Hospital Charity Fund

nxdmsandkaskdjaqd

PlutoinCapricorn wrote: »

I see that next to the column that shows the Incoming income for the appeal in question, there is a "resources expended" column. I am not certain whether this refers to the money spent on admin/fundraising, or what has been spent on the unit. It could well be the latter.

What page is this on?

PlutoinCapricorn

Did you see the article in the local paper saying that the building was on hold? There is going to be a review. The money raised will be spent on O & H services.

The whole thing is very vague, and I quite understand your concern. It does seem that they may have been dribbling away some of the money the raised on 'services'.

nxdmsandkaskdjaqd

Could you point me to the page where the drippling away is shown?

PlutoinCapricorn

In the TAR for 2007/08, page 19 shows that £646k was raised and £132k expended.

PlutoinCapricorn

nxd... I would be interested to hear the results of any request for information that you make.

One final thought: their reports do say that restricted income funds are "expendable at the discretion of the Trustees in furtherance of some particular aspect(s) of the objectives of the charity and are in line with the donor’s wishes.

These funds have arisen from income generated and are for use
by the fund managers to benefit the area specified in the Appeals
purpose. The funds must be utilised in line with the specified
purpose."

I am wondering whether this covers spending the appeal funds on services for people suffering from the stated conditions, as opposed to enhancing the Unit.

nxdmsandkaskdjaqd

I will let you know the outcome.

PlutoinCapricorn

This is an interesting subject.

I still think that directly asking the organisation in question what the appeal money raised has been spent on and why is the best approach, but doing some research produces some interesting background information.

It is called "initial failure" when an appeal for a specific purpose fails to reach its target. The correct procedure is to return their money to as many donors who can be identified as possible: anything else is a betrayal of trust. However, if the wording of the original appeal mentions that if the target isn't reached or the money cannot be spent as planned, it will be allocated to a similar cause, anyone who donates is deemed to have consented to this.

In this case, it seems that as cuts of £30 million must be made, it was considered unwise to spend the appeal money on the unit. I wonder whether this was taken into account when the appeal was launched in 2006.

nxdmsandkaskdjaqd

PlutoinCapricorn wrote: »

It is called "initial failure" when an appeal for a specific purpose fails to reach its target. The correct procedure is to return their money to as many donors who can be identified as possible: anything else is a betrayal of trust. However, if the wording of the original appeal mentions that if the target isn't reached or the money cannot be spent as planned, it will be allocated to a similar cause, anyone who donates is deemed to have consented to this.
.

The appeal did reach it's target, in fact the target was extended, so the issue is the appeal money not being spent as planned. I do not believe I have access to the information that will state what would happen in this case.

Your findings of Today 11:17 AM does give them ability to do what they like with the funds.

PlutoinCapricorn wrote: »

In this case, it seems that as cuts of £30 million must be made, it was considered unwise to spend the appeal money on the unit. I wonder whether this was taken into account when the appeal was launched in 2006.

I don't believe that the £30m in cuts was around in 2006, it's likely that this became a priority as a result of the 2008 meltdown.

PlutoinCapricorn

Section 74C of the Charities Act gives trustees the power to reallocate a Restricted fund to "similar purposes". These purposes should be similar in essence to the original purpose.

PlutoinCapricorn

I have consulted someone who says that the auditors would not let money raised for a capital appeal be used for services (unless of course it was just a surplus amount). So it seems that the resources expended from the Restricted fund were primarily for fundraising costs.