Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

(part 2) to think that Camila Batmanghelidgh must be lying when she says she has done nothing wrong in her spending of Kids' Company Funding?

635 replies

LuluJakey1 · 01/09/2015 17:34

She is like Jimmy Saville in that what she has been doing has been under all of all our noses and we have refused to speak up about it or believe it.

It is not just the luvvies who have been up close and personal with her- involved with the charity and CB at a very close level, some even Trustees. It is also the employees and the parents of children, the children themselves, the volunteers. We are not talking about a hidden mis-use of funding. We are talking aout a whole culture of open waste and self-indulgence.

I know it is from The Daily Mail but it is actually an interview with het.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3199527/My-heart-clear-says-Kids-Company-boss-Batmanghelidjh-admits-charity-paid-school-fees-employees-children-denies-wrongdoing.html

£5000 a month rent on an Art Deco House with private swimming pool - which houses a member of staff, and the swimming pool is used by CB but hot by any children- they are 'not allowed' (her words)

£40,000 chauffeur- now a specialist worker (according to CB). also has private school and therapist funding for his 2 children.

Staff( how many?) have their children sent to private schools because the job is stressful and it is part of a 'staff well-being package'

The Chauffeur's sister is also employed - now as a 'brilliant accountant', last summer as 'the woman who does my sewing' (mind you that would be a full-time job in itself, but it does imply the charity pays for those vile outfits much as I suspected)

25 young people given £769,000 a year funding - £31,000 a year each, to do nothing. They are CB's specially selected young people- many of whom have received funding for many years. She describes them as 'like a family, hanging round the house'. She deals with their funding herself.

Yet STILL CB complains staff should not have spoken up about any of this and implies those who have will suffer for it.

In my view this woman and her behaviours are corrupt, dishonest and immoral.

Are my views unreasonable? I feel this could be jus the tip of the iceberg in terms of what is yet to emerge and prosecutions will be very likely.

I think there should be a down- to the -bone, in-depth investigation of every aspect of the work of this charity and of CB. Not simply any concerns that have now been raised but a complete trawl of the spending, the practices and the behaviours of CB herself.

OP posts:
MrsJamin · 03/09/2015 23:06

BoffinMum can you please give me a link to what you're referring to- I'm really not sure what you're on about that free schools and academies are independent schools - do you mean 'Independent' or 'independent'? I know quite a bit about free schools TBH. Feel free to message me as I know this is off-topic now.

ChristineDePisan · 04/09/2015 00:26

MrsJamin - they have to meet the regulatory requirements of the independent schools standards (because they aren't bound by the same requirements eg re national curriculum as other state schools)

Pneumometer · 04/09/2015 07:35

they have to meet the regulatory requirements of the independent schools standards

They are inspected by Ofsted (which independent schools don't have to be), they are subject to closure by the direction of the secretary of state (which independent schools aren't) and rely for their continued funding upon compliance with a funding agreement with the DfE (which independent schools don't).

MissBattleaxe · 04/09/2015 08:18

Could we get back on topic please? We keep talking about independent schools and academies.

MrsJamin · 04/09/2015 08:35

Sorry missbattleaxe. Find it difficult to ignore when people are stating untruths. Pnemometer, exactly, free schools are owned by, responsible to, inspected by and paid by the state and not at all private /Independent. They are independent (verb) of the local authority but that's as far as it goes. I think the fact they don't have to adhere to the national curriculum is one of the only ways they differ from academies once open.

BoffinMum · 04/09/2015 09:08

Ah, Joe Hallgarten. The wanton plagiarist.

BoffinMum · 04/09/2015 09:11

MrsJamin This BBC article puts it well. www.bbc.co.uk/news/10161371

MissBattleaxe · 04/09/2015 10:49

I genuinely mean this nicely, but could you start another thread about it? Feelings clearly run high and there's lots that people want to say.

TheBeautifulAndTheDamned · 04/09/2015 12:09

The funny thing about that article featuring John Frieda is that his idea (train young people to have a proper trade so they can earn money and regain stability) is much, much better than Camila's idea to run self-esteem workshops, styling people's hair and showing them how to do make up.

Lightbulbon · 04/09/2015 12:19

Re: Christine's DM article above

What on earth does a 24 yo employed graduate with 14 GCSEs, ex head girl etc need help from a charity for??

Talk about cherry picking your clients!

Of course you are going to have 'good outcomes' when you choose to work with clients who have already demonstrated excellent life/academic skills.

Also all these revelations which seem to point to most of KC clients as being adults rather than children is that not fraud in itself when they call themselves kids company?

Shouldn't there be some kind if brand/advertising regulation about using a name which misrepresents what you actually do?

It's like giving to a save the panda charity who actually spend your money on lions!

squeaver · 04/09/2015 12:24

Yes, absolutely, Frieda's original idea was pragmatic AND measurable.

Also amazing that the DM ran that feature just 2 weeks before the charity closed down and when serious questions were already being asked.

jeronimoh · 04/09/2015 12:38

'I think the fact they don't have to adhere to the national curriculum is one of the only ways they differ from academies once open.'

Can I just add (sorry I know that it's going off topic) that independent schools don't need to employ qualified staff, however it is my understanding that the SENCO must be a qualified teacher in an academy.

Is this the same in free schools and was there a SENCO at KC?

jeronimoh · 04/09/2015 12:40

JF's idea would have helped young people to become independent young people. Earning money, working and independence improves self-esteem.
It was a much better idea.

squeaver · 04/09/2015 12:41

Can I please back up Miss Battleaxe and ask you nicely to start another thread on this issue?

squeaver · 04/09/2015 12:42

I mean the academies/free schools thing. Sorry, x-post there.

SonicStamp · 04/09/2015 13:30

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MissBattleaxe · 04/09/2015 16:25

It's amazing how many high profile clients wanted to be seen to be involved with KC. There's a bit of a loud silence now. Personally I think some of the facts that are coming out about CB are indisputable but somehow she became the Cause du Jour.

MrsJamin · 04/09/2015 18:18

This news report from Bristol is interesting - apparently the Bristol branch of KC had 213 children and "young people" on its books, and the council are currently reassessing them all to see just who does need extra help. The underlying tone is that not all of them did need help - or am I just reading it cynically?

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 04/09/2015 18:31

I'd presumed that as clients can self.refer, and that no-one is ever turned, that some clients will have more needs than others

SonicStamp · 04/09/2015 18:44

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LuluJakey1 · 04/09/2015 18:58

mrsjamin That news report is so unspecific and vague and has gaps so huge you could drive a tank though them. I don't think there is any doubt it is saying that KC was wasteful and had created an impression of extreme need and vulnerability levels that were in accurate.

They should publish the figures, it was public and charitable funding.

OP posts:
ChristineDePisan · 04/09/2015 20:02

interesting that 40 children with complex needs were being educated by KC and paid for by Bristol CC - I wonder whether than provision was ever inspected by Ofsted?

ChristineDePisan · 04/09/2015 20:03

Interesting that the contract in Bristol was already due to cease - genuinely, I wonder why?

RomComPhooey · 04/09/2015 20:04

That Bristol article just underlines the importance of keeping our public services going, not least to pick up the pieces when the "big society"/private sector hits the buffers.

TalkinPeace · 04/09/2015 20:24

So, the Bristol article :

Kids Company ran an Open Access drop in centre with undefined aims, outcomes and users

it also ran a 40 pupil PRU for which the annual contract had not been renewed
which implies they were utterly dire at getting kids ready for return to school.

If ALL of the Kids Company funding was put into decent PRUs in every part of the country the good to society would be many, many times what the unaccountable charity achieved