Peter C. Weber, PhD
Associate Professor and Program Coordinator
Philanthropy and Nonprofit Studies (PNPS) Program
College of Human Sciences
Auburn University

NACC Community,

I’m currently feeling that mix of excitement and relief that comes when ARNOVA-related tasks begin appearing on my to-do list. I’m excited about ARNOVA and the prospect of seeing old and new friends, and I’m relieved because this marks the semester’s halfway turning point. After administering the fall semester’s round of midterm exams, I always feel like sliding into the winter break, with ARNOVA and Thanksgiving as welcome breaks from the daily routine.

ARNOVA season also means I’m wrapping up my first year as NACC president. It has been both a good and challenging year. I look forward to finally seeing fellow NACC members in person at our upcoming membership meeting at ARNOVA. The membership meeting will provide an opportunity to discuss NACC’s future and the long-term value of nonprofit and philanthropic education. I also look forward to co-hosting the Wednesday reception with ARNOVA, George Mason University, and Baruch College. I am grateful to Alan Abramson and George Mitchell for making this possible, and to Alan for his vision of closer connections between ARNOVA and NACC. As these events approach, I encourage you to invite colleagues who may be unfamiliar with NACC to attend the membership meeting and reception, learn more about the organization, and join the conversation about the future of our field. And keep an eye on summer 2027 for NACC’s biennial conference that will be hosted by the University of Connecticut, with the tentative theme: “Imagining Better Futures with Communities: Nonprofit and Philanthropic Education as a Catalyst for Change.” Stay tuned, the NACC conference call for papers will be released in late November.

One of the most exciting things we have been working on as NACC is the revision to the accreditation process. Over the past months, we have used surveys and feedback to gauge interest in the NACC accreditation and possible revisions. This has allowed us to set the work for the Accreditation Task Force that we are in the process of forming. Based on the feedback we have collected, the revised process should move beyond a primary focus on guidelines to incorporate broader dimensions of program quality, including resource capacity, faculty qualifications, and community engagement. This expansion could build on the five pillars identified at the 2025 Auburn Summit: Community-centric, Core curriculum-focused, Values-based, Administrative capacity, and Ongoing learning. At its core, however, this conversation is not simply about accreditation. It is about articulating the value of nonprofit education to both internal and external audiences and ensuring that our programs are positioned to thrive in the years ahead.

Our conversations about accreditation, together with this cycle’s faculty openings and the closure of several well-known centers, have reminded me of the importance of both nonprofit education and the nonprofit sector itself. I am glad for universities’ investments in the study of nonprofits, philanthropy, and civil society. At the same time, the closure of programs and centers reminds us of the difficult context for these endeavors, both within academia and more broadly, amid economic, political, and social pressures.

At a time when trust in higher education is at historic lows, nonprofit and philanthropic education should go beyond the crucial goal of building the nonprofit sector’s capacity. All our students, regardless of the careers they choose, are future donors, volunteers, and board members, and more than anything else (we hope) engaged and informed citizens. The nonprofit sector remains one of the primary ways people engage with their communities, address social challenges, support one another, and create positive social change. Yet, as a recent report from the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy reminds us, many Americans engage with nonprofit organizations without realizing it, highlighting how invisible much of the sector’s work remains in our daily lives. This disconnect underscores the importance of our work as educators, researchers, and practitioners.

As we gather at ARNOVA in November, I hope we take time not only to discuss our research and teaching, but also to reflect on the broader role our programs play in strengthening the nonprofit sector and the communities it serves. NACC’s ongoing conversations about accreditation, quality, and value are ultimately conversations about ensuring that nonprofit and philanthropic education remains vibrant, relevant, and impactful for years to come.

Thank you,
Peter C. Weber
Board President, NACC

Peter C. Weber, PhD
Associate Professor and Program Coordinator
Philanthropy and Nonprofit Studies (PNPS) Program
College of Human Sciences
Auburn University

NACC Community,

As the spring semester comes to a close, many of us have wrapped up teaching, graded countless assignments, submitted final grades, responded to emails asking for grades to be rounded up, and read end-of-semester student evaluations. Like many of us, I’m looking forward to shifting my focus from teaching to research over the summer months.

This time of the year also brings some familiar reflections. It reminds me how much of our life as academics, researchers, and teachers is shaped by evaluation. Our teaching is assessed by students, our research by peer reviewers, and our work by colleagues and administrators. Even after years in academia, I still feel that familiar mix of anxiety and anticipation when opening a set of course evaluations or an editor’s decision letter.

While writing this, I realized I was also thinking about heading to Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu (BJJ) class later this evening. I started practicing jiu-jitsu when I moved to Auburn in 2019 to do something that would keep my mind off work. Part of what draws me to it is a simple idea: the mats don’t lie. You either succeed or you don’t, but there is little room for posturing or pretending. Progress comes through practice, feedback, and consistency. (We affectionately call it “killer yoga.”)

At the same time, what makes that environment meaningful is the sense of community that underpins it. A good gym is a space of mutual support, where learning and teaching are shared responsibilities. Of course, comparison is inevitable (and often humbling), but there is a recognition that everyone’s path is different, and growth is an ongoing process rather than a fixed outcome.

Reflecting on this, I realize the similarities between my experience at my BJJ gym and NACC. Both are centered on honest feedback, collective learning, and individual journeys. Organizations like NACC, ARNOVA, and ISTR have long served as spaces where many of us “grew up” as scholars. They are places where we present early ideas, receive feedback, build collaborations, and develop both intellectually and professionally. Competition and comparison are unavoidable parts of academic life. But they should not define our professional communities. What sustains us over the long term are the relationships we build, the conversations we engage in, and the sense of shared purpose that connects our work.

For many years, NACC has played a particularly important role in this regard. For nonprofit scholars and center directors, especially in the early days when there were few of us, dispersed across many institutions, NACC has often functioned as a kind of professional home. It has been a space for connection, support, and learning. Over the years, we have jokingly referred to NACC as a “self-help group” or even a “drinking society.” Yet those characterizations also point to the underlying essence of NACC. At our best, we are a community where we could and still can be candid, supportive, and collegial in ways that are not always possible within our home institutions.

At the same time, NACC is continuing to evolve. As a board and membership, we have been actively reflecting on what the organization can and should become. These conversations have included efforts to establish a regular review cycle for NACC’s curricular guidelines and to strengthen the accreditation process. (If you responded to my recent email or survey on accreditation – thank you!) Still, I think it is important not to forget that in a professional environment where we are constantly evaluated, compared, and, at times, isolated, the value of a collegial and supportive community is essential. The relationships we build through NACC are a core part of what sustains it.

I am also looking ahead to the upcoming ISTR conference in Lisbon. Conferences like ISTR have shaped many of our professional journeys. I still remember attending, with a mix of excitement and anxiety, my first ISTR conference in Barcelona in 2008. Some of my fondest memories from past conferences are not only the panels and presentations, but also gathering with colleagues and friends from around the world to watch World Cup matches together. Once again, I look forward to reconnecting with old friends and meeting new ones, gathering with colleagues and peers in local cafés, and watching this summer’s World Cup matches. If you will be in Lisbon, I hope we can connect.

In a profession defined by evaluation, NACC reminds us that some of the most important things we do (the relationships we build, the colleagues we support, the community we sustain) are never captured on any rubric. Let’s keep supporting one another’s journeys, which are always individual and communal.

Thank you,
Peter C. Weber
Board President, NACC