New research from the Charity Commission captures a sector operating in a more volatile public environment. A quarter of charities say they have been directly affected by polarisation and division, including vandalism, protests, falling support, threats to staff, or changes to the services they provide. Two percent of trustees report that staff have been threatened in person. Across a register of more than 171,500 charities, the Commission estimates that staff in up to 3,000 charities may have experienced in-person threats.

The figures demonstrate the extent to which hostility towards charities is now a part of the operating context for a meaningful minority of the sector. Organisations working on human rights, racial and religious harmony, refugee support and other contested causes are particularly exposed. Much of this work begins with social need, but it is now increasingly interpreted through the lens of political identity and cultural conflict.

There are clear implications for the voluntary sector in terms of communications planning and crisis management. ‘Owning the public square’ with your organisational messaging has become more critical than ever before.

In a fragmented political system, charities are being pulled into disputes they did not create. Issues such as migration, poverty, identity, community cohesion and inequality are no longer only questions of service provision or public benefit. They have become markers in wider cultural and political battles. Some charities are expected to take a side. Others are attacked because their work is interpreted as taking one. Yet their role has not changed, they exist to pursue their charitable purposes for public benefit.

Incoming Chair of the Commission, Dame Julia Unwin, touched on these challenges in a  recent speech, Holding steady: The Commission’s role in uncertain times. In a more divided public climate, “holding steady” cannot mean institutional caution or regulatory silence. It means protecting the legal space in which charities can pursue their lawful purposes, while insisting that public trust depends on responsible action and clear accountability. Strategic communications have a clear role to play in this context.

The balance between assertion and accountability is becoming harder to sustain. Charities are increasingly being asked to deal with the fallout of social fragmentation while operating with thinner financial margins. Public services remain stretched, grant funding is harder to secure, and many charities are being asked to do more with less institutional resilience. This is visible in the Commission’s own findings: 12% of charities used reserves more than planned, while 4% of trustees said their charity may close within the next year.

Public trust is the counterweight to this pressure, and strong strategic communications are central to securing that trust. The Commission’s research shows that charities remain among the most trusted institutions in society, behind only doctors. Registration also still carries weight: 27% of people say knowing an organisation is a registered charity contributes to their decision to donate. The public has not turned against charities but has practical concerns over whether donations reach the cause, that decisions are made responsibly, and that charitable status means proper accountability.

Governance therefore cannot sit in the background as paperwork. In this climate, it is part of how charities defend their legitimacy. Trustees need to be able to explain why the charity exists, how decisions are made, how resources are used, and how risk is managed when campaigns and protests escalate. The Commission’s finding that 11% of charities reported a decrease in support, while 9% reported an increase, demonstrates how polarisation can reshape public backing in both directions.

The Commission’s task is to protect lawful charitable activity without becoming another participant in political conflict. For charity leaders, the lesson is equally practical. A charity’s purpose is only defensible if its governance and public explanation can carry the weight. Public trust remains strong, but in a divided country it belongs to charities that can show their workings, not simply assert their purpose.

Communicators working in the voluntary sector should use a clear checklist of actions designed to secure these objectives:

• Conduct a review of your charitable objectives and ensure that these are clearly explained and reflected in your owned, earned and paid media channels
• Ensure that you have crisis communications and strategic communications planning built into to your stakeholder engagement infrastructure, so that you deploy quickly should difficulties arise
• Train your communications teams in difficult media handling and state of the art digital communications, including how to ensure your charity is faithfully reflected online and in AI summaries
• Keep your strategic communications planning under review at board level and involve your trustees in contingency planning

To find out more about DRD’s charities expertise, please click here.