In the weeks since the horrific death of George Floyd and subsequent protests, many charity leadership teams have spent a great deal of time reflecting on inequalities in the charity sector and society as a whole. The issue is not a new one.

Complaints have been made about the lack of diversity among charity trustees and staff since the days when I could expect to be the youngest person in the boardroom as well as the only person of colour. To take just three:

  • In 1993, Third Sector magazine reported in a piece called 'The great, the good and the white' that only 2% of voluntary organisations in England and Wales had a black trustee.
  • In Building on Trust, their 1995 study of trustees for NCVO, Naomi Sargant and Kate Kirkland found that, 'the stereotype of trustees being white, middle-class, middle-aged and male is largely true.'
  • In 1995, Andrew Hind concluded in the book from which I have drawn the above references, The Governance and Management of Charities, that:

 'One is forced to conclude - when faced with the evidence - that the voluntary sector has to do better.'

So, Has Anything Changed?

Perhaps the tone has changed. There is certainly a sense of urgency in some quarters, at least for now, and many organisations have published ambitious aspirational statements about their commitment to make our society a better place - and are beginning to develop the action plans necessary to make those aspirations a reality. However, there was a good deal of urgency about protests and campaigns in the 1980s and 1990s (and no doubt before that). Yet decades later we are still 'forced to conclude ... that the voluntary sector has to do better'.

It is not yet clear whether the attention these issues currently enjoy will be sustained for long enough to deliver the fundamental change that is needed. Boards will differ in how far they feel their charities have a role in this process. What feels clear to me from the client calls I have taken over the last few weeks, is that many people working in, or interested in, the sector have been led to expect real change. While the position of charities will differ, all trustees should be considering these issues, otherwise they may be ill-equipped to respond to demands for action from the charity's staff or the people it serves.

What Should Trustees Be Considering? - 'Listen, Reflect and Decide'

Trustees should make time to reflect and determine the charity's strategy on issues of Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI), because:

  • as outlined above, the high level of expectation and the close public scrutiny at present means this is an important issue for most charities
  • it is important that the charity's operational staff have a clear framework to work to
  • it is important that any decisions made address the issues for charities holistically, rather than focusing separately on particular operational areas

The trustees' deliberations should take place within the usual framework of responsibilities outlined in the Charity Commission's guidance note on charity trustees and decision making (CC27).

That is likely to include:

  • Systematic Review
    Trustees will want to assure themselves that both the organisation's internal processes and the way in which it delivers its charitable objects are consistent with its organisational values and its position on EDI issues. For example, issues of equality, diversity and inclusion are clearly relevant matters for educational charities, both in determining the adopted curriculum and in delivering the wider moral education of students, including values. This process of review may be informed by strongly expressed views. In the example of an educational charity, students are likely to have strong views on the actions the board should take and may also express potentially contentious views on aspects of the history of the organisation. However, it is clearly not just educational charities that need to ensure such consistency if they want to stake a robust claim to organisational integrity.

    Umbrella bodies and infrastructure organisations will have a role in both disseminating guidance and modelling good practice. The Home Truths report issued by ACEVO with Voice4Change England is an example of a measured report which nonetheless includes 'uncomfortable home truths for many white leaders who do not understand how racism manifests in their own organisations and actions' and clear proposals for action.

  • Safeguarding
    Issues of EDI are of critical importance to safeguarding people who work for or receive services from a charity. For example, those from black and minority ethnic backgrounds should be protected from the harm presented by inequality and racism, including unconscious bias. This may involve reviewing disciplinary standards and processes or other policies and procedures to ensure racism and discrimination are addressed consistently. Ensure that processes are applied fairly, consistently and that no one is improperly disadvantaged by the process.

    Staff and beneficiaries should be and feel able to raise concerns and feel that the charity is a safe and trusted environment. EDI is an aspect of protecting people from harm and should be central to culture and have sufficient resource allocated to it. See the Commission's Regulatory Alert on safeguarding and Safeguarding and protecting people for charities and trustees. Clear and consistent policies and procedures will work equally to help safeguard all members of staff, whether they are experiencing discrimination or face an allegation that their words or actions are discriminatory.

  • Staff Terms
    Issues of EDI are equally important to ensure staff are protected from harm. Staff codes of conduct, training and discipline procedures should similarly ensure that racism and discrimination are addressed including unconscious bias. Racism and discrimination should be addressed consistently and processes applied fairly, consistently and so that no member of staff is disadvantaged by the process.

    Staff should be and feel able to raise concerns and feel that the organisation provides a safe and trusted environment to work. It is an aspect of protecting people from harm and should be central to culture and have sufficient resource allocated to it.
  • Board Recruitment

    Matters of EDI are relevant to decisions about the process of recruiting, appointing, appraising and removing trustees. See the Charity Commission's guidance and the Charity Governance Code.

    Trustees should:

    • carry out skills audits and recruit for gaps
    • adopt a recruitment strategy and methods that encourages a broad range of potential trustees to apply
    • consider whether support for trustees would help - expenses, formats for documents including translations and braille
    • hold meetings at times that don't exclude any groups
    • ensure everyone has an opportunity to contribute to discussions
    • take part in training on diversity (including unconscious bias)
    • have diversity objectives
    • transparently report on what has been done to address board diversity and its performance against diversity objectives

Acting Prudently - Key Risks

Trustees are expected to exercise sound judgment, avoiding undue risk and not over-committing. They should ensure they understand the risks and issues their charity is likely to encounter in securing EDI and that the action plans they agree can be properly resourced to meet those needs as part of the charity's work in furtherance of its objects.

  • Acting Outside of Objects
    A charity cannot generally donate to organisations outside of its purposes, nor use its name to endorse organisations unless it is clearly within its objects and in its interests to do so.
  • Political Activities
    Trustees should be particularly cautious of political activities. By this we mean activities in support of political parties or movements, or which seek by their object to amend (or preserve) law or government policy.

    A charity can never support a political party - even one which has favourable policies towards it - since to support a political party is to support its other policies too. For similar reasons, we recommend that charities do not support political movements as they may encompass additional policies.

    In certain narrow circumstances, where it would support the delivery of its objects, a charity may campaign to promote a change (or preservation) of law or government policy.
  • Positive Action
    Provisions in Part 11 of the Equality Act 2010 do permit positive action. It can be in the charity's interests to take positive action, whether to secure diversity of its trustees and staff to improve the range of experience the charity can draw upon or directly, to promote the objects by extending its benefits beneficiaries/pupils who are representative of the public for whose benefit the purposes exist. Positive action applies where trustees reasonably think that a group (sharing a characteristic protected by the Equality Act) who could use their service suffer from a disadvantage linked to that characteristic, or have a disproportionately low level of participation or need different things from the charity's work than other groups. Trustees are then able to take action to overcome or minimise the disadvantage, encourage participation or to meet those different needs. The law allows trustees to do this in a proportionate way. See Charity Commission guidance on the Equality Act.

Language and Scope

One factor that makes conversations about racism and EDI difficult is that those involved may have very different understandings and levels of ambition as to what EDI work can and should achieve - or even whether the term itself is appropriate. The campaign group which emerged from the hashtag #CharitySoWhite is clear that 'this isn't a conversation about diversity and inclusion, it is a conversation about power and privilege' and say 'we speak about and value lived experience over data'. Many trustees and managers will be unsure how to contribute to this conversation, particularly where they do not have lived experience of discrimination to draw on. To avoid setting these discussions up to fail, the terms of reference need to be agreed at an early stage.

Involvement and Co-Delivery 

Trustees will need to consider how best to ensure Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic staff and beneficiaries are adequately involved in shaping the organisation's work on EDI. This will involve balancing the desire to centrally co-ordinate their response with the need to involve interested people beyond the board. Options for doing so could include the establishment of an advisory group, or groups with no formal standing or powers under the charity's constitution or a formally constituted committee. However the group is established, it should have clear terms of reference to avoid mission drift, or a mismatch between the expectations of the group and the expectations of the board of trustees. We have encountered several instances where the high expectations of such groups were not met by the charity concerned and disputes arose as a result.

What Can Trustees Be Doing Now?

In considering EDI issues, trustees will need to act decisively to address the fear that they will simply producing more reports without meaningful change. In doing so, they will need to ensure that the work done is sufficiently considered and robust to reduce the risk that decisions will be swayed by a perceived risk of reputational damage at a time when issues of EDI are prominent and the expectations are correspondingly high. Trustees, and the leadership team as a whole, will need to be ready to explain and if necessary defend the steps they propose if, for example:

  • staff or beneficiaries suggest that the organisation has a profound problem with racism, or
  • vocal members / supporters criticise steps taken by the organisation to address EDI or respond to the national conversation about Black Lives Matter

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.