By Adam Riddell, Director, Crystal PR

A recently published report looking at the value of Jersey’s charity sector has thrown up some interesting communications issues.

Overall, the report – The Value of Jersey’s Third Sector – confirms a fair amount of what we already presumed but about which we had little data.

It includes a broad range of interesting figures, including that the sector contributes £230m to the local economy, that around 7,700 people are either employed or volunteer for the sector in some capacity, and that 37% of charities have less than three months’ worth of reserves available to them.

In other words, it’s a vital element of the local economy, adding real value; it impacts a lot of people; but it’s massively under threat.

Interestingly, a fair amount of local media coverage relating to the report has picked up on the narrative that the finance industry has to ‘step up’ to support the charity sector, to address this vulnerability. Comments have alluded to the idea that only 2% of charity income comes through corporate sponsorship.

However, in the report itself, the finance industry is not actually mentioned or singled out at all.

What it actually says is that corporates only contribute 2% of earned income. Earned income is only a part of overall income. The other parts are, generally, donations and grants. And in fact, the report acknowledges that it is difficult to know exactly the total income charities receive from corporates. 

‘Corporates’ seems to have been interpreted as a proxy for the finance industry. It’s understandable in an economy where finance dominates, but it’s not quite the full picture.

Of course, it is very possible that finance firms – and other corporates – could and possibly should contribute more to charities in different ways. Greater diversity of charity support would be one area, for instance, in an island where there are more than 700 charity organisations, and there is definitely scope for engagement and greater strategic alignment with charity needs within the private sector.

But it does seem to be a bit of a disservice to the report to make this the key finding. Because there’s a lot of other good stuff in this report too – some with clear relevance to good communications and relationship management.

Greater long-term planning, collaboration and engagement on the part of charities and the private sector, for instance, are some areas where the report makes recommendations and where communication can play a positive role.

It’s quite striking that only 11% of charities claim to have a long-term vision or plan, and that 44% of charities rarely or never engage with public policymakers.

And these are similar findings to another recent paper published by Bristol-based consultancy Strike Communications, which makes the case for a strategic approach to communication enabling charities to achieve their business objectives. It can do that by raising awareness, building trust, and meaningfully engaging with stakeholders.

Such findings are very much echoed in the Jersey report too.

So what are the comms lessons from the report?

First, it’s important to take a critical approach to data analysis. Reports and surveys can be rich and data complex. Communicators need to be careful in how data is interpreted.

And second, strategic communications can play a big part in enabling charities – and corporates – to address some of the big picture issues they very clearly face.

Adam also sits on the Advocacy and Communications Sub-Committee for the Association of Jersey Charities.