It’s the first Tuesday of the month, you're sitting in a board meeting.
The financial reports have been distributed. Last month's results have been discussed. Questions around program delivery, staffing, and performance have all been answered.
Then someone asks:
"What does our cash position look like over the next three months?"
It's not a trick question. In fact, it's exactly the sort of question a board should be asking.
After all, decisions about staffing, programs, investment, funding applications, and strategic priorities are all influenced by what an organisation expects to happen next, not simply what happened last month.
Yet for many not-for-profits, this is the moment where the conversation becomes less certain.
Someone references the current bank balance.
Someone else mentions an upcoming grant payment.
Another person recalls a large expense that's due next month.
The answer is usually somewhere in the room, spread across multiple people, systems, spreadsheets, and conversations.
The challenge is bringing it all together.
Most NFPs Don't Have A Reporting Problem
One of the reasons this issue can be difficult to identify is because, on the surface, everything appears to be working.
The bookkeeping is being completed.
Reports are being produced.
The accountant is handling compliance.
Payroll is running on time.
From the outside, the finance function appears healthy.
Which is why many organisations are surprised when they begin struggling to answer relatively simple questions about the future.
Questions like:
- Can we comfortably recruit another team member?
- What happens if a funding payment is delayed by six weeks?
- Which programs are generating the strongest financial outcomes?
- How much flexibility do we have heading into the next quarter?
These aren't unusual questions. They're leadership questions.
And leadership questions require a different type of financial visibility than month-end reporting alone can provide.
The Problem Usually Appears During Growth
In early stages, many organisations can operate quite comfortably with a bookkeeper, an accountant, and a leadership team that stays close to the numbers.
The challenge is that organisational complexity rarely stays still.
A not-for-profit that once managed a single funding source may now be managing several. Programs expand, staffing grows, reporting requirements increase, and our favourite - funding agreements carrying different conditions and timelines. Strategic decisions become larger and more consequential.
None of these changes are problematic in isolation.
The difficulty is that while the organisation evolves, the finance structure often remains largely unchanged with the same people involved, using the same systems as day one.
Despite the complexity surrounding the numbers increasing significantly…
Eventually, leaders find themselves spending more time chasing information, validating assumptions, and piecing together reports than they do actually using the information to make decisions.
When Everyone Owns Part Of Finance
Despite it being unintentional, one of the most common patterns we see in growing not-for-profits is finance becoming fragmented across multiple people - mostly through necessity.
How similar does this look for your organisation:
- The bookkeeper manages transactions and reconciliations.
- The accountant provides compliance support and year-end advice.
- Operations teams help track program activity.
- The CEO prepares information for board meetings and funding discussions.
Each role contributes something valuable.
The challenge is that nobody is responsible for connecting those pieces into a complete picture.
As a result, important financial questions often require multiple conversations before an answer emerges.
The information exists - but the ownership doesn't and over time, that creates friction.
- Board reports take longer to prepare than they should.
- Forecasts become outdated.
- Decisions are delayed because leadership wants more certainty before committing.
- Opportunities are harder to evaluate because nobody can confidently explain the financial implications.
Eventually, finance becomes something the organisation is constantly coordinating rather than something it can confidently rely on.
The Difference Between Knowing And Understanding
One of the more interesting things we see when working with organisations is that many leaders already know their business is performing well.
They've been told by their accountant their reports look healthy, and often, the bank account reflects it.
What they often struggle with is understanding why.
- Which programs are performing best?
- Where are margins strongest?
- Which activities create the greatest financial pressure?
- What decisions are driving results?
- What decisions are reducing them?
Knowing the organisation is doing well and understanding what is driving that performance are two very different things.
The first provides reassurance, but the second creates visibility.
And visibility is what allows leaders to make better decisions moving forward.
Why The 90-Day Question Matters
The reason we often ask leaders whether they can confidently tell their board what cash looks like in 90 days isn't because forecasting is the ultimate measure of financial health.
It's because the question reveals how connected an organisation is to its financial reality.
Strong answers usually indicate strong financial visibility.
Weak answers often point towards fragmented ownership, disconnected information, or a finance structure that hasn't kept pace with organisational growth.
In other words, the question is rarely about cash flow alone, but rather, it's a window into how finance operates across the organisation.
Because when leadership has clear visibility over the future, planning becomes easier, decisions become faster, and your board becomes more confident.
Finance shifts from being something that reports on the organisation to something that actively supports it.
If answering the 90-day cash flow question feels harder than it should, it may be worth looking beyond the forecast itself and examining how finance is structured, owned, and communicated throughout the organisation.
The answer is usually far more revealing than the cash balance alone.
