Russ Robertson

The goal isn’t just to start a capital project. It’s to start it ready.

Introduction

For most nonprofit organizations, getting to the starting line of a capital project is often harder than getting to the finish line.

Boards and executive teams tend to assume that once a need is identified—more space, a better building, a modernized facility—the project is “ready.” In reality, readiness is rarely triggered by a single condition. It’s determined by several overlapping, and sometimes competing, criteria that take time, discipline, and alignment to resolve.

I’ve seen many organizations stall not because they lacked vision, but because they underestimated what it truly takes to be ready. This blog is meant to help leaders visualize the major indicators that suggest a capital project is actually imminent—not just aspirational.

Physical Need: When the Mission Outgrows the Building

The first and most common readiness trigger is physical necessity.

Over time, organizations change. Programs evolve. Services expand or contract. Client needs shift. Staff sizes grow—or sometimes shrink. When that happens, the space that once supported the mission may no longer fit the work.

Key questions to ask include:

  • Has the organization’s program model changed over a defined period of time?
  • Does the current facility limit service delivery, access, or operational efficiency?
  • Is the organization operating in space that is functionally obsolete, under-sized, over-sized, or poorly configured?

In some cases, readiness shows up as growth pressure—more people, more programs, more demand. In others, it appears as a modernization issue: outdated systems, inefficient layouts, or facilities that no longer reflect the organization’s credibility or values. Occasionally, readiness even means downsizing or consolidating.

When a physical mismatch between mission and facility persists long enough, it often becomes the first undeniable signal that a capital project may be necessary.

When a physical mismatch between mission and facility persists long enough, it often becomes the first undeniable signal that a capital project may be necessary.

Financial Opportunity: When Capacity Meets Capital

Physical need alone does not make an organization ready.

The second major readiness indicator is financial opportunity. Specifically, does the organization have the fundraising capacity—and credibility—to support a capital effort?

This doesn’t mean having all the money in hand. It means understanding whether the organization can realistically leverage its fundraising history into a capital narrative. The Capital Project Calculator can be a useful tool in understanding the project’s high-level economics.

Important considerations include:

  • Has the organization demonstrated consistent success raising funds for operations?
  • Are there existing funders who could be engaged early around a capital vision?
  • Does the organization have access to funders known for supporting capital grants, not just programs?

Capital fundraising is different from annual fundraising. It requires a longer runway, different messaging, and often a broader coalition of supporters. Organizations that have successfully stewarded donors, communicated impact, and managed restricted funds are better positioned to test a capital concept in the marketplace.

When leadership can begin to socialize a project—quietly and strategically—and receive early validation from funders, readiness starts to solidify.

Strategic Alignment: When Leadership Is Truly on the Same Page

The third readiness condition is often the most difficult—and the most overlooked.

Is the organization aligned?

Many capital projects originate with a passionate executive director or a visionary staff leader. But funders, lenders, and partners want to see more than enthusiasm. They want evidence of shared conviction.

Questions that matter include:

  • Is the board aligned with staff on the need for a capital project?
  • Does the project clearly advance the organization’s mission and near-term strategy?
  • Is there a current, board-affirmed strategic plan that supports the facility decision?

Beautiful renderings and compelling concepts are not substitutes for strategic alignment. Without a plan that clearly ties facility investment to program outcomes, growth objectives, or operational sustainability, even well-designed projects struggle to gain traction.

True readiness emerges when board and staff together acknowledge not just the desire for a new or improved facility—but the necessity of it.

Beautiful renderings and compelling concepts are not substitutes for strategic alignment.

Readiness Is a Process, Not a Moment

If there’s one thing nonprofit leaders should take away, it’s this: preparing for a capital project is complex and emotionally demanding.

Senior decision-makers often live in an uncomfortable space for extended periods of time—balancing physical pressures, financial uncertainty, and governance dynamics simultaneously. By the time all three criteria finally align, exhaustion has often already set in.

That’s why many organizations choose to onboard professional owner’s representation services early. Doing so helps shoulder the burden of readiness—bringing structure, objectivity, and momentum to what is otherwise a prolonged and draining process.

The goal isn’t just to start a capital project. It’s to start it ready.

Key Takeaways

  • Capital project readiness is not defined by a single trigger—it emerges from multiple, overlapping conditions.
  • Physical need often initiates the conversation, but it must be paired with financial opportunity and strategic alignment.
  • Funders look for evidence that facility investment is grounded in a clear, board-affirmed strategic plan.
  • The readiness phase is often the most taxing part of a capital project cycle.
  • Engaging experienced owner’s representation early can reduce risk, fatigue, and misalignment—before construction ever begins.

Ready to take the next step? We’d love to chat with you!

Contact Us