Supplementary memorandum from Volunteering
England (DCH 228)
1. On whether education and (in part) health
should be removed from the charitable sector and the Exchequer
tax or should subsidise them in another way under legislation?
(Q157)
The draft Bill states that an organisation is
charitable in law provided that its purposes fall within the new
list of charitable purposes set out in the Bill and that it is
for the public benefit. There has been broad agreement both within
the sector and elsewhere that the new list of charitable purposes
is about right: that is to say it closes the gap between the legal
definition of charity and the types of causes people believe should
be charitable. We agree with this.
We would also emphasise that both health and
education cover a much wider range of organisations and activities
than simply schools and hospitals. Therefore the question is not
whether education or health should be included in the list of
charitable purposes (they clearly should), but whether particular
organisations can show that they are for the public benefit.
We agree with NCVO that the Bill should be less
concerned with ensuring either the inclusion or exclusion of particular
types of organisation from charitable status than with ensuring
that all organisations with charitable status are able to demonstrate
that they provide public benefit. We think that this should be
determined on a case-by-case basis.
2. On whether the Bill should lay down criteria
for the on-going testing of public benefit? (Q160)
The key issue is that on-going testing of public
benefit should be carried out, as recommended by the Strategy
Unit. We would like clarification of the Charity Commission's
position on this and, specifically on whether it has the power
to undertake such checks. If it does not have the power to do
so, then this should be addressed on the face of the Bill.
However we do not think that the Bill should
lay down criteria for the tests themselves. These criteria should
be based on the test applied to charities registered under the
existing fourth head of charity, "any other purposes beneficial
to the community". The difference being that in future these
tests will apply to all charities and will do so on an on-going
basis, not just at registration.
3. On examples of how disproportionate reporting
requirements, imposed by funders, can impact small organisations
(Qs 194-196).
Approximately £6.9 million is distributed
annually through the Department of Health's Opportunities for
Volunteering scheme (OFV). Grants, ranging from £1,000 to
£35,000, are primarily distributed to small under-resourced
organisations.
OFV reporting requirements include the completion
of three eight-page project progress reports and one 15-page monitoring
report on an annual basis. Funded organisations are also required
to submit an audited, or independently examined, statement of
income and expenditure which relates to their OFV grant regardless
of the size of that grant.
Completion of these reports requires relatively
complex financial forecasting and the collation of highly detailed
information about volunteers which has to be handled in accordance
with data protection regulations (for example; turnover of volunteers
by age, ethnic group and employment status).
Evidence suggests that it takes on average 17
hours to complete a single report, with some organisations spending
over 30 hours per report. This does not include the time taken
to compile or manage the information on a day-to-day basis. An
organisation receiving a grant to pay for a part time employee
(two days per week) could therefore be spending between 8%-15%
of that grant reporting on its activities as opposed to delivering
those activities.
Anecdotal evidence also suggests that the burden
of reporting is discouraging potential applicants.
4. On how the Bill can help create a climate
encouraging funding bodies (such as local authorities and government
departments) of charities to impose auditing and reporting requirements
which are not disproportionate and onerous.(Q201)
We would like to see reference in the Bill to
the need for proportionality in the reporting requirements imposed
by funding agencies, particularly in relation to small grants
to charities with few, if any, paid staff.
Christopher Spence MBE
Chief Executive
| 
