nfpSynergy has called for the development of a panel of charities which would pool fundraising data to put an end to significantly divergent reports on whether giving to charity has increased or bottomed out.

The organisation’s push comes a week after the publication of the UK Giving Report, which found a 20 per cent decline in giving over the last 12 months. The report was followed by some raised eyebrows in the fundraising sector, with the Institute of Fundraising in particular suggesting the report did not correlate with the reality on the ground.

Joe Saxton and Cian Murphy from nfpSynergy have also poured doubt on last week’s report, produced by NCVO and Charities Aid Foundation. But while comparing the data to nfpSynergy’s own – which shows only a 1 percentage point decline in the number of people who say they have donated to charity within the last three months – the consultants admit that: “If we’re honest, we don’t think either are right”.

The UK Giving Report is based on three surveys of 1,000 people about their giving habits – a methodology which has been consistent over the life of the survey, which has been going on for some years. nfpSynergy’s report is similarly based on the public reporting on their own generosity – or lack thereof; a method of gauging giving that nfpSynergy says is inherently flawed. Similarly, using gift aid claims to measure giving has its own set of problems.

Writing in a blog, nfpSynergy’s top brass says the sector could follow a model of income monitoring similar to that of the retail industry, in which a panel of charities – of different sizes and types – would feed in their income data on a quarterly basis. This ‘hard numbers’ information would be pooled together to form an index of giving based on actual giving – not donor self-reporting or gleaning information from the Charity Commission, which is based on the publication of annual reports and as a result can be up to 18 months out of date.

“It is well within the ingenuity and determination of the sector to create a measure for giving that is both completely robust and timely,” Murphy and Saxton write. “This would have the advantage of giving all charities a better idea of how their fundraising is doing compared to the market.”