Human Appeal vs Penny Appeal
In short: Human Appeal runs relief, development and one-to-one orphan sponsorship through its own hubs, field offices and local partners. Penny Appeal funds water, food, orphan and emergency programmes through partners, with orphan sponsorships shared by up to eight donors.
Last reviewed by CharityCompare editorial.
Both are UK charities offering orphan sponsorship and 100% Zakat promises, but the promises differ in detail. Human Appeal says Zakat given to its Zakat Fund with Gift Aid reaches programmes in full, with costs covered by Gift Aid. Penny Appeal says it takes no fees from Zakat, though partners may deduct up to 12.5%. In 2024 Human Appeal spent £63.0 million on charitable activities and Penny Appeal £10,260,387.
Human Appeal vs Penny Appeal: key differences
| What to compare | HUMAN APPEAL | PENNY APPEAL |
|---|---|---|
| Registered work and operating model | Emergency relief, development, Ramadan and Qurbani programmes and orphan care, through hubs, field offices and local partners. | Water, food, orphan care, education, eye care and emergency work through partners overseas, and a community kitchen in the UK. |
| What to consider | It reports 6,240,711 people helped across 30 countries in 2024, counting project outputs in Gaza where unique people could not be counted. Its Zakat policy also allows up to 12.5% of the Zakat fund for Zakat overseers, without explaining how that fits its 100% promise. | Its 2024 report counts money rather than people, and the 50 million and 59.6 million beneficiaries on its website are undated and undefined. Its orphan figure of over 121,000 counts sponsorships since it began, not children sponsored now. |
| Access and practical checks | For the 100% route, give to its Zakat Fund and tick Gift Aid; Zakat is held as a restricted fund. Orphan sponsorship is one-to-one and open-ended, for orphans in developing countries rather than the UK. | Its 100% Zakat policy takes no Penny Appeal administration or fundraising fees from Zakat, but its disclaimer says partners may deduct up to 12.5%. Sponsoring one specific orphan costs £15 a month alongside seven other donors, or £120 alone. |
| Sourced result or evidence gap | 35,607: Orphans sponsored. 2024, 14 countries. A charity-reported output for a one-to-one programme; its website defines an orphan as a child without a father or both parents. Separately, it reports £13.65 million of Zakat donated by 87,850 people in 2024. | No 2024 people-reached figure is given. Its 2024 report shows £10,260,387 of charitable spending, including £2,785,013 on orphans; these are financial inputs, not results for children. |
What the latest filings show
Figures from the accounts held in our dated dataset; the live register may contain newer filings. Ratios can span multiple years, as labelled. Clarity scores use our methodology. Cost to raise £1 of donations is not part of the score; legacies make it lumpy, and it is withheld where trading costs would distort it (how it works).
| Metric | HUMAN APPEAL | PENNY APPEAL |
|---|---|---|
| Latest accounts year in our snapshot | 2024 | 2024 |
| Financial snapshot refreshed | 2026-09-06 | 2026-09-06 |
| Ratio reporting window | 3-yr avg | 3-yr avg |
| Overall score | 78/100 (4★) | 69/100 (3★) |
| Accountability & Finance | 100/100 | 100/100 |
| Spend on charitable activities | 73% of expenditure | 72% of expenditure |
| Fundraising efficiency | £4.4 total income per £1 fundraising (2022–2024, disclosed years) | £3.5 total income per £1 fundraising (2022–2024, disclosed years) |
| Cost to raise £1 of donations | 18p per £1 (2024) · 24p over 2022–2024 | 28p per £1 (2024) · 30p over 2022–2024 |
| Latest income | £90m | £13m |
| Fundraising spend | 25% of expenditure | 28% of expenditure |
| Reserves | 1 month | 4 months |
| Accounts filing | On time | On time |
| Data confidence | high | high |
| Charity number | 1154288 | 1128341 |
Considering Human Appeal
- You want a 100% Zakat route funded by Gift Aid, through its Zakat Fund.
- You want to choose a specific orphan to sponsor one to one.
Considering Penny Appeal
- You want to share the sponsorship of one specific orphan with other donors.
- You want to support water, food and eye-care programmes as well as orphan care.
Human Appeal vs Penny Appeal: questions answered
Human Appeal or Penny Appeal: which should I support?
There is no universal winner. Human Appeal runs relief, development and orphan sponsorship through its own hubs, field offices and partners; Penny Appeal works through partners and is a smaller charity by spending. Compare their Zakat terms and orphan sponsorship models, then check the accounts period. A financial rating is not an impact assessment.
How do their 100% Zakat policies differ?
Human Appeal says Zakat given to its Zakat Fund with Gift Aid goes in full to programmes, with administrative costs covered by Gift Aid; its policy also allows up to 12.5% of the Zakat fund for Zakat overseers. Penny Appeal says it takes no administration or fundraising fees from Zakat, but its partners may deduct up to 12.5%.
How does orphan sponsorship work at each?
Human Appeal’s sponsorship is one-to-one and open-ended: you can choose an orphan or have one assigned, and it reports 35,607 orphans sponsored in 2024. Penny Appeal assigns each sponsorship to one specific child, funded by eight donors at £15 a month or one donor at £120.
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.