Nonprofit Board Matrix Template

A board matrix is a grid: skills down the side, directors across the top, marks where they meet. The empty rows are your recruitment brief.

It exists because most nonprofit board recruitment is opportunistic. Someone knows someone, they seem willing, they join. Five years later the board has four people with similar backgrounds and nobody who can read a financial statement.

What to put down the side

Three of those rows deserve particular attention, because they are the consistent gaps.

Financial literacy. Not an accountant necessarily, but someone who can read a statement of activities and ask a real question about it. Score this honestly: a director who once worked near a finance team is not financial literacy, and pretending otherwise leaves the board without the oversight it thinks it has.

Lived experience of the issue. The most under-recruited qualification in the sector, and increasingly the one funders ask about. A board governing a service for a group none of its members belongs to is making decisions from a distance.

Willingness to ask people for money. Rarer than every other quality on the list. Distinguish it from fundraising experience, which is not the same thing.

Track tenure alongside skills

The second half of the template is a tenure grid, because a board can have every skill covered and still be about to lose half of it at once.

Stagger terms so roughly a third of the board rotates each year. Boards where everyone’s term ends together lose their institutional memory in a single evening, and the replacements have nobody to learn the organization from.

Using it to recruit

The point of the matrix is to change the question from who do we know to what are we missing.

Complete it honestly, identify the two or three rows with no marks, and write a short recruitment brief naming those gaps. Then look for people who fill them, which is a far more effective ask than a general invitation because the person can see why they specifically are wanted.

Where to look: people who already volunteer, since boards recruit people they have watched; local board matching services and nonprofit support centres; employer board placement programmes, which are common in finance and law; and the people you serve, who are the most under-recruited group of all.

One caution. Do not recruit a professional to obtain their services free. A lawyer on your board is there to ask informed questions, not to be your unpaid counsel, and the arrangement creates a conflict where they end up advising on matters they will then vote on.

Scoring honestly

The failure mode of every board matrix is generous scoring. A board fills it in, marks itself covered on every row, and concludes it has no gaps.

Two disciplines fix this. Define what each row means before anyone scores, in a sentence: financial literacy means able to read a statement of activities and identify what to question, not comfortable with numbers. And have each director score themselves rather than having the chair score everyone, then discuss the rows where the board thought it had a skill and the individual did not.

The uncomfortable conversation that produces is the point of the exercise.

Reviewing it

Once a year, at the same meeting each time, ideally alongside your conflict of interest acknowledgements so both become routine.

Three checks. Does every skill row have at least one mark. Are more than a third of terms expiring in the same year. Does every director give, and attend.

Record the review in the minutes. The full Form 990 asks a series of governance questions, and a board that can demonstrate it reviews its own composition annually is answering them from practice rather than aspiration.

The other thing a matrix cannot capture is willingness. A director may genuinely have a skill and have no intention of using it for you. Mark the skill, and separately record what each person has actually agreed to do this year, which is the tenure grid’s purpose.

The rest of the recruitment pack

The matrix identifies who you need. Three other documents determine whether they say yes and whether they are any use once they do.

A role description. One page: what the board does, what an individual director is expected to do, meetings a year, committee expectations, whether giving is expected, term length. The most common cause of a disengaged director is a vague invitation.

An information pack for candidates. The articles and bylaws, the last two Form 990s, the current budget and latest financials, a year of minutes, the conflict of interest policy, and confirmation that directors and officers insurance is in force. Informed candidates ask for these, and hesitating to provide what is already public is itself an answer.

An induction. The same pack, plus a visit to see the work in person, plus a pairing with an existing director for the first few meetings. A director who has never watched a programme run governs from abstraction.

None of that takes long to assemble and it exists at very few small organizations, which is why so many boards contain people who accepted an invitation they did not fully understand.

What the matrix will not tell you

A matrix measures composition. It does not measure whether the board works, and a board can score perfectly and govern badly.

The first row is the most diagnostic. A board whose minutes record twelve months of unanimous votes with no recorded discussion is either extraordinarily aligned or not really deliberating, and it is usually the second.

Run the matrix annually for composition, and once every two or three years run a short self-assessment for behaviour: a handful of questions answered anonymously by each director, discussed openly at the following meeting. That combination catches both kinds of problem.

Diversity, and doing it properly

Many organizations add rows for demographic diversity. That is worth doing and it is worth doing carefully.

Collect the information voluntarily and by self-identification, never by assumption, and be clear about what it will be used for. Some directors will decline to answer and that is their right.

The more useful question than counting is whether the board reflects the community the organization serves, and whether people from that community have real influence rather than a seat. A board that recruits for representation and then makes decisions in a subcommittee of long-standing members has changed its composition and not its governance.

Download this template

Free, no email address, no signup. The full text is on this page as well, so you can read it before you download it.

• Nonprofit board composition matrix Fifteen skills across eight directors, with automatic gap flags and a tenure grid XLSX · 7 KB

Questions people ask

What is a board matrix?

A grid with skills and attributes down one side and directors across the top, marked where a director brings that skill. The rows with no marks are the gaps you recruit against.

Most versions also track tenure: when each director joined, when their term expires, how many terms they have served, whether they give, and how many meetings they attended.

Its purpose is to change recruitment from opportunistic to deliberate. Without one, boards tend to recruit people similar to those already there, and discover the gaps only when something goes wrong.

What skills should a nonprofit board have?

The consistent gaps on small boards are financial literacy, lived experience of the issue, and willingness to ask people for money.

Financial literacy means someone who can read a statement of activities and challenge it, not necessarily an accountant. Score it honestly, because a board that believes it has this and does not is worse off than one that knows it is missing.

Beyond those three: legal, human resources, technology, marketing, subject expertise, community connections, governance experience, and facilities or real estate if you hold property.

You do not need every skill on the board. You need to know which you lack and to buy or borrow those.

How do we use a board matrix to recruit?

Complete it honestly, find the rows with no marks, and write a short brief naming those specific gaps.

Then make the ask specific. An invitation saying the board is looking for someone with financial oversight experience, meeting six times a year, is far more effective than a general invitation to join, because the person can see why they in particular are wanted and what the commitment is.

Recruit through the work where you can. Boards recruit people they have watched, so volunteers are the most common route in.

Do not recruit a professional in order to obtain their services free. It creates a conflict and it is a poor arrangement for both sides.

How often should we review board composition?

Annually, at the same meeting each year, ideally alongside collecting conflict of interest acknowledgements so both become calendar-driven rather than someone's task.

Three checks each time. Does every skill row have at least one mark. Are more than a third of terms expiring in the same year. Does every director give, and attend at least about two thirds of meetings.

Record the review in the minutes. The full Form 990 asks a set of governance questions, and a board that reviews its own composition annually answers them from practice.

Should a board matrix include diversity?

Many do, and it is worth doing carefully.

Collect demographic information voluntarily and by self-identification, never by assumption, and be clear what it will be used for. Some directors will decline, and that is their right.

The more useful question than counting is whether the board reflects the community the organization serves, and whether people from that community hold real influence rather than a seat.

A board that recruits for representation and then makes its decisions in a subcommittee of long-standing members has changed its composition without changing its governance.

How many board members should a nonprofit have?

Check your state minimum, which is most commonly three, then recruit above it.

Five to seven suits most small organizations: enough to spread the work and survive a departure without losing quorum, small enough that decisions get made in the room.

A board of three loses quorum when one person resigns and may then be unable to act, including to appoint a replacement, which is a trap organizations discover at exactly the wrong moment.

Set a range in your bylaws rather than a fixed number, so ordinary changes do not require an amendment.

What should we do about a director who never attends?

Have the conversation first. Most absent directors are overcommitted rather than disengaged, and a frank discussion often produces a graceful resignation, which is better for everyone.

If that does not resolve it, follow your bylaws, which typically permit removal with or without cause by a supermajority vote with proper notice.

Do not leave it. A board carrying two absent members has a quorum problem it has not admitted to, and every meeting becomes harder to constitute.

Prevent the recurrence with an attendance expectation stated at recruitment and term limits that give people a defined exit.

Can non-directors serve on board committees?

Usually yes, and it is a good practice, with one significant exception.

Committees that exercise the authority of the board must generally consist solely of directors. Advisory committees that research, recommend and report back can include anyone.

This is one of the most useful recruitment routes available. A finance committee that includes an accountant who is not a director gives you the expertise without asking for a full board commitment, and it lets both sides find out whether the fit works before a seat is offered.

Check your state statute and your own bylaws, since the line between advisory and authority-exercising committees is where the legal distinction sits.

This is reference information, not legal or tax advice. Rules vary by state and change over time. For a decision that carries real consequences, check the current text at irs.gov or your state registry, and talk to a nonprofit attorney or CPA.