Captain Tom Foundation spent more on costs than causes

[KerryWeaver]

This is a disappointing read.

"More than £240,000 of the registered charity’s expenditure went on the costs, while four grants totalling £160,000 were paid out to good causes. Of the foundation’s costs, £125,000, almost one-tenth of its income, went on fundraising consultancy fees, including to a firm run by Captain Tom’s daughter."

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/captain-tom-foundation-spent-more-on-costs-than-causes-z3b9vw0fh

I could see this coming. She is profiteering from her late fathers name and legacy. A disgrace

@ENoeuf

Ok, I don’t hold the same suspicions. I get it’s a media storm right now but having looked at the accounts and the sums etc I’m just not excited by it. Plus her being front and centre is a different ‘crime’ to the money stuff. We can disagree without falling out online.

Whose falling out? Its an online discussion.

And no one said being front amd centre was a crime. But it is linked. If you are front and centre, you are front and centre. In both good times and the bad.
The focus is on her because she made sure the focus was her and her dad. Her Dad isn't here anymore, so it's just her. But that was her choice

And working in PR, I am sure she knew the benefits and risks.

@AlDanvers

Andblossomthe daughter has a husband who is also linked to the businesses.

However, he didn't put himself front and centre like his wife did. She took on, in the story they were selling, the role as the person in charge. She joined her father on most interviews. Often talking more than he did. She is the one that positioned herself as driving force behind it. She ensure she, and by association, her business got the attention and made sure it was clear she was as a big a part of it as he was.

If he had been pushing himself forward as much as she was, then I could understand the point. But he didn't. She wanted to be the face of it with her dad. That comes with positives and negatives. The negatives being you will still be considered the one responsible when things go tits up.

This 💯

@stairway

Tbh I was not impressed with his daughter after the decision to holiday in the Caribbean was made. Though I’ve always seen Captain Tom as genuine the daughter seemed like an opportunist.

I remember having mixed feelings about this at the time. The daughter seemed to be in it for the publicity and aggressively marketed her fathers good deeds.
I had a feeling there'd be something in it for her 🙁

‘BoredZelda

a woman’s role being given more scrutiny than a man’s.

Charity commission audit all charities, not just those run by women.

And, it is her husband who is the trustee.’

Obviously I know that. I thought it was clear I was referring to here and the media. Anyway obviously I’m a lone voice so no real room for discussion beyond being told I’m wrong 😂

Obviously I know that. I thought it was clear I was referring to here and the media

And drawing conclusions where there are none. The problem with crying misogyny where there is none is that people take it less seriously when it is actually the problem.

I am not at all surprised. I always thought that he was being "used" by his daughter to raise her (and her company's) profile and earn fees.

There's always going to be something dodgy about any charity that is hyped as much as this one was. Remember Kids' Company and Wonderful Camilla who couldn't possibly be criticised because she was so wonderful and magical... until the charity collapsed in absolute disarray, not only financially but in terms of the useless and even dangerous 'services' it was providing.

@WouldIBeATwat

And how is having Virgin Money as your donation platform working out for you?

I’m not with the charity anymore but they’re a) still going (many aren’t post-pandemic) and b) still using it, so I would guess it’s going well.

Well that's surprisingly as it closed down leaving many charities in the lurch.

@CallMeNutribullet

It's wild to me that people think a CEO for a large charity shouldn't be paid the wage of a CEO. Considering they'll already be paid a fraction of what they'd be paid in the private sector.

Big charities simply wouldn't be able to do the work they do or have the reach they have without full time work from people who have the skills required. In order to attract those people you need to pay them accordingly.

It just displays a real lack of critical thinking.

No, not paying Care Workers more than minimum wage shows a lack of critical thinking. I worked for a failing charity and know how much money is wasted, meanwhile the CEO and managers get absurd pay to mismanage and abuse staff who just get basic minimum wage, not even living wage.

The CEO can live on half that pay, care workers cannot live on the pittance they get. As evidenced by the chronic staff shortages in the industry.

This thread reminds me of the recent one about LadBaby. They quite clearly do very well off the back of their charitable 'machine', but anybody suggesting that they may be chiefly using the concept of charity in order to profit handsomely themselves is slapped down and shamed because the charity gets something that they otherwise wouldn't.

I agree. This thread would have been unthinkable a year ago. Those of us who were sceptical of the CT love in, who rolled our eyes when he was on BBC breakfast every other day and who saw millions being raised for NHS charities whist seeing smaller charities at risk trying to find support and getting none, wouldn’t dare to say so publicly.

I just don’t have an issue with it. I used to advocate a lot and support my grandparent, I just see it as a family thing. And maybe it’s her / their opportunity to make a mark and leave a legacy.

Even aside from any 'findings' that may or may not emerge regarding the proper administration of the charity, I would dare to suggest that it isn't really fair to describe all the money raised for the NHS as CT's 'legacy'.

I think he was in the right place at the right time when the nation was suddenly immensely in awe of the NHS, and his daughter realised this and decided to go all out to make the most of it. I believe that most people giving were under the impression that they were actually giving towards the NHS itself and directly towards the fight against Covid, rather than to associated charities - and they would have done this regardless of who originally set up the giving fund.

CT seemed like a very nice, good-hearted man himself, but to consider the £33m his own actual legacy is a bit like crediting the saving of hundreds of lives from a burning building directly to somebody who shouted "The fire escape is this way!" as they ran towards it, before word started to be spread amongst everybody else inside.

@Wreath21

There's always going to be something dodgy about any charity that is hyped as much as this one was. Remember Kids' Company and Wonderful Camilla who couldn't possibly be criticised because she was so wonderful and magical... until the charity collapsed in absolute disarray, not only financially but in terms of the useless and even dangerous 'services' it was providing.

Except it turned out that most of what was said was BS and she got complete vindication in the end. fundraising.co.uk/2021/02/15/high-court-dismisses-case-against-kids-company-founder-trustees/

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8675347/CAPTAIN-TOM-MOORE-reveals-sexless-marriage-fight-wed-love-life-new-memoir.html

Sorry for the DM link,I read this extract last year, it was pretty clear at the time that his daughter although a PR professional, fell for her own spin in regards to hero worshiping her father and thought the family would always have the press on their side, if she thought that this extract was in any way good for her father’s brand.

With a tame press, the management fees would easily be spun by the tabloids as fair compensation for a hardworking devastated family and anyone suggesting otherwise would be shouted down as heartless and unpatriotic for besmirching our nations hero whilst his family and country are still in mourning. I can imagine the tear soaked interviews with daytime tv now with the dignified but outraged daughter .

Unfortunately for her, The Conservative party and it’s tame press require as many fallen idols as possible , so that the British public can be led to believe that no one behaved well at that time rather than single out Boris and friends. The quicker the public use the phrase ‘ they’re all as bad as each other’ the quicker it can be glossed over like the rest of the past 10 years and the country can carry on in its apathy.

@BoredZelda

This thread reminds me of the recent one about LadBaby. They quite clearly do very well off the back of their charitable 'machine', but anybody suggesting that they may be chiefly using the concept of charity in order to profit handsomely themselves is slapped down and shamed because the charity gets something that they otherwise wouldn't.

I agree. This thread would have been unthinkable a year ago. Those of us who were sceptical of the CT love in, who rolled our eyes when he was on BBC breakfast every other day and who saw millions being raised for NHS charities whist seeing smaller charities at risk trying to find support and getting none, wouldn’t dare to say so publicly.

This happens a lot. There's questions being raised around charities now, Ashley Cains charity is one of them. They're ignoring families pleas for money to help their sick kids, but do phone calls etc. when asked about the money, followers shoot them down. Yet no one asks how he and his partner don't have jobs, yet afford all they have. It's like you can't question things about charities whereas they should be so transparent about the money.

This is how most of the charities run. Did not surprise me in the least.

I felt really uneasy about it from the start, to me it was exploiting a very old man who would presumably never have considered raising money on his own.
The ensuing efforts of disabled children walking to raise money were far more impressive in my opinion especially as CT’s DD seemed to be appearing everywhere promoting herself as some sort of saviour to the NHS.
As for the Michael Ball single, I thought it was very distasteful and exploitive., along with all the tacky merchandise.
I happily volunteer for smaller charities and donate whenever I can, but this whole shebang gave me the creeps.

@BoodleBug51

My cousin works for a large well known local charity that gets a lot of national coverage as it's very niche.

I've never given them a penny after seeing what he gets "on the firm".

I now only support small local charities as a result.

Give us a clue, what does he get 'on the firm?'

Thank you for posting that link @ambushedbywine

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-60319650

[quote SmellinOfTroy]www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-60319650[/quote]
Capt Sir Tom Moore: Watchdog to review charity's accounts

This is a confusing story. Didn't they raise £39 million?

@Curiousmouse

This is a confusing story. Didn't they raise £39 million?

That was raised and went to NHs charities. The go fund me was in her company name.

They then set up the foundation and raised an addition 1 million for on hoping charity work.

I feel dreadful even thinking it, but I just automatically assume that the big charities are all on the make nowadays, looking to feather their own nests, pursuing political and vanity campaigns that have very little to do with their stated purpose and wasting money - often given sacrificially by the poorest people - left, right and centre.

For some of them, it seems to be an academic exercise in gathering as much money as they possibly can and almost feeling sad when they have to give some of it up - by using it for the express purpose of the charity.

Whether it's chuggers, charity Christmas cards, pop singles, playing the averages based on hugely expensive TV ads or whatever, there's just so much looking at the bottom line, without apparently caring how they arrive there: how much money ordinary people have given that disappears straight into the churn and how much they and their cronies end up profiting off the back of it all, on top of the kudos for how selfless and amazing they apparently are!

When done well and efficiently, fundraising is vital for so many wonderful things; but I suppose I find it leaves a bad taste when the fundraiser gets all the adulation (not including children, of course) - or a massive pay packet in the case of charity CEOs - and those who have given are pretty much ignored as completely inconsequential.

@Lennybenny

Why the surprise? No one knows where the money he raised went. Seriously where did all the millions go to? What did it do? Who did it help?

I’m an NHS community team.....we got about 300 quid or thereabouts