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

Cancer Research UK - Not Upheld

Published: 13th September 2010

Complaint Summary

Cancer Research UK runs a very successful fundraising event known as Race for Life, which is 5km. Since its inception Race for Life has been a female only event and by definition excludes male participation.

1. The complainant believes that Cancer Research UK are in Breach of Article 14 of The Human Rights Act and Section 29 of The 1975 Sex Discrimination Act as the Race for Life is a female only event and prevents male participation.
2. Sadly, the complainants eldest daughter, the mother of two daughters and one son, died from ovarian cancer, in 2001. In memory of his deceased daughter, he wished to participate in the Race for Life with his wife, his other daughter, granddaughters, daughter-in-law and female friends of the family in helping to raise funds for cancer research but was not permitted to do so. As a result, for some time now, the complainant has been seeking to persuade Cancer Research UK to change its participation criteria in the Race for Life to include men.
3. From the complainant’s perspective, the male alternative race, branded the “Run for Moore” 5 km race is not as accessible or as frequent. Cancer Research UK coordinate across the UK, 240 Race for Life Events while last year Cancer Research UK coordinated only 1 Run for Moore event held in Blackheath Common, London.
4. The complainant believes that since cancer affects all members of the family, without discrimination, then Cancer Research UK should take steps to remove the blatant sex discrimination of the (female only) Race for Life over 5km.
5. The complainant also believes that, in coordinating so few Run for Moore events and excluding men from participating in the Race for Life, this means that Cancer Research UK are being Unfair and Unreasonable.

Members Response

1. The charity has explained to the complainant on a number of occasions that the Race for Life event is a successful event driven by high levels of participation and generating strong and regular funding to support their cause. Last year the event raised £66 million making it their most successful fundraising initiative. They have also stated on a number of occasions that they would not continue over an extended period with a fundraising event if, on balance, it did not generate sufficient funds for the cause they support.
2. The lack of male fun run events coordinated by Cancer Research UK is simply due to a lack of demand to hold them. The Run for Moore event was set up in 2006 by Cancer Research UK to see if there was the support for a male only fun run similar to the female only Race for Life but it has proven not to be anywhere near as successful. As a result, in 2009 Cancer Research UK decided to consolidate the series into one event per year held on Blackheath Common. They argue that streamlining the number of events within the series has allowed them to make the best use of their resources and deliver the best results for the Bobby Moore Fund.
3. The charity repeatedly stated that events which they invest time, resource and money should be a good use of the charity’s funds in the context of their fundraising strategy. They cannot justify continuing with a fundraising event that does not produce the necessary returns for which they plan.
4. Cancer Research UK also believe that their continued research and surveying of participants of both events has proved to them that a female only fun run, Race for Life, is something that will continue to receive high levels of support from its participants and the donating public.

Stage 2 Resolution Attempted

A number of explanations from Cancer Research UK about why they wish the Race for Life 5km fun run to remain female only have been rejected by the complainant as being insufficient and he states that as it is a non competitive event it breaches the 1975 Sex Discrimination Act.

We asked Cancer Research UK if they might consider a mixed sex fun run on similar lines and they declined as their market research suggests that it would be unsuccessful.

We asked Cancer Research UK if they would like to provide the complainant with a further response. The charity declined as they did not feel that it would progress matters and satisfactorily placate the complainant.

Assessment

The Board adjudicated on the basis of the Fundraising Promise statement “We are fair and reasonable”.

OUTCOME: Not upheld

The Board considered that, from the information they had before them, Cancer Research UK had been fair and reasonable in their efforts to provide events that catered for both men and women.

Cancer Research UK provided evidence that they had trialled a mixed 5km fun run/walk, which had proved to be unsuccessful. They demonstrated that they are continually reviewing and testing their event programmes to ascertain what are the most successful fundraising events. They also run a number of alternative local ‘supporter led’ events across the UK and actively encourage their supporters to set up their own activities. It would not be fair or reasonable either to donors or beneficiaries for them to run events which were not successful and which they knew were not going to be successful.

Cancer Research UK had also contacted the Equality & Human Rights Commission about the complaint’s concerns. The Commission noted that Cancer Research UK was committed to complying with all laws applicable to it. They also decided that no action was required in relation to this matter. The Board considered that with the information before them, there was no breach of the high standards requirement that members should not breach the law.

Having considered all the information before them, the Board concluded that there was no breach of the Fundraising Promise.

The Board also wanted to commend Cancer Research UK on their sensitive handling of this particular complaint. They addressed the essence of the complaint, they were sympathetic in tone, they were clear why they disagreed and they repeatedly offered alternative ways for the complainant to be engaged in the cause. This is an excellent example of best practice in complaints handling.

Return