The Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust has reiterated its commitment to it grantees “at a time when many of the important causes we stand behind have been weaponised for political gain”.

Helen Moulinos, interim chief executive of the grantmaker, has published an open letter setting out its approach to the organisations it supports in 2024.

“As a funder supporting those working on the root causes of conflict and injustice, we recognise that many of the grantees we have funded during our history have not always been considered ‘popular’ or necessarily warmly received by powerful institutions or governments,” she wrote.

“We wish to reiterate our continued commitment to all of our grantees at a time when many of the important causes we stand behind have been weaponised for political gain, are accused of polarising public opinion, and when many funders and donors can feel pressurised to choose ‘safer’ causes.

“Our grantees prioritise systemic change work because there are serious and complex problems to fix in our society and we want them wholeheartedly to succeed.”

She said: “In reiterating our commitment to our grantees, we want to offer reassurance that JRCT will stand with them and continue to use its position to collaborate with those we fund within the constraints of our available finances, the finite capacity of our JRCT colleagues, and our grant governance framework.”

Asked if the grantmaker had been prompted by any particular recent event to issue the statement, Moulinos told Third Sector: “This is a broad statement of solidarity and not related to a specific grantee or incident but rather the broader, complex and difficult environment change-makers operate within.”

In 2015, the JRCT was pressured by the Charity Commission to stop funding the advocacy group Cage. 

Orlando Fraser, now the chair of the regulator but then part of its board, was among the board members who had called for the commission to open a “look-see” statutory inquiry into the JRCT.

No inquiry was opened but the grantmaker agreed, under pressure from the commission, that it would no longer fund the group. 

Cage then sought a judicial review of the regulator’s actions on the grounds it had exceeded its powers. 

The judicial review was withdrawn after the commission made a statement in the High Court recognising that “it has no power to require trustees to fetter the future exercise of their fiduciary duties under its general power to give advice and guidance”.