IBJNews

Not-for-profit Leadership Ventures calling it quits

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

An Indianapolis-based not-for-profit that trains board members of volunteer organizations will cease operations June 30.

In a letter to supporters sent Thursday, Leadership Ventures’ President Ruth Purcell-Jones and Board Chairman Lee Lewellen attributed the closing to declining revenue tied to the economic downturn. Both donations and client fees have fallen in recent years.

Leadership Ventures has been hit particularly hard, Purcell-Jones told IBJ, because of its status as what’s known in the industry as an “intermediary” that serves other not-for-profits.

“[Donors’] focus, for the most part, is on direct services to those that are in the most need,” she said. “So professional development is not something, at this moment, that is at the tops of most people's minds.”

The past few years have been difficult for the organization. Leadership Ventures ran a deficit of more than $303,000 in its last two fiscal years, according to the IRS Form 990 it filed in 2009.

Contributions dwindled from $141,085 in 2008 to $99,800 last year, and other revenue fell from $322,458 to $241,625 during the same period.

Leadership Ventures launched 12 years ago as a program of founder Katherine Tyler Scott. Originally called Trustee Leadership Development, it achieved official not-for-profit status in 2006. The organization has two employees, down from seven last year, according to the organization's 990.

A feasibility study done by Indianapolis-based consulting firm Achieve concluded that, while a need for not-for-profit training exists, the financial resources are lacking, Purcell-Jones and Lewellen said in their letter.

For intermediaries such as Leadership Ventures to be successful, especially in the difficult economic climate, they need to convey the value they contribute as clearly as they can, said Angela White, chief operating officer of Johnson Grossnickle and Associates in Greenwood.

Take for instance United Way of Central Indiana, she said.

“They’re not directly feeding the hungry, but they’re allocating funds to organizations that do,” White said, acknowledging that it also is a much larger organization. “What’s the value added for gifting to the intermediary? I think that’s the key.”

One of Leadership Ventures’ flagship events, the Board Chair Summit, now will be presented by Lacy Leadership Association, which agreed to assume ownership. The first summit, held in January, gave not-for-profit leaders the opportunity to come together to learn new practices and share ideas with one another.

Leadership Ventures has provided training for more than 30,000 not-for-profit board and staff members, Purcell-Jones said.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • good intentions
    While the cause was (remains) a good one, my experience in these fields led me to believe this organization tried to grow too big too fast, a bit like the late Executive Service Corps. When your payroll balloons, you have to feed the beast and you may begin to lose focus on the doable part of your mission. Smaller is better in my book.
  • Is that the whole story?
    Trustee Leadership Development was always a controversial organization because it's founder could not practice what she preached. That left sour grapes and a hint of inconsistency with many folks that they dealt with locally. I wonder if, following the departure of the founder, things never got onto a level keel?
  • Sad news
    I had the honor of meeting Ruth a few years back and have always been impressed with the focus of Leadership Ventures. As someone who has sat on various not for profit boards, I am sad that a key leadership development organization will not be a player helping to train and prepare future leaders.

    I encourage her to find a way to make it work in another approach. It really is that important.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.

ADVERTISEMENT