Share

Why shouldn't the Commission charge a fee to view charities' accounts?

The CSV 'homepage' on the Commission's online register
Blogs

Why shouldn't the Commission charge a fee to view charities' accounts?5

Governance | Tania Mason | 28 Sep 2012

The Charity Commission takes too long to make charities’ accounts public on its website, says Tania Mason. Maybe it should take a leaf out of Companies House’s book and charge a fee to see them.

The Charity Commission wastes no time chivvying charities along to file their accounts by deadline, but it’s not exactly on-the-ball when it comes to publishing newly-submitted accounts on its own online register.

Take a look at CSV’s current entry, for example (pictured below).  The border is green, confirming ‘Due documents received’ and the site states that the charity’s accounts for the year to 31 March 2012 were received by the Commission on 13 September.

Read on to the figures immediately below and you’ll be told that the income for the year was £33.3m and the expenditure was £29.6m.  The clear inference from the page is that these are the figures for 2011/12, for which the due documents have been duly received.

But this is not, in fact, the case.  The figures quoted on the page are actually the previous year’s figures, because the Commission has not yet made CSV’s latest accounts available on the site, despite receiving them more than two weeks ago. But you only find this out if you click through to the ‘financial history’ page of CSV’s entry.

It’s not a massive outrage, in the grand scheme of things - you can usually find the accounts on the charity's own website.  But this CSV page is not an isolated case – the regulator often takes several days or weeks to make charities’ accounts available for public view, after it receives them.

I accept that the Commission has less resource than it used to, and probably a backlog of accounts, especially at this time of the year when all those charities with a March year-end submit their documents.  But the delay doesn’t reflect well on the Commission, especially when you can almost always go to the Companies House website and obtain the accounts from there.

But maybe therein lies the solution.  Companies House charges £1 for each document you download – the Charity Commission charges nothing.  As a journalist who looks at plenty of charity accounts on the online register, I may be shooting myself in the foot here, but it’s an idea worth putting out there.  Perhaps the Charity Commission should charge members of the public a nominal fee to view charities’ accounts?  

Sam Younger said this week that six million of the 43 million page views to the Commission’s website last year were to charities’ pages on the register.  If even 10 per cent of these looked at accounts, that could raise an additional £600,000 for the Commission. With this extra income, it could employ more resource to make sure every set of accounts that are submitted are published immediately, and the ‘homepage’ of each charity’s register entry will always be up-to-date and not misleading.

CSV homepage on the online register

Les Hems
Director of Research
CSI
1 Oct 2012

The CSV accounts are available on the Companies House website. Discussion of free access to charity accounts or the immediacy of their availability are futile - two government funded agencies are duplicating the task of making charitable company accounts available.

This duplication and waste of effort has been known for a decade - I am sure it will be resolved shortly - but in the meantime simple technology can be used so that when charity accounts are received by Companies House they are automatically made available to the Charity Commission. GuideStar UK was using this method in 2008.

David
28 Sep 2012

If the Charity Commission attempts to replace lost funding by charging to access accounts then not only would they put both the public and charities out of pocket but they would expose themselves to further cuts. Simply making life more expensive isn’t a sustainable solution when no one has any spare cash. Fortunately, the minister for civil society has made it clear that the sector needs to learn how to do more with less.

Opening up the Charity Commission’s data to innovators and entrepreneurs would have many potential benefits, from assisting campaigners hoping to make the sector more accountable to helping fundraisers identify new grant makers. Charging for accounts would make this much more difficult and deny the wider public the opportunity to help the Charity Commission in their mission.

Meredith
28 Sep 2012

I respectfully disagree. The Charity Commission provides a vital service in making accounts freely available, one which benefits the sector as a whole. Free access to charities' accounts goes a long way towards promoting donor confidence and encouraging charities to be transparent. Establishing a "pay wall" behind which charities' accounts would hide would be a step backward. Obviously, the accounts do not become freely available for free. If there is a need for this service to be subsidised, it makes more sense for that (nominal!) subsidy to come from the charities themselves when the accounts are filed, not at the point of access.

Matt Parker
Lamplight Database Systems Lim
28 Sep 2012

No, this should be freely available - the data should be more open, not less (see http://opencharities.org/info/about)

Better perhaps to put a clear label above the charts showing what year the figures are from. And if the Charity Commission really need that extra money, I'd say charge a filing fee to the charity (also like Companies House).

Derek Froud
Head of Fundraising
Royal Blind Society
28 Sep 2012

Not only does Tania Mason shoot herself in the foot, but everyone who believes that charities should be financially transparent, and every trust fundraiser who undertakes their own conscientious research rather than rely upon out-of-date and incomplete directories

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.

Tania Mason

Tania Mason is group editor at Civil Society Media. She has been a journalist for 20-odd years and has specialised in the charity sector since 2003.

Follow Tania on Twitter @taniamason

Martin Farrell (43) Tesse Akpeki (40) Robert Ashton (27) Andrew Chaggar (21) Tania Mason (18) Ian Allsop (12) David Philpott (12) Celina Ribeiro (9) Niki May Young (9) David Davison (8)
John Tate (8) Gordon Hunter (8) Vibeka Mair (7) Neal Green (5) Dorothy Dalton (5) Jeremy Swain (5) Rowena Lewis (5) Kirsty Weakley (5) Gareth Jones (4) Daniel Phelan (4) Andrew Hind CB (3) Suzi Leather (3) Ingrid Marson (3) Alexander Swallow (3) Belinda Pratten (3) Sir Stuart Etherington (2) Stephen Lloyd (2) Adrian Beney (2) Jesper Christensen (2) Paul Gibson (2) Andrew Scadding (2) Anne Moynihan (2) Kevin Carey (2) Shirley Otto (2) Garreth Spillane (2) Rosie Chapman (2) June O'Sullivan (2) Paul Emery (2) Lesley-Anne Alexander CBE (1) Victoria Cook (1) Claris D'cruz (1) Peter Gotham (1) Sir Thomas Hughes-Hallett (1) Justin Davis Smith (1) Kate Sayer (1) Sally Kirby (1) Anne-Marie Piper (1) Peter Scott (1) Jo Swinhoe (1) Karl Wilding (1) Richard Williams (1) Joe Saxton (1) Pauline Broomhead (1) Mike Hudson (1) Sir Christopher Kelly (1) Daniel Fletcher (1) Martin Brookes (1) Simon Hebditch (1) Lindsay Driscoll (1) Jo Coleman (1) Cedric Frederick (1) Jonathan Lewis (1) Dame Mary Marsh (1) Rosamund McCarthy (1) Jill Pitkeathley (1) Hal Broadbent (1) Linda Laurance (1) Nadine Nohr (1) Suzie Who (1) Rob Dyson (1) James Thompson (1) Stephen Hammersley (1) John May (1) Julian Blake (1) Malcolm Hurlston (1) Anne Owers (1) Beth Yorath (1) Paul Amadi (1) Caroline Beaumont (1) Judith Davey (1) Dan Corry (1) Douglas Rouse (1) Jackie Turpin (1) Jonathan Last (1) Tom Flood (1) Dan Sutch (1) Jonathan Crown (1) Ruchir Shah (1) Katy Wing (1) George Ames (1) Sir David Varney (1) Liam Barrington-Bush (1) Mairéad O'Reilly (1) Lisa Clavering (1) Ian Joseph (1) Jonathan Bruck (1) Rachel Short (1)
Less +++ More +++

When ignorance is far from bliss

20 May 2013

A shifting political atmosphere is putting power in the hands of the inexperienced, warns Robert Ashton.

Pointless ministers?

9 May 2013

Ian Allsop muses on the unattractive political career prospects of a charities minister.

Tablets: the end of an era?

9 May 2013

John Tate asks whether the inexorable rise of the tablet will spell the end for the humble PC.

Free eNews

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 <<