Welcome to the April 2016 issue of the Factary Phi Newsletter.
Our regular update on newsworthy donations from across the nonprofit sector.
Our analysis of a recent report or article concerning the nonprofit sector.
Phi In Numbers
A statistical analysis of some of the data used to drive Phi, concentrating on sectors or donor types.
A profile of a significant donor – whether an individual or an organisation – or set of donors on the Phi database.
Recent Phi Survey, The New Trust Update Archive and our Major Giving News
I’d just like to take this opportunity to thank those subscribers who responded to our Phi survey in April. The results from the survey have been collated into a blog piece, which can be read here. I do hope you find it interesting.
As an update, following on from some suggestions for improvements to Phi, we have made two immediate changes which you may have noticed;:
- Automated log-out time is now set at 24 hours, so you won’t keep having to log in throughout the working day
- Results will be displayed at 100 per page (rather than 10) with options to view 200 or 300 at a time
Other suggestions that we are looking at include;
- ‘Saving’ search preferences, so that you don’t have to re-fill the search boxes each time you go ’back’
- Streamlining the search process
If you have any further thoughts or suggestions on Phi, please do contact Nicola Williams whenever you like on firstname.lastname@example.org.
New Trust Update
If you use Phi for researching Trusts & Foundations I thought you might be interested to hear about some improvements we’ve made to another one of our subscription services – the New Trust Update (NTU).
As you probably know, New Trust Update (NTU) is our monthly publication of trusts & foundations that are newly registered at the Charity Commission. With a subscription to NTU, you can find out about newly registered grant-making trusts before almost anyone else. Our monthly report provides extensive information about grant-makers of potential interest before they are published in directories and swamped with applications. Each month, Factary researchers interview the settlors and administrators and conduct in-depth research into new trusts to produce a publication containing full details of all new grant-makers.
Together with the monthly report, Factary have also just launched the ‘NTU Archive’ which is now included as part of the subscription. This archive service allows subscribers to view every single edition of the NTU that has been published in the past ten years. This gives them access to all 2,500+ trusts that have appeared in the NTU since 2005.
The archive is only be available to subscribers and is accessed securely via our website. It is fully searchable by trusts’ stated areas of interests, date of publication and trustee name – enabling subscribers to search through the archive to find only those trusts which are relevant to their work.
You can read more about the launch of the NTU Archive on our Blog. The Archive also contains access to our publications ‘Foundations of Wealth’, which were special annual editions of the NTU from 2012 – 2014 containing details of trusts set up by HNWIs / UHNWIs. We have recently reviewed the grant-making behaviour of these trusts and written another blog piece, which can be accessed here.
If you’d like an information pack about the NTU (containing sample reports so you can see the breadth of information we would include on any trust which features in the publication) please do email me on email@example.com. You can also see more information on our website. Also, we have a separate FAQ’s section about the Archive, which can be accessed by clicking this link.
We have had some great feedback so far, with one subscriber describing the NTU Archive as “a great new tool in prospecting”.
The cost to subscribe is only £695 for a one year subscription. Subscriptions include 12 editions of the monthly publication and access to the Archive. However, we do offer a joint Phi and NTU subscription of £1,000 (with VAT payable on £500 of this as the NTU is zero rated for VAT), this is a saving of £195 per annum on separate subs. Please let me know if you’re interested by emailing me on firstname.lastname@example.org.
Cheryl Fernandez-Versini donates £500,000
Her donation has been made to The Prince’s Trust, and the money is to be used to fund a new centre for the support of young people living in Newcastle.
Cheryl, who was raised in Newcastle, said, ‘Too many young people are growing up without vital support. With no-one to turn to, many of these young people are battling issues such as long-term unemployment, addiction, homelessness and depression, alone. Life can seem harsh for these young people, and we need to help them before it is too late.’
London’s Air Ambulance to receive £2m
London Freemason’s are set to donate £2m to go towards the funding and sustaining of a secondary emergency helicopter in and around London.
The donation has been made due to the charity’s ‘Your London, Your Helicopter’ campaign, and the appeal has been funded by 40,000 members across 1,350 lodges.
Tony Shields, who is London Freemasons Metropolitan Grand Charity Steward, said: ‘London’s Air Ambulance delivers an incredible service 24 hours a day, 365 days a year and we are proud to be raising funds to help this superb charity acquire and sustain a vital second helicopter.’
Report: Independence in Question: The Voluntary Sector in 2016
This month we have included our summary of several chapters from the latest report on the independence of the voluntary sector. It is entitled Independence in Question: The Voluntary Sector in 2016.
The latest edition was initiated by the Civil Exchange, and it has been supported by The Baring Foundation and The Lankelly Chase Foundation.
According to the conclusions drawn from the previous edition of this report (An Independent Mission: the voluntary sector in 2015), there were a number of serious threats cited by its contributors who felt gravely concerned for the future independence of the sector.
We have now moved into 2016 and unfortunately the situation appears to have worsened. It is thought that once again unless these threats to independence can be properly addressed, the sector will face greater, even more fundamental challenges that may erode its independence and hasten its decline.
Why independence is important
Ideally, a healthy and vibrant voluntary sector should be representative of a healthy and democratic society overall. The reason for this, it is stated, is because voluntary activity arguably acts as a critical counterbalance to the power of the state and the corporate sector. With a healthy balance of both of these influences in society, it is thought that the right public policy and appropriate services can exist together and facilitate a healthy environment in which everyone can thrive.
The challenges to independence
As was also set out in chapter one of the full report, the panel originally broke the idea of independence, as it pertains to the voluntary sector, into three key elements.
These were identified as purpose, voice and action, all of which can be supported through strong governance and effective regulation.
The panel then identified 6 specific challenges which have been brought together under four headings below. In the main, the report finds that not only do these challenges still remain, but they have become even more prominent over the past 12 months.
Threats to independent purpose (due to a loss of distinctive identity, commercialisation and external control over governance by funders).
In its final report, the panel concluded that the voluntary sector had been losing its distinctive identity and that its independent mission was in danger of being undermined. The Panel identified the public sector’s contract culture – which has been established under successive Governments – as a key cause of the threat to the voluntary sector’s independent mission. It was also concerned about threats to the independent governance of some charities.
According to the report, some charities have been criticised for appearing to prioritise chasing money in order to fund their activities in a way that is not consistent with their original mission.
Threats to independence of voice (including threats to the right to campaign and a lack of consultation).
Unfortunately over the last twelve months, the attitude of the Government towards campaigning has become increasingly negative and restrictive. This attitude looks set to worsen even further, with the legitimacy of the sector’s ‘independent voice’ becoming increasingly in question.
Indeed, the overall climate in terms of charity campaigning has become even more negative, regardless of whether organisations receive government funding or not. The report has also found that ‘no advocacy’ clauses are being applied to the new Tampon Tax Fund, and that such clauses are also being used in contracts for services for refugees, refuges for domestic violence and victims of trafficking.The latest edition was initiated by the Civil Exchange, and it has been supported by The Baring Foundation and The Lankelly Chase Foundation.
It is thought that it may only be a matter of time before these are extended further and the Government has also made it even more difficult for the voluntary sector to take court action on behalf of individuals. The Lobbying Act gas muted the voice of the voluntary sector during the last General Election and generally, self-censorship has remained a major issue.
The report concludes that the Government must answer for why it has chosen to take such a restrictive view of the campaigning and policy work undertaken by the voluntary sector.
Threats to independent action (due to unsupportive statutory funding and contracting arrangements).
The work of small and medium sized voluntary organisations that to an extent on government funding, mainly those that work in social welfare and often in poorer communities, is considered vital to the independence of the sector as a whole.
The panel concluded that the current model of public service reform (based on competition) is failing to unlock the potential of the sector in terms of social change. In particular, the panel were concerned about poor commissioning and procurement practices that failed to draw on voluntary organisations in terms of their own distinctive strengths.
The use of Payment by Results in the Work Programme came under particular criticism, and the panel also called on the Government to ensure that funding and commissioning processes support independence and are not biased against smaller and more specialist organisations.
Threats to independent regulation (The Commission is giving the impression of being politically driven. Its focus seems to be on an agenda determined by the Government, despite its statutory independence).
The Charity Commission continues to be criticised for an over-politicised style of enforcement, and the Panel expressed concerns regarding a new extension of those powers granted through the latest charities legislation.
An NAO report has warned of the dangers of the board’s continuing involvement in executive matters and there is evidence that the Commission is seeking to address this. The Compact has also been broken by the Government and it is proving ineffective.
Final conclusions and recommendations
Not only is the independence of the sector being threatened, the independence of the charity regulator is also facing challenges. Some of these threats are external and in order for them to be fully addressed, the recommendations made by the Independence Panel to the Government will need to stand and may even need to be extended.
Other issues will require Trustees to reflect on whether they are doing all they can ensure that their organisations remain accountable and true to their core charitable purpose. In order to fully defend external threats to independence, the sector must work collectively to defend the voice of the sector.
New forms of funding and working that better support independent action and collaboration must be identified, and on an organisational level, this must be used to maintain a clear focus on independent mission with funding that supports it.
Fostering a greater sense of collaboration is also important, for both the umbrella organisations that govern charities and also for individual charities in terms of how they engage with each other and their stakeholders.
The sector (particularly the largest and most successful institutions) must be clearer about their own independent missions and how these can be achieved, and also in terms of how to communicate this in both their words and actions.
Clickhere for a full version of the report.
Phi in Numbers: April 2016
During the course of this month, 9,177 new records of donations have been uploaded onto the Phi database worth in excess of £5.8m.
This brings us to a total of 669,275 records of donations in Phi overall, with the latest upload containing donations made to a variety of UK universities and charities. Some examples of these include Somerville College, The University of Surrey, the Royal College of Music, Age UK, the St Giles Trust and more.
As Phi rapidly approaches the 700,000 mark in recorded donations, we thought it might be interesting to survey the composition of all donations throughout the database in terms of their numbers and total value according to donor type.
It should be noted that for the sake of accuracy, donations with only a ‘gift-band lower’ have been excluded, and the results of the survey are also based on the data as it appears in Phi, and it is therefore not necessarily representative of the wider giving sector as a whole.
As the graph above demonstrates, donations from individual donors make up the majority of the database. This is true both in terms of donation numbers and in terms of their overall value, representing well over £19bn.
The next largest category is Trusts/Foundations with over 200,000 records of donations. Donations made by this donor type are worth a minimum of £10bn, and the database also contains over 46,000 donations made by Other Grant-Making Bodies and a little over 39,000 made by the Companies donor type.
Profile: The Charles Hayward Foundation
The trust was established in 2000 thanks to a merger between the Hayward Foundation and the Charles Haywood Trust, both of which owe their existence to businessman Sir Charles Haywood, who was a noted industrialist and an entrepreneur.
Born in 1893 in Wolverhampton, he got his first job working as a circus performer under the moniker ‘The Living Head’, before then embarking upon a slightly more conventional career as an engineering apprentice. From here, he set up his first business as a 19 year old which specialised in the manufacture of engineering patterns and later, motorcycle sidecars. He eventually sold the business to another company called AJS, but was retained as its Managing Director.
In 1928 he moved to London to briefly pursue a career as a stockbroker, and it was during this period that he founded Electric & General Industrial Trusts Ltd, which in turn led to the formation of the Firth Cleveland Group of Companies, which would make his name.
He served as Chairman of Firth Cleveland Ltd from its inception in 1953 until his retirement in 1973. At its peak, the firm ran 23 factories in the UK, and also had operations in the Netherlands, West Germany, South Africa and Australia.
The group was later sold to GKN in 1970 and his original ‘Hayward Foundation’ was first founded in 1961, before it was eventually merged with the Charles Hayward Trust to form a new, single organisation.
For the financial year ending the 31st December 2014 the foundation reported an income of £1,357,974 and an expenditure of £1,892,391. Factary Phi holds 1,310 records of donations made since 2005 worth a minimum of £11.8m. The highest proportion of these have been made to causes associated with Welfare (340), followed by Health (158), Elderly (132), Development/Housing/Employment (111), Children/Youth (103), International Development (94), Heritage (72), Disability (55), Arts/Culture (54), Religious Activities (51), General Charitable Purposes (40), Education/Training (28), Environment (21), Mental Health (19), Rights/Law/Conflict (16), Sport (10) and Animals (8).
Julia Chamberlain is a Trustee of the D and Mrs H E W Gaunt Charitable Settlement.
Sue Heath is Chair of the foundation and she is also a Trustee of Ebbesbourne Wake – King’s Charity.
Mr Brian Insch is the former human resources Director of GKN Holdings Plc. He appears to be retired.
Mr Nikolas Van Leuven QC
Nikolas Van Leuven is a private practice advocate.
Alexander James Heath
Mr Alexander Heath is a freelance photographer. Previously he was the associate Director of the West End Office Agency and he was a graduate surveyor at Chesterton.