To choose between similar UK charities, separate three questions: Does this charity do the work I want to support? What can I establish from its records? What could an additional donation help it do? A single score cannot answer all three.
Use the charity comparison tool for up to four organisations. Keep the original register and annual report open beside the comparison. The steps below turn the figures into questions you can answer, rather than a league table of who deserves your money.
1. Compare the work before the numbers
Two charities in the same cause category may do different things. A breast cancer charity might fund laboratory research, provide support after diagnosis, campaign for policy change or run local groups. A Muslim or Christian charity may deliver overseas relief, UK community services or faith activities. The label alone does not establish what your gift supports.
Write down the beneficiaries, the service or programme, and the place you want to support. Check each charity’s activity statement and current programme pages against that description. A registered contact address is not a service boundary, and an organisation’s broad area of operation does not confirm eligibility for a particular service.
For a practical starting point, explore our breast cancer, Muslim and Christian charity guides. If you need help yourself, use find support to check access routes instead of a donor ranking.
2. Make sure the financial comparison is fair
Look at the start and end of each accounting period. The Charity Commission’s annual-return guidance allows accounting periods of different lengths. Comparing a short first period with a full year can make ordinary activity look like rapid growth. Source: annual-return question guide.
Our financial peer panel matches the regulator, broad cause, income band and accounts year. It uses annual periods and shows the number of disclosed values behind each median. It excludes the featured charity. Read the peer comparison method before interpreting it: even a matched group can contain different service models and year-end months.
| Evidence to compare | Question to answer | What it cannot establish by itself |
|---|---|---|
| Income and expenditure, with period dates | Are the periods and organisational boundaries comparable? | Whether growth means more effective work |
| Charitable activities spending | What is included, and is the figure reported for both charities? | How much of your specific gift reaches a beneficiary |
| Fundraising costs | Does the period include an investment or campaign whose income arrives later? | The return on each extra pound donated today |
| Reserves and the trustees’ policy | Which funds are available, restricted or committed? | A universal ideal level of cash |
| Filing history and governance information | What is reported, missing or explained? | A guarantee of integrity or service quality |
| Results and evaluation | What changed, for whom, over what period? | Causation when only activity counts are reported |
Missing data means that the comparison is incomplete. It is not a reported zero, and it is not by itself evidence of poor practice. Use the comparison download to retain the source URLs and reporting dates alongside the figures.
3. Read reserves in context
The Charity Commission defines reserves around freely available unrestricted funds, after relevant exclusions. Restricted funds, property used for services and money committed to future activity are not interchangeable with spendable cash. Its guidance says there is no single reserve level appropriate for every charity. Compare the amount with the trustees’ explanation of risks and commitments. Source: Charity Commission reserves guidance, sections 3.1–3.4.
If a headline ratio looks unusual, locate the reserves policy in the annual report before drawing a conclusion. Our reserves guide explains the questions to ask.
4. Ask what changed for people or the cause
A report may count sessions, grants, meals or people reached. Those figures help describe activity. To assess results, look for an outcome, its definition, the population covered and the time over which it was measured. Check whether the report explains uncertainty, unsuccessful work and what would likely have happened without the programme.
GiveWell’s evaluation approach illustrates the distinction: it considers evidence of effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, capacity to use additional funding and transparency. That approach does not supply an impact rating for every UK charity. Source: GiveWell evaluation criteria.
For example, one fictional service might report 1,000 appointments, while another reports 600 people receiving support. Those totals cannot be ranked as if they measured the same thing. Ask whether people can attend more than once and whether any change in wellbeing or circumstances was assessed. See how to read charity impact evidence.
5. Check the next use of your donation
A charity’s income last year does not reveal its current funding gap. Ask what additional unrestricted support would enable, whether a specific appeal has restrictions, and what happens if its target is exceeded or the planned activity changes.
Useful questions for either charity are:
- Which programme or service currently needs funding, and why?
- Where can I read its most recent results and limitations?
- Can you explain the unusual movement in the accounts?
- Is this appeal restricted, and where are its terms published?
- Are there useful ways to volunteer or donate goods, with current requirements listed?
Use a contact route on the official register or verified website. CharityCompare does not confirm that a vacancy, goods collection or grant application is currently open unless a dated source says so.
6. Save the reasoning, then choose
Record which charity fits your priorities, the sources you checked and any unanswered questions. Save a watchlist or share a comparison link if you want to revisit the decision. Choose an amount and frequency you can sustain, and check Gift Aid eligibility where relevant.
The aim is a decision you can explain: the work fits your priorities, the evidence is understood, and the donation route is authentic. Neither size nor a high Clarity Score substitutes for that judgement.