Reflections on my time as CEO
In one of her final speeches as CEO, Helen Stephenson reflects on 7 lessons she has learnt about the charity sector - one for each of her years in office.
Good afternoon everyone. Thank you for having me.
I’m delighted to be here with you again this year and for this opportunity to offer some thoughts and reflections as I prepare to hand over the baton as CEO of the Commission this summer.
It’s important to me to be sharing these thoughts here with you at Trustee Exchange.
We know from the Commission’s research how much trustees value learning from and supporting each other and I know from my own experience how much I gain from hearing from the triumphs and challenges of my peers and mentors.
So I’m grateful to Civil Society and its sponsors for their ongoing commitment to this trustee-focused event.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again – and again today: trusteeship is one of the most important forms of civic action and public service it is possible to undertake in England and Wales.
As trustees, you make up the very backbone of charity.
Whatever its size, mission or complexity, the fate of every charity rests ultimately in your hands.
Trusteeship may be largely unseen, and too often unsung, but your work, and your importance is not lost on me or on the Commission as a whole.
Much of what we are doing at the Commission now and over recent years is driven by the recognition that to regulate effectively, we need to understand and respond to your experience as trustees, and support you as far as possible in a way that meets you where you are.
I’ll say more about this in a moment.
Now it is both with great pride and with some degree of sadness that I approach the end of my time at the Commission.
The past years have been enormously fulfilling professionally, and personally.
As a Commission, we have made significant achievements, and responded to challenges that have tested me and my team to our limits.
There hasn’t been a boring day, every single moment has been a privilege and I have learnt a lot.
There is much I want to say, but in an effort at brevity and self-discipline, I’ve allowed myself seven reflections – one for each year of my time at the Commission.
You may not agree with everything I say – and I welcome discussion and challenge – but these are matters I have come to feel strongly on, based on evidence and experience. So please hear me out.
The role of charity in society
My first point is not controversial. In fact, it’s quite simple – but sometimes we miss the simple things. We take them for granted.
And it’s this: the role, value and importance of charities in our society continues to rise.
The difference charities make in our communities and all of our lives is immeasurable, and it is growing.
Many social and cultural touch points in our lives, cradle to grave, are offered or curated by charity. We are a society built on a strong symbiosis of state, market, and the charitable sector.
And – crucially – this now appears to be an accepted and indeed celebrated facet of our national life.
When I began my career in charities, the very existence of charity was often subject to political concern on both sides of the spectrum.
Many on the left saw the continued existence of charitable provision as shameful evidence of a wholly broken social system, marked by failing state services and a Victorian reliance, by those born into deprivation, on scraps from the rich man’s table.
Meanwhile, some on the right were sceptical of ‘lefty’ charitable provision, seeing it as part of a system trapping people in dependence and deprivation, disincentivised from taking greater responsibility for their lives.
These reservations are now, largely, a thing of the past.
There are many, deep divisions in our society, but we now seem to have consensus, across the political spectrum, that voluntary civic action is more than a stop gap for state provision. And about more than paternalism or pity.
We should celebrate this hard-fought consensus on the central role of charities.
But we should remember that this consensus is also built on public trust in what charities do, and how they do it. It’s incredibly heartening to know that, over the past six years, public trust in the sector has recovered after a significant drop prompted by high profile charity scandals.
Charities are now, again, among the most trusted groups in society – second only after doctors.
But trust is hard earned and easily lost.
I would urge all those involved in the sector to remember that your work ultimately relies on public trust and goodwill – which in turn rests on you delivering against your purpose in a way that is true to your values.
And I would say also - let’s recognise and value the role fair, balanced and independent regulation plays in upholding the covenant of trust between the state, the public, and the sector on which the crucial role of charities in our society rests.
No right number of charities
Second, and linked to this: I cannot count the number of times someone has nobbled me during my time as CEO of the Commission to tell me that there are too many charities and that we ought to curtail their number.
I understand the concern. There is without doubt room for consolidation in some parts of the sector – and I quietly rejoice whenever I see charities coming together – either in merger or in significant collaboration. I would like to see this happen more often.
Mindful co-operation and coordination between charities can only serve to enhance the experience of beneficiaries, and improve the effective use of charitable resources.
I agree that the Commission must continue to prompt those setting up new charities to consider whether doing so really is the best way of achieving their stated aims.
And I am immensely proud of the work we have done with DCMS and UK Community Foundations during my time as CEO to revitalise over 118 million pounds of charitable resources back into circulation and activity.
We’ve worked with around 1,300 charitable trusts that were moribund and dormant to either get them back into action or to transfer their funds to charities better able to make use of them. Just one example from the Revitalising Trusts Programme in Wales which worked with dormant funds across the country to free up much needed resources:
Like similar charities across England and Wales, Sketty Foodbank in Swansea has seen a huge surge in demand for its services due to the cost of living crisis. A grant from the programme enabled the foodbank to continue to meet rising demand.
The Revitalising trusts Programme supports the Commission’s role as Registrar, as holder of the register and shows how some level of intervention in the register is necessary.
But to limit the number of charities permitted to operate in this country would be a mistake, as would involving the Commission in any kind of rationing of charitable energy and innovation.
I believe, fundamentally people should have the ability to set up an organisation to help their community, give their time or money. It isn’t for the regulator to set a cap on that good will.
I believe that this healthy, organic, bottom-up regeneration of the sector must be allowed to continue with minimal interference from the state. Do I wish more charities would collaborate or merge - yes I do. But I don’t think it is the role of the regulator to enforce that to happen.
Similarly, let’s acknowledge and agree that there is no one ‘right size’ for a charity to be. Often, over the years, I’ve heard sweeping statements about the evils of large supposedly “corporate charities” versus “nice” small charities. Or conversely, heard complaints about there being too many tiny charities that ought all to consolidate into more effective, efficient, larger organisations.
This size-focus is mistaken, or rather fails to start with the question of what is needed.
Our society needs large, well resourced, efficient and effective cancer research charities.
And we need small, volunteer led organisations working in our communities that have no ambition to ‘scale up’ or grow.
Let’s let charities find the size that is right for them. And let’s let them come and go as the needs of communities and society change.
The Charity Commission’s resources versus expectation creep
I do have some concerns, however, about the Commission’s resources relative to the size of the sector, and growing expectations as to the nature and extent of our oversight of charities.
And this is my third reflection.
Charity law purposely grants charity trustees very wide discretion to run charities as they see fit.
This is to protect the independence and freedom of civil society.
In turn, the Commission is resourced – in terms of our funding and our powers - as a last resort enforcement regulator. There to offer guidance, hold charities to account via the register, and take action where there are serious concerns about the way in which a charity is being run.
But over recent years, we have experienced what you might term expectation creep.
Growing expectations that we serve not just as regulator, but as a charity ombudsman, able to offer some kind of remedy for those who feel that they have not had the service from a charity that they might have expected. Or as an inspectorate that visits every charity on a regular basis, auditing its processes and impact.
Neither of these expectations is realistic or manageable under the current framework, and this worries me.
Over coming years, the Commission is going to have to work hard to explain its role – what it can do, and what it can’t and won’t.
I hope that we will have the sector’s support in this task.
Because make no mistake – any other regulatory model than the one operated by the Commission now would likely mean burdensome oversight and red tape for charities.
Let’s all work to avoid that.
The balance of regulation
Which brings me on to my fourth reflection. It’s about the perennial pendulum swing over the decades, between a focus on enforcement on the one hand and support for trustees on the other.
This swing is not unique to charity regulation – we see it over time in many sectors.
I’d like to say once and for all that this is an unhelpful, false dichotomy.
If I’ve sought to achieve one thing during my time as CEO it has been to cement within the Commission a culture that recognises both support and robust enforcement are necessary poles of our work which should attract equal amounts of regulatory energy and investment.
Charities are run by volunteer trustees who need and deserve our active guidance and support in understanding their legal duties and doing the best job they can.
And public trust and confidence and the overall health of the sector requires that the Commission takes unflinching action when we come across the deliberate or reckless abuse of charities.
The Commission has done a huge amount over the past 7 years to strengthen both aspects of our work:
-
Overhauling our online guidance to trustees and developing effective campaigns to help ensure trustees see and access that guidance
-
Investing in technology that over time will allow us a direct digital connection with every single trustee.
-
Ensuring we use the enforcement powers Parliament has granted us without fear or favour.
-
Holding publicly to account those charities where things have gone badly wrong.
-
Setting the record straight when charities have been subject to wrong or unfair public criticism.
I am proud of this legacy and delighted that the Commission’s new strategy cements this balance into the foundations of our work into the years ahead.
Scrutiny of charity leaders.
My fifth reflection is a little tangential to the Commission’s core regulatory role, but it’s important for me to speak out on this.
I feel strongly that there is a risk charity leaders are coming to face disproportionately intense, unpleasant, and sometimes unfair personal scrutiny – often from both within their charities, and externally.
I want to be clear – as regulator my position absolutely is not that charity leaders should be spared scrutiny for the decisions they make, or the way they work.
And I understand that people feel passionately about charities and their work, and want their voices heard – whether via social media, mainstream media, or by raising concerns and complaints directly towards or within a charity.
But I am worried that what charity leaders face can stretch beyond legitimate scrutiny.
Overall, public debate on social issues in our country has become too charged, polarised, and often simply nasty.
And I am now concerned that potential candidates may be put off taking on leadership of charities because they are not prepared to bare their lives to the harsh light of unrelenting scrutiny.
Leading a large charity is never going to be easy. It involves overseeing complex, sensitive work supporting the most disadvantaged people in our society or operating in challenging environments around the world.
But what is putting people off is not the work, responsibility or the relatively modest pay. It’s the sense that they are on trial, just for doing their job.
So, just as we rightly require charities to act with respect, tolerance and consideration to others, as I prepare to move on from the Commission I want to say to us all – to trustees, the media, politicians, individuals with concerns or complaints about charities – to remember that charity leaders deserve also to be treated with courtesy, respect, and on the assumption that even those we disagree with may have honourable intentions.
And let’s support charity leaders as well as challenging them to do the best job they can.
Volunteer trusteeship must remain attractive proposition
Next, and just as important is that we collectively – the Commission, government, law-makers, and charities themselves - ensure that trusteeship remains an attractive proposition.
Without the ongoing willingness of people from all backgrounds, skills sets and experience to come forward and step up and serve as trustees, the very infrastructure of the charitable sector would crumble.
We must ensure that trusteeship is something that people from all walks of life,all backgrounds and all world views feel willing and able to take on. And we know from our research that many charities are already carrying vacancies, with some struggling to fill gaps.
So we need to widen the pool of trustees, and that requires people of all backgrounds to come forward and volunteer their time. To show up, for their communities and the causes they care about. To offer their skills, perspective, experience, and passion. To give back, and in doing so receive valuable and marketable skills and experience.
This is not just about fairness – it’s about ensuring that charities benefit from the talent of the broadest possible sweep of society.
To help ensure that happens, the Commission is now working with partners to further develop research into trustees and trusteeship, in the hope that the findings will help the sector focus and refine its work to encourage new talent onto charity boards.
We hope to say more about that work publicly very soon.
Purpose-ride or die
My final lesson is very simple, but too often not followed.
I’ve been involved in charities from almost all possible perspectives for a long time .
As a volunteer as a charity leader myself, from the vantage point of government, as a funder, donor, and latterly as regulator.
I’ve seen charities achieve the impossible.
And I’ve seen charities get it badly wrong.
And when I reflect on what it is that makes the difference between a charity that succeeds and one that gets lost along the way, it is this: a great charity is one whose trustees and wider leadership, over time, are led always and alone by the charity’s purposes.
Not by whim, fashion, or funding but by a shared commitment to delivering on the purposes that got the charity on the register in the first place.
This is easy to say, but it can be difficult to achieve day to day.
It requires consistent leadership and oversight by trustees who are prepared to support, help and hold to account their executive team.
It requires confidence, resilience, and courage – including the courage to say no to funding or a contract that would lead the charity away from its core purpose.
Please, if you take anything away with you from what I’ve said today, let it be this: that as trustees you are first and foremost the steward of your charity’s mission.
Whatever talent, experience or skill got you on the board in the first place – once you’re there, your purpose is the charity’s purpose.
Don’t allow yourself to be swayed from that purpose by anyone or anything.
So those are my seven reflections, distilling some of the convictions I’ve formed over the 7 years of the best – and most challenging – job I’ve ever had.
There is much more I could say about what the Commission has achieved over recent years.
But all that’s left for me to say today is thank you – thank you for the work you do for your charities, your communities and for our society as a whole.
We all owe you a great debt.
On behalf of the Commission, and for myself. A very heart felt thank you.