We have to talk about fluffy

I like Charity Bank’s new #Charityis campaign which seeks to counteract the recent negative press with some positive messages about charities. It runs from 14^th to 20^th March and I urge you to participate. My contribution to this week is an ‘is not’: #Charityis NOT FLUFFY.

I am often involved in introducing business people to their local charities or the charity sector as a whole. I am always amazed by the persistent myths that people hold about charities: that they are amateur, inefficient, homespun or well-meaning and worthy. A term that is often used – especially when the arts are involved - is ‘fluffy’.

When people think ‘fluffy’ they mean that a charity is a ‘nice to have’ rather than fundamental to society. Calling charities ‘fluffy’ does them a gross disservice. ‘Fluffy’ means soft or superficial. It suggests charities offer tea and sympathy rather than effecting change. I think it is used as a shorthand for things that cannot easily be measured or monetised. But just because things like promoting wellbeing and creating a sense of community are not easy to measure or put a cash value on does not make them ‘fluffy’.

There really is nothing ‘fluffy’ about operating a crisis support service 24/7 to ensure women fleeing domestic abuse have somewhere safe to go. Nor when trying to find a hostel bed for a homeless person who is still drinking. Nor when supporting a family when their loved one is diagnosed with dementia. And neither is it ‘fluffy’ to run a modern day charity which is all about balancing competing demands, resource allocation, financial sustainability and demonstrating impact.

Charities are an important part of society. Here are just some of Charity Bank’s findings:

·         78% of UK adults have used charity services in the last year

·         800k people are employed in the UK voluntary sector

·         9.3m UK adults received emotional support or counselling from a charity.

So when we talk about what a charity is, how about ditching ‘fluffy’ and talking about how complex and vital charities are?

https://charitybank.org/charityis#get-involved

Emma Beeston Consultancy advises funders and philanthropists on giving strategies and processes; researching and scoping options; selecting causes and charities; assessments and impact monitoring.
www.emmabeeston.co.uk ; emma@emmabeeston.co.uk; emmabeeston01

You CAN take it with you when you go

As a funder, the first contact I usually have with a charity is with the fundraiser. This may be a bid writer, a general fundraiser, or the Chief Executive depending on the size of the charity. And once a grant is awarded, this person usually becomes my main point of contact for the ongoing relationship.

It is a common occurrence that when I get in touch with the charity for a progress report or other monitoring requirements two or three years later the original applicant has moved on. How well this is handled varies hugely and is rather telling about the charity’s internal communications and systems.

In the worst incidence, a disgruntled employee had not only left with all the information about the grant, but also took passwords and keys with them. Of course, the charity should never have let one individual have so much control. It took them some time to re-establish access to essential systems and data and they were put in an embarrassing position when explaining the situation to me.

Far more common, is that when the fundraiser leaves, the first anyone at the charity knows that we are funding them is my phone call about a late report. Just as you don’t want to be asking the Charity Commission for a copy of the constitution (which sadly happens a lot), you really don’t want to be asking a funder for a copy of your original application.

To prevent this, remember that information about the funder, such as the original application, reporting requirements, contact names, and when to discuss re-applying should be shared and not kept by the individual fundraiser. Other information such as potential funders, reasons why applications were unsuccessful and how a particular funder likes to be approached, are also a valuable resource to be kept by the charity as this will save future time and effort.

Losing this information and relationship when a fundraiser leaves is a risky position to be in. You risk the current funding if you cannot report on what you were meant to be delivering. And you put future funding at risk too as it certainly does not present the competence and good management that all funders are looking for.

Fundraisers do go off sick and leave so make sure you have systems in place to ensure you keep hold of the vital information when they go.

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