Chugging research “fundamentally flawed”
Published Wed 26 November 2008
Source – Professional Fundraising
A mystery shopper exercise on face-to-face fundraising conducted by Intelligent Giving has been criticised by the head of a face-to-face agency as "fundamentally flawed".
Earlier this week Intelligent Giving's director Adam Rothwell (pictured) called for a boycott of the practice after his researchers reported that just four of 50 street fundraisers provided unprompted information about being paid to do their job. He also claimed a small number of fundraisers' behaviour was tantamount to harassment, contrary to the code of practice developed by the Institute of Fundraising.
But Milly Ahmed, joint managing director at face-to-face agency GIFT, whose fundraisers were approached by Intelligent Giving researchers, told Charity News Alert the research is a "complete farce". She said the fact that Intelligent Giving's researchers did not sign up for a direct debit on the street means fundraisers did not have to go through the full disclosure process, meaning their findings are fundamentally flawed and should be discredited.
Misunderstanding of what fundraisers do
"What they have done shows a complete misunderstanding of what fundraisers do," she said. "If they had gone through the entire process and signed up, they could have cancelled afterwards. That's what the PFRA does when it does mystery shopping - they sign up and then cancel later. It's completely flawed."
Ahmed says when she asked Rothwell for the names of the fundraisers involved from GIFT he refused to share them. "It is irresponsible not to share the names. I am not against what they have done, I don't think it is a bad idea but they should at least share their information and give a balanced view."
Fundraisers as animals
Ahmed continued: "The way Adam Rothwell talks about fundraisers is as if we are animals who should be eradicated. And to call for a boycott or to ban face-to-face fundraising is ridiculous. It is now in the Charities Act - it has never been more legal. I feel for those charities that have got difficult trustees who will have read the story and not understood what has happened. Fortunately I have to say it has had no impact on the street. We had one of our better days on Monday, so it's not affected the public response at all."
The board of the Public Fundraising Regulatory Association (PFRA) will discuss the findings today as part of its regular meeting. PFRA vice-chair Michael Naidu said: "Face-to-face has proved to be an invaluable form of fundraising for charities large and small and the PFRA, as ever, is committed to working towards best practice on the street. We are always open to constructive criticism and all of our members, both professional fundraising organisations and charities, are committed to the long term sustainability of face-to-face."
Lucy Harvey
26 November 2008