NOT the king's ransom! According to the study, having royal patronage does not bring a noticeable increase in the income of a charity
- Study "Couldn't Find Evidence Royal Sponsors Increase Charity Revenue"
- Most of the charities surveyed had no public engagements with royals in the past year
- The taking of evidence suggests that charities are selected by history and location in certain cases
A study found that if a member of the royal family became a patron, there was no financial benefit to a charity's income.
The independent think tank Giving Evidence has conducted a comprehensive study of the revenue of the 1,187 UK-registered charities that have at least one royal sponsor.
The study, published online, says, "We have found no evidence that royal patrons are increasing a charity's revenue (there were no other results that we could analyze), nor that royalties are increasing generosity more broadly."
CEO Caroline Fiennes said: “Donors sometimes think that if a charity has royal patronage, it is somehow of better quality than its peers. We have found no evidence of this. & # 39;
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have 21 charities, Prince William has 12 and Kate Middleton has nine
Prince Charles founded the Prince’s Trust in 1976 and is also a patron of charities such as Age UK and Age Cymru
The study found that 74 percent of charities that have a member of the royal family as their patron saint have not received a visit from them in the past year.
Despite being only two percent of the causes of the research, charities founded by a king were more likely to get an official visit or event.
Ms. Fiennes said: “Many charities believe that a royal patron will visit them and that they can benefit from the press and the event.
"I was really surprised to see that three-quarters of all these charities have not had a single public engagement over the past year."
"We have found no evidence that royal patrons are increasing a charity's revenue (there were no other results that we could analyze), nor are royalties increasing generosity more generally."
The former CEO and board member of the charity, Ms. Fiennes, said that patronages are not necessarily about quality, but about history and location.
What is royal patronage?
The first royal patronage dates back to the 18th century, when King George II was involved in the Society of Antiquaries, an organization that deals with the history of architecture and art.
The royal family has 2,862 patronages, less than half of which are registered with charities in the UK.
The website states: “A royal patron or president provides important publicity for the work of these organizations and enables their tremendous achievements and contributions to society to be recognized.
"Royal patronage gives an organization status, and visits and involvement of a royal patron can often bring much-needed advertising."
She said: “Donors sometimes think that if a charity has royal patronage, it is somehow of better quality than its peers.
"We have found no evidence of this."
Giving Evidence's research says: “Not only have we found no evidence that Royals are generating revenue for their charities, we have no reason why donors should expect a royal charity to outperform their peers.
'Take an ambulance. There are 21 ambulance charities in the UK, each operating a different “patch”.
& # 39; Those with high-ranking royal patrons are: Cornwall (Camilla: Duchess of Cornwall), London (William: who lives in London), Wiltshire (Camilla who has a house in neighboring Gloucestershire that the Wiltshire Air Ambulance covers) and Yorkshire (Andrew: Duke of York).
"It is likely that this choice will depend less on quality than history and geography."
London, the South East and the South West are said to be "over-patronized" compared to other parts of the country, while Royals tend to be "undisputed" cases such as environmental, animal, cultural and sports charities.
It added: "The sectors with the fewest royal patronages are housing, employment, social services and religion."