In this episode of the Fundraising Everywhere podcast, host Cam St-Omer Donaldson is joined by Claire Stanley, Director of Policy and Communications at the Chartered Institute of Fundraising, to unpack not only what the new rules mean, but also where charities are still looking for greater clarity.
Together they explore the distinction between the ICO’s legal guidance and the Fundraising Regulator’s fundraising framework, discuss some of the grey areas charities are navigating, and explain how the Chartered Institute of Fundraising is working with regulators to represent the sector’s experiences and help shape future guidance.
They explore:
- What the charitable purposes soft opt-in changes and what it doesn’t.
- The difference between the ICO’s legal guidance and the Fundraising Regulator’s practical framework.
- Areas where charities are still seeking greater clarity, including common implementation questions.
- How the Chartered Institute of Fundraising is engaging with the ICO and other regulators to raise sector feedback and support further clarification.
If you enjoyed this episode, don’t forget to hit follow and enable notifications so you’ll get notified to be first to hear of future podcast episodes. We’d love to see you back again!
And thank you to our friends at JustGiving who make the Fundraising Everywhere Podcast possible.
Transcript
Jade Cunnah: Welcome to the Fundraising Everywhere podcast, your go-to place for fundraising tips and inspiration. Love what you hear? Get more insights straight to your inbox. Subscribe to our email list for exclusive fundraising resources, early access to training, special discounts, and more. Just head on over to fundraisingeverywhere.com/podcast to subscribe.
Jade Cunnah: Now, on to today’s episode. Enjoy.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Hello everyone, and welcome to another episode of Fundraising Everywhere podcast. I’m Cam St. Omer-Donaldson, I’ll be your host for today. And today we’re talking about one of the most talked about, I guess, developments at the moment in fundraising regulation for many years, the introduction of the charitable purposes soft opt-in.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Um, I actually come fresh off the back of our webinar, our part two webinar at Fundraising Everywhere, which was answering your questions about soft opt-in, and particularly around third-party platforms. So lots of you fed back that was really helpful and useful sessh- uh, session. But of course, uh, still questions remain.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: I think it’s a change that’s been welcomed by many charities. You know, it’s an opportunity to engage with supporters. But of course, it’s prompted plenty of discussion about how that legislation should be interpreted and what it means in practice. And more so, what does that mean for us and our supporters and the wider supporter journey?
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: So to help us unpack all of that a little bit further I’m delighted to be joined today by Claire Stanley, Director of Policy and Communications at the Chartered Institute of Fundraising. And we’ll just be exploring, um, the guidance, uh, also the new framework from the fundraising regulator. Some of the questions it’s raised as well, and then again, what charities should be thinking about as they begin to put that into practice or don’t.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Um, so we’ll discuss that today. So Claire, thank you so, so much for joining us today. And thank you for being here.
Claire Stanley : Hi, Cam. You know, thank you for having me. It’s, um, it’s my pleasure to be here, and it’s always nice to talk about a subject which I feel is now ingrained- Yeah … into my, my everyday being.
Claire Stanley : Yeah. Soft opt-in’s been on my agenda pretty much since I started at the Institute two and a half years ago. It was raised to me by one of our members who said, “Oh, are, are you aware of this?” It’s something that was currently in the, um, previous government’s, uh, there was a bill going through Parliament at the time.
Claire Stanley : Right. And then it was thrown into the long grass when we had the general election and, and obviously it’s, it’s come back and, and here we are. So it’s- … it’s been going on for a long time, and I think there’ll be people listening to this who will agree that it’s, it’s something that they’ve been looking for for quite
Claire Stanley : I mean, the, the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations came into play in 2003, so it has been a long time coming for charities to have that sort of- Equal footing to the, the commercial sector. Although I think some would argue, having seen the, the guidance from the ICO, that it’s not quite achieved what many thought it would set out to do in terms of that, that, um, level playing field.
Claire Stanley : So there, there’s, there’s a, there is a lot to un- to unpack with it. I’ll start with the, the, also the fundraising regulator has come out with its, its framework on the back of the, the ICO’s guidance, and it’s-
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Mm-hmm …
Claire Stanley : you know, we have heard that people think they’re quite different in, in regards to what the ICO are saying and, and what the, the regulator is saying.
Claire Stanley : But I think it’s important that people know that the, the legal guidance is from the ICO. You know, they’re looking at this in, through the eyes of the law and, and this is what the regulations set out, and this is what you have to follow to su- to ensure that you are not in any sort of breach of legislation.
Claire Stanley : And the fundraising regulator’s framework is more about The sector putting it into practice and looking at, at examples of best practice. So, the regulator’s framework has got a lot of words in it. If you’ve, if, if you’ve had the time to read it, there- there’s a lot- Mm … um, within the, the regulator’s framework.
Claire Stanley : But the, the really important parts are the, I think, you know, the, the … and if they are listening to me, they’ll, they’ll probably give me a, a slap across the wrists for this just because they’ll say, “It’s all important, Claire.” But I think the, the, the, the parts that I think are really, really important for people to read are the examples that the regulator’s come up with.
Claire Stanley : Because they’ve come up with, I think it’s nine really good real-life, everyday examples of where charities can decide whether soft opt-in is the best thing for them and whether that’s good practice or actually it’s not for us to use in this instance. Mm-hmm. What they haven’t done is give examples of bad practice around soft opt-in.
Claire Stanley : Uh, but that’s because it’s not for the regulator to say if something’s incorrect when it comes to soft opt-in. That’s for the ICO to look at. So the regulator has looked at it from a best practice point of view as opposed to here’s what not to do. Mm-hmm. Um, which I think is probably, is, is probably, uh, uh, the best thing for it because it, they, they’re not the ones who are legally in charge of it.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Yeah. Absolutely. And I think, Claire, it was really good to hear just from you then again, like, just that this is- Mm … like two years plus in the making. Um, versus, like, us all coming to the forefront since February, I guess, when it was put into practice. There’s been, like, lots behind the scenes and consultations and people feeding in into those conversations as well.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: So I guess that background work, not to be forgotten that that’s done. And just taking kind of from what you’ve said, I guess, then do you think then charities should see the fundraising regulator’s guidance as simply, like you said, explaining the law and then, you know, the … or sorry, I guess the ICO’s guidance, sorry, is explaining the law and then the fundraising regulator’s guidance or, or framework as they’ve referred to it, which I think is a really important differentiation, which I’d love to- Yeah
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: hear you talk about in a mo- in a moment. But that’s encouraging charities to adopt, like, that higher standard of fundraising practice, right? So the two things can exist at the same time. One is explaining the law. The other is giving you those really crucial examples. And they’ve not called it guidance, have they, Claire?
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: They’ve called it framework.
Claire Stanley : Yeah. They’ve called it a framework. And I think they’ve done that very purposely because of … I mean, if you look at the fundraising regulator’s website, pretty much everything else is guidance. Mm. And it’s based on, you know, this is guidance around how to use AI in fundraising.
Claire Stanley : This is guidance on how to work with donors in vulnerable circumstances. This is guidance on- X links to the codes of fundraising practice. So there’s, they are very clear on what’s guidance. Yeah. So and I, I think the reason why they’ve called this framework is because they know that the guidance itself has to come from the organization which has laid out the legislation, and that’s the ICO.
Claire Stanley : So that’s, it’s, that’s to differentiate the- … the regulator’s sort of interpretation of it from the actual legal guidelines that people have to follow. You know, it’ll help charities, I think, Mm-hmm. It- Sorry, I sort of lost my train of thought there because I, I went off on a off on a- That’s actually-
Claire Stanley : as I apologize … that’s actually what I do. It’ll kinda , it’ll help charities sort of navigate those real world fundraising scenarios.
Multiple Speakers: Mm-hmm.
Claire Stanley : Um, while also balancing compliance, supporter expectations, and, and public trust. So I would advise people to, if they … I think at this point, you know, we’re in July now.
Claire Stanley : The, the legislation has been live since February. I appreciate we didn’t get guidance from the ICO until April, and the regulators, I think, came out only-
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Last month, was it?
Claire Stanley : Yeah, towards, was it, was it the middle of last month?
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Yeah.
Claire Stanley : Roughly, or towards the end of last month. So we’re, we’re not, it’s not like we’re, we’re months and months into the, the, the guidance.
Claire Stanley : But I think, you know, by this point, people should have certainly read the ICO’s guidance. Mm-hmm.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Um,
Claire Stanley : if they are wanting to adopt it. And, and I, if you haven’t gone on and looked at the regulators, particularly their nine examples of best practice, I would advise you, you go and do that. Because I, I think it is really helpful, and it, it does give that
Claire Stanley : sort of very simple, everyday
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: breakdown- Yeah …
Claire Stanley : of, of fundraising practice. Because essentially, you know, the regulator wants to see charities achieve that kinda gold standards of fundraising practice. They, they- Yeah … they, they don’t want Charities to be getting into trouble over this. Um, so I, I do think it is very helpful, um, and, and would recommend a, a read of it.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Yeah. And again, like you said, that gold standard, that best practice you know, the- there, there is always a, a situation where as a charity, you know, you will need to look at that internally, whether that’s through like doing legitimate interest assessments, working out whether or not this fits within your entire donor-supporter journey.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: And you know, one of the questions that’s actually come up around that, Claire, was around expressing an interest. Mm-hmm. And there’s been lots of different discussions. And again, I think sometimes, you know, we, we … I remember being in, in fundraising and really just wanting a definitive list for everything.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Just tell me the … definitively what I can and can’t do. What does and doesn’t be included and, and, you know, there’s no world unfortunately where, where that’s possible. But I know it’s one of the areas that people are trying to interpret- Mm … uh, is what it means for someone to have expressed an interest in a charity’s purpose.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: So I mean, how should charities approach that testing in, in practice, and where would you maybe encourage some of those charities to still be a bit cautious around expressions of interest and
Claire Stanley : what is- Yeah. It’s, it’s a really good question, um, and I think something that’s charities are giving a lot of thought to.
Claire Stanley : Donors are usually the clearest example of eligibility for the, um, expressed interest because of course, donations are one of the strongest foundations for soft opt-in. The individual has actively provided support to the charity. They know- Yeah, yeah … that their donation is going to that charity, and it’s-
Claire Stanley : Then, okay, there might be occasions where someone is, is making a donation because they’re perhaps sponsoring someone or they’re doing something in memory of someone. They, they, they, they maybe don’t have a huge particular interest in that charity, but it’s rare. Um- Mm-hmm … I’d say, like, you know, 99% of the time if someone’s making a donation to a charity, it’s because they are actively interested in the, the work of that charity, and they support their causes.
Claire Stanley : So, that’s your clearest example of eligibility. And volunteers and campaign supporters can also qualify. You know, support’s broader than financial giving. Absolutely. So, you know, a charity should consider whether the person has demonstrated genuine support for or interest in its charitable purposes or if they’re just volunteering to tick off a box.
Claire Stanley : But again, there’s that thing where I think it’s highly unusual that someone would, would go and volunteer for a charity if they’re not genuinely interested and cared about what that charity does. Yeah. So in my view, if someone’s volunteering or they’re helping with a campaign, it’s because they are passionate about that charity, and they want to know what that charity is doing.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: And of course, like, once you had contacted them, again, with the appropriate wording, they could also ch- Like, if, if you then contacted them, they could choose, “Actually, no. Sorry. You’ve clearly misunderstood.” Like, “That isn’t my interest,” and they could let you know that. So there is the option to opt out of those communications ongoing.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: That exists in every communication subsequently. And I think there’s a lot of, like- You know, none of this is static. And I constantly talk about how, you know, with supporters you should always be in conversation. There should never be a static easier said than done I think with CRMs and databases.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: But they’re, they’re not static, that’s why you do, you run a new report every evening in your CRM to see who’s made changes, who’s done something different. And, and that’s an ongoing conversation that you’re having with your supporters. It might not feel two-way because it’s over an email. Yeah.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: But it absolutely very much is, and that’s why that opt-out option, um, and wording is, is there to make sure that the supporter or the donor or the person also has that kind of agency to be able to also let you know if they’d rather not receive that. And, you know, all of us who’ve been in fundraising, like we know supporters will let us know stuff.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Especially if it’s something they don’t wanna see or they don’t want. And as long as we have incorporated the ability to be able to make that change through our data systems and, and CRM database, et cetera, then that also supports us. One of the examples that Mark, who often speaks at Fundraising Everywhere, he’s from Hope and May, uses is like, you know, if you go into a coffee shop, for example and you buy a coffee that isn’t branded at all in a particular charity’s name, um, but they do support a particular charity, like it’s reasonable to say that might not be an expression of interest.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Yeah. Because actually I really just wanted the cup of coffee, and it was the coffee shop that’s next to the station. I had no other choice. Um, versus like you say, somebody deliberately making a donation to an organization that they know the charity, who the charity is or, or what it’s supporting or what its charitable aims are.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: And, and supporting that I think is the two-
Claire Stanley : Yeah … two points
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: as well.
Claire Stanley : Yeah. Absolutely. And then there’s the other, um, the, the, the, the, there’s the, the other one where this is where caution would be advised, is if people are seeking support from a charity for a particular reason. Yes. So you, you ask not only can we send this, but should we send this?
Claire Stanley : Because there can be vulnerable circumstances-
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Yes …
Claire Stanley : and, and, potential harm needs to be considered. So one of the sort of most obvious ones that, that we’ve spoken about, you know, in, in, in other conversations is if you’re, say, for example, a women’s aid charity- Mm-hmm … and someone comes to you seeking support to get out of a bad situation They’re not necessarily the sort of people that you would want to soft opt-in- yeah
Claire Stanley : to, to your direct marketing because they’ve come to you in a very vulnerable circumstance- Mm-hmm … and they need your help. But, the sort of six to 12 months after is probably not the best time to be reaching out to them asking for donations. Mm-hmm. So it’s things like that. It’s just y- using it.
Claire Stanley : There’s common sense really- Yeah … involved in the soft opt-in as well, and, and that’s certainly one of those circumstances where you would be asking the question, “Should we send this?”
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Yeah.
Claire Stanley : And the answer really would, should be no.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Yeah. Absolutely. And I think it comes back down to that journey again, like what is the communication that you’re sending, like, in the first place?
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: What is the experience you’re giving this person? And I, I totally agree in that instance it would be a no, but I think even where there isn’t a vulnerability or someone hasn’t come to you as a service user, maybe someone has just made a donation, is it still the likely point that the first email they receive should be to ask them to become a regular giver?
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Probably not. Mm-hmm. You might want to ask them some questions about why they love what you do, or you might want to find out a bit more about them, or you might want to introduce them a little bit more to what your charitable purposes are. So again it, rather than looking at it purely as a transactional interaction, that’s where we go back to that supporter experience, supporter journeys, which are a part of conversations anyway, and soft opt-in should be fitting themselves into that.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: And I guess that leads me onto that piece around, like, trust versus compliance, because I do think, and it’d be interesting if you agree, that there’s maybe a bit of a danger that charities become so focused on whether they can or can’t contact some- someone, that actually we think, which would be another issue.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: But also that they lose sight then of whether supporters would actually expect to hear from them. Like- Yeah … how should charities strike that balance between, like, legal compliance but also maintaining that public trust? How should they be making those decisions internally about whether that’s right for their, like, organizations as well?
Claire Stanley : Oh, that’s a good question. It really is a good question because, yeah, I mean, if just speaking personally, if I- Yeah … am a regular giver to a charity- Yeah … I expect emails ev- uh, now, what I’m not expecting is an email every single day. But I’m expecting regular emails to update me on what is happening within- Yeah
Claire Stanley : that organization. Because the majority of supporters want to know where their donations are going. They want to know what causes the money is supporting- Mm-hmm … the, the impact that it’s having. They want to read about success stories. They want to hear about new research. That’s why they’re donating to that charity.
Claire Stanley : So there is that reasonable expectation that people will want to know- If they don’t want to know, they can opt out, and that’s where it’s really important. This is the compliance side of things. That’s where it’s really, really important to have the wording clear, prominent on every single piece of communication.
Claire Stanley : If you no longer want to receive these emails, click here and you’re out. And, and I actually think as well it’s helpful to have, b- because the way the CRMs update, it might not be- Yeah … an immediate thing. So it’s helpful to have wording that says, “Please note it may take up to 30 days-”
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: For
Claire Stanley : you to just, to stop receiving communications.
Claire Stanley : Because some people might not realize that. They might think they’ve unsubscribed, and maybe five, six days- I’ve had that
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: even from, like, commercial organizations. Yeah. I’ve gotten just, like, you know, I’ve bought something from a online store, and I’m like, “Okay, actually I wanna unsubscribe,” and then I still keep getting them.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: And it, even me, I have to go back and be like, “Oh yeah, it probably doesn’t kick in immediately.”
Claire Stanley : Yeah. So, you know, five, six days later they might get another email and be like, “Well, I thought I’d, I thought I’d opted out.” And that’s where someone might be encouraged to make a complaint, to say, “Well, I opted out and I’m still getting these emails.”
Claire Stanley : So I think it would be, it’s, it’s important to also as well as having that transparent wording to allow people to opt out, have an explanation of how long
Claire Stanley : it could potentially take- Yeah … for the system to update. So I think the, I think for, um, to err on the side of caution, up to 30 days is probably the, the best way to, to put it. And, and then that way people know if they do get any further emails in that time, it’s just simply an automated-
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Yeah
Claire Stanley : system, and it’ll, it will stop within the, the four weeks.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Yeah. It’s really interesting. And it, it, it starts me thinking again about those kind of welcome journeys and again, like, what the ongoing communication looks like. Because maybe that’s something you build into your first 30 days that actually it’s before you’ve started asking for financial donations at that point.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Because then that means if there was somebody who, who had opted out within that first kind of period of time, it’s not that even if by accident they’d be receiving financial emails from you. Mm-hmm. It might just be support updates. I’m not saying that’s best practice, but it just might be something.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Again, these are all things that are helping organizations to consider what does that ongoing journey look like for somebody who I am applying soft opt-in for. And maybe those first 30 days of a welcome journey, any of the emails within that actually aren’t about financial donations. Maybe at that point it’s still about getting to know your supporter.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Maybe it’s about still sharing some things. And I know they can opt out at any point, but it’s more likely that they’re gonna do it immediately if it’s something they don’t want. So again, these are things I think that just could be starting to think about baking into your journeys and thinking about how yeah, how, how you’re communicating with your supporters during that period of time, especially where they could, where it’s more likely that if they want the option to opt out they will take it then.
Claire Stanley : Yeah. Absolutely.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Amazing. Um, and I mean, we couldn’t have had this podcast without coming back onto third-party platforms and third-party- Of course. Um, I don’t think that has left the conversation from the first word of, of soft opt-in. Yeah. And probably generated the most debate. And understandably, you know, like, so many charities work with third parties to be able to make it possible to recruit new supporters.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: And you know, the guidance- Says that charities shouldn’t be relying on opt-in where personal data has, has been collected by a third party. What it hasn’t done is break down whether that’s a third-party platform or third-party face-to-face agency or third-party data processor or all of those things. So I think I wanted to caveat by saying, of course, we’ve had lots of stuff on Fundraising Everywhere where, you know, if you’re working with a third-party platform who for all intents and purposes is on behalf of your charity in terms of the visual capturing of data and, and details on the platform, and they are not that data processor and you can confirm that, then that has been
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: I know that those platforms have spoken to the ICO and that has been something they’re incorporating. But where I wanted to shift our attention to is another conversation that we’re having around third parties, which is what about those kind of face-to-fa- which is, like, my background. I, I came from face-to-face and telephone fundraising and I’m like, you know, so, like, what about those spaces within face-to-face fundraising and, and telephone fundraising, um, when you’re using an agency?
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: What, what at the moment is your understanding of where that sits?
Claire Stanley : Yeah. M- so my ans- the, the, the ICO states, the wording in the guidance states there is no such thing as a third-party marketing list that is soft opt-in compliant. Mm-hmm.
Claire Stanley : Of course, like you said, Cam, they don’t break it down on what they mean by, necessarily mean by third party. So m- from the sort of sparse conversations that I’ve managed to have with the ICO- Mm-hmm … my understanding is that if you are a face-to-face fundraising agency, a telephone fundraising agency, any professional fundraising agency that is contracted to a charity to carry out campaigns on their behalf, then soft opt-in does not apply.
Claire Stanley : Okay. So if it’s not
Claire Stanley : the charity directly obtaining the contact details, then you, y- you cannot use soft opt-in and you would have to stick to the existing model of proactive consent. Which is frustrating. Mm-hmm. It’s really frustrating because, you know, in, in the, in the eyes of the public- Yeah … the majority of the public, certainly before I started working in the, the charity sector, I had no idea what a, a, a fundraising agency was w- you know, compared to a charity.
Claire Stanley : Yeah. Same, right. If someone stopped me in the street, if someone stopped me in the street for a chat, and they’re wearing the vest of a charity- Mm-hmm … and they’re saying, “We’re doing this campaign for this charity,” as far as I’m concerned, that person wor- is working for that charity.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Yeah.
Claire Stanley : And so the majority of members of the public will feel that way.
Claire Stanley : Um, they’re contracted to that charity. They’re carrying out the campaign on behalf of that charity. The details are being put into an iPad that’s been sent straight to the charity. To me, it simply doesn’t make sense-
Multiple Speakers: Mm …
Claire Stanley : that parties are not viewed as sort of an arm’s length organization- Yeah … as you know, from the, from the charity.
Claire Stanley : And that the, they are not eligible to use soft opt-in. It doesn’t seem … It doesn’t make sense to me, but unfortunately, that’s the way the ICO have laid out, um, within their legislation. And, m-
Claire Stanley : I’m … No, I’m not a lawyer, so- Yeah … this is certainly not, not any kind of legal advice. But from discussions that I have, my understanding is that for that to change, the whole law around the privacy and electronic, uh, privacy, um, electronic communications regulations would have to change.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Got you.
Claire Stanley : So
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: there’d
Claire Stanley : have to be a full update- Oh, wow
Claire Stanley : to the law in order for that to change. Which I don’t think they’re willing to do, um, because that opens up a whole, a whole other can of worms. Like, the, the, i- there’s so much more to it than simply soft opt-in for charitable- Yeah … purposes. Um, so as much as it frustrates me to say it, I don’t think we’ll see any- I see
Claire Stanley : sort of movement on that. And it’s annoying because we’ve had so many of our members reach out- I know … to us about this.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Same. Same.
Claire Stanley : Um, and it’s, it’s j- it’s … I, I, I almost feel a bit … I feel a bit useless when I go back to them to say, “Look, I’m really sorry. We have tried. We put it into the consultation response,” and everything that we’ve spoken to about, and we’ve, we’ve really pushed it.
Claire Stanley : But it’s … They’re, they’re not budging on it. And it’s, I think it is … It’s less about the, the ICO wanting to be … i, um, and I’m, I’m trying to m- make sure that people understand this. It’s probably … You know, it’s not the
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: ICO’s fault, you know, like I don’t- Yeah, yeah, yeah … I don’t actually- They’re not punishing anyone is what I’m understanding. Like-
Claire Stanley : Yeah, I don’t actually think … When I read it at first, I just thought, “They’re just trying to …” I genuinely did think they’re trying to make this more difficult for charities. Mm.
Claire Stanley : But having read more about it, I don’t think that’s what they’re trying to do. And I think they are sort of tied into the existing law. They can only update based on what has been agreed in this bill, but they can’t change the full regulations. Okay. Um, that, that would require, uh, s- something else completely.
Claire Stanley : So yeah, I think we are stuck with it for the time being.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Fair. Thank you, Claire. And I think it’s just, I think our listeners will be really k- keen to hear that, like, that you’re having this dialogue as well, Claire. Like, you know, the, the Chartered Institute of Fundraising represents so many in terms of our profession.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: So I think to know that you’re, you know, fight- fighting the cause, fighting the good fight you know, I think that will also be some sort of comfort to, to, to our- … to our listeners, I hope. And I know that, again, like I said, as a, as a previous dialogue fundraiser, um, I, I definitely saw myself as an extension, uh- Yeah
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: of charities that I represented, and I, I believe that supporters saw me as such. But I also, you know, that we are where we are. Um, and I, you know, I do believe that it’s not … We, we still have the consent model. Um, and we can still ask supporters to consent into hearing more from us. And again, those communications, the more they are two-way, the more they create positive experiences, and supporters can see what they get from it as much as what we get from it, and that kind of two-way, um, experience.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: I think the more that, you know, we’re opening up those windows to make sure we can communicate with them in a consent model, Mm-hmm … and there’s other opportunities in other spaces where we can use soft opt-in is what you’re saying as well. You know? Yeah. Yes, I know that acquisition through face-to-face and telephone fundraising is a, is a big part.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: But also the consent model is what we’ve been using for a really long time, and I’ve definitely worked with some charities who still get really great results in terms of their consent opt-ins and, and the quality of those and, and then the conversations they can go on and have to see what those supporters then do in the future.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: So that still exists. Uh, and just again, for our listeners, this … We, we were specifically talking around sort of face-to-face and telephone with this question versus your kind of third-party fundraising platforms. Um, we’ve had a separate conversation about those on our website, so if you wanna check out that session.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: With some of your third-party platform sup- suppliers, um, you can do that on the Fundraising Everywhere on-demand as well. All right. Well, I guess before we close up, um, Claire, I think, like so many of these conversations I have, I’m like, sometimes I learn some new bits, sometimes they seem the same, and I’m just frustrated that it’s not going our way or my way or the way that maybe I know would really benefit our members.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: But I think, you know, as charities begin to implement these new rules, um, and I think as we move kind of going forward, what would you leave fundraisers with one piece of advice about using that charitable pur- purposes soft opt-in, what, like, what would it be? Because I think we are seeing it as an opportunity.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Yes, there’s some limitations. I think there’s much more clarity on what those are now. Yeah. But there’s also a starting place, right? So- Yeah … what, yeah, what would you leave our listeners with?
Claire Stanley : There’s, I mean, there’s a few, there’s a few things. I think one of the most important things is treat soft opt-in as a relationship building tool and not simply as a way to increase email volumes.
Claire Stanley : I think you’ve kinda, y- you kinda ni- hit the nail on the head earlier, Cam, when you were talking about that, about engagement and keeping that dialogue going. It is a relationship building tool, and it can lead to lifelong journeys if it’s done right.
Multiple Speakers: Mm-hmm.
Claire Stanley : Um, and then just make sure that you build compliant opt-out wording into all your future supporter journeys.
Claire Stanley : Just always make sure people have got that option there, that they can see it. It’s clear in every email that they can opt out whenever they want because that’s your robust audit trail really. If anyone was ever to put in a complaint about The number of emails they’ve received, then as long as you could show that that person’s opted in and in every single piece of correspondence they’ve had, they’ve had the opportunity to opt out.
Claire Stanley : You’ve- you’ve done everything right. You’ve done what you were supposed to do. Um, so robust audit trails and it’s probably worth, if you can, if you’ve got the system in place, not every charity’s gonna have the- the ability to do this, but monitor your supporter feedback, your unsubscribe rates, and any complaints that you get and- and just learn from them.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Yeah. Absolutely. That ongoing monitoring, that documenting is such a key part of that kind of learning from what might happen. Um, and yeah. And- and I think we should continuously be doing that I’m sure you agree, Claire. So that should be a part of the processes that we have anyway. Someone said this in a webinar I was listening to the other day, that, like, a lot of these conversations we’re having around soft opt-in are actually conversations we should be having around our entire fundraising program anyway.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Mm-hmm. About our CRM databases, can they capture and do the right things? Like, about, and segment, uh, different data. About our, like, supporter journeys, can we create them in a way that’s two-way? About documenting, about audit trails. So, you know, I think this is also an opportunity for- for us to kinda get houses in order as well.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Yeah. As well as looking at the opportunity with soft opt-in, which I think can be, um, yeah, a- a good opportunity for us as a sector.
Claire Stanley : Yeah.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Well, no doubt, Claire, we will be back.
Claire Stanley : Well, there’s plenty to talk about with this, I think. Plenty
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: to talk about, I think. Um, and you know, I think for our listeners, I’d really love to hear from some organizations.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: I know that there are some, um, who are already implementing it, already trying it. Again, in our webinar that happened last week, um, they listed a couple of charities that were trying it, and I reckon everyone went to that charity’s website. Like, “I’m gonna test it.” They probably got loads of donations, like, “I’m gonna test the donation to see what happens.”
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: So I know that some organizations are trying it already, and I think, lots of those smaller organizations sort of leading the way in that because I guess smaller systems and complexities to manage. Um, but I think as we go on, it’ll be really, really great to learn from that. Do you think the CIOF will do any kind of benchmarking of this in the future, or the reg- like, pair up with the regulator to look at this?
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: ‘Cause I think-
Claire Stanley : Yep …
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: something that maybe people won’t always hear about unless, yeah, there’s a- Yeah … manual following benchmark or something.
Claire Stanley : Yeah. That’s- that’s a good point, actually, Cameron. I think it’s probably something we could look at doing because, um, we’ve got s- we’ve got so many, like yourself, we’ve got so many members who want to adopt it, um, and- and are just starting out.
Claire Stanley : And I think it’s probably something that you would look at maybe in 18 months- Yeah … to two years time. Once it’s embedded and people have actually had the chance to kinda get used to it. Mm-hmm. I don’t think, I don’t think a year would be long enough for- Fair … for this. Exactly. Especially given that there was such a delay in getting the guidance.
Claire Stanley : That, you know, really although it started on the 5th of February, I don’t think people would really have started going, “Okay, let’s make, let’s do some changes,” until May. Yeah. Because you … without the guidance, it was really hard to actually start anything. Yes. Um, so I would say maybe around this time next year would be a time to start looking at gathering data towards the end of the year, and then seeing what, what’s come out of it.
Claire Stanley : But yes, that’s some food for thought. I’m gonna add that to my list.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Well, remember where you hear it, heard it first.
Claire Stanley : I’ll give, I’ll give you the exclusive. Yes.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: We’ll have an exclusive here on Fundraising Everywhere. I love that. So we’ll have the exclusive for our listeners as well, which will be awesome.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Thank you, Claire. And thank you so much for coming to, to talk about- Thank
Claire Stanley : you for having me. It’s a pleasure as always.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: Thank you, Claire. Take care. Bye. And a big goodbye to our listeners as well. Thank you so much for tuning in to today’s podcast episode. As you all know, um, as being a Fundraising Everywhere member, you also get access not only to our podcast, but to our on-demand library.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: All of those sessions that I referenced, if you wanna go back and look at anything we’ve done in the past. Also, connecting with some other organizations to hear from them on stories that they might have of things that they’ve tried, or challenges or opportunities. Um, so if you’re interested in that, you can always head to our website and click on the Join Us button, um, and you can find out more as well.
Cam St-Omer Donaldson: But I think that’s it from us. Um, so thank you again for listening and hopefully see you on the next podcast. Usually it’s Simon who hosts these, so you probably won’t see me on the next one. But, um, it was nice to be here. Thank you.
Alex Aggidis: Thank you so much for listening to the Fundraising Everywhere podcast.
Alex Aggidis: If you’re enjoying this podcast, why not share it with a fundraising friend? And if you would like to give us a little like or subscribe, it really helps more fundraisers like you find us. Thank you so much. See you next time.