The public is divided on the use of AI in the work of charities, a new survey has found.
A survey of a sample of 3,000 UK adults by brand monitoring tool CharityTracker found that 36% support the use of AI by charities and 27% oppose the use of AI by voluntary organizations. The remaining 37% said they were unsure.
Almost two-fifths (38%) of respondents said it was unacceptable to use AI to decide who receives support, compared to 33% who said it was acceptable.
Almost half (46%) of the sample of people aged 55 and over said this use of AI is unacceptable, as did 49% of the sample who had never used AI.
Charities using AI to respond to inquiries via chat or email was deemed acceptable by 41% of respondents, while 30% found it unacceptable.
More than two-fifths (44%) of respondents said yes. It’s important to have an easy way to talk to humans instead.
Using AI to detect fraud and fraud is considered acceptable by 64 per cent of the sample, while 53 per cent said they would be comfortable with charities using the technology to improve back-office productivity such as scheduling and financial planning.
Respondents cited time savings (selected by 29% of those surveyed) and improved services (27%) as positive aspects of charities using AI. and helping charities use money more efficiently (27%).
However, this sample also cited perceived risks, including data security (36 percent), human factor loss (35 percent), and risk of making a major mistake (31 percent).
Just under a fifth (13%) of the sample said they were satisfied with their sensitive personal data being used in AI systems, highlighting strong expectations for data minimization and consent.
Ashley Rawthorne, executive director of CharityTracker, said: “It’s no surprise that charities are exploring AI to manage pressure on services and make better use of resources, but this research shows how easily this can be misunderstood.”
“The public is not completely rejecting AI; there is real permission when AI supports people, protects funds, and improves efficiency.
“But trust quickly erodes when human judgment begins to replace human judgment in who receives help.”
Familiarity with using AI also influences how much the public can trust the technology, Rawthorne said.
“People who have personally used AI in the past year are more resistant to its use by charities, while non-users are more cautious,” Rawthorne said.
“Strong governance, transparency and human accountability are essential to maintaining public trust.”
