Religious Nonprofits Research Articles

The Internal Communication Barriers: A Communication Audit Report of a Nonprofit Organisation

Purpose: The purpose of this research is to investigate the root cause of the Internal Communication Barriers within a non-profit Catholic religious organization which examined three research questions to arrive at a construct. Design/methodology/approach: The research methodology used in this study is the semi-structured interview with the use of open-ended questions. An audiotape is used to record the findings from the research, and the data generated were analyzed and transcribed using qualitative research and thematic analysis. Findings: This study revealed that the internal communication barriers within this organization have to do with several contributing factors such as (the lack of staff meetings, unwillingness to open communication, the lack of entertaining feedback).

Mobilizing Missions in a Disruptive World: International Sports Federation Case Study

Nonprofit organizations have been a part of the US business economy since the late 1800s. Religious nonprofits have seen consistent growth in availability and services for the past several years. With that growth, there is increased competition. The purpose of this case study is to analyze International Sports Federation, a nonprofit organization, and provide recommendations for sustainable growth. Today’s religion-focused organizations find themselves challenged in a disruptive climate. The result of this research is beneficial to scholars and practitioners, so that they can assist religious nonprofit organizations in gaining sustainable success under the lens of disruptive change in the marketplace.

Fundraising efficiency in Buddhist temples in Thailand: An application of the stochastic frontier analysis model

Nonprofit religious organizations play an important role in enhancing social welfare in Buddhist countries. In Thailand, people are typically involved in Buddhist temples at many levels ranging from personal to communal to social. As a result, Buddhist temples in Thailand can conduct fund‐raising activities from donations or merit‐making activities from Thai Buddhists. This study examines the fundraising efficiency of Buddhist temples in Thailand by applying the stochastic frontier analysis model. Our results show that fundraising efficiency of Buddhist temples in Thailand is relatively low. In addition, the results show that government grants have a negative impact (the so‐called the crowding‐out effect) on fundraising efficiency. On the other hand, the use of information and communication technology improves fundraising efficiency of Buddhist temples in Thailand.

PENERAPAN AKUNTANSI, AKUNTABILITAS DAN PENGENDALIAN INTERNAL PADA GEREJA KRISTEN EQUITY JAWA WEDI

This study discusses the application of accounting, accountability andinternal control contained in the Gereja Kristen JawaWedi Klaten, because a lot of corruption in religious institutions. The purpose of this study was to analyze and evaluate the implementation of accounting, accountability and internal controls exist in Gereja Kristen Jawa Wedi Klaten. The method used in this research is qualitative descriptive method, that is by direct observation, interviews, and literature. This research was conducted in Gereja Kristen JawaWediKlaten which is a non-profit religious organization. Research results obtained Gereja Kristen Jawa Wedi Klaten namely the application of accounting, accountability, and internal controls are already well underway, but there are some shortcomings that reporting is not in accordance with IAS 45, the employee who is not competent, and yet there is a good division of labor

PENERAPAN AKUNTANSI, AKUNTABILITAS DAN PENGENDALIAN INTERNAL PADA GEREJA KRISTEN EQUITY JAWA WEDI

This study discusses the application of accounting, accountability andinternal control contained in the Gereja Kristen JawaWedi Klaten, because a lot of corruption in religious institutions. The purpose of this study was to analyze and evaluate the implementation of accounting, accountability and internal controls exist in Gereja Kristen Jawa Wedi Klaten. The method used in this research is qualitative descriptive method, that is by direct observation, interviews, and literature. This research was conducted in Gereja Kristen JawaWediKlaten which is a non-profit religious organization. Research results obtained Gereja Kristen Jawa Wedi Klaten namely the application of accounting, accountability, and internal controls are already well underway, but there are some shortcomings that reporting is not in accordance with IAS 45, the employee who is not competent, and yet there is a good division of labor

A Prelude to Civil War: The Religious Nonprofit Sector as a Civil Means of Debate over Slavery, Christian Higher Education, and Religious Philanthropy in the Stone-Campbell Movement

This paper examines the role of Christian higher education and religious philanthropy in the debate over slavery prior to the Civil War. Competing religious views regarding slavery led to the founding of Indiana’s abolitionist Butler University. The school’s decision to brazenly support the cause of abolition directly conflicted with the leadership of The Disciples of Christ and mired the Indianapolis school in one of the most impassioned debates about the role of religious practice in civic life in the nineteenth century. In this case, the religious nonprofit sector functioned as battlefield upon which competing forces engaged in a form of civil conflict. An examination of the role of Butler University’s philanthropic action provides fresh insight into the debate over slavery brewing on the eve of Civil War and the way individuals use philanthropic institutions, especially religious institutions, as a means to assert their values within society. Research for this study has employed primary archival research of documents held at Butler University, Christian Theological Seminary, and The Indiana Historical Society. The author has consulted period specific newspapers, journals, and handwritten documents. The author has also employed a host of secondary resources ranging from academic journals and religious histories to personal interviews and literature on the State of Indiana.

Do Government and Foreign Funding Influence Individual Donations to Religious Nonprofits? A Survey Experiment in Pakistan

AbstractDonors support faith-based organizations whose missions and work cohere with their religious values. Might such donors located in the local community be less likely to donate to a hypothetical Madrasa, an Islamic seminary providing K-12 education, which receives funding from non-local sources, specifically the federal government or foreign donors? We examine this question using a survey experiment in Lahore, Pakistan. Because some Madrasa students have indulged in acts of terrorism, the government of Pakistan has offered Madrasas financial assistance to secularize their curriculums. Most Madrasas, however, have refused government funding because they fear it will harm their reputations in the local community for piety and religious training. Alongside, several foreign donors also provide funds to Madrasas, some to aid governmental reform efforts, and others for religious reasons. Based on the survey of 530 respondents, we find that acceptance of government funding does not diminish the respondents’ willingness to donate to the hypothetical Madrasa. Additionally, we find modest evidence that willingness to donate diminishes when the Madrasa accepts money from donors in Saudi Arabia and the United States (but not Germany).

Compelling Interest Cacodoxy: Why the Contraception Mandate Fails RFRA's Compelling Interest Analysis

Since its birth in 2011, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s (“ACA”) Contraception Mandate (the “Mandate”) has been a frequent subject of discussion, debate, and litigation. From the outset, the government has defended the Mandate generally in the name of public health and gender equality. While both public health and gender equality are well within the government’s regulatory domain, these broadly framed interests are inadequate to survive the compelling interest test under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (“RFRA”) and its companion, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”).As RFRA’s text provides, when a person’s sincere religious exercise is substantially burdened, the government must demonstrate that application of the burden to the person is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest. As the Supreme Court unanimously held in O Centro, RFRA’s “to the person” language requires that strict scrutiny is applied to the asserted harm of granting specific exemptions to a particular religious claimant, rather than the broadly formulated interests justifying the general applicability of a law. As will be explained, there is no compelling governmental interest under RFRA to enforce the Mandate against religious non-profits or closely-held businesses that sincerely hold religious objections, especially for coverage of contraceptives that operate to prevent implantation after fertilization. In Hobby Lobby, the Court assumed arguendo that the government had a compelling interest in the Mandate in order to base its decision on narrow tailoring. In doing so, the Court never conducted a RFRA compelling interest analysis. The purpose of this Note is to argue that the government lacks a compelling interest in enforcing the Mandate against religious non-profits or closely-held businesses after such an organization proves that the Mandate substantially burdens a sincere religious belief. Part I lays the scope and foundation of this Note, providing information on RFRA’s compelling interest test, the organizations and their beliefs, the Mandate, and the coverage mandated. Part II applies RFRA’s compelling interest test to religious non-profits and closely-held businesses. It notes the numerous exemptions already in place, the lack of evidence supporting the government’s claim that the Mandate furthers women’s health, and the small impact the Mandate has on a national scale for employers whose sincerely held religious beliefs are not substantially burdened by its imposition. Part III gives the current status of the Zubik cases, which in part involve the subject of this Note.

The Lazarus Project and Grace Ministries: The Role of Religious Nonprofits in Addressing Personal and Social Problems

This review essay of Williamson and Hood’s (2016) Psychology and Spiritual Transformation in a Substance Abuse Program: The Lazarus Project examines spiritual transformation in the context of substance abuse and homelessness. The essay first tackles the question of whether change results mostly from individual spiritual transformation experiences or from the social surroundings the converts are part of, based on the author’s research on spiritual transformation and homelessness as well as Williamson and Hood’s work, and then it examines the debate surrounding the application of Foucault’s “technologies of the self” to programs that are similar to the Lazarus Project. The last part of the essay offers a few methodological suggestions for studies of similar projects.

Explaining Variations in the Nonprofit Founding Process

Although the organizational founding process is subject to various isomorphic pressures, significant variation is still found in the completion, ordering, and timing of founding events. Prior research on entrepreneurship suggests the importance of education and previous experience in determining who is best positioned to recognize entrepreneurial opportunities, which may explain some of the variation in the founding process. In this article the authors present an analysis of an original survey of recently founded religious nonprofits to better understand how founder, organizational, and contextual characteristics influence the founding process in this specific nonprofit context. Overall, the authors’ findings show that founder education and experience particularly affect the founding process as well as organizational characteristics; however, these effects vary across different dimensions of this process.

Learning to lead: Segmentation of attendees to a Christian leadership conference

Christian leadership conferences are religious events in which attendees can improve their leadership skills in their current or potential area of ministry. Despite considerable anecdotal evidence, there is limited empirical research that has determined why attendees are motivated to attend these events and if they can be differentiated based on their personal characteristics and year of event attendance. To address these research gaps, 335 questionnaires were collected at an Australian Christian leadership conference during the 2013 and 2014 events. To better equip me in my current leadership role and to feel encouraged to learn more about God were the two dominant motivations identified by respondents, regardless of the year of data collection. Motivational differences also existed based on respondents' personal characteristics. This study has provided theoretical and practical implications for religious nonprofit organizations relating to these issues and provides future research opportunities.

In Pursuit of Religious Freedom: The RFRA and How It Applies to Non-Profit Organizations and Their Objections to the Accommodation of the Affordable Care Act Contraceptive Mandate.

The Hobby Lobby case decided by the Supreme Court back in 2014 determined the rights of for-profit corporations to refuse to provide certain contraceptives guaranteed by the Affordable Care Act in their employee’s health insurance plans. Hobby Lobby had argued their case under the three-part test of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, claiming that the government-mandated provision of certain contraceptives substantially burdened its free exercise of religion. The Supreme Court with a narrow majority agreed with Hobby Lobby, finding a substantial burden existed due to Hobby Lobby’s limited options. In dicta, the Court noted the accommodation to the contraceptive mandate as a viable option to relieve Hobby Lobby of its substantial burden. This dicta gave birth to a new wave of contraceptive-mandate cases. The Supreme Court will soon decide the new contraceptive-mandate issue in Zubik V. Burwell. As a consolidation of several cases, plaintiffs in this round of contraceptive controversy are all non-profit organizations who object on religious grounds not just to the contraceptive mandate but also to the accommodation process created for religious non-profit organizations by the government. This process requires the objecting non-profit to either notify by form the department of Health and Human Services (HHS) or, by form, notify its health-insurance provider. These non-profit plaintiffs have the same argument as Hobby Lobby with a twist. They argue that the notification requirements make them complicit in the provision of the contraceptives that they find to be religiously abhorrent. In turn, the non-profits claim that once they notify either HHS or their insurance provider, they have essentially become facilitators of the provision of these contraceptives. Because they can either provide the coverage they find objectionable, give notification they find objectionable, or drop coverage and be subject to fines, the plaintiffs claim the government has placed a substantial burden on their exercise of religion. Thus, the question for the Court is whether a substantial burden is being imposed on the plaintiffs and if so has the government employed the least restrictive means of achieving its compelling interest in protecting the health of women. To answer the first question, this Article examines the historical interpretation by the Supreme Court of what constitutes a substantial burden since the RFRA’s enactment in 1993. This is critical in determining whether the plaintiffs will pass the first prong of the RFRA action and place the burden on the government to show its compelling interest and that it employed the least restrictive means. In answering the second question, this Article looks to the Hobby Lobby case discussion of least-restrictive means to determine if the government’s accommodation scheme will pass the least-restrictive-means test. With the recent death of Justice Scalia, these questions could go either way. The author believes this article gives insight into how the Court should and will decide to usher in this new era of RFRA litigation.

RFRA Rights Revisited: Substantial Burdens, Judicial Competence, and the Religious Nonprofit Cases

The most recent challenge to the free exercise of religion is here. And while it stems from the same legislation that prompted the action in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. — the contraception mandate under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the “ACA”) — it raises unique and equally important issues: what constitutes a substantial burden on the exercise of religion and who gets to decide (the religious adherents or the courts). In Hobby Lobby, the government contended that for-profit corporations could not exercise religion and, consequently, could not avail themselves of the broad protection afforded free exercise under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. In the seven religious nonprofit cases pending before the United States Supreme Court, the government acknowledges that RFRA applies to religious nonprofits but now alleges that the ACA does not substantially burden the free exercise of these religious organizations. In particular, the government argues that the accommodation to the contraception mandate (which permits religious nonprofits to avoid directly providing coverage for all FDA-approved contraceptives and sterilization procedures by giving notice to their insurance issuers or third party administrators that the religious organizations object to providing such coverage) does not burden, let alone substantially burden, the religious nonprofits’ exercise of religion.To date, eight circuit courts of appeals have sided with the government, instructing the religious nonprofits that their sincerely held belief — that the accommodation makes them complicit in a grave moral wrong (i.e., the provision of contraceptives and abortifacients) — is incorrect because the ACA, not any actions by the religious nonprofits, is the legal cause of the insurance issuers’ and TPAs’ obligation to provide such coverage. Under the majority’s “Pontius Pilate” defense, the accommodation “washes the hands” of religious nonprofits, cleansing them of any legal or moral responsibility for providing the objectionable coverage. As a result, the religious nonprofits cannot meet their burden under RFRA because the accommodation does not substantially burden their exercise of religion. Only the Eighth Circuit has ruled for the religious nonprofits. The Supreme Court’s resolution of the circuit conflict, therefore, will impact the scope of free exercise protection far beyond the ACA context by deciding whether courts or religious practitioners have the right to determine when government-mandated actions actually contravene sincerely held religious beliefs.This article contends that the circuit court majority is wrong. Contrary to the majority’s claim, Hobby Lobby and Holt v. Hobbs preclude courts from deciding whether the ACA (or any other statute) actually burdens a religious adherent’s sincerely held beliefs. Although, as Chief Justice Marshall famously declared, “it is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to declare what the law is,” courts lack the authority and competence to declare what the religious commitments of a faith are and when those commitments are violated. Under the Court’s free exercise precedents, courts can determine only whether the government puts a religious practitioner to the choice of engaging in conduct that violates her beliefs or of disobeying the government’s policy and facing “serious” consequences. Religious and philosophical questions regarding moral complicity are left to religious adherents, not the courts. As the Founders recognized, religious and moral questions transcend the legal, imposing a different — and higher — obligation on religious believers. For religious adherents, only God (through a religious authority determined in accordance with their sincere religious beliefs) can determine whether an action makes them complicit in sin. Consequently, as the Court explained in Hobby Lobby, “question[s]” about moral complicity are ones “that the federal courts have no business addressing.”

Divine callings: religious sensemaking in the organizational founding process

Organizational scholars have not considered the potential power of religion as a sensemaking tool. Religion scholars have wondered whether religious sensemaking is simply a post hoc justification for behavior, or whether it can shape future actions. In this article, we present mixed methods research that gets at the intersection of these issues. In interviews with founders of religious nonprofit organizations, we find that many frame their founding experiences in religious terms, such as believing that God gave them the idea for their organization or attributing certain founding events to divine intervention. We then examine data from a survey of young religious nonprofits and find that reports of personal religious experiences are more common among primary founders compared to other leaders. We also find that those founders reporting certain religious experiences work more hours in the organization, suggesting that sensemaking strategies could have consequences for individuals’ behavior.

Delegating Religious Liberty: The Executive's Role in Accommodating Religion

The Affordable Care Act of 2011 requires group health insurance plans to include “preventive care” for women; the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) interpreted this language to include all Food and Drug Administration-approved abortifacients. After receiving substantial pushback from religious organizations, HHS created two rules: one exempting churches from the “contraceptive mandate,” another creating an “accommodation” for other religious nonprofits. These groups have sued HHS, arguing that the accommodation makes them complicit in providing contraception, an act they believe is against their religious faith. While the main goal of this litigation — currently on appeal at the Supreme Court — is to expand HHS’s religious exemption, one of the threshold issues implicitly involved is whether an administrative agency can make these religious accommodations. Because crafting religious exemptions has historically been in the province of the legislature (with a growing role for the judiciary over the past fifty years), studies of the executive’s decision to grant religious exemptions are absent in legal scholarship. This Note fills that void, arguing that the history of religious exemptions, canons of administrative law, and current religious liberty jurisprudence do not support the ability of the executive to, carte blanche, create religious exemptions from general laws. I further explore the nuances of when the executive branch might be able to exempt religious individuals from laws and how the nondelegation doctrine interacts with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. I conclude with an argument for why limiting the executive’s authority with respect to religious exemptions should not be construed as a broader argument against administrative law and why, as a normative matter, the executive branch should generally not be in the business of accommodating religion.

Thou Shalt Not Electioneer: Religious Nonprofit Political Activity and the Threat “God PACs” Pose to Democracy and Religion

The Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. FEC invalidated a longstanding restriction on corporate and union campaign spending in federal elections, freeing entities with diverse political goals to spend unlimited amounts supporting candidates for federal office. Houses of worship and other religious nonprofits, however, remain strictly prohibited from engaging in partisan political activity as a condition of tax-exempt status under Internal Revenue Code § 501(c)(3). Absent this “electioneering prohibition,” religious nonprofits would be very attractive vehicles for political activity. These 501(c)(3) organizations can attract donors with the incentive of tax deductions for contributions. Moreover, houses of worship need not file with a government agency to begin operating and deriving tax benefits, and the IRS has shown reluctance to aggressively audit their activities. Two circuits have previously upheld the electioneering prohibition against legal challenges, but recent jurisprudential shifts expose the tax code provision to challenge under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which directs courts to apply strict scrutiny to facially neutral laws that substantially burden the free exercise of religion. First, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. greatly reduced the barriers to successful RFRA claims. Second, by lifting restrictions on political speech for many other types of organizations, Citizens United magnified the burden the electioneering prohibition imposes on religious organizations. The decision also rejected compelling state interests that might have previously shielded the law from invalidation. This Note is the first analysis of the electioneering prohibition’s vulnerability in this new legal climate. Despite these significant developments, this Note ultimately concludes that the electioneering prohibition can survive RFRA challenges because the prospect for widespread use of religious organizations as conduits for political activity undermines the values reflected in Establishment Clause jurisprudence.

Perceived Competition, Leadership Effort, and Organizational Outreach in Religious Nonprofit Organizations

The religious economies literature argues that religious leaders are motivated by the existence of competition. This motivation is said to lead to more effort and outreach on the part of leaders and their organizations. Previous research examining this hypothesis has focused on the presence of religious or organizational diversity at an ecological level. This study shifts the focus to leaders’ perception of competition as the central mechanism of interest. Utilizing data produced from a survey of founders of religious nonprofit organizations, I analyze how perceived competition shapes the number of hours the leader puts into the organization and the number of outreach strategies the organization pursues. The analysis finds no support for the competition-effort hypothesis.

Moving Targets: Religious Freedom, Hobby Lobby, and the Future of LGBT Rights

The recognition of marriage equality in Obergefell v. Hodges, just one year after Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. broadened the law of religious freedom, highlights the potential collision course of these movements. This paper is an attempt to navigate the waters where such a collision is most likely. As LGBT rights grow, the choice between generic religious privilege, typified by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), and specific religious accommodations, such as the treatment of religious non-profits in federal law, will define the terms of the conflict. Part I addresses current federal law, and focuses on the extent to which federal law authorizes religious exemptions from duties to avoid discrimination. The principal examples considered involve the duty of public officials, such as Rowan County (KY) Clerk Kim Davis, to respect the rights of same-sex couples; the duties of military chaplains; and the obligations of employers under the Family and Medical Leave Act. Part II turns to the potential effect of Obergefell and Hobby Lobby on legislative expansion of federal non-discrimination law to cover sexual orientation and gender identity. Hobby Lobby will exacerbate the difficulty of legislative compromises between the cause of LGBT rights and religious freedom concerns. As reflected in the proposed Equality Act, the most difficult questions of law and policy, analyzed in this Part, will involve the rights of religious organizations to engage in otherwise forbidden LGBT discrimination. Part III turns to state law, where recent battles in Indiana and elsewhere have been nationally explosive. Part III.A. explores the significant geographical disconnect between states with RFRAs and those with broad protections for LGBT rights. This Part includes analysis of the cases involving refusal by vendors to serve same sex weddings. Part III.B. discusses recent and anticipated legislative fights, including those involving religiously affiliated non-profit organizations, and suggests that 1) Hobby Lobby has made negotiations more difficult, and 2) some accommodations of religious non-profit organizations remain viable, especially if it coupled with broad expansion of LGBT rights in the commercial sector. Part III.C. focuses on the adjudicative battles that lie ahead between LGBT rights and religious freedom, and the significance of Hobby Lobby for those contests.

Initial Results from a Survey of Two Cohorts of Religious Nonprofits

Next to congregations, religious nonprofit organizations represent one of the most numerous categories of religious organizations in the United States. However, very few data exist that shed light on this sector. In this research note we introduce new data from a survey of two cohorts of religion‐related public charities, also known as 501(c)(3)s or simply as religious nonprofits. We also present initial findings from these data. Specifically, we provide a descriptive profile of religious nonprofits’ founders and how these individuals compare to leaders and founders of other organizations, including congregations. We also provide a descriptive profile of these organizations’ activities, staffing, and structure. This note serves as the first step in what we hope will be an expanding literature on religious nonprofit organizations.

The Church and the Tax Law: Keeping Church and State Separate

ABSTRACT In a democracy characterized by the separation of church and state, what role does the federal government play in regulating the activities and the financial transactions of churches and other religious nonprofit organizations? What are the current federal requirements regarding tax exemption for churches, tax deductibility of donations to churches, and political activity by churches, and are these requirements justified? Rather than interfering with the free exercise of religion, does the federal government actually come closer to violating the establishment clause of the First Amendment by providing inappropriate tax benefits to churches and clergy? This paper discusses tax laws and federal court decisions relating to these and other issues.