Sponsored Academies : Charity Status is the safeguard .....

[Talkinpeace]

or maybe not
www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-22571711
up to £237,000 paid to trustees
in TOTAL breach of Charity rules
and if KPMG say so openly it MUST have been worse than that.

sorry PRH but the charity status on which you set so much store is open to utter devaluation

The law provides a lot of safeguards. Most charities obey the law. In this case however it is clear that the law has been broken. I hope the trustees are held personally liable for their failure to obey the law.

AND that the oversight of ALL such charities is tightened up
Broon's "lighter touch" became discredited in companies years ago
BUT
there is no evidence yet that the gravy train is coming to a halt - the penalties for illegality are not engorced

prh : trust me : those people will face no rteal sanctions at all, nor will their advisers - including the ones who booked those jollies

Of course, corruption happens at LAs too, frequently with no action against the officers and politicians concerned. There is no setup available that guarantees to prevent corruption.

By the way, the figure of £237,000 comes from EFA, not KPMG, and it is not clear that this all went to trustees. The original report in TES says, "a total of £393,000 was spent on ?procedural irregularities? including consultancy fees, breaking E-Act?s own financial rules, £237,000 of which was spent by Sir Bruce Liddington."

None of this takes away from the fact that rules were clearly broken.

The numbers of incidents in LAs over the years is truly horrifying.

Any system can be abused. At least in this framework it comes to light far morE quickly than long-running LA frauds.

This is another way private foreign owned companies that own trusts are making money from taxpayer funding: patented curriculum development. What do we know about Aurora Academies Trust and Mosaica Education UK?

www.guardian.co.uk/education/2013/may/18/academy-pays-for-us-curriculum