A closer look at lay sponsorship. A CHA survey reveals some problems with two established models

The private association of the Christian faithful (PACF) and private juridic person (PJP) are two lay sponsorship options for healthcare organizations that find traditional sponsorship unavailable. Today two questions relate to these models: Are the PACF and the PJP still realistic and attractive models of sponsorship? Can Catholic identity be maintained in them? Last summer CHA surveyed the seven member organizations that use either the PACF or the PJP as sponsorship models. In addition, CHA conducted four site visits, which corroborated the survey findings. Most respondents said their organizations had adopted the lay model as a means of remaining Catholic after their original sponsors withdrew. Most said they had a good relationship with the local diocese, although formal meetings with the diocesan leaders were infrequent. Each organization had a clearly articulated mission and reinforced their mission and values in various ways. Leadership development appeared somewhat weak. Some respondents spoke favorably of the PACF and PJP models of sponsorship, but others saw limitations, including isolation, lack of clarity in reporting mechanisms between the organization and the diocese, and lack of board education about the models. Even those who saw a future for lay sponsorship on the PACF and PJP models said that, although it is important for Catholic healthcare to develop lay leadership, these models are not promising steps in that direction.