Call 020 7280 4985 for more information

Fundraising in the UK………Are we still in the dark ages?

Posted on 12 Oct 2011 by Anonymous
Categories: Fundraising

The fundraising profession has made enormous strides in the UK over the past twenty years, and it continues to grow. Umbrella organisations like the Institute of Fundraising, the National Council of Voluntary Organisations, and ACEVO work hard to increase the professionalism of the sector, and the fundraisers who are an integral part of it.

That is why it’s so surprising to hear—still—about third sector trustees and senior execs who find the very idea of fundraising “embarrassing” and “tacky.”

Truth be told, generous funding from statutory and other public sources has made many of these decision-makers complacent. Government contracts, Arts Council money, and lottery funding have been relatively reliable, and many nonprofits have pursued these income streams with zeal. But too many have failed to increase their voluntary income with the same enthusiasm. They’ve become too dependent on too few income streams, and as those streams dry up, the very future of their organisations is threatened.

Any company, nonprofit or for-profit, benefits from diversified income sources. We’re even taught as children “not to put all of our eggs in one basket.” But only now, with public sector funding being slashed, are many nonprofits beginning to investigate the necessary diversification of their income.

The key question is whether they can do it without letting their choking disgust get the better of them.

Perhaps in anticipation of the looming public sector cuts, the new coalition government has been talking about expanding the “culture of giving” in the UK, looking to the USA for inspiration in private philanthropy and longer-term endowments. While it won’t take the place of public funding, there is enormous potential to dovetail private contributions with government money—creating a natural stability that does not rely on any single source of income.

Although this less a political issue than a matter of reality for our sector, there are many who simply refuse to see it.

Just a few weeks ago, a member of the House of Lords made the same tired argument on BBC’s Ten O’Clock news, linking his concept of American-style philanthropy to wealthy donors who want their names on buildings. He said it wouldn't work in the UK, calling it "tacky" and adding that he himself would be "embarrassed" by such recognition.

Sadly, opinions like this one perpetuate the stereotype that philanthropy comes solely from the wealthy narcissists. Any cultural shift in the UK's giving will be driven by donors at every level, and the fundraisers who facilitate that giving. Support of 1 2 charitable organisations is a responsibility we're all learning to share, and not one that's borne only by the wealthy.

Supporting our favourite charities and nonprofits is something that should elicit pride, whatever the level of our contributions. While it’s clear that not every donor can be offered the opportunity to name the new wing of a building, why be embarrassed about supporting a cause you believe in? Let’s talk about our contributions and why we make them! Who knows, we may even spur someone else into doing the same. They might even give more than we did.

In a recent issue of Third Sector magazine, Richard Gutch interviews a number of fundraisers about the future role of fundraising in light of reductions in public sector income. His research reveals many of the same issues, with trustees and chief executives seeing fundraising as a “necessary evil” or as “peripheral” or, once again, as “embarrassing.”

There is hope, however, as these attitudes are changing. Indeed, they are being forced to change, as more and more charities realise that fundraising income is impossible to ignore.

And when it comes down to it, which is more embarrassing: asking people for money, or winding up your charity because you resisted doing exactly that?

Written by an Expert Fundraising Consultant from ACEVO Consulting

To speak to an advisor about the matters raised in this article please call 020 7280 4933 referencing the article.

This article is also available in PDF format, click here to download the article.

Comments

TheIronyy

Twitter: @ order accutane online 622151 tramadol >:-)

2nd February 2012 at 2:51am

order accutane online 622151 tramadol >:-)

Babykleding

Twitter: @Babykleding

30th January 2012 at 7:33am

Hey, I read a lot of blogs on a daily basis and for the most part people lack substance.

Babykleding

Twitter: @Babykleding

30th January 2012 at 7:31am

Hey, I read a lot of blogs on a daily basis and for the most part people lack substance but

skitina

Twitter: @ order prednisone online 58783 colchicine 97782

29th January 2012 at 2:02pm

order prednisone online 58783 colchicine 97782

Renaldoow

Twitter: @The great difficulty with conferences such as these is that they can only appeal to organisations with sufficient spare cash – and staff of course – to send delegates. I used to run a vol

28th January 2012 at 3:07am

The great difficulty with conferences such as these is that they can only appeal to organisations with sufficient spare cash – and staff of course – to send delegates. I used to run a voluntary group that was truly voluntary and had absolutely no money other than that which the group members put in – and that was very little. But we carried on until we got our change to the law in the form of a new Act of Parliament. Conferences such as these ignore nano-groups like mine and yet they are the basis, surely, of what is so clumsily called the Big Society.

cheap auto insurance online

iovubfoari

Twitter: @dHvf5L hwdlxwxhgbqp

7th January 2012 at 9:42am

dHvf5L hwdlxwxhgbqp

Steffie

Twitter: @What's it take to boemce a sublime expounder of prose like yourself?

6th January 2012 at 9:33am

What's it take to boemce a sublime expounder of prose like yourself?