Do not register to vote

Today I got another request from a charity to vote for them to help them to win some funding. I am sure, like me, you get lots of these requests. It only takes a few minutes to register and vote and it is an easy way to demonstrate support. However, I am becoming increasingly reluctant to participate and I have two reasons why I am uncomfortable with this voting model as a source of funding for charities:

1. Popular ≠ Good

It takes resources to select the charity that meets the greatest need or has the most impact. A cheaper option is to hand over the decision to a public vote. I am a supporter of people (grant recipients, service users) being involved in funding panels. But that is not what this is. There is no judgment against criteria, just a simple measure of the most votes. Voting in this instance is a measure of how many supporters a charity can mobilise. On the list of the awards you will therefore see lots of sports clubs and Scout groups as these are well placed to appeal to friends and family members for votes. Charities that work with prisoners, trafficked women or other unpopular causes don’t stand a chance.

2. Proportionality

Proportionality usually comes up when designing grant programmes. For example, is the amount of internal resource needed to assess and administer applications appropriate? Is the amount of work that the applicant has to put in to their application worth it for the size of the grant? But proportionality also applies to the PR gained with any grant. With the voting model, the corporate behind it benefits from the positive profile with the charities, their supporters and the wider public. Such programmes can generate great PR and be cost effective for the company involved but often with just a few hundred pounds going to each ‘winner’. The substantial effort lies with the applicant – to create and upload a profile and encourage their supporters to vote.

You could argue that there is no harm done. The company gets good PR and some popular groups get some unrestricted funding. But I believe there is harm done in the opportunities lost. Charities miss an opportunity to raise awareness of their cause and reach a new audience of potential supporters. In a recent voting appeal, there were over 3,000 profiles for Bristol charities alone – no one is going to read those to make an informed choice. Rather than small cash ‘winners’, these funding pots could be properly managed and allocated with greater effect. Companies could properly engage and create genuine partnerships with charities, not just create an online voting system and leave the public to it.

I for one would like to see an end to these voting appeals – what about you?

Emma Beeston Consultancy advises funders and philanthropists on giving strategies and processes; selecting causes and charities; assessments and impact monitoring. Services for charities include external perception reviews; bid reviews; training for fundraisers and non-fundraisers involved in bids. www.emmabeeston.co.uk ;  emma@emmabeeston.co.uk ; emmabeeston01