Holyrood, charities and culture war
28 April 2021
David Green
Politics and the third sector
On 6 May 2021 Scotland will elect a new parliament. But you're forgiven for not noticing, given the lack of visible campaigning caused by the current COVID-19 pandemic. I've seen just one TV debate; and had a bundle of leaflets drop to the floor with my post (seven in one day!).
But do the five parties represented at Holyrood have anything to say to the third sector in this election?
The answer is clearly yes; and there is a fair amount of agreement. Indeed, at a hustings event held on 8 April organised by SCVO, the party leaders all said that multi-year funding is needed to provide stability and allow the sector to plan ahead with greater certainty.
This is significant; and no doubt will be welcomed by everyone in Scotland’s third sector. But it comes at a time when some charities face continued criticism from politicians based down in Westminster.
Indeed, a number of high profile organisations have drawn fire from MPs for taking positions on issues such as anti-racism and slavery.
Twenty conservative MPs complained to the Charities Commission (England and Wales) about the Runnymede Trust for criticising the Sewell Report, with one MP asking the government to stop the “worthless work…of organisations that are promulgating weird woke ideas…”
Earlier, in March, the Charity Commission ruled that it had no grounds for regulatory action against the National Trust. This follows criticism of some research commissioned last year by the Trust into its links with colonialism. They were one of 25 organisations summoned to meet the culture secretary Oliver Dowden to discuss how they represent British History.
Earlier still, back in November 2020, the now former chair of the Charity Commission, Baroness Stowell, herself a tory peer, warned the sector that “whoever is tempted to use charities as another front on which to wage broader political struggles should be careful.”
And last year twelve Tory MPs called on the Charity Commission to investigate a Barnardo’s blog article discussing white privilege.
Of course, MPs are entitled to raise questions about whether charities are following the rules. But in my view, it does seem driven more by political indignation than by reason. By trying to silence charity voices, these MPs are crossing the line.
The importance of risk management cannot be overstated. It is an essential aspect of charity governance, helping trustees to act in the best interests of their organisation. So what is involved? Ideally, you will have a risk register. This will serve as a compass, guiding your trustees through the unpredictable waters of potential hazards. It's a comprehensive document that identifies, assesses, and prioritises risks that could impede the achievement of an organisation's objectives. These risks can range from financial uncertainties and operational setbacks to reputational damage and regulatory compliance issues. In particular, it should also suggest options for avoiding or mitigating each risk. By regularly reviewing your risk register, the trustees will be in a much better place to assess emerging threats and review the severity of existing risks. Not surprisingly, developing your register requires a thorough assessment of all anticipated risks. Common risks faced by charities include financial mismanagement, fraud, reputation damage, cybersecurity threats, regulatory compliance issues, loss of key personnel, and loss of funding. But there will likely be others specific to your circumstances. So your assessment of risk should cover internal processes, external factors, beneficiary and other stakeholder expectations to create a comprehensive risk profile. Once risks are identified, the trustees must develop and implement robust risk management strategies to mitigate potential threats. This involves establishing actions to be taken, assigning responsibilities to key personnel, and fostering a culture of risk awareness and accountability within the organisation. Then once you have your risk register, regular monitoring and evaluation of risk management practices are essential. You must be ready to adapt to new and evolving risks and ensure the effectiveness of mitigations you have put in place. In conclusion, charity risk management is a vital process that requires proactive identification, assessment, and mitigation of risks to safeguard the mission and reputation of the organisation. By implementing effective risk management strategies, charities can enhance their resilience, build trust with beneficiaries and other stakeholders, and continue making a positive impact on the communities they serve.
In today's interconnected world, every organisation, regardless of size, should be promoting equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI). For small charities, embracing EDI principles is not just an ethical goal but also a strategic necessity to better serve their communities. So, what practical strategies can small charities adopt to enhance EDI in their service delivery? Hopefully, you are already working along these lines: Cultivate a Diverse Team : Try to improve diversity within your charity's team. Where possible seek candidates from different backgrounds, cultures, and experiences to bring varied perspectives and insights that reflects the communities you serve. Establish Inclusive Policies and Practices : Develop clear policies that uphold equality and inclusion. Include anti-discrimination measures, flexible working arrangements, and accessibility measures for full participation. Engage with the Community : Build strong connections with the communities you serve. Where practical, aim to be more user-led. Gather input from beneficiaries and other stakeholders through community forums, social media, or surveys to tailor services effectively. Provide Training and Education : Invest in training to raise awareness of EDI issues among staff and volunteers. Cover topics like unconscious bias, cultural competence, and inclusive communication. Offer Culturally Relevant Services : Customise services to reflect the community's diversity. Provide materials, where appropriate, in different languages, incorporate cultural traditions, and offer specialised support for different demographic groups. Foster Partnerships and Collaboration : Collaborate with organisations sharing EDI commitment to address inequalities collectively. Share ideas and expertise for more effective interventions and a broader reach. Monitor and Evaluate Progress : Establish ways to monitor and evaluate EDI efforts. Assess team diversity, gather user feedback, and track outcomes to refine strategies over time. Integrating EDI principles into service delivery takes commitment, but if it leads to better engagement and outcomes, it will be worth the effort. Indeed, such an approach should mean that regardless of background, your beneficiaries have access to the support and opportunities they need to thrive.
Creating content with artificial intelligence
Post-COVID many organisations introduced a hybrid mixture of home and office working. But what are the pros and cons? The pros of hybrid working: Increased flexibility: Hybrid working allows staff to have a better work-life balance by giving them the flexibility to work from home on certain days. This can be particularly beneficial for those with long commutes or personal commitments. Improved productivity: Studies have shown that home working can increase productivity due to fewer distractions and interruptions in a home environment. Hybrid working allows staff to choose the most suitable environment for their tasks, leading to increased focus and efficiency. Cost savings: Hybrid working can result in cost savings. Staff can save money on commuting expenses, and meals etc. Employers can also save on office space and related expenses. Reduced environmental impact: With fewer people commuting to the office every day, hybrid working can contribute to a reduction in carbon emissions and traffic congestion, leading to a positive environmental impact. Enhanced satisfaction and retention: Offering hybrid working options can improve staff satisfaction and morale. It shows that the organisation values work-life balance and trusts staff to manage their time effectively. This, in turn, can lead to higher employee retention rates. The cons of hybrid working: Communication challenges: Hybrid working can create communication gaps between those in the office and those working at home. It may be more difficult to collaborate, share information, and maintain team cohesion, especially if not all staff have access to the same communication tools. Potential for decreased collaboration and innovation: In-person interactions often foster collaboration, creativity, and innovation. Hybrid working may limit spontaneous brainstorming sessions, informal conversations, and face-to-face problem-solving, which can hinder the development of new ideas. Blurred work-life boundaries: While hybrid working offers flexibility, it can also blur the boundaries between work and personal life. Some individuals may find it challenging to switch off from work when they are constantly connected to their home office. Inequality and fairness concerns: Hybrid working may not be feasible or accessible for all staff. Those with limited access to technology, suitable home working environments, or caregiving responsibilities may face disadvantages, leading to potential inequality and fairness concerns. Potential for decreased employee engagement: Without regular face-to-face interactions, some may feel isolated or disconnected from their colleagues and the organisational culture. This can impact engagement, motivation, and overall job satisfaction. Reinforcing existing prejudices and discrimination: Research by the TUC found that perceived issues with work commitment led to closer monitoring of hybrid workers from black and minority ethnic communities. The same study also found that hybrid working led to some people working longer and constantly being available in order to cope with increasing workloads or to prove their worth. It is important for organisations to consider all these pros and cons when implementing hybrid working and to find ways to address the potential challenges to ensure a successful transition. A good hybrid working policy can set out how such challenges can be avoided or overcome. For charities, a big problem is a lack of investment in IT. Traditionally, the private sector has had deeper pockets when it comes to installing the infrastructure needed for home based working. If charities are to deliver successful hybrid working, then they need to ensure their staff and volunteers have the technology and Internet speeds that will enable them to work smoothly from home as well as the office. What’s more, they must ensure their staff are trusted, treated fairly and feel supported. Involving staff (or their trade union) in the design of hybrid working systems, and staying in touch can help to anticipate and deal with any problems. As such, charities should ensure that communication within their team is as seamless as possible. Indeed, once hybrid working arrangements are up and running, regular monitoring is essential for success.
