Reflections from the 2026 Independent Sector National Summit
I recently returned from the 2026 Independent Sector National Summit in Phoenix, where nonprofit leaders, funders, consultants, and other changemakers gathered to explore the challenges and opportunities facing the charitable sector.
Throughout the Summit, conversations touched on a range of issues: growing demands on nonprofit organizations, shifting funding environments, relationships between funders and grantees, leadership well-being, and the need to build stronger, more sustainable organizations.
While these topics may seem distinct, I found myself returning to a common thread: How do we create the conditions that allow mission-driven organizations to deliver on their commitments?
It's a question that sits at the intersection of strategy, leadership, organizational capacity, and trust.
Trust Is Built Through Follow-Through
I had the opportunity to contribute to the Summit's Trusted and Well-Governed Strategy Lab, where I shared perspectives on the relationship between strategy execution and organizational trust.
When we talk about trust, we often focus on transparency, accountability, and relationships. All are important. But I believe there's another dimension that deserves attention: an organization's ability to follow through on what it says matters.
Consider what happens when an organization announces ambitious strategic priorities but continues to take on new initiatives without making decisions about what to stop or deprioritize. Or when teams are asked to deliver results without clear ownership, adequate resources, or the authority to make necessary decisions.
Even with the best intentions, these conditions can undermine progress and, over time, erode trust.
Trust isn't built simply by declaring our values or commitments. It's built through the decisions we make and the actions that follow.
That means translating strategic priorities into clear responsibilities, aligning resources with commitments, establishing meaningful measures, and creating opportunities to assess progress and make adjustments.
Follow-through doesn't happen by accident. It has to be designed into how an organization operates.
Organizational Capacity Is a Strategic Consideration
Another theme that resonated with me throughout the Summit was organizational capacity.
Nonprofit leaders are navigating increasing demands, often while facing significant uncertainty about funding and resources. They're expected to respond to emerging needs, sustain existing programs, demonstrate impact, and care for their teams.
Yet conversations about organizational capacity are sometimes treated as separate from conversations about strategy.
I would argue that they're inseparable.
A strategic plan represents a set of choices about where an organization intends to focus its energy and resources. Those choices are only meaningful if the organization has the capacity to act on them.
In my work with nonprofit organizations, I've seen how easy it is for priorities to accumulate. A new initiative is added, an emerging opportunity demands attention, or an existing commitment continues long after its strategic relevance has diminished.
Rarely is there an accompanying conversation about what the organization will stop doing.
Over time, this creates a gap between ambition and capacity.
Closing that gap requires leaders to ask difficult but necessary questions:
Are our current activities aligned with our most important strategic priorities?
Do we have the people, resources, and systems needed to deliver on our commitments?
What might we need to stop, scale back, or approach differently?
Are we creating realistic expectations for our teams?
These aren't simply operational questions. They're strategic leadership decisions.
Sustainable Impact Requires Shared Responsibility
The Summit also reinforced the importance of looking beyond individual organizations when considering what it takes to achieve lasting impact.
Discussions about funding practices, nonprofit leadership, and organizational sustainability highlighted the interconnected responsibilities of funders, boards, and organizational leaders.
Pui Ling Tam of the Walter & Elise Haas Fund shared insights from the Endeavor Fund, an initiative providing seven-year general operating grants to seven Bay Area nonprofits. What stood out to me was the intentional focus not only on supporting the organizations' missions, but also on strengthening their long-term capacity and investing in the well-being of the people doing the work. It's a concrete example of how funding practices can help create the conditions for sustainable impact.
But funding practices are only one part of the equation.
Boards have a role in ensuring that strategic expectations are realistic and that organizational capacity receives appropriate attention. Executive leaders must make choices about priorities, investments, and tradeoffs. Teams need clarity about how their work contributes to organizational goals.
And across these relationships, trust grows when commitments are accompanied by meaningful action.
I was also struck by Kim Berry Jones's discussion of the Kinship Fund's Third Space Initiative, which creates opportunities for nonprofit leaders to connect with peers and access coaching and well-being support.
This particularly resonated with me. Having facilitated peer advisory conversations among nonprofit CEOs, I've seen firsthand the value of creating intentional spaces where leaders can learn from and support one another.
Leadership can be isolating, and investing in the people leading organizations is just as important as investing in the programs they deliver.
Sustainable impact isn't simply about asking leaders and organizations to do more. It's about creating the conditions that allow them to do their work effectively over time.
Turning Reflection Into Action
Conferences like the Independent Sector National Summit create valuable opportunities to exchange ideas, challenge assumptions, and consider new possibilities.
But the real test comes afterward.
What will we do differently as a result of what we've learned?
For nonprofit leaders, I would encourage starting with three questions:
1. Where is the greatest gap between our stated priorities and how we're actually spending our time and resources?
Look beyond the strategic plan itself. Examine current initiatives, staff workloads, leadership attention, and budget decisions. What do those choices reveal about the organization's real priorities?
2. What is one decision we've been avoiding that could strengthen our ability to execute?
Perhaps it's discontinuing an initiative, clarifying accountability, investing in a critical capability, or acknowledging that an existing commitment is no longer realistic.
Making progress often requires making choices.
3. How will we know whether we're following through?
Establish clear ownership, meaningful measures, and regular opportunities to review progress. Just as importantly, create space to discuss what's working, what's not, and what needs to change.
These practices don't eliminate uncertainty or resource constraints. But they can help organizations respond more intentionally and make better use of the capacity they have.
Moving From Intention to Impact
I left the Summit encouraged by the commitment, creativity, and thoughtfulness of the people working to strengthen the nonprofit and philanthropic sector.
I also left reminded that meaningful change requires more than good ideas and shared aspirations.
It requires decisions. It requires alignment. It requires a willingness to make tradeoffs. And it requires consistent follow-through.
Ultimately, the credibility of our commitments is reflected in what we do next.
That's how we move beyond good intentions, build trust, and create lasting impact.