NCVO review of mermaids

...batshit.

This is more special pleading that anything linked to the word trans should be immediately exempted from normal standards, safeguards, common sense and ethics.

Which is how they managed all these safeguarding disasters in the first place. The biggest one being, I would suggest, that they do not appear able to recognise or understand that any one of these disasters is a safeguarding disaster, or matters, or means that they are doing anything wrong. Capacity is becoming a front and centre very major issue. And arguing that this doesn't matter, because trans, is just piling more concerning inability on top of inability.

I dunno, Jane, I just copy and pasted. That's what it says!

Ultimately having trustees who are personally invested is of huge benefit to Mermaids as an organisation, and that investment should not be compromised in favour of objectivity.

This is surely the wrong way round?

It should be:

Ultimately having trustees who are personally invested is of huge benefit to Mermaids as an organisation, but that investment should not compromise objectivity.

'Throughout this review, a trend emerged around transparency and communications. We raise this particularly as there was a significant difference in view between the staff we spoke to and the trustees'

'there is clear evidence of historic communications challenges'

'Part of leading an organisation like Mermaids is making objective decisions about topics which are likely to be close to an inherent aspect of trustees’ identity or the identity of those they are close to'

'Ultimately having trustees who are personally invested is of huge benefit to Mermaids as an organisation, and that investment should not be compromised in favour of objectivity.'

Well, they're writing out their homework and getting a pal to mark it, it seems.

There does seem to be a worrying lack of neutrality with the CEO of the NCVO weighing in on a political battle that Mermaids chose to engage in (and lose) with the LGB Alliance.
And then her organisation fails to challenge self identified high level scores of management & safeguarding in the face of the scandals already mentioned upthread??

Marking their own homework AGAIN?!

Still an interim CEO after 10 months then? Hmm.

Sarah Vibert opining about how vital it is for all charities to be inclusive of trans people. What, even the Cats' Protection League?

Oh, wait, they also did a skills audit:

'This exercise is based on a self-declaration and as such has some limitation'

Oh.

'Individuals were asked to score performance out of 10, with 10 being a level of mastery beyond where many boards get to and being a role model for other organisations and 1 being that the board is not functioning and is unaware of risk'

So the whole thing is based on their own subjective feels about how well they're doing?

'... there is an element of subjectivity to the exercise,'

No shit.

Thanks for sharing this, looking forward to reading the report!

Five separate safeguarding disasters that I can think of - any one of which would have likely blown apart a less teflon category group - and they identify as high level skills in safeguarding and risk management.

Yeah.

And I identify as believing them.

Yeah this Sarah Vibert, who has also signed up NCVO to the 'Stand With Trans' charity CEOs pledge. So very neutral (credit to the ever diligent KF for clocking this)

https://twitter.com/LGBTConsortium/status/1614221931389095936

@rogdmum Thank you for the update.

The Charities Commission emailed the complainants last week to request permission to send the details of their complaints to Mermaids. No timescales for conclusion of the investigation are being given.

Correction - her tweets were in 2021.

How cosy.

Indeed. While adults with interests not commensurate with safeguarding children ran amok.

Sarah Vibert (she/her) joined NCVO in 2020 and became their CEO in 2022.

In 2019 she posted these critical tweets about LGB Alliance and recommended Mermaids as a charity.

Then in January this year, Mermaids appointed NCVO to conduct an independent review into their governance.

How very...interesting.

Flagging to @glinner

I read somewhere that before SG got involved it was actually a really helpful organisation where they assumed that most gender non confirming kids wouldn’t be trans when they grew up.

Do we know when the outcome of the Charity Commission review will be issued?

'The report very helpfully recommends an article to read: "How to control your emotions during a difficult conversation" with techniques to put emotions into context.'

😶

To be fair to the NCVO - they have identified the major problem of Mermaids appointing activists who are so "subjective" about this issue that they have difficulty in controlling themselves in a manner that befits being a trustee of a children's charity:
"Ultimately having trustees who are personally invested is of huge benefit to Mermaids as an organisation, and that investment should not be compromised in favour of objectivity. Mermaids should instead look to support trustees in balancing their personal opinions and experiences with the wider needs of the organisation. It is also important that trustees feel able to challenge each other and the organisation without this being perceived as subjective".

The report very helpfully recommends an article to read: "How to control your emotions during a difficult conversation" with techniques to put emotions into context.

So they did spot one of the elephants in the room - just as Cass did at GIDs. The negative impact of out of control trans activists pushing their personal ideology / demands at the expense of others.