Is it fair to assume that the board members of a charitable nonprofit all understand their organization’s mission? After all, why would they have been elected or willing to serve unless they understood and had some important feelings about the mission?

Of course, board members have a fiduciary duty to know and act on their organization’s mission. Many understandably consider the mission of an organization to be the statement on its website and recent charitable solicitations and publications. But that may not be the case if such statement is outside of the purpose statement in the organization’s governing documents (e.g., articles of incorporation and bylaws).

Some organizations also have multiple mission statements, depending on where they are stated (e.g., website, grant application, IRS Form 990). That can result in the lack of a unified direction, confusion, and even conflict among board members, staff members, the charitable class being served, funders, regulators, and others.

The law requires board members of charitable nonprofits to act in the organization’s best interests in light of its purpose. See Restatement of the Law: Duty of Loyalty. This is what makes a singular mission statement important.

The purpose, when clearly defined, should inform the organization’s resource allocation, including as it may relate to their investments in advocacy and intergenerational equity (i.e., balancing current mission delivery with future mission delivery).

For example, a food bank might have one of the following mission statements: (1) to provide food to those in need, (2) to prevent hunger, or (3) to end food insecurity. While many may discount the very significant differences in these mission statements, a closer examination may suggest different strategies and uses of its charitable assets.

1. Providing food to those in need suggests that the organization’s efforts should be focused on addressing immediate and ongoing needs, which likely should include some policy advocacy (e.g., policies affecting access to food assistance, the availability of nutritious food in the community, and donations of food)
2. Preventing hunger suggests that the organization’s efforts should be focused on (1) addressing immediate and ongoing needs and (2) research and policy advocacy (including on income and economic security and food affordability).
3. Ending food insecurity suggests that the organization’s efforts should be focused more on research and policy advocacy (including on economic drivers impacting food security) than addressing immediate and ongoing needs.

If a nonprofit’s activities and its leaders’ decision-making must be mission-centric and purpose-driven, clarity on the organization’s mission is critical.

Additional Resources

The Mission Statement: Some New Thoughts.

Purpose-Driven Board Leadership (BoardSource)