Ian MacQuillin responds to the Fundraising Regulator’s critique of his and Adrian Sargeant’s recent ideas on fundraising ethics and regulation.
A “systematic review” of fundraising’s professional ethics is needed before any major review of the Code of Fundraising Practice in England and Wales is made, a new paper published in the Journal of Business Ethics argues.
As it emerges that some charities have not paid the levy to the Fundraising Regulator, Adrian Sargeant asks if fundraising’s new regulatory regime represents value for money.
Each month, the Critical Fundraising blog presents a digest of the best fundraising-related blogs and articles that have adopted a critical fundraising mode of thought.
If it’s beneficiaries, rather than donors, who are actually charities’ ‘consumers’, Ian MacQuillin asks if this changes how fundraising ought to be regulated.
Fundraising regulation is often predicated on the assumption that donors require the same degree of ‘protection’ as consumers. In the first of a two-part blog, Ian MacQuillin argues that it’s beneficiaries, not donors, who are a charity’s true consumers
Organisations that regulate fundraising need to move away from a ‘consumer protection ethos’ to ensure that charities can be more accountable to their beneficiaries, Rogare’s evidence to a parliamentary enquiry says.