CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) AND SCSBC’S RESPONSE: Find the lastest updates here for students, faculty and staff.
CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) AND SCSBC’S RESPONSE: Find the lastest updates here for students, faculty and staff.
It is no secret that the work of a board of directors of a Christian school is much more sophisticated than it was 50, 30, or even ten years ago. Many current boards navigate issues that require professional legal support, work hard to maintain school community unity amid a smorgasbord of contentious and divisive issues both within and outside the church, and respond to steadily rising expectations of what a “good” school looks like for families.
All of this takes place in the context of fluctuating economies, changing local and state/provincial political landscapes, and an increasingly consumer-oriented mentality among prospective parents—often during challenging financial times. Taken together, these realities point to a clear need for boards that are high-functioning and effective.
One of the goals of SCSBC is to support the achievement of that reality. One key measure of a high-functioning and effective board is its makeup: who is on the board, what skills and dispositions they bring to the table, and how well they represent the richness and depth of the community they serve.
High-functioning boards are diverse. As “iron sharpens iron,” a board with diverse ideas and perspectives creates the opportunity for strong decision-making. I say “create the opportunity” intentionally, because diversity can derail a board if members are not fully united around the school’s mission and vision and committed to filtering all decisions through those shared commitments.
In fact, the word ‘diversity’ should really be ‘diversities’. The first diversity focus is on ensuring that a strong board includes members with varying skills and abilities.
skill-based diversity:
Building a Well-Rounded Board
There should be members skilled in human and social processes—such as counselors or therapists—who can manage difficult interpersonal dynamics and ensure a fair process. There should be entrepreneurial-minded members who think outside the box about financial management, marketing, school growth, and program change. Boards also benefit from members well-versed in financial management who can track fiduciary risks and opportunities with skill and care.
In addition, there should be members serving in ministry roles who can provide spiritual leadership and help the board remain sensitive to the realities of not-for-profit service. Members with legal backgrounds can assist the board in avoiding unnecessary risk and ensuring compliance with local, state/provincial, and federal requirements. Some members should genuinely enjoy policy work and be willing to review and improve board policies.
There should be more than one person capable of leading the board—individuals who can chair effective meetings, set purposeful agendas in collaboration with the head of school, and address the community publicly with poise and confidence. Boards also need strong advocates for students and student learning, as well as passionate parents committed to student success. Members with experience in non-profit governance can help keep the board aligned with best practices in policy, procedure, and accountability.
Most boards will not have all of these attributes represented at once, but ideally, they will pursue them intentionally over time.
Representing the Church Community
The second diversity pertains directly to the community the school serves. Who are the various church constituent groups, and do the board members include representatives of those perspectives?
These board members are not present to vote in allegiance with their church membership or pastor, but rather to bring insight into the experiences and viewpoints of those groups. While decisions are not made to please everyone, they should be made with a clear understanding of how different communities may be affected and how they might respond.
Gender and Ethnicity in Board Leadership
The third diversity focuses on gender and ethnicity. It is important that staff members and students can see themselves reflected in their leadership. If a school community is primarily made up of three or four ethnic groups, it is ideal for the board to reflect that reality.
Our diverse ethnic and cultural heritages bring different perspectives to complex issues, enrich board conversations, and strengthen final decisions. Gender balance also matters. Without diving into a sociological study of gendered discourse norms, boards with balanced gender representation often experience healthier discussion, stronger listening practices, and greater trust—especially in the face of disagreement.
That is a lot to keep in mind as a board seeks to remain strong and capable moving forward. The most effective way to track all of this is to use two board matrices.
Board Matrix #1: Understanding the Present
Board Matrix #1 is a snapshot of the current board (see Appendix A, above). Board members identify their skills and abilities, gender, ethnicity, church affiliation, and the number of years remaining in their term. This process highlights both strengths and gaps, helping the board understand where its collective capacity is strong and where it needs development.
Board Matrix #2: Preparing for the Future
Board Matrix #2 (the same as Matrix #1 but filled with potential rather than current names) focuses on future board members. This chart outlines desired skills and abilities, gender, ethnicity, and church affiliation for potential candidates and serves as a guide for recruitment and nomination.
The goal is to populate this second matrix with multiple names in each category. Ideally, a board committee—often called the governance or nomination & recruitment committee—oversees this work in collaboration with the head of school.
This group brainstorms potential candidates from the community, seeking individuals who can meet both current and anticipated board needs. While this work is ongoing, it typically intensifies every three years as the committee makes a concerted effort to build a robust future board matrix.
This process includes interviewing potential candidates, discussing their support for the school’s mission and vision, exploring the skills they would bring to the board, and considering how they would collaborate with fellow board members and the head of school. Candidates are also asked to review key documents such as the trustee commitment letter, community standards, strategic plan, and budget, and to reflect on whether they can support and endorse the school’s direction.
A strong Board Matrix #2 includes multiple candidates in each category, with each person having consented to have their name stand for possible board service within the next one to four years. This intentionality reduces risk and supports long-term governance health.
Finally, from this future matrix, the board selects a slate of candidates equal to the number of available board positions and asks the community to affirm the recommendation. Running candidates against one another often weakens the board, as those not elected frequently decline to stand again, resulting in the loss of strong potential trustees.
That said, a process of affirmation demands full transparency. If a board is perceived as limiting the slate to advance a particular ideological agenda, trust erodes, and the process can quickly stall.
A rigorous board selection and election process requires time and energy. However, our schools deserve the strongest boards possible—boards capable of making wise, faithful decisions that advance the school’s mission and vision for the long term.
Dave Loewen
SCSBC Executive Director
