Many years back I heard this paradigm: a group of citizens/volunteers organize and create a nonprofit as a solution to a problem. Over time the nonprofit gets so good at what it does, the government wants to contract for the services. Over more time the nonprofit becomes de facto, an extension of the government. And over time, another group comes along saying that the problem originally targeted by the nonprofit at the beginning of the story has now become part of the problem.
The questions for the day: was the evolution of the nonprofit toward being identified as a part of the problem a failure in governance? Did growth and the need for resources to fuel the growth become the driver over mission by the nonprofit board?
Why the questions? Take a look at what's going on with Education Colleges (noting that many of these actually are state organizations but the argument still has validity, in my opinion). A nonprofit advocacy group is challenging these colleges to up their quality. Is this not just a failure in governance, fulfilling the duties of care and obedience, on the part of the Education Colleges?
For more background, see the story in the Wall Street Journal.