ARmy Rumour SErvice

Originally Posted by canteen_cowboy

Also charities have more inspections than any Government department especially on audits.

They are audited if registered with the CC. The audit is like any other company audit, one year out of date and gives figures not detail. With 162,000 charities to adminster the CC can at best only do a level of sampling, or respond to complaints and do an enquiry.

Normally at that stage the damage is done and the money is gone.

The guidelines on adminstative expenses and charitable work are very wide. So long as returns are posted on time and in the correct manner that tends to be extent of the inspection.

Originally Posted by canteen_cowboy

i think you will find that is bullshit. turning point and adaction are business in the guise of charities and has been given more tenders than any other within England, and in most cases it's a partnership with the NHS. who will then de staff by about 1/3rd cant provide the services but are always favoured and because like the NHS who insist on wasting money like any government funded organisation.


I'm speaking from my own experiences of course and the many people i've been involved with, I used the charities I know of as an example but their will be many others milking away public money in other areas.
These drug charities tend to have a tiny part of services within the NHS and that's likely to be the prescribing part.

I have dealt with several NHS drug & alcohol tendered services within the midlands, and in my experience NHS and social Services commissioning groups who in most cases joint fund either drug or alcohol/both services always go for the cheapest option.

Yes, they do often go for the cheapest option and they then force patients out of treatment and the job is done and they are in profit.


and it is the RMN's/NHS who are in general the worse to work with.Blinds must be at windows clients are not allowed to enter through same doorway as medical staff. medical staff do not share offices with non medical excuses like because of sensitive documents,yes of course, same documents in same folder filled out in clients case notes.

I suppose RMN's may be sensitive about such things as many such as myself will have probably worked with extremely violent patients over the years and tend to be a bit careful. A lot of documents aren't shared as they confidential medical records and shouldn't be shared. No idea why they can't share offices though as the documents should be securely stored.


my own opinion of quite a large proportion of the NHS clinical staff i have worked with, on drugs and alcohol services. so far up their own important arrses they cant see the minions that did not qualify, and are seen as so low down the class ladder to not be mixed with. or........they couldn't hack the local mental health duties and took an easy way out while keeping their grades on less hours!

Yes I have also found a number of poorly trained NHS staff with bad attitudes and very long titles, i've seen some very idle Nurses who never do a tiny bit over and above, then i've seen some shining examples of practice. I've also seen some Nurses who have been disciplined for some matter or another placed in drug and alcohol services as a type of punishment, they used to be sent to elderly wards years ago.

Also charities have more inspections than any Government department especially on audits.

A charity may have plenty of inspections and audits but if we look still at drug and alcoohol services and how they operate locally they probably aren't going to have inspections and just 'wing it'.
I've seen a number share a clinical director who is a psychiatrist, he can't possibly work for so many organisations in a meaningful way. I've seen managers of drug services who didn't have any protocols and didn't have any understanding of clinical governance. I've seen such shoddy practice that i'd have been struck off for but you can't strike off a drugs worker.

As i mentioned earlier the charities move in with vulnerable poeople first, the mentally ill, drug users, people with learning disabilities and it just slowly moves along. These groups have few people that will stick up for them and as we've seen recently in the care homes you can batter these people for years without complaint before anything changes.

Originally Posted by exile1

And in your last paragraph lies the rub. A charity should be funded by donations.............. or call it a government organisation and fund it from tax.

Couldn't agree more. If a charity gets more than 33% of its income from the government, an unhealthy dependency has been created. Some charities are dependent on the government for 70 - 80% of their income; collecting from Joe Public has become a minor part of their activities. It also means they lose a lot of their independence and are forced to toe the governments line for fear of losing their income.

Set a limit for how much funding a charity can accept from the government and remove the entitlement to call themselves 'charities' if this limit is breached. Give then another name like 'government funded voluntary organisation' or such like.

If the government is going to fund the great majority of an activity that should be made very clear. I will judge how much reliance to place on a 'charities' pronouncements by independent of government it is.

Wordsmith

There are so many charities in the UK as let's face it it is cheap labour for the government to fund these than actually provide the services that are needed for the public.

Also some charities in my own view are business's, Age Uk or whatever guise it goes by these days, and other "national" charities, basically a lot of these only provide advice as charity the rest clients pay for,ever seen age UK/concern or whatever title they use with old minibuses etc? doubt it, they pay volunteers expenses, but still charge quite a bit to have your grass cut/garden tided etc.
again charities should not be run to make money they are supposed to be non profit in my opinion, and also should be supporting causes, not doing the job for other agencies/government departments etc.

Originally Posted by CaptainPlume

We've been around the block many times on that one, exile1. The reason these charities pay top dollar for the top people is because they are multi-million pound organisations.

If they want to restrict themselves to donations of a few pfennigs, some shirt buttons & MasterPlume's pocket money (he is determined to put cash in every collecting tin he sees) and expenditure of sending a sack of coal to a pensioner at Christmas then hire me to run the thing. Anything else is going to need a bit more whack, experience & contacts.

Edit to add:

What really annoyed me about working for Raleigh was that while volunteering several salaried posts came up which I fitted to a T. It turned out that these appeared to have been stitched up for the "in crowd" & I was not part of that. My Mother, who holds an MBA & has extensive experience as a volunteer for local & national charities including at regional board level had a similar experience with OXFAM.

The high profile roles are handled by people like my good mate who is a headhunter and they will only be searching out and appointing the very best person for each post. It's these lower level operational mangement where the real "jobs for the boys" (or more accurately wimmin) stuff goes on.

Somthing is just not working in your life.. :0

Originally Posted by O2 Oxygen Thief

Somthing is just not working in your life.. :0

I see your point! His headhunting business recruits for CEOs of Blue Chips, heads of Major Charities & jobs like the England Rugby head honcho so it'll be a couple of years before I'm on his professional rather than social radar.

Strangely enough the moment one of his colleagues in the education section heard I had been appointed as a school bursar said colleague wanted to meet up so he can groom me for the future!

Originally Posted by CaptainPlume

I see your point! His headhunting business recruits for CEOs of Blue Chips, heads of Major Charities & jobs like the England Rugby head honcho so it'll be a couple of years before I'm on his professional rather than social radar.

Strangely enough the moment one of his colleagues in the education section heard I had been appointed as a school bursar said colleague wanted to meet up so he can groom me for the future!

Yes, a lot of grooming went on at my old school too. Took me years to realise what was going on.

Originally Posted by CaptainPlume

What really annoyed me about working for Raleigh was that while volunteering several salaried posts came up which I fitted to a T. It turned out that these appeared to have been stitched up for the "in crowd" & I was not part of that. My Mother, who holds an MBA & has extensive experience as a volunteer for local & national charities including at regional board level had a similar experience with OXFAM.

The high profile roles are handled by people like my good mate who is a headhunter and they will only be searching out and appointing the very best person for each post. It's these lower level operational mangement where the real "jobs for the boys" (or more accurately wimmin) stuff goes on.

Welcome to the SNCO's world!