Eddies and Tides

Dunn, Alison; Breen, Oonagh B.; Sidel, Mark; Fremont-Smith, Marion R.

doi:10.1017/9781316711446.003

Cited by 4 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It was two cases of charity financial misconduct-at Moonbeams and Breast Cancer Research-that acted as the germinator for the establishment of a dedicated Scottish charity regulator (Lambert, 2011). Prior to OSCR, the Scottish charitable sector was very lightly regulated by the U.K. Inland Revenue, and there was significant support from the sector itself for clearer statutory regulation (Dunn, 2016). Cases and concerns such as these call into question the adequacy of charity monitoring and regulation, and their role in protecting and enhancing public confidence in the sector (Cordery, 2013;Krashinsky, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Determinants of Charity Misconduct

McDonnell

Rutherford

2017

Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Authors' Note The authors would like to thank the Economic and Social Research Council(ESRC) and the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR) for their generous financial support of the research through a collaborative PhD studentship. In particular credit is due to Louise Meikleham and Judith Turbyne at OSCR for their substantial co-operation and feedback, and the anonymous reviewers for their insightful and constructive comments. DataThe data underpinning the analysis can be obtained by contacting the corresponding author, though it will be made available through an open-access repository in the near future. AbstractCharities in the UK have been the subject of intense media, political and public scrutiny in recent times; however our understanding of the nature, extent and determinants of charity misconduct is weak. Drawing upon a novel administrative dataset of 25,611 charities for the period 2006-2014 in Scotland, we develop models to predict two dimensions of charity misconduct: regulatory investigation and subsequent action. There have been 2,109 regulatory investigations of 1,566 Scottish charities over the study period, of which 31 percent resulted in regulatory action being taken. Complaints from members of the public are most likely to trigger an investigation, while the most common concerns relate to general governance and misappropriation of assets. Our multivariate analysis reveals a disconnect between the types of charities that are suspected of misconduct and those that are subject to subsequent regulatory action.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Determinants of Charity Misconduct

McDonnell

Rutherford

2017

Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Britain, the design and development of the fundraising self-regulatory codes represent a deliberate attempt by the state to give self-regulation an opportunity to prove itself as an efficient and effective mode of regulation while reserving the power to the minister to legislate whether fundraising regulation falls short of the mark (Dunn, 2017). 11 Not leaving it to the sector to define “success” of self-regulation, the Home Office published a list of principles against which to measure the success of self-regulation in 2006 (Goggins, 2006).…”

Section: The Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Riding the Regulatory Wave: Reflections on Recent Explorations of the Statutory and Nonstatutory Nonprofit Regulatory Cycles in 16 Jurisdictions

Breen

Dunn

Sidel

2019

Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores both state-based regulation and self-regulation, shared narratives, and lessons to better understand the interaction of these two forms of regulation in the nonprofit space. “The Context” section outlines six preliminary research questions that inform the work. “The Framework” section then outlines the regulatory framework, focusing on various regulatory motivations, before “The Findings” section turns to country findings. In unpacking some of the major findings, we look first at state perspectives on the role of regulation before considering the sector’s perspective. Taking both on board enables us to configure the relationship spectrum between state and sector when it comes to regulation and to begin to identify, based on the 16 case studies undertaken, the most common triggers for regulatory change identified therein and to reframe them through the development of a series of five regulatory propositions and seven environmental variables to help understand how different forms of regulation are triggered and interact.

show abstract

“…At the international level, there have been more than 300 initiatives developed by charities, suggesting that self-regulation is a rapidly evolving trend (Warren & Lloyd, 2009). In United Kingdom, charity self-regulation is a well-established regulatory trend (Dunn, 2016). It has been estimated that there are over 130 self-regulatory initiatives developed at sectoral level, the most well-known is the Charity Governance Code (Dunn, 2016).…”

Section: Charity Self-regulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In United Kingdom, charity self-regulation is a well-established regulatory trend (Dunn, 2016). It has been estimated that there are over 130 self-regulatory initiatives developed at sectoral level, the most well-known is the Charity Governance Code (Dunn, 2016). Diverse self-regulatory initiatives exist, from quality standards programs to third-party accreditation schemes, and they encompass many aspects of organisational life ranging from fundraising (Fundraising Regulator) to digital engagement (Charity Digital Code).…”

Section: Charity Self-regulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Diverse self-regulatory initiatives exist, from quality standards programs to third-party accreditation schemes, and they encompass many aspects of organisational life ranging from fundraising (Fundraising Regulator) to digital engagement (Charity Digital Code). Contemporary co-regulation 1 effort between the Charity Commission and umbrella bodies like NCVO proposes that this approach is used as a regulatory infrastructure to fill normative gaps in standards and governance (Dunn, 2016).…”

Section: Charity Self-regulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation