Share

Greater transparency needed in fundraising, FRSB chief advises

Alistair McLean, chief executive, Fundraising Standards Board
News

Greater transparency needed in fundraising, FRSB chief advises1

Fundraising | Niki May Young | 13 Jul 2012

Results from the latest FRSB trust and confidence survey show that many donors are non-committal on whether charities' fundraising methods are effective, or whether their spend on fundraising and administration is too high.

Of the 961 donor respondents around half (54 per cent) agreed that 'charities use the most effective means of fundraising', but with only 9 per cent disagreeing, 37 per cent gave a 'neutral' response, indicating a lack of confidence or understanding in this area.

Additionally, while 48 per cent of donors said they agreed that 'charities do not spend too much money on fundraising or administration', 44 per cent were neutral.

These figures compare to overwhelming confidence in other areas, such as whether the charities they support make a difference (84 per cent agree), or whether the charities they support value their donations (80 per cent agree).

Alistair McLean, chief executive of the FRSB, said that the neutral results were unexpected, and the organisation would amend next year's survey to allow it to "drill down" and get a better picture of what they mean. But he advised that the results indicated a lack of confidence from donors:

"Whilst we can’t be conclusive, the high level of neutral responses in these areas would suggest that we need better transparency and openness in the sector. Charities and fundraisers need to share with their donors what they do and how they do it.

“Wouldn’t it be great to get that 44 per cent of donors to jump into the agree box and say, actually I know my charity doesn’t spend too much money on admin or fundraising, and what an endorsement that would be for the sector.”

Support for regulation

The annual survey, conducted by independent agency TNS for the FRSB, posed some welcome figures for the membership body. Of the 1,062 respondents (961 donors, 101 non-donors), 72 per cent said they would have more trust in a charity's fundraising if it were accountable to an independent regulatory body, and 71 per cent would have more trust if it were a member of the FRSB. More than 60 per cent said they would be more likely to give to a charity if it were a member of the umbrella body. 

Regularity of giving

Just 9 per cent of those asked said that they were not donors, but a further 10 per cent said they gave less than once a year, and 10 per cent said they give on an annual basis.

Only 11 per cent give more than once a month, while 33 per cent give monthly. 16 per cent give once every three months and 11 per cent give once every six months. 

The figures showed great disparity in trust and confidence levels between donors and non-donors, with just 33 per cent of non-donors agreeing that they trust charities, while 82 per cent of donors said that they trust the charities that they support.

The variation continues in the earlier discussed results, with 19 per cent of non-donors agreeing that charities do not spend too much on fundraising and administration, compared to 48 per cent of donors; and 32 per cent of non-donors agreeing that charities use the most effective methods of fundraising, compared to 54 per cent of donors.

Non-donors

Non-donors displayed a much higher neutral response rate than donors, for instance 45 per cent of non-donors neither agreed nor disagreed that 'giving to charity is the best way of supporting good causes', as opposed to 18 per cent of donors.

However there were some questions which prompted a significant negative response from non-donors, such as 'Charities use donations wisely', with 33 per cent disagreeing, or 'I trust charities' which attracted a 29 per cent 'disagree' response. 

 

 

Tania Cohen
Freelance Consultant
Various Charities
13 Jul 2012

It is really difficult to see how the conclusion has been drawn from this data that “the results indicated a lack of confidence from donors” or that there is “Greater transparency needed in fundraising”

Donors are non-committal when asked whether “Charities use the most effective means of fundraising” because they are not fundraising experts and are reluctant to comment on whether the most effective fundraising methods are being used. Effectiveness for the donor in their donation is about where the money is going not the fundraising mechanism. We wouldn't expect a shopper to know whether the item they want to buy has a particular type of supply chain - they buy it because of what it achieves, how it works, and that it is right value for them.

The survey shows that donors are more interested in what their money will achieve than how it is raised - and this echoes the results of the recent Charity Commission publication in to Public Trust and Confidence in Charities.

In the same FRSB survey, only 3% disagreed with the statement that “Charities must invest in fundraising to secure the future of their services” and only 4% disagreed with the statement that “The money I donate goes to the right place”. If donors thought the fundraising was not effective and their money was being wasted, both of these would have been higher.

Fundraisers are not complacent about the need to be transparent - but we wouldn't want charities communicating more about the fundraising mechanisms than where the money will go and what it will achieve.

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

  • Robust but respectful debate
  • Strongly held opinions
  • Intelligent relevant discussion
  • The sharing of relevant experiences
  • New participants

We will not publish:

  • Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
  • Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
  • The posting of contact details for yourself or others
  • Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
  • Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
  • Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
  • Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
  • The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

  • Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
  • Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
  • You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear

Please:

  • Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
  • Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.

Free eNews

Nandy demands PM inquiry into Big Society Network grants

24 Jul 2014

Lisa Nandy, the shadow minister for civil society, has written to David Cameron demanding an inquiry into...

Nesta: ‘We were not forced to fund Big Society Network’

24 Jul 2014

Nesta has denied a claim by a former board member that it was “forced” to provide start-up funding...

Barnardo's launches retail gift aid appeal

23 Jul 2014

Barnardo’s has launched an appeal to raise awareness of retail gift aid and the extra £6.5m that could...

Nandy demands PM inquiry into Big Society Network grants

24 Jul 2014

Lisa Nandy, the shadow minister for civil society, has written to David Cameron demanding an inquiry into...

Workfare charities set to be named after Tribunal rules against DWP

23 Jul 2014

Charities that are involved in the workfare programme run by the Department for Work and Pensions look...

Dove Trust charities will be paid a third of what they are owed

23 Jul 2014

The charities and good causes owed money by the Dove Trust, owner of the suspended fundraising website...

Greenpeace video removed from YouTube following copyright claim

14 Jul 2014

A campaign video by Greenpeace against Lego’s relationship with Shell has been subject to a copyright...

Oxfam advert removed after appearing before extremist videos

10 Jul 2014

Oxfam has removed one of its adverts from YouTube after it was shown on channels showing content from...

Data protection proposals 'potentially catastrophic' for fundraising

8 Jul 2014

EU data protection proposals could have a “potentially catastrophic” impact on charity fundraising,...

Join the discussion

Twitter button

@CSFundraising