Joe’s blog about TOIL has provoked much comment, not least in the nfpSynergy office. Mirroring the comments on our site, opinion is divided. And all of this happening while Joe is sunning himself in the Caribbean…

For me, the discussion about TOIL relates to broader questions facing charities about how to balance staff needs with responding to other stakeholders. Unlike profit-making organisations, charities have no 'simple bottom-line' to solve this.

There is no doubt that thousands of people have volunteered at the Olympics and helped make the games a success. Their breadth of roles and range of backgrounds is humbling.

In the midst of all our research and analysis to benefit the charity sector, we here at nfpSynergy have been keenly following the Olympics action – a bit of morning judo, lunchtime dressage, boxing, kayaking, swimming – we can’t seem to get enough of it. So all the controversy about empty Olympic venue seats and corporate sponsors got us thinking a bit more about funding for sports and physical fitness initiatives in this country and how to involve the public to a greater degree.

Lord Hodgson's review highlighted the need for fundraising regulation, but what about other parts of the sector?

It’s a risky move to gleefully emphasise how much you want to work somewhere else during company time in an interview, but it’s a gamble I was happy to take when I applied for my internship here. Knowing that I would be able to keep up my volunteering commitments was a real selling point for me and it is for many employees. 

We have just launched the results of our research into what charities want from grant-makers, and what a model grant-maker looks like in the eyes of charities. ‘Taking nothing for granted’ is an extensive piece of research and here is a blog outlining what we believe are some of the hallmarks of a model grant-maker.