Exploratory Studies on Fundraising Practices Studies on...Exploratory Studies on Fundraising...

Exploratory Studies on Fundraising PracticesBased on Institutions of a Public Character (IPCs) in the Health, Social and Welfare Sectors

Dr. Isabel Sim

Senior Research Fellow, Department of Social Work, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, National University of Singapore

Director (Projects), Centre for Social Development Asia (CSDA)

2nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 2

About this Project• Outcome of a three‐year collaboration between the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants (CIMA), Centre for Social Development Asia (CSDA) and Department of Social Work, Faculty of Arts and Social Science, National University of Singapore (NUS).

3 Years’ Research Funding from CIMA’s Centre of Excellence


About this Project• 4 authors on this project:

− Dr. Isabel SimSenior Research Fellow at the Department of Social Work, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, National University of SingaporeDirector (Projects), Centre for Social Development Asia (CSDA)

− Ms. Usha MenonExecutive Chairman of Usha Menon Management Consultancy

− Dr. Alfred LohAssociate Professor at the Department of Accounting, NUS Business School

− Dr. Hoe Siu Loon Member at the Institute of System Science, National University of Singapore

• 1st Year (2015): Financial Characteristics of VWOs with IPC status

• 2nd Year (2016): Exploratory Studies on Fundraising Practices – Based on Singapore’s IPCs in Health, Social and Welfare Sectors

• 3rd Year (2017): Proposed topic – Corporate Governance of Charities in the Social Service Sector


Acknowledgements

5

RESOURCE COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSONA/P Corinne Ghoh (Centre for Social Development Asia)

RESOURCE COMMITTEE MEMBERSMr. Gerard Ee (Charity Council)Ms. Sim Hui Ting (Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth)Ms. Kelly Teo (Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth)Ms. Poh Lay Chin (Ministry of Health)Mr. Cheng Tai Chin (Ministry of Social and Family Development)Mr. Barry Ryan Shah (Ministry of Social and Family Development)Ms. Lorraine Chue (National Council of Social Service )Ms. Choy Yee Mun (National Volunteer and Philanthropy Centre)

REVIEWERSA/P Esther Goh (Department of Social Work, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, National University of Singapore)Dr. Sushilan Vasoo (Department of Social Work, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, National University of Singapore)Ms. Ang Bee Lian (Ministry of Social and Family Development)

CSDA STAFFMs. Joanne Liang MingzhuMs. Tan Shi HuiMr. Vincent Yang

INTERNSMr. Alvin Ng Jin HuiMs. Claribel Low Sin YeeMs. Charmaine Phua Li JieMs. Choy Yun ZhenMs. Dong WeiMs. Fang QianyaoMr. Gregory Ang Tai XiangMs. Joy Wang Xin YuanMr. Leuar Kok HonMs. Lim Swee YeeMr. Liu ChenxiMs. Neo Yee WinMr. Ng Ching SiangMs. Ng Hong WenMs. Ng Li YinMr. Ong Qin LiMs. Persa Labeeba ChowdhuryMr. Quinten Jad Roslen Wei RongMr. Rick Yang QingbinMs. Sakshi DovedyMr. Sebastian Ang Cheng HuiMs. Sim Hui PingMr. Tan Chongsheng MicahMr. Teo King HweeMs. Toh Yan LingMs. Wong Jin YiMr. Yuen Jing Sheng

Exploratory Studies on Fundraising PracticesBased on Singapore’s Institutions of a Public Character (IPCs) in the Health, Social and Welfare Sectors

• Introduction • Charity Landscape and Fundraising in Singapore• Disclosure of Fundraising Practices • Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising• Limitations • Future Research


IntroductionIMPORTANCE OF FUNDRAISING INCOME

IPC’s Size as measured by Total Operating

Expenditure (TOE)

Income from Donation,

Fundraising and Sponsorship

Income from Government and Other Grants

Other Income

More than SGD 10 million 23.5% 43.1% 33.4%

From SGD 5 million to 10 million 34.9% 36.8% 28.3%

From SGD 1 million to 5 million 31.9% 40.6% 27.5%

From SGD 500,000 to 1 million 48.9% 29.6% 21.4%

From SGD 250,000 to 500,000 55.0% 24.6% 20.5%

Less than SGD 250,000 56.6% 31.7% 11.7%

Notes: The data is obtained from 'The Social Service Sector in Singapore: An Exploratory on the Financial Characteristics of Institutions of a Public Character (IPCs) in the Social Service Sector' (Sim, Ghoh, Loh & Chiu, 2015). 'Other Income' includes income from programmes, social enterprise and investment.

Findings from past research suggested income from donation and fundraising activities remain the most important sources of income for IPCs in the social service sector.

Donations: Voluntary gifts to charities (including IPCs) such as donations in case and donations in kind. Fundraising Income: Income generated by activities to raise funds. The activities involve an element of exchange, with the charities receiving income in return for providing foods or services.Sponsorship: Value of in‐kind support received and which are used in fundraising exercise


Breakdown of Income Sources for Health, Social and Welfare IPCs FY2011 to FY2013 (n=202) – Based on a 3‐year average

IntroductionSOME KEY LEGISLATIONS AND VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE GUIDELINES FOR CHARITIES IN SINGAPORE


Some Key LegislationsRegulations DescriptionsCharities Act (Chapter 37) (first introduced in 1995) Parent act to regulate all charities in Singapore

Charities (Institutions of a Public Character) Regulations (2007)

Subsidiary legislation to provide specific guidelines for a more specific group of charities, which is the IPCs

Charities (Accounts and Annual Reports) Regulations (2011)

Subsidiary legislation to provide specific guidelines regarding the reporting aspect of all charities

Charities (Fund Raising Appeals for Local and Foreign Charitable Purposes) Regulations (2012)

Subsidiary legislation to provide specific guidelines regarding the fundraising matters of all charities

Voluntary Disclosure GuidelinesGuidelines DescriptionsCode of Governance for Charities and IPCs (first introduced in 2007, latest revision in 2011)

Provides principles and practices of governance and management for charities and IPCs

Charity Transparency Framework (CTF) (introduced in July 2015)

Charity transparency scorecard to help charities enhance their disclosure and governance practices.

Notes: For more requirements and guidelines, refer to the Charity Portal: https://www.charities.gov.sg/manage‐your‐charity/Pages/Legislation%20Governing%20Charity_IPC.aspx

Introduction

• The Charities (Fund‐Raising Appeals for Local and Foreign Charitable Purposes) Regulations 2012 and Charities (Institutions of a Public Character) Regulations require charities, including IPCs, to adhere to the 30/70 fundraising rule.

• This rule specifies that the total fund‐raising expenses of a charity or IPC in a financial year shall not exceed 30 per cent of the total receipts from fundraising and sponsorships for that financial year.

• The fundraising efficiency ratio is the ratio of the total fund‐raising expenses of a charity or IPC to its total receipts from fundraising and sponsorships. It is computed as follows:

E SR S 100% 30%

where E refers to the total expenses relating to fund‐raising for the financial year, including • (a) direct and material indirect expenses of any kind; and • (b) payments made to commercial fund‐raisers engaged by the charity, but excluding, in a case of the sale of goods by or on behalf of the

charity for fund‐raising (and not trading), the cost of the goods sold; R refers to –• (a) in a case of the sale of goods by or on behalf of the charity for fund‐raising (and not trading), the total receipts from such sale (after

deducting only the cost of the goods sold); and • (b) the total gross receipts from any other fund‐raising for that financial year; and S refers to –• (a) the total amount of sponsorships in cash received by the charity relating to fund‐raising for that financial year that is conditioned upon

the provision of direct or indirect commercial benefit to the sponsors; and • (b) [Only applicable to IPCs] the total cost or value of sponsored property, goods and services for which tax deduction receipts are issues

relating to fund‐raising for that financial year.


FUNDRAISING EFFICIENCY RATIO

IntroductionSUMMARY OF GUIDELINES FROM THE CODE OF GOVERNANCEON FUNDRAISING PRACTICES


Basic I Guideline on Fundraising Practices for1. Charities (without

IPC status) with gross annual receipts of less than SGD 50,000

Conduct of Fundraising Activities The charity should ensure that its fundraising activities will

preserve the integrity and transparency of the charity.

Basic II, Enhanced and Advanced Guidelines on Fundraising Practices for1. Charities with gross

annual receipts of SGD50,000 and up to SGD 10 million

2. IPCs with gross annual receipts of SGD 200,000 and up to SGD 10 million

3. Large Charities with gross annual receipts of more than SGD 10 million

4. Large IPCs with gross annual receipts of more than SGD 10 million

Conduct of Fundraising Activities The charity should ensure that its fundraising activities will

preserve the integrity and transparency of the charity.Accountability to Donors The charity should ensure that donors receive accurate and

ethical advice about the charity, and the intended use, value and tax implications of donations.

All collections should be properly recorded, promptly deposited and accounted for.

The charity should respect donors’ confidentiality. It should not disclose the identity of donors or share information on donors without prior permission from the donors.

Use of Third Party Fundraisers The charity should exercise due care in engaging third party

fundraisers. It should take into account how the public may view its use of third party fundraisers. The use of a third party fundraiser, its rationale and fee arrangements should be approved by the Board and disclosed to potential donors.

In general, it is discouraged to pay third party fundraisers based on the value of donations.

Charity Landscape and Fundraising in Singapore

Number of Registered Charities and IPCs in Singapore from 2008 to 2015

1,944 1,973 2,028 2,093 2,130 2,142 2,180

2,217

504 532 542 568 580 599 612 633

‐

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Num

ber o

f Organ

isations

Years

Number ofRegisteredCharities,includingIPCs

Number ofIPCs

Notes: For the number of charities, the figures are obtained from Chart 1, Page 12, Commissioner of Charities Annual Report 2015. For the number of IPCs, the figures are obtained from Chart 8, Page 18, Commissioner of Charities Annual Report 2015.

Distribution of Charities by Income Size in 2014 (Based on Annual Receipts)

50.1%

10.1% 9.0%

19.7%

4.2%6.9%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

<$250k $250k to$500k

$500k to$1 mil

$1mil to$5 mil

$5mil to$10 mil

>$10 mil

% of C

harities

Distribution of Charities by Annual Receipts Notes: Figures are obtained from Chart 2, Page 13, Commissioner of Charities Annual Report 2015.

• The number of registered charities and IPCs has been rising steadily from 2008 to 2015.

• As of 2014, 50.1% of all registered charities, including IPCs, in Singapore were relatively small, with an annual receipts of less than SGD 250,000.


Charity Landscape and Fundraising in SingaporeBreakdown of Total Annual Receipts and Donations Received by Sector in FY2014

Estimated Breakdown of Registered Charities, IPCs and IPCs' Tax Deductible Donations Received by Sector in 2014


SectorTotal Annual

Receipts in FY2014 (SGD Million)

Total Donations Received in FY2014

(SGD Million)

Arts and Heritage $883.00 $75.70Community $77.50 $24.90Education $8,794.50 $345.90Health $921.70 $276.70Religious and Others $2,071.90 $1,344.90Social and Welfare $1,693.20 $424.80Sports $137.70 $31.50Total $14,579.50 $2,524.40

Sector

No. of Registered Charities in

2014

No. of IPCs in 2014

Tax Deductible Donation Received by IPCs in 2014 (SGD Million)

Arts and Heritage 124 67 $55.20Community 88 71 $27.10Education 119 43 $307.70Health 131 78 $229.00Others 1290 94 $64.80Social and Welfare 364 220 $402.10Sports 64 39 $6.40Total 2180 612 $1,092.30Notes: Table 2 is an estimated comparison based on data available. For the number ofregistered charities in 2014, the data is obtained from Table 1, Page 13, Commissioner ofCharities Annual Report 2014. It includes the number of IPCs and the figure is net of charitiesderegistered in that year. For the tax deductible donations received by IPCs in 2014, the datais obtained from Chart 11, Page 21, Commissioner of Charities Annual Report 2014. Thereare no IPCs under the Religious sector. Charities and IPCs under 'Others' sector includecharities set up for animal welfare, environment conservation and youth development.

Notes: For the total annual receipt in FY2014, the data is obtained from Chart 3, Page 14,Commissioner of Charities Annual Report 2015. For the total donation received in FY2014,the data is obtained from Chart 7, Page 17, Commissioner of Charities Annual Report 2015.Figures are compiled based on the annual returns submitted by charities for financial yearsending in 2015, and the data covers both tax deductible and non‐tax deductible donations.Hence, the data may depict a different trend from the tax deductible donations data due todifferent reporting periods and data coverage. Charities and IPCs under the 'Others' sectorinclude charities set up for animal welfare, environment conservation and youthdevelopment. • The IPCs in the Health, Social and Welfare

sectors account for 57.8% of the total tax deductible donation received by the charity sector in 2014.

• The Health, Social and Welfare sectors received 17.9% of the total annual receipts and 27.8% of the total donations in FY2014.

Charity Landscape and Fundraising in Singapore


Box Story 1:Donations and Tax Deduction

The Government introduced tax deductiondonations to foster better charitable givingbehaviour and to encourage charities toincreases their fundraising efforts. Coupledwith the Care & Share grant by CommunityChest, donations have been increasing.

Box Story 3:Community Chest

For more than three decades, CommunityChest has collaborated with and supportedover 80 different charities each year acrossfive social causes. It is the largest fundraisingbody in Singapore.

Box Story 4:Giving.sg

As an online giving portal, Giving.sg aims tomake giving more accessible by lowering costof fundraising. It was launched by NationalVolunteer and Philanthropy Centre (NVPC) in2015.

Box Story 2:Charitable Giving

It is important to understand the mechanismthat drives charitable giving. They are:Awareness of Needs, Solicitation, Costs &Benefits, Altruism, Reputation, PsychologicalBenefits, Values, and Efficacy.

Research Overview


Two exploratory research studies on the fundraising practices of Institutions of a Public Character (IPCs) in Health, Social and Welfare sectors in Singapore were carried out:

Research Objective : To find out IPCs’ disclosure of fundraising practices in their annual reports and financial statements from FY2012 to FY2014

Sample Size: 26 IPCs in the Health Sector and 100 IPCs in the Social and Welfare Sector for FY2012, FY2013 and FY2014

Disclosure of Fundraising Practices

Research Objective: To find out IPCs’ fundraising manpower, fundraising methods, donor engagement, fundraising accountability, disclosure and compliance, and fundraising challenges

Sample Size: 5 Focus Groups with 34 participants from IPCs the Health, Social and Welfare sectors

Focus Group Discussion

on Fundraising

Disclosure of Fundraising PracticesIPCS’ DISCLOSURE OF FUNDRAISING PRACTICES IN ANNUAL REPORTS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

1. Sample and Methodology

2. Findings on Fundraising Manpower

3. Findings on Fundraising Methods

4. Findings on Donor Acknowledgement

5. Findings on Disclosure of Fundraising Efficiency Ratio




1. SAMPLE AND METHODOLOGY

Sample breakdown of IPCs by Size by TOE, Sector and Financial Year

Sector Health (n=26) Social and Welfare (n=100)

Year FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014

0‐250k 0 1 1 7 6 4

250k‐500k 3 2 1 12 9 8

500k‐1m 0 0 1 18 19 18

1m‐5m 11 10 8 42 42 45

5m‐10m 6 6 8 8 9 12

>10m 6 7 7 13 15 13

Stage 1The COC Office provided the list of charities with active IPC status in FY2012, FY2013 and FY2014. A list of 283 charities in the Health, Social and Welfare sectors, with IPC status for the three financial years were identified.

Stage 2Of these 283 IPCs, 130 of them have publicly available annual reports and financial statements, from FY2012 to FY2014.

Stage 33 IPCs were removed as they do not have consistent 12‐month accounting data. A very large health foundation was also removed to avoid the possibility of skewed findings. Thus, leaving a final sample of 126 IPCs in the Health, Social and Welfare sectors.



2. FINDINGS ON FUNDRAISING MANPOWER (FY2014)

17

10 10

4

20

119

5

0

5

10

15

20

25

Presence ofFundraisingCommittee

VolunteerInvolvement inFundraisingActivities

Full‐timeFundraising Staff

Use of ThirdParty

FundraisingAgency

Num

ber o

f IPC

s

Disclosure of Fundraising Manpower

Fundraising Manpower as Disclosed in Annual Reports and Financial Statements (FY2014)

IPCs in the Health Sector (n=26)

IPCs in the Social and Welfare Sector (n=100)

The findings suggests that:

• Volunteers, including fundraising committee members played a major role in the charities’ fundraising operations

• Only some IPCs had full‐time fundraising staff.

• The use of third party fundraising agency was not a common practice.



3. FINDINGS ON FUNDRAISING METHODS (FY2014)

23

7 6 4 6 6

60

1911

15 1220

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

FundraisingEvents

Flag Day PersonalAppeals

DirectMailers

RegularGiving

Programmes

OnlineDonations

Num

ber o

f IPC

s

Fundraising Methods

Fundraising Methods as Disclosed in Annual Reports and Financial Statements (FY2014)

IPCs in the Health Sector (n=26)


The findings suggested that:

• Special Events remained the most common fundraising methods used by charities.

• Flag Day remained a popular fundraising method.

• Personal Appeals, Direct Mailers, and Regular Giving Programmes were not commonly utilised by IPCs.

• Online donation is gaining popularity.


EXAMPLE OF ONLINE FUNDRAISING: Stand Up for Our Hawkers

• Donation appeal for 22 hawkers in the recent Jurong West Hawker Centre Fire on a online donation platform

• Assurance: Accounting Firm to administer the crowdfund and disbursement to the beneficiaries identified

• Volunteer services by digital marketing firmsRetrieved from https://give.asia/movement/stand_up_for_our_hawkers



3. FINDINGS ON FUNDRAISING METHODS (FY2014)

75 4 3

20

16

108

0

5

10

15

20

25

Charity Dinner Charity Golf Charity Walkathon Charity Run

Num

ber o

f IPC

s

Types of Special Events as Disclosed by IPCs

Popular Special Events Organised by IPCs in the Health, Social and Welfare Sectors

IPCs in Health Sector (n =26) IPCs in Social and Welfare Sector (n=100)



4. FINDINGS ON DONOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT (FY2014)

14 1310

3

5561

24

7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Acknowledgementof Individual

Donors

Acknowledgementof Corporate

Donors

Acknowledgementof CorporateSponsorship

Acknowledgementof CorporateAdoption

Num

ber o

f IPC

s

Disclosure on Donor Acknowledgement

Donor Acknowledgement as Disclosed in Annual Reports and Financial Statements

IPCs in the Health Sector (n=26) IPCs in the Social and Welfre Sector (n=100)IPCs in the Social and Welfare Sector (n=100)

The findings suggested that:

• It is a common practice for charities to acknowledge the individuals and corporations for their donations and sponsorship in charities’ annual reports.



5. FINDINGS ON DISCLOSURE OF FUNDRAISING EFFICIENCY RATIO (FY2014)

4

7

012345678

IPCs in the Health Sector(n=26)

IPCs in the Social and WelfreSector (n=100)

Num

ber o

f IPC

s

Disclosure of Fundraising Efficiency Ratio in Annual Reports and Financial Statements

(FY2014)


Fundraising efficiency ratio could be useful information to donor and the public.

Voluntary disclosure of charities’ fundraising efficiency ratio in their annual reports and/or financial statements should be encouraged.

Focus Group Discussions on FundraisingFOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION ON IPCS’ FUNDRAISING PRACTICES

1. Sample and Methodology

2. Findings on Fundraising Manpower

3. Findings on Fundraising Method

4. Findings on Donor Engagement

5. Findings on Fundraising Accountability, Compliance and

Disclosure

6. Findings on Fundraising Challenges


Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising1. SAMPLE AND METHODOLOGY


Size by TOE/ Number of IPCs

Health IPCs (n=26) Social and Welfare IPCs (n=100)

FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014

Small (TOE Size smaller

than SGD 1 million)

3 3 3 37 34 30

Medium (TOE Size from SGD 1 million to

5 million)

11 10 8 42 42 45

Large (TOE Size larger than SGD 5 million)

12 13 15 21 24 25

Distribution of Sample into Small, Medium and Large Charities

Notes: TOE refers to Total Operating Expenditure. The IPCs can be categorized based on TOE size, ranging from SGD 0 ‐ 250k, SGD 250k ‐ 500k, SGD 500k ‐ 1m, SGD 1m ‐ 5m, SGD 5m ‐ 10m, and SGD 10m and above (Sim, Ghoh, Loh & Chiu, 2015).

Notes: 'Small' refers to TOE < SGD 1 million. 'Medium' refers to SGD 1 million < TOE < SGD 5million . 'Large' refers to TOE > SGD 5 million. 'Small and Medium' refers to TOE < SGD 5million.

Classification for the Five Focus Groups

Size by TOE Sector Group Name

Small and Medium Health Focus Group A

Large Health Focus Group B

Small Social and Welfare Focus Group C

Medium Social and Welfare Focus Group D

Large Social and Welfare Focus Group E

The sample was drawn from the 126 IPCsused in the quantitative research studycomprising of 26 from the Health sectorand 100 from the Social and Welfaresector.

Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising1. SAMPLE AND METHODOLOGY


Type of IPCs Sample Size

Number of Focus Group Participant

Participant’s Designation

ED/CEO/Managers

Chairperson of Fundraising Committee

Fundraising Staff Other

Focus Group A 11 6 5 0 1 0(Health; Small and Medium)Focus Group B 15 7 5 0 2 0(Health; Large)Focus Group C 30 6 3 3 0 0(Social and Welfare; Small)Focus Group D 45 9 7 0 0 2(Social and Welfare; Medium)Focus Group E 25 6 6 0 0 0(Social and Welfare; Large)

Total 126 34 26 3 3 2

A total of 34 participants took part in the focus group discussions in the 5 focus groups.

Notes: 'ED' refers to Executive Director. 'CEO' refers to Chief Executive Officer. 'Others' refers to other designations include being a Team Leader or Executive.

Breakdown of Focus Group Participants

Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising2. FINDINGS ON FUNDRAISING MANPOWER


Discussion Points raised by Focus Groups A to E on Fundraising Manpower

Discussion Points Raised

Focus Group A Focus Group B Focus Group C Focus Group D Focus Group ESmall and

Medium Health IPCs

Large Health IPCs

Small Social and Welfare IPCs

Medium Social and Welfare

IPCs

Large Social and Welfare IPCs

VolunteersYouth volunteers lack training, experience and expertise

Board’s Role in FundraisingThe Board plays a crucial role in fundraising

Fundraising Committee

Forming fundraising committees

Dedicated Fundraising StaffRecruiting fundraising staff

Lack of experienced fundraising staff

Note: The tick indicates that the particular discussion point was brought up by the respective focus groups. It indicates that the issue was relevant to the specific group.

It was found that the fundraising operations of IPCs in Health, Social and Welfare sectors are run by:

1. Volunteers (including board members and fundraising committees)

2. Fundraising Professional (full‐time or part‐time staff)

3. Third Party Fundraisers

Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising3. FINDINGS ON FUNDRAISING METHODS


The participants shared that:

1. Special Events and Flag Day are currently popular fundraising methods

2. Online fundraising will be the future norm

Discussion Points raised by Focus Groups A to E on Fundraising Methods



Medium Health IPCs

Large Health IPCs

Small Social and Welfare IPCs


IPCs

Large Social and Welfare IPCs

Corporate Donations IPCs are dependent on corporate donations

Specific Fundraising Methods Decreasing use of Direct Mailers

Flag Day is regarded as ineffective

IPCs organise special niche events

Legacy Giving as a potential fundraising source

Engagement of Third Party fundraisers

Online fundraising is regarded as effective

Fundraising Trends A rise in donations in 2015 due to SG50


EXAMPLE OF ONLINE FUNDRAISING: Sick boy who loves golden retrievers dies

Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising

Influence of Internet, social media on awareness of Charitable Causes

Retrieved from: http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/sick‐boy‐who‐loves‐golden‐retrievers‐dies

Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising4. FINDINGS ON DONOR ENGAGEMENT


The participants shared their charities’ experiences and insights on:

1. Donor Relations

2. Management of Donor Databases

3. Donor Appreciation

Discussion Points raised by Focus Groups A to E on Donor Engagement



Medium Health IPCs

Large Health IPCs

Small Social and Welfare

IPCs


IPCs

Large Social and Welfare

IPCsDonor RelationsCharities’ reputation is an important factor that influence donors’ decision to donate

Importance of staff‐donor relationships

Donor Database ManagementIPCs using CRM software IPCs keen in using CRMsoftware

CRM software must beuser‐friendly

Donor AppreciationA range of donor engagement methods used

Personalised engagement methods for different group of donors


Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising5. FINDINGS ON FUNDRAISING ACCOUNTABILITY, COMPLIANCE AND DISCLOSURE


The participants shared their charities’ experiences and insights on:

1. Accountability to Donors

2. Issues on Tax Deduction for Donors and Sponsors

3. Fundraising Compliance and Disclosure

Discussion Points raised by Focus Groups A to E on Fundraising Accountability, Compliance & Disclosure


Focus Group A

Focus Group B

Focus Group C

Focus Group D Focus Group E

Small and Medium

Health IPCs

Large Health IPCs


IPCs

Medium Social and

Welfare IPCs


IPCsAuditors, Income Classification & Tax Deduction, and Reserves PolicyIncomes from donation, fundraising activities and sponsorship are not always mutually exclusive, making categorization difficult.

IPCs perceived that there are grey areas in tax deductibility.

For greater clarity, there should be more detailed guidelines for reserves policy.

IPCs are supportive on disclosing their reserves policy in their annual reports

IPCs faced challenges when they change auditors. This is because different auditors have different methods and approach to audit the financial statements.

Fundraising LegislationInland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS), NCSS and Charity Portal provide helpful information and assistance to charities on fundraising issues

Fundraising Compliance and DisclosureNeed to upgrade Charity Portal, so compliance can be more efficient and less time consuming Note: The tick indicates that the particular discussion point was brought up by the respective focus groups. It indicates that the issue was relevant to the specific group.

Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising6. FINDINGS ON FUNDRAISING CHALLENGES

34

The participants shared extensively on:

1. Public’s Perception of Charities

2. Increase Expectations and Involvement by Corporate Donors

3. Competitive Fundraising Environment

4. Lack of Comprehensive Fundraising Strategy

5. Lack of Trained Fundraising Staff

Discussion Points raised by Focus Groups A to E on Fundraising Challenges


Focus Group A Focus Group B Focus Group C Focus Group D Focus Group ESmall and Medium

Health IPCs

Large Health IPCs


IPCs


IPCs


IPCsPublic’s Perception of CharitiesCharity’s Image – Dissemination of charities’ information through mainstream media

The sector should work on educating and raising public awareness so that public fundraising can be more effective.

Increase Expectations and Involvement by Corporate DonorsSecuring corporate donations is becoming increasingly challenging since they are becoming more discerning.

In making donation decisions, corporations are increasingly concerned with IPCs’ outcomes

Impact factor – donors are keen to know how they have helped beneficiaries

Competitive Fundraising EnvironmentCompetition amongst charities for public donations

Costs of Fundraising are rising Encourage collaboration between IPCs to allow the sharing of knowledge, experience and resources

Lack of Trained Fundraising StaffFundraising should not be limited to fundraising staff. The entire organisation, from beneficiaries to board members, to volunteers should be involved.

Tech savvy staff should be hired to reach out to online donors


Limitations

362nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV

• Sample is limited to 126 IPCs in Health, Social and Welfare sectors• The findings may not be explain the fundraising practices of smaller charities, or charities without IPC status, or charities in other sectors

• Findings are limited by the availability of public information and quality of disclosure by IPCs• The lack of disclosure in annual reports and financial statements by the IPCs resulted in the poor quality of data collected, thereby affected the overall findings

Quantitative Research Study

• Sample is contingent upon voluntary acceptance from the participants• The IPCs that accepted the invitations to the focus group discussions, may have better track record at fundraising than those who rejected.

• Participants’ discussions may be biased• Focus group participants’ responses may be influenced by social setting. • This may be due to selective memory, telescoping, attribution and exaggeration.

Qualitative Research Study

Future Research

372nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV

• Future research involving survey method on charities’ fundraising manpower and methods may yield better insights

1. Survey Research on Fundraising Manpower

and Methods

• Future research could be directed at fundraising practices for other groups of charities, such as charities without IPC status, the different charity sector and charity size or in other sectors

2. Fundraising Practices for Other Groups of

Charities

• Online donation as a fundraising method was observed to be gaining popularity

• More research on online giving is needed

3. Research on Online Fundraising

• In order for charities to sustain themselves, it is important for charities to understand the proper role of the Board and volunteers in fundraising

4. Roles of Board Members and Volunteers in Fundraising

• Charities need to know what donors care about5. Donor Motivation

Thank You


Date post:	27-May-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	6 times
Download:	0 times

Exploratory Studies on Fundraising Practices Studies on...Exploratory Studies on Fundraising...

Documents