Arts & culture · Reg 1197546
Rosetrees
Charity rating & review
61/100 Clarity Score · 3 stars · Charity Commission filings · How we score
Clarity score
Needs improvement
Quick answer
Is Rosetrees a good charity?
Rosetrees scores 61/100 (3 stars, Needs improvement) on CharityCompare's Clarity Score, calculated from its UK regulator filings. Its latest accounts year is 2025 (£6.8m total income, 89% of spending on charitable activities). This reflects financial transparency and stewardship on paper — not the real-world impact of its programmes. See the full breakdown.
Donate
How can you give to ROSETREES?
You leave CharityCompare to complete a donation on the official ROSETREES form. We do not process payments or take commission. Opens their official online donation form.
What does Rosetrees do?
Rosetrees is a registered charity (no. 1197546) working in arts & culture across the United Kingdom. Its latest Charity Commission filing directs 89% of spending to charitable activities, holding roughly 125 months of reserves, and files its annual accounts on time. Reported income changed sharply in 2024 (likely a merger, transfer or reporting change) — year-on-year trend labels are not meaningful across that step. CharityCompare's Clarity Score rates the organisation only from public Charity Commission accounts — accountability, financial health, efficiency and community support — not the quality or impact of its programmes.
Summarised from public filings — Rosetrees hasn't added its own description yet. Work here? Add it free →
In short: ROSETREES scores 61 out of 100 (3 stars). 89% average program spend (3-year average). Review the pillar breakdown below.
What is Rosetrees?
Rosetrees has a Clarity Score of 61 out of 100 on CharityCompare (3 stars, Needs improvement). Charity Commission registration number 1197546. Status: Registered. Primary cause area: Arts & culture. Latest accounts year 2025: total income £6.8m, with 89% of expenditure on charitable activities. Accounts filing: up to date. Reserves: approximately 125 months of operating costs. 2 filing concern(s) noted on this profile. Scores are independent and based on official filings — not a donation recommendation.
Data from Charity Commission register, last updated .
Overall score
61/100
3★ · Needs improvement
Cause spend
89%
3-yr avg · charitable activities
Accountability
93/100
Finance beacon
Income
£6.8m
Latest year 2025
Reserves
125 mo
Months of running costs
Accounts filing
On time
Charity Commission
Fundraising efficiency not stated · 1% overhead · Website on register · Confidence: high
How does ROSETREES compare?
Clarity Score percentile against similar UK charities — the share of peers ROSETREES scores higher than.
Scores higher than 11% of 619 charities in its income band · 61/100 vs 78 peer average (marker).
Scores higher than 14% of 624 charities in this cause · 61/100 vs 76 peer average (marker).
How reliable is Rosetrees's data?
- Source
- Charity Commission (England & Wales)
- Accounts year
- 2025
- Filing date
- Profile reviewed
High confidence — complete filing data
Scores reflect the latest annual accounts on the register. Clarity Score measures how clearly the charity accounts for money in those filings — not programme impact.
Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Sources: Charity Commission for England and Wales, Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator and Charity Commission for Northern Ireland. Open Government Licence v3.0 .
What is Rosetrees's Beacon report?
Detailed accountability and finance metrics from UK regulator filings — structured for transparency in our four-beacon report.
Accountability & Transparency
Baseline trust from filing discipline, board oversight, and declared governance policies.
93/100
| Metric | Score | Value |
|---|---|---|
| Filing history (5 years) 100% on-time over five years = 15 pts · one late filing = 5 pts · two or more = 0 pts. | 100% | 15/15 pts |
| Trustee oversight Three or more trustees on the register = 15 pts, scaled down for fewer (governance red flag below three). | 100% | 10 trustees · 15/15 pts |
| Declared policies Safeguarding (4) · conflict of interest (3) · volunteer management (3) — from Charity Commission annual return. | 70% | 7/10 pts |
Financial Health
Stability and solvency — reserves, revenue trend, and debt from Charity Commission accounts.
13/100
| Metric | Score | Value |
|---|---|---|
| Reserves (months of cash) 3–24 months = full marks, tapering on both sides · 0 months or 4+ years (hoarding) = 0 pts. | 0% | 125 months · 0/15 pts |
| Income stability / growth +20% or more over the window = 10 pts · flat = 5 pts · −20% or worse = 0 pts, scaled between. | 0% | 0/10 pts · 3-year average |
| Liabilities to assets 0% liabilities-to-assets = 5 pts, scaling down to 0 pts at 60%+ debt. | 80% | 18% · 4/5 pts |
Financial Efficiency
How efficiently funds reach the cause — program spend and fundraising cost ratios.
100/100
| Metric | Score | Value |
|---|---|---|
| Program expense ratio 90%+ on charitable activities = full marks, scaling down to 0 pts at 50% or below. | 100% | 89% · 10/10 pts (3-year average) |
| Fundraising efficiency ≤10p to raise £1 = full marks, scaling down to 0 pts at 40p or above (fundraising cost ÷ income). | 100% | 0p per £1 income · 10/10 pts (3-year average) |
Community Support
Grassroots backing from Charity Commission workforce data — volunteers vs paid staff.
0/100
| Metric | Score | Value |
|---|---|---|
| Volunteer-to-staff ratio Volunteers at 2x staff or more = full marks · no volunteers = 0 pts, scaled between. | 0% | Not reported · 0/10 pts |
What is Rosetrees's Clarity Score?
61/100 total · Needs improvement · 3 of 5 stars
Four pillars (40 + 30 + 20 + 10 points) from Charity Commission filings — see methodology for full weightings.
Accountability & Transparency
Baseline trust from filing discipline, board oversight, and declared governance policies.
93/100
Financial Health
Stability and solvency — reserves, revenue trend, and debt from Charity Commission accounts.
13/100
Financial Efficiency
How efficiently funds reach the cause — program spend and fundraising cost ratios.
100/100
Community Support
Grassroots backing from Charity Commission workforce data — volunteers vs paid staff.
0/100
How much does Rosetrees raise and spend?
Latest filed year 2025 · Source: Charity Commission filings
| Category | Amount | % of spend |
|---|---|---|
| Total income | £6.8m | — |
| Total expenditure | £15m | — |
| Charitable activities | £14m | 90% |
Where does the money go?
Latest accounts (2025) · £15m spent
- Charitable activities90% · £14m
- Other spending10% · £1.5m
What trust indicators does Rosetrees have?
Pulled from the Charity Commission register — filing behaviour, board size, and workforce where reported.
-
Accounts filed on time
up to date · last filing
-
Trustee board size (3–12)
10 trustees on the Charity Commission register
Fundraising Regulator
Status not yet checked
Separate from our financial scores — shows whether the charity follows the Code of Fundraising Practice.
Check Fundraising Regulator →Official register
Reg 1197546
Full trustee list, accounts, and regulatory history on the Charity Commission.
View on Charity Commission →Trustees & officers
- LEE ROBERT MESNICK since 2023
- Richard Alan Ross since 2023
- Mark Andrew Stewart since 2023
- Dr Jane Alison Mitchell since 2023
- Nicholas Caine since 2023
- Jamaria Kong since 2024
- Andrew Edwards since 2024
- Dr Shana Vijayan since 2024
- Rachel Livermore since 2024
- Dr David Lomas since 2025
How we score charities +
The Clarity Score is a 100-point rating from UK regulator filings (Charity Commission for England and Wales, OSCR and CCNI). Four pillars — Accountability & Transparency (40), Financial Health (30), Financial Efficiency (20), and Community Support (10) — each scored on a continuous scale, not pass/fail cutoffs. A statutory inquiry sets the score to 0 automatically.
Accountability & Transparency
Scored from filings
40 points — filing history (15), trustee oversight (15, scaling up to a board of three or more), declared policies (10).
Financial Health
Scored from filings
30 points — reserves (15, full marks 3–24 months, tapering on both sides), income stability (10), liabilities to assets (5, scaling down as debt rises).
Financial Efficiency
Scored from filings
20 points — program expense ratio and fundraising cost, each on a graduated scale (not a single cutoff). Kept at 20% of the total: financial-ratio scoring alone is not a reliable effectiveness signal (see "why not just an overhead ratio?" below).
Community Support
Scored from filings
10 points — volunteer-to-staff ratio from Charity Commission workforce data, scaling continuously up to a 2:1 ratio.
Overall score
Sum of all pillar points. Display stars use the same bands as the labels: 90–100 → 5★ Exceptional; 75–89 → 4★ Good; 60–74 → 3★ Needs improvement; 1–59 → 2★ Poor; 0 → not rated.
How have Rosetrees's finances changed over five years?
- Income
- Spending
- Cause spend
Values in £ thousands · Cause spend plotted only when the filing discloses a split · Source: Charity Commission accounts
What are the key facts about Rosetrees?
- Overall score
- 61/100 (3★)
- Income
- £6.8m
- Cause spend
- 89% of expenditure
- Reg number
- 1197546
- Scope
- UK-wide
- Reserves
- 125 months
- Trustees
- 10
- Accounts year
- 2025
- Filing
- up to date
How does ROSETREES compare, and where else can you look?
Where ROSETREES sits
The causes this charity is classified under, and other charities working nearby.
Similar arts & culture charities
Top-rated peers by CharityCompare score
- HACKNEY QUEST 100/100 · £827k
- COMMON WEALTH THEATRE LIMITED 100/100 · £760k
- PALLANT HOUSE GALLERY 99/100 · £3.0m
- CREATE (ARTS) LIMITED 99/100 · £1.6m
How can you share Rosetrees's rating?
Opens a printer-friendly view of this profile for Rosetrees.
For this charity
How do you add Rosetrees's rating to your site?
Free to use — a lightweight HTML badge or an embeddable score widget, each linking back to this independent profile and our methodology.
What red flags does Rosetrees have?
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about Rosetrees's rating, finances, and Charity Commission status.
Is Rosetrees a good charity? +
Rosetrees scores 61 out of 100 (3 stars — Needs improvement) on CharityCompare's Clarity Score, our independent read of its UK regulator filings. Around 89% of its spending goes to charitable activities and its accounts are up to date. That reflects how transparent and financially healthy it looks on paper — it does not measure the real-world impact of its work, so treat it as one factor alongside the cause you care about. CharityCompare never tells you where to donate.
Is Rosetrees a legitimate charity? +
Yes — Rosetrees is a legitimate registered charity (charity number 1197546). Verify it on the official register: https://register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/en/charity-search/-/charity-details/1197546. Registration proves status; Clarity Score then summarises filing transparency on paper, not programme impact.
What is Rosetrees's charity number? +
Rosetrees's charity number is 1197546. Check that number on the official register (Charity Commission, OSCR or CCNI) or this CharityCompare profile before you donate — scammers sometimes reuse real numbers on fake appeals.
What is Rosetrees's charity rating? +
Rosetrees scores 61 out of 100 on CharityCompare (3 stars — Needs improvement). The Clarity Score V1 sums four pillars from UK regulator filings: Accountability & Transparency (40 pts), Financial Health (30), Financial Efficiency (20), and Community Support (10). Stars use the same bands as those labels — 90+ is 5★ Exceptional. It is not an impact ranking.
Does Rosetrees have reviews and complaints? +
CharityCompare does not host public user reviews for Rosetrees. Instead you get a filing-based Clarity Score, cause spend, reserves and red flags such as late accounts (2 filing concern(s) noted on this profile). For formal complaints about a charity, contact the Charity Commission, OSCR, CCNI or the Fundraising Regulator as appropriate.
How much of my donation reaches Rosetrees? +
According to its 2025 regulator filing, 89% of Rosetrees's total spending went to charitable activities (3-yr avg across disclosed years). That is the closest official figure to "how much of your donation reaches the cause" — it is an average across all spending in the filing, not a pound-by-pound breakdown of an individual gift.
What are Rosetrees's overheads? +
According to its 2025 regulator filing, combined overheads (fundraising plus governance) were about 1% of total expenditure at Rosetrees. The filings CharityCompare uses do not publish CEO or senior-staff pay, so we cannot say what Rosetrees's chief executive is paid — where disclosure rules apply, senior pay appears in the trustees' annual report on the Charity Commission register.
How much income does Rosetrees receive? +
Rosetrees reported £6.8m total income in its 2025 accounts, based on UK regulator filings. Five-year trend: restructured.
Are Rosetrees's accounts up to date? +
Filing status: up to date (last filing 2026-06-24). CharityCompare flags late or missing accounts separately from the financial score.
Where is Rosetrees based? +
Rosetrees is listed at London · UK-wide · HA8 7LW and operates UK-wide, focused on arts & culture.
How does CharityCompare score Rosetrees? +
We calculate a Clarity Score of 0–100 from four pillars in Rosetrees's regulator filings: Accountability & Transparency (40 points — filing history, trustees, policies), Financial Health (30 — reserves, income trend, debt), Financial Efficiency (20 — cause spend and fundraising cost, on a graduated scale) and Community Support (10 — volunteer-to-staff ratio). An open statutory inquiry scores 0. The score measures reporting on paper, not programme impact. CharityCompare is free for donors, takes no commission on donations, and scores cannot be bought.
How often is this page updated? +
This profile was last updated on 17 July 2026 from the latest UK regulator data available to CharityCompare, and Rosetrees's most recent accounts cover 2025. Scores and figures refresh whenever we re-ingest the register, so the page reflects our latest data pull rather than a one-off review.