To not understand the 'kids company' closure

[LunchpackOfNotreDame]

The news is saying the government fully supported the charity and handed over £3million to them, yet on the news tonight the protesters were blaming Cameron.

I thought it was financial irregularities that created the issues?

The £3m was for restructuring and downsizing. They allegedly broke terms by paying overdue staff salaries with it.

Shocking and sad to see this charity closing.

After a long catalogue of issues, the government, against its better judgment, gave them £3 million last week to sort themselves out, with strict conditions attached.

They broke the conditions, so the government wants their money back, so KC has to close.

Rather embarrassing all round really.

Not sure, but I think they're blaming Cameron for being so badly swayed by CB that he was willing to give them whatever they wanted, despite the fact that everyone else saw the huge issues and advised against giving them the money. It shpuld have been quite obvious it was a terrible idea.

No, I think the protestors are blaming Cameron because they think KC should be allowed to break the conditions with impunity and still operate.

I really don't think this is one that can be laid at Cameron's doorstep though. He really bought in to KC and it would have saved him a lot of embarrassment if it had been rescued.

These threads are illuminating:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/in_the_news/2441665-Kids-company-what-a-cock-up
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/2416795-Government-cuts-hit-Kids-Company-and-Camila-Batmanghelidjh-is-stepping-down

Shame not as much grace given to KC as was RBS.

Kids company had a budget of 20 million last year.

Child and adolescent mental health budget in Scotland for the same period?

45 million!

It's really upsetting because of the children kc is helping and what will happen to them?
iirc was a news story recently about CB putting forward some allegations (on behalf of child victims) about the current child abuse investigations/claims (involving public figures) which seemed to be just before all of this stuff about kc mismanaging money?
The main thing is that kc helps some really poor and vulnerable children

The main thing is that kc helps some really poor and vulnerable children

It is not entirely clear that they do...

In London at least there have been questions for a while about whether or not they are helping or enabling

Everyone I know who got involved with kc were evangelical about it but after a year or so they went quiet and cut ties with it.

Yes I think half the problem is that no one is very sure that they DO help vulnerable kids.

And if RBS failed it was taking the government and half the pensioners in the UK with it. Whereas KC is simply a case of throwing good money after bad.

They had a budget of £20m last year and couldn't pay staff on time last month. That on its own is a sign that something is very badly wrong. They had to use money that was meant for something else to pay last month's staff salaries. Where were they expecting to find the money for this month's salaries? Were staff expected to carry on from month to month not knowing if they would be paid?

what are the other charities littlechinapig who are going to do what KC do? I don't think half of adolescent MH spend in Scotland makes the amount of money seem too much tbh, when it's providing a place for young children who need support to go, as it could save on adolescent MH spending in England later down the line? I wonder if gov't thinks the problem will just 'go away' same as with disabled/people using food banks/carers etc.
Are you saying kc has fabricated claims against key figures in relation to sex abuse claims or that all the claimants have? convenient that allegations against kc were made straight after imo. It does all smell a bit fishy to me.

not saying anything about how well finances were managed btw - just wondering what gov't intends to do about the children needing help as they can't speak up for themselves

Kids company relied on a charismatic founder with good intentions to get money. What started as a small project became too big for CB to manage, she's not an experienced business woman and should have stood aside whilst still being a figurehead a long time ago to allow someone with proper experience to manage the charity.

It's quite clear she was relying on herself and her reputation for finding and didn't have a clear fundraising strategy as to how she was going to raise money in the even of the government cutting her funding. It's no surprise that they weren't going to give her the same as she has had in the past, all charities have had funding cut and she should have planned for it. They aren't able to prove the impact their work has and support it with robust data and be transparent about how she's spending money. Every other charity has to answer to their funders, why should they be any different?

It's very interesting to get to know people working in the charity sector- there are a few household names which are well known/bitched about/ avoided. Not because they are necessarily bad at the particular "cause" but if they are operating an environment which people find toxic, leave quickly then you have to wonder why.
I understand a cohort of senior mgmt all resigned from KC not that long ago.

There was some talk of them paying older children to attend the actual building/events/activities itself implying oddly, under use or them trying to justify budgets/spending?? Why cant a new boss take over or is it beyond help/too much of a mess maybe? Too embarrassing all round maybe for all concerned to try and turn round such an embarrassment?

Sazzle, they did, supposedly, have a new boss lined up to restructure the organisation. That was what the three million pounds was supposed to pay for. Now part of that has been mis-spent I should think the rest is probably off the table.

Tbh it confirms what i think of charity at the moment...

I agree with LittleChinaPig. CB using her 'knowledge' of high-level child abuse as leverage to get people on her side is nothing short of disgusting. She needs to go to the police with her information, not use it in interviews to hint at a conspiracy. She ought to be ashamed of herself.

I certainly hope so littlechinapig I'm not sure what the other charities are though thought kc was fairly unique. Its handy for the government anyway imo, another vulnerable group of people swept under the carpet