Don’t throw good money after…

.

The above title was going to be “Don’t Throw Good Money after Bad” but I am not sure money given to a church for ministry can ever be considered “bad” money.

We have all heard that adage.  Most of us have probably used it when discussing financial prudence and not wanting to waste money. So let me explain how this applies to Facility Stewardship.

As we have written about several times recently, we strongly suggest that churches have a Facility Condition Assessment performed to understand the current condition of their facility, the presence of any deferred maintenance and to develop a plan for long term budgeting and capital reserve. We feel free strongly about this.

There are times that the above is not just good information that could improve your stewardships, but let me explain a time when it is imperative…non- negotiable…must-have…don’t pass Go and collect $200.  When is that time? Glad you asked.

Most of the churches that retain us to perform Facility Condition Assessments (FCA) are generally those with aging facilities. I am not sure we have yet done an assessment with a facility that was less than 25 years old….and most are 50+ years old. These are the most obvious facilities that need an FCA. But there is a growing trend and movement of churches revitalizing aging facilities.  In many cases it is a church that is on a path of ministry, community and vision revitalization and realize that their current facility is not congruent with their revitalization plans.  Others are facilities that have been “adopted” by another congregation as a merger…re-plant…multi-site initiative.

In both cases, it is prudent to understand the condition of these soon to be revitalized facilities. But the often overlooked consideration is the potential renovation/renewal of the facility.  In these cases, it is very important to do a combination of a FCA and “master plan” of the facility.  By doing them together you can avoid potential “double spending” during the process.  If the FAC identifies that the floor covering in an area of the building is past its Remaining Useful life…and that area is also going to have significant renovations, then it would not be prudent to change the carpet now….to only replace it again in 6-12 months.

Another example would be where there are HVAC systems that are inefficient and nearing their end of life, and that section of the building is going to have major systems overhaul.  In that case…keep using chewing gum and duct tape to keep the systems operational until the renovation is ready to go.

In many cases, where we have been involved in such dual assessments, we have saved the church hundreds of thousands of “deferred maintenance” dollars by delaying them slightly longer until the renovation was initiated.

This is not being slack…this is prudent. It is INTENTIONAL.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *