Ownership of the Plan

[page 3] One of the great assets of this model is that a plan is developed by lay people rather than by the pastor. Congregations that do not have some kind of planning process usually have only a pastor's plan to follow -- a plan that belong to the pastor, resides in the pastor's mind, comes when the pastor comes, and leaves when the pastor leaves. Very seldom does the plan get from the pastor's mind to the people's hands and hearts. The people certainly do not have ownership of the plan, because they had no part in designing it.

Think for a moment about what happens to lay people when the plan for their congregation moves with the pastor. A new pastor moves in, and all of a sudden a new plan is being projected. It must be awfully confusing for lay people to experience a pastoral change when there is no plan that the congregation has formulated for ministry. Every pastor seems to bring a new plan and a new set of ideas, and that can be confusing.

For this reason, the model being proposed here is an especially effective way of dealing with problems of pastoral change in an itinerant system such as that of The United Methodist Church. When the pastor moves, the plan stays, because it was developed by lay people through the Joel Committe. The pastor's role is to help implement the plan.

Of course, this whole concept underscores a strong trust relationship on the part of clergy and laity. How can the church expect to be a strong force in society, unless clergy and laity sense their mutual responsibilities in trusting each other and working closely together? I think we clergy must reevaluate the limitations we have put on the [page 4] ability and trust of lay people. Laity have such a big vision of what God wants to do through the church and are eager to help design a plan to see God accomplish it through their congregation.

At the same time, the role of the clergy in collaboration with the Joel Committe is very important. At Frazer, as senior pastor, I have had the responsibility of recommending names for selection to the Joel Committee. This is recognized as part of my leadership responsibility. Notice, I did not say that I simply choose the members of the Committee. Rather, I submit names to the Administrative Board for their approval and election.

In addition, part of my role as pastor is to inspire and hold accountable. I always contact each member approved for selection to the Committee and stress to him/her the importance of the planning process and of each person's participation in it. I express my expectation that all members of the committee will be present at each meeting. What we cover in each session builds upon what was covered in the previous sessions. I suggest that a person not agree to serve unless that person can attend each session. I have discovered that lay people will change their business or personal schedules to be present for the Joel Committee meetings. Lay people respond to the level of expectation that is presented to them!

Further, I always list the number of times the committee will meet -- usually four to six times a year. I express confidence that the committee can do its work in this time, and I have discovered that committees usually complete their work in the amount of time that is predetermined. Committees that have no set expectation for ending usually last longer time and accomplish very little.

Following this approach, I have discovered that lay people get extremely excited about being involved in a plan into which they have given input and design. Lay people will give all the money, time, and talent necessary to carry out a plan in which they really believe. Lay people seldom will give much commitment to a plan they perceive as the pastor trying to sell them something they need to be doing. Lay people are interested and committed if they sense that they have a part in creating the plan.

Lay people get excited about seeing God's will done through the life of the local congregation. They begin to catch a vision of what God wants to do through the local congregation and see the tremendous part they are playing in helping carry out God's will. [page 5]

Ownership of the plan is a great motivation for ministry. If people have designed a ministry, they are eager to communicate that plan to the rest of the congregation. The best interpreters of the plan become the people who participated in designing it.

Scope of Planning

The Joel Committe is a short-term committee -- more like a task force. The Committe is asked to serve effectively for a specific period of time and to make its report. Then it is dissolved. I personally feel that this is realistic if the individual members of the Committee do their homework and plan to complete their work at a given time.

Notice, the concrete goal of the Joel Committee is the presentation of its report to the Administrative Board of the congregation and to the Council on Ministries. The Council and the Board are then asked to review and approve the plan. Once the report is adopted, it is then published in the worship bulletin so that every member of the congregation is informed of the long-range plan.

Notice too that this process does not simply assume passage by the Council and the Board. Theoretically it is possible for the report to be rejected. But this again is where the selection of your Joel Committee plays such a vital role. The selection of Joel Committee members and the leadership and integrity they have in the congregation will largely determine the response of the accountability groups for adopting the proposals. If the Administrative Board and the congregation have faith in the Joel Committee, they will approach the report from the perspective of trust and faith. Each time a congregation adopts the proposals of the Joel Committee, and the plan is carried out, it gives greater credibility and trust to the next Joel Committee. Almost all of the Joel Committee reports from Frazer Memorial have been adopted unanimously by the Administrative Board. This is due more to the people serving on the Committee than to the proposals presented.

The basic format of presenting the report at Frazer is always the same (see the report form on page 6, and the examples of actual reports in the Appendix, pages 109 - 114). We always begin with the names of the members of the Joel Committee making the report. This is important. In keeping with all that we have said on this subject above, most people want to know who is involved in making proposals before they even consider the proposals themselves. [ page 6 - 7]

After the Committee members are listed, our custom at Frazer has been to move immediately to a presentation of basic statistical data. First, we look at the actual figures for Sunday school and worship attendance in recent years, and then we project attendance figures on that basis into the future. Listing these projections gives people a real vision of the potential of the congregation. At the time of Frazer's first Joel Committee's report, the Committee and the Administrative Board were both amazed at the potential indicated by the statistical studies. The report helped to expand the vision of everyone, and opened up possibilities for growth that we would never have imagined.

In the report for 1980, for example (see Appendix, page 111), we registered a growth trend in Sunday school that had reached 800. From there, we projected a figure of 950 in 1981 and 1,100 in 1982. The figures for your congregation would naturally have to be adjusted to reflect your own trends. If recent trends have been down, you may have to generate new ministry before your report can become a positive projection. But it is amazing how the planning process itself, grounded in prayer, can move you toward more positive results.

Notice, at Frazer, we always deal more with attendance at Sunday school and worship than with membership. The plans toward which we are aiming involve facilities, staff, and ministries. These kinds of plans relate more to numbers of people participating than to numbers on the membership rolls.

Next in the report, based on statistics and projections, we move to the three major areas of the report itself. The scope of the planning process at Frazer center on three areas: ministries, staff, facilities. We use the term ministries rather than programs because the church is not an institution running a program. Rather, it is a community of faith that is in ministry. Likewise, staff is essential to train and equipe people for ministry; and facilities are essential to give staff and lay people a place to be in ministry.

Good planning looks at these three areas: ministries, staff, and facilities. Part of our responsibility is to be sure we plan for each of these areas to keep them in proportion to each other. The three must form an equilateral triangle. [page 8]

Facilities

Facilities and property are essential to give staff and lay people an opportunity to do ministry through the local church. Some group needs to be planning for future property and facilities. Many churches are "locked in" by property and facility limitations because of poor planning in the past. Property and facilities should not determine the scope of ministry anymore than a shoe should determine the size of the foot!

In 1980, the Joel Committee report at Frazer indicated that worship facilities should be enlarged. It also suggested that a decision should be made by the end of 1980 concerning these facilities. This put the church in a position of acting for the future rather than reacting at a time when the facilities were overcrowed. Since we were already involved in three morning worship services, the decision was made in 1980 to pursue a larger sanctuary. Architectural plans were drawn, and a new sanctuary became a reality in 1982! This was an example of the importance of planning.

One of the options for dealing with the question of additional facilities was the possibility of relocating again. These suggestions were listed in the report under "Facilities." The Joel Committee is an effective way to deal with very controversial questions. You might imagine how controversial it would be if the church had just relocated ten years earlier, and now was considering relocating agaqin!

The credibility of the study group was so strong that the Administrative Board voted unanimously to consider the possibility of selling the current facilities and relocating. The process of planning made possible the consideration of the possibility of relocating. The major [page 9] reason for remaining at the present location was the avilability of additional property at the time the Joel Committee was making this report.

New recommendations were made for facilities in subsequent Joel Committee reports. In 1986, for example (see Appendix, page 113), recommendations were made to provide additional nursery space; to expand worship space in the existing building; to provide additional office space, rooms for children's ministry, and additional parking space. In the area of facilities, the needs of the congregation will naturally be different, and these needs will change and become more dynamic as years of proyerful planning build on each other.

Staff

Staff is essential to train and equip people for ministry. The task of staff is never to do ministry, but rather to train lay people for ministry.

The recommendation concerning staff at Frazer has b ecome a standard one. The Staff/Parish Committee is charged with the responsibility of adding a staff person as new members are received in the church. Because of the large use of part-time staff persons, the Staff/Parish Committee has the option of hiring part-time persons or a full-time staff member. The Administrative Board does not hold the Staff/Parish Committee in strict obedience toa formula based on the ration of new members required to hire a new staff member. The Board leaves this basically up to the Staff/Parish Committee. The Board does, however, put a large sum on money into each new budget to be used for hiring additional staff persons. The figure of $50,000 is provided in next year's budget for future staff.

At Frazer, we have had a lot of discussion about how many new members will require an additional staff person. In 1980 we used the figure of 350 new members. You will notice in the report from 1986 that we had the number less defined when we said that a staff person should be hired for every 200-350 new members. The reason for this wide range is the strong commitment to utilizing part-time staff persons. Also, each part-time staff person is not expected to give the same amount of time as other part-time staff people.

One other thing we encountered as we started to grow was the need to differentiate between new member and net gain of new members. In 1980 we were not losing many new members due to their moving and transfer. By 1986 this became more critical, and is more critical [page 10] today. We now use a basic rule of thumb of adding a full-time staff person or two to three part-time staff persons for every net gain of 250 members.

Ministries

Facilities and staff are not an end in themselves. As we have said before, the bedrock of all planning is ministry. But it is interesting -- even amazing -- to observe how the plans for ministry always dovetail with the plans for facilities and staff.

This is a good place to re-emphasize the difference between ministry and program. Programs can easily become "busy work." Programs have a tendency to become self-serving and create a need to perpetuate themselves. On the other hand, ministry is serving. The model is sevanthood -- people finding life as the lose their lives in service. Programs tend to become "church work." Ministries are the "work of the church." People get tired of "church work," but they never get tired of the "work of the church."

In the area of ministries, several concree suggestions were made by the 1980 Joel Committee that became reality in ensuring years. The committee suggested the use of portable classrooms for Sunday school to help meet that facility need. Those portable classrooms became a reality in 1981 and proved to be an effective way of providing facilities for Sunday school and small group needs.

Also in 1980 the Joel Committee gave visibility to the importance of assimilating new members. This task was given to the work area on Evangelism and the work area on Stewardship, in order for specific measures to be taken to insure that we were responsible stewards in assimilating new people. One specific plan that grew out of this was to have an Administrative Board member assigned to each new family unit to serve as sponsors of that new member unit. The Aminiistrative Board member would report back concerning the place where the new member was involved in serving and the Sunday school class in which the new member was participating.

In 1986, on the other hand, a number of new and important ministries were envisioned by the Joel Committee. The "In Christ Way" ministry is a ministry of local missions that reaches out to people in need in the community. Any person who has financial needs can submit that need to a committee of lay persons. The most legitimate needs are dtermined and all money that has been given to thie [page 11] ministry is then distributed to people in need in the community. It is based on the model of Matthew 25 when Jesus talked about people who were hungry, imprisoned, naked, lonely, and said, "Just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me" (25:40).

The In Christ Way Ministry has continued to grow. In 1990, In Christ Way Ministry gave out over $120,000 to pay utility bills, house payments, etc. An additional 6,000 familes were helped with clothing; 5,394 pounds of food were distributed' and 100 family units were given financial counseling.

Another important ministry that was suggested in 1986 was the "Debt Retirement" emphasis. The Finance Committee and Stewardship Committee worked toward a plan for Frazer to become debt-free. Beginning in 1986, the money for all building needs was given before the buildings were constructed. People were given an opportunity to pledge to an early debt retirement during the stewardship program. An additional $300,000 was paid each year on the early debt retirement. Frazer should be debt-free in the early 1990s.

These illustrations are not intended to suggest that every recommendation of every Joel Committee at Frazer has gone off without a hitch. In 1980, the Committee recommended that we find ways to increase participation at the 8:40 A.M. hour both in Sunday school and in worship. Because the congregation was basically young, we had a difficult time building a strong 8:40 A.M. worship service. Young couples with small children do not get up early on Sunday morning and bring them to Sunday school or worship.

One suggestion here was to start a fellowship breakfast to encourage families to come together, meet other families, and eat before the early morning worship service. Several people volunteered to prepare the breakfast, and this is a ministry that continues to grow. Today the Sunday morning breakfast and fellowship is an important part of the total ministry of Frazer.

As you look through the sample Joel Committee reports from Frazer 9given in the Appendix), you will see many more ideas for ministry that began with this Committee and its report: a counseling center, a teacher training program, the Frazer Memorial Television Ministry. (Today this television ministry involves about eighty volunteers and presents ten hours of programming each week on five different stations, including the local ABC affiliate.) This list goes on. But what is [page 12] most significant is not the specific things that Frazer has done in its ministry, but what you can do if youwill use an effective planning model. All of the ministries we have named began with a Joel Committee that dreamed a dream to open new doors for ministry.

Before concluding this section, I must emphasize an additional point: the importance of carrying out the plan. Plans are no good unless the church carries tham out. I have tried to illustrate here some of the concrete ways in which Frazer has carried out the plans that were formulated by its Joel Committee. The Joel Committee dreams dreams, then gives those dreams to the appropriate committees in the congregation to work out the details, and then the congregation experiences the joy of seeing plans become reality.

A very simple formula to follow in the church is, "Plan your work -- work your plan." Workin the plan is as important as planning the work!