Kids Club - Camilla Batmanghelijdjh

In the interests of balance, here is another interesting article about Kids Company. So sad that closure was the reaction to allegations of impropriety, leaving so many children without the support they had been receiving.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/09/kids-company-camila-batmanghelidjh-i-saw-the-good-work-it-did-and-mourn-its-passing

A most interesting article and confirms my doubts about the charity.

Thanks Grannyknot really interesting and disturbing. The story of the woman who sold her house was especially touching. Whatever happened she was treated appallingly. Something was definitely wrong with KC no doubt more will emerge.

That was a very interesting read Granny knot. Thank you for posting. I think that gradually all sorts more will emerge. Maybe people living in London knew what the charity did but whereas I had a good idea about NSPCC or Banardo's etc I had no idea of what their role actually was.

A blog from the whistleblower:

blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/08/the-inside-story-of-how-the-spectator-broke-the-kids-company-scandal/

What struck me is the mention of £150 million over two decades. That's a lot of money.

CB was forced to resign, and then made the announcement it was shutting down after she'd got the £3m and paid her staff with £800,000 of it. The £3m wasn't for overheads but to maintain the service so that's when warning bells went off.

Having already got through the £25.5m budget for this year it's no wonder why it was shut down, IMO, especially as she couldn't account for where that money had gone. I understand there were some extremely questionable practices like it funding a boarding school place for her chauffeur's daughter (who wasn't in receipt of a service from KC) and staff salaries averaging £50k p.a.

As far as I know the governement dont have a choice about bailing out a number of banks if they get into trouble together.
Else the whole pack of cards comes down. They are not happy about doing it!

CB closed down Kids Company herself didnt she? She has to get the allegations of abuse sorted before carrying on, if she were to.

So £3million wasn't support claireseptember?

Am not an expert but have been following this case and have talked to people who are/ have been social workers working with vulnerable young people. From what I understand the organisation were doing extremely valuable work with difficult and vulnerable youngsters who had fallen through the net of other kinds of statutory support systems. On the other hand, it seems there was inefficiency and wastage in their financial systems (tho this still has to be proven).
My point is this, when big banks are mismanaged, corrupt and wasting taxpayers' money on a grand scale through greed and speculation, the government is happy to bail them out at our expense, and their CEOs continue to receive gigantic bonuses on top of their gigantic salaries, but when a charity helping some of the most vulnerable members of our society appears to be mismanaging its finance, instead of being offered expert support it is immediately closed down.

jinglebellrocks - you made me laugh

My message refers to iPhones - sorry out of sequence.

Depends what your priorities are.

fullfact.org/factcheck/education/kids_company_36000_helped-47069
I think it's a can of worms; charismatic CEO who could talk the talk, a charity with apparently no accountability to anyone and that this is the tip of the iceberg.
None of the figures add up, the charity's reports appear to some critics to read like fiction.

No, I don't have first hand experience of KC, but I have spoken to many who have over the years and they've always been impresssed and very supportive. It is a difficult job in a difficult environment, damaged kids are not easy and will continue to steal, make allegations, fight etc. cos that's the way they've always got by and it takes a lot to change, a lot of personal guidance, good role models, good honest meals etc. Its a shame people have withdrawn their support, though I suppose they have to until the legal stuff is sorted out.
There should be a gov't provision for things like this, but had they kept going or even expanded to every city (as the need is there) in a few year's time, just before the next election, the papers will be saying 'gov't funded charity buys kids Nike trainers - at taxpayers expense,' and how is that going to sit with Ian Duncan Smith's, 'we need benefits cut to the bone to balance the books.'
That's why KC were shut down. That and CB's challenge to the child protection system.
In the 70's/80's social services used to help much more in a practical way because it really helped kids move on.

They were a charity.
There are loads of charity rules. If you dont obey them, I'm not sure what happens.

If they passed all the government audits then they can't have been doing much wrong with the money. I think for the staff there was the issue of not getting paid if they carried on because KC had not built up a reserve in the bank as they kept spending it on the children - and they were mopping up an awful lot of things that should be done by the local authority. I know that in Bristol there was (and possibly is) NO provision at all for therapeutic services for children who had been abused, unless they were deemed suicidal and then it was minimal. Even when they arrested a teacher in Weston Super Mare and had a whole schoolful of children to check through, the parents had nowhere to get help. Not sure much has changed.

The big thing about Kids Company is the children can walk in off the street rather than be referred by a social worker, so they were helping youngsters in all sorts of situations not just those who had already hit rock bottom.

I think a lot of the media coverage has been appalling and simplistic.

btw I also read that if you rely on govt funding you can't build up big reserves in your bank account. It is all horribly confusing but the bottom line is there are a lot of children out there who need this support.

How true,Helmacd. Unfortunately (for her) CB was never a tick box person.

I will have to reserve judgement re the charity until it has been properly investigated.
However, I would like to comment that this is one of the many problems with this stupid 'gone-far-to-far political correctness. I suspect that when any doubts were expressed/ complaints made, the lily livered people who should have investigated with rigour, were just too frightened that they would be called racist.

Lizziemik On what do you base such a sweeping statement?

Why is the government doling out this amount of money to needy kids in the London area. Theres needy kids all over the UK, although needy sometimes means they dont have an i phone.

Well the Chairman of the Trustees is adamant that all the paperwork, including the accounts, is absolutely in order. I don't know anything about the day-to-day working of KC, but it has always seemed to me to be doing a great job and I have donated sporadically in the past. They have worked with children who should have been cared for by parents, and for whom there is no other immediate provision. It looks as if donors, as soon as they saw a possible problem, withdrew donations. And, according to CB, lots of donors gave equipment, etc., rather than money. And the accusation of child abuse is 'interesting'. Several 'celebs' have been accused of the same and there has been absolutely no evidence against them. As far as I'm concerned the jury is still out - but I have to admit that I'm hoping for a 'not guilty' verdict!

spabbygirl. Do you have any actual experience of Kids Company?

Bear in mind that newspapers won't print articles such as 'woman sits down and talks to child,' 'volunteer takes child to optician' they have to be eye catching so 'charity buys child posh trainers' it will have to be, but doubtless much of their work will have been the former, compensating for work the parent's should have done but don't.

Also, its no good saying an abused person should have counselling and giving them an appointment for 2 weeks time, I know from personal and professional experience that when trauma overwhelms you, you need to speak to someone there and then & these people often won't have family/friends that can help. That is the beauty of KC, they can respond quickly and in a way that is individual, no 2 young people are the same.

I think the charisma of its founder matters not a jot to their daily work. Its very useful to have someone who is articulate on these matters and can speak to big groups, the fact that she has first hand experience of these kids is only a benefit those listening, once you've heard their stories, its very difficult not to feel compassion for them. I once worked with a 15 yr old chap who stole his foster carers car and wrote it off, almost killing pedestrians in the process. He was in care cos his parents had gone to spain and left him with a disinterested neighbour. Before I met him I thought he would be awful. When I met him I sat and spoke to him, 'I know I did wrong,' he said, 'it was a bloody silly thing to do. But some money had been stolen from his foster carer's purse and I got the blame. And it wasn't me, it was their own son. And it hurt.'
Incidentally, after few months of sensible talking through issues with me, he gave the local police details of all the local drug dealers knowing it could cause him problems. Sometimes people just need setting on the right tracks.

I am very saddened because it seemed such a great organisation. I think it is the difficulty you get when one charismatic person is in charge.
Maybe she would have been better had she just had one role - either hands on- or for publicity and fund raising.
I suspect the paper work was not in order which it has to be with that sort of money.

spabbygirl I agree with a lot of what you say. I know we live in a society where the 'right trainers' matter to a child, and where deprived children don't get pocket money. Of course it would be nice to be able to provide those things to create a more equal society. Unfortunately, it does appear that KC may have lost sight of what was important and instead started to offer what was desirable.

All organisations have to work within their budget, wherever that money comes from. Staff salaries are crucial (as long as you have the right staff); providing shelters, food, therapeutic services for vulnerable children are all essential. Handing out pocket money and subsidising poor parents may be a nice thing to do and may make you and your charity popular but it's not wise when it empties the coffers and means your charity has to close. I'm afraid that blaming everyone else when this happens is not very wise either.

I don't believe everything I read in the papers, and I'm quite prepared to believe there may be more to this than we are being told. However, my views at the moment are formed from hearing what the users of this charity and CB herself have to say.