The issue of financial sustainability in the non-profit sector has been addressed frequently with various concepts, phrases, and analyses, but historically, it has taken a long time to confine it to a single concept, and thus formal research on this concept is extremely limited. Accordingly, the initial research projects aimed to design a conceptual and practical framework for financial sustainability capable of accommodating the main topics drawn from the literature related to the leadership and management of non-profit organizations.

The second task for researchers is to test the value of the literature on sustainability by considering the experiences of at least five organizations in the hope that this framework will help them understand the unique and common challenges faced by the non-profit sector.

For this small research, I define financial sustainability as a combination of revenue and cost management strategies that enable an organization to pursue its mission and mandate in the long term, and the likelihood of an organization improving its financial sustainability is influenced by its ability to work strategically in response to external and internal factors and demands for innovation and/or revitalization and/or attracting strong leadership.

I was inspired by Bowman (2011), who widely published the following definition: "Sustainability refers to the ability of leaders to maintain the organization in the long term. However, the definition of financial sustainability can vary widely between profit and non-profit institutions, which is defined as organizations that use surplus revenue to achieve their goals rather than distributing it as profits or gains.

"Financial capacity consists of resources that grant the organization the ability to seize opportunities and respond to unexpected threats while maintaining its overall operations by relying on the business structure or the overarching goal of the organization." (Quoted from Sontag-Padilla et al, 2012, p. 2.)

Leon (2001), who inspired many researchers to delve into this comprehensive and renewable concept for the non-profit sector, emphasizes that financial sustainability relies on four pillars: firstly, financial and strategic planning, then income diversification, thirdly sound management and financing, and finally income generation. These four pillars are a good benchmark for dismantling the current theory, especially since financial sustainability is a complex topic and Leon's views only cover the essential technical requirements, but I believe we can expand our understanding to include new ideas such as the role of leadership and organizational management at the very least.

Despite financial sustainability being an utmost necessity, where the funding of non-profit organizations in Canada, for example, has reached a critical stage, alongside the large number of constrained organizations, some of which are severely threatened due to inconsistent and insufficient funding, the reasons for this insecurity are numerous and varied, but the outcomes could change the face of civil society across the country.

Non-profit organizations, large and small, face difficult choices, some for the first time and others entering a financial crisis for the second or third time, driving the issue of financial sustainability to become a powerful engine for change for the non-profit sector and for communities as a whole.

It is said that there is a time when financial sustainability can be approached with enthusiasm and optimism: government funding sources are expanding, institutions are flexible, donors are available, public awareness is more characterized by a community mentality, and corporate giving is growing rapidly.

However, globalization, information technology, political design, and unsafe financial markets have all produced an environment less concerned with the local community or issue or culture, and more focused on the safety of systems and widespread outcomes that align with the needs of funding sources. Non-profit organizations focusing on community, issue, or culture appear to be outdated and merely a roadmap for obtaining support.

Organizations driven by a specific mission, as noted for decades, have dual sustainability issues. Their primary mission revolves around achieving a goal governed by financial planning and working to maintain it, driven by community and human values. Their secondary mission is to create integrity and productivity within the organization while maintaining it for the purpose of executing the mission. Most non-profit organizations were born from a strong primary purpose and are led by many. Many believe that if the primary purpose succeeds, value will be automatically recognized by funders, leading to financial security.

The truth is that the assumption of the evident value of community-benefiting organizations is gone: everything must be proven, as powerful and determined funders continue to narrow the scope of work by more tightly defining the required outcomes, as if communities or issues or culture are merely a series of measurable indicators.

Funders are also focusing on adapting to new second-degree motivations: the sustainability of the funders themselves, and the current high vision of "social innovation" exemplifies the tensions between the past and the present.

The classic view that organizations need to create a large, balanced, and diverse funding base, including revenue-based sales, sustainable long-term fundraising, and ongoing support from institutional sources, remains sincere. With weak institutional support, particularly in the environment and arts sectors, some organizations have responded by transitioning to social innovation and project solutions more than before, achieving success, at least in the short term.

But does this changing balance provide a foundation for long-term financial sustainability?

Large-scale social enterprises and social innovation herald success for organizations that have broad appeal and cost-effective solutions to tough issues, particularly those that can achieve better outcomes by scaling up. Numerous small and local social institutions are successful, and social innovations at the grassroots level continue to provide energy and find new solutions to seemingly intractable problems. However, there remains a continuous need for political and institutional commitment to complex community issues, or issues, or cultural problems, which are issues characterized by little appeal and do not yet enjoy practical and scalable solutions.

Source