Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

Adam Rothwell, Intelligent Giving, on face-to-face fundraising research

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
764 views
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Nov 25, 2008

Adam Rothwell, Director of Intelligent Giving, discusses his charity's research into face-to-face giving which found many street fundraisers not adhering to the relevant legislation and professional codes of practice.

  • likes, 2 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (19)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • not all charities use agencies for face-to-face fundraising.... :-)

  • @curiouscas I would like to point out that the PFRA are a trade association and not the 'regulator' that they claim to be. Trade associations look after their members and try to influence public policy to suit their members (chugger agencies etc). I am currently speaking to my MP about this and why councils are doing a deal with a trade association as they are not a publicly elected body.

    Most agencies that I know of use a PRP setup and pay bonus'.

  • @curiouscas the problem in chugging is far worse than that. I have seen many bad chuggers all year round and the reason why people are so 'negative' about them is the fault of the chugging industry, noone elses. They have made a bad name for themselves noone else has and it all boils down to greed. Charities should never have allowed for private companies to profit from charity as this is the cause of the problem.

  • Alot of chuggers are just kids working the job for the summer who don't really care, some of us though really care about the charities, abide by the PRFA guidelines and work our asses off whilst staying polite to people despite alot of negativity from people. I've had people who i haven't even approached saying things like 'you don't deserve to live' etc.

    I also have worked for a few charities and companies and have never ever had pay proportional to donations. Just a flat rate of hourly pay.

  • Furthermore, what I find more concerning is the lack of condemnation of the research findings from the chuggers that have posted here. The research was conducted scientifically and factually from a site (now defunct) that supports charities and good practice. To me, as they have failed to even remotely condemn it, they support this behaviour.

    Do these chuggers not care about the good name of charity? No, is the answer, they are only in it for themselves

  • Good on you Adam!!! Chuggers are a menace and a public nuisance and should be banned. About time that the sometimes illegal and unethical side of fundraising raises it's ugly head.

    I see all the chuggers have posted here to complain. They don't like criticism and tend to shout it down en mass.

  • For every £1 spent by charities on 3rd-party fundraising, a return of £3-£4 is achieved - this represents a fantastic return on charities' investments, and importantly is money which charities would otherwise not receive. There is clearly no case for getting rid of street fundraising, even though we all find it annoying from time to time.

  • Intelligent Giving? You're asking to boycott a method of fundraising that generates millions for charities every year? Should't he change the name of his company?

    Adam - why dont you go and ask the family of someone whoes life was saved from cancer by funding provided by F2F fundraising and see what they say?

    You are a moron and I hope you reap the reward from the evil you soe.

  • How do you think charities would get that money that is so desperately needed? You could have been born in the developing world and have no way out and be dependent on their work, work made possible by fund raisers. Think about that before you criticize it again.

  • Think not just of the money they raise, but the inspiration they give to the uninspired.

    I worked on the street for 3 years and it inspired me enough to have dedicated the rest of my life to helping others, animals and the planet.

    One conversation could create the next generation of people who have made the world a better place on a large scale; People like: Nelson Mandela, Paul Watson, Tony Juniper or Martin Luther King.

    "Its better to live for something than die for nothing"

    EcoChav

Loading...

0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more