directly for an all-in cost estimate covering every fee category before committing.
- • Reviewing costs periodically, the same way the church's investment policy statement requires an annual fee review, is a simple, repeatable habit that protects long-term growth.
Household practice step: Households complete a short worksheet listing every investment or retirement account they hold, and commit to requesting a plain-language, all-in cost disclosure for each from the account provider or a qualified advisor within the next 30 days.
Supports this principle: S5's investment policy statement models disciplined, annual cost review for church funds; this complement extends that same fee-literacy discipline to the households the church is discipling in stewardship.
This is general financial education about how costs affect long-term growth, not advice about any specific account, fund or fee structure; households should review actual costs and alternatives with a qualified, independent, licensed financial or investment professional.
Discussion prompts
- What time horizon and risk tolerance best fit our Future Ministry Fund given our ten-year vision map?
- What would tempt our leadership to skip the qualified-advisor step, and how does our policy guard against that?
- How will we communicate to the congregation that invested funds are managed conservatively and reviewed independently?
- What specific practice should our policy explicitly prohibit, given our church's particular history or temptations?
Reflection: Where in our current handling of long-horizon funds have we favored either fearful inaction or hasty enthusiasm over written, diligent policy?
Use these prompts to prepare your own response before the group discussion. Honest differences help the church identify where further work is needed.
Lesson 4: Deciding, Approving and Reviewing Investments in Ministry
What you will learn: Adopt a written decision, approval and review framework that governs how future-ministry investment proposals are made, evaluated, approved and revisited.
90 minutes · Full board or governing body, pastor, treasurer, and the leads from Lessons 1 through 3
Scripture lens — Proverbs 15:22
Without counsel purposes are disappointed: but in the multitude of counsellors they are established.
King James Version (KJV) · Public domain
This proverb ties good outcomes directly to a multitude of counselors weighing in before a decision is finalized, a fitting foundation for a lesson establishing a formal proposal, evaluation and approval process rather than allowing any single leader to decide alone.
Materials and evidence you will use
- Ten-Year Capacity and Calling Vision Map
- Future Ministry Fund Charter and Funding Formula
- Investment Policy Statement Draft
- Framework tested against a real past decision
- A named owner for tracking proposals and scheduling reviews
By the end of this lesson, you should be able to
- Leadership has adopted a written framework naming who may propose, who evaluates, who approves and at what dollar thresholds
- A standard proposal template exists requiring a tie to the ten-year vision map and the Future Ministry Fund
- A recurring post-implementation review schedule has been set for every approved investment above a stated threshold
- The team can name at least one past decision that would have gone differently under this new framework
Study reading
Understand the concept
Your work in this lesson focuses on this outcome: Adopt a written decision, approval and review framework that governs how future-ministry investment proposals are made, evaluated, approved and revisited.
Good counsel, sought consistently through a written framework rather than occasionally through a hallway conversation, is what turns a funded vision into well-stewarded ministry capacity.
Why it matters for your church
Without tiered approval thresholds, significant investment decisions can be made by a single enthusiastic leader without adequate counsel or evaluation.
A standard proposal template filters out impulsive or disconnected ideas early while still giving strong ideas a clear path to be evaluated fairly.
Skipping post-implementation review means the church repeats the same estimating and planning mistakes across successive investments instead of learning from them.
Examine the evidence
Use Ten-Year Capacity and Calling Vision Map, Future Ministry Fund Charter and Funding Formula, and Investment Policy Statement Draft to compare your church's present practice with its stated intentions. Look for documented patterns, missing information, and differences between what people assume and what the evidence supports.
Your completed work should be supported by Framework tested against a real past decision, and A named owner for tracking proposals and scheduling reviews. Record uncertainty honestly so your team knows what still needs to be verified.
Prepare for the shared exercise
Adopt a written, tiered decision framework with a standard proposal template and a mandatory post-implementation review schedule for future-ministry investments. The Decision, Approval and Review Framework produces the Decision, Approval and Review Framework, which contributes to the principle's principal deliverable.
Before working with your team, consider this reflection: Which of our past ministry investment decisions, examined honestly through today's framework, would we make differently now?
Key terms
- Approval threshold: A dollar amount above which a proposed expenditure or investment requires a specified higher level of review or approval.
- Proposal template: A standard written form required for any future-ministry investment proposal, tying it to the vision map, a funding source and an expected impact.
- Post-implementation review: A scheduled evaluation, conducted after an investment is completed, assessing whether it achieved its stated purpose and what should be learned for future decisions.
Failure patterns to avoid
- Setting approval thresholds so low that routine ministry spending is needlessly slowed down, breeding resentment toward the process
- Requiring a proposal template but never actually enforcing its use, so decisions revert to informal influence and whoever speaks loudest
- Approving major investments without ever scheduling the post-implementation review, so lessons from past decisions are lost
Ministry case — The Renovation Decided in a Hallway Conversation
A synthetic congregation, Fictional Maple Street Church, approved a $95,000 renovation of its youth space, an illustrative figure, after a hallway conversation between the pastor and one board member led to a verbal go-ahead before the full board ever discussed the project formally. Costs ran nearly 40 percent over the original estimate, in part because only one contractor bid had ever been obtained, and no one had checked the project against the church's broader facility priorities.
In this module's debrief, leadership recognized that a proposal template requiring two independent estimates and an explicit tie to the ten-year vision map would very likely have caught both problems before money was spent. Adopting the tiered approval framework the following month, the church's next major investment — a technology platform integration — went through finance-committee review, came in under its estimated budget, and had its post-implementation review already scheduled on the calendar at the moment of approval.
Lesson takeaway: Good counsel, sought consistently through a written framework rather than occasionally through a hallway conversation, is what turns a funded vision into well-stewarded ministry capacity.
Exercise — Decision, Approval and Review Framework (produces: Decision, Approval and Review Framework)
Adopt a written, tiered decision framework with a standard proposal template and a mandatory post-implementation review schedule for future-ministry investments.
- Set three dollar-amount approval tiers appropriate to the church's budget size.
- Define who may approve at each tier and what documentation is required.
- Draft the standard proposal template fields, requiring a tie to the vision map and a named funding source. Complete it online
- Test the tiers and template against the past decision case study. Complete it online
- Set the post-implementation review timing (six to twelve months) and required content for investments above the middle threshold.
- Assign a named owner to maintain the proposal template and track pending proposals and scheduled reviews. Complete it online
- Adopt the completed framework as part of the Future Ministry Investment Plan.
Worksheet columns: Approval tier · Dollar threshold · Approver(s) · Required documentation · Post-implementation review timing
Saves as you typeDecision, Approval and Review Framework
Complete the Decision, Approval and Review Framework here. Your answers are kept under your name and are waiting for you when you return.
Decision, Approval and Review Framework # Approval tier Dollar threshold Approver(s) Required documentation Post-implementation review timing 1 2 3 Saving keeps it private to you; submitting shares it with your coach and church panel.Worked sample — Fictional Maple Street Church (illustrative example — not actual church data) (illustrative, scored 19/20)
Fictional Maple Street Church is a synthetic congregation of about 310 attendees used here to illustrate a completed decision, approval and review framework.
Decision, Approval and Review Framework adopted with three tiers, a standard proposal template requiring vision-map ties and independent estimates for major items, and mandatory post-implementation reviews scheduled at approval.
- The board formally adopted the three-tier framework and the accompanying proposal template effective immediately.
- The finance committee chair was named the owner of tracking pending proposals and scheduling every required post-implementation review at the moment of approval.
The framework was tested rigorously against a real past decision and closed the specific gap that had caused a cost overrun, though the Tier 1 threshold's reporting requirement was left slightly underspecified.
BAG Index complementRetirement and long-horizon saving vehicles for households
Just as the church has built a disciplined, decision-governed Future Ministry Fund for its own long-horizon needs, households benefit from understanding the basic categories of retirement and long-horizon saving vehicles available to them, so their own decade-plus stewardship decisions are made with the same clarity and discipline modeled in this module.
Teaching points
- • Common long-horizon saving vehicles include employer-sponsored retirement plans, individual retirement accounts, and taxable investment accounts, each with different tax treatment, contribution rules and withdrawal restrictions.
- • Many employer-sponsored plans offer a matching contribution up to a certain percentage of pay; missing that match, where available, generally means leaving available compensation unclaimed.
- • Tax treatment varies by account type — some vehicles reduce taxable income now with taxes owed later, others use after-tax contributions with tax-free qualified withdrawals — and the right mix depends on an individual household's full financial picture.
- • Early withdrawal from most retirement-designated accounts before a specified age typically carries taxes and penalties, which is why these vehicles are best matched to money genuinely intended for the long horizon.
- • A written, simple personal review — what accounts exist, what the employer match is, and whether it is being fully used — is a practical first step before considering any account changes.
Household practice step: Households complete a short worksheet listing every retirement or long-horizon account they hold, noting whether an employer match is available and currently being fully claimed, and identifying one question to bring to a qualified tax or financial professional.
Supports this principle: S5 models disciplined, decade-plus stewardship of church funds through governance and review; this complement extends that same long-horizon discipline to households building their own retirement and future security.
This is general financial education describing categories of accounts, not advice about any specific account, contribution amount or tax strategy; households should consult a qualified, independent tax or financial professional before making retirement account decisions.
Discussion prompts
- What dollar thresholds for our three approval tiers actually fit the size of our church's budget and typical decisions?
- Which past decision, examined honestly, most needed a formal proposal and review process?
- How will we make sure the post-implementation review actually happens rather than being forgotten a year from now?
- How do we introduce this framework to ministry leaders as a support for good ideas rather than a barrier?
Reflection: Which of our past ministry investment decisions, examined honestly through today's framework, would we make differently now?
Use these prompts to prepare your own response before the group discussion. Honest differences help the church identify where further work is needed.
Rate this principle
Rate each area from 0 to 4 as the church is today, not as you hope it will be.
- 0 — Not Established: Nothing is in place for this area today.
- 1 — Emerging: Something has been started but it is informal and inconsistent.
- 2 — Developing: It works in parts of the church but is not documented or dependable.
- 3 — Established: It is documented, consistently followed and reviewed.
- 4 — Exemplary: It is a strength others could learn from, with evidence to prove it.
1. Ten-Year Vision Clarity
Weighted 20% of the Invest in Future Ministry score.
What this represents: A written ten-year capacity and calling vision exists, is prioritized, and is reviewed by leadership at least annually against actual progress.
Reference points for your rating
- 0 — Not established:
- Leadership has never discussed facility, technology or staffing needs beyond the current budget year, and no written vision exists.
- 2 — Developing:
- A rough list of future needs exists, but it has not been prioritized, costed or connected to the church's stated calling and growth trajectory.
- 4 — Exemplary:
- The ten-year vision is actively used to guide every major facility, technology and staffing decision, is refreshed on a fixed cycle, and is understood by the whole leadership team, not only the pastor.
Use the closest reference point, then select 1 or 3 when your church falls between two descriptions.
2. Future Ministry Fund Discipline
Weighted 20% of the Invest in Future Ministry score.
What this represents: A written Future Ministry Fund charter and funding formula are adopted, and contributions are made on the agreed schedule most years.
Reference points for your rating
- 0 — Not established:
- No dedicated fund or account exists for future ministry investment; any surplus is spent or absorbed into general operations.
- 2 — Developing:
- A funding formula has been proposed but not formally adopted, and contributions happen inconsistently depending on the year's finances.
- 4 — Exemplary:
- The Future Ministry Fund is funded consistently regardless of a given year's ups and downs, its balance and use are reported to leadership regularly, and it has already funded at least one planned future-ministry investment.
Use the closest reference point, then select 1 or 3 when your church falls between two descriptions.
3. Prudent Investment Stewardship
Weighted 20% of the Invest in Future Ministry score.
What this represents: A written investment policy statement is adopted, a qualified, independent advisor has been engaged for implementation, and costs and diversification are reviewed periodically.
Reference points for your rating
- 0 — Not established:
- Long-horizon balances, if they exist, sit in accounts chosen without any written policy, risk consideration or qualified advice.
- 2 — Developing:
- A draft investment policy statement exists covering horizon and risk tolerance, but diversification, cost review and advisor engagement are incomplete.
- 4 — Exemplary:
- The investment policy statement is followed consistently, reviewed annually against actual performance and fees, and leadership can explain, in plain language, why each holding fits the church's stated risk tolerance and time horizon.
Use the closest reference point, then select 1 or 3 when your church falls between two descriptions.
4. Decision and Approval Governance
Weighted 20% of the Invest in Future Ministry score.
What this represents: A written decision framework defines who proposes, evaluates and approves future-ministry investments above a stated dollar threshold, and it is followed.
Reference points for your rating
- 0 — Not established:
- Future-ministry investment decisions are made informally by whoever happens to raise the idea, with no defined approval threshold or process.
- 2 — Developing:
- A rough approval threshold exists informally, but proposals are inconsistent in quality and are not routinely brought back for post-investment review.
- 4 — Exemplary:
- The decision framework is followed consistently, every major investment has a documented post-implementation review, and lessons from past decisions visibly shape how new proposals are evaluated.
Use the closest reference point, then select 1 or 3 when your church falls between two descriptions.
5. Review and Accountability Rhythm
Weighted 20% of the Invest in Future Ministry score.
What this represents: Future-ministry investments are reviewed on a fixed annual schedule, with findings reported to the full leadership team.
Reference points for your rating
- 0 — Not established:
- No one revisits past future-ministry investments to check whether they achieved their intended purpose.
- 2 — Developing:
- A review is planned but has not yet become a fixed, recurring calendar item that leadership actually keeps.
- 4 — Exemplary:
- The annual review rhythm is fully institutionalized, findings are used to refine the ten-year vision and funding formula, and successes and shortfalls are both discussed candidly.
Use the closest reference point, then select 1 or 3 when your church falls between two descriptions.
90-day plan for Invest in Future Ministry
Name the first three moves, who owns each one and when it is due.
Completion checklist
- • All four lessons marked complete
- • All four exercises submitted
- • Required evidence uploaded
- • Named principal deliverable generated and approved
- • 90-day action plan created with owners and dates
- • Coach review recorded
0 of 4 exercises written · 0 of 5 areas rated
Leland Rubin
5
Participant Workbook
Sample contents created by Allan Bell - CPA, CMA, MBA, for illustrative purposes.
What happens to these answers
Approval sits with people, not the software.
- Individual answers are held for the coach. Church reporting, board packs and the printed workbook show compiled scores and themes only.
- Leland's Seven Stewardship Principles methodology, content, exercises and deliverables are created by Leland Rubin and remain in author-review draft pending his approval.
- Prototype: responses live in this browser session only. No invitations, emails or text messages are sent, and nothing is written to a server.
A partnership between Leland Rubin, creator of the Seven Stewardship Principles, and Allan Bell - CPA, CMA, MBA, Nsites founder and creator.