Evaluating the Harvest: Looking at a Decade of NAMB Church Planting

I was first seriously introduced to the idea of evangelism through church planting in the Spring of 2007. Donald Miller's emerging church book, Blue Like Jazz, mentioned a preacher called "Mark the Cussing Pastor." After a quick Yahoo search, I found Mars Hill's podcasts of Mark Driscoll and downloaded all the available previous sermons to my iPod. He talked up church planting and a small group of churches called Acts 29, who were trying to plant more churches in America. God's timing couldn't have been more serendipitous. My family had just moved into a duplex beside a pastor studying church planting and exploring a call to plant in Seattle. We hit it off and almost went with them, but then God sent our three core-team families to three different cities, where we planted three churches that still thrive today.  

When the time came to plant a church, I didn't partner with Acts 29. While in seminary in 2011, I listened to a presentation of the Southern Baptist plan through the North American Mission Board (NAMB) to focus all their money and attention on planting churches in 32 major cities and then see those churches export Christianity and more church plants into all the rest of the U.S. and then out to the entire world. They called it the Send City Initiative. It made sense to my impressionable mind, and I was already a member of an SBC-affiliated church. So when the time came to plant, I saddled up with NAMB.  

It's been nearly 12 years since church planting changed my life, almost ten years since our Risen Life Church-supported Bible study in my home quickly became the makings of a church plant and birthed a new church in Salt Lake City, Utah. I've been asking myself what went well, what didn't, what I might have changed, and what would have been more helpful if I were to do it over. Was it worth the hard work, time, and money? I think so. I love Redeeming Life Church. But that's where honest evaluation and prayer have been insightful.  

As our church looks at evangelism in the U.S., we must consider how church planting serves this mission. As an SBC-affiliated church, we are evaluating our cooperation's "home team" church planting network. Is this the best place for our church to invest our time, work, and money? 

Coming up on the 13th anniversary of the NAMB trustees' election of Kevin Ezell as the President and 11 years since the launch of the Send City Initiative, it seems reasonable to take some time and evaluate how it's all going. Is it achieving the original goals? Is it working? If so, excellent! If not, what needs to change so we can be better stewards of God's gospel mission and the funds for that mission?          

At the 2023 annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention, Tyler Gresham, a messenger from Fairhaven Baptist Church in Demopolis, Alabama, made a motion requesting that the trustees of the North American Mission Board form a task force to study:  

1. The number of church plants started and church planters sent to those church plants since 2012; 

2. The number of those churches that continue to exist regardless of denominational affiliation, the number of those that continue to exist as SBC-affiliated churches, and the number of those that have ceased to exist; 

3. The number of church planters sent out since 2012 who continue to serve as vocational pastors regardless of denominational affiliation, the number of those who continue to serve as vocational pastors of SBC churches, and the number of those who no longer serve as vocational pastors; and 

4. The total amount of Cooperative Program funds spent on church plants since 2012.  

Gresham's motion concluded with a request that the NAMB trustees make the report of their findings available at the 2024 annual meeting in printed and digital formats.  

This motion is both an appropriate and reasonable request. When I partnered with NAMB as a church planter, they expected me to send them monthly reports, including how much money came into the church, how much I sent back to the Cooperative Program, how many gospel shares we had, how many in attendance, and how many baptisms. If I didn't give them an honest report of how we stewarded the funds they sent us, I suspect the partnership would need to be adjusted or terminated. Gresham's motion asks NAMB to do the same thing they expect from their planters.  

I would add two things to the request. First, not just how much money NAMB sent to each church planter, but how much was spent on the salaries of the Send City Missionaries, coordinators, and other NAMB employees involved with church planting and re-planting (maybe broke up between planting and re-planting), and how much was spent on travel, "Catch the Vision tours," conferences, hospitality, and marketing (NAMB swag). Second, it would be informative to have a report of the total number of gospel shares, professions of faith, baptisms, and other numbers to help assess the total cost per planter, existing church plant, gospel share, baptism, etc. Also, a breakdown by region or state would be helpful. 

I'm grateful for the large amount of CP money we received directly from NAMB for support and resources. I can see that amount for our church. But I don't know how much money was necessary for the NAMB missionaries who helped me find other partnerships. I don't see the cost of training meetings and conferences per attendee or planter. NAMB blessed my family with various gift cards and books sent to us for encouragement, but I didn't think to keep track of that cost. There were also football tickets, clothing, ATV days, and many other blessings that helped encourage me and the Send Salt Lake community of planters. I'm sure there were high costs to all of these blessings. When I survey my community and see how many plants closed or never launched, and how many planters left the field, I also have to factor all their costs into the effort.  

Honest transparency of this information will give us a clear picture of what we can celebrate and what needs adjusting. This information will help the SBC-affiliated churches who support NAMB be good stewards and partners in our Lord's mission to evangelize the United States and Canada.  

I am praying for the NAMB trustees because sharing a report of this caliber requires substantial integrity. If the findings look great, they will be eager to share the information, even if they had not been asked by the Messengers. But we have to realize it won't be swimming in every area. There is going to be room for improvement. But being publically transparent with the people paying the bills and sending the planters won't be easy. If there are glaring issues, the temptation to hide the information under a rug will be high. Maybe they brush the request off. Or even worse, they succumb to the temptation to spin the data to look good or, heaven forbid, falsify information.  

I still believe church planting is a vital part of the Great Commission. Southern Baptist-affiliated churches need to do their best to engage in church planting. An honest evaluation of how we've done over the past decade will help us make improvements for the next decade and beyond. NAMB trustees, please take Tyler Gresham's motion seriously and put together the best task force you can so we have the most helpful report possible so we can be the most effective group of churches planting churches in the world. We should strive for nothing less.