Regulation – Critical Fundraising

NEW THINKING: New typology identifies different ways charities can be cut out of the processes of giving and asking for donations

Explores how the ‘traditional charity model’ is disintermediated by individuals, companies and other types of charity
Each type of disintermediation raises its own ethical and regulatory issues, which have barely begun to be addressed
Disintermediated giving is a lot more than just donating via crowdfunding platforms.

NEW THINKING: Blog digest – November/December 2022

Each month, the Critical Fundraising blog presents a digest of the best fundraising-related blogs and articles from the previous month that have adopted a critical fundraising mode of thought. This month we have a double edition as the editor got Covid and was not able to compile the November digest.

Inclusion in this digest does not indicate that Rogare agrees with any arguments presented, only that we thought they made a good case.

The ‘wildcard blog’ is a blog that does not discuss ideas that are directly related to fundraising, but whose ideas we might be able to use if we think critically and imaginatively about them.

NEW THINKING: Blog digest – August 2022

Each month, the Critical Fundraising blog presents a digest of the best fundraising-related blogs and articles from the previous month that have adopted a critical fundraising mode of thought.

Inclusion in this digest does not indicate that Rogare agrees with any arguments presented, only that we thought they made a good argument.

The ‘wildcard blog’ is a blog that does not discuss ideas that are directly related to fundraising, but whose ideas we might be able to use if we think critically and imaginatively about them.

NEWS: Major review of global fundraising self-regulation published

Rethink systems of accountability to be more accountable to beneficiaries
Adhere to the five principles of good regulation
Explore how models of regulating a common pool resource could be more widely applied beyond just face-to-face fundraising.

NEW IDEAS: Radically rethinking fundraising regulation to include duties to beneficiaries

Around the world, fundraising regulators focus their activities almost exclusively on acting in the interests of donors. Ian MacQuillin describes the change in regulatory philosophy that’s needed to bring beneficiaries into the frame. Continue reading NEW IDEAS: Radically rethinking fundraising regulation to include duties to beneficiaries

OPINION: Fundraising regulation owes more than lip services to the rights of beneficiaries

Ian MacQuillin responds to the Fundraising Regulator’s critique of his and Adrian Sargeant’s recent ideas on fundraising ethics and regulation

NEWS: Review of fundraising ethics must precede major changes to the code of practice

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.

NEWS: Second Rogare national report shines spotlight on critical issues facing Scottish fundraisers

A lack Scotland-specific research and analysis of giving trends and fundraising practice is holding back strategic development of the profession. The conclusion comes form Rogare’s latest Critical Fundraising Report, which is launched today at the AGM of the Institute of Fundraising (Scotland) in Edinburgh.

NEWS: New report identifies critical issues and challenges confronting fundraisers in Ireland

Greater collaboration among professional fundraisers is needed to address some of the major issues facing fundraising in Ireland, according to a new report by the think tank Rogare, which is published today at the Ask Direct Summer School in Dublin.

KNOWLEDGE: Blog digest July 2017

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. Inclusion in this digest does not indicate that Rogare agrees with any arguments presented, only that we thought they made a good argument.