OK- so this “weekly” round up is in serious danger of being accused of flagrant false advertising at this point… Perhaps it would be less of a hostage to fortune if I re-labelled it a “regular” (or even “occasional”) round up instead? In any case, I have managed to find time to do sufficient web scouring to bring you my five best stories of the week (with a reasonably heavy social investment flavour this week).

1) First up is an interesting snippet from New Scientist asking “does online slacktivism reduce charitable giving?” (Slacktivism, for those of you who don’t spend all your time reading articles about trends in social action, is the fairly loathsome neologism describing the sort of social activism that consists mainly of signing online petitions, liking Facebook pages and retweeting things). This is a question I have considered a bit in the past, when wondering whether new forms of “low-friction” giving will have a negative impact on traditional donations (see this blog post for more info).

 2) This week saw the first anniversary of Big Society Capital, which it marked by producing its first annual report. An interesting article on Pioneers Post by social investor James Perry took an objective look at the progress BSC has made so far and the challenges it faces.

 3) Further afield, there was some intriguing impact investing news from India, where a group of nine of the country’s leading impact investors have come together in an attempt to self-regulate their nascent industry. There are particular cultural concerns in India, where the recent experiences of failures in the microfinance industry have left many scarred and cynical about attempts to add a commercial edge to traditionally charitable endeavours. These impact investors have drawn up a charter in an attempt to nip such concerns in the bud. It will be fascinating to see how this develops.

 4) Another interesting story highlighted the intersection between cutting edge CSR and social investment, with the news that outdoor clothing manufacturer Patagonia is launching an in-house $20m impact investing fund. This will invest solely in companies that share Patagonia’s social and environmental values, and looks like a fascinating model of the way that CSR could be done in the future.

5) And finally… bringing together the clothing company and philanthropy theme is the news that the founder of underwear maker Spanx has become the first female billionaire to sign the Giving Pledge. Apparently not content with helping millions of women through the medium of body-sculpting pants, Sara Blakely now wants to commit over half of her $1 billion fortune to women’s causes around the world.

 Rhodri Davies

CAF’s Parliamentary Inquiry on Growing Giving is looking at how people of different ages interact with charity, and this week saw the first of three oral evidence sessions in Parliament.

The session on Wednesday focused on the way that young people engage with charities, and also included a look at the potential that digital giving has to encourage more people to give.

Chaired by Rt Hon David Blunkett MP, the inquiry session was addressed by a number of organisations who want to strengthen the ties between young people and charity. In addition, a number of young people came along to give evidence and their stories show that many people of all ages are already incredibly charitable. The challenge for the inquiry is to ensure that all generations grow up giving.

For a detailed look at the days’ proceedings, read Steve Clapperton’s blog here.

An interesting article in yesterdays’ Sunday Times previewed the forthcoming Giving List, and gave an indication of the sorts of famous figures we can look out for when the annual list of Britain’s top 100 philanthropists is published next week.

The Giving List is published alongside the Sunday Times Rich List and measures the top 100 philanthropists in the country based on the proportion of their total wealth that they give away to good causes. The 2013 list found that the top 100 philanthropists have given away £1.77bn to charity over the past year, with the sum donated by the total 231 people on the list amounting to an impressive £2.08bn - only slightly below the record levels reached in 2010. To qualify for the top 100 on the giving list this year a philanthropist needed to give away 0.65% of their wealth, rising to 2.62% for those who were chasing an appearance in the top 30.

This years’ list is topped by David Kirch, who has pledged his £100m fortune to the elderly on the island of Jersey, where he has resided since 1973. Mr Kirch told the Sunday Times that “I don’t think rich people give enough to charity” and that his decision to give his fortune to local people is because of his determination to “make a difference.”

Mr Kirch is joined on the list by a number of high-profile celebrities including Sir Elton John who has emerged as the biggest philanthropist in the music world over the past year, and showed that he is definitely someone who has his heart in the right place.

Coming in at No 20 in the list are One Direction. Whilst they would undoubtedly be disappointed if this was a music chart, their entry into the Giving List is admirable: collectively they have given 4% of their combined £25m wealth to charity, which has seen the boy band sensation show that younger generations are doing their bit for charity too.  Other representatives from the music world include Coldplay, whose trio of Guy Berryman, Jonny Buckland and Will Champion are collectively 34^th on this list, with front-man Chris Martin and his actress wife Gwyneth Paltrow coming in at 58^th.

Elsewhere the list includes Martin Lewis, founder of the Moneysavingexpert website, who recently sold his business and chose to give £11.1m of the resulting cash and shares to good causes. Mr Lewis is joined as a first-time top ten entry by Talal Shakerchi, who has given more than £22m earned through his work as a hedge fund manager and high-stakes poker player. In the Sunday Times article, Charities Aid Foundation (CAF) chief executive Dr John Low explains that he believes the growth of charitable giving at this level is being driven by entrepreneurs, many of whom have not inherited their wealth and therefore are less inclined to pass their estate down to the next generation.

Whilst the figures in the Giving List are impressive and highlight the incredible work that some of the wealthiest people in society do to support charity, it is only a snapshot of the philanthropic activity of a few individuals and the rise in donations from the top 100 philanthropists does not necessarily correlate to an easing of the challenges that charities are faced with. We know from the UK Giving 2012 report that overall donations are down. The data from the Giving List is positive, but it does not make up for the 20% drop in donations that CAF’s earlier research has found, and it is important that the work of movements such as the Back Britain’s Charities campaign continue to help charities during these tough economic times.

It will also be interesting to look at the age and occupation profiles of those on the Giving List when the list is published in full next week. CAF’s Parliamentary Inquiry on Growing Giving is looking at the way that people of all ages interact with charity, and if the rise of young philanthropists such as One Direction is echoed by others in role-model positions we hope that this will help us address the problem of charities being forced to rely on donations from older people, and that young stars will help show that giving is fashionable.

We’ll be looking at the Giving List in more detail when it is published in full and trying to assess what it means for the future of philanthropy. In the meantime we raise our glasses to those who have been unveiled so far as some of the most philanthropic people in the country, and hope they continue supporting the causes that they care about.

Steve Clapperton

Over recent months the challenges facing charities have been increasingly in the public eye, particularly as a result of the joint CAF & NCVO Back Britain’s Charities campaign. The increased focus on the future of charities has extended to the House of Commons, where numerous MPs have been using Parliamentary tools such as Parliamentary Questions (PQs) to help create a detailed picture of life in the charity sector. We thought this would be a good opportunity to look at some of the tools charities can use to influence political debate here in the UK.

One of the key roles of MPs is to scrutinise the Government’s policies, and many Parliamentarians take a specific interest in policies that are having the largest direct impact upon their constituency. Given that the average Parliamentary constituency houses over 200 charities, it’s no surprise that MPs are aware of the challenges that charities face, and their interest is reflected by the topic of many recent PQs.

There are two types of Parliamentary Question: written, and oral. Oral questions take place in the House of Commons Chamber and, with the exception of the weekly grilling of the Prime Minister, each member of the Cabinet is expected to answer questions on behalf of the Government approximately once every six weeks. Written questions allow MPs to scrutinise the work of departments between these oral question times, and are presented in a more factual manner than those in the Commons.

Patterns in the usage of Parliamentary questions can give an indication of the issues that are currently on the political agenda, and can help organisations like CAF to gauge the effectiveness of our campaigns and public affairs work. For example, over recent months the Back Britain’s Charities campaign has been raising awareness of research which found that one in six charities fear being forced to close in the next year. Following significant media interest and activity to promote these figures, oral questions in Parliament have been asked by MPs including Graeme Morrice, Hugh Bayley, Andrew Gwynne and Gareth Thomas that have focused on the campaign’s findings. As a result, there has been a significant spike in the campaign’s Parliamentary activity, and the knowledge that MPs are using our figures to inform their work shows that the campaign is cutting through to Parliamentarians.

PQs are also used by MPs to scrutinise the Government, and in return give Ministers an opportunity to explain and clarify their policies. In particularly, responses to written Parliamentary questions often give the Government the opportunity to present their policies in a clearer way than the rough and tumble of the Commons Chamber typically allows. For example, following a question from Jim Dobbin MP on the steps that the Government is taking to strengthen the charity sector, Nick Hurd MP was able to explain that the £600 million Big Society Capital fund, £20 million Investment and Contract Readiness Fund, £10 million Innovation in Giving Fund and £20 million Social Action Fund had all been established to boost the sector. Withdrawn from the often-heated tone of debate on the floor of the House, answers to written PQs can provide clarity and are therefore used to provide information.

Of course that isn’t to say that oral question sessions cannot be informative, and indeed they are often used by MPs to scrutinise the Government and press for clarifications or changes to policy. Following the Justice Secretary Chris Grayling’s recent announcement on reforming the probation service, a number of question marks remained about the impact of payment by results (PbR) on charities, and MPs such as Peter Aldous took it upon themselves to ensure that charities wanting to take part in the PbR process were able to compete on a level playing field. After being pressed on the issue, Chris Grayling was able to tell the House that modifications from previous PbR initiatives had been made to make the process more friendly to charities, and to explain that a team working in the Cabinet Office has been tasked with ensuring that the voluntary sector is prepared for the bidding process. This demonstrates that MPs are able to use their position and expertise to pressurise governments on changes to policy, and can often wield significant influence through their choice of question.

In short, PQs can be used to scrutinise the Government and pressurise for a modification of policies, retrieve data and statistics, raise awareness of an issue, and provide greater clarity about existing policies. There are of course other Parliamentary tools that MPs can use and that charities can turn to their advantage: from debates, committees, amendments, motions and Bills, to EDMs, petitions and the lesser spotted ‘praying against’ – more on these another time. It is fair to say that PQs are one of the most potent weapons in an MP’s arsenal, and keeping an eye on Hansard and proceedings in Parliament can be of great interest. At an estimated cost to the public of £450 per oral and £164 per written question PQs aren’t cheap, but their value to the political process is undoubted and their usage is one of the best ways for MPs to fulfil their primary duty of representing their constituents and the interests that they care about.

Steve Clapperton

I realise that once again this “weekly” update has slipped to being fortnightly, so apologies for that. In my defence though, this time it was Easter weekend that got in the way, rather than my own shoddy timekeeping. In any case, I’m back in the game now, so here are this week’s picks:

1)      Up first is an update from the Wall St Journal on the proposals to cap tax deductions on charitable giving in the US. This is something we should keep a close eye on in the UK, as if such a change is introduced in the US it makes it far more likely that there will be some sort of new attempt to introduce a cap on charitable tax relief over here in the future.

2)      A blog on the Huffington Post posed the intriguing question “Is there a role for philanthropy in a Socialist State?” The author bases most of her analysis on a recent visit to Cuba and doesn’t draw any firm conclusions, but there is some decent food for thought on what I think is a fascinating topic.

3)      More evidence of the growth of social investment in Australia with the publication of a government-commissioned report on “Impact investing in an Australian context”. (You can download the whole report here). It certainly seems as though there is a lot of enthusiasm for social finance down under at the moment.

4)      ESPN carried an investigation into sport stars’ charities in the US, which found that many of them do not meet basic standards of governance or efficiency. I was particularly interested because we spent a bit of time looking at the philanthropy of Premiership football stars in the wake of the ‘David Beckham giving his PSG wages to charity’ story (hence this blog), and that made me wonder what a similar investigation in the UK would find…

5)      And finally… I loved this article from Wired detailing the ways in which sci fi and fantasy geeks are using their love of fictional worlds as the basis for charitable acts in this one. (I feel fine using the word “geek” as I would class myself as one- as demonstrated by my excitement at the fact that Patrick Rothfuss was quoted in this article…)

Rhodri Davies

The annual ritual of crowding around the office TV, listening to the Chancellor’s Budget announcement to see if there are any mentions of charities is now over for another year. And the snap judgement on this year’s Budget is… pretty good, to be honest.

Charities weren’t front and centre like they were in 2011, but then neither were they presented with a nasty surprise as they were with 2012’s charity tax debacle. This year, there were a few announcements on charities and social investment and they all seemed pretty positive.

I want to focus on two announcements: on digital Gift Aid and on a new tax incentive for social investment (not because the fact that charities will be eligible for a new £2,000 employer allowance against National Insurance Contributions is not important, but merely because I don’t have anything much to say except “er, that sounds good?”).

Digital Gift Aid

At CAF, we have been banging on for years about the need to reform the Gift Aid system to make it fit for the 21st century and ensure that it works with new forms of technology-enabled donations. So it was great to see that not only have the Government committed to a full consultation on changes to Gift Aid by Summer 2013, but that they specifically mentioned the idea of “enabling donors to complete a single Gift Aid declaration to cover all their donations through a specific channel”. Further clarification from HMRC makes it clear that the prospect of a “universal Gift Aid declaration” linked to a donor database is also still on the table.

We have long argued that the ambition for Gift Aid should be to combine a one-off universal declaration with a simple form of unique identifier and a database of donors who had signed up for the system. This would enable charities to cross-reference donations against the central database to see who was signed up for Gift Aid. If the identifier was something that could be linked automatically to donations made through certain channels (which would certainly be possible for mobile and online giving), the whole process could happen in way that meant the donor experience was almost frictionless.

Obviously this vision is still a long way off, and one swallow doth not a summer consultation make, but this is a promising first step on the road to getting Gift Aid fit for the 21st century.

Social Investment tax relief

The other big news that caught my eye was the announcement that “the Government will introduce a new tax relief to encourage private investment in social enterprise”. This is another thing that CAF has been calling for for some time, and I have been involved in various working groups and reviews on the issue for a couple of years. I have to say that I was quite pessimistic about there being any positive news in this year’s Budget, so I am happy to be proved wrong!

There is no suggestion at this point of what form this relief might take- will it be a truly new tax incentive solely targeted at social investment, or an extension of an existing relief (such as the Enterprise Investment Scheme or Venture Capital Trust) to cover social as well as commercial investment? However, a commitment to introducing a new relief of this kind (whatever form it takes) is definitely positive news. CAF will be working with the Treasury and with others in the social investment sector to help shape the new incentive over the coming months.

Rhodri Davies

Some great bits of philanthropy and social investment news this week, although you wouldn’t necessarily know it from looking at my Twitter feed as i’ve been a bit busy with real world work to do much tweeting. Not to worry though- I have saved the best bits up for this weekly blog post:

1) Unashamedly up first is the launch of CAF’s own “Growing Giving” campaign, which will investigate what can be done to encourage people to give throughout their lifetimes. We announced this week that we will be running a cross-party Parliamentary Inquiry, chaired by David Blunkett MP with help from Andrew Percy MP and Baroness Tyler (check out the campaign website for more info). We also released our “Growing Up Giving” report, which looks at the attitudes of primary and secondary school children to charitable giving. We even made it on to BBC Newsround as a result!

2) Also big news in the UK philanthropy world was the launch of NPC’s major new report into the motivations and attitudes of donors, “Money for Good”. This contains a wealth of fascinating findings, including that less than half of people think that there is a moral obligation to give if you have the money (which is both surprising and slightly depressing).

3) Some fairly technical but potentially very significant social investment news, with the announcement that the European Parliament has voted in favour of a new Bill that will make it easier for social investment fund managers to market funds across borders within the EU.

4) Fascinating article on the ongoing challenges facing civil society in China, where a new law has been proposed that would treat giving as a mandatory “tax” that would go to government controlled charities. More grist to the mill of our Future World Giving research project.

5) And finally, without making any judgments about the rights and wrongs of the situation,this story has a headline worth the price of entry by itself: “Holidaymaker who wrestled shark sacked by charity”.

Rhodri Davies

Today’s launch of the Parliamentary Inquiry on Growing Giving is an important move towards greater understanding of the patterns and trends in generational giving, and gives interested parties the opportunity to participate in an exciting piece of work designed to strengthen the charity sector.

Last year CAF published the Mind the Gap report, which showed that charities are becoming increasingly reliant on donations from older people. Specifically it found that over-60s now account for more than half of all charitable donations, and that donations coming from the under-30s have more than halved since the 1980s.

These trends mean that there are significant disparities across different generations when it comes to giving. What isn’t clear is why these variations exist, and – more importantly-  what can be done to encourage people to give time and money throughout their life so that charities are not overly reliant on the generosity of older people.

The Growing Giving inquiry has been launched with the enthusiastic support of a cross-party group of parliamentarians – David Blunkett MP, Andrew Percy MP and Baroness Tyler – and will call on a wide range of experts to give evidence to explore this issue further. The inquiry will be split into three stages, with each focusing on a distinct stage of a person’s life and aiming to investigate the opportunities that a typical person is given to engage with charities. Following the conclusion of the inquiry, recommendations will be made to government which will aim to strengthen the UK’s culture of giving.

To coincide with the launch of the inquiry CAF commissioned a poll of young people asking for their opinions on charities. Given that the Mind the Gap report points to declining donations amongst the under 30s, it is perhaps surprising that young people proved to be so charitable in spirit, and suggests that something is preventing young people from transforming their charitable intent into positive action as they grow older.

The poll discovered that 9-11 year olds give an average of £1.99 a month to charity, while 16-18 year olds were able to give £5.73 a month. More than half of young people (53%) believe it is more important to help others than help themselves, and more than two thirds (68%) believe that young people should give up some time to help others. It is clear that young people are altruistic, and the challenge for charities and government is finding ways to put that altruism into practice and encourage this generation to give throughout their adult life.

One finding of particular interest is that young people see schools as key to shaping their understanding of and engagement with charities, with 61% of young people saying that schools arranging charity work would be most likely to encourage them to help charities, followed by charity themed days at school (53%) and charities coming to school (49%). These scores were significantly stronger than those for celebrity endorsements, friends and families, and the inquiry will be exploring how the relationship between charities and schools can be developed.

The first stage of the inquiry is now open for interested parties who wish to submit written evidence, and will be focusing on the role of education, opportunities for young people to engage with charities, and reforming giving to be fit for the digital age. Read more about the inquiry to find out how you can be involved with Growing Giving and ensure that future generations continue to give.

Steve Clapperton

Hello again Friday philanthro-socinv fans! Apologies that there hasn’t been a web round up for while, but I have been off for a few weeks. Rest assured that I’m back now though, and have rolled up my sleeves and sifted through the Internet (yep, the whole thing) to find the best stories about philanthropy and social investment which I present here for your delectation:

1) At number one is a good article from Forbes India about growing philanthropy in Asia. I was particularly interested to see how closely this echoes the recently-released first report in CAF’s Future World Giving series, which assesses the potential rise in philanthropy that could  result from the boom in the the global middle class.

2) A great blog by the Institute for Government’s Adrian Brown suggested that the UK Government’s enthusiasm for Payment by Results might be waning in the wake of disappointing intital results form the flagship Work Programme. PbR is something I have been intersted in for a while (see CAF’s Funding good Outcomes report for more on this if you’re interested).

3) A major new report this week from Big Society Capital and the City of London attempted to make the case for the importance of tax incentives in encouraging social investment. It estimated that an additional £480m of social investment could be unlocked if the right incentives were put in place. I will be analysing these findings in more detail in a separate post.

4) And while we’re talking impressive-sounding estimates of the potential for social investment, the Rockefeller Foundation suggested this week that social investment (or “impact investing” to use their more American term) in India is likely to grow at 30% a year. If this proves true, India could become a massive global player in the social investment area.

5) In the “And Finally” slot this week is news that filmaker George Lucas has proposed making an extraordinary gift that could be worth more than $1bn in the long-term, to fund a museum devoted to the art of visual storytelling. If there is any truth in the idea that philanthropy can be used to absolve us of our earthly sins, then this just about starts to atone for The Phantom Menace…

Rhodri Davies

An interesting report on the Guardian’s Voluntary Sector website gives an insight of the state of the charity sector in Ireland, and suggests that many of the challenges facing Britain’s charities are being mirrored across the Irish Sea.

The report cites data from the Revenue Commissioners (the Irish equivalent of HMRC) which shows a 15% reduction in charitable contributions between 2009 and 2011, as well as a recent survey by a Charity Umbrella organisation called The Wheel which concluded that 60% of Irish charities have seen a fall in funding since 2009.

Combined with a reduction in state funding, the report argues, means that charities are “under greater pressure to do more with less.” This reflects the experiences of charities in Britain who are struggling to cope with a reduction in funding from government, a drop in donations, and rising demand for the services they provide.

The Irish charity sector is substantial, accounting for the employment of 6% of the working population (compared to 2.7% in the UK) and generating an income of 3% of Irish GDP. But it is not designed to deal with this increased pressures, and the effects of such a rise in demand are starting to bite. So severe are these pressures that 75% of Irish non-profits have been forced to reduce pay, introduce pay freezes or reduce working hours just to stay afloat.

This highlights the impact that the economic climate is having on charities, who are being forced to adjust and reduce in size just to stay afloat. In Britain, we know that 17% of charities fear being forced to close in the next year, and that 40% fear closure if the wider economic climate does not improve. Strengthening the global economy is of course beyond the powers of charities, but until growth does pick up the outlook for charities looks set to remain gloomy. These challenges are why the Back Britain’s Charities campaign has been launched, and bringing charities together to champion the sector’s work and highlight the challenges we all face is helping to make a real difference.

The article does acknowledge that Irish charities have been able to retain staff – partly because many staff as so loyal to the causes that they serve - and that many are enacting innovative and exciting  policies to save money where possible, and ensuring that all donations they receive can go as far as possible. This is more important than ever when times are tight.

As the World Giving Index 2012 records, the Irish charitable sector remains strong – one of the strongest in the world. The challenge for policy makers is to ensure that this intrinsic strength is not eradicated by the struggles of the economy, and for government to work with charities to ensure that vulnerable people still have somewhere to turn.

Steve Clapperton