Sportivater Limited, Bonitas Multi-Academy Trust, Chancery Education Trust, Enquire Learning Trust, and Venn Academy Trust: March 2026

Name and type of organisation(s): Sportivater Limited, a commercial organisation 

Bonitas Multi-Academy Trust  

Chancery Education Trust 

Enquire Learning Trust  

and Venn Academy Trust 

Fundraising method: Events (challenge) 

Code themes examined: Misleading information; solicitation statements 

Code breach? Yes  

The complaint  

Sportivater Limited (“Sportivater”) arranges sponsored sporting events for primary schools, with the money raised split between the company and the school. The complainant felt that Sportivater was not clear enough about how the donations were divided. In particular, the complainant was unhappy that it’s possible the school may not receive any of the funds raised by an event. 

What happened? 

The complainant was unhappy with the transparency of an event Sportivater held at their child’s school. They complained directly to Sportivater asking how much of the money raised by a school fundraising event had gone to the stated cause of sports equipment. Despite repeated requests for information and clarification, the complainant remained dissatisfied with Sportivater’s responses and the general lack of engagement. The complainant was concerned that Sportivater’s fundraising materials were not sufficiently transparent to potential donors, with different levels of disclosure to school children, parents, and school staff. 

The original complaint to us was outside our remit because the school was not a charitable organisation.  

In their subsequent complaint, the complainant showed that Sportivater had worked with a number of schools which were part of charitable trusts, or independent charities in their own right. The involvement of these organisations brought the complaint within our remit. We included some of these charitable organisations in the investigation. While these are schools that are run by charitable trusts, for the purpose of this investigation summary we will refer to them as "schools".

We found that when working with schools that were also charitable organisations, Sportivater would legally be considered a "professional fundraiser". This meant that their activities were covered by the Code of Fundraising Practice (“the code”).

We met with Sportivater, and it agreed to make changes to its documentation and processes to comply with the code, whether or not it was working with schools that were operated by charitable trusts. The complainant remained unhappy with the changes and asked us to investigate formally. 

Our decision 

We found that Sportivater had breached the code sections relating to solicitation statements and informing donors.  

At the time Sportivater worked with the schools, it was not providing enough information to potential donors or meeting the legal requirement to give a solicitation statement when fundraising. This is a verbal or written statement that professional fundraisers must give before collecting donations. It must include, as accurately as reasonably possible, how much the professional fundraiser will receive in connection with the fundraising appeal and how that is calculated.  

We also found that the schools had breached sections of the code relating to working with third party fundraisers. We recognised that it would not necessarily have been clear to the schools at the time that they were entering into a professional fundraising agreement. 

We reviewed the changes Sportivater made after it first engaged with us. We were satisfied with the changes it had made to its website. We agreed with the complainant that some of the statements Sportivater made to potential donors when organising events could be misleading. We also agreed that, while it had begun to include more information about its process on its paper sponsorship forms, the font it used was too small to be widely accessible. This breached the code requirement that fundraising must be open. 

We found that Sportivater’s materials breached the code requirement to give potential donors enough information to make an informed decision. The updated materials did not make it clear enough that Sportivater might retain 100% of donations if the event did not raise enough funds to cover its fee. 

We also identified that Sportivater is required by law to give a solicitation statement when asking for donations. We found that its first attempts to do this did not comply with the code as they were not detailed enough. The solicitation statement must estimate as closely as reasonably possible how much Sportivater will receive from each event. We recognised this was difficult to calculate precisely, and suggested Sportivater could improve this by using statistics to estimate how much it would receive at a given school. 

Throughout the investigation we found that Sportivater was cooperative and made significant efforts to adapt their materials so that they are compliant with the code.

Code sections considered 

Code of Fundraising Practice, version effective 1 October 2019 (last updated 4 June 2021) 

The schools: 

• Standard 7.2.10: breach identified
• Standard 7.3.1: breach identified  

Sportivater: 

• Standard 1.1.1: breach identified
• Standard 1.3.1: breach identified
• Standard 1.3.6: breach identified
• Standard 7.4.1: breach identified
• Standard 7.4.3: breach identified
• Standard 7.4.4: breach identified

Our recommendations 

We recommend that the schools consider and discuss this report with their trustees, identify any learning and consider how this will be shared with school staff.

We recommend that Sportivater implements the following changes to its marketing materials.  

• To be clear with donors that donated funds will pay for the event in the first instance, while any funds in excess of this will benefit the school’s sport activities.  
• To advise donors that Sportivater may also benefit from any vouchers given to the school for use to buy sports equipment via Sportivater as its share in any excess funds raised.
• To provide donors with a figure for the estimated amount rather than expecting donors work out that figure for themselves
• To include the name of the charitable institution on the paper form itself when working with a charitable school. 
• To increase the size of the disclosure text on its paper form to ensure it is accessible to potential donors. It should ensure the size of the disclosure text is at least the larger of: 
  • the smallest text appearing elsewhere on its page, or
  • ten-point Arial font. 

We recommend that Sportivater update its video presentation to avoid potentially misleading participants and donors. This should avoid implying that funds raised will definitely contribute to buying games equipment. 

Outcome 

Following our final decision the complainant asked for our external reviewer to consider our decision in this case. However, the external reviewer did not think that the reasons for this request met the criteria for review as per our process.

The schools have accepted our findings and agreed to follow our recommendations.

We asked that Sportivater confirm what changes it will make in response to our findings and recommendations. The company has outlined significant changes taken since the original complaint and subsequent investigation, and we will continue to liaise with it about these, and its ongoing work in the areas identified in this case.