The 2022 dissolution figures are in, and they’re raising eyebrows. Three thousand and eighty-seven CICs were dissolved — 12% of the register. That’s up sharply from 2021’s 7%. The headlines write themselves: “Post-pandemic CIC collapse,” “CIC bubble bursts,” “Thousands of CICs fail as support ends.”

I’m not buying it.

A significant proportion of the CICs being dissolved are pandemic-specific organisations. They were formed in 2020 and 2021 to meet specific COVID-related needs — food distribution, mutual aid coordination, vaccine outreach, community shielding support. Those needs have now passed, or been absorbed into mainstream services. The CICs that formed to meet them have done their job. Winding down is the appropriate response.

This is exactly how the CIC model is supposed to work. You identify a need. You incorporate. You deliver services. When the need is met or the funding runs out, you close. The asset lock ensures that any remaining assets go to another community purpose. The reporting requirements ensure transparency. The low dissolution cost means you can wind up without destroying the value you’ve created.

The CIC model isn’t designed to create immortal organisations. It’s designed to create responsive ones. Some CICs will last decades. Others will last two years and do exactly what they were created to do. Both outcomes are successes.

The pandemic cohort of CICs was extraordinary in its scale and its focus. Over 11,000 new CICs formed in 2020 and 2021 alone, many of them purpose-built for COVID response. The fact that some of them are now dissolving isn’t a sign of failure — it’s a sign that the response worked and the organisations are no longer needed.

The CIC movement should be proud of those 3,000 dissolutions. They represent thousands of communities that received support when they needed it, through organisations that were set up quickly, operated effectively, and closed responsibly. That’s not a bubble bursting. That’s the model working exactly as intended.

← Back to articles