Log in
Watch Our Video
Our 2nd UK non profit director and charity trustee benchmarking survey was carried out in Oct 24. The data has been analysed below and a selection of the comments have been included in italics throughout the report, so that their voices can be heard. This report is augmented with the data from the Charity Trustee Survey 2023 data and also data from the Charity Excellence main system. I've put the key points in a (15 Min) video on our You Tube Channel.
(The Board) Works together to bring about real, practical and positive change and improvement,
Nobody knows but there are probably about 2 million charity trustees and, with some 95% of charities volunteer run, they are critical to the delivery of charity services. All the way through Covid and the cost of living crisis and for some, for many decades before either, our charity trustees have been working unpaid to make our Society a better place. We all owe them respect and a substantial debt of gratitude.
We also owe them our support because, if we do not now act, there is a risk of eroding the huge well of commitment they bring to their unpaid work and, without them, the sector would be plunged into even deeper crisis.
In terms of grant making, the burden of grant application admin is now greater than ever, with the ratio of successful applications to rejected ones the worst they have ever been. Moreover, whilst the case for more core funding has been made often enough already, it's worth reiterating. Charities love new and innovative projects as much as grant makers but not right here, right now when so many are struggling to just keep the lights on and too many aren't succeeding.
In terms of their area of responsibility and the biggest challenges they feel they face, the most prominent theme by far was fundraising, followed by recruiting and, to a lesser extent, long term planning/strategy.
More positively, trustees did not report any specific areas that they felt they were doing extremely badly in and reported that they were doing very well in a number of broad areas. In terms of areas for improvement the trustee board's skills and experience were the 2 weakest areas reported. Moreover, fundraising is now widely recognised to be in crisis, yet this is an area trustees are still reporting they are not actively involved in.
Lack of diversity also remains an issue.
However, some groups are far less represented than others and this should be taken into account in policy making and training/resource provision.
financial issues and fundraising - currently it is mostly (90%) down to one person - me
The answer is, nobody knows how many UK charity trustees there are. The only definitive figure I have is that the Charity Commission E&W reported that it had 923,885 trustees as at Oct 24 for the . However, the register does not include exempt or excepted charities, nor unregistered charities or the charities in Scotland and Northern Ireland. The real figure cannot be exactly determined but is probably around 400k, or 500k, including non profits such as CICs. Taking a pro rata of those figures, gives a total number of trustees in excess of 2 million.
Harnessing their time and ability when many of them have busy full time occupations
The Cost of Living Crisis may have largely faded away for most but not for the charity sector which is falling deeper into crisis. The system's overall governance rating has fallen from 63% last year to 61% this year. That represents a significant fall. Organisational Purpose (Impact and Outcomes) and Board Effectiveness are the lowest rated areas. However, compared to the governance data at peak Covid, shows a much more significant fall from 65% (Q2 and Q3 2020). Performance in each of the 7 Charity Governance Code areas fell but was most marked for Decision Making, Risk & Control, which fell from 67% to 61%.
| Current - Apr to Oct 2024 | Peak Covid - Apr to Oct 2020 |
 |
 |
Governance is and always has been the highest reported area. Possibly, because we all think well of ourselves (self included!). This is the first time we have ever seen a warning indicator for a governance measure. Looking more widely, there are now 8 warning indicators (out of 21) on the sector dashboard. That is higher than during both Covid and the CoL crisis and is the highest number we have ever had since data collection began.
| The graph on the right shows the system's overall governance rating for the period 2019 to 2024.
Charities reported that governance performance began to fall as we entered the cost of living crisis and has continued to do so in 2024. |
 |
The system analytics assess all aspects of organisational performance. Some such as funding, resources, staffing and demand are at least party driven by external factors. However, the majority should not be, such as leadership, culture, systems and processes. The decline we are seeing is reflected in other areas of our data. We think but do not have the data to demonstrate a causal link that charities may be prioritising funding to front line services, to the detriment of essential back room services, and that trustees and staff are now so overwhelmed they are becoming increasingly less able to fully discharge their responsibilities.
Neither Government nor grant makers have the funding needed to close the now huge funding gap but it is entirely within their gift to cut the regulation, bureaucracy and administration they impose upon charities. All charities must obey the law and follow regulation. However, a culture of demanding incredibly high standards, often written by lawyers and bureaucrats, results in a wall of admin, standards charities cannot possibly meet, instructions many often cannot even understand and poor deployment of resources. We are not asking that high standards be reduced but recognition that what's being done isn't working and is harming charities.
The whole way the sector governance, regulation and funding-go-round works sometimes feels painfully, devastatingly inefficient: why are so many talented and knowledgeable people, with the potential to improve people's lives / our society / the world at large so much, tied to their desks battling bureaucratic processes and systems and trying to persuade others that they are worthy?! Why is so much funding diverted to 'middlemen' and wasted on patronising and excessive grant administration?
Reduce the burden on trustees. The demands of the CC, funders, govt etc and the level of responsibility they place on trustees are forever increasing. I'm standing down because I don't have the capacity to fulfil the role to the standard expected of us.
Below are the more detailed findings and data that underpin the above analysis.
Work together. Support our management team and get our hands dirty when required
What the sector needs is for there to be a balance between long standing trustees, with significant experience and newer trustees bring in new ideas and ways of thinking. The breakdown below meets this with 14% being a year or less, 50% between 1 and 10 years and 36% more than 10 years.
Financial matters as none of us are specialist or understand it
However, this is at sector level and it is not possible to see what the mix on individual boards, so we cannot confidently say that our boards have the right mix of experience.
| Answer Choices | Responses | |
| Less than a year? | 14% | 48 |
| Between 1 and 5 years | 32% | 111 |
| More than 5 years but less than 10 | 18% | 63 |
| More than 10 years but less than 20 | 21% | 74 |
| More than 20 years | 15% | 54 |
One of the lowest rated areas within the Charity Excellence main system is trustee turnover (below) Specifically that charities have regular turnover of board members, with no one person remaining in appointment for an excessively long period of many years.
Founding members of the charity being stuck in their ways and using old style management.
| 2024 | 2023 |
 |
 |
Understand the need for help with overheads. We are really struggling to survive. It's no good having help for a project if you can't keep the doors open and lights switched on.
Increasing diversity- especially youth- on the Board
Respondents were invited to click any of the options below that they felt reasonably described themselves. Based on our caveats below, we think that the numbers are probably being under reported. However, using these figures, by far the most under-represented group is young people, followed by disabled and Black and Asian people and, to a lesser extent, women. However, a survey by Ecclesiastical in Nov 24 found that Two in five Gen Z people (18 to 24 years old) were interested in becoming charity trustees, so the issue is no lack of enthusiasm on their part.
Diversity - we are struggling to find, recruit and retain non white trustees
| Answer Choices | Responses | ONS 2021 | |
| Black or Asian | 5% | 27 | 14% |
| Other ethnic minority | 3% | 16 | 5% |
| Under 25 years old | 1% | 4 | 30% |
| LGBTQI+ or transgender | 5% | 23 | 2% to 3% |
| Disabled | 7% | 35 | 18% |
| Female | 41% | 206 | 51% |
| Lived experience | 18% | 90 | |
| Skipped | 20% | 100 | |
There appears to have been no material change in this breakdown, when compared to 2023.
| 2024 | 2023 |
 |
 |
Caveats.
Charity Excellence System Data. The CEF runs its own Diversity Excellence standard that assesses 18 issues from leadership and culture , through processes to outcomes. Unlike the Charity Governance Code, it follows the commercial sector process of including targets. These are the relevant results that charities report the do best - in reverse order, with the highest rated last. The data is the average of scores submitted over the previous 6 months to end Oct 24. Boards report that support for diversity within their charities is good.
| Access. If we deliver services for the benefit of certain groups of people, but not others, we have considered this and are confident that we do not deny access to anyone who might reasonably be entitled to use these |
| Culture. We have a culture in which everyone is treated with respect and everyone feels able to speak up, with any form of abuse, or discrimination seen as unacceptable to people at every level in our organisation |
| Leadership. The Board and management team make clear their expectations that everyone will be treated fairly and with respect, demonstrably live up to these and are respected by our staff and other stakeholders for doing so |
| Access. In considering training, promotion, transfer or other opportunities, we always consider the need to make reasonable adjustments for any disabled staff/volunteers who might wish to apply. |
| Discrimination Complaints. We always take any discrimination/sexual harassment complaints seriously, respond sensitively and quickly and, if proven, ensure that the action taken is prompt and effective |
Taking the system data, and the benchmarking survey data for both for trustees and staff/volunteers, in general, charities have a culture where diverse people and respected and cared for.
The problem seems to be that we are less invested in the need for diversity and to actively recruit to deliver this. This guide to encouraging diversity may offer some insight into why this is and what we might do about it. I've been trolled by members of the charity sector for writing this.
These are the issues that charities rate lowest, with the lowest rated first.
| Reporting. The Board has considered including diversity targets/achievement and action being taken to address any gaps, including timescales to do so, in its annual report |
| Induction. We have an induction process for board members and provide any additional support that may be needed, to enable them to participate and contribute to the Board's work |
| Targets. No more than two thirds of the management team is of one gender and its diversity appropriately reflects our stakeholder base |
| Targets. No gender represents more than two thirds of board members and the diversity amongst our stakeholders is appropriately reflected in the Board composition |
| Recruiting. In recruiting board members, we actively encourage under-represented groups, have identified the barriers they face and taken steps to remove these |
Balance the legal and financial needs of the charity with the demands of our beneficiaries.
The Charity Excellence system includes a governance module that assesses all aspects of trustee governance (141 statements), including key responsibilities, systems and procedures, and also specialist aspects that apply only to particular types of non profit. For example, sports, NHS, Northern Ireland Faith and unregistered charities, and also CICs. The elements of this to that apply to individual trustees were extracted (27) and used to create the trustee survey. In part, this was done to ensure that the more granular data collected could be imported into and linked to the core Charity Sector Data Store data set.
Support small charities with grant applcations
The charity trustees taking part were invited to rate each statement from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The vast majority of statements were rated by all trustee respondents.
Share ideas and expertise in a respectful and collaborative way.
Those areas where most trustees were confident they were doing very well
| Rating out of 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| I understand the time commitment required to be a trustee, give this and rarely miss meetings | 17 | 3 | 7 | 69 | 299 |
| I understand the charity’s values, mission and strategy | 14 | 8 | 12 | 70 | 289 |
| I understand what governance is and my role as a trustee in this | 15 | 11 | 17 | 76 | 275 |
| I have read and understand our governing document, and the board policies and procedures | 19 | 10 | 21 | 80 | 266 |
| At meetings, I understand the debate, contribute and am listened to when I do | 16 | 12 | 12 | 93 | 263 |
| I have a good relationship with the Chair and understand how I can best contribute | 16 | 14 | 20 | 82 | 258 |
| I understand the charity’s financial position and the action in hand to address any issues | 13 | 11 | 14 | 103 | 252 |
We all have clear roles where we focus on certain things, and work collectively. We are problem solvers and this is important.
Charity Excellence Data. The system's Governance module covers all aspects of managing a charity trustee board, so the number of questions is far greater than those in the survey and cover broader issues.
These are the areas that trustees rated most highly with the highest rated at the bottom.
| Culture. We have a culture in which everyone is treated with respect and everyone feels able to speak up, with any form of abuse, or discrimination seen as unacceptable to people at every level in our organisation |
| Financial Management. There is no modified audit opinion or ‘emphasis of matter’ in our audited accounts or, if there is, the Board has ensured that action has been taken, which will address this within a reasonable timescale |
| Leadership. The Board and management team make clear their expectations that everyone will be treated fairly and with respect, demonstrably live up to these and are respected by our staff and other stakeholders for doing so |
| Public Benefit. The benefits we deliver are clearly identifiable, focussed on our aims, give rise to only incidental personal benefit, and we do not deny access to our services to those who may reasonably be entitled to do so |
| Access. In considering training, promotion, transfer or other opportunities, we always consider the need to make reasonable adjustments for any disabled staff/volunteers who might wish to apply. |
| Financial Management. Action is in hand to resolve any internal/external inspection/audit observations within a reasonable timescale, with oversight by board members; none have been outstanding for an unacceptably long time |
| Discrimination Complaints. We always take any discrimination/sexual harassment complaints seriously, respond sensitively and quickly and, if proven, ensure that the action taken is prompt and effective |
Identifying suitable volunteers to become Trustees to cover specific skills gaps
Those areas where fewest trustees were confident they were doing well.
| Rating out of 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| We support and positively challenge the management team | 15 | 16 | 52 | 149 | 153 |
| We regularly report to and are accountable to our stakeholders and beneficiaries | 17 | 29 | 80 | 123 | 142 |
| We actively support fundraising by helping to secure donations, acting as an ambassadors, or in other ways | 28 | 41 | 85 | 108 | 129 |
| I am confident that the Board has oversight of all key issues and that these are adequately debated | 10 | 30 | 58 | 169 | 128 |
| We actively seek the views of beneficiaries and take their wishes into account in decision making | 12 | 34 | 109 | 125 | 110 |
| I know what my development needs are and am being supported in meeting these | 18 | 35 | 106 | 126 | 106 |
| I am confident that we collectively have all the skills and experience we need, as a Board | 12 | 50 | 117 | 149 | 68 |
Time allocation as all volunteers with full time jobs
These are the lowest rated areas from the Charity Excellence system Governance module. These are in priority order with the lowest rated at the top.
| Development. We regularly offer board members development opportunities, have carried out a board appraisal/self assessment, within the last year, and have reviewed the effectiveness of our governance within the last 3 years |
| Succession. We have an effective succession plan/procedures in place for key appointments in our organisation |
| Diversity. The Board has considered including diversity targets/achievement and action being taken to address any gaps, including timescales to do so, in its annual report |
| Strategy. The Board’s strategy review assessed the overall scale of unmet need and identified where this is greatest, taking into account the services provided by others |
| Risk. The Board regularly review our key risks and take any necessary action to ensure we can be confident that these are being managed effectively |
| Work Planning. The Board has an annual work plan, with adequate time allocated for all key board responsibilities, such as a review of board effectiveness, the annual report, strategy, business/operation, risk and budget plans and reports |
| Trustee Turnover. We have a regular turnover of board members, with no one person remaining in appointment for an excessively long period of many years |
More guidance for genuinely small charities who have very limited resources and probably lower levels of expertise
The other areas trustees were invited to to rate themselves.
| Rating out of 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| I always read papers before meetings and am able to understand these | 16 | 12 | 29 | 90 | 249 |
| I know what Public Benefit is and the Board’s responsibilities for this | 14 | 16 | 35 | 101 | 229 |
| I have a good understanding of our work and am able to communicate that in a compelling way to anyone I meet | 10 | 14 | 28 | 114 | 227 |
| I understand the charity’s legal framework and the legal obligations of the Board | 18 | 9 | 27 | 115 | 225 |
| We make decision collectively, which are supported by all board members, including anyone who may have disagreed | 16 | 8 | 19 | 134 | 217 |
| I work well with my fellow trustees and we all actively support each other | 13 | 19 | 29 | 131 | 201 |
| I receive board/committee papers in good time and these focus on key issues and the action being taken | 12 | 32 | 52 | 109 | 189 |
| I understand what the key risks are and the action being taken to manage these | 9 | 16 | 32 | 149 | 186 |
| We all understand that operational decision making is the remit of the Senior Team | 18 | 24 | 48 | 126 | 176 |
| We recognise and debate difficult issues, and act to address these, when they arise; there is no elephant in the room | 15 | 21 | 48 | 139 | 172 |
| I understand the importance of diversity and the action we are taking to ensure we are appropriately diverse | 15 | 15 | 64 | 131 | 170 |
| We support and positively challenge each other | 15 | 13 | 47 | 147 | 168 |
| I understand what our beneficiaries want from us and why our services are the best way to meet these needs | 8 | 20 | 46 | 163 | 156 |
I guess the two main areas are funding and guidance
A greater understand of the impact of our work and what would happen if we didn’t pick up the slack from statutory services
Listening to views of others. Understanding what we can and cannot do.
There were 352 responses covering a huge range of activities, all of which the Charity Commission would approve of. The theme that came through most strongly was listening but working collaboratively/ collective decision making and supporting the CEO/management also featured. Supporting fundraising only appeared twice and looking externally (environmental scanning) didn't really appear either. This fits with our main system data and is something trustees might wish to consider focussing on more. The first is critical in the current climate and the 2nd is a key aspect of strategy and managing risk.
We all contribute, both at meetings and in other ways
Obtaining sufficient funding to offer all our services
The most prominent theme by far was fundraising, followed by recruiting and, to a lesser extent, long term planning/strategy. It's clear that trustees feel their biggest challenges are the resource constraints they face.
Lack of skills and resources, development of fundraising strategies, recruitment of new trustees
More funding and pro bono support for training and development and governance
Funding was a key theme but not simply the lack of it but the need for core funding, support with grant applications and simpler, less bureaucratic processes.
More coherent and collected strategic sector wide leadership.
This was also a theme more widely, including Government commissioners and the Charity Commission, with some suggesting specific small charity guidance and support, in recognition that they have less capacity and skills.
As a wholly volunteer-run organisation, compliance and the administrative burden associated with the operations of the charity are by far the most challenging
Accuracy of Findings. Compared to the overall size of the sector, the number of respondents is (inevitably) very small. Therefore, we do not think our findings are conclusive and the margin for error in individual scores is probably quite high. Nonetheless, the overall findings fit with other (admittedly anecdotal evidence) and we believe these can be considered to be indicative. We would welcome constructive criticism from anyone that would enable us to improve our work and we would be happy to publish any counter arguments provided by the banks to make this report more balanced. Responses should be sent to ian@charityexcellence.co.uk.
Respondent Numbers. The survey was carried out in Oct 2024 with the survey sent to Charity Excellence community members but also promoted on social media and by other organisations. A total of 396 individuals responded, compared to 352 in 2023.
Sector Comparison. Compared to our sector model, this appeared to be representative of the sector, excepting the number of micro charities (under £10k pa income) appeared to be significantly under-represented. For simplicity and clarity, numbers above have been rounded to one decimal point.
Potential Bias. We recognise the risk of response bias. That is people who are unhappy may be more inclined to respond to a survey than those who aren't. This is not reflected in the findings as we are unable to identify if it's an issue, let alone quantify it.
To mitigate response bias, we made the survey anonymous and offered to send a copy of the results to anyone who completed it but were unable to use follow-up reminders or financial incentives to further mitigate this. We have neither the capacity not funding to do so.
Data Use. Should anyone wish them, here are our survey and data management policies. This survey was anonymous with respondents only sharing their e mails, if they wished to be sent a copy of the survey. These e mails will also be registered for our newsletter, as per the terms of the survey but will not be shared or used for any other purpose.
Ethics. We have not been paid or received donations from anyone to carry out this survey and we are not a campaigning organisation.
Press for public funding for organisations like Charity Excellence which enable charities to operate more efficiently and effectively
Main Operating System. The main operating system tracks all aspects of governance and reports these in the format used by the Charity Governance Code. The system works for all and includes provision for all non profit governance codes but we do it this way as it's generally recognised by the majority of our users. The percentages displayed are primary how well something is being done but modified to reflect its importance. These are not a simple absolute measure and are used comparatively. For statistical reasons, small fluctuations in the main reporting system reflect significant changes. This is due to the fact we use averages of user data which compresses the distribution curve.
Main Operating System Data. The Governance module comprises 141 statements, drawn from across the operating model - that is, the relevant statements from all 8 questionnaires. The number of statements in each Governance questionnaire varies, as the system builds unique questionnaires around the needs of each user.
Dashboard Reporting. The dashboard reports use a rolling average of the scores over the previous 6 months. For the data at end Oct 24, used in this report, the data from 509 scored governance questionnaires was included. On average, a questionnaire incudes about 26 statements.
A registered charity ourselves, the CEF works for any non profit, not just charities.
Plus, 100+downloadable funder lists, 40+ policies, 8 online health checks and the huge resource base.
Quick, simple and very effective.
Find Funding, Free Help & Resources - Everything Is Free.
