A high percentage of charities with omitted results set
vague and unmeasurable aims.
A notable characteristic of the under-reported and omitted
aims was organisational direction. Almost every charity
(88 per cent, 35 charities) set internal aims, but 26 of them
omitted them from their reporting in subsequent years.
This means almost a third of charities chose to focus on
showing progress against external objectives despite
acknowledging the need for internal goals within their
broader strategic initiatives.
Measurability
No charity was included in the sample unless it had
established at least one measurable aim that could be
tracked and reported over time. We considered the range of
activities and objectives that charities undertake and if an
aim's progress and achievement was demonstrable, it was
considered measurable.
With this definition, the number of measurable aims set over
five years was high. Over 80 per cent of set aims could be
reasonably reported back in later years, in some form.
Although most aims were measurable, 58 per cent of
charities set at least one aim within the five-year period
that was deemed unmeasurable and were unable to
demonstrate progress or achievement on this aim over
time. These aims lacked the characteristics that could show
progress or achievement, namely:
specificity
focus
performance indicators
metrics
definitive or tangible evidence
As a result, over half of the charities assessed did not have
the potential to reach a 100 per cent achievement rate
against their reported objectives.
Reporting
We categorised the reporting of progress against set aims
into three divisions:
Three charities failed to register any fully reported aims,
although these organisations did partially report back on a
proportion of their objectives.
Eleven charities (28 per cent) failed to fully report back
on at least one aim in each year examined. This means
the majority of charities fully reporting at least one aim in
every year reviewed. A full reporting of the aim does not
necessarily constitute an aim being achieved, but it was in
most cases.
Achievement and omissions by income
and area of activity
Mid-tier income charities demonstrated the highest
achievement rating and the lowest rate of omissions. They
set a reasonably low percentage of high-level aims and
provided fully reported results for just over half of the aims
that were set.
The lower income group showed the highest proportion of
measurable or demonstrable aims, but they had the lowest
achievement rate and highest rate of omissions. The smaller
income charities also set the lowest number of high-level aims.
Medical, health and sickness charities had the highest rate
of successfully fully reported objectives, alongside those
operating in art, leisure and nature. On average, they had 11
per cent higher rates of reported achievements of their aims
than the overall sample.
Education and training charities had the lowest achievement
rate against their aims despite setting almost entirely lowerlevel
and measurable objectives. Their omission rate was also
the highest, which is likely to have drastically impacted their
achievement rating. Housing and financial support charities
also showed a fairly high omission rate, and less than half of
the objectives in this sector were fully reported.
fully
reported
partially
reported omitted
16