Decision

1st Knight Military Charity

Published 4 September 2018

This decision was withdrawn on 18 January 2022

This Inquiry report has been archived as it is over 2 years old.

The charity

1st Knight Military Charity (‘the Charity’) was entered onto the register of charities (‘the Register’) on 31 July 2014. The Charity was governed by a Trust Deed dated 6 February 2014 as amended by deed dated 10 June 2014 as amended on 1 October 2015. It was removed from the Register on 23 March 2018 in accordance with section 34 of the Charities Act 2011 (‘the Act’) as it ceased to exist (following its dissolution).

The Charity’s objects were:

To assist persons who are currently serving or who have served in the armed forces, and their dependents or carers, by advancing any lawful charitable purpose at the discretion of the trustees and in particular but not exclusively:

• to promote and protect the health of those that have been wounded or injured whilst serving in the armed forces through the provision of facilities, equipment or services for their rehabilitation
• to make grants to other charities who assist members of the armed forces and their dependents
• to promote and protect the health of those that have been wounded or injured whilst providing services to, or in conjunction with, and in either case under the direction of the commander of, the armed forces, in an area of conflict or war and to provide benefits to the dependents of such persons who are in need
• to assist persons who are terminally ill, as evidenced by a written note from an accredited doctor

Background

In October 2016 the Commission was contacted by BBC Scotland for an interview with the commission in relation to an undercover investigation which featured the Charity. The programme, titled ‘The Great Military Charity Scandal’ (the Programme’), was aired on 8 November 2016. Prior to the Programme being aired the Commission’s Director of Investigations, Monitoring and Enforcement was shown, as part of her interview for the Programme, undercover footage and items relating to the charities which were obtained by the BBC as part of its investigation for the Programme.

The Programme showed undercover footage of a trustee (‘Trustee A’) and a volunteer making wholly offensive and inappropriate anti-Islamic comments. It also showed the sale of offensive merchandise from the charity’s shop which was derogatory towards those who follow the Islamic faith and which displayed images of weapons and depicted violence. The footage also showed another trustee (‘Trustee B’) acknowledging that the offensive t-shirts could not be displayed openly in the shop or its windows.

The Trustees confirmed to the Commission that they had apologised for the offensive comments prior to the Programme being aired and had withdrawn the offending merchandise from the charity’s shop.

Despite the Trustees’ apology and the action they took to remove the offending merchandise, it remained of serious concern that these comments were made in the first instance and that these items were available for purchase from the charity’s shop.

On 8 November 2016, after considering the undercover footage from the Programme and the information provided by BBC Scotland, the Commission opened a statutory Inquiry (‘the Inquiry’) into the Charity, under section 46 of the Act.

Scope of the Inquiry

The scope of the Inquiry was to investigate a number of issues including:

• the conduct of the Trustees – particularly in respect of the Charity’s fundraising activities both online and physical and the conduct of individuals recorded as part of the Programme
• the activities of the Charity and its management and administration by the Trustees – including whether the Charity’s income and expenditure can be accounted for
• whether the Charity is operating for the public benefit and its income is applied solely on activities which further its stated charitable purposes

On 22 February 2018 the Commission issued an order, exercising its legal powers under section 84B of the Act, to direct the Trustees to wind up and dissolve the Charity. This order directed the Trustees to transfer any remaining property (funds) to a charity with the same or similar purposes – see regulatory action for further details.

The Inquiry was closed on 4 September 2018 with the publication of this report.

Findings

The conduct of the Trustees in respect of the Charity’s fundraising activities both online and physical and the conduct of individuals recorded as part of the Programme

The Inquiry established that the Charity had two main fundraising streams, the sale of goods online and in the charity’s shop based in Blackpool, Lancashire (‘the shop’) and a commercial fundraising partner.

The charity’s shop sold a mix of new and donated goods. The Programme showed an undercover reporter inside the shop speaking with Trustees A and B, and a volunteer whilst purchasing items. The Programme showed Trustee A and the volunteer making wholly offensive and inappropriate anti-Islamic comments, in response to questions posed by the undercover reporter. Trustee B was present at the time the comments were made. It is evident from the footage that Trustee B did not comment or intervene to challenge the comments made by Trustee A or the volunteer.

The Programme shows the undercover reporter purchasing t-shirts and a Velcro patch with offensive anti-Islamic slogans. The undercover footage showed that the offensive merchandise was concealed from public view. The volunteer and Trustee B acknowledged that the t-shirts could not be worn in public or displayed in the window of the shop. The Commission considers that due to the concealment of the items, Trustees A and B and the volunteer where aware that it was inappropriate for the items to be sold in the shop and it was for this reason that they were not displayed in the window or otherwise – yet they remained available for purchase.

The Inquiry established that the offensive merchandise available for purchase from the charity’s shop and the online shop was purchased from third party companies alongside all other new items available for sale in the shop. Trustee A was delegated responsibility for all stock ordering, however, a volunteer assisted with the charity’s online shop.

During the course of the Inquiry the trustees informed the Commission that the offensive merchandise referred to in the Programme was purchased in error. It is unclear why the trustees did not seek to return the stock once the error was identified or otherwise dispose of it as opposed to selling it in the charity’s shop. Furthermore, the Inquiry also found that the offensive merchandise was purchased on more than one occasion (on 24 February 2015 and 19 April 2016).

During the course of the Inquiry further information from BBC Scotland was obtained which included other t-shirts for sale on the Charity’s online store (not shown as part of the Programme), which depicted Nazi symbolism. The Commission considered this to be wholly offensive and inappropriate. Despite the trustee’s assurances that all offensive and inappropriate merchandise had been removed and disposed of following the Programme in November 2016, the Inquiry found these still available on the Charity’s online store in February 2017. Although the inquiry found that the offending physical stock in the charity’s shop was removed from display and sale following the Programme, it was evident that the trustees had not conducted a thorough review of items advertised for sale on the Charity’s online store.

During a meeting with the Commission on 12 June 2017, the trustees explained that an initial search and disposal of offensive items had focused on those featured in the Programme. The trustees added that the t-shirts with Nazi symbolism shown on the Charity’s online store were never stocked or available and if someone had ordered such items, the order would not have been fulfilled. The Inquiry concluded that it was academic if the items were actually available or not, the fact they were advertised at all was inappropriate and damaging to the reputation of the Charity. The trustees agreed with this finding.

Whilst the purchase and advertising of all stock was delegated to Trustee A and a volunteer, the trustees are collectively responsible for the Charity’s management and administration. They should have ensured that there was sufficient oversight of Trustee A when he was carrying out the delegated activities. By allowing the offensive merchandise to have been sold and advertised the trustees acted without due care and consideration. Trustees have a duty to ensure that they act with reasonable care and skill, in the best interests of the Charity.

The Inquiry concluded that the explanation provided by the trustees relating to the purchase and sale of offensive merchandise was not plausible or acceptable. The Inquiry also concluded that the sale of the offensive merchandise resulted in irreparable damage to the reputation of the Charity. The trustees failed in their duty to protect the Charity’s assets (which includes reputation) by not exercising appropriate oversight or control.

The Inquiry also considered the Charity’s relationship with a commercial fundraising partner, which was also mentioned in the Programme which was the subject of additional complaints made to the Commission. The Inquiry found that a service agreement (‘the Fundraising Agreement’) was in place between the Charity and the commercial fundraising partner which commenced on 9 November 2015 and expired on 31 December 2016. The trustees made the decision to suspend all fundraising via the commercial fundraising partner on 28 November 2016 following the opening of the Inquiry. The Fundraising Agreement was not extended nor was any further agreement signed with the commercial fundraising partner after 31 December 2016.

The Fundraising Agreement was for the sale of ‘prize draw tickets’ and ‘wristbands’ to members of the public in shopping centres in England, Wales and Scotland in order to raise awareness of the Charity. The Inquiry noted that the Charity would receive 20% of the commercial fundraising partner’s total ‘turn over’ exclusive of VAT. Trustees are expected to ensure that the terms of any agreement with a third party, are in the best interests of the charity. The trustees had a duty to ensure the terms of the agreement with the fundraising partner were in the best interests of the Charity and for the Trustees to ensure that all funds due to the charity were received.

The Inquiry had concerns in relation to the percentage amount received by the Charity and how the trustees could demonstrate that the Fundraising Agreement was in the best interests of the Charity. The Trustees confirmed that the Charity had received all funds due to it under the terms of the Fundraising Agreement at the time it had expired. As the fundraising was suspended when the Inquiry was opened and the Fundraising Agreement expired in December 2016 it was not considered proportionate for the Inquiry to consider this further.

The activities of the Charity and its management and administration by the trustees – including whether the Charity’s income and expenditure can be accounted for

Charity trustees are legally responsible for the management and administration of the Charity. They are required to act collectively in decision making. They are jointly and severally liable for the decisions and actions taken. The Inquiry found that the day to day running of the Charity was delegated to Trustee A, with minimal supervision. The other trustees failed to oversee Trustee A’s decision to purchase and put up for sale offensive merchandise, in the charity shop and the online shop. When trustees choose to delegate they must ensure that there is an appropriate level of oversight and management.

It was also established that two trustees, Trustee D and Trustee E were based outside of the UK and had no input in relation to the governance or decision making for over a year prior to the opening of the Inquiry. The Inquiry corresponded with Trustees A, B, C, D and E.

Charity trustees must collectively act in the best interests of their charity and ensure that its activities further its charitable purposes. Charity trustees have a legal duty to ensure the funds and assets (which includes its reputation) of a charity are accounted for and sufficient safeguards are in place to protect them.

The Inquiry considered the activities undertaken by the Charity in furtherance of its objects. The Inquiry found that the main charitable activity was the provision of respite breaks for former members of the armed services suffering from physical or mental injuries. The Charity paid for beneficiaries to visit a bed and breakfast in Spain, usually for a week. The Inquiry found that the Charity funded 17 respite breaks between July 2014 and August 2017. In addition to the 17 beneficiaries the Charity also funded 9 carers to travel with the beneficiaries. The Inquiry found that the provision of respite breaks did further the objects of the Charity.

On 4 occasions Trustees A or B accompanied beneficiaries on these respite breaks and the Charity met the cost of flights, transfers and accommodation. The trustees confirmed that Trustee A and B are both carers but were not remunerated for their services. Neither Trustee A or B accompanied a beneficiary on a respite break during the Inquiry, as such it was decided not to consider if there was a benefit to Trustees A and B by travelling with beneficiaries in the capacity of ‘carers’.

A fundamental duty of charity trustees is to comply with the terms of their charity’s governing document and charity law. Trustees have a legal duty to act in the best interests of their charity, as such they must not put themselves in a position where their duties as trustees may conflict with any personal interest. A conflict of interest is any situation in which a trustee’s personal interests or loyalties could, or could be seen to, prevent them from making a decision in the best interests of their charity. Trustee benefit includes any instance where money, or other property, goods or services, which have a monetary value, are received by a trustee from the charity. Trustees cannot receive a benefit from their charity, whether directly or indirectly, unless they have legal authority.

The Inquiry found there was an unmanaged conflict of interest in respect of an agreement for the provision of bed and breakfast facilities for respite breaks. An agreement was signed on 11 June 2014 by Trustees A and B as trustees and also as providers of a bed and breakfast services in Spain (‘the Agreement’). The bed and breakfast was used by the Charity to provide respite breaks for beneficiaries. In July 2014, as part of considerations to register the Charity, the Commission raised concerns about the Agreement with the then Trustees and advised them that a new agreement was required and should be signed by independent trustees to satisfy the terms of the Trust Deed dated 6 February 2014. The Trustees stated they did not believe the Agreement was between themselves as trustees and providers. The Inquiry found that as of December 2016 the Agreement remained in place and had not been rescinded or amended as advised by the Commission. In response the Trustees explained that the Agreement was due to be reviewed before the end of 2016 and that another provider was being utilised. The trustees later contradicted this statement by stating that the Agreement was terminated on 31 July 2015.

The Inquiry found that the Charity has been given an invoice by Trustees A and B, as providers of bed and breakfast services in Spain, for £2,678.74 in the financial year ending 30 June 2015. Trustees A and B stated that the invoice had been raised under the terms of the Agreement but it was never their intention to receive recompense. The Inquiry did not consider this to be a plausible explanation.

The Charity’s Trust Deed dated 6 February 2014 set out the trustees’ powers and the restrictions on receiving benefits. The Inquiry found that the trustees failed to comply with the relevant provisions of the Charity’s Trust Deed as they did not identify and manage the conflicts of interest that arose from the Agreement. The Agreement did not comply with the restrictions imposed by the Trust Deed and the decision to enter into it are not valid.

Although the Inquiry saw no evidence of payments under the terms of the Agreement being made, Trustees A and B failed to demonstrate that they acted in the best interests of the Charity by placing themselves in a position whereby they could receive a financial benefit from the Charity, which was not properly authorised. The other trustees at the time the Agreement was signed, Trustee C and Trustee D did not identify or seek to manage the conflict of interest as they were required to and failed to act in the best interests of the Charity and breached the provisions of the Trust Deed.

Whether the Charity is operating for the public benefit and its income is applied solely on activities which further its stated charitable purposes

Charities must operate for the public benefit and ensure that its income is applied solely on activities which further its stated charitable purposes. Trustees have a duty to manage risk of harm to the charity’s beneficiaries or to the public in general that may arise from a charity’s activities. The Inquiry found that the Charity undertook activity which furthered its charitable purposes for the public benefit by providing respite breaks for injured former service personnel. The Inquiry also found that the operation of the charity’s shop gave beneficiaries the opportunity to volunteer and engage with members of their local community which benefited their mental wellbeing.

Following the opening of the Inquiry the Trustees decided to suspend all new charitable activity, however, all pre-arranged respite breaks were honoured. The last respite break took place in August 2017.

The Inquiry found that Trustees have committed acts (and/or by inaction), of mismanagement and/or misconduct in the administration of the Charity.

Charity trustees are legally responsible for the management and administration of the Charity. They must act collectively and are jointly a severally liable for the decisions they make and the actions they take. The Inquiry found that the day to day running of the Charity was left largely to Trustee A. When trustees choose to delegate they must ensure that there is appropriate oversight and management.

It was also established that two trustees, Trustee D and Trustee E were based outside of the UK and had no input into the governance or decision making for over a year prior to the opening of the Inquiry.

The failure of the trustees to act jointly contributed directly to the sale of wholly inappropriate and offensive merchandise in the charity’s shop and online store. It also contributed to the unmanaged conflict of interest with Trustees A and B. The Trustees’ failure to act is misconduct and/or mismanagement in the administration of the Charity.

The conduct of the trustees

The Inquiry found that Trustee A had committed misconduct by ordering stock for sale in the charity’s shop which was wholly offensive and inappropriate. The sale of which caused irreparable damaged the reputation of the Charity and that of the trustees. Whilst Trustee A was delegated the responsibility of ordering and advertising stock the other trustees failed in their duties to protect the Charity by not exercising appropriate oversight or control, committing act of misconduct and/or mismanagement by not acting.

The Inquiry found that the conduct of Trustees A and B as shown in the Programme was wholly unacceptable and amounted to misconduct and mismanagement. The misconduct and mismanagement by the trustees caused irreparable damaged to the Charity to the point that the trustees wished to wind up the Charity immediately. The Inquiry considered that there was little likelihood that the Charity could continue to operate beyond the end of the Inquiry.

The unmanaged conflict of interest resulted in a situation in which Trustees A and B stood to benefit financially from the Charity. Whilst the trustees ultimately did not receive a financial benefit the fact the conflict went unmanaged for two years even after the Commission had raised concerns is misconduct and/or mismanagement.

Activities of the Charity in line with objects

The Inquiry concluded that the Charity had, up until the opening of the Inquiry, operated in furtherance of its charitable purposes.

The Inquiry was not clear how the terms of the Fundraising Agreement between the Charity and a commercial fundraising partner was in the best interests of the Charity given the low percentage of profits the Charity received. However the Inquiry acknowledges that the Charity received £55,861.40 under the Fundraising Agreement which it may not have otherwise received. As all fundraising activity was stopped following the opening of the Inquiry and the Fundraising Agreement expired in December 2017 the Inquiry did not pursue this matter further.

The Inquiry did not extensively explore how the Charity identified beneficiaries. The Trustees provided an explanation making reference to advertising the Charity’s services on social media and through fundraising and taking referrals from an NHS Trust. However the Inquiry did not seek any further evidence or explanation given that all new charitable activity was undertaken during the Inquiry and the trustees desire to wind up the Charity at the conclusion on the Inquiry.

Conclusions

The Inquiry concluded that there was misconduct and/or mismanagement in the administration of the Charity by the trustees because:

• the trustees failed to have adequate oversite of Trustee A in relation to the tasks that he was delegated with
• Trustee A was responsible for misconduct and/or mismanagement as his offensive comments made to the undercover reporter in the Programme and ordering of offensive stock had a negative impact on the reputation of the Charity
• Trustee B was responsible for misconduct and/or mismanagement as they did not adequately oversee or seek to intervene or challenge Trustee A or the volunteer about their wholly offensive and inappropriate comments made to the undercover reporter
• Trustees A and B were responsible for misconduct and/or mismanagement in allowing themselves to enter into an agreement that prohibited by the Trust Deed and which was not in the best interests of the Charity
• the trustees are jointly and severally liable for making decisions and their failure to identify and manage the conflict of interest resulted in misconduct and/or mismanagement
• all the trustees were responsible for misconduct and/or mismanagement in that they did not fulfil their basic legal duties, particularly acting jointly and in the best interests of the Charity

The trustees co-operated with the Commission during the course of the Inquiry throughout, as they are expected to.

Regulatory action taken

During the course of the Inquiry the Commission exercised its legal powers, provided by the Act, to issue various orders and directions for the purposes of information gathering.

The Commission issued orders under section 52 of the Act to obtain copies of the charity’s bank statements.

The Inquiry exercised legal powers and issued orders under section 47 (2) (a) and of the Act on 16 occasions, directing the trustees and other relevant parties to provide responses to the Commission’s questions and to provide copies of documents.

On 7 December 2016, the Commission conducted an unannounced visit to the charity’s shop. Upon obtaining consent from a volunteer, the members of the Commission conducted a search and review of the stock available in the shop. The search found no offensive merchandise referred to in the Programme or any other stock which could be considered offensive or inappropriate.

On 23 December 2017, the Inquiry wrote to Trustee A pursuant section 89 (5) of the Act to give notice that the Inquiry proposed to exercise its legal powers under section 79 (2) (a) of the Act to remove him as trustee of the Charity.

This decision was taken as the Commission were satisfied, in accordance with section 79 (2), that there had been misconduct and/or mismanagement in the administration of the Charity by Trustee A and it was necessary or desirable to act for the protection of the property of the Charity. The Commission relied on the purchase and sale of offensive merchandise, the offensive and inappropriate comments by Trustee A and failure to manage a conflict of interest as evidence of misconduct and/or mismanagement. The failure to protect the reputation of the Charity was considered a risk to Charity property.

Representations against the decision to remove as a trustee were received from Trustee A which were subject to an independent review, which agreed with the findings of the Inquiry that there had been misconduct and/or mismanagement in the administration of the Charity for which Trustee A was responsible. However, the independent review did not agree that the grounds for the risk to property was sufficiently met. Further to the independent review’s decision the Commission decided to withdraw its proposal to remove Trustee A pursuant to section 79(4) of the Act.

On 12 June 2017 the Commission met with Trustees A, B and C to discuss the findings of the Inquiry and the future of the Charity. During the meeting the possibility of exercising powers under section 84(B) of the Act to direct the winding up and dissolution of the Charity was discussed.

On 8 December 2017 the Inquiry informed the trustees of its proposal to issue an order under section 84B directing the winding up and dissolution of the Charity. On 22 December 2017 Commission published a public notice, pursuant to section 84B(4) of the Act, of its intention to issue the order under section 84B (2) of the Act.

It was published on the Commission’s website for a period of 60 days. The Commission did not receive any representations following issuing public notice. After the period for representations expired the trustees were directed to take specified action to wind up and dissolve the Charity and have its remaining property transferred to a charity with the same or similar purposes. The Commission set out that the legal grounds for issuing the order were met, as the Inquiry had found that there had been misconduct and/or mismanagement in the administration of the Charity, and/or it was expedient in the public interest to promote the effective use of charitable resources.

On 22 February 2018 the Inquiry issued an order under section 84B(2) of the Act which gave the trustees a period of 1 month (22 March 2018) to take specified action to wind up and dissolve the Charity. The order specified the settling of any remaining liabilities, the disposal of any remaining stock for the shop and online store and the transfer of any property (funds) to a specified charity with the same or similar purposes. The Commission identified a registered charity with the same or similar aims and purposes to that of the Charity which was willing and able to apply residual funds held by the Charity (‘the recipient charity’)

On 22 March 2018, the recipient charity received £2,061.88 by way of bank transfer from the Charity. In accepting the transfer of funds the recipient charity can apply the remaining funds in accordance with the intentions of the donors, namely to assist current or former service personnel who may have been wounded or injured whilst serving in the armed forces.

The recipient charity confirmed that funds received will be used to provide support to wounded Veterans and their loved ones, via evidence-based physical and psychological Recovery programmes.

Also on 22 March 2018 the trustees provided evidence that the Charity’s liabilities had been settled, the bank account was being closed and the Charity had been dissolved.

The Charity was removed from the Register on 23 March 2018.

Issues for the wider sector

The purpose of this section is to highlight the broader issues arising from the commission’s assessment of the issues raised publicly that may have relevance for other charities. It is not intended as further comment on the charity in addition to the findings and conclusions set out in the earlier sections of this report, but is included because of their wider applicability and interest to the charity sector.

Trustees Duties

Trustees are representatives of the charity they govern and of the wider charitable sector in which they operate. Trustees must be aware of and act in accordance with their legal duties and act with integrity. The conduct of trustees can be a key driver of public trustee and confidence in charities more widely. When the conduct of trustee(s) falls below the standards expected there can be damage to the reputation of individual’s trustees, the charity and possibly the wider sector.

Charity trustees are responsible for governing their charity and making decisions about how it should be run. Making decisions is one of the most important parts of the trustees’ role. Trustees can be confident about decision making if they understand their role and responsibilities, know how to make decisions effectively, are ready to be accountable to people with an interest in their charity, and follow the 7 principles that the courts have developed for reviewing decisions made by trustees.

Trustees must:

• act within their powers
• act in good faith and only in the interests of the charity
• make sure they are sufficiently informed
• take account of all relevant factors
• ignore any irrelevant factors
• manage conflicts of interest
• make decisions that are within the range of decisions that a reasonable trustee body could make

It is important that charity trustees apply these 7 principles when making significant or strategic decisions, such as those affecting the charity’s beneficiaries, assets or future direction. Trustees’ must be able to show that they have followed these principles and keep adequate records to evidence that their decisions have been properly made, particularly for important or controversial decisions.

Further information can be found in the Commission’s guidance:

The essential trustee: what you need to know, what you need to do (CC3)

It’s your decision: charity trustees and decision making (CC27)

Ensuring items for sale are legal and appropriate

Trustees have a duty to ensure that they comply with their legal duties, which includes acting in the best interests of a charity. The sale of goods associated with a charity can be an effective way to generate funds, however trustees must ensure that any goods advertised, sold or offered free of charge are legal and appropriate.

The advertisement or sale of goods which are illegal or inappropriate is not within the best interests of a charity and can have a detrimental impact on the reputation of the charity and its trustees, employees and volunteers.

Trustee decision making

Trustees are jointly and equally responsible for the management of their charity. To be effective and to meet their statutory duties as charity trustees they must contribute to the management of the charity and ensure that it is managed in accordance with its governing document and general law. They should be able to devote sufficient time to enable them to play a full role. A charity is entitled to the independent and objective judgment of each of its trustees, acting in the best interests of the charity.

Conflicts of interest

Trustees have a legal duty to act only in the best interests of their charity. If there is a decision to be made in relation to a charity where a trustee has a personal or other interest this could result in a conflict of interest.

The trustees should have in place policies and procedures to be able to identify and actively manage any conflicts of interest. The trustees should step back from or avoid any situation where a conflict exists or is likely to arise. If it is clear the conflict cannot be adequately managed, even if this means, for example, that additional disinterested trustees are appointed or that the affected trustees resign. It is vital that trustees avoid becoming involved in situations in which their personal interests may be seen to conflict with their duties as trustees.

The Commission recognises that it is inevitable that conflicts of interest will occur. The issue is not the integrity of the trustee concerned, but the management of any potential to profit from a person’s position as a trustee, or for a trustee to be influenced by conflicting loyalties. Even the appearance of a conflict of interest can damage the public’s trust and confidence in the charity, so conflicts need to be managed carefully.

Charity trustees should ensure that they have a conflicts of interest policy in place to ensure that they are fully aware of their responsibilities and that any conflicts that do arise are appropriately managed.

Where a charity trustee has a conflict of interest they should follow the basic checklist set out in the Commission publication Conflicts of interest: a guide for charity trustees (CC29) and where necessary or appropriate take professional advice.

Professional fundraisers

Partnering with a specialist individual or business to raise money for a charity can bring benefits. However, to meet their legal duties, trustees must ensure that:

• these arrangements comply with the specific legal requirements that apply

• they can show that the arrangements, including the costs, are set and monitored in the best interests of the charity, protecting it from undue risks to its reputation and other assets

• money raised is always used in an effective and efficient way to advance the objects of the charity and support beneficiaries

Trustees should be satisfied that:

• there is strong management of the people and organisations that the charity works with

• they can explain fundraising costs, being transparent about how the charity benefits

The Commission issued a regulatory alert about working with Third Party fundraisers in 2016.