Charities should only call people who have specifically given their permission to be contacted by them, the NCVO working group on opt-in fundraising has recommended.
For direct mail, charities should avoid contacting people if they have just ticked a box saying they are “happy to receive marketing from selected third parties” unless they have a reason to believe that they would be interested in the charity.
NCVO said this would “significantly cut down on direct mail and unwanted calls and put members of the public back in control of who contacts them”.
Charities should also give the public an opportunity to opt out each time they are contacted. Large fundraising organisations should renew consent from telephone donors every two years.
A number of large charities have already moved towards an explicit consent model, including the RNLI, Cancer Research UK and the British Red Cross.
The Fundraising Regulator will now consider the recommendations.
NCVO established the working group in January to come up with guidelines to ensure that charities comply with the forthcoming European General Data Protection Regulation, which the Information Commissioner’s Office has indicated is still likely to apply even when the UK leaves the EU. This regulation will require all charities to have “unambiguous consent”.
The report says the recommendations go beyond the minimum legal requirements in some cases because “the spirit of the law, as opposed to the strict letter of it, along with the demands of the public, require our sector to show it is operating to higher values than just legal or other requirements”.
Research carried out on behalf of NCVO and the working group found that two-thirds of the public do not currently trust charities to use their data properly.
Sir Stuart Etherington, chief executive of NCVO, said: “This is a complex area for charities. The working group have taken the time to untangle the legal and regulatory issues involved in using the public’s contact data in order to come up with guidelines that are practical and demonstrate that charities take their responsibility to work to high standards seriously.”
‘Balance the needs of charities with those of supporters’
The working party was chaired by Mike Adamson, chief executive of the British Red Cross. The other members were Liz Tait, director of fundraising at Battersea Dogs and Cats Home; Eleanor Harrison, chief executive of Global Giving; Campbell Robb, chief executive of Shelter; Tim Hunter, director of fundraising at Oxfam; Mark Flannagan, chief executive of Beating Bowel Cancer and Nicola Dandridge, chief executive of Universities UK.
The group consulted with a reference group of around 50 other charities.
Adamson, who announced that the Red Cross would move to an opt-in model earlier this year after a meeting with the ICO, said: “We have come up with proposals that balance the needs of charities to get in contact with supporters and potential supporters with the public’s right to have control over how they are contacted."
He added that the public are “most concerned about unwanted phone calls” which is why “these proposals would mean that charities would never phone members of the public unless they had clear permission to do so”.
“Charities have been under pressure in recent years and they have stepped up their fundraising in response. But sometimes they have pushed too hard. It’s time to re-establish a better balance for the long term.
“An updated approach to consent is the foundation stone for a trusting relationship between charities and their donors.”
Flannagan said: “It’s vital charities demonstrate to their donors that they are operating to the best possible practice. These principles are an important step in that direction, and I hope colleagues across the sector will them pick up enthusiastically.”
Fundraising Regulator to ‘review’ the recommendations
The Fundraising Regulator, which launched in the summer, has said it will review NCVO’s proposals.
Stephen Dunmore, interim chief executive of the Fundraising Regulator, said the report is “a positive contribution that will help charities understand the requirement to secure proper consent from their donors as a key part of restoring public trust and confidence in fundraising.
“We will review the report and consider how we use it to prepare appropriate guidance for charities and in our development of the Code of Fundraising Practice.”
IoF: ‘We must guard against unintended consequences’
The Institute of Fundraising said it supported the principle of charities regularly reviewing their practices. But it said some of the recommendations, particularly around the risks of genuine supporters ceasing to hear from charities, need further consideration.
In a statement it said: “We support the vision of the work, that charities should be reviewing their practices and ensuring they have excellent relationships with their supporters. One of the strengths of the Code is that it is a living document that is reviewed and updated where appropriate ensuring high-quality standards are set on an ongoing basis.
“These recommendations should, therefore, provide a good starting point for the Fundraising Regulator...to engage in consultation and discussion on any future changes to the Code.
“Individuals need to have choice and control over the communications they receive, but charities also need to be able to engage new supporters and establish relationships. Some of the recommendations will require further thought as part of any review of changes to the Code. In particular, we believe that there needs to be greater consideration of the risks and impact of some genuine existing supporters not hearing from charities they care about.
“It is really important to get the standards right to guard against unintended consequences for both the public and charities, and we look forward to further discussions with the Regulator as any review of the Code develops.”
Key recommendations
The seven key recommendations from the report are:
- Charities should acquire an individual’s consent for fundraising through all channels of communication, and should minimise their reliance on indirect consent and ‘legitimate interest’ alone.
- If a charity relies on indirect consent, it should take a cautious approach to its use and provide the necessary safeguards to ensure the individual has a reasonable expectation about being contacted by the charity for fundraising purposes.
- Legitimate interest should be avoided as a basis for a charity to contact a potential donor. While it is legal, provided it is combined with reference to a privacy and fair processing statement, it does not create a sufficient presumption of a matching of the cause and the expectation or interest of the donor. If a charity relies on legitimate interest as a way to appeal to potential donors, it should take a cautious approach to its use and provide the necessary safeguards.
- When a charity contacts a donor by telephone for fundraising purposes, it should regularly ask the individual if he or she is happy to continue hearing from the charity in this way in the future. Periods of refresh will vary depending on the type of institution and fundraising activity. However, it is proposed that large fundraising organisations that undertake mass fundraising campaigns should refresh consent at least every 24 months.
- If an existing donor cancels their regular gift, charities should consider that consent to receive further fundraising communications cannot be assumed to continue indefinitely. It is proposed that consent should be treated as lapsed and no longer valid after 24 months from the cancellation of the gift.
- Charities should not generally engage in teleappending or telematching. In particular, if there has been a change in a donor’s circumstances (for example the person has moved house) charities should ask themselves whether it is appropriate to engage in the practice of teleappending and telematching: if the donor has not informed the charity and updated it on how he or she can be contacted, then there is reason to consider that the initial consent is out of date.
- Where data was acquired a long time ago or donors have been inactive for a long period, charities should refresh and update the consent they have.
