The best starting point for most nonprofits is a one-page hierarchical org chart grouped by function, with the board shown separately from staff and any dotted-line relationships clearly labeled. It is easy to print, explain, and update, while still showing who makes decisions and where day-to-day responsibility sits.
What to Look For
A useful nonprofit org chart does more than put names in boxes. It helps staff, board members, volunteers, funders, and new hires understand how work is organized and whom to contact. Choose a format that matches the way your organization actually operates, rather than one that looks impressive but hides shared responsibilities or informal reporting.
- Clear governance and management: Show the board and its relationship to the executive director separately from the staff reporting structure. Board members generally provide oversight rather than manage employees; a chart should not suggest otherwise. If committees matter to the reader, show them as a distinct governance layer.
- Readable at its intended size: A chart that will be printed should remain legible on a standard page or a clearly identified larger sheet. Keep labels short, use consistent box sizes, and avoid fitting every detail into the diagram. A larger chart can be useful for internal planning, but it may not work as a handout.
- Roles as well as names: Titles make a chart more durable when employees change. Include names when the chart is meant to help people find colleagues, but consider a role-only version for public sharing or long-term planning. Avoid personal contact details unless there is a specific need.
- Accurate relationship lines: A solid line usually communicates direct reporting. Use dotted lines only when they have a defined meaning, such as project coordination or shared supervision, and explain that meaning in a key. Too many line styles make a chart hard to interpret.
- Room for nonprofit realities: Small organizations may combine fundraising, communications, and operations in one position. Volunteers, contractors, and shared-service partners may contribute without being employees. The chart should identify these roles accurately without implying an employment or reporting relationship that does not exist.
- Easy maintenance: A simple chart that one designated person can update is often more useful than a complex diagram that becomes stale. Include an “updated” date, keep a clean source copy, and decide who approves changes before circulating a new version.
Before choosing a layout, decide who will use it. A chart for staff orientation may need names and contact pathways; one for board discussion may focus on reporting layers and open positions. If one chart cannot serve both purposes, maintain a concise internal chart and a simplified public version.
Option 1: One-Page Hierarchical Staff Chart
This is the strongest general-purpose choice for a nonprofit with a clear executive director or chief executive and a handful of functional teams. Place the board above or beside the executive director, label the board’s oversight relationship, then show direct reports and their teams. Common branches include programs, development, finance and administration, and communications, though the labels should reflect the organization rather than a standard formula.
Strengths: The reporting path is immediately visible, the layout is straightforward to print, and newcomers can quickly see who leads each area. It is also simple to revise when a position changes. Trade-offs: A strict hierarchy can make collaboration look like supervision, and small nonprofits may have people wearing several hats. Do not duplicate one employee in multiple branches without explaining why. Best for: Small and midsize organizations that need a clear staff overview for onboarding, internal reference, or a board packet.
Option 2: Functional Teams Chart
A functional chart groups people by the work they perform rather than emphasizing each level of authority. It can show an executive director at the top, then major functions such as programs, fundraising, operations, and communications, with roles nested under each. For a lean organization, a box can list a function and the role responsible for it, even when that person covers another function too.
Strengths: It gives readers a quick view of capacity and makes gaps easier to spot. It can also show that a small staff is organized around outcomes rather than a large number of management layers. Trade-offs: Functional grouping alone may leave reporting unclear, especially when a person works across teams. Add a reporting line or a short note for shared roles. Best for: Organizations reviewing responsibilities, preparing for growth, or explaining how programs and administrative work fit together.
Option 3: Board-and-Staff Governance Chart
This format distinguishes governance from operations in two clearly labeled sections. The board and its committees appear in the governance area; the executive director and staff appear in the management area. A labeled connector can show that the board oversees or employs the executive director, while staff report through the executive director. Committee connections should not be drawn as direct staff supervision unless that is the organization’s actual structure.
Strengths: It reduces confusion about the board’s role, helps new board members understand the structure, and can make committee relationships easier to explain. Trade-offs: It takes more space than a staff-only chart, and committees can change more often than formal leadership roles. Keep committee detail brief if the chart is intended for public use. Best for: Organizations that need a board orientation document, have several active committees, or regularly share an overview with community partners.
Option 4: Matrix or Shared-Responsibility Chart
A matrix chart is useful when staff report to one manager but contribute to multiple programs, locations, or initiatives. One axis can show roles and managers; another can show programs or projects. Use a small legend to distinguish direct supervision from coordination, and name the person accountable for decisions when work is shared.
Strengths: It represents cross-program collaboration more honestly than forcing every role into one branch. It can expose duplicated work, unclear handoffs, and teams that rely heavily on a single person. Trade-offs: Multiple lines and intersections can quickly become difficult to read, especially in print. A matrix is not a substitute for clarifying who sets priorities or resolves conflicts. Best for: Larger nonprofits, multi-site organizations, or teams delivering programs jointly across departments. For a small team with few shared roles, a standard chart plus a short note is usually clearer.
Option 5: Current-and-Future Structure Chart
This planning format pairs the current organization with a proposed future version, or marks planned positions differently from filled roles. It can help a leadership team discuss what capabilities may be needed as programs change. Clearly label the sections “current” and “proposed,” and use a key for vacant, planned, or temporary roles so readers do not mistake an idea for an approved position.
Strengths: It supports thoughtful conversations about workload, succession, and growth without implying that every proposed box already exists. It also gives board and staff a shared picture of change. Trade-offs: A planning chart can be mistaken for a promise about hiring or timing if it circulates without context. Add an owner, a date, and a brief status note; do not include sensitive personnel assumptions in a broadly shared copy. Best for: Organizations considering a reorganization, expanding a program, or preparing a discussion about future capacity.
Printable Nonprofit Org Chart Template
Copy the blank fields into a document or print this table. Add rows as needed. Use the reporting field for direct supervision, and use the notes field to explain dotted-line or shared responsibilities.
| Level or team | Role or position | Name | Reports to | Relationship or notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Governance | ||||
| Executive leadership | ||||
| Team or function | ||||
| Team or function | ||||
| Team or function | ||||
| Volunteer or partner role |
Sample — fictional organization: Governance | Board of Directors | Jordan Lee | Oversight of executive director | Board committees advise the board. Executive leadership | Executive Director | Morgan Reed | Board of Directors | Leads staff operations. Programs | Program Manager | Casey Park | Executive Director | Coordinates two community programs.
Document owner: ____________________ Updated: ____________________
How to Choose
Start with the use case. For onboarding, prioritize names, job titles, and direct reporting. For board orientation, separate governance from staff operations and include only the committees readers need to understand. For planning, use a current-and-future comparison and label every proposed or vacant role. For a public-facing document, show only information that helps an outside reader understand the organization; an internal directory can carry more detail.
Match the complexity to the organization. A small nonprofit often needs one executive director, a few functional branches, and a note explaining shared duties. Do not create extra management layers just to make the chart look balanced. If someone wears multiple hats, either list the roles together under that person or show the person once and use a clear cross-functional note. For a larger or multi-site organization, separate charts by location or program can be easier to read than one oversized page.
Set a budget based on the document, not the label. If you only need a printable chart, a basic table or diagram made with tools your organization already uses may be sufficient. A paid template or design service can save formatting time, but it is not automatically more accurate or easier to maintain. Before paying, check whether the file can be edited, printed at a readable size, and shared with the people who need it. Confirm that the format works for your organization’s accessibility and document-sharing practices.
Choose what to show and what to leave out. Names help colleagues find one another but require updates when people leave. Role-only charts last longer and can be safer for public distribution. Contact details, individual workloads, and personnel notes usually belong elsewhere. Include volunteers or contractors only when their relationship to the organization is relevant, and label the relationship precisely.
Keep the chart governed and current. Assign one person to maintain the source file, agree on who confirms reporting changes, and add a revision date. A short legend can define solid and dotted lines, abbreviations, vacancies, and temporary assignments. If a chart needs a paragraph of explanation to make its main structure understandable, simplify it or create separate versions for different audiences.
If a chart decision raises employment-law, tax, or other regulated questions, ask a qualified professional rather than relying on the diagram as guidance.
Frequently Asked Questions
Should the board appear on a staff org chart?
Usually, yes, if readers need to understand governance, but show it as a separate layer from staff management. Label the board’s relationship to the executive director and avoid drawing committee lines that suggest direct supervision unless that is accurate.
Should an org chart include names or just job titles?
Use both for an internal reference where people need to identify colleagues. Use role titles alone when durability or public sharing matters more. Some organizations keep an internal named chart and a public role-based version.
How do we show a person with two responsibilities?
List both functions in the role field or show the person once with labeled connections. Make the direct manager clear, and explain any coordination relationship in the notes or legend. Duplicating a name without explanation can make readers think there are two positions.
What if our nonprofit has no formal departments?
Use function labels rather than inventing departments. A chart can show the executive director and the roles or work areas beneath them, even if one person covers several areas. Simplicity is preferable to a structure that does not reflect daily practice.
How often should we update the chart?
Update it whenever a meaningful reporting relationship or role changes, and review it periodically even when there has been no obvious change. Put an updated date on the document so readers can judge whether they have the current version.
Bottom Line
For most nonprofits, choose a one-page hierarchical chart grouped by function, with governance clearly separated from staff reporting. It balances readability with enough detail to answer the practical questions people ask: who leads each area, who reports to whom, and where shared work fits. Use a governance-focused, matrix, or future-state format only when that specific need justifies the extra complexity. Keep the chart editable, dated, and honest about the organization as it operates today.