Forging a New Partnership: What the Commission's new strategy means for Charities by Sam Younger, Charity Commission

A new relationship

What the Commission’s new strategy means for charities

Sam Younger, Chief Executive12 May 2011

Why a new strategy?

• Existing strategy covered 2006-2011 –strategic review was always planned for 2010-11

• Reduction in our budget of 33% over four years –need to set new priorities

• Times are changing –Advances in technology and behaviour give us opportunities to do things differently

Listening to you –the consultation

The consultation process

• Full public consultation3-month consultation which attracted over 300 responses

• Extensive discussions with key stakeholdersOver 80 meetings between Commission and charities, MPs and other regulators

• Interaction with charities and public Ipsos Mori focus groups with members of the public Strategic review blogsite viewed nearly 12,000 times

What did we ask?

Our consultation asked people to:

- Identify what they considered the main risks facing sector over next 5 years

- Name their preferred approach to key questions

• Name bodies that could take on functions that we currently have

“The Commission should be rigorous and questioning before accepting

registrations”v

“The Commission should encourage charitable activity through a light touch

registration process”

What did you tell us?

Main risks facing the sector

Funding – by far most frequently cited risk Rising demand for servicesGovernance/skills issuesBureaucracyFraud/abuseFuture of ‘charity brand’

What did you tell us?

Key expectations of the Charity Commission

Areas of general consensus

• Prevent/ investigate abuse in charities (esp. fraud)• Ensure charities are transparent with financial information• Robust registration process• Uphold charity brand• Publish advice for charities

What did you tell us?

Key expectations of the Charity Commission

Areas put forward by some

• Lobby government on charity issues/ champion the sector• Provide individual advice to small charities • Provide information/ research about the sector • Encourage trusteeship• Promote charitable giving • Promote effective use of charitable resources

What did CFDG say?

Commission should…

• Ensure we remain able to maintain public trust and confidence

• consider charging advisers (e.g. lawyers) for using our services

• maintain advice function for small charities• charge for late submission of documents?• strengthen partnerships with umbrella bodies

Key principles

What did you tell us?

Warm endorsement of role of independent regulator

Endorsement of Commission’s current role and focus

No support for radical change

Who do we exist to serve?

the Commission exists to

serve the public

Who are the public?

• Donors• Taxpayers• Beneficiaries• Volunteers • Trustees

What should be our focus?

Commission should focus on

things only we can do

Rebalancing the relationship:reinforcing trustees’

self-reliance

What this meansfor charities

Rebalancing the relationship

Trustees will see…

…greater self-reliance – or greater reliance on advisors…greater accountability to public…less individual interaction with the Commission …more independence to take certain decisions…less hand-holding by Commission

Rebalancing the relationship

Commission will…

…make processes more streamlined…review information required of charities …produce more tailored guidance …provide less individual advice (currently ca 30% of our

work)…take proactive approach to risk assessment…intervene only in cases of serious and systemic risk

What this means for the sector

Umbrella bodies

• Bodies such as CFDG take on enhanced role in providing one-to-one advice to trustees

• Umbrella bodies as ‘champions of the sector’

• Shared responsibility for upholding reputation of the sector

Peer review programme

• Partnership between Commission and sector (umbrella bodies and individual charities)

• Identifying areas of greatest risk to sector

• Helping charities develop ways of addressing risks

Any questions