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

Transcription

1

2 Exploratory Studies on Fundraising Practices Based 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) 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 2

3 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 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 3

4 About this Project 4 authors on this project: Dr. Isabel Sim Senior Research Fellow at the Department of Social Work, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, National University of Singapore Director (Projects), Centre for Social Development Asia (CSDA) Ms. Usha Menon Executive Chairman of Usha Menon Management Consultancy Dr. Alfred Loh Associate Professor at the Department of Accounting, NUS Business School Dr. Hoe Siu Loon Member at the Institute of System Science, National University of Singapore 1 st Year (2015): 2 nd Year (2016): 3 rd Year (2017): Financial Characteristics of VWOs with IPC status Exploratory Studies on Fundraising Practices Based on Singapore s IPCs in Health, Social and Welfare Sectors Proposed topic Corporate Governance of Charities in the Social Service Sector 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 4

5 Acknowledgements RESOURCE COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSON A/P Corinne Ghoh (Centre for Social Development Asia) RESOURCE COMMITTEE MEMBERS Mr. 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) REVIEWERS A/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 STAFF Ms. Joanne Liang Mingzhu Ms. Tan Shi Hui Mr. Vincent Yang INTERNS Mr. Alvin Ng Jin Hui Ms. Claribel Low Sin Yee Ms. Charmaine Phua Li Jie Ms. Choy Yun Zhen Ms. Dong Wei Ms. Fang Qianyao Mr. Gregory Ang Tai Xiang Ms. Joy Wang Xin Yuan Mr. Leuar Kok Hon Ms. Lim Swee Yee Mr. Liu Chenxi Ms. Neo Yee Win Mr. Ng Ching Siang Ms. Ng Hong Wen Ms. Ng Li Yin Mr. Ong Qin Li Ms. Persa Labeeba Chowdhury Mr. Quinten Jad Roslen Wei Rong Mr. Rick Yang Qingbin Ms. Sakshi Dovedy Mr. Sebastian Ang Cheng Hui Ms. Sim Hui Ping Mr. Tan Chongsheng Micah Mr. Teo King Hwee Ms. Toh Yan Ling Ms. Wong Jin Yi 5 Mr. Yuen Jing Sheng

6

7 Exploratory Studies on Fundraising Practices Based 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 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 7

8 Introduction IMPORTANCE OF FUNDRAISING INCOME Breakdown of Income Sources for Health, Social and Welfare IPCs FY2011 to FY2013 (n=202) Based on a 3 year average 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 From SGD 1 million to 5 million From SGD 500,000 to 1 million From SGD 250,000 to 500, % 36.8% 28.3% 31.9% 40.6% 27.5% 48.9% 29.6% 21.4% 55.0% 24.6% 20.5% Less than SGD 250, % 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 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 8

9 SOME KEY LEGISLATIONS AND VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE GUIDELINES FOR CHARITIES IN SINGAPORE Introduction Regulations Charities Act (Chapter 37) (first introduced in 1995) Charities (Institutions of a Public Character) Regulations (2007) Charities (Accounts and Annual Reports) Regulations (2011) Charities (Fund Raising Appeals for Local and Foreign Charitable Purposes) Regulations (2012) Guidelines Code of Governance for Charities and IPCs (first introduced in 2007, latest revision in 2011) Charity Transparency Framework (CTF) (introduced in July 2015) Some Key Legislations Descriptions Parent act to regulate all charities in Singapore Subsidiary legislation to provide specific guidelines for a more specific group of charities, which is the IPCs Subsidiary legislation to provide specific guidelines regarding the reporting aspect of all charities Subsidiary legislation to provide specific guidelines regarding the fundraising matters of all charities Voluntary Disclosure Guidelines Descriptions Provides principles and practices of governance and management for charities and IPCs Charity transparency scorecard to help charities enhance their disclosure and governance practices. Notes: For more requirements and guidelines, refer to the Charity Portal: yourcharity/pages/legislation%20governing%20charity_ipc.aspx 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 9

10 Introduction FUNDRAISING EFFICIENCY RATIO 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: ES RS 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. 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 10

11 SUMMARY OF GUIDELINES FROM THE CODE OF GOVERNANCE ON FUNDRAISING PRACTICES Introduction Basic I Guideline on Fundraising Practices for 1. Charities (without IPC status) with gross annual receipts of less than SGD 50,000 Basic II, Enhanced and Advanced Guidelines on Fundraising Practices for 1. 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. 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. 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 11

12 Charity Landscape and Fundraising in Singapore Number of Registered Charities and IPCs in Singapore from 2008 to 2015 Distribution of Charities by Income Size in 2014 (Based on Annual Receipts) Number of Organisations 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, ,944 1,973 2,028 2,093 2,130 2,142 2,180 2, Number of Registered Charities, including IPCs Number of IPCs % of Charities 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 50.1% 10.1% 9.0% 19.7% 4.2% 6.9% Years Notes: For the number of charities, the figures are obtained from Chart 1, Page 12, Commissioner of Charities Annual Report For the number of IPCs, the figures are obtained from Chart 8, Page 18, Commissioner of Charities Annual Report The number of registered charities and IPCs has been rising steadily from 2008 to % <$250k $250k to $500k $500k to $1 mil $1mil to $5 mil $5mil to $10 mil Distribution of Charities by Annual Receipts >$10 mil Notes: Figures are obtained from Chart 2, Page 13, Commissioner of Charities Annual Report 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, nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 12

13 Charity Landscape and Fundraising in Singapore Breakdown of Total Annual Receipts and Donations Received by Sector in FY2014 Sector Total Annual Receipts in FY2014 (SGD Million) Total Donations Received in FY2014 (SGD Million) Arts and Heritage $ $75.70 Community $77.50 $24.90 Education $8, $ Health $ $ Religious and Others $2, $1, Social and Welfare $1, $ Sports $ $31.50 Total $14, $2, Notes: For the total annual receipt in FY2014, the data is obtained from Chart 3, Page 14, Commissioner of Charities Annual Report For the total donation received in FY2014, the data is obtained from Chart 7, Page 17, Commissioner of Charities Annual Report Figures are compiled based on the annual returns submitted by charities for financial years ending 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 to different reporting periods and data coverage. Charities and IPCs under the 'Others' sector include charities set up for animal welfare, environment conservation and youth Estimated Breakdown of Registered Charities, IPCs and IPCs' Tax Deductible Donations Received by Sector in 2014 Sector No. of Registered Charities in 2014 No. of IPCs in nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 13 Tax Deductible Donation Received by IPCs in 2014 (SGD Million) Arts and Heritage $55.20 Community $27.10 Education $ Health $ Others $64.80 Social and Welfare $ Sports $6.40 Total $1, Notes: Table 2 is an estimated comparison based on data available. For the number of registered charities in 2014, the data is obtained from Table 1, Page 13, Commissioner of Charities Annual Report It includes the number of IPCs and the figure is net of charities deregistered in that year. For the tax deductible donations received by IPCs in 2014, the data is obtained from Chart 11, Page 21, Commissioner of Charities Annual Report There are no IPCs under the Religious sector. Charities and IPCs under 'Others' sector include charities set up for animal welfare, environment conservation and youth development. development. The IPCs in the Health, Social and Welfare The Health, Social and Welfare sectors sectors account for 57.8% of the total tax received 17.9% of the total annual receipts deductible donation received by the charity and 27.8% of the total donations in FY2014. sector in 2014.

14 Charity Landscape and Fundraising in Singapore Box Story 1: Donations and Tax Deduction The Government introduced tax deduction donations to foster better charitable giving behaviour and to encourage charities to increases their fundraising efforts. Coupled with the Care & Share grant by Community Chest, donations have been increasing. Box Story 2: Charitable Giving It is important to understand the mechanism that drives charitable giving. They are: Awareness of Needs, Solicitation, Costs & Benefits, Altruism, Reputation, Psychological Benefits, Values, and Efficacy. Box Story 3: Community Chest For more than three decades, Community Chest has collaborated with and supported over 80 different charities each year across five social causes. It is the largest fundraising body in Singapore. Box Story 4: Giving.sg As an online giving portal, Giving.sg aims to make giving more accessible by lowering cost of fundraising. It was launched by National Volunteer and Philanthropy Centre (NVPC) in nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 14

15

16 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: Disclosure of Fundraising Practices Research Objective : To find out IPCs disclosure of fundraising practices in their annual reports and financial statements from FY2012 to FY2014 Focus Group Discussion on Fundraising Research Objective: To find out IPCs fundraising manpower, fundraising methods, donor engagement, fundraising accountability, disclosure and compliance, and fundraising challenges Sample Size: 26 IPCs in the Health Sector and 100 IPCs in the Social and Welfare Sector for FY2012, FY2013 and FY2014 Sample Size: 5 Focus Groups with 34 participants from IPCs the Health, Social and Welfare sectors 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 16

17 Disclosure of Fundraising Practices IPCS 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 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 17

18 Disclosure of Fundraising Practices 1. SAMPLE AND METHODOLOGY Sample breakdown of IPCs by Size by TOE, Sector and Financial Year Sector Year Health (n=26) Social and Welfare (n=100) FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2012 FY2013 FY k k 500k k 1m m 5m m 10m >10m Stage 1 The 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 2 Of these 283 IPCs, 130 of them have publicly available annual reports and financial statements, from FY2012 to FY2014. Stage 3 3 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 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 18

19 Disclosure of Fundraising Practices 2. FINDINGS ON FUNDRAISING MANPOWER (FY2014) Number of IPCs Fundraising Manpower as Disclosed in Annual Reports and Financial Statements (FY2014) Presence of Fundraising Committee Volunteer Involvement in Fundraising Activities 9 Full time Fundraising Staff Disclosure of Fundraising Manpower IPCs in the Health Sector (n=26) IPCs in the Social and Welfare Sector (n=100) 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV Use of Third Party Fundraising Agency 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.

20 Disclosure of Fundraising Practices 3. FINDINGS ON FUNDRAISING METHODS (FY2014) Number of IPCs Fundraising Methods as Disclosed in Annual Reports and Financial Statements (FY2014) Fundraising Events Flag Day Personal Appeals Direct Mailers Fundraising Methods Regular Giving Programmes 20 Online Donations 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. IPCs in the Health Sector (n=26) IPCs in the Social and Welfare Sector (n=100) Online donation is gaining popularity. 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 20

21 Disclosure of Fundraising Practices 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 Retrieved from Volunteer services by digital marketing firms

22 Disclosure of Fundraising Practices 3. FINDINGS ON FUNDRAISING METHODS (FY2014) 25 Popular Special Events Organised by IPCs in the Health, Social and Welfare Sectors Number of IPCs Charity Dinner Charity Golf Charity Walkathon Charity Run Types of Special Events as Disclosed by IPCs IPCs in Health Sector (n =26) IPCs in Social and Welfare Sector (n=100) 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 22

23 Disclosure of Fundraising Practices 4. FINDINGS ON DONOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT (FY2014) Number of IPCs Donor Acknowledgement as Disclosed in Annual Reports and Financial Statements Acknowledgement of Individual Donors 61 Acknowledgement of Corporate Donors Acknowledgement of Corporate Sponsorship Disclosure on Donor Acknowledgement 3 7 Acknowledgement of Corporate Adoption 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. IPCs in the Health Sector (n=26) IPCs in the Social and Welfre Welfare Sector (n=100) 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 23

24 Disclosure of Fundraising Practices 5. FINDINGS ON DISCLOSURE OF FUNDRAISING EFFICIENCY RATIO (FY2014) Number of IPCs Disclosure of Fundraising Efficiency Ratio in Annual Reports and Financial Statements (FY2014) 4 IPCs in the Health Sector (n=26) 7 IPCs IPCs in the in the Social Social and and Welfre Welfare Sector Sector (n=100) (n=100) 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. 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 24

25

26 Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising FOCUS 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 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 26

27 Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising 1. SAMPLE AND METHODOLOGY Distribution of Sample into Small, Medium and Large Charities Size by TOE/ Number of IPCs Small (TOE Size smaller than SGD 1 million) Medium (TOE Size from SGD 1 million to 5 million) Large (TOE Size larger than SGD 5 million) Social and Welfare Health IPCs (n=26) IPCs (n=100) FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2012 FY2013 FY 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). 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 Notes: 'Small' refers to TOE < SGD 1 million. 'Medium' refers to SGD 1 million <TOE<SGD5 million. 'Large' refers to TOE > SGD 5 million. 'Small and Medium' refers to TOE < SGD 5 million. The sample was drawn from the 126 IPCs used in the quantitative research study comprising of 26 from the Health sector and 100 from the Social and Welfare sector. 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 27

28 Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising 1. SAMPLE AND METHODOLOGY Type of IPCs Breakdown of Focus Group Participants Sample Size Number of Focus Group Participant ED/CEO/ Managers Participant s Designation Chairperson of Fundraising Fundraising Staff Committee Focus Group A (Health; Small and Medium) Focus Group B (Health; Large) Focus Group C (Social and Welfare; Small) Focus Group D (Social and Welfare; Medium) Focus Group E (Social and Welfare; Large) Total Notes: 'ED' refers to Executive Director. 'CEO' refers to Chief Executive Officer. 'Others' refers to other designations include being a Team Leader or Executive. A total of 34 participants took part in the focus group discussions in the 5 focus groups. Other 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 28

29 Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising 2. FINDINGS ON FUNDRAISING MANPOWER Discussion Points raised by Focus Groups A to E on Fundraising Manpower Discussion Points Raised Volunteers Youth volunteers lack training, experience and expertise Board s Role in Fundraising The Board plays a crucial role in fundraising Fundraising Committee Focus Group A Focus Group B Focus Group C Focus Group D Focus Group E Small and Medium Social Large Health Small Social and Large Social and Medium Health and Welfare IPCs Welfare IPCs Welfare IPCs IPCs IPCs Forming fundraising committees Dedicated Fundraising Staff Recruiting 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 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 29

30 Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising 3. FINDINGS ON FUNDRAISING METHODS Discussion Points raised by Focus Groups A to E on Fundraising Methods Discussion Points Raised 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 Focus Group A Focus Group B Focus Group C Focus Group D Focus Group E Small and Medium Social Large Health Small Social and Large Social and Medium Health and Welfare IPCs Welfare IPCs Welfare IPCs IPCs IPCs 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. The participants shared that: 1. Special Events and Flag Day are currently popular fundraising methods 2. Online fundraising will be the future norm 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 30

31 Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising EXAMPLE OF ONLINE FUNDRAISING: Sick boy who loves golden retrievers dies Influence of Internet, social media on awareness of Charitable Causes Retrieved from: boy who loves golden retrievers dies

32 Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising 4. FINDINGS ON DONOR ENGAGEMENT Discussion Points raised by Focus Groups A to E on Donor Engagement Discussion Points Raised Donor Relations Charities reputation is an important factor that influence donors decision to donate Focus Group A Focus Group B Focus Group C Focus Group D Focus Group E Small and Small Social Medium Social Large Social Large Health Medium Health and Welfare and Welfare and Welfare IPCs IPCs IPCs IPCs IPCs Importance of staffdonor relationships Donor Database Management IPCs using CRM software IPCs keen in using CRM software CRM software must be user friendly Donor Appreciation A range of donor engagement methods used Personalised engagement methods for different group of donors 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. The participants shared their charities experiences and insights on: 1. Donor Relations 2. Management of Donor Databases 3. Donor Appreciation 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 32

33 Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising 5. FINDINGS ON FUNDRAISING ACCOUNTABILITY, COMPLIANCE AND DISCLOSURE Discussion Points raised by Focus Groups A to E on Fundraising Accountability, Compliance & Disclosure Focus Group Focus Group Focus Group Focus Group Focus Group E A B C D Discussion Points Raised Small and Small Social Medium Large Social Large Health Medium and Welfare Social and and Welfare IPCs Health IPCs IPCs Welfare IPCs IPCs Auditors, Income Classification & Tax Deduction, and Reserves Policy Incomes 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. 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 Fundraising Legislation Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS), NCSS and Charity Portal provide helpful information and assistance to charities on fundraising issues Fundraising Compliance and Disclosure Need 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. 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 33

34 Focus Group Discussions on Fundraising 6. FINDINGS ON FUNDRAISING CHALLENGES Discussion Points Raised Discussion Points raised by Focus Groups A to E on Fundraising Challenges Public s Perception of Charities Charity 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. Focus Group A Focus Group B Focus Group C Focus Group D Focus Group E Small and Medium Health IPCs Large Health IPCs Small Social and Welfare IPCs Medium Social and Welfare IPCs Large Social and Welfare IPCs Increase Expectations and Involvement by Corporate Donors Securing 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 Environment Competition 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 Staff Fundraising 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 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. 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 34

35

36 Limitations Quantitative Research Study 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 Qualitative 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. 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 36

37 Future Research 1. Survey Research on Fundraising Manpower and Methods Future research involving survey method on charities fundraising manpower and methods may yield better insights 2. Fundraising Practices for Other Groups of Charities 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 3. Research on Online Fundraising 4. Roles of Board Members and Volunteers in Fundraising Online donation as a fundraising method was observed to be gaining popularity More research on online giving is needed In order for charities to sustain themselves, it is important for charities to understand the proper role of the Board and volunteers in fundraising 5. Donor Motivation Charities need to know what donors care about 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 37

38 Thank You 2 nd November 2016 Town Hall Meeting IV 38