SORP 2026 impact reporting: the volunteer data your trustees' annual report will need
In short
A CFG survey found only 4% of charities feel fully prepared for SORP 2026, which applies to accounting periods from 1 January 2026 and asks for fuller impact and volunteer reporting. This article explains what the SORP's summary and accountancy firms say about volunteer reporting by tier, lists the volunteer data to start collecting now, covers the systems and data protection basics, shows how to keep figures consistent across funder reports and the annual report, and gives a five-point agenda for briefing trustees.
One in five charities has not started preparing for SORP 2026. That is the headline from a Charity Finance Group survey of 101 charities across the three new reporting tiers, reported by Civil Society on 4 November. Only 4% said they were fully prepared, 30% mostly and 39% partly. Nearly two-thirds felt confident they understood the requirements, yet, as CFG’s Richard Sagar put it, understanding the changes and being ready for them are two different things.
The timing matters. SORP 2026 applies to accounting periods starting on or after 1 January 2026, so the first affected trustees’ annual report will cover a period that starts this year and will be written in 2027. The volunteer data you are collecting, or not collecting, now is the data that report will draw on. It is also Trustees’ Week, 9 to 13 November, a natural moment to brief the board.
What SORP 2026 asks about impact and volunteers
The new SORP sorts charities into three income tiers: tier 1 below £500,000, tier 2 from £500,000 to £15 million, and tier 3 above £15 million. Civil Society reported refreshed annual report requirements with dedicated sections for impact reporting and for environmental, social and governance issues.
The SORP’s own summary of changes says impact reporting is now a “must” for all charities. Accountancy firms read the detail in slightly different ways. Kreston Reeves says every charity must set out its main achievements and the difference made to beneficiaries and wider society, with tiers 2 and 3 also explaining longer-term effects. On volunteers, it says all charities must explain the scale and nature of volunteer activity, while tiers 2 and 3 should also report volunteer numbers and the activities they support, adding hours or staff equivalents where practical. Menzies reads impact reporting as mandatory for tiers 2 and 3 and recommended for tier 1, notes that KPIs are not compulsory, and says tiers 2 and 3 need fuller volunteer information such as numbers, roles and estimated hours.
Those readings overlap but differ in detail, so check module 1 of the SORP with your auditor or independent examiner for your tier. The Charity Commission has also updated its reporting and accounting guidance to reflect the new SORP.
The direction of travel is clear either way. Volunteers have sat in trustees’ reports for years, often as a single sentence of thanks. The new expectations push towards scale (how many, how often), nature (what they do) and difference made (what changed as a result).
The volunteer data to start collecting now
If you already track these, good. If not, start now so part of 2026 is covered.
Active volunteers by role: a headcount at a fixed date, plus how many were active across the year, split by role or team.
Hours: actual hours from check-ins or shift logs wherever possible. A figure you can trace back to records is one an auditor, funder or sceptical trustee can rely on.
What the activity delivered: sessions run, clients visited, parcels packed, calls answered. These are outputs, the countable things volunteers did.
Training and checks completed: induction, safeguarding training, background checks where roles require them.
Retention: how many volunteers active in January are still active in December, and why people leave. Exit surveys help.
Outcomes and voices: a few measures that show change for the people you serve, with short quotes from clients and volunteers.
Be clear about the difference between outputs and outcomes. Two hundred befriending calls is an output. Fewer people reporting loneliness after three months is an outcome, and you can only claim it if you measured it. David Holdsworth, chief executive of the Charity Commission, told the NPC Ignites conference that charities should be deliberate about impact reporting, that it cannot be an annual tick-box, and that it should not go the way of cut-and-paste public benefit statements. A modest, evidenced claim beats a grand one you cannot support.
For IT and data leads: the systems question
Only 20% of charities in the CFG survey had identified the changes needed to systems, data collection or record keeping, and 14% had agreed an implementation timetable. Whoever looks after your data should be in the room early. The questions are practical ones.
One source of truth: volunteer records held in one place, not across spreadsheets owned by different teams.
Consistent categories: the same role names and activity types across services, so figures add up.
Standard dates: one date format, start and end dates for every volunteer, and an agreed definition of “active”.
Export: numbers that can be pulled out in a form finance and the report writer can use.
Access controls: who can see and edit what, with a record of changes.
Data protection under UK GDPR: a stated purpose for what you collect, no more data than you need, a retention period, and volunteers told what you hold and why.
Where volunteer data needs to meet your CRM or finance system, agree how and how often. Platforms such as Volunteero log hours automatically from check-ins and export to Excel, which removes much of the manual work.
For fundraising and grants teams: collect once, use everywhere
The same figures feed funder reports, grant applications and tenders. The risk is not that you lack numbers but that different documents carry different ones. Say a bid claims 340 volunteers and the annual report says 290. Funders notice.
Agree definitions once, write them down and use them everywhere: what counts as an active volunteer, how hours are counted, whether travel time is included, what a “session” means. Settle who signs the figures off. Our guide to showing what hospice volunteers are worth applies to any charity, and a well-designed volunteer survey can supply the outcome evidence and quotes.
Brief the board this Trustees’ Week
Over half of charities in the CFG survey had a named lead, and a similar share had briefed trustees or the audit committee. If yours has not, a five-point agenda:
Which tier are we in, and what does that mean for the impact and volunteer sections? Confirm with the auditor or examiner.
Who owns the impact section of the trustees’ report, and who supplies the volunteer data?
What data do we already have on volunteer numbers, hours, activity and outcomes, and how reliable is it?
What are the gaps, and what can realistically be collected for the rest of 2026?
What will the first report look like? Draft the volunteer section now with placeholders, so everyone can see what is missing.
Trustees already carry responsibility for volunteers for governance, risk and safeguarding. Reporting on their contribution is an extension of that, not a new burden. If it also prompts more consistent recognition of volunteers, so much the better.
Last week ACEVO, NCVO, NAVCA and CFG called for an independent review of sector infrastructure after a run of closures. Pressure is not easing, and credible impact reporting strengthens your position with funders, regulators and the public at once. Put volunteer data on the agenda this week, and start by asking your volunteer manager: what can you already report, today, with confidence?
Written by
Co-founder and CEO
Ashley Staines is the co-founder and CEO of Volunteero. After seven years in investment banking, he started it to make volunteering easier to organise.
