Research with trustees 2024 - GOV.UK

* Research and analysis RESEARCH WITH TRUSTEES 2024 Published 16 August 2024 APPLIES TO ENGLAND AND WALES CONTENTS * Executive summary * Trustee Role * The Commission and Charities in

Society * Charity Commission Support * Banking * Appendices Print this page © Crown copyright 2024 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except

where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London

TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected]. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This

publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/research-into-public-trust-in-charities-and-trustees-experience-of-their-role-2024/research-with-trustees-2024

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Trustees are confident in their responsibilities and their ability to protect their charity and beneficiaries from harm. They generally understand what they should be doing

when making important decisions – such as understanding potential costs and what the charity can afford, as well as listening to different views and perspectives, but are less sure on

things they should not be doing, including avoiding seemingly awkward questions, or making decisions based on trustees’ personal views. This confidence and understanding of role and

responsibility is greater amongst more experienced trustees, and those who have had more interaction with the Commission. Confidence in the abilities of the Commission, and perceptions of

fairness are also strong, and again influenced positively by higher levels of interaction with the Commission. Trustees are aware of their own role in upholding the reputation of the charity

sector. Generally, perceptions among those who don’t interact with the Commission aren’t negative, they just reflect a lack of knowledge about the Commission. In focus groups, some trustees

suggested more of a partnership-style relationship and more signposting to the ways in which they can get support- particularly in terms of current issues such as banking. As not all

trustees recognise an opportunity or reason to directly interact with the Commission, the challenge is around how to shift perceptions and raise awareness among those who don’t interact.

Trustees in focus groups had some ideas around how to encourage this. TRUSTEE ROLE CONFIDENCE IN DIFFERENT AREAS OF TRUSTEE WORK IS HIGH, THOUGH SLIGHTLY LOWER AMONGST NEW TRUSTEES TRUSTEE

AREAS TOTAL CONFIDENCE VERY CONFIDENT SOMEWHAT CONFIDENT NOT VERY CONFIDENT NOT CONFIDENT AT ALL Managing finances 87% 51% 37% 7% 1% Safeguarding 92% 57% 35% 3% 1% Identifying and dealing

with conflicts of interest 93% 49% 44% 4% 1% Reporting information 96% 64% 32% 2% 0% Making decisions 98% 70% 28% 1% 0% Delivering your charity’s purpose 99% 77% 22% 0% 0% STATED CONFIDENCE

IN DIFFERENT TRUSTEE AREAS TOTAL CONFIDENCE AMONGST TRUSTEES OF DIFFERENT EXPERIENCE LEVELS TRUSTEE AREAS MORE THAN TEN YEARS FIVE TO TEN YEARS ONE TO FIVE YEARS LESS THAN ONE YEAR Managing

finances 92% 86% 85% 81% Safeguarding 92% 91% 93% 90% Identifying and dealing with conflicts of interest 94% 94% 92% 89% Reporting information 98% 97% 95% 91% Making decisions 99% 99% 98%

94% Delivering your charity’s purpose 99% 99% 99% 95% NEARLY ALL TRUSTEES ARE CONFIDENT IN THEIR ABILITY TO PROTECT THEIR CHARITY AND BENEFICIARIES FROM WRONGDOING AND HARM, THOUGH THE LEVEL

SAYING THEY ARE VERY CONFIDENT HAS DROPPED CONFIDENCE IN ABILITY TO PROTECT CHARITY AND BENEFICIARIES FROM WRONGDOING AND HARM, BY TRUSTEE EXPERIENCE: VERY CONFIDENT SOMEWHAT CONFIDENT

Total 56% 41% Less than one year 41% 50% One to five years 49% 48% Five to ten years 58% 39% More than ten years 65% 33% CONFIDENCE OVER TIME: CONFIDENT TOTAL VERY CONFIDENT SOMEWHAT

CONFIDENT 2021 98% 62% 36% 2022 98% 63% 34% 2023 98% 63% 35% 2024 97% 56% 41% TRUSTEES ARE GENERALLY AWARE OF THEIR MAIN LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES, ALTHOUGH THERE ARE SOME GAPS IN THEIR

KNOWLEDGE. THOSE WHO USE COMMISSION RESOURCES ARE BETTER INFORMED ANSWERED ‘THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES ARE JOINTLY RESPONSIBLE’: ALL TRUSTEES USES CHARITY COMMISSION RESOURCES LESS THAN ONCE A

YEAR/NEVER USES CHARITY COMMISSION RESOURCES AT LEAST ONCE A YEAR Ensuring that all of the charity’s activities help to achieve the purposes for which it was set up 90% 88% 94% Making the

important decisions in the charity 90% 89% 93% Checking and approving the charity’s annual accounts and trustees’ report 83% 80% 90% Ensuring the charity’s governing document, policies and

procedures are fit for purpose and are being followed 79% 76% 85% Making sure the charity’s resources are kept safe, properly used and accounted for 77% 74% 85% Managing conflicts of

interest so that they don’t wrongly influence trustee decisions 69% 67% 74% Keeping up to date with relevant Charity Commission guidance 69% 65% 79% Making sure the charity sends the right

information to the Commission at the right time 55% 51% 65% * 22% said the Chair is responsible for managing conflicts of interest so that they don’t wrongly influence trustee decisions *

11% said the Chair is responsible for keeping up to date with relevant Charity Commission guidance, with 10% saying the Secretary is responsible for this * 14% said the Chair is responsible

for making sure the charity sends the right information to the Commission at the right time, with 14% saying the Secretary is responsible for this MOST TRUSTEES KNOW WHAT THEY SHOULD ALWAYS

DO WHEN MAKING DECISIONS, BUT THEY ARE LESS SURE ABOUT BASING DECISIONS ON PERSONAL VIEWS, OR RECOGNISING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST TRUSTEE AWARENESS OF THINGS TRUSTEES SHOULD DO: TRUSTEES

SHOULD ALWAYS DO THIS IT DEPENDS TRUSTEES SHOULD NEVER DO THIS Understand potential costs and what the charity can afford 98% 2% 0% Listen to different views and perspectives 98% 2% 0% Make

sure they have all the information they need 98% 2% 0% Follow what it says in the charity’s governing document 94% 5% 0% Decide what is relevant to that decision 93% 7% 0% Keep a record of

decisions and any objections 93% 7% 0% Speak up if they disagree with the majority 89% 11% 0% TRUSTEE AWARENESS OF THINGS TRUSTEES SHOULD NOT DO: TRUSTEES SHOULD ALWAYS DO THIS IT DEPENDS

TRUSTEES SHOULD NEVER DO THIS Avoid asking seemingly awkward questions 16% 25% 59% Make decisions based on trustees’ personal views 7% 40% 53% Try to ensure decisions benefit other

organisation they are involved in 28% 33% 38% THE COMMISSION AND CHARITIES IN SOCIETY CONFIDENCE IN THE CHARITY COMMISSION’S ABILITY TO UNCOVER WRONGDOING AND HARM, AND THAT WRONGDOING WILL

BE DEALT WITH APPROPRIATELY, CONTINUES TO BE HIGH CONFIDENCE IN THE CHARITY COMMISSION’S ABILITIES OVER TIME: CONFIDENT/VERY CONFIDENT IN THE CHARITY COMMISSION’S ABILITY TO UNCOVER

WRONGDOING AND HARM WHEN THEY OCCUR IN OTHER CHARITIES CONFIDENT/VERY CONFIDENT THAT INSTANCES OF WRONGDOING AND HARM ONCE UNCOVERED WILL BE DEALT WITH APPROPRIATELY BY THE CHARITY

COMMISSION 2020 74% 90% 2021 85% 95% 2022 86% 94% 2023 87% 95% 2024 85% 92% Generally most trustee groups have a similar level of confidence in the Charity Commission’s ability to uncover

wrongdoing. Those more likely to be confident include: * those aware of the 5-minute guides (88%) * trustees in Wales (94%) The only group more likely to be confident in the Charity

Commission’s ability to deal with wrongdoing appropriately when uncovered are: * those aware of the 5-minute guides (94%) IN FOCUS GROUPS, TRUSTEES EXPRESSED DOUBTS ABOUT THE CHARITY

COMMISSION’S ABILITY TO DETECT WRONGDOING, BUT CONFIDENCE THAT IT COULD TACKLE IT WHEN NEEDED Confidence in the Charity Commission’s abilities: * 85% are confident in the Charity

Commission’s ability to uncover wrongdoing and harm when they occur in charities * 92% trustees are confident that instances of wrongdoing and harm, once uncovered, will be dealt with

appropriately by the Charity Commission In focus groups, trustees seemed more sceptical of how the Commission would be able to uncover wrongdoing itself, despite it being seen as primarily a

regulatory body. Trustees said that this is expected, given the volume of charities that exist and the limited information that they receive. They did not consider this a flaw, but rather

accept that they might have to rely on other sources reporting wrongdoing. In terms of dealing with wrongdoing once uncovered, trustees feel that in well-known cases the Commission has done

the right thing. When citing firsthand experience, there is more mixed opinion, with one trustee mentioning the Commission taking immediate action with a charity that was not being run

properly, while another told of an incident of fraud that, when reported, they felt went with little help or support from the Commission. TRUSTEES ARE MORE LIKELY TO FEEL THAT THEIR

CHARITY’S STANDARDS OF CONDUCT AND BEHAVIOUR SHOULD BE HIGHER DUE TO ITS REGISTERED STATUS UNDERSTANDING OF CHARITIES’ IMPACTS ON THE PUBLIC AND WIDER SECTOR Statement A. Where charities

fall short of public expectations it is usually because the public doesn’t understand the complexities and difficulties in those charities delivering their purpose    0 (AGREE WITH STATEMENT

A) 6% 1 2% 2 5% 3 6% 4 6% 5 30% 6 7% 7 11% 8 12% 9 4% 10 (agree with Statement B) 10% Statement B. Where charities fall short of public expectations it is usually because charities don’t

spend enough time and trouble understanding those expectations and trying to meet them 0 (AGREE WITH STATEMENT A) 15% 1 8% 2 14% 3 12% 4 7% 5 26% 6 4% 7 6% 8 4% 9 1% 10 (agree with Statement

B) 4% Statement A. I have a clear understanding about how public expectations ought to shape the way charities go about doing what they do Statement B. I am unclear about how public

expectations ought to shape the way charities go about doing what they do THERE HAS BEEN LITTLE CHANGE OVER TIME IN TRUSTEE PERCEPTIONS OF PUBLIC EXPECTATIONS UNDERSTANDING OF CHARITIES’

IMPACTS ON THE PUBLIC AND WIDER SECTOR OVER TIME Statement A: Where charities fall short of public expectations it is usually because the public doesn’t understand the complexities and

difficulties in those charities delivering their purpose Statement B: Where charities fall short of public expectations it is usually because charities don’t spend enough time and trouble

understanding those expectations and trying to meet them      AGREE WITH STATEMENT A NEUTRAL AGREE WITH STATEMENT B 2021 23% 30% 46% 2022 25% 31% 44% 2023 27% 32% 41% 2024 25% 30% 45%

Statement A: I have a clear understanding about how public expectations ought to shape the way charities go about doing what they do Statement B: I am unclear about how public expectations

ought to shape the way charities go about doing what they do AGREE WITH STATEMENT A NEUTRAL AGREE WITH STATEMENT B 2021 58% 25% 17% 2022 55% 26% 20% 2023 56% 24% 20% 2024 55% 26% 19%

TRUSTEES TEND TO FEEL THEIR STANDARDS OF CONDUCT SHOULD BE HIGHER, AND THAT ONE CHARITY’S ACTIONS CAN IMPACT PERCEPTIONS OF ALL CHARITIES UNDERSTANDING OF CHARITIES’ IMPACTS ON THE PUBLIC

AND WIDER SECTOR Statement A. My charity ought to have the same standards of conduct and behaviour as any other organisation  0 (AGREE WITH STATEMENT A) 20% 1 4% 2 3% 3 2% 4 1% 5 9% 6 5% 7

8% 8 14% 9 7% 10 (agree with Statement B) 27% Statement B. Because of its registered status, my charity’s standards of conduct and behaviour ought to be higher than in other organisations

Statement A. If you are a charity, how you act impacts what people think of other charities in England and Wales 0 (AGREE WITH STATEMENT A) 25% 1 9% 2 16% 3 12% 4 6% 5 14% 6 2% 7 4% 8 4% 9

2% 10 (agree with Statement B) 6% Statement B. If you are a charity your actions have no impact of what people think of other charities Statement A. If there is story about a charity

breaking the rules in the news, the public may think my charity is also breaking the rules 0 (AGREE WITH STATEMENT A) 5% 1 3% 2 7% 3 10% 4 7% 5 18% 6 5% 7 12% 8 14% 9 5% 10 (agree with

Statement B) 13% Statement B.  If there is a story about a charity breaking the rules in the news, the public will think it only applies to the charity in question QUALITATIVE RESEARCH FOUND

THAT THERE IS A CLEAR SENSE OF COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY AMONGST CHARITIES, AND THAT THE MEDIA DOES NOT WHOLLY INFLUENCE PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS Discussions amongst trustees highlighted that

there is a level of distrust in the media. They also mentioned that things would not necessarily reach the news unless it was negative, and unless it was uncommon. They generally feel the

public see charities in a positive light, however wrongdoing can have a widespread effect and as one trustee said “you only hear when something goes wrong”. “I think unfortunately charities

have done things that have been exposed by the press and I think that that does tar the brush of a lot of other charities.” Overall, there is a strong sense of collective responsibility to

uphold the positive perceptions of charity, and that some charity actions can result in negative feelings from the public, such as fundraising via ‘cold-calling’ and TV adverts. These were

examples which trustees agreed may negatively impact public perceptions of charities in general. “You’ve only to watch the television for three or four days to find that the general public

are bombarded with requests for assistance from charities and, of course, that tends to have a negative effect…no one can support or give a bit of cash to every charity.” SOCIAL MEDIA WAS

SEEN AS A SERIOUS ASSET IF TRUSTEES HAD THE SKILLSET Social media was seen by trustees as very valuable to charities. The uses and benefits of social media mentioned included: * advertising

their fundraising events * inviting people to get involved in fundraising and volunteering * general marketing and promoting the purpose of the charity * informing people on how they can

donate * interaction with audiences including reading reviews and asking opinions No one denied the importance of social media, however it was agreed on that the quality also counts. Those

who did not use social media in their charity explained that they did not have anyone with the skillset to run an effective social media page, so it was better not to have one at all. No one

brought up any specific risks associated with social media, but there was general concern about cyber security and the lack of expertise most charities would have in this area. “Everyone

uses social media now. As a charity in such a big county we wouldn’t be able to get the message out, we would dwindle without it.” “Charities need to ensure that there are people who are

able to create good quality content to engage people – not many trustees would have that skillset.” AI IS USED MORE BY CHARITIES WITH HIGHER INCOMES, BEING USED MAINLY FOR DRAFTING WEB

CONTENT OR COMMUNICATIONS DOES CHARITY USE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN OPERATIONS? BY INCOME: YES NO DON’T KNOW Total 3% 89% 9% Less than £10k 2% 93% 5% £10k-£100k 3% 92% 6% £100k-£500k 5%

86% 10% Over £500k 6% 78% 16% Breakdown for charity income between £10k-£100k: * £10k-£25k: 3% use AI in operations * £25k-£100k: 3% use AI in operations Breakdown for charity income over

£500k: * £500k-£1m: 2% use AI in their operations * £1m-£5m: 8% use AI in their operations * Over £5m: 8% use AI in their operations WHAT DOES CHARITY USE AI FOR?: PURPOSE Drafting web

content or communications 58% Drafting internal documents 39% Research or information gathering 37% Fundraising 24% Other 7% TRUSTEES ARE MORE LIKELY THAN NOT TO SAY THERE IS NOTHING WRONG

WITH CAMPAIGNING FOR SOCIETAL CHANGE, AND THAT CHARITIES SHOULD RESPOND TO DEBATES TO STAY RELEVANT UNDERSTANDING OF CHARITIES’ IMPACTS ON THE PUBLIC AND WIDER SECTOR Statement A. There is

nothing wrong with charities campaigning for change in society, if it helps them meet the needs of those who rely on them. 0 (AGREE WITH STATEMENT A) 19% 1 6% 2 10% 3 9% 4 5% 5 18% 6 4% 7 5%

8 8% 9 4% 10 (agree with Statement B) 13% Statement B. Charities should focus on meeting the needs of those who rely on them, rather than campaigning for change in society. Statement A.

Charities should respond to social and cultural debates if they want to stay relevant and keep the support of the public.       0 (AGREE WITH STATEMENT A) 14% 1 5% 2 11% 3 11% 4 7% 5 26% 6

4% 7 5% 8 6% 9 3% 10 (agree with Statement B) 8% Statement B. Charities should not get involved in social and cultural debates if they want to keep the support of the public. THE PUBLIC ARE

MORE EVENLY SPLIT IN THEIR VIEWS ON CHARITY CAMPAIGNING TRUSTEE VS. PUBLIC Statement A. There is nothing wrong with charities campaigning for change in society, if it helps them meet the

needs of those who rely on them TRUSTEE PUBLIC 0 (agree with Statement A) 19% 13% 1 6% 6% 2 10% 9% 3 9% 8% 4 5% 6% 5 18% 17% 6 4% 8% 7 5% 8% 8 8% 9% 9 4% 5% 10 (agree with Statement B) 13%

10% Statement B. Charities should focus on meeting the needs of those who rely on them, rather than campaigning for change in society THE PUBLIC ARE ALSO MORE DIVIDED ON CHARITY

PARTICIPATION IN SOCIAL AND CULTURAL DEBATES TRUSTEES VS. PUBLIC Statement A. Charities should respond to social and cultural debates if they want to stay relevant and keep the support of

the public. TRUSTEE PUBLIC 0 (agree with Statement A) 14% 8% 1 5% 4% 2 11% 8% 3 11% 9% 4 7% 9% 5 26% 22% 6 4% 9% 7 5% 8% 8 6% 10% 9 3% 4% 10 (agree with Statement B) 8% 9% Statement B.

Charities should not get involved in social and cultural debates if they want to keep the support of the public. TRUSTEES FEEL THE COMMISSION SHOULD FOCUS MORE ON ENABLING CHARITIES TO BE

MORE EFFECTIVE, AND LESS ON KEEPING A REGISTER OF CHARITIES UP TO DATE. THEY FEEL THAT THE COMMISSION IS FOCUSING THE RIGHT AMOUNT ON ENFORCING COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW Trustees were asked to

allocate 100 points across these five areas to show their perceptions of what the Commission focuses on, and what they think it ought to focus on. For example, a trustee thinking the

Commission ought to focus on all of these equally would allocate 20 points to each. WHERE THE CHARITY COMMISSION OUGHT TO, AND DOES, FOCUS ITS WORK (1-100 MEAN): OUGHT TO FOCUS ON (MEAN)

ACTUALLY DOES FOCUS ON (MEAN) Identifying and dealing with wrongdoing 26.64 25.61 Enabling charities to be more effective 22.61 17.22 Giving charities advice and guidance to ensure they

comply with the law 23.15 22.13 Informing the public about charities 11.53 12 Keeping a public register of charities up to date 16.07 23.04 In focus groups it was clear that trustees were

not completely certain of the Commission’s role and aims. There was a general agreement that the Commission focuses on regulating, or ‘policing’ charities, and getting involved when

something goes wrong. One trustee mentioned that the Commission is a regulator but also aims to give advice, and that “the two roles in one can be challenging.” WHILE THERE IS SOME AMBIGUITY

AROUND THE MEANING OF FAIR, BALANCED AND INDEPENDENT, TRUSTEES GENERALLY THINK THAT THE COMMISSION UPHOLDS THESE VALUES Trustees in focus groups were asked to dissect the meaning of the

Commission’s aim to be “fair, balanced, and independent”. There was not a universal consensus on these words, with trustees saying they could be very subjective and ambiguous – as well as

overlapping in their definitions or being “three versions of the same thing.” Generally, trustees thought that these were good values that aligned with their own. FAIR AND BALANCED There was

some overlap in these definitions. Fairness was interpreted as treating all people and organisations equally, and transparently, while balanced shared a similar interpretation as not

shifting one way or the other and to be a middle ground.  Examples of balance and fairness were given, such as offering guidance about statements around the Israel/Gaza conflict. Trustees

did however ponder about how balanced the Commission can be in investigating wrongdoing when it relies on others to raise concerns, and that this might lead to an investigation being

one-sided. INDEPENDENT Most clear to trustees was the idea of independence, understood to mean being an organisation that is not swayed by other bodies like political parties, or big

donations. A common theme was a question over the extent to which it can be truly independent when it is a department of government and funded by the Treasury.         “Their email address

is a gov.uk email address so I think to say independent… (independent) of what? It is a government agency.”

                                                                                                                                      TRUSTEES FEEL THAT CHARITY LAW IS (RIGHTLY) THE MAIN

INFLUENCE ON THE COMMISSION, BUT THE MEDIA AND POLITICIANS HAVE MORE INFLUENCE THAN THEY SHOULD HOW THE CHARITY COMMISSION IS /SHOULD BE INFLUENCED BY OTHER FACTORS (1-5 MEAN): IS INFLUENCED

BY (MEAN) SHOULD BE INFLUENCED BY (MEAN) The media 3.34 1.92 Politicians 3.34 2.01 Charities 3.40 3.93 The public 3.20 3.31 Charity Law 4.62 4.71 These findings about influence were echoed

in the discussions around how independent the Commission is from the government, with multiple trustees citing a gov.uk address on the Commission’s website. There was also discussion about

the influence of the media, as the Commission may be more likely to act on charities that are more likely to get media attention. The Kids Company case was mentioned as an example of this.

Additionally, trustees felt that charities’ level of influence on the Commission differs depending on their reputation and size with larger, well-known charities having more sway. CHARITY

COMMISSION SUPPORT TRUSTEES WHO HAVE INTERACTED WITH THE COMMISSION ARE MORE LIKELY TO THINK IT ACTS FAIRLY, WHILE THOSE WHO HAVE NOT HAD INTERACTION ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE UNSURE ON HOW IT

ACTS HOW FAIRLY THE CHARITY COMMISSION ACTS BY SUBGROUPS: VERY FAIRLY SOMEWHAT FAIRLY NEITHER FAIRLY NOR UNFAIRLY SOMEWHAT UNFAIRLY VERY UNFAIRLY DON’T KNOW Total 22%   24% 9% 1% 0% 44%

Those who have had any form of interaction with the Charity Commission 26%   29% 8% 2% 1% 35% Those who have had no interaction with the Charity Commission 20%   21% 9% 1% 0% 47% Trustees

with 1 to 5 years experience 18%   23% 9% 1% 0% 48% Trustees with over 10 years experience 25%   25% 9% 2% 1% 39% Charity income:               £0 - £10,000 22%   22% 10% 1% 0% 45% Charity

income:               £10,000 - £100,000 23%   24% 9% 1% 0% 43% Charity Income: £100,000 - £500,000 22%   24% 8% 2% 1% 43% Charity Income:               £500,000 + 23%   31% 10% 3% 1% 33%

NEARLY HALF OF TRUSTEES SAY THE COMMISSION ACTS FAIRLY, WHILE JUST 1% SAY UNFAIRLY. A SUBSTANTIAL PROPORTION DON’T KNOW WHETHER IT ACTS FAIRLY OR NOT, LIKELY DUE TO LACK OF INTERACTION HOW

FAIRLY THE CHARITY COMMISSION ACTS: VERY FAIRLY SOMEWHAT FAIRLY NEITHER FAIRLY NOR UNFAIRLY SOMEWHAT UNFAIRLY VERY UNFAIRLY DON’T KNOW Total 22% 24% 9% 1% 0% 44%   Charities with an income

of over £500k are less likely to say they don’t know how fairly the Commission acts (33%), as are trustees with over 10 years’ experience (39%). Those who have used the Commission resources

at least once a year are more likely to say it is fair (53%). In focus groups, Trustees viewed ‘fairness’ as treating parties equally and transparently, including providing equal access to

resources and training. MOST (70% OF) TRUSTEES WHO HAD CONTACT WITH THE COMMISSION AROUND PERMISSION, ADVICE, OR DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES FELT THEY WERE TREATED FAIRLY HOW FAIRLY CHARITIES

HAVE BEEN TREATED BY THE CHARITY COMMISSION: VERY FAIRLY SOMEWHAT FAIRLY NEITHER FAIRLY NOR UNFAIRLY SOMEWHAT UNFAIRLY VERY UNFAIRLY DON’T KNOW 2024 56% 14% 12% 1% 1% 16% 2023* 71% 10% 9% 2%

1% 8% *In 2023 respondents were asked separately depending on whether they said they had sought advice/permission or if they had been subject to a disciplinary procedure while 2024 base

covers both combined. Why did you say that? (of those who said ‘unfairly’) “The process was slow and bureaucratic and at one point we were sent back to square one.” “No communication with

Trustees before action by CC.” TRUSTEES STILL USE COLLEAGUES OR OTHER TRUSTEES AS A SOURCE OF INFORMATION MORE OFTEN THAN THE CHARITY COMMISSION WHAT SOURCES OF INFORMATION TRUSTEES HAVE

USED AT LEAST ONCE A YEAR: 2024 2023 2022 2021 A colleague or another trustee 62% 57% 70% 71% Looking on the internet 46% 38% 59% 55% The Charity Commission 26% 19% 29% 29% A friend or

family member (expert) 21% 19% 28% 29% Another charity or advisory body 20% 16% 23% 24% A friend or family member (non-expert) 9% 7% 13% 13% Other 7% 6% 8% 10% TRUSTEES HAVE FOUND A

COLLEAGUE OR ANOTHER TRUSTEE THE MOST HELPFUL SOURCE OF INFORMATION. 93% OF THOSE WHO HAVE USED THE CHARITY COMMISSION AS A SOURCE OF INFORMATION HAVE FOUND IT HELPFUL HOW HELPFUL TRUSTEES

HAVE FOUND EACH SOURCE OF INFORMATION: VERY HELPFUL FAIRLY HELPFUL NOT VERY HELPFUL NOT HELPFUL AT ALL The Charity Commission 49% 44% 6% 1% A colleague or another trustee 52% 45% 2% 1%

Another charity or advisory body 64% 30% 3% 3% A friend or family member (expert) 37% 55% 6% 2% Looking on the internet 25% 65% 9% 1% A friend or family member (non-expert) 15% 59% 21% 4%

Other 51% 28% 5% 16% MOST TRUSTEES WHO HAVE NOT USED COMMISSION GUIDANCE AT LEAST ONCE A YEAR SAID THEY DON’T NEED HELP AND GUIDANCE THAT REGULARLY, CONSISTENT WITH PREVIOUS YEARS WHY THE

CHARITY COMMISSION HAS NOT BEEN USED AS A SOURCE OF INFORMATION: 2024 2023 2022 2021 I don’t think I need help and guidance that regularly 58% 57% 50% 51% I didn’t know that the Charity

Commission provided help and guidance 16% 14% 19% 20% I don’t know how to find what I need 12% 8% 14% 11% I don’t think the help and guidance provided by the Charity Commission is clear

enough 7% 4% 8% 6% I don’t use the internet very much 5% 5% 6% 5% I don’t think there is enough help and guidance provided by the Charity Commission 5% 3% 4% 4% Other 8% 11% 11% 14% THE MAIN

REASON FOR NOT USING THE COMMISSION AS A SOURCE OF HELP OR GUIDANCE MORE OFTEN IS A BELIEF THAT TRUSTEES DON’T NEED HELP REGULARLY – PARTICULARLY AMONGST THOSE WITH MORE EXPERIENCE WHY THE

CHARITY COMMISSION HAS NOT BEEN USED AS A SOURCE OF INFORMATION BY TRUSTEE EXPERIENCE: TOTAL TRUSTEE FOR LESS THAN ONE YEAR TRUSTEE FROM 1 TO 5 YEARS TRUSTEE FOR 5 TO 10 YEARS TRUSTEE FOR

MORE THAN 10 YEARS I don’t think I need help and guidance that regularly 58% 44% 53% 60% 64% I didn’t know that the Charity Commission provided help and guidance 16% 26% 19% 17% 10% I don’t

know how to find what I need 12% 16% 14% 13% 9% I don’t think the help and guidance provided by the Charity Commission is clear enough 7% 7% 6% 6% 9% I don’t use the internet very much 5% 2%

4% 4% 8% I don’t think there is enough help and guidance provided by the Charity Commission 5% 5% 5% 4% 6% Other 8% 16% 8% 7% 8% Interestingly, the sub groups showing the most noticeable

differences from the total were trustees who have been in the role less than a year, and those who have been in the role for more than 10 years. Those who have been a trustee for less than a

year are more likely to be unaware of the Charity Commission providing help and guidance, and more likely to not know how to find what they need compared to the total. Trustees who have

been in the role for more than 10 years are less likely to think that they need help and guidance that regularly but are more likely to know that the Charity Commission provides help and

guidance, and how to find what they need than the total overall. LEVELS OF INTERACTION AND EXPERIENCES WITH THE COMMISSION VARY Qualitative research uncovered a range in the extent to which

trustees interact, or have interacted, with the Commission. Reports of how helpful the Commission was were varied. At one end of the spectrum, trustees had had very little to do with the

Commission and did not consider this to be interaction at all. Some were not aware that it even offered resources to help trustees in their role. At the other end of the spectrum were

trustees who had sought advice from the Commission around matters including the following: * help ensuring due process was followed when making a volunteer a full-time paid member of staff *

guidance in dealing with an incident of fraud * setting up a new charity Some trustees felt that the Commission had been helpful once they had spoken to it and acknowledged its usefulness

for charities, but others felt it offered little support when reached out to. One trustee also mentioned that they felt the Commission reverted to a regulatory rather than supportive role

when it was unsure of an answer to a query. Furthermore, trustees mentioned that it could be difficult to get hold of someone at the Commission and that there were often slow response times.

“The Charity Commission certainly answer the phone but then go into bureaucracy mode quite quickly, so they’re defensive.” “They (the Commission) should be a trustee’s first point of

reference.” THE COMMISSION’S GUIDANCE IS VALUED, BUT SOME TRUSTEES FEEL THAT THERE ARE GAPS IN SUPPORT Most trustees had had at least some exposure to Commission resources, including

training materials and governance papers. Overall, the guidance and training material is considered practical and valuable. This was felt particularly in reference to training new trustees,

or to help refresh knowledge of specific responsibilities. It was seen as positive that the Commission didn’t bombard trustees with information on learning and guidance, but trustees

acknowledged that it did exist if they knew how to look for it. “They do some really good practice stuff, [such as] what the treasurer should do. A really useful source of information.” Some

trustees felt relevant guidance was difficult to locate, and in some cases, lacking. Trustees also felt that the value and usefulness of the guidance could differ depending on the type of

charity, and that for some it may be easier to reach out to other bodies such as Companies House. One participant, who had set up their charity themselves, faced many challenges for which

they needed support and said a phone call from the Commission would have helped. “The usefulness depends on the size of the charity and the way it’s set up.” Trustees identified gaps in the

guidance and resources on offer, with the participant who set up their charity on their own suggesting short phone calls from the Commission would help others in setting up a charity, as an

introductory audit. Some felt it could be useful to have resources for new trustees sent out specifically to them – so charities can ensure new trustees automatically gain a baseline

knowledge of what it means to be a trustee. “They could be a bit more proactive about support, when you can find guidance it’s good, but it is hard to find.” AROUND ONE IN TEN TRUSTEES HAVE

USED A 5-MINUTE GUIDE IN THE PAST YEAR - THE MOST FREQUENTLY USED GUIDES ARE THE ONES ON MANAGING FINANCES AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AWARENESS OF THE 5-MINUTE GUIDES I HAD NOT HEARD OF THEM

66% I had heard of them, but have not used them in the past year 22% I had heard of them, and have used them in the past year 9% Don’t know 3% USE OF EACH OF THE 5-MINUTE GUIDES MANAGING

FINANCES 46% Conflicts of interest 44% Reporting information 43% Safeguarding people 42% Delivering purpose 40% Making decisions 37% Political campaigning 5% Don’t know 5% AWARENESS AND USE

OF THE 5-MINUTE GUIDES HAVE BEEN MAINTAINED SINCE INCREASES SEEN IN 2023 AWARENESS OF THE 5-MINUTE GUIDES USED IN PAST YEAR AWARE UNAWARE 2024 9% 31% 66% 2023 9% 33% 65% 2022 5% 23% 75% Use

of the 5-minute guides by those aware: The proportion of those who have used a 5-minute guide has remained stable since 2023 at 9% The trustees more likely to have used a 5-minute guide in

the past year compared to the total (9%): * trustees of charities with an income of over £500,000 (20%) * trustees who have interacted with the Commission (15%) * those who interact with the

Commission several times a year (38%), or at least once a year (25%) * those whose charities provide advocacy, advice or information (13%) In two focus groups there was a general mix of

those who had and had not used the 5-minute guides, and in one group no participants had used them. Where trustees had used them, they agreed that they were succinct and helpful. “They

popped up on social media, and I thought they were interesting as they didn’t require a huge commitment.” “Good for learning about the role or reminding about responsibilities.” TRUSTEES

WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SEE SUPPORT IN RECRUITMENT AND MORE COLLABORATION In discussing the Charity Commission’s role and resources, trustees explored other areas where they’d like support, and

the avenues by which these could be implemented. RECRUITMENT * trustees reflect that they are often keen to recruit new trustees but that those who would be appropriate or relevant to their

charities’ purpose are often not those most eager to take the role. * they would appreciate assistance in encouraging new people to take on a trustee role and facilitate getting charities to

appoint a more diverse range of people as trustees e.g. younger people, different backgrounds, those with lived experience. COLLABORATION * trustees would like to see opportunities to

connect with other charities, for example in regional forums where they can speak not only to Commission representatives, but also those in similar charities or roles. * this would enable

knowledge sharing and allow trustees to learn from each other and problem solve together. * other bodies such as Citizens Advice or local authorities could also be a part of forums to

establish local networks supporting each other in goals. POSITIVE PARTNERSHIP * trustees think the Commission should become more of a partner to trustees, being more visible and working with

charities to help them improve. * it should be more proactive about its support and ensure that it signpost assistance to all trustees. * trustees also want to see more evidence of the good

that the Commission does, rather than just the enforcement side of it. This could include what it does day to day and case studies of how it has helped charities. BANKING Two out of five

trustees say their charity has encountered a banking issue in the past year, with updating contact details or signatories the most common problem. CHARITY HAS ENCOUNTERED ANY OF THESE

BANKING ISSUES IN PAST YEAR: YES Summary: Any 42% Issues with updating contact details or signatories 32% Difficulty opening a new account with a bank 18% Difficulty complying with identity

requirements 15% Difficulty understanding what the bank requires 14% Information being lost by the bank 7% Account being frozen/being blocked out 6% I do not have awareness of this side of

the charity 14% No, none of the above 44% Charities with income between £10k and £100k are more likely to say they have encountered any banking issues in the past year (47%) and charities

with income over £500k are less likely to say this (30%). A RANGE OF BANKING PROVIDERS ARE INVOLVED IN ISSUES, BUT COMPARISONS TO ANNUAL RETURNS DATA SUGGESTS SOME MAY BE MORE PREVALENT THAN

OTHERS BANKING PROVIDER INVOLVED* Barclays 32% NatWest 18% Lloyds 15% HSBC 14% Co-operative Bank 5% Santander 5% CAF Bank 5% Metro Bank 3% Don’t know 11% Other 7% *Banking provider was not

a variable that was used for either sampling or weighting for the trustee survey. This means we cannot be sure that the survey data is representative by banking provider.  Therefore, the

comparison to Annual Returns data below should be treated as indicative only. BANKING PROVIDER INVOLVED VS. ANNUAL RETURNS DATA: BANKING PROVIDER INVOLVED WITH ISSUE. SOURCE: SURVEY DATA

PROPORTION OF CHARITIES THAT USE PROVIDER. SOURCE: THE COMMISSION ANNUAL RETURNS 2022 Barclays 32% 20% NatWest 18% 17% Lloyds 15% 19% HSBC 14% 15% Co-operative Bank 5% 5% Santander 5% 4% CAF

Bank 5% 6% Metro Bank 3% 1% Other/don’t know 18% 14% TRUSTEES HAD SUGGESTIONS FOR HOW THEY HOPE THE COMMISSION COULD SUPPORT THEM SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT Trustees were keen for the

Commission to act quickly and prioritise this issue. They were aware of the political implications if the Commission were to start recommending banks but suggested it could work with the FCA

to encourage or enforce banks to behave in a more responsible way with charities of all sizes. Furthermore, there was a need for more immediate support on financial management and banking

so that trustees can have support from the Commission in all steps of resolving their issues when they arise. Lastly, ongoing support such as improved guidance around financial matters, or

perhaps a community where trustees could talk to each other and share experiences and solutions, would be beneficial. “There could be a standard response of what to do when you have a

problem – this would give charities some support when dealing with banks.” “[the Commission] have a national voice, they could put pressure on the banks to behave responsibly.” APPENDICES

BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY QUALITATIVE FIELDWORK * Following the quantitative survey, three focus groups were conducted with trustees with the aim of exploring further into topics touched on

in the quantitative research. * Participants were recruited from the pool of those who had completed the survey, and who had opted in to being contacted about further research. From this

selection of trustees, participants to invite to focus groups were contacted. * These took place virtually using Zoom, between 22nd April and 1st May, and lasted 90 minutes each. * Each

group comprised of trustees of different charity sizes, different lengths of trustee experience, and each group contained at least three trustees whose charity had experienced banking

issues. * In total 23 trustees participated in the qualitative research: 10 in the first group, 6 in the second group and 7 in the third. BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY * Background: For several

years the Charity Commission has carried out research to monitor the progress of its impact measures, feeding into overarching strategic objectives. This year BMG Research were commissioned

to be the research partner for the Commission for the next three years, and as part of this, conduct their annual survey of trustees. 2024 marks the final year of the current strategy. *

Research Objectives: To understand trustees’ knowledge of their own role and duties as well as their attitudes to governance, and to establish how they view and engage with the work of the

Commission * Methodology: The Charity Commission sampled a selection of 24,000 trustees to invite, via email, to take part in the online survey. This sample was designed to be representative

of the spread of registered charities in England and Wales by annual income. * Fieldwork dates: Fieldwork took place between the 2nd February and 12th February 2024. * Completes: The survey

achieved 2,541 completes. * Weighting: While the sample was originally chosen to reflect the spread of registered charities in England and Wales, weighting by income was applied to correct

any imbalance. COMPARABILITY OVER TIME * It is important to note that the survey contents, and its administration have undergone a number of changes compared to previous years.  These

changes were necessary to improve the relevance and robustness of the data collected, and to facilitate a new research partner. * Throughout this report comparisons are made to previous

waves where there have been no substantial changes to the question wording or routing.  However, these comparisons should be treated as indicative only as there is likely to be some impact

on the data from the changes detailed below. As such, statistical significance testing across waves has not been carried out. * The changes include: * A number of new questions: These have

been added to reflect the current needs of the Charity Commission. As new questions have been added at various points throughout the survey there is a risk that responses to existing

questions could have been impacted by the presence of the new questions. Some questions from previous waves have also been removed from the survey. * Some small changes to existing

questions: These changes have been made to improve the quality of the data collected and include changes such as adding in ‘don’t know’ options to allow respondents to answer more

accurately. Direct comparisons to previous years data for questions have not been made. * A change in research partner: BMG was commissioned as a new research partner in 2023. Sampling and

weighting has been kept as consistent as possible based on Charity Commission’s information. SAMPLE BREAKDOWN ANNUAL INCOME OF CHARITY (USED FOR WEIGHTING): INCOME £0-£10,000 41%

£10,001-£25,000 15% £25,001-£100,000 17% £100,001-£500,000 14% £500,001-£1,000,000 3% £1,000,001-£5,000,000 3% £5,000,000+ 1% Don’t know/new charity 6% CHARITY’S MAIN AREA OF OPERATION:

LOCATION England and Wales 2% Overseas 2% Wales 4% Across all of the UK 8% UK and overseas 10% The Midlands 12% South and South West of England 12% North of England 13% England 14% London

and South East 22% CHARITY SECTOR: PURPOSE Animal welfare 2% Overseas aid 3% Accommodation/housing 5% Human rights/ religious and racial harmony/Equality and diversity 5% Education

(research/other) 6% Economic/community development/employment 7% Amateur sport 7% Environment/conservation 9% Disability 11% Other charitable purposes 12% The advancement of health or saving

of lives 14% Education/training (adult) 16% The prevention or relief of poverty 16% Religious activities 16% Recreation 16% General charitable purposes 18% Arts/culture/heritage 19%

Education/training (children and young people) 26% CHARITY ACTIVITY: PURPOSE Sponsors or undertakes research 4% Acts as an umbrella or resource body 6% Provides human resources 8% Provides

advocacy/advice/information 18% Other charitable activities 25% Provides buildings, facilities or open space 29% Provides grants or other funding to individuals or organisations 33% Provides

services 34% ROLE IN CHARITY: ROLE Vice Chair 4% Other 4% Secretary 10% Treasurer 14% Board or Management Member 18% Chair 19% Trustee 84% LENGTH OF TIME AS A TRUSTEE: TIME Less than one

year 7% One to five years 33% Five to ten years 24% More than ten years 36% Back to top