Share

New CC14 is exciting

Jackie Turpin, head of finance, Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust
Blogs

New CC14 is exciting 1

Governance | Jackie Turpin | 18 Nov 2011

As head of finance at a large grantmaker, Jackie Turpin congratulates the Charity Commission on powerful new investment guidance that should encourage trustees to think outside the box.

I have to admit that the prospect of reading the revised CC14 Charities and Investment Matters: A guide for trustees was not the most exciting thing on my to-do list.  But as I read through it I felt my level of excitement rising.  Far from being a dry, directional guidance note, it is a powerful, enabling document.

For me there are three particular aspects of CC14 which stand out.

Shift in emphasis

The first relates to what is clearly a significant change in emphasis in CC14 regarding investment and trustees’ responsibilities.  Despite ongoing legal developments, including the infamous Bishop of Oxford case, the temptation for many trustees has been to play safe and to invest in what CC14 defines as financial investments, ie in investments which yield the best financial return within the level of risk considered to be acceptable.  To date, many foundations have paid little attention or only lip-service to ethical and social investment.

However, in expanding CC14 to include programme-related investments (to further the charity’s aims, not to generate a financial return) and mixed-motive investments (that has elements of both financial investment and programme-related investment), the Charity Commission has deliberately not made any value judgements about which approach should be taken.  As Jane Hobson, head of policy at the Charity Commission, said on this website this month: “So long as trustees follow the principles set out (in CC14) and can clearly demonstrate having properly considered all the options, including taking advice where necessary, they are unlikely to be challenged or criticised for their investment decisions”.  This should bring comfort to trustees considering different types of investment proposal.

While it would not be appropriate for trustees to throw caution to the wind, CC14 does free them up to think more widely, in the context of the aims of their particular charity, about the investment options open to them. Provided that they act within the law (including their governance documents) and properly manage risk, there is no reason why they should rely solely or in part on financial investments to discharge their fiduciary responsibilities.  In fact, at the other extreme, it may even be argued that they are failing in their duties if they only consider these investments.

It is to be hoped that, as a result of CC14, trustees will be encouraged to be more adventurous in thinking about how they invest, especially in respect of ethical and social investment.

Testing new waters

The second thing that stands out for me relates to the Charity Commission’s receptiveness to mixed-motive investment which, as an investment type, is still in its infancy.  When it talks about these investments, it is as “new and developing investment opportunities” which “can still be justified as being in the interest of the charity”.  

For those who have put off looking at mixed-motive investment (or indeed programme-related investment) because they have been uncertain about its acceptability, the message from the Charity Commission is clear.  While CC14 does not absolve trustees of their fiduciary responsibilities in this area, it is not something that charities should feel that they have to avoid.  In fact CC14 goes as far as to positively say that it “could be an appropriate way for some charities to respond to the changing environment in which they work”.

Those currently involved in mixed-motive investment will already appreciate the challenges of developing appropriate frameworks for evaluation, monitoring and reporting.  However, the fact that the Charity Commission recognises that this is not a long-established form of investment and, by implication, one that is still finding its way, should provide them with the encouragement to explore new opportunities and to come up with solutions.

Shareholder activism

Finally, my third highlight relates to the Charity Commission’s laudably clear guidance on ethical investment and shareholder activism. Specifically it suggests that, subject to legal requirements being met, a charity “might invest in companies whose environmental policies it does not approve of in order to encourage more responsible business practices within those companies”.  This actively encourages trustees to think about their reserves not merely as a financial resource-generating machine but also as a much wider tool which can used to generate public benefit in other ways.  It allows charities to reap a double harvest.

This not only applies to operational charities.  Endowed grantmaking charities, which may well have more opportunity to lead on this, may consider working with their grantees to see if, in addition to generating grant funding, there are ways in which their endowment can support their work, for example, in supporting shareholder resolutions.

The above only touches on some of the positive aspects of CC14.  The Charity Commission is to be congratulated on producing a guidance document which is not only progressive but encourages thinking outside the box on a number of investment issues.  At a time when charities need all the help that they can get to achieve their aims, it should be warmly received.

Jackie Turpin is head of finance at the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust

Nick Kavanagh
Lecturer in Charity Finance
Various
18 Nov 2011

I agree with this analysis. The guide took a long time to come out, but that was because the Charity Commission put out an exposure draft that I believe sparked quite a bit of discussion and subsequent changes.
The outcome is a very clear document which I for one will be drawing on heavily in my lecturing on this subject to students working in charities.

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.

Martin Farrell (36) Tesse Akpeki (31) Tania Mason (13) Andrew Chaggar (13) Robert Ashton (10) David Philpott (9) John Tate (8) Gordon Hunter (8) Celina Ribeiro (6) Ian Allsop (6) Less +++ More +++

Carrot and stick

21 May 2012

Community isn't led by government, so why wait for it to tell you what to do, protests Robert Ashton....

How to resolve your pensions problem

21 May 2012

How do you solve a problem like a pension deficit? David McHattie tackles the issue.

Pursue pension change together

15 May 2012

David Davison mounts his soapbox to call for pensions reform.

emailalert

Join the discussion

Twitter
 
Training

Attending our one day courses is a highly effective way of ensuring new and existing trustees fully understand their role, responsibilities and liabilities.

>> Find out more <<