1. Preserving the Public Value
of Sacred Places
Partners for Sacred Places
Parishes and their buildings play a key This role can be called the
role in the life of our communities… “public value” of sacred places.

2. Why Should We Sustain Historic
Sacred Places?
• Older churches help anchor our
streetscapes, mark our skylines and
offer the best artistry and architecture
in our neighborhoods
• Research data shows that urban
congregations open their buildings to
serve people in need, often sacrificially
• Parishes and related entities such as
schools add to the economic health and
vitality of neighborhoods

3. Why Help Sacred Places NOW?
• Many community-serving
congregations face serious
repair issues costing more
than they can afford
• Some are at risk of closure or
dismantling piece by piece
• Partners’ work in
Pennsylvania, Texas and
Illinois demonstrate how a
program serving historic
churches can attract public
and private funding

4. Research: Documenting Public Value
• In the mid-1990s, Partners
embarked on a major public
policy study with Dr. Ram
Cnaan and the University of
Pennsylvania’s School of
Social Policy and Practice
• 115 congregations surveyed
in Philadelphia and five
other cities
• First study in America to
document how
congregations serve the
public, including
contributions of space, staff
and volunteer time, cash,
utilities and in-kind support.

5. Research:
Sacred Places at Risk Findings
19%
81%

6. More Sacred Places at Risk Findings
• 93% of urban congregations open their doors to serve
outside members of the community
• Each congregation provides, on average, 5,300 hours
of volunteer service annually
• Value of space and resources put into programs is
estimated at $200,000 per congregation
• 76% of all services provided are located within a
congregation’s own building

7. Who Congregations Serve Most Often
Most Frequent Programs
• Clothing Closets and Food
Pantries
• Music performances
• Partnerships with
Neighborhood Groups
Group Served Most Often
• Children and Youth

8. Research Made Practical:
The Tool Kit and New Dollars
•Makes Sacred Places
at Risk methodology
available to
congregations
•Helps
congregations write
and communicate a
new case for their
community value
The toolkit was developed in 2002; New Dollars began in 2003

9. “Economic Halo Effect” of Sacred Places
A Pilot Study
• Funded by the William Penn
Foundation, this project is
looking into over 50 factors
that describe a sacred place’s
contribution to the
community
• Factors range from the value
of green space to the
leveraging effect of capital
projects.
• Partners is working again
with Dr Ram Cnaan,
University of Pennsylvania

10. “Economic Halo Effect” of Sacred Places
Participating Parishes and Congregations
Congregations:
• Mother Bethel A.M.E. Church
• Arch Street United Methodist
Church
• Visitation B.V.M. Church
• Gloria Dei Church
• Congregation Rodeph Shalom
• First Baptist Church of Paschall
• Jones Tabernacle A.M.E. Church
• Shiloh Baptist Church
• The Church of St. Luke and the
Epiphany
• St. Mary's Episcopal Church,
Hamilton Village
• Calvary United Methodist Church
• Summit Presbyterian Church

11. “Economic Halo Effect” of Sacred Places
Economic value of social services and cultural
programs sponsored or hosted by congregations
• Value of clergy, staff, and volunteer time, space
provided, in-kind support, utilities, and cash
support for community-serving programs
supported by and/or housed by congregations
Environmental Factors
• Community value of outdoor space, trees, gardens,
etc.

12. “Economic Halo Effect” of Sacred Places
Impact of Congregational • Support for local municipalities
Spending
via payroll or income taxes for
• Congregational impact on local employees
jobs, including janitorial,
building maintenance, • Impact of regular repair projects
food/catering services; banking; and occasional large capital
funeral home/florist services; projects
musicians; printing services, etc.
• Spending by congregation
members who commute to their
sacred place from the wider
region, patronizing local
businesses after worship,
meetings or events.

13. “Economic Halo Effect” of Sacred Places
Congregations as catalysts for
economic activity and
development • Impact of visitor traffic to
congregation-hosted artistic
• Incubation of small businesses performances, family reunions,
and non-profits in affordable and other ‘life events.’
space within the sacred place.
• Impact of stable, active sacred
places on adjacent business
districts.
• Economic impact of CDCs and
other non-profits formally
affiliated with congregations.

14. Case Study:
Visitation B.V.M.
• Total Halo effect
calculated at
$21,823,359
• Nursery School
and Daycare
impact: $4,817,250
• Individual Impact:
$4,153,270

15. THE CHALLENGE NOW
To follow the pilot with a more
comprehensive research project so
that we can continue:
• building a constituency of civic
leaders and donors who support
community-serving sacred places
• building the capacity of
congregations to manage their
properties, fund their care, and use
them well in service to their mission
Partners for Sacred Places