Originally published by charitytimes: www.charitytimes.com
Written by Gillian McKay
29/08/18
The revised disqualification rules for charity trustees and senior charity positions came into force on 1 August. This reflects the changes brought in by the additional powers granted under the Charities (Protection and Social Investment) Act 2016.
There have always been automatic reasons for disqualifying trustees, this revision extends the list of reasons for disqualification and extends the disqualification rules to the chief executive and chief financial officer roles. These roles are now considered ‘restricted’ under the disqualification rules.
The Commission’s guidance clearly states: “If you are disqualified you must not act in a trustee or relevant senior management position at a charity, unless and until your disqualification is waived by the Charity Commission”.
Therefore, under the new rules, any individual acting in either trustee, chief executive or finance director position, must either obtain a Charity Commission waiver or resign.
It is worth noting that it is the senior management function rather than the role title that defines whether a role is restricted or not. For smaller charities, both these functions may fall to one person, or there may be employees with split responsibilities, for example an office manager who also manages the finances, now being affected.
The penalties for continuing to act in these positions while knowingly disqualified include being asked to repay remuneration, benefits and expenses received while in post, or being referred to the police.
The list of reasons for disqualification includes unspent convictions for a number of specified criminal convictions and a list of civil court judgements. Charities are expected to review their internal procedures to accommodate these changes. For some of the criminal convictions, such as terrorist offences, bribery or fraud, there may be very few circumstances where a charity would consider such an individual suitable to remain in post. However, the list of relevant offences include those involving “deception or dishonesty”.
Annex A of the Commission’s guidance provides a list of offences, which may include dishonesty or deception, these include theft, fraud or obtaining service, by false representation or failing to disclose information. However, some convictions qualifying under this could, in some circumstances, be rather minor, for example petty shoplifting or forgetting to update insurance policy details on which there is a later claim.
Are there unexplored consequences for charities here? The Commission has been accepting applications for waivers since 1 February, encouraging early application in order to get a decision “in good time”. However, it is not clear how long it takes to obtain a waiver.
It is possible that an employee in a restricted position has been convicted of a dishonest offence, in the period after 1 August 2017, which they contested in court but lost. They are fined and the crime will be unspent a year from conviction.
The details of this were made perfectly aware to the trustees at the time. The trustees consider the offence to be suitably minor and that there are sufficient controls in place to mitigate any harm to the charity. The waiver is applied for but not received by 1 August.
Presumably this person must now resign, in which case there are several issues. What if the waiver is granted soon after, or the conviction becomes unspent shortly after? Can the individual demand to be reinstated and demand compensation and from whom?
Presumably the early application for waivers was to allow for charities to plan for such eventualities, but it is hard to see what could be concluded in this period given the uncertain nature of the outcome.
These are integral roles in the charity, expecting these individuals to now step down could have operational, legal and personal consequences for the charity and all of those involved.
Gillian McKay is head of charity and voluntary sector at the ICAEW
Originally published by charitytimes: www.charitytimes.com
Written by Charity Times
10/08/18
The government has launched its new civil society strategy, announcing a number of changes to the sector, but as always, the devil is in the detail. Here is a breakdown of everything you need to know:
Dormant assets
The government plans to release £20m from dormant charitable assets and place the funds into grassroots community organisations. The money will be distributed to community trusts and commitments to support corporate social responsibility. The inactive funds will also be plugged into the improvement of the take-up of the Social Value Act.
While charity bodies were generally happy about plans to release the assets, NCVO chief executive, Sir Stuart Etherington said more could be done: “There is an estimated £2 billion in dormant assets, which the government can use to start a real revolution in community ownership and participation, but three years after they began work on this, progress seems limited and there is no mention at all of dormant assets in today’s strategy,” he said.
“We hope they will provide more detail on this area in the near future.”
Corporate social responsibility
The strategy also pledges to strengthen corporate social responsibility by setting up a new leadership group with senior figures from business, investment and social sectors.
However, IoF chief executive, Peter Lewis argued the strategy “could have gone further” in clearly setting the government’s role in promoting philanthropy and giving across all government departments and “embedding an ambition to raise, celebrate, and promote charitable giving more widely”.
Grant-making
Elsewhere in the strategy document, the governement promised “a revival of grant-making”, with the view to “broaden the range of funding options for community initiatives”.
The government said all public bodies should follow the Grants Functional Standard, which sets out minimum standards for general grants. A “ministerial event” will be held with the aim of improving data infrastructure. It has also said there will be new guidance published for commissioners on grant-making to small and local charities.
Providing a voice
Digital also features heavily in the strategy, with the government pledging to launch regional pilots to trial creative ways of involving people in local democracy, such as through online polls for community decisions. It also claims it will use digital to help charities reach more people and will support charities to have their voices heard.
However, Bond head of policy and campaigns, Claire Godfrey, said the best way of giving civil society “the confidence to speak out”, would be to revise the Lobbying Act and “stop inserting anti-advocacy clauses into grant agreements”, but it claims the government’s new strategy does neither of those.
“We welcome the offer to work with civil society, regulators and other government departments to determine how to support advocacy and campaigning in the UK, but this is not enough. Real confidence will now have to come from actions rather than words.”
The Compact
Among other changes to the sector, the government has also announced it will renew its commitments to grants and the principles of the Compact, a document that sets out a series of principles and commitments governing the relationship between the social sector and the government.
NCVO welcomed this announcement, claiming it is something the organisation has long been campaigning for. “This is an important symbolic gesture to show the government takes its relationship with charities seriously. In particular, I hope it will reinforce good practice in collaborative policy-making. We know that the best solutions to challenges come when the government works together with expert charities,” Etherington said.
Originally published by charitytimes: www.charitytimes.com
Written by Lauren Weymouth
31/07/18
The charity sector must go further than “simple box-ticking” against their legal duties in order to improve safeguarding, the Charity Commission has said.
In response to a report published today by the International Development Committee about sexual abuse and exploitation in the aid sector, the regulator said charities should be judged “not just by what they do or achieve, but by how they go about it”.
The report found sexual abuse among the aid sector has been ongoing for a “long time” and the sector is guilty of being almost “complicit” in the scandal.
MPs declared abuse among aid charities as an “endemic” and “confirmed under-reporting” means the exact scale of it is “impossible to define”. It added that the cases that have come to light, such as those at Oxfam and Save the Children, are “only the tip of the iceberg”.
Commenting on these findings, Charity Commission director of investigations, monitoring and enforcement, Michelle Russell said: “The Commission is clear that sexual exploitation and abuse, and any other behaviours that put beneficiaries, staff, volunteers and members of the public at risk, have absolutely no place in charity.
“We are pleased that the report makes a number of helpful suggestions to the sector as to how these can be stamped out. We take safeguarding extremely seriously. Our role is to hold all charities, including those working in the international aid sector, to account for the way they fulfil their duties in keeping people safe,” she said.
However, Russell stressed the sector must do more to ensure it complies with legal duties, rather than ‘ticking-boxes’.
“We are particularly pleased to see the Committee’s focus on the responsibility of charity leaders to set an organisational culture that demonstrates zero tolerance for abuse,” she said.
“Charities should be judged not just by what they do or achieve, but by how they go about it. Our research shows that the public expect charities to demonstrate the highest standards are met through everything they do.
“In the context of safeguarding this means creating safe and trusted environments, including for victims to come forward if abuse does occur, and being transparent with us as the regulator, and the public where appropriate, when things go wrong. It is time for charities and their leadership to fully confront these issues with a real commitment to lasting and demonstrable change.
“We are pleased that the Committee recognises our crucial role in monitoring and upholding standards on safeguarding in charities, and welcome the Committee’s recommendation that the Commission should be properly resourced to meet these challenges. We will continue to work with government to ensure we are adequately resourced to meet future challenges.”
The Institute of Fundraising’s head of policy and external affairs also commented on the report, claiming the report highlights “hugely important issues for the international aid sector, as well as the need for all charities to ensure they have proper safeguarding policies and procedures in place.
“Everyone who works with, for, or comes into contact with a charity must be treated with respect and have their rights protected,” he said.
“Supporters and the public rightly have high expectations of how charities work and hold them to high standards. They care about causes, and while we never take public donations for granted, we believe that people will continue to support charities and continue to give.
“Charities need to show real and meaningful change, be transparent, and fully accountable. By being upfront, honest, and clear with supporters charities can keep support and continue to work to make the world a better place.”
Essex County Council is dedicated to improving Essex and the lives of our residents. Their ambition is to deliver the best quality of life in Britain. They aim to achieve this by providing high-quality, targeted services that deliver real value for money. Read more…
Chairman and trustee resigned amid investigation into more than £90,000 spent on consultancy firm they directed.
Firstsite, the ill-fated arts centre in Colchester, Essex, that has received or been promised around £10m in Arts Council funding, is in crisis after revelations that its chairman and a trustee faced accusations of a conflict of interest over expenditure of more than £90,000 on consultancy services. In June, a confidential independent report on the affair led the Charity Commission to describe the payments as “a serious incident”.
Noorzaman Rashid, Firstsite’s chairman, and fellow trustee Robert Surman resigned on 16 March this year. This followed the news that the arts centre had paid £91,040 between September 2015 and November 2016 for human-resources consultancy advice from the company Friary West, based in Maldon, Essex; both Rashid and Surman were directors of the firm.
Rashid had been appointed the chairman of Firstsite in July 2015 and became a director of Friary West in January 2016, while the arts centre was still making payments to the company. Surman, who was appointed a trustee of Firstsite in September 2015, also became a director of Friary West in January 2016. Two of the firm’s four directors were therefore on Firstsite’s board.
In March, Firstsite appointed the accountancy firm Mazars “to investigate the links”. Its report, submitted in June, shows that both men “declared their interest to the board of trustees and its register of interests”. Both also “stated that they received no financial reward for the work they undertook for the company”.
The report recommends that Firstsite should “review its existing procurement policy and define the specific criteria for selecting suppliers”. It also says that the arts centre should “provide staff and trustees with training so that they understand the procurement policy adopted by Firstsite and can apply it correctly”.
After receiving the report, a spokesman for the arts centre said: “Firstsite’s board has accepted the findings and recommendations of the investigation by Mazars and is actively reviewing the operation of its procurement policy in light of this to ensure that it is effective, supported by robust procurement procedures and with appropriate collective decision-making for high-value contracts.”
The Charity Commission also responded in a statement, which said: “The [Firstsite] trustees have reported a serious incident to the commission and we are aware of concerns about Firstsite’s use of its charitable funds. There are circumstances in which trustees’ professional connections may bring benefits to a charity’s work; however, it is vital that any conflicts of interest are managed effectively in order to maintain public trust and confidence in the charity. We will be assessing information provided by the charity and will be engaging with the trustees to ensure that they are acting in line with their legal duties and our guidance.”
Major funder had concerns
In recent years, Firstsite’s major source of funding has been Arts Council England. In 2014, it was awarded £815,000 a year for the period 2015/16 to 2018/19, but by February 2015, the Arts Council had become concerned about the centre’s viability and the three-year arrangement was replaced with a one-year grant. In June 2017, after the Arts Council was reassured about Firstsite’s revised plans, a further two years’ funding was reinstated; this runs from April this year. The long-term funding therefore came into force just a month after the revelations about the payments to Friary West.
In June, a spokeswoman for the Arts Council told us: “We welcome the measures that Firstsite has taken to examine its governance procedures. Both its management and its board are working hard to implement the recommendations of the independent [Mazars] review.”
We have not received a response to a request for comment from Rashid and Surman.
The number of charity shops is soaring in the West Midlands – sparking fears small independent businesses are disappearing from the high street.
An exclusive analysis of figures from NOMIS shows that in 2017 there were 375 charity shops in the metropolitan area, 39 per cent more compared to the 270 registered in 2010.
Solihull saw the biggest increase locally – charity shops went up by 75 per cent in seven years from 20 to 35.
Birmingham followed with an increase of 61 per cent from 90 to 145 while the number of charity shops in Walsall has increased by 50 per cent from 20 to 30.
Across the UK, charity shops have soared by a third, or 32 per cent, from 8,550 to 11,260.
According to chartered accountants Kreston Reeves, which ran a charity shops survey in 2016, “charity shops generally perform best during a recession”.
As their report says, “the Brexit vote is a bright spot on the horizon for charity shops as many commentators believe it may return the country to recession.”
Charity shops pay only 20 per cent of the standard business rates which makes it easier for them to take over premises that might otherwise stay empty.
Commenting on the national trend, a Charity Retail Association spokesperson said: “The success in raising charity shop numbers is down to many factors.
“It is an environmentally-friendly way to shop and the public is always keen for a bargain.
“Our research shows that the amount of charity shops in one particular area is not linked to deprivation.
“The UK public is always generous when it comes to raising money for charity and we see no sign of that declining.”
The founder of a children’s cancer charity is to go on trial accused of fraud involving more than £340,000.
Colin Nesbitt, 57, started the Little Heroes Cancer Trust in 2008, which raised money to buy toys for children with cancer and support families.
He appeared at Bradford Crown Court where he denied five fraud charges and five allegations that he supplied false information about the charity’s spending to the Charity Commission.
He will go on trial on 15 April.
It is alleged that Mr Nesbitt, of Kent Road, Bingley, abused his position as director of the charity by transferring money into bank accounts and giving loans to two men.
Originally sent in an email from Media Trust: mediatrust.org
In a rapidly evolving digital world, there is an increased need for charities to enhance their digital communications knowledge and implement a digital strategy to help them reach new supporters and deliver successful campaigns online. However, when resources and budgets are stretched, this can prove difficult for most.
That’s why, last month, we announced the launch of our new UK-wide digital skills training programme, delivered through local masterclasses, mentoring and online learning.
Register for a digital masterclass near you
You can now book onto the first wave of our regional masterclasses, starting in September. Charities and community organisations can sign up to attend free digital skills masterclasses in locations around the UK, including Birmingham, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Manchester, Leeds, Leicester, Newcastle, Bristol and London*.
* Please note, the next London masterclass will repeat the topics covered at our launch event on 21 June 2018.
Southend United have announced a partnership with Prostate Cancer UK that will see the charity’s logo emblazoned on the club’s home and away kits.
Shrimpers boss Chris Powell is an ambassador for the charity and ran the London Marathonback in April to raise money for them.
The logo will be on the front of the kits for the duration of the 2018/19 League One season.
Prostate Cancer UK is one of the Football League’s chosen charities, and Shrimpers boss Powell is hopeful that the shirt sponsorship deal will help to raise awareness.
“I think it’s a wonderful move by us,” Powell told ITV News Anglia.
“We know there’s many men that watch football and may be unaware of what prostate cancer is about, so it will certainly raise awareness in this part of Essex, that’s for sure.”
Prostate Cancer UK Chief Executive Angela Culhane has commended the partnership and believes it will make a real difference.
“This partnership extends our footprint in football and proves again the power the beautiful game can have in shaping real change,” she said.
“It will help us make sure the messages about prostate cancer continue to ring loud for the football community, with all at Southend United playing their part in making prostate cancer a disease the next generation of men need not fear.”
Originally published by charitytimes: www.charitytimes.com
Written by Charity Times staff writer
20/07/18
Almost 90 per cent of donors prefer to donate directly via their website instead of through third-party fundraising websites, new research has revealed.
According to the recent report, The Future of Online Giving, commissioned by Charity Checkout, 89 per cent of donors said they would be more likely to give again when donating directly through a charity’s website, while just 19 per cent said they would be likely to give again after using third-party fundraising platforms.
The results also found just under half (47%) of donors don’t remember the charity they donated to when they last sponsored a friend online. Of those who were willing to receive follow-up communications after making an online donation, 76 per cent said they were happy to be contacted by the charity itself, while just 10 per cent said they preferred to hear from a third-party fundraising platform.
Charity Checkout founder Chester Mojay Sinclare said the results from the survey “clearly indicate” issues it has been aware for some time, including that donors “greatly value” the direct relationship with the charity itself over an intermediary platform.
“Issues like the ease of giving, trust and transparency have for some time been considered key barriers to giving. Providing a seamless donor journey through a dedicated website can not only attract more donations but actually increase the level of giving – nearly half of donors said they would give more generously via a charity’s own website.”
Other findings in the report indicate that there are other areas of concern around donor loyalty, charity brand, identity and consent which has direct implications on the level of giving that a donor makes to their charity of choice.
Honeypot Children’s Charity fundraising and marketing director, Peter Suchet added: “Currently, the status quo is to encourage charities to use third-party fundraising websites who insist on putting their consent statement before the charity.
“This results in charities missing out on obtaining permission to contact their donors in the future, as donors are often unwilling to provide their consent to both parties. The data shows that the vast majority of donors only want to receive communications from the charity, yet the third-party fundraising platforms are attempting to put themselves first in the relationship.”
He added that overall, the report provides “very actionable and useful insights” including evidence that people are more likely to give generously when they engage with a charity directly, and are more willing to be contacted by a charity when the subject matter coincides with their existing interests.
“Charities cannot afford to ignore or underplay this shift towards online activities. They need to understand and act upon the opportunities these present – from how people prefer to be contacted to the information donors want to receive about the impact of their gifts,” he said.
The report was carried out by independent research company Maru/Usurv and surveyed 1000 members of the public in Q1 2018.