Article Originally Published: Financial Advisor
The fiduciary standard takes center stage in the National Association of Personal Financial Advisors (NAPFA) recently unveiled strategy for the next three years, Strategic Framework | NAPFA. NAPFA is known as the long-time leader in promoting fee-only personal financial planning.
Criticism of the strategy from NAPFA members soon followed. Tracey Longo reports that some members believe the strategy emphasizes DEI too much while ignoring its core purpose to promote fee-only financial planning. (See NAPFA’s Embrace Of DEI Divides Members.) Are these fair criticisms? The record suggests so.
In NAPFA’s incorporation articles, four points are cited in Article II. The first is to “Foster the practice of comprehensive, fee-only financial planning.” The third is to “Promote public awareness of financial planning and the alternative of fee-only financial planning assistance.” In NAPFA by-laws, Article III, the fee-only planning priority is clear. See Governance and Fiscal Information | NAPFA.
NAPFA notes its “Board of directors, staff and key stakeholders collaborated to plan the future direction of the organization. These efforts led to the creation of the 2025-2028 strategic plan, which reflects the evolving needs of members, the profession, and the public.” NAPFA names three goals.
1. Elevate the Fiduciary Standard.
2. Ignite Connections Through Community and Engagement.
3. Deepen Professional Education and Learning.
NAPFA also explains the outcomes it seeks from this strategy, quoted directly:
- “Increased public recognition of NAPFA and its fiduciary standard;
- Greater member satisfaction with engagement and support;
- Increased participation in education and professional development;
- Stronger sense of belonging and inclusion within the NAPFA community; and
- Recognition of NAPFA as a high-performing, mission-driven organization.”
In the charter and by-laws, NAPFA is defined by furthering fee-only financial planning.
In the new strategy, NAPFA is defined by elevating fiduciary and “member satisfaction” and a “stronger sense of (member) belonging and inclusion”. This is a huge departure from NAPFA’s founding.
It also raises numerous questions. The most basic is should the board essentially ignore NAPFA’s rationale for existing stated in its founding documents and also fulfill its fiduciary duties?
