For field staff with Ockenden International, the scary bit of working with displaced communities or rootless refugees in volatile countries such as Afghanistan or Uganda can sometimes be soothed and smoothed by a laptop link or cellphone call to the charity's base in leafy Surrey.

For would-be donors attracted to the sunny (though sweaty) side of giving through sponsorship, IT makes the process easy. Via Ockenden's website, they can sign up for such worthy challenges as bike rides through Cuba or trekking on the Inca trail in Peru.

With an annual income of just over £1m, Ockenden is a positive instance of a medium-sized charity using new technology in a useful - if still limited - way that is common enough for commercial firms but relatively new for voluntary organisations. Its position is much better now than it was when finance controller Liz Whiting joined seven years ago: the office then boasted just two PCs. "We've introduced a Windows network, there's a PC on every desk and all overseas staff are linked by a secure computer system," says Whiting.

But there is still a lot more that IT could do for the organisation. "We're not properly networked for emails and we can't afford a dedicated IT member of staff," Whiting admits.

The issue of how far to embrace IT, and how much to spend on it, torments many charities. It's a sensitive point. Funds earmarked for computer hardware, software and staff training usually come from donations, leaving less for the good causes that charities are there for. Will donors resent part of their cash being diverted in this way?

Yet if bought-in computer expertise is seen as too expensive, not to say scarce, what is holding back cooperative schemes, whereby several charities might jointly hire a consultant to divide a working week among them?

Proper IT resourcing has the potential to make life a whole lot easier for many of Britain's charities. But the evidence suggests that not all managers are fully aware of the benefits - and that concerns about costs are holding back others who are.

A new survey, supported by the Guardian, shows that while most charities now have their own information websites, use of IT for internal office purposes is generally patchy. Asked "how well is your organisation embracing technology?", only 37% felt confident enough to reply "well". The majority (64%) settled for "OK".

It is the mid-range and small charities which tend to be in the most difficulty with new technology, according to John Tate, chairman of Tate Bramald, an IT consultancy which organised the survey. He says: "Those who can't afford an IT department - those with just a few PCs and a small network - are in an awful position. The external services they hire [to run their systems] are often variable, and costs often spiral out of control."

The survey results, published today, are based on replies from 221 charities, of which 55% described their focus as education and training, 45% welfare and 34% mental and/or physical disabilities (several identified more than one). By size, only 6% said they had more than 500 staff; most (59%) employed fewer than 50. By income, 38% said they banked between £100,000 and £1m a year, and 33% between £1m and £5m, although the range extended from £25,000 to in excess of £100m.

The typical charity surveyed had only one person concentrating on IT, and 37% had nobody in this role, buying in outside help as necessary. Budgets for IT tended to be small - some £20,000 a year on average and usually accounting for less than 2% of income.

Huge percentages affirmed that IT had made their charity more effective at communicating - internally, 82%; externally, 90%. Yet many charities appeared to echo Whiting's view that "it's a case of having prudent, rather than leading edge, technology" when it comes to updating equipment. Only 46% predicted that they would be spending more next year; 25% thought they would be spending less than now. Just 30% of systems were accessible by staff away from the office. Charities have at least recognised the value of having their own websites: 82% of those surveyed had set them up, either for marketing and information or for trading online, or both. But they might not be using them to the best advantage: only 37% undertook weekly updates; 40% monthly.

Overall, 34% of the charities were offering membership online, or soliciting donations, while 29% said they would do so next year. The bigger the charity, the more likely it was to be reaching supporters by the internet, but 23% had no plans to use their websites in this way.

Opinion was split over the value of e-commerce to charities: 30% said it was very important to their competitiveness, but 45% rated it unimportant or irrelevant; only 26% said it mattered in terms of possible income, with 34% saying it did not.

Given that chief executive officers and heads of finance have crucial roles in deciding how far their organisations embrace IT, the survey - carried out in conjunction with the Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations and the Charity Finance Directors Group - asked them several specific questions. Only 43% of chief executives confessed to being happy with their own knowledge of current developments in IT. By contrast, 58% of finance chiefs felt confident, but only 52% agreed that their chief executive "visibly helps develop the IT strategy".

Tate suggests that this wariness on the part of chief executives may reflect some charities' bad experiences, with several having got their fingers badly burned by poor investment in new technology. And he admits: "PC-based systems have been expensive to install and maintain, and IT projects have consistently taken longer to implement and cost more than has been budgeted."

However, he says there are substantial benefits for those prepared to be patient. "The forward-thinking charities are realising that there is a huge opportunity to actually start to reap the rewards of this investment, particularly through the use of web technology," he says. "The internet is proving a highly cost effective medium for communicating both with staff and volunteers and with external individuals and organisations."

Tate also argues that IT will enable major cost reductions on the back of information that is captured once at source, avoiding the need for endless re-keying of information. Chief executives may at times fail to understand the scale of the opportunity, he says.

But there is one big area of caution. As to how popular and stable online giving will prove to be as a way of getting donations, Tait says: "The jury is still out." The personal approach, he believes, is one of the great strengths of the charity world and should not be discarded lightly.