Figures released on incidents reported by charities have sparked a debate about whether organisations should be required by law to report concerns

Scottish charities have reported hundreds of serious concerns over the past three years.

Since a system of organisations self-reporting incidents was introduced, 320 notifiable events have been reported to the Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR).

Concerns identified include allegations of misconduct and fraud. OSCR has said it is pleased with the progress that is being made to encourage charities to make contact when concerns are raised.

Notifiable events are defined as incidents that could have a potentially significant impact on a charity.

Of the 320 incidents reported since the system was introduced in 2016, 24% related to issues of financial loss, and 22% fraud and theft. A total of 11% were classified as safeguarding issues, with almost of third of these (28%) related to a charity declaring they were involved in the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry.

The vast majority of cases were deemed to have been handled appropriately by trustees, with 27 cases (8%) referred to OSCR’s compliance and investigation team. In 19 of these cases, the team undertook further inquiries.

Jude Turbyne, OSCR's head of engagement, said the figures showed awareness over the system had increased among charities.

She said: "The regime is still fairly new, and it is still developing. We are pleased with the progress we are making.

"In early 2018, we wrote to every charity and reminded them of notifiable events and how to contact us if one happened.

"Since then, we have seen a significant increase in the number of events raised, but this is because charities are more aware of the regime, not necessarily because these incidents are more common.”

Anna Fowlie, chief executive of the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations (SCVO), said: “Charities were asked to report notifiable events from April 2016, and it’s no surprise that concerns raised since then have increased.

“Retaining high levels of public trust is vital for organisations, and this means embracing good governance whilst recognising and addressing any issues of concern when they arise.

“The 320 notifiable events cover a wide range of issues, with only a relatively small number requiring further investigation.”

Alastair Keatinge, head of charities at Lindsays solicitors, has called for charities to be placed under legal obligation to report notifiable events.

He told the BBC: "I come at this as a supporter of OSCR, but they shot themselves in the foot by not making it a legal obligation to report a notifiable event.

"The current set-up leaves the door open for trustees, who are perhaps embarrassed or worried about the reputational damage to their organisation, to try to keep the issue in-house.

"Just over 300 events over three years when there are something like 23,000 charities strikes me that it is inevitable there is an under-reporting of notifiable events."

Stephen Phillips, head of the third sector team at Burness Paull LLP, said introducing a legal obligation could address any concerns around under-reporting, however making details public should be avoided.

He said: “The introduction of a legal obligation on charity trustees regarding notifiable events would help to reinforce OSCR’s position where there is a failure to notify OSCR – and that’s something that should certainly be addressed through the current (and long-overdue) review of the 2005 Act. It would also go some way towards addressing the concerns that have been expressed regarding under-reporting of notifiable events.

“However, any proposal to create a legal obligation on the charity to make some form of public notification at the same time should, in my view, be strongly resisted. Charities operate in a difficult environment, and strive to maximise the public benefit they deliver - operating with what is often a hard-pressed staff resource and limited funds. Things will go wrong from time to time, and it should be left to the judgement of OSCR as the charities regulator to determine whether further investigation or remedial action is needed.

“Exposing a charity in this position to the full glare of the media and public comment at the stage when notification is given could cause serious damage – and that’s particularly inappropriate given that, in the vast majority of cases, the charity will already be taking active steps, in line with principles of best practice, to remedy the position and minimise the risk of any recurrence.”