The evidence suggests that support for UK development NGOs is actually growing

According to Dan Brockington and Nicola Banks, the evidence suggests that the demise of UK aid is greatly exaggerated. They want to know if they’ve missed something…

International development NGOs are facing interesting times in the UK. We live in a rising tide of nationalism, parochialism and suspicion of, not care for, distant strangers. Austerity measures make charities, and the giving public, poorer. And this was all before the safeguarding scandal put the entire sector on the back foot. The public mood appears more hostile to international development than ever.

At the risk of being heretical, we want to suggest that these threats may be exaggerated. Support for development NGOs is not merely resilient; it is growing. Entrepreneurial NGOs are creating new constituencies that champion new development causes. Far from being a sector under threat, we see a rich diversity of development NGOs flourishing in the UK, sustained by influential minorities.

These are the inescapable conclusions of our study of the changing fortunes of 898 development NGOs in England, Wales and Scotland as part of a collaborative project by the Universities of Sheffield and Manchester, with considerable consultation across the sector. Here are four key findings from the main report, which we should bear in mind as we think through current challenges

1. There are more and more development NGOs. Numbers have been increasing, not decreasing over time. This is despite mergers and declines of a prominent few. There seems to be a sustained appetite for new organisations. Moreover newer organisations can grow quite quickly – age is no guarantee of size.

2. They are spending more and more money. Expenditure by these organisations has increased from just over £3.5 billion to over £5 billion per year by 2015, with scarcely a blip

Note: excludes STC International and the British Council for reasons we explain in the full report

3. The sector expands through entrepreneurship not cannibalism. Development NGOs are expanding in size and financial health by finding new sources of funds, not by stealing supporters from their colleagues. The increases in the number and budgets of the larger organisations cannot be explained by declines in other organisations. This means that these organisations are finding new sources of funding from new supporters, not raiding existing supporter bases. This in turn suggests that fundraising is really important for expansion. NGOs which sustain high expenditure almost all invest in fundraising.

4. This growth has been possible primarily through the generosity of the British public, which is by far the largest source of funds for the sector. It has given just under £10 billion from 2009-2014. It is currently the most important single source of funding, accounting for over 40% of income. The dominance of public giving is plain for all sizes of organisation. And, if that’s not enough, income from the public is increasing even as public disposable income falls as this article shows.

Source of income for NGOs of different size classes

The vigour of the sector puts a different gloss on current travails. It does not make the opposition any less painful or politically dangerous. We are particularly keenly aware of the challenges to the 0.7% commitment. But it does change the challenge facing development NGOs – for it means that the hostility of other elements of the British public is less financially threatening than is often assumed.

We know that overall, UK charities are not sustained by the general public as a whole. Rather, as John Mohan’s work has shown, the sector is primarily supported by a ‘civic core’ of about 31% of the nation which is responsible for 79% of giving and 87% of volunteering. Development NGOs appear to be a special instance of this bespoke supporter action. They may even have their own civic core, for while the rest of the charitable sector has been struggling in recent years, development organisations have been enjoying healthy growth. They are, relatively, austerity proof.

There is something rather remarkable about the development NGO sector as we have described it here. Even in the aftermath of the safeguarding scandal there is evidence to suggest that support for development NGOs has remained resilient. In an era of Brexit, growing insularism, anxiety about refugees and pressure on the Aid budget, the number of charities which work on famine relief and overseas poverty increases at double the rate of other charities. Perhaps this is not a sector which should be understood in terms of what average Britons think or believe, or even dominant political discourses. Perhaps this is the outpouring of a rather stronger vein of cosmopolitanism and concern for distant strangers that runs deep in such a significant minority of people that the creativity and resources of that minority are yet to be exhausted. Perhaps the sector, by virtue of its growth and vigour, creates the very markets and audiences that it seeks funding and support from.

These findings may surprise many colleagues are facing difficult fund-raising environments and hostile media. One of the reasons we have published this blog is that we want to ask ‘do they resonate with your experience’? We would love to hear your views as we pursue our next steps. On our part one challenge is that we cannot tell who this giving public is from current data, or how supporter constituencies are formed, and what conducive environments produce them. We want to understand who constitutes the giving public for development NGOs.

Development NGOs still face some of their most challenging times. There is good evidence that the consequences of episodes of hostility and opposition are felt many years in the future, not in the immediate aftermath. And a far more robust response to the safeguarding crisis is essential. But our point is not that these challenges do not exist, or are somehow irrelevant. Rather our research suggests that the sector can face them with a strong tail-wind of core believers who back them still.

Subscribe to our Newsletter

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. For information about our privacy practices, please see our Privacy Policy.

We use MailChimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to MailChimp for processing. Learn more about MailChimp's privacy practices here.

Comments

5 Responses to “The evidence suggests that support for UK development NGOs is actually growing”
  1. Hi Duncan,

    So the crisis is off? Or are we just panicking about the future because we have become used to rising budgets, and flat budgets would be a crisis.

    I note that notwithstanding “business as a development partner”, their contributions are rather marginal. Is this a choice or are they not playing the game?

    • Nicola Banks

      Hi Sam, Nicola here. Thanks for the comment.

      I wouldn’t say the crisis is off – it’s just that the crisis we’re all discussing is at the periphery of this growth in the sector. So while the legitimacy crisis exists, we’re not seeing the impact we’d expect in income and expenditure (yet). That would suggest (and I say suggest, because we can’t break down our public income source down further with what we’ve got), that the problems here are being mitigated by another core support group of the development NGO sector, who we’d strongly guess would be the wealthy. But two big caveats;

      1) The ‘yet’ factor – it’s frustrating we can’t get really up to the minute data because all our feedback from the sector is that things have changed and this will show in our data. This was even before this year’s crises. A culmination of the legitimacy crisis we speak of but also potentially the long-term effects of the economic crisis (I’d say these were linked, but that’s another story). But we’re limited by annual reports (and all NGOs report to the Charities Commission by different dates) and the income source data has an even bigger time lag. But we’re getting the 2016 expenditure data moving as we speak.

      2) The story may be experienced completely differently at the individual organisational level and this success story may not resonate. In the broader analysis we break down experiences by size classification. No surprise to anyone that the largest NGOs have benefited from BY FAR the largest increases. Somewhat remarkably, despite this large influx of income over the 5 year period, unevenness in the sector in terms of the distribution of expenditure is incredibly stable – just under 90% of sectoral expenditure accruing to the 8% largest NGOs. But there has been positive growth across all size classifications if you measure this by growth of the ‘average’ individual within each category. The least, however is among the smallest NGOs – growth for those spending between £10K and £100K has been driven by an increase in number of organisations rather than increases in return to individuals orgs within it, to a greater extent.

      And business – yes, they hardly hit the radar, and where they do it’s for the largest NGOs. A strong advocacy to be made here. Without this kind of data it’s probably quite easy for them to pretend it’s not the case with a clever PR and marketing strategy about what they’re donating and contributing. In another life when I worked for an NGO, we were amazed at the ability of a huge multi-lateral corporation who had donated a relatively minor amount (in terms of the programme’s income, let alone the power of the company) to make HUGE claims about the work they were doing helping the group we were working with. Making claims on the whole programme based on a tiny donation. I would not be surprised if this were widespread, they have the teams to put behind it.

  2. Jonathan Glennie

    Very good news from this report, if true, is that fundraising from the public is not a fight for “the development pound” – NGOs are successfully increasing size of public cake.

    One reflection though – while a growing sector has to be good news, the challenge of growth is a profound one, and one that is often poorly managed (as I have suggested here re Save the Children UK, https://www.opendemocracy.net/transformation/jonathan-glennie/at-what-cost-reflection-on-crisis-at-save-children-uk

    We need more research into the costs of growth, how to manage growth responsibly (incl. how to ensure that more money leads to more impact…)

    • Nicola Banks

      Hi Jonathan, thank you for sharing your open and honest post, I really enjoyed (I’m not sure if enjoyed is the right word, given the content, but I’m sure you know what I mean) reading both. Your points on understanding this growth are well taken – as a qualitative researcher that doesn’t normally work with such big datasets, these figures raise more questions than answers for me. Lots to take forward into a future research agenda at least and comments/reflections from the sector are really important to understand where we can do that most usefully. Thank you.

Leave a Reply

Your e-mail address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.