01.04.2026 / Eli Fader
While this blog post is focused on TEE programs, we are aware that many of the same issues face the broad spectrum of training and equipping programs from grassroots ministerial training to academic institutions providing theological education. We believe the solutions suggested may also help these programs as well.
In our first blog about TEE finances (Theological Education, TEE and funding), we articulated the need for all believers to be equipped for ministry and the role TEE has played in supporting this important work of the Church. We pointed out that two major funding models existed for this work: covering the cost of the program through student payments or covering the cost through funds from the TEE program itself (through outside funding). Unfortunately, both of these models still leave a significant gap in funding the totality of a successful TEE program. It is our desire to explore different ways TEE programs have closed this gap.
Why does a funding gap exist for these two models? TEE programs often operate for the benefit of active believers who are functioning in capacities of leadership in the local church and are seeking to be equipped. These men and women are often older with increased responsibilities in their families, communities, and work. Their time and resources are often stretched already. In addition, TEE programs often operate among the rural communities and urban poor, characterized by a lower economic standing.
A TEE program that tries to cover all the costs of the tutors, materials, printing, transportation, and administration for the courses through student fees finds that they must charge a higher amount that many students are able to afford. This leaves the uncomfortable decision of either leaving out well-qualified students due to high fees or lowering fees and being unable to cover the costs of the program. In either situation, the finances needed to run the program are insufficient and the quality of the program suffers. Some of the initial ways programs lower their costs (and quality) of the program is through substandard printing of materials, lowering tutor incentives causing discouragement, or spreading administration too thin leaving gaps in communication and implementation. Just the basic running of the courses may be more than most TEE programs would like to charge, leaving nothing for course writing, teacher training, and expansion of the program. We have witnessed the struggle of many TEE programs that seek to cover all their costs through student fees and it inevitably leads to lower quality, discouraged tutors and eventual closure of the program.
Other TEE programs follow the model of covering the costs of the program through seeking funds from outside. They spend their time raising support from their denomination and searching for theological education grants from overseas. The success and expansion of these programs often lie with the director who must constantly lobby for finances to keep the program moving forward. Many programs succeed and spread significantly when run well but collapse when the director is replaced or a new bishop removes the funding for TEE. The over-reliance on funds from outside the program leaves it in a precarious position.
Closing the Gap
TEE programs can strengthen their financial stability by diversifying the source of their finances. Despite the difficulties most students face in contributing to their TEE education, programs should consider asking for something within the reach of the students in order to solidify the commitment of the students in the program and to cover some of the basic running costs of the program. However, TEE programs cannot survive only on the student fees collected. There are a number of ways to close the funding gap including: denomination support, alumni support, income generating activities, support from sponsors, and fundraising through grants.
The first step in closing the gap is searching out funds from the institutions that benefit from a well-equipped laity: the Church. Many denominational leaders would greatly appreciate if their up-and-coming leaders were educated, trained, and mentored for the ministry they are tasked to carry out. Even better if these leaders did not have to be sent away to a far city where they might not return. TEE programs can confidently request partial support of the students they are training which will directly help the churches in the future.
The second area TEE programs can explore to close the funding gap is through a well-organized alumni association that continually informs and inspires alumni to contribute to other students in the TEE program. This alumni association may reap benefits in other ways beyond financial gifts as alumni may wish to volunteer their time and energy to teach, write a course, host a TEE center, or support a student within their church.
The third area where additional funds for TEE programs may be found is through income generating projects. TEE programs are already organized into groups of mature adults who meet regularly. Many projects through the government or NGOs seek groups such as this to implement their income generating projects. The TEE program in Uganda where I am involved has seen success with saving-groups, seed sharing, and is in the experimental phase of beekeeping being introduced to TEE groups. This requires the students to stay for some additional time or to meet outside of their usual TEE day. These income generating activities can be integrated into the program and help students with finances, small business knowledge, and market access. TEE groups should consider what activities can be profitable through minimal time and financial input as most students are quite busy with family and ministry. Funds that are generated through these activities can be used by the students to pay their school fees. TEE programs themselves can have income generating activities that bring is support to the entire program. We are currently making and selling lotion with locally available materials as an income generating project for our TEE program as a whole. A word of caution here: starting an income generating project or business to support TEE is time-consuming, risky, and carries a high risk of failure. The program I am involved with in Uganda failed in three businesses before finding a profitable project through bees.
The fourth way TEE programs can close the gap is through sponsorship of students. With our world growing smaller every day, many students have relationships with friends and family all over the world. TEE programs can greatly benefit by establishing a bank account or process by which sponsors can directly support a student by paying their school fees. It is advisable to be able to provide receipts and clear accounting so students and sponsors know exactly what has been covered and what might remain. Programs that open their doors beyond their denomination also benefit from sponsors that are tied to a particular church. I have had several students who came to our TEE program because they were seeking further education, they had sponsor who was willing to support them, but they did not have an education program for their church. I was more than happy to include them in our TEE program and the sponsorship helped grow our program. Some donors do not have a relationship with particular students but have a heart to see leaders trained. TEE programs have a strong track record of equipping students for ministry that remain in ministry. TEE programs can seek out these sponsors and can support students who are particularly needy of support.
The fifth way TEE groups can close the gap in funding is through seeking out grants and funds through Theological Education funds, mission organizations, and schools. This is a technical process and usually only provides funds for use within a year. TEE programs can be greatly assisted by these funds to cover extra expenses for the development of the program such as teacher training, one-time costs for TEE centers, course-writing, or translation, to name a few. Our experience has shown that once we have established a credible record with an grant-awarding organization, they are likely to consider us in the future. A word of caution: grants often come with strict usage and reporting requirements. It is also true that if the TEE program develops a reputation for mishandling funds or poor reporting, it may not receive funds in the future.
In our first blog about TEE finances, we pointed out that TEE programs cannot think of themselves as self-sustaining in the sense that all their costs are covered by the students or program itself. Instead, TEE programs should think of themselves as self-sustaining in that they seek to make themselves financially stable through a combination of financial sources. This includes student fees and support from outside, but can also include funds from the local churches and income generating activities. TEE programs should creatively consider what opportunities avail themselves to their particular context.