FundRaising Standards Board

Advice & Regulation

• The Standards
  • The Codes of Fundraising Practice
  • The Fundraising Promise
  • Self-regulation
  • Influencing the Standards
• Complaints
  • Identifying a Complaint
  • Our Process
  • Adjudications
  • Annual Return
• Supporter Care
• The FRSB Tick
  • Public Confidence
  • Using the Tick
  • Download the Tick
  • Promoting Your Membership
• Your Membership
  • What It Means
  • Getting Started
  • Communicating your membership
  • The Advisory Forum

Adjudications

UNICEF (United Nations Children's Fund) - Informally resolved (no further action required)

Published: 24th April 2009

Complaint Summary

A member of the public complained that UNICEF, through their 'Child Immunisation Card' appeal, as featured in the June/July issue of the Radio Times, was misleading. The complainant believes they are making exaggerated claims and are using scare tactics.

A complaint was made to the charity in the first instance; however the matter could not be resolved at the first stage and was referred to stage two as per the FRSB complaints process.

Issues

UNICEF used exaggerated claims in their immunisation appeal.

Complainant's Summary (in own words):

UNICEF's mock-up 'Immunisation Record' card claims:

• "When a child has an immunisation card like this, it proves they're protected against six deadly diseases."
• "Sadly, over 3,400 of the world's poorest children - just like little Hossain - die every single day from these six child killers: Whooping cough, polio, diptheria, measles, tetanus, tuberculosis. Perhaps the real tragedy is that each of these deaths can be prevented."

Both wildly exaggerated claims, that not even the vaccine manufacturers, nor any epidemiologist, would state to be realistic expectations.

I would simply ask that UNICEF is less misleading with their claims and more honest with the efficacy of vaccinations to induce sustainable immunisation and hence a possible limited percentage protection response.

To state that "each of these deaths can be prevented" by vaccination is untrue. UNICEF's Response (Summarised from responses)

The charity has explained that, the statement "when a child has an immunisation card like this, it proves they are protected against 6 deadline diseases" means that the immunisation card is given to all babies who have received (or are receiving) vaccines against the 6 diseases mentioned on the card. They explained the card is similar to that which is used in the UK, whereby a parent/carer is able to track and prove the immunisation of their child. If a child has an immunisation card, it means they have/or are receiving immunisations.

UNICEF said, given that the 6 key vaccines mentioned on the card are given to a child whilst they are a baby, if the child has the card, it means they have received the relevant immunisations and are therefore inoculated against the diseases.

The charity stated that althought no vaccine attains 100% effectiveness they are very effective. They added that more than one dose of a vaccine is generally given to increase the chance of developing immunity.

UNICEF said its aim in immunisation campaigns is to provide a high level of coverage in order to achive immunity among the whole population by interrupting transmission (known as "herd immunity"). This will protect even children who have not received a vaccination and the very small number who have been vaccinated without producing an immune response. UNICEF said that this is an important element of its claim for the efficacy of immunisation programmes.

UNICEF said that, based on the fact that vaccines are highly effective, they believe the communication ("Child Immunisation Appeal") is not exaggerated or misleading as immunisation does protect a child from preventable diseases.

Stage 2 Resolution Attempted

• An explanation from UNICEF about their appeal was rejected by the complainant as being insufficient.
• The complainant provided information to back up his opinion including information on the efficacy of vaccinations. The FRSB could not consider the relative effectiveness of vaccinations and as such this part of the complaint was not taken forward.
• We asked UNICEF if they might consider including a supporting statement as part of the their appeal in the future to back up/clarify claims in their appeal. The charity felt that it was not appropriate to provide the information suggested on the material itself but that detailed further information was available following any subdequent request or query.
• We asked UNICEF if they would like to provide the complainant with a further response. The charity did not feel that providing information additional to what they had already provided would change the complainant's opinion.
• The complainant asked to escalate the complaint to stage three of the process as there was not a resolution at stage two.

Assessment

The Board adjudicated on the basis of the Institute of Fundraisings Codes of Fundraising Practice:

Accountability and Transparency in Fundraising - in particular Section 6.1, relating to Fundraising Materials, taking into account the requirements that charities "should think carefully about fundraising requests, statements and examples that are used on marketing materials and ought not to mislead".

And the Fundraising Promise: "We are honest and open" taking into account the commitment "we tell the truth and do not exaggerate".

OUTCOME - Informally resolved (no further action required)

The Board's view was that there were parts of the leaflet which could be construed by readers as exaggeration, although in the Board's view there was no intent to mislead, and the average member of the public would not be likely to be misled.

In determining what, if any, further action might be taken in this case, the Board has considered the following:

• That the potential for a breach is a relatively minor one and is unlikely to have misled or caused distress to members of the public
• That UNICEF has agreed to make changes to the relevant copy.

As such, the matter is informally resolved without the need for further action.

Adjudication Recommendation

No further action required - UNICEF has made amendments to its immunisation appeal leaflet with which the Board is satisfied (see Appendix below).

Appendix

• "If Hossain had been given an Immunisation Card like this, he'd have been protected against the measles that killed him." Text removed altogether
• "When a child has an immunisation card like this, it proves they're protected against six deadly diseases" changed to "When a child has a completed immunisation card like this, it shows they've received life-saving vaccines against six deadline diseases."
• "Perhaps the real tragedy is that each of these deaths can be prevented" changed to "Perhaps the real tragedy is that these deaths are entirely preventable" (Referenced to http://www.immunisation.nhs.uk/about_immunisation/
  around_the_world/the_global_context)
• "Just 61p will pay for the medicine to save a child's life. It's incredible to think that just 61p will pay for the medicine to immunise a child against all six killer diseases" changed to "Just 61p will pay for the vaccines to help save a child's life".

Return