The new Fundraising Regulator, which oversees the ways charities raise money, released its proposals last month for a new Fundraising Preference Service (FPS) – set to launch in 2017 – that will enable people to more easily control the fundraising communications they receive from charities.

The FPS Working Group, which was set up last December following Sir Stuart Etherington’s report, Regulating Fundraising for the Future, listed a number of recommendations that formed the basis for the Fundraising Regulator’s proposed arrangements for the FPS (see boxout, right).

At the time Etherington’s report was released, mailing houses were unsure as to what impact on volume the impending changes might have. 

But a year later – and with many charities having self-regulated their fundraising methods ever since – the initial signs suggest that direct mail could be well placed to benefit in the long term.

John Mitchison, head of preference services, compliance and legal at the Direct Marketing Association (DMA), and a member of the FPS Working Group, says: “While it’s affected the telephone industry considerably – we’ve seen call centres go out of business – we haven’t seen that in the mailing sector.”

The proposals for the new FPS allow some leeway to ensure charities can still get messages across where the core purpose is not fundraising. So while there may be an initial drop in volumes as unsolicited mail is cut down, charities will likely quickly find other ways to communicate their messages.

“It’s a long overdue change for the charity sector and I think they’ll now have to be more creative and do some different kinds of communications,” says Mitchison.

He adds direct mail could ultimately see a resurgence because charities will no longer make calls to people that they might have previously phoned without technically having permission to do so.

“But they will still have that person’s name and address so they might switch from phoning to mailing in a number of cases.

“They’ll have to be careful with it and include an unsubscribe mechanism in that mailing and also use things like the MPS [Mail Preference Service] and various other suppression files but it could be quite good.”

GI Solutions Group says that its charity work, which is mainly done through agencies and print managers rather than directly with the charities, has remained relatively static in terms of volume since the Etherington report was released.

GI Solutions managing director Alistair Ezzy believes this could be because direct mail has the advantage of not being as intrusive as phone calls. “There is no pressure to respond and the consumer has the choice not to open the piece and dispose of it quickly.”

He adds: “Equally, direct mail allows the charity to put the reasons clearly across about why the donation will make a difference, which the donor can read when they choose.”

Etherington’s review said that approximately 2,000 charities spend more than the £100,000 a year threshold that the FPS will apply to on fundraising.

“There are bound to be a few others that want to use it too,” says Mitchison. “As with the way the MPS works, companies don’t want to waste their money sending stuff out to people that have said they don’t want it.” 

The proposals suggest that the running costs of the FPS should be largely met by the charities that use it.

They could be asked to pay an annual subscription, with terms and conditions applying to use of the data and responsibilities for data security, that could cost between £3,000 to £4,000 a year. Smaller entities would pay lower rates, though the proposals do not specify what these might be. 

Daniel Fluskey, head of policy and research at the Institute of Fundraising, has a number of concerns over the costs.

“The additional financial burden for charities should be looked at – many charities will find it hard to pay additional costs,” he says.

But Mitchison disagrees. “Undoubtedly it will cost some money but I don’t think it’s something charities would be right to complain about as there was genuinely a problem.”

He concludes: “Charities do a lot of good work and as much as they might have caused an issue with their marketing techniques recently, nobody wants them to go out of business or see the people that receive money from charities suffer.” 

Fundraising Regulator’s key proposals for the FPS

• The FPS will apply to charities spending £100,000 a year or more on fundraising, though there will be no barrier to smaller charities signing up to use the service voluntarily, in order to demonstrate their commitment to best practice
• The ability to register a ‘vulnerable’ third party must be limited to individuals with a power of attorney or equivalent
• The service should enable consumers to specifically choose which charities they do not want to hear from, rather than having only one option to end communications from all charities
• The FPS should signpost users wishing only to stop unwanted phone calls or ‘junk’ mail to the existing Telephone Preference Service (TPS) and Mail Preference Service (MPS) respectively
• Charities and other organisations with an existing fundraising relationship with someone registering on the FPS should have the opportunity to make contact to clarify if the registration is intended to cover them in the light of the direct, existing relationship
• The FPS should not apply to communications where the core purpose is not fundraising
• The running costs of the FPS should, at least to an extent, be met by those using the service to manage their communications
• Registration on the FPS should be limited to two years