|
June 08
|
|
|
A
selection of articles from the issue are featured
below.
To
view the contents page from this issue, click the
link below. To open this page you will need acrobat
reader. If you need to download this, click here
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Full
contents of the June 2008 issue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Well
established in America and gaining ground
in the UK, homeshoring could be the next big
thing in flexible working. Peter Davy investigates |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
It’s
all about qualifications these days, so should
charity managers looking to demonstrate their
‘business’ acumen take up a traditional
MBA course, or is there more value in one
tailored to the voluntary sector? Emily Ford
finds out |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
While
still early days, Peter Davy investigates
how changes to the rules surrounding face-to-face
fundraising are impacting the sector, and
how those rules are likely to evolve |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The
growth of social networking sites has created
an entirely new medium for charities to
get their message out, and get funds in.
Duncan Jefferies examines how some organisations
are taking advantage of mainstream sites,
and how others are doing it themselves
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
David
Adams reports on the Charity Times ethical
investment roundtable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplement
: Investment quarterly
|
|
|
Second
quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
credit crunch has produced a very risk-averse
environment, yet some argue that charities
should adopt a less defensive stance with
their investment portfolios. Graham Buck examines
the case for and against |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David
Adams asks if property is still a viable investment
choice for charities, whether directly or
through funds, despite the rather gloomy picture
painted by the national media |
|
|
|
|
|
sponsored
by
|
|
|
|
|
Audit
& accountancy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paul
Gibson says there are no easy answers in the
wide-ranging debate around financial thresholds
for charity reporting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
latest phase of the Charities Act and proposed
higher audit thresholds aim to reduce regulatory
burdens and expenses for smaller charities.
But could they erode already fragile public
confidence, asks Graham Buck? |
|
|
|
 |
