Mark Koscinski NFP, Uncategorized

Fiduciary Duty

The Wall Street Journal recently carried an article about how irate donors are going after university boards of trustees that used restricted funds to cover operating deficits. While the article didn’t address other NFP entities, the same logic applies there as well. While I am not a lawyer, I think I can offer NFP boards some advice on this topic

I would be willing to bet that most of these university boards did not simply raid the endowment, as the article states. The mechanism tapping these funds was probably borrowing against the endowment. The intention was to pay the endowment back with interest at the going rate. If that plan was successful, then all would be well. The Board would have accomplished its fiduciary duty to both sides of the transaction. The university program succeeded, and the loan was paid back. However, when the plan goes sideways, there are problems. To put it simply, the cash is gone, no matter how its transfer to the operating budget of the university was categorized or papered. The uncomfortable reality is the board was “on both sides of the transaction.” It has a fiduciary duty to protect the endowment while at the same time being responsible for the financial well-being of the college. The failure of the program harms not only the university but the endowment too.

I am also sure that board counsel has taken care of all of the legal niceties when it papered the loan. Nevertheless, it may not be enough. Irate donors who thought their money was going to a pet project only to find it was going someplace else can easily find an attorney who will sue on their behalf. The goal may not be to win but to bring bad publicity to the university, especially during recruiting season. The university administration may then settle to avoid the publicity.

If the university has trustees and officers’ insurance, the real target of the litigation is the D&O policy ( unless the trustees have substantial independent wealth). The insurance company and the insurance policy provide deep pockets for potential litigants. The insurance company will control the legal defense and can determine when to settle. The point is this: what is legally correct may not be morally correct. Of for that matter, even “publicity correct.” Directors and trustees need to make sure their “Is” are dotted and their “Ts are crossed paperwork-wise. They also have to ask themselves, what will happen if the borrowing from the endowment fails and becomes public? What type of media scrutiny will this generate? Can we afford the bad publicity? If the answer to that question is no, perhaps the whole funding strategy will need to be rethought.

Mark Koscinski Uncategorized

World Heritage Conference

I am happy to say I will be presenting some original research on Jan Hus and his impact on the Independent Catholic Movement during the World Heritage Conference to be held in Bethlehem, PA, in November 2026. The agenda, times, dates, and presentation schedule are included here. for the conference, and the title of my Poster presentation is included below.

Program – Conference of The Institute for Moravian History and World HeritageDownload
Mark Koscinski NFP, Uncategorized

Continuing Education for NFP Leaders

I have become active in the NFP space after taking a little hiatus. It was a needed break to stop burnout. During this time, I worked on and completed my D.Min. degree. I believe this gave me some fresh insights—and a renewed conviction: continuing education isn’t a luxury for NFP leaders; it’s a responsibility. Our organizations operate at the intersection of mission and management, compassion and compliance. That complexity demands leaders who are always learning.

First, the landscape is changing faster than ever. Donor behavior is evolving, digital fundraising and storytelling are table stakes, and emerging regulations—from data privacy to financial reporting—require at least a passing knowledge. A leader who relies solely on what worked five years ago risks making decisions with outdated frameworks. Ongoing learning equips us to anticipate change, not react to it, and to build resilient strategies rather than quick fixes.

Second, professional development directly serves our stakeholders. In the NFP space, resources are entrusted to us for maximum impact. When leaders invest in learning—whether in governance, program evaluation, trauma-informed care, or community engagement—we sharpen our stewardship. We make better budget choices, design stronger programs, and measure outcomes more honestly. The return on this investment shows up in lives changed, dollars well spent, and missions advanced with integrity.

Third, continuing education nurtures a leader’s inner life. Not-for-profit work is emotionally demanding. Burnout is real. My D.Min. journey reinforced that leaders need rhythms of renewal and spaces for reflection, not just new tactics. Courses, cohorts, and retreats can rekindle vocational clarity, deepen ethical grounding, and strengthen resilience. My cohort was a delight to work with, and I learned so much from them. When our inner life is healthy, our organizations feel it: clearer communication, steadier decision-making, and a culture of trust.

Mark Koscinski NFP

Stabilizing an Organization

What do you do when you take over an NFP organization that is in turmoil?  Surprisingly, the answer is sometimes nothing. At least for a while. When faced with a decision, we often have a predilection for acting, even when there is no persuasive reason to do so. The father of modern decision analysis, Daniel Kahneman, would often counsel waiting before making a decision, eschewing the psychological pressure to act as quickly as possible. Perhaps new data will become available, allowing a better decision to be made. This can be frustrating for observers, but it might be the right decision when a new CEO is leading an organization that has recently experienced turmoil. In such a case, the organization’s leaders have determined that it is necessary to stabilize the organization before it can move forward. In a sense, it is the opposite of a turnaround situation, in which every piece of furniture and every employee can be thrown overboard to save the organization. 

One example of this principle has been the way that Pope Leo has operated the Vatican since his election in 2025. There has been no radical change in the doctrine or structure of the Roman Catholic Church since the beginning of his pontificate, nor has there been any reversal of actions undertaken by his predecessor, Pope Francis. Francis addressed many contemporary issues during his pontificate, to the consternation of many in the Church. Consequently, the Church was rocked by the specter of synodality, LGBTQ issues, and the virtual ban on the Latin Mass. Pope Leo has undertaken some diplomatic initiatives and sought to address AI’s impact on the world, but his actions have focused more on consolidating the Church’s position and maintaining unity. This has been applauded by many Catholics as a way of steadying the ship on a rough sea. 

This can only be a temporary stance, though. Leo’s current posture may not be possible much longer. The SSPX (Society of St. Pius X), a traditionalist wing of Catholicism, has threatened to ordain bishops without the Vatican’s permission. German bishops have been actively advocating for the ordination of women to either the priesthood or the diaconate. Many traditionalist Catholics are calling for the return of the Latin Mass. It seems Francis will need to act soon on these issues. Only time will tell how his leadership will shake out.

The Pope’s recent encyclical on artificial intelligence can be found here.

Mark Koscinski decision analysis, NFP

Back Again

Hello, everyone. I have been away from this website for over a year due to some tragic circumstances. During the past year, my beloved wife contracted a rare form of an affliction that resulted in paralysis for several months and her eventual death. My mother, who suffered from dementia, also passed away. Finally, the family dog Molly, who reached the ripe old age of seventeen, also passed away from internal organ failure. 

I don’t bring this up to ask for pity, as I am acutely aware there are clearly those who had much more traumatic experiences than I. My position, for better or worse, is contained in the book of Job: The Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away. Blessed be the name of the Lord (Job 1:21).

 I do think that there was clearly a learning moment here for nonprofit organizations. My wife, Susan, was originally diagnosed with an aggressive form of melanoma, resulting in two operations that failed to curtail the spread of the disease. As a result, Susan underwent immunotherapy, which is today thought to be the best approach to handling the melanoma.  Chemotherapy would be the second line of defense. Several months into the treatment, Susan began to feel ill. Within five days, she could no longer get out of bed and was functionally paralyzed. The doctors were perplexed, having no explanation or treatment for what was happening. 

They began by treating the most likely causes of the paralysis, taking the most appropriate course of action with the highest potential for success. This approach failed. The doctors then began holding daily conference calls to brainstorm the situation. This was also an appropriate course of action, but produced no better treatment option. Finally, a friend who was also an oncologist thought outside of the box and found that similar symptoms were reported from treating various forms of cancer associated with female organs with immunotherapy. There were only two other reported cases where the immunotherapy resulted in this paralysis for patients being treated for melanoma. The upshot was that it was considered such a remote possibility that it was initially set aside. After all other possible diagnoses were ruled out, the correct diagnosis was made. The delay of about two weeks had devastating consequences. The proper treatment was finally given, but it was too late.  

The question that arises is whether the diagnosis and decision process was flawed or appropriate. From a decision analysis perspective, probably not. The most common possibilities were treated first. As the situation worsened, doctors began consulting with one another to pool knowledge. Where did the process break down? Perhaps the doctors did not think outside the box and did not quickly consider other options with very low probabilities. Most strikingly, there was no discussion of using AI to attempt to diagnose the malady. Perhaps a proper questioning architecture could have cut days off the diagnosis process and possibly saved my wife’s life. It is simply not possible to know now. The point I am making is that decision protocols should now include consultation with AI when an expert system or a proprietary large language model is available. Bayesian analysis might have helped as well. 

Note: The doctors were professional and worked long and hard to save my wife. I have no complaints. You will also forgive me if the medical details I have outlined here are not entirely correct. I am a simple CPA who studies decision methodologies and misses Susan dearly.

Mark Koscinski NFP

Memorial Day Musings

Memorial Day Musings

Despite the fact we have had some decidedly “unsummer like weather” in the Northeast, Memorial Day is the unofficial start of the summer.   It is also the start of the real negotiations on the tax bill currently  moving through Congress.  Speaker Mike Johnson has said he would like to get the bill to the Senate for a vote before Memorial Day.   The bill will change as it moves through the Senate and back to conference,  but let’s take a look at how the current provisions in the bill  might impact the not-for-profit  (NFP) world.

Congress appears to be ready to increase the allowable deduction for state and local taxes (SALT) on an individual’s federal income tax return.  This may have a positive impact on NFP organizations. The hike from the current $10,000 cap on SALT deductions  for married couples to $40,000 is substantial.  There is a phase-out for those making more. At the same time, the bill proposes a hike in the standard deduction to $32,000 for a married couple.  On the face of it, these changes could make it more likely individuals can  itemize deductions on their federal income tax returns. This means it will be easier to deduct charitable contributions again.  Previously, the low cap on SALT deductions precluded people from itemizing since the standard deduction is so high. If you live in a “Blue” State, you pay a pretty hefty state income tax and property tax, most of which is not deducible.  Increased charitable contribution deductions may mean more donations to qualified NFPs.  Onc can only hope at this point. 

There have been two other developments in the NFP space worth mentioning.  As I write this, the U.S. Supreme Court has deadlocked on the legality and constitutionality of state  funding of  charter schools. The whole issue of charter schools is a contentious one, with public school unions opposing any funding for them at all, let alone those schools chartered by religious groups. There was no opinion issued by any of the Justices, so it is difficult to determine exactly what their thinking was on the matter. The tie vote was possible because Justice Barrett, a practicing Catholic, recused herself from the case.  The Court affirmed the decision of the Oklahoma Supreme Court that state funding of a religiously affiliated charter school was unconstitutional. In recent years the Court has been very accommodating to  religious groups.  Perhaps there was something about this case that Chief Justice Roberts, the presumed swing vote, did not like. Only time will tell if this ruling will stand. For now, the ban on state funding of religiously backed charter schools  applies only in Oklahoma and not nation-wide. 

The second development is the cost-cutting activities of the Trump Administration.  Many have been blocked by  federal district court judges. The issue of the “universal injunction”  will also be decided by the Supreme  Court in the near future.  I believe some of the cuts will in fact be enacted. Which will survive and which will be blocked is still up in the air, as well as any impact on NFP organizations. 

In closing, I want to wish all of you a wonderful Memorial Day.  And remember to contribute to your favorite charity.  It is the American thing to do.  Even if you don’t get a tax deduction. 

Mark Koscinski Uncategorized

Hello Again Everyone!

It has been a while since I have been here. However, that does not mean that I have not been active. Here are some of the things that have been going on:

–The Moravian University School of Business and Economics is proud to announce it ‘s business programs have once again achieved accreditation from the Accreditation Council For American Business Schools and Programs (ACBSP). for the next ten year cycle. This is a mark of distinction for our School, its programs, faculty, students and our alum. Please join me in congratulating Dean Sonia Aziz and other members of the faculty for this accomplishment! I was the coordinator of this project, and it was truly a ton of work.

–With Dr. Heather Kuhns, I have been co-authoring a blog for the Pennsylvania Institute of Certified Public Accountants. We have published a number of these blogs already. Their focus is the management of a CPA firm rather than the technical accounting. You can find them in other locations in this website. I have to add that Dr. Kuhns also was an instrumental part of the SOBE accreditation process, including the update of the SOBE website and writing about our compliance for ACBSP Standard 7.

–I am finishing up my course work for my D.Min. degree. On the the major project (akin to a dissertation.).

–I am also active in my church as an ordained deacon, and serve on the Bishop’s task force for licensing and programming for its seminary.

In short, a lot has been going on. I will be back to the Not For Profit blogging very soon!

Mark Koscinski behavioral economics, decision analysis

Lessons From a Cornhole Tournament

My university runs an annual cornhole tournament at the end of the Fall semester.  A colleague from the School of Business and Economics and I entered the tournament for the first time. We didn’t make it past the first round.  We were  annihilated by a team from the Admissions Office.  Our defeat was quick and decisive.  In truth, I was a piano on the back of my colleague.  I was nowhere near the target with my errant throws, sometimes missing the entire board.   As I thought about  my poor performance, I realized there were several lessons any manager can take away from the entire event in general and my poor performance in particular. What can you learn from a poor showing at a cornhole tournament?  Well, maybe a few things… 

Teamwork and morale building exercises are great tools and contribute to  successful organizations.   The tournament was a celebration at the end of the semester.  All staff and faculty across the entire university were invited.  Over thirty teams showed up to compete for minimal, even seemingly trivial  prizes. The real prizes ( and  joy)  were the friendly competition and being in the presence of  colleagues from other departments we don’t get to interact with during the semester because we are  all too busy.  It was a magnificent team building experience.   A simple event like this spread goodwill and enjoyment throughout the organization at a minimal cost.  Even though we were shellacked, my teammate and I felt good about participating and being part of the university community. 

The regression to the mean is a powerful force but has a common exception..  Daniel Kahneman won  the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2002 for his work in decision analysis. In his book Thinking Fast and Slow. He tells the story of how Israeli Air Force pilots were expected to repeat exceptional performances. They  routinely failed to do so. Kahneman pointed out our performances all regress to our mean performance over time.  If we do something extraordinary (defined in a cornhole tournament as hitting the target hole with our bag), the expectation is we should be able to do that again and again and even improve on our performance.  In reality, we should expect to perform worse after an unusually good performance. We tend to regress to our mean performance. In my case, that means  just plain missing the hole, or even sometimes the entire board after previously sinking the bag into the hole on the previous throw. 

Another common example of this principle is the awesome  batting averages major league baseball players have at the beginning of the season.  The players  can keep their performance at a high level for a short streak, but over time they will perform at their mean batting average.  In our case, my partner and I hit bullseyes a couple of times but were not able to repeat this with any regularity.  

There is one caveat to the regression to the mean theory. Repetitive tasks can  tire you out over time. Economists explain this as the difference between the short run and the long run. What works in the short run  may not work in the long run.  In the long run you tire out and you can’t keep your performance level up. Your performance degrades until it is  below your mean performance simply because you get tired. A friend of mine claims a round of golf should only be fourteen holes.  He gets tired and his performance diminishes drastically over the last four holes.  He gets tired and loses his concentration.  The baseball season is 162 games.  Players get tired or injured over time and their batting averages decline. In the cornhole tournament, I felt my concentration declining as the game wore on. In short, don’t expect your employees to repeat unusually high performances and don’t ignore the toll that repetitive action and time will have on your performance. 

Keep in mind the difference between noise and bias. Kahneman, in his book Noise, uses a bullseye and the resulting shot pattern of misses around the bullseye to demonstrate the difference between noise and bias.   A normal distribution of misses around the target is an example of noise.  Misses that fit into a discernible pattern are an example of bias.  This was a useful insight  to me as I kept “missing to the left” when I was throwing the bag.   I moved to the right and was able to make an adjustment to my throws  that eliminated that bias.  The noise is not so difficult to overcome.  In my case, I still kept missing. Practice is the only way to overcome the noise.

Who knew decision analysis theory could be so useful in everyday life? 

Mark Koscinski NFP

Taking Your NFP From Good to Great

So, you are the executive director of a Not-For-Profit (NFP) organization.  You look around, and think that you have a good organization.  The first question that comes up is: “Is this good enough?” Many people would say no. We want to have a great organization. We all strive for this. The next question is: How do you make it a great organization?  One way is to look at the book “Good to Great” by Jim Collins. “Good to Great” has become a bestseller in the business world, influencing management practices and leadership styles. It can be adapted to the NFP world as well.  “Good to Great” emphasizes the importance of long-term vision, building a strong culture, and having the right people in place for sustainable success.

 The book focuses on how ordinary companies can make the leap from being merely “good” to becoming truly great over a sustained period. The principles Collins puts forth work just as well for NFP organizations as well as for for-profit companies.  Collins identifies “Level 5” Leadership as the crucial factor differentiating good organizations from great ones. A Level 5 leader blends humility and “professional will”, prioritizing the organization’s success over personal success. Great organizations  understand the “Hedgehog Concept,” the intersection of three key circles: what they can be the best in the world at (passion), what drives their economic engine (cash flow), and what truly matters to their clients (passion). Many NFP leaders are not comfortable dealing with the fiscal side of the business, but as one religious leader told me, “it takes money to do God’s work.” Similarly, it takes cash flow to keep your  doors open. 

Collins believes organizations can build a culture of discipline  This is achieved by having:

  • Discipline of People: Great organizations  foster a culture of discipline by employing and promoting talented individuals who embody the company’s core values and principles. This same principle applies to volunteers as well. 
  • Discipline of Thought: Great organizations maintain a culture of thinking and challenging assumptions, fostering a data-driven approach while remaining adaptable. Harold Geneen, the former president of ITT famously said, “the numbers will set you free.”
  • Discipline of Action: Great organizations  translate plans into action with a relentless focus on execution and achieving results.

By doing this culture of discipline, your organization will achieve The Flywheel Effect. Your NFP will  build momentum through the flywheel effect, where sustained effort in core areas like people, strategy, and operations reinforces each other, leading to continuous improvement.

To be sure, there are some criticisms of this book. A common one is its treatment of an organization’s development is simplistic, and doesn’t deal with root causes. Nevertheless, “Good to Great” offers valuable insights for NFP organizations aiming to achieve long-term excellence. It highlights the importance of leadership, culture, and a consistent focus on core principles for achieving sustainable success.  It can be a roadmap for taking your organization from being merely “good” to “great”!