Charities monthly round-up – April 2026

We hope you all had a great Easter and managed to enjoy a bit of sunshine, even if it felt like it arrived on a very short‑term contract.

After two gloriously warm days, normal service quickly resumed with Storm Dave a not so gentle reminder, if one were needed, not to pack away the winter coat just yet.

While the weather may have teased us, the charity law and regulatory world has been anything but quiet. This month’s newsletter has plenty to get stuck into: from whistleblowing at board level, the new Crime and Policing Bill and a fresh spotlight on Scottish charities, to cautionary tales from the Charity Commission of blurred governance boundaries, reassurance on education and political activity, and a round‑up of key employment law changes now in force. So settle in, enjoy what might be the calm between April showers, and dive into this month’s charity‑focused updates.

Speaking up at the top: who protects the whistleblowers?

A recent Employment Appeal Tribunal decision has shone a light on an important (and perhaps surprising) gap in whistleblowing protection. The tribunal confirmed that charity trustees and non‑executive directors don’t currently benefit from statutory whistleblowing protection under the Employment Rights Act 1996 in the same way employees and workers do. In this case, an unpaid charity trustee was found not to be protected because his role was one of governance and oversight, not one where he worked under direction or subordination. While the tribunal acknowledged how important it is for trustees to be able to speak up, it concluded that trustees have other routes open to them, such as raising concerns with the Charity Commission or another regulator.

This ruling matters to charities because it means trustees who raise concerns about wrongdoing may not have the same legal safety net as staff. That makes it even more important for charities to handle concerns raised by trustees thoughtfully and constructively. If issues aren’t dealt with well internally, there’s a real risk that matters escalate into regulatory complaints, public scrutiny or wider governance problems. The decision also highlights an uneasy mismatch between the law and regulatory expectations: trustees are still expected to act in the charity’s best interests and to report serious concerns, even if the legal protections around doing so are limited.

This case is explored in greater detail in a brilliant blog post by Katherine Sinclair legal director in our employment and pensions team, in collaboration with colleagues from our charities team, including senior associate Esther Campsall. The blog takes a deeper dive into the ruling, what it means in practice and how charities can manage the risks when trustees speak up.

Spotlight on Scottish charities: what’s now on the public record

The Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR) recently began publishing more information on the Scottish Charity Register as part of the final reforms under the Charities (Regulation and Administration) (Scotland) Act 2023. These changes mean that the first and last names of all charity trustees will now be publicly visible. Annual reports and accounts will also be published in full, without redactions. OSCR will now include more helpful background information already collected through the annual return, such as a charity’s own description of its activities and headline figures on trustees, staff and volunteers. The aim is to boost openness and build public confidence in the sector. You can read more about the changes here.

For charities registered in Scotland, this translates into a much brighter public spotlight on governance, finances and day‑to‑day operations. Trustees should be aware that anything submitted to OSCR will now be accessible in full. This means accuracy, clarity and careful handling of personal data are all more important than ever. It may also be a good time to take a fresh look at how your charity describes what it does on the Register, given the reputational impact this information can have on funders, beneficiaries and the wider public. If you would like to discuss how these changes could impact your organisation, please contact Katie Crosbie or your usual AC contact.

The Crime and Policing Bill – Implications for charities promoting religion

Parliament is in the final stages of passing the Crime and Policing Bill, which includes changes affecting churches and other religious charities. It will be of significant interest to charities whose purposes are to advance religion and particular those charities who will be carrying out public worship and prayer, youth ministry and groups, pastoral care, street evangelism and public proclamation of faith.

The Bill introduces mandatory reporting requirements for individuals in designated roles who have reasonable grounds to suspect child sexual abuse. This significantly strengthens safeguarding obligations for charities, including faith-based organisations. Failure to comply may expose charities and individual office‑holders to criminal, civil and regulatory consequences

Public worship, prayer and sharing faith remain lawful. However, the Bill gives police new powers to impose conditions on protests near places of worship where activity could intimidate or disrupt services. These powers aim to balance freedom of protest with freedom of religion and worship.  This may particularly affect charities whose worship services are open to the public; that hold regular prayer events or religious festivals; or whose premises are in city centres or near protest routes

Charities should, in light of the impending new laws, review their safeguarding policies in light of mandatory reporting duties; ensure training for staff, clergy and volunteers, with clear reporting procedures; make sure that safeguarding responsibilities are properly governed, supervised and documented; carry out risk assessments for public‑facing religious activities; review policies covering public worship, outreach and evangelism; and have strong trustee oversight and record consideration of the Bill and its implications.

If you would like advice on the mandatory reporting requirements that will be introduced, please contact Tim Coolican in our regulatory team.  Similarly, if you have concerns regarding the public nature of your religious services and outreach please contact me, Sarah Tomlinson  or your usual AC contact.

Shared people, shared resources… shared problems

A recent Charity Commission inquiry into two closely connected charities is a clear warning of what can go wrong when governance arrangements blur and trustees lose sight of proper procedures and good governance. The Commission identified serious failings across both charities, including poor financial controls, inadequate record‑keeping, unmanaged conflicts of interest and a lack of transparency around trustee decision‑making. The charities concerned were connected in such a way that they shared trustees, staff and premises, however, the Commission found little evidence of proper oversight of how money was being managed or transferred between them.

One of the Commission’s biggest concerns was the number of transactions involving trustees and individuals connected to them. These transactions were found to be often without clear authority, written agreements or any meaningful consideration of conflicts. The inquiry also flagged the very real risks that arise when one charity becomes financially dependent on another, particularly where the same individuals are involved in both charities. The outcome was stark: both charities were removed from the Register and several trustees were disqualified, underlining just how seriously the regulator views failures to protect charitable assets and meet core trustee duties.

The key lesson that trustees should take from this inquiry is simple but important: good governance really matters. Strong structures, clear boundaries between connected organisations and open, well‑managed conflicts of interest are essential. Payments to connected persons must always be lawful, properly justified, clearly recorded and demonstrably in the charity’s best interests. Where charities share resources or work closely together, formal agreements and regular reviews aren’t just good practice – they are vital. If you’d like to talk about how this might affect your organisation, please contact Edwina Turner or your usual AC contact.

When education meets politics (and stays lawful)

The Charity Commission has recently closed an investigation that followed allegations made online and in the media that a charity’s educational work in schools had crossed the line into inappropriate political activity. After reviewing the charity’s materials and meeting with its trustees, the regulator concluded that the charity had acted within both its charitable purposes and the law. Crucially, it confirmed that criticising aspects of government policy can be perfectly permissible, provided it supports the charity’s objects and does not stray into party politics.

This outcome is a helpful reassurance for charities involved in advocacy or education, particularly in sensitive or high‑profile areas. The Commission restated that education does not need to be completely “value free”, meaning charities are allowed to express a viewpoint where that viewpoint supports their charitable aims. As long as activities remain clearly connected to the charity’s purposes and avoid party‑political bias, campaigning and education can sit comfortably within the rules.

The case also shines a light on the real governance and reputational risks that can arise from misinformation campaigns. Trustees should make sure decisions are properly documented, policies (especially on education, communications and political activity) are clear and up to date, and there is good oversight of how activities might land externally. Being able to show strong governance and regulatory awareness remains one of the best defences when coming under scrutiny. If you would like to talk through any concerns related to these issues, please contact Catherine Gibbons or your usual AC contact.

When good intentions meet regulatory reality…

The Charity Commission also recently concluded a regulatory compliance case involving HOPE Unlimited Charitable Trust (previously known as the Hope Not Hate Charitable Trust), which is a timely reminder of the risks that can arise when charities work closely with non‑charitable organisations. Although the charity and the linked non‑charitable company had similar aims, the Commission was concerned that shared branding, messaging and funding arrangements blurred the lines between the two — especially as the non‑charitable body was heavily involved in political campaigning. After repeated complaints and renewed scrutiny in 2025, the charity was required to take action, including rebranding to clearly delineate the organisations, strengthening board independence and putting clearer operational boundaries in place.

The big takeaway? Independence and transparency are important – and they need to be obvious to the outside world, not just understood internally. Where charities collaborate with connected organisations, trustees should be confident they can clearly explain who does what, why decisions are being made and how funds are being used in furtherance of charitable purposes. Grant making, in particular, needs proper justification, robust due diligence and ongoing oversight so there’s no suggestion the charity is just passing money along unchecked. The case also shows that when the regulator raises concerns, dragging your feet can make things worse. Acting quickly, clearly and decisively can make all the difference – both for compliance and for protecting your charity’s reputation. Please contact me, Sarah Tomlinson or your usual AC contact if you wish to discuss this further.

Employing people? Here’s what’s new from April

If your organisation employs staff, there are some important employment law changes now in force that are well worth having on your radar. From 6 April 2026, a suite of reforms under the Employment Rights Act 2025 and related regulations have strengthened worker protections in several key areas – many of which will affect charities as employers just as much as any other organisation. The changes include expanded family‑friendly rights (with minimum service requirements removed for paternity leave and unpaid parental leave), new entitlements for bereaved parents and enhanced whistleblowing protections, with sexual harassment now expressly recognised as a “protected disclosure” issue.

There are also some changes with real operational and financial impact. Statutory Sick Pay is now payable from day one, with the lower earnings limit removed. This will likely affect absence management and budgeting. For charities undergoing restructures, the potential exposure in collective redundancy situations has increased, with maximum protective awards rising to 180 days’ pay. Employers must also keep proper records to demonstrate compliance with annual leave and holiday pay rules, reinforcing the need for good systems and clear documentation.

The main thing to consider is that policies, processes and staff training may now need a refresh. Reviewing family leave policies, sickness procedures, whistleblowing frameworks and working time records is a sensible place to start – especially for organisations operating with lean HR resources or a mix of paid staff and volunteers. Our Anna Dabek , partner in the employment and pensions team has set out the changes clearly in a recent blog post, which is well worth a read if you want the full picture

For more information

For more information or advice on the topics covered in this month’s newsletter, please get in touch with your usual AC contact or me, Sarah Tomlinson, your editor for this month.

For those of you who may not know me, I have specialised in governance and regulation for charities for 21 years, reviewing and advising on charitable trusts, church and ecclesiastical matters, Charities Act restrictions on property disposals and obtaining Charity Commission consents, mergers, reorganisations and governance reviews. I am an approved Interim Manager (and has been appointed as such five times) for the Charity Commission as part of their regulatory remit, trusted to manage the governance of a charity in place of or alongside trustees, where they are subject to a Charity Commission Statutory Inquiry. I lead the firm’s work in relation to Church Sharing Agreements, Local Ecumenical Partnerships and equity sharing for ministerial property.