Andrew Hind explains why the decision to merge should be about charitable impact as well as saving costs.
I have never believed there are too many charities out there. Despite the fact that around 200,000 registered charities are overseen by the three UK charity regulators, I take the view that civil society is about encouraging ‘a thousand flowers to bloom’.
But, as economic austerity has taken hold over the last three years, it has become common to hear the call for market consolidation and merger in the sector, in the name of driving up levels of efficiency.
The problem with this analysis is that civil society can’t be assessed using the metrics of business alone. Cutting costs, trimming overheads, and merging structures may lead to a more efficient charity, but it won’t necessarily ensure that it delivers a better service to its beneficiaries.
Maximising charitable impact is about leveraging to best effect all available resources. Chief among them for many organisations – particularly at the smaller end of the scale – are human resources; and when there isn’t much money about that means volunteers.
According to the Charity Commission’s register, there are 3,843 active Scout groups in England and Wales alone; 1,415 charities helping cancer sufferers; 223 swimming clubs; 114 cat protection societies; and 13 donkey sanctuaries (how disappointing – I thought there might be more of these).
On one analysis that represents horrendous duplication and inefficiency, with trustees behaving as if they have money to burn.
But the story begins to look very different if one focuses on the countless millions of hours given voluntarily each year by friends and supporters to keep these organisations going. Those turning out on a cold winter’s night to run the 1st Bembridge, St Helens & Seaview Sea Scout Group on the Isle of Wight – to pick one of 3,843 Scout groups I happen to know about – certainly wouldn’t do it if ‘their’ charity was merged with all the other groups in the south of England, and they took their instructions not from trustees in Bembridge but from distant Bracknell or Basingstoke.
Reason to celebrate
So, whenever I hear of the latest charity merger proposal, I am more interested in learning about how it will increase charitable impact than the costs that will be saved.
A merger that had the potential to save costs; improve charitable outcomes; and encourage higher levels of volunteering would be reason indeed to celebrate.
That may just be what transpires with the forthcoming merger of NCVO and Volunteering England early next year. Both organisations have had a very tough financial time since the government’s 2010 Spending Review slashed their budgets. At civilsociety.co.uk we reported last month that NCVO lost a third of its staff in 2011/12 as income dropped by 27 per cent, and Volunteering England fared even worse, losing more than half its workforce and seeing income plunge by over 50 per cent.
Traditionally, NCVO’s target audience has been CEOs and trustees, while Volunteering England has had excellent links to volunteer managers in charities and across the statutory sector. Bringing them together will certainly save costs; but on this occasion it may well lead to better charitable outcomes – more effective volunteering across the country – as well.
The evergreen Justin Davis Smith, who moves across to NCVO as executive director for volunteering, and ebullient NCVO chief executive Sir Stuart Etherington, may just put a smile on our faces and prove that mergers really can work. Sometimes.
