1
FUS Governance Forum
April 30th
& May 1st
, 2011
• Necessity for Change
• Key Goals
• Impact of Recommended Changes
– Bo...
2
The Need for Change
• Senior Lay Leaders and Staff have recognized the need for change
for years
– Vision 2000
– Attempt...
3
Key Goals
Unleash our full potential by:
•Having the Board focus on defining the mission/priorities, governing and
overs...
4
Impact of Recommended Changes - Board
• Clearly define the role of the Board as one of:
– Discerning the mission that st...
5
Impact of Recommended Changes - Board
• Streamlining the size and structure of the Board
– Reduce members from 11 to 7 (...
6
Impact of Recommended Changes - Staff
• Board has clearly delegated the responsibility to “carry out the
ministry” to th...
7
Impact of Recommended Changes - Staff
• Clear Requirements established on how evaluation process will
work at FUS
– Annu...
8
Impact of Recommended Changes –
Councils/Committees
• Disbanding Current Council and Committee Structure
– Created too m...
9
Impact of Recommended Changes –
Members/Volunteers
• New Structure should create more opportunities for input into
Board...
10
Next Steps
• Today – Clarify proposals, answer questions, obtain feedback
• May 14/15 – Members of Board & GTF will be ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Fus governance-forum-slides-may 2011

333
-1

Published on

Slides for the First Unitarian Society of Madison presentation on Governance May 1, 2011.

Published in: Self Improvement, Career
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
333
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Fus governance-forum-slides-may 2011

  1. 1. 1 FUS Governance Forum April 30th & May 1st , 2011 • Necessity for Change • Key Goals • Impact of Recommended Changes – Board of Trustees – Staff – Councils and Committees – Members / Volunteers • Next Steps • Questions/Feedback/Input
  2. 2. 2 The Need for Change • Senior Lay Leaders and Staff have recognized the need for change for years – Vision 2000 – Attempts to better define roles – Internal Structure review – Board hires consultant and creates Governance Task Force • Key Issues –Increasing size and complexity of FUS no longer consistent with our governance model –Board was disappointed by the amount of time it dealt with administrative and “situational” decisions –Staff was unclear on when they needed “permission” and when they had the authority to act –Volunteers were disappointed by the inability to spend time mainly on program work rather than in meetings 2
  3. 3. 3 Key Goals Unleash our full potential by: •Having the Board focus on defining the mission/priorities, governing and oversight with significantly more opportunities for direct input from members •Clearly delegating the power to “manage” to the Staff along with the limits of that power •Provide members with more opportunity and flexibility to bring their creativity and energy to fulfill our mission •Redefine the relationships of our current Councils and Committees to work directly with a staff member rather than report to the Board, and empowering staff to call meetings and recruit volunteers as necessary Output of Our Work: Recommendations for bylaw modifications and an initial set of policies that have the support of the Board, Ministers and Staff. 3
  4. 4. 4 Impact of Recommended Changes - Board • Clearly define the role of the Board as one of: – Discerning the mission that states clear goals and priorities – Evaluating progress toward the achievement of these goals – Monitoring its own work – Governing by creating written policies to guide the work of the staff in carrying out the vision – Better engaging the members on difficult questions and priority setting • Clarifying how the Board will operate: – Agenda setting policy – Establishment of Board Committees to provide incremental support on: • Governance Matters (Governance Committee) • Oversight of Financial health of FUS (Finance Committee) • Personnel Policies and Oversight (Personnel Committee) – Better defining expectations of Board members and when there are conflicts 4
  5. 5. 5 Impact of Recommended Changes - Board • Streamlining the size and structure of the Board – Reduce members from 11 to 7 (more in keeping with new role) – Move to 3 year terms for Board members – Change President role to a 2 year term as President: • Currently: President-Elect, President, Past President • Recommending: President Elect, President for 2 years – Eliminate Treasurer position as an officer of the Board • Replace with Chair of the Finance Committee – Move to a nominating committee that would be elected by the Members • Establishing how the Board will Monitor and Evaluate – Senior Minister will be responsible for reports on staff progress on priorities and compliance with Board polciies – Requires production of financial statements and audit every five years – Systematic updates from staff members on specific program areas 5
  6. 6. 6 Impact of Recommended Changes - Staff • Board has clearly delegated the responsibility to “carry out the ministry” to the staff –Clarifies role, responsibility and limits of power –Creates a clear “head of staff” in the person of the Senior Minister –Sets up clear lines of responsibility for the success of our mission, but does not reduce the need for members to volunteer their time and talents to insure the execution and success of our programs • Creates a more defined structure for Staff Leadership –Senior Minister is clearly defined as being responsible for staff performance –Day-to-day oversight and management will be carried out by a Chief Operating Officer who will report directly to the Senior Minister –Clear expectations established for: • Care for Members and Guests (policies on safety, emergency planning, firearms, discrimination etc. ) • Care for Paid Staff (policies on hiring process, annual reviews, grievances, etc.) • Care for Resources (policies on spending, borrowing, use of gifts, financial controls, insurance, etc.) 6
  7. 7. 7 Impact of Recommended Changes - Staff • Clear Requirements established on how evaluation process will work at FUS – Annual evaluations are part of an ongoing culture of open conversation – Creates a circular evaluation process where the Board evaluates the Senior Ministers role as head of staff, and Senior Minister will evaluate the Board’s effectiveness at fulfilling its role – Creates expectations of an annual review process for all other paid staff, to be conducted by either the COO or their direct supervisor • Includes Ministers relative to their compliance with policies and the consistency of their work with the mission and priorities of FUS – Creates a Triennial Review of Called Ministers by a committee of three members mutually acceptable to the Board and the Ministers • Broader focus 7
  8. 8. 8 Impact of Recommended Changes – Councils/Committees • Disbanding Current Council and Committee Structure – Created too many operating groups that reported to the Board – Created confusion – who was ultimately responsible for program execution/success (Council chair ? Staff ? ) – Created roadblocks to forming new groups that could help fulfill the mission and goals of FUS • New Structure: Ministry Teams – Programmatic goals are not necessarily different – Clarifies that responsibility lies with staff person – Volunteers are directly working on fulfillment of programs – New ministry teams can form quickly and easily, and will receive support from FUS staff as long as they are helping to fulfill the mission – Should create new opportunities for members, including an opportunity to help our staff members coordinate the activities of volunteers 8
  9. 9. 9 Impact of Recommended Changes – Members/Volunteers • New Structure should create more opportunities for input into Board goal setting and defining our mission – Board will annually create a “Vision of Ministry” that sets priorities for the coming year – will hold meetings to gather member input – Board will create a list of “Open Questions” that represent challenging questions where the Board seeks input from members as they work to define the scope of our mission • Policies that create clear expectations of how things will work should improve confidence that FUS is governed effectively and consistent with UU Principles • Ministry Team structure should create more opportunities to use your creativity and energy to help execute our programs in a satisfying manner 9
  10. 10. 10 Next Steps • Today – Clarify proposals, answer questions, obtain feedback • May 14/15 – Members of Board & GTF will be available after services to gather more feedback • June Parish Meeting: – Board is recommending temporary (2-year) bylaw changes that will help enable new structure – needs a 2/3 vote of members present (and a quorum) at the Parish meeting to take effect – Board has affirmed numerous new policies (contained in the FUS Policy Manual) – is asking for a “vote of confidence” on this new direction from the Parish at the June meeting • If Approved: – New Board structure and other bylaws changes will take effect July 1st – Board will vote to formally adopt the new Policies and create new Board committees – Ministry Team structure will begin to take effect – COO search will begin in earnest in Fall (when Michael returns from sabbatical) – Expect new structure to be fully implemented by late 2011 or early 2012 10
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×