Research and analysis

Every complaint matters: a thematic review of complaints about charities

Published 25 February 2020

Charities continue to play a vital role in our society, as they have for centuries. Most charities rely on the goodwill of volunteers, including their trustees, to carry out their work and all charities rely on public goodwill for the special status they hold. Charities’ ethos and purpose is part of what makes them unique. It’s also a factor in why the public has high expectations of them.

People often complain to us when a charity’s actions fall short of those high expectations. We want anyone who has serious concerns about a charity to report these to us, confident that their concerns will be heard. We will make sure that no complaint is ignored. All complaints contribute to our trend data, even where no direct regulatory action is taken.

This report sets out the findings of a review of complaints and serious incident reports to the Charity Commission. From April to June 2019 we received 600 complaints and reports about charities which fell below the threshold for direct regulatory action because:

• they were not serious enough, or not supported by enough evidence, to justify direct regulatory action; or
• the charity had taken appropriate action already

We carried out in-depth reviews of over 200 of these complaints and reports. This also allowed us to verify that our initial assessment of the complaints was correct. (In only one case we referred a complaint for further evaluation).

This is the first thematic review of complaints we have conducted under our 2018 to 2023 Strategy. It is part of our work to hold charities to account. We hope it will also help to give charities the understanding and tools they need to succeed. In future reviews we may explore other themes.

This represents a new approach to learning from complaints; we hope it will encourage every charity to do likewise. This is crucial for charities to be accountable to beneficiaries, supporters and the wider public. These research findings are intended to help charities develop a deeper understanding of who complains to us and why their expectations matter. We include examples of why people contacted us about charities, and what concerned them.

Findings and themes from the review

1. People who complain are usually people you know

People raised concerns about charities of all kinds and all sizes. It isn’t the case that people only complain about a few large household name charities.

More significantly, people usually contacted us about a charity they were involved with. In most cases the complainant was one of the charity’s own supporters, beneficiaries, members, volunteers, staff or trustees. They complained to us about issues that affected them personally.

2. Be accountable – it’s worth making the effort to explain and to listen properly

Many of the complaints we received were about matters that charities had not dealt with effectively. People felt their concerns had been ignored or dismissed.

Complaints about noise or parking, planning issues or damage to property might seem petty, but if charities don’t have effective complaint procedures, fail to listen or respond to concerns, or don’t explain their decisions clearly, it can increase suspicion and frustration. That lack of accountability increases the likelihood of a complaint to the regulator.

True accountability means doing more than going through the motions

We received a series of complaints about a recreational charity’s plan to sell part of its land. Some were about the loss of recreational amenity; others were planning objections outside our remit. There were allegations of breach of duty and conflict of interest. The local press also got involved. We contacted the charity trustee (the local authority) because of the number of complaints we had received.

Although the trustee was acting within its powers, it hadn’t acted accountably. It held a public meeting, but it was unclear how it took account of local concerns (or even the concerns of its own members) in reaching its decision. It was also unclear if it recognised and addressed the potential for conflict between its roles as trustee and local authority. A cultural blind-spot increased the risk of breaching a legal duty.

Charities might think that completing their annual accounts and reports is a mere tick-box exercise, but members of the public do raise concerns if a charity’s accounts and report are overdue, or if information looks wrong or incomplete.

Some trustees’ reports tell a compelling story, clearly showing the difference the charity’s work has made. Others simply list the charity’s activities. Least compelling of all are brief, legalistic compliance statements; these are unlikely to inspire public trust in the charity’s work.

When you don’t have a good story, people rightly ask questions

We received concerns about a charity’s accounts. The charity earns its income from property and investments. It makes grants to benefit the local community.

The charity’s accounts and reports were up to date. But the last few years’ accounts were very basic, and the report contained minimal detail. The report on the charity’s activities was identical every year, even when the charity made no grants. Over time, governance costs increased, and charitable grants fell to zero. The local press also reported concerns about the future of a public amenity on part of the charity’s land.

We referred this case for further evaluation and action, which is currently ongoing.

3. Don’t take your status as a charity, and the public’s support, for granted

People start or join charities because they feel passionate about a cause. Passion is vital. But charitable aims do not justify uncharitable means. Being passionate about your cause doesn’t justify attitudes or behaviour that contradict the values you stand for and undermines what the concept of charity means to people.

Several complaints highlighted poor decision making and unmanaged conflicts of interest. One charity’s executives kept the trustees in the dark about its activities while its debts mounted up. Events like these may suggest that trustees lack the skills or knowledge they need. But for trustees to allow such situations to continue unchecked suggests that underlying attitudes were an issue.

Show how you have managed conflicts of interest – transparency is vital

1. A charity rented premises from a local school. The charity’s manager and one of the trustees were also school governors and members of the school’s finance committee. They used their positions to obtain a reduced rent for their charity. They failed to recognise that this was a conflict of interest (although they didn’t benefit personally). The school was a charity regulated by the Department for Education, which took action to deal with the conflict.

2. We received a complaint about a charity that funds the arts. A majority of the trustees were related. One of the charity’s larger grants was to an organisation run by a relative of the trustees. This was declared in accounts, and there was no indication of any improper financial benefit. But it was unclear how the trustees had managed their conflict of interest.

Trustees must always act in their charity’s best interests. If a trustee has a conflict between their duty to their charity and either their personal interests or their duty to any other body, they must declare it and deal with it. Transparency is essential. For more detail, see our guidance on conflicts of interest.

Many of the complaints involved disputes and interpersonal conflict. There were stories of controlling behaviour, bullying, factions and inner circles. Trustees were omitted or excluded from discussions. Some were simply told they had been removed from office. Tolerating or fostering this kind of behaviour undermines people’s expectations of charity and can also result in breaches of trustees’ legal duties.

4. How you do something is as important as what you do

Charities must comply with legal and regulatory requirements as well as their own policies and procedures. But this alone will not build trust with beneficiaries, supporters or the public. Good practice, appropriate attitudes and behaviour need to be embedded, to become part of a charity’s expected norms. How you implement your policies, and the motivation behind them, is as important as the policy itself.

Some of the stories we heard show the benefit of a good culture which underpins and embeds policies, such as safeguarding, anti-fraud and cyber security. It makes prevention easier. If an incident occurs, people know how to respond and who to involve. Any concerns the Commission might have can be quickly resolved.

Handling a bad situation well does a lot to inspire trust

A charity was contacted by a former beneficiary who claimed he had been a victim of abuse in the past. The alleged abuser had died, so the police could take no action. The victim made a threat against the charity and its current beneficiaries.

The charity demonstrated that safeguarding is not only a policy but part of its culture. It promptly reported the incident to us. It was clear that the charity had appropriate systems and procedures in place. People knew what action to take and who to involve. They showed appropriate care for the victim.

They also acted appropriately to protect the charity’s current beneficiaries and members from harm.

We understand that things can go wrong. Charities should have controls and procedures in place for what they can reasonably foresee. Of course, it’s impossible to foresee or prevent everything. What really matters is how a charity responds if something unexpected happens. The charity needs to be able to show that it has done what it reasonably could in the circumstances, and that its trustees have acted lawfully, honestly and reasonably.

Conclusions

Supporting a charity is not like buying a product. It involves a personal investment, an emotional connection. It follows that people have expectations of the charities they support. When people complain to us about a charity, they usually have some connection with that charity. They care about the cause and feel strongly about it. That strength of feeling is what motivates them to get involved, but it is also likely to leave them feeling let down, and more inclined to complain, if things go wrong.

Charities can, and should, lead the way in taking public expectations seriously, if they are to continue to attract public support. We know that charities’ accountability matters to the public. It’s not only about being accountable, but welcoming and actively demonstrating that accountability. For example, governance and service failures can affect any organisation, not just charities. But as our research into Trust in Charities shows, the public expect charities to be different.

Charities should be distinct from other organisations in their attitude and behaviour, in their motivations and methods. People want charities to show how they further their mission, manage resources responsibly, and reflect their purposes in their values and culture. When things do go wrong, how charities handle it is important.

Complaints can be a learning opportunity. We don’t expect charities to assume that complainants are always right, or to meet unreasonable expectations. But even someone who expresses their concern unreasonably may have a valid point. Complaints are worth listening to, if only to understand why people are concerned, and assure them that they have been heard. It’s important to have a complaints procedure that works in practice and feels fair.

The stories of interpersonal conflict in charities chime with our experience. We see too many examples of disputes, internal factions and divisions. We hear of groups clinging onto power and keeping others from having a voice. We also see examples of controlling behaviour, or of a culture where people never question or challenge. This can be just as harmful to effective decision making and the charity’s best interests, and it undermines the reputation of charity more widely.

These kinds of behaviour may go unnoticed outside the charity, but they can do huge damage to people, relationships and trust. By the time we become involved, there may be little hope of reconciliation or a positive outcome. The people within a charity are best placed to act promptly and accountably to look for ways to resolve these kinds of issues.

We hope that this report will help charities to reflect on these issues. As always, we want the lessons from our work to empower and enable charities, either to take preventative steps or to respond more effectively when issues arise. We also hope to reassure those who raise concerns with us that we are listening to, and learning from, what they say.