Faith In Action® National Program Report

Of the 1,715 Faith in Action projects that RWJF funded, some 1,048 projects either closed or did not meet updated criteria for inclusion in the program.

What happened to those 1,000 projects?

In some ways, it should not be surprising that so many projects did not continue, reflected RWJF Program Associate Ann Pomphrey.

Faith in Action project directors were asked to take on an almost impossible task: start and maintain a coalition, serve a vulnerable population, raise funds, drum up volunteers, publicize the project in the community and recruit and maintain a board of directors—all for no more than $35,000 for the Phase 2 and Phase 3 projects.

Little Money for a Huge Task
"The amount of money we provided was very small," said Pomphrey. "We assumed and hoped that the new projects would bring to the table some local funding, which would enable the project to hire a full-time executive director. The reality was that more often than not, there was no extra money."

According to Pomphrey, for much of the duration of Faith in Action, the emphasis was on funding a large quantity of projects rather than seeking out the best quality. Some of the projects funded were small, serving a handful of people and were never going to grow, she reflected.

Some funded projects expressed distress that RWJF concentrated on funding new projects rather than giving additional funding to existing projects to strengthen and sustain them. Tom Brown, the national program director of Faith in Action, Phase 3, said that many congregations that became program sites were not equipped to run what was essentially a social service project and did not have the necessary financial or governance controls in place.

Unprotected by Umbrella Organizations
What's more, some Faith in Action projects operating under the umbrella of larger social service organizations were often disbanded once RWJF funding ran out or the umbrella organization was no longer able to support it.

In other cases, the staff members of the projects simply did not do the work or violated the conditions of the grants. During the course of the program, RWJF terminated nine projects for these reasons, according to Pomphrey. Of those nine, two were terminated for proselytizing and seven were cut short for "noncompliance" with the terms of the grant—that is, there was no indication that they were providing Faith in Action services.

In some cases, there was no project director or advisory board in place. In others, projects never provided required reports about their work.

A Top Faith in Action Project Closes its Doors
Even the best run Faith in Action projects had difficulty, Pomphrey reported. Coastal Caregivers, a project in Point Pleasant, N.J., (RWJF grant ID# 029859) was headed by a thoughtful and energetic leader who took the time to establish an infrastructure to support the project. The director, a former manager of a large grocery store, set up a computer system, developed plans to financially support the project and encouraged the board of directors to take an active role in the project's work.

The project could point to some impressive results in 2001: it had 400 active volunteers and 1,223 care recipients. It had funding from other foundations, the state of New Jersey, town governments in the project area, the United Way, churches, volunteers and fundraisers.

But a few years later, the project shut down. According to the RWJF program office, the project had financial difficulties because promised funding from the state did not materialize and the board decided that the organization did not have sufficient funds to continue.

Caregiver Volunteers of Central Jersey, located in nearby Toms River, N.J., absorbed some of the Point Pleasant project's services, Lynnette Whiteman, executive director of Caregiver Volunteers, said that they had a staff member working 20 hours a week in the area that the Point Pleasant project served. However, the part-time staffer was serving only a fraction of the number of people that the Faith in Action project used to serve, Whiteman said. She also found it was difficult to re-build trust among the project's original volunteers who were wary about the staying power of her organization.

Budget Fears
Even the Toms River project, which had an annual budget of $400,000, was at risk, Whiteman said in October 2008.

"There is so much competition for money," she observed. "There is a limited pot, especially from businesses in the area. Everybody is stretched so thin. And senior citizens are not a sexy issue. Businesses don't see this as something that affects them in the community. I think [all nonprofits] are scared out of their mind," she said. "Me included."

For more information about Coastal Caregivers, see the Grantee Profile.