• Keenan Wellar

    I was hoping this story was less about responding to financial pressures and more about responding to a desire to put an end to “facilities” for people with intellectual/developmental disabilities, but it sounds like things are moving in the right direction, even if the motivations are mixed in nature.

  • michael

    Two stories that relate:

    1) Two years ago I served as Coach to a Board President involved in planning a Capital Campaign. As we projected future space needs, trends in work-from-home and technology meant perhaps we didn’t need as many private office spaces as we have today. The plans were reworked to eliminate 1/3 of permanent offices in favor of open area workstations. This reduced total area square footage by 15% and construction costs by 9%.

    2) Two night ago I attended a Board meeting of a large nonprofit which built a huge new facility in the early 90s. Changes in funding (and technology) have reduced staff from 85 to 60, with vast majority of those reductions taking place in program management positions. As a result there is large chunks of unused space in the builiding….space that nonetheless must be maintained, heated, insured, etc.

    Bricks and Mortar are expensive. All nonprofit boards should be asking “Do we know enough about the future to invest in ownership, or should we opt for the flexibility of leasing?”