Charity Kids Co. director asked to step down.
Discussion
rich1231 said:
OpulentBob said:
Hugely sad and worrying. As said before, CB is in my opinion (actually having met the woman and having had a partner who (still) works for her) an inspiration when it comes to the care of vulnerable children, and for her organisation which she has put her entire life's work in to to be subject to this, must be destroying her inside. In my experience, KC is a very worthwhile charity and is just about the last organisation I would have expected this to happen to. 
Its quite possible to be charismatic and totally incompetent at heading a large organisation. This recent thing with funds being used for payroll is astounding.I have no doubt that at a personal level she will be more than upset that what what she created with her best intentions and hard work has come to this. That's a hard thing for a person to come to terms with.
drivin_me_nuts said:
rich1231 said:
OpulentBob said:
Hugely sad and worrying. As said before, CB is in my opinion (actually having met the woman and having had a partner who (still) works for her) an inspiration when it comes to the care of vulnerable children, and for her organisation which she has put her entire life's work in to to be subject to this, must be destroying her inside. In my experience, KC is a very worthwhile charity and is just about the last organisation I would have expected this to happen to.
Its quite possible to be charismatic and totally incompetent at heading a large organisation. This recent thing with funds being used for payroll is astounding.I have no doubt that at a personal level she will be more than upset that what what she created with her best intentions and hard work has come to this. That's a hard thing for a person to come to terms with.
As for CB, again time will tell. But however good her fundraising has been, it will be more difficult from now on. She wouldn't get a penny from me.
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 5th August 09:37
drivin_me_nuts said:
rich1231 said:
OpulentBob said:
Hugely sad and worrying. As said before, CB is in my opinion (actually having met the woman and having had a partner who (still) works for her) an inspiration when it comes to the care of vulnerable children, and for her organisation which she has put her entire life's work in to to be subject to this, must be destroying her inside. In my experience, KC is a very worthwhile charity and is just about the last organisation I would have expected this to happen to.
Its quite possible to be charismatic and totally incompetent at heading a large organisation. This recent thing with funds being used for payroll is astounding.I have no doubt that at a personal level she will be more than upset that what what she created with her best intentions and hard work has come to this. That's a hard thing for a person to come to terms with.
I suspect her 'network' is starting to shrink as the 'slebs and wealthy donors start to distance themselves from the growing negative media attention. She seems to me to be someone with good intentions and the ability to get people onside, but a complete inability to see her own failings.
REALIST123 said:
You seem quite trusting. Time will tell, but the level of incompetence (at best) or deliberate mishandling (at worst) implied by the rumours and reports is very worrying. To spend £800K of £3M 'desperately needed' funds on staff salaries is difficult to understand. Especially when it's not a true donation but taxpayers' cash.
As for CB, again time will tell. But however good her fundraising has been, it will be more difficult from now on. She wouldn't get a penny from me.
For now, I prefer to hold a view that she screwed up (big time..), rather than there be a more subversive agenda to her actions. Time and investigative process will tell. I certainly prefer that approach to the idea of trial by media who also have their own self serving agenda.As for CB, again time will tell. But however good her fundraising has been, it will be more difficult from now on. She wouldn't get a penny from me.
Edited by REALIST123 on Wednesday 5th August 09:37
drivin_me_nuts said:
It is a great shame that her skills and her ability to draw money was not extended and ring fenced away from the day-to-day running of the charity. Organisations such as this do better with charismatic leaders. But if this shows anything, it is that they should a) not steer the ship b) hold the purse strings c) employ those who can.
I have no doubt that at a personal level she will be more than upset that what what she created with her best intentions and hard work has come to this. That's a hard thing for a person to come to terms with.
Well said.I have no doubt that at a personal level she will be more than upset that what what she created with her best intentions and hard work has come to this. That's a hard thing for a person to come to terms with.
drivin_me_nuts said:
REALIST123 said:
You seem quite trusting. Time will tell, but the level of incompetence (at best) or deliberate mishandling (at worst) implied by the rumours and reports is very worrying. To spend £800K of £3M 'desperately needed' funds on staff salaries is difficult to understand. Especially when it's not a true donation but taxpayers' cash.
As for CB, again time will tell. But however good her fundraising has been, it will be more difficult from now on. She wouldn't get a penny from me.
For now, I prefer to hold a view that she screwed up (big time..), rather than there be a more subversive agenda to her actions. Time and investigative process will tell. I certainly prefer that approach to the idea of trial by media who also have their own self serving agenda.As for CB, again time will tell. But however good her fundraising has been, it will be more difficult from now on. She wouldn't get a penny from me.
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 5th August 09:37
REALIST123 said:
.....and you may very well be correct in your view but it will still be more difficult for her to be taken seriously in the future, IMO.
It will no doubt be thrown at her, both in malice by those who enjoy such behaviours, but also by those with more serious and legitimate concerns. My local radio station, Radio Bristol, did a piece on this earlier this morning. Kids Company has "around" six centres in Bristol for the children it deals with.
All through the report, there seemed to be an air of secrecy around this charity. The reporter said they had asked KC how many kids they deal with but there was no answer; they asked what they actually spend the money on but came up against a brick wall and even the doubt over the number of centres they actually have in my area is a farce. it's a bloody charity that on one level, gets taxpayers cash to continue their, well, "whatever they do" and on another, pleads for donations from us, the general public. Yet when it comes to openness and honesty, nothing of the sort.
I've raised money before for CHSW (Children's Hospice South West) by running the 2004 Bristol Half Marathon. When a group of us runners declared our intention to run for them, the charity invited us all across for an "Open Day" where we had food and drink and were given an extensive tour of the property, pretty much an "access all areas" visit except for the area where patients were being cared for. Even to the point of going into the Starlight room, the beautiful area where to put it bluntly, the little kids actually pass away. Incredibly emotional visit. But it was as far a polar opposite from Kids Company as it could be, even allowing for the fact that you can't offer the same level of openness where abused kids are concerned.
All through the report, there seemed to be an air of secrecy around this charity. The reporter said they had asked KC how many kids they deal with but there was no answer; they asked what they actually spend the money on but came up against a brick wall and even the doubt over the number of centres they actually have in my area is a farce. it's a bloody charity that on one level, gets taxpayers cash to continue their, well, "whatever they do" and on another, pleads for donations from us, the general public. Yet when it comes to openness and honesty, nothing of the sort.
I've raised money before for CHSW (Children's Hospice South West) by running the 2004 Bristol Half Marathon. When a group of us runners declared our intention to run for them, the charity invited us all across for an "Open Day" where we had food and drink and were given an extensive tour of the property, pretty much an "access all areas" visit except for the area where patients were being cared for. Even to the point of going into the Starlight room, the beautiful area where to put it bluntly, the little kids actually pass away. Incredibly emotional visit. But it was as far a polar opposite from Kids Company as it could be, even allowing for the fact that you can't offer the same level of openness where abused kids are concerned.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33787201
Cameron mesmerised?
Yentob sitting in on her interview with Radio 4?
Not Common Purpose cronyism then?
Cameron mesmerised?
Yentob sitting in on her interview with Radio 4?
Not Common Purpose cronyism then?
This is going to get embarrassing for David Cameron, once again his poor personal judgement, particularly when it comes to assessing an individuals character, has been highlighted. Damage is also going to be done to plans for increasing the involvement of the charity sector in delivering public services.
Magog said:
This is going to get embarrassing for David Cameron, once again his poor personal judgement, particularly when it comes to assessing an individuals character, has been highlighted. Damage is also going to be done to plans for increasing the involvement of the charity sector in delivering public services.
Yes of course, it's all David Cameron's fault. 
Johnnytheboy said:
Magog said:
This is going to get embarrassing for David Cameron, once again his poor personal judgement, particularly when it comes to assessing an individuals character, has been highlighted. Damage is also going to be done to plans for increasing the involvement of the charity sector in delivering public services.
Yes of course, it's all David Cameron's fault. PorkInsider said:
Johnnytheboy said:
Magog said:
This is going to get embarrassing for David Cameron, once again his poor personal judgement, particularly when it comes to assessing an individuals character, has been highlighted. Damage is also going to be done to plans for increasing the involvement of the charity sector in delivering public services.
Yes of course, it's all David Cameron's fault. Johnnytheboy said:
Magog said:
This is going to get embarrassing for David Cameron, once again his poor personal judgement, particularly when it comes to assessing an individuals character, has been highlighted. Damage is also going to be done to plans for increasing the involvement of the charity sector in delivering public services.
Yes of course, it's all David Cameron's fault. BBC said:
The former Children's Minister Tim Loughton MP says that Downing Street over-ruled the Department for Education and decided to continue funding Kids Company in 2012.
The Department for Education was responsible for the grant at that time. Mr Loughton says ministers and officials at the department had reservations about the funding.
Mr Loughton says he recommended funding shouldn't continue to the level the charity wanted "but the decision was taken out of our hands and No 10 decided that the money should be paid and the grant carried on. You are told by Downing St that the money should be paid so therefore it is out of your hands".
If it turns out Cameron played a part in making sure the £3m was paid last week, against the advice of Richard Heaton then it will be embarrassing for him.The Department for Education was responsible for the grant at that time. Mr Loughton says ministers and officials at the department had reservations about the funding.
Mr Loughton says he recommended funding shouldn't continue to the level the charity wanted "but the decision was taken out of our hands and No 10 decided that the money should be paid and the grant carried on. You are told by Downing St that the money should be paid so therefore it is out of your hands".
Edited by Magog on Wednesday 5th August 14:13
Magog said:
Johnnytheboy said:
Magog said:
This is going to get embarrassing for David Cameron, once again his poor personal judgement, particularly when it comes to assessing an individuals character, has been highlighted. Damage is also going to be done to plans for increasing the involvement of the charity sector in delivering public services.
Yes of course, it's all David Cameron's fault. BBC said:
The former Children's Minister Tim Loughton MP says that Downing Street over-ruled the Department for Education and decided to continue funding Kids Company in 2012.
The Department for Education was responsible for the grant at that time. Mr Loughton says ministers and officials at the department had reservations about the funding.
Mr Loughton says he recommended funding shouldn't continue to the level the charity wanted "but the decision was taken out of our hands and No 10 decided that the money should be paid and the grant carried on. You are told by Downing St that the money should be paid so therefore it is out of your hands".
If it turns out Cameron played a part in making sure the £3m was paid last week, against the advice of Richard Heaton then it will be embarrassing for him.The Department for Education was responsible for the grant at that time. Mr Loughton says ministers and officials at the department had reservations about the funding.
Mr Loughton says he recommended funding shouldn't continue to the level the charity wanted "but the decision was taken out of our hands and No 10 decided that the money should be paid and the grant carried on. You are told by Downing St that the money should be paid so therefore it is out of your hands".
Edited by Magog on Wednesday 5th August 14:13
Magog said:
Johnnytheboy said:
Magog said:
This is going to get embarrassing for David Cameron, once again his poor personal judgement, particularly when it comes to assessing an individuals character, has been highlighted. Damage is also going to be done to plans for increasing the involvement of the charity sector in delivering public services.
Yes of course, it's all David Cameron's fault. BBC said:
The former Children's Minister Tim Loughton MP says that Downing Street over-ruled the Department for Education and decided to continue funding Kids Company in 2012.
The Department for Education was responsible for the grant at that time. Mr Loughton says ministers and officials at the department had reservations about the funding.
Mr Loughton says he recommended funding shouldn't continue to the level the charity wanted "but the decision was taken out of our hands and No 10 decided that the money should be paid and the grant carried on. You are told by Downing St that the money should be paid so therefore it is out of your hands".
If it turns out Cameron played a part in making sure the £3m was paid last week, against the advice of Richard Heaton then it will be embarrassing for him.The Department for Education was responsible for the grant at that time. Mr Loughton says ministers and officials at the department had reservations about the funding.
Mr Loughton says he recommended funding shouldn't continue to the level the charity wanted "but the decision was taken out of our hands and No 10 decided that the money should be paid and the grant carried on. You are told by Downing St that the money should be paid so therefore it is out of your hands".
From the article that began this thread;
article said:
These decisions have been taken at a high ministerial level. The prime minister has, in the past, defended the charity's funding against efforts by ministers and officials in the Cabinet Office and Department for Education to cut its funding or intervene.
Officials report that Justice Secretary Michael Gove and Oliver Letwin, minister without portfolio, have supported a tougher approach to the charity.
In March, Dominic Cummings, a former Department for Education adviser, revealed that officials from the department had questioned the financial management of the charity, and said "they did not think taxpayers' money should be given to it".
Mr Cummings insisted that the prime minister himself "overturned the decision" after receiving letters.
Wonder who the letters were from? Officials report that Justice Secretary Michael Gove and Oliver Letwin, minister without portfolio, have supported a tougher approach to the charity.
In March, Dominic Cummings, a former Department for Education adviser, revealed that officials from the department had questioned the financial management of the charity, and said "they did not think taxpayers' money should be given to it".
Mr Cummings insisted that the prime minister himself "overturned the decision" after receiving letters.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff