I think I may be showing my age in this respect. A considerable time ago there was a fair bit of fuss about charities getting a much larger proportion of some legators estates than had been originally intended, precisely because house price inflation had made a nonsense of original wills leaving a fixed amount to children and the remainder to the charity.

I don't particularly want to labour this - my real point was that some charities might have made a conscious decision not to mention residuaries. The same also applies to will pledges; since there seems to be some evidence that people don't like these, a competent fundraising dept. might make a judgement call not to use them. 

First, I got the idea that charities were going to lose out from falling house-prices from an article by Cathy Pharoah, in the latest edition of Caritas's magazine. It in turn referred to a study conducted by Legacy Foresight in 2004, which I confess to not having read. 

Second, it does, as always, make my day to read Catman's contribution to this debate. A couple of things need emphasizing here. Most importantly, I am but mortal and must rely on the results of others' research. Much as I would like to have the time to investigate the RSPCA's behaviour in depth, I just don't have the time. That said, I think the Bluefrog research is both solid and very revealing - though it's most intriguing to see that the RSPCA have been nominated for an award regarding their legacy programme. Maybe they've overhauled their efforts recently? I should also add that I would never drink Blue Nun under any circumstances, and would point out that you can get some extremely decent Mosel Riesling for about the same price. This would always be my preferred option.

Third, I rather like antbaum's point - that the falling market will lead to better fundraising practices. If that's not a silver lining, I don't know what is. 

Adam, Intelligent Giving

Adam,
In the interests of journalistic attribution (yes, I know this is a blog so it's not strictly necessary but...) who was it that said RSPCA and RNLI will lose out from the slump?
Is this from a piece of new research (not done by bluefrog)? I would like to be pointed towards it if it is please!
Thanks

Adam -

 I think you'll find that both the charities you mention have been aware of the implications of house price values on their legacy revenue streams for many years. They are ones who are subject to frequent criticsm about the level of their reserves. Hey Ho - perhaps the next journofest will be on 'wise virgins'.

Taking up the rough and smooth theme - no one can deny that all moderately competent charities have had a great run for the last fifteen years, whether directly through a generous public chosing to support their cause, or indirectly through the government deciding for them.

We, and our beneficiaries, may be in for a harder times for the next few years, but it will get better. But one thing one can guarantee - fundraisng creative, database management and donor communication programmes are going to get a whole lot better in a hurry.

If anyone would like a copy of the report but would rather not submit their email address to our website then please email me at james@bluefroglondon.com. I will be happy to send you a copy and then delete your email.

And just to be clear, we didn't single anyone out. It was Adam who mentioned RSPCA.

Kind Regards,

James

Evening Adam,

Prophet of doom again eh? Yes, the value of legacy income will drop as house prices re-adjust, but the unsustainable rise in house prices  would have resulted in higher legacy income to charities...gotta take the rough with the smooth. Any potential legacies missed out on from poor donor care would take 5-10 years to return to the charity, just in time for the new economic boom? 

Both the RNLI and the RSPCA have been building a database of donors over a number of year and, some of that legacy income would have been invested in a more predictable income stream to offset any lost legacy income. And both charities have got huge brand recognition in the Bristish psyche so I shan't be losing any sleep for them  

You have failed to mention that both Corporate and Special Events income is already dropping as companies and the rich tighten their belts. I heard that the budget for the Monaco Grand Prix was cut this year. Better get that champers down you while you can, it will be Blue Nun all round for the next couple of years.

As to the report, it isn't free, I have to give you my details so you can market your products to me. The whole point of writing the report is to make money for your agency (not in my eyes a bad thing) but it is by no means fact. I am surprised that the RSPCA are being singled out as they are nominated for the "best use of legacy marketing" award at the upcoming IoF convention.

http://www.nationalfundraisingawards.org.uk/shortlist.php.

I just can't believe that a team who could create and market this product wouldn't send a folder of info out in the post. In fact, I have seen the folder (lots of kittens you would have loved it Adam!) with enough info to get Richard Radcliffe hot under the collar. Why didn't you give them a call yourself Adam before writing this blog?

catman

Just to respond on those points:

First of all, we didn't mark charities on whether they 'pushed' people towards a residuary legacy, just on whether they mentioned the option and encouraged donors to consider it.

The second more serious point is the (baseless) speculation that the test was somehow flawed and invalid. Oh that it was. The test was rigorous and we stand by its results.

Information was requested online or via email/phone if an online option wasn't available. The email and postal details given were personal addresses unconnected with and untraceable to bluefrog. If anything, the results are more accurate than a survey of 'actual enquirers' because times, dates and deliveries were meticulously recorded.

To my knowledge, not a single charity involved has challenged our results.

The findings clearly show that the fulfillment of online enquiries by many of the UK's top charities is shockingly poor. 35% failed to respond at all and only 5% of organisations subsequently followed up our enquiry.

We're not trying to tell the world 'legacy fundraising in general is shambolic' - far from it. But what we presented in our survey of online activity are facts pure and simple – and worrying facts given the information gathering habits of the Baby Boom generation.

If anyone wants to read the report, it's available completely free at www.bluefroglondon.com

Thanks,

James

James Briggs
Planning Director
Bluefrog

I'm not sure about some of their comments. Personally I wouldn't be all that impressed by a charity that tried to push me towards leaving a residuary legacy if I'd indicated that I might leave them a fixed amount (because of the potential for this to result in my dependants receiving less than I intended). 

I also wonder a bit about the measure of non-response - they don't appear to have surveyed actual enquirers about their experience of asking for further information on giving a legacy, but to have put in some kind of test request themselves.

If it was obvious from the form of the request that they were a survey outfit, not an actual person offering a legacy, that would go some way to explaining the number of charities who didn't respond at all.