The Intelligent giving blog

Un-transparent charities: they should be ashamed of themselves

Read comments
Email this page
Adam Rothwell - Wednesday, October 8, 2008

A till The only demand the government makes of most charities is a simple one: to write an annual report, prepare a set of accounts, and send them to the Charity Commission.

By requiring charities to submit this information, the government ensures that charities are doing something to justify both their tax-breaks and the trust they’re given by the public. In other words, it’s how charities justify their existence to the outside world.

Yet for some charities, reporting is just too much like hard work – and they get cross when their legal duties are pointed out to them.

Evidence for this comes from today’s Third Sector magazine. According to the industry rag, some charities – including Bowel Cancer UK and the Chernobyl Children’s Project – are up in arms over a recent decision by the Charity Commission to name and shame organizations which submit their accounts late.

This is astonishing. The Commission gives charities a full ten months to prepare these documents, meaning there’s simply no excuse for not submitting them in time. Yet Linda Walker from Chernobyl Children’s Project has audaciously gone on the record to defend her charity’s decision to hand in its accounts over 70 days late.

This type of story makes me cross. Some charities, it seems, still don't realize that they have a legal – and, I think, moral – duty to be transparent and accountable to the public. Behaving responsibly in this way is one of the most important ways charities mark themselves as different from their commercial cousins. And it’s also just a straightforward matter of obeying the rules.

Why can’t these rebel charities just understand that?
 

 


Login or register to comment



 

Get the IG Blog delivered by email. Just enter your address:

 Or subscribe to our RSS feed

Delivered by FeedBurner

Good grief.
Submitted by Dancing Queen (not verified) on Thu, 09/10/2008 - 10:38am.

What a surprise it is that all the charities complaining about the new system are those who have filed their accounts late! Hmmm.....

Seriously, though, do they expect sympathy? And how can they be surprised about this when they know it's a legal requirement to file on time anyway?

As a fundraiser and researcher, I get so frustrated with charities that don't submit their accounts, or submit them late. Beside the obvious issues regarding the law and transparency, there is also the issue - especially with grant-making charities - that if they don't make information available about their recent activities, they'll receive far more irrelevant enquiries and requests for help because people won't be able to do their research properly - so creating more work for themselves, and wasting more of their own time, as well as mine!

I actually hope that this is, as the Commission claims, just the first step towards increasing compliance, and that over time they will take further steps to discourage laziness and complacency in this area. Time will tell...


How hard is it?
Submitted by Martin Davies (not verified) on Thu, 09/10/2008 - 9:57am.

Accounts have to be done after year end. 10 months to do accounts is quite generous.
Self employed often get just under 10 months (for trading years ending 5th April need to be in by 31st January is just under 10 months).
Or be fined.

Charity commission, as I recall, has had the requirement of 10 months for quite some time now.
Yes, accounts have to be submitted to the AGM. How hard is it to book the AGM months or even a year in advance?
If even complex, large charities manage to get accounts done by accountants in 10 months, how can some charities feel they shouldn't be bound by the same law?
Sheesh - it seems some charities would rather do things at their own convenience. And 70 days late is, by my count, over 12 months after year end.


Remarkable
Submitted by Charity Chris on Wed, 08/10/2008 - 9:04pm.

I'm quite shocked at this. I knew that there were charities who were late with their annual report. The fact that they don't seem to be bothered, indeed, seem to think that they are somehow being picked on for being asked to obey the law is incredible.

You're right in that charities owe a duty of care to the wider public because of their priveleged status, and highlighting late accounts is a first step in what I hope and expect to be a firming up of the approach to defaulters.

 


Post new comment

To prove you're not a spammer's robot
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.