The family of renowned pandemic fundraiser Captain Sir Tom Moore made more than a million pounds through their association with the charity set up in his name, a damning report has found.
The Charity Commission’s investigation into The Captain Tom Foundation has found repeated instances of misconduct and/or mismanagement by the family of the late fundraiser, who set up the charity in his name.
The official report, published today, is highly critical of the conduct and actions of the charity’s former trustee and CEO (Hannah Ingram-Moore) and a former trustee (Colin Ingram-Moore).
It sets out evidence of serious failings in the charity’s management, including failures to act solely in the best interests of the charity and to effectively identify and manage conflicts of interest.
Captain Tom became a household name during the first Covid-19 lockdown, by walking up and down his driveway in Bedfordshire.
The £38.9m raised by Capt Sir Tom for NHS Charities Together, as a result of his efforts, did not form part of the commission’s inquiry, and all of that sum went to NHS charities.
The report found however that Mr and Mrs Ingram-Moore, who are now disqualified from serving as charity trustees, are responsible for a “pattern of behaviour” which saw them repeatedly benefitting personally from their involvement in the charity.
The failure to manage conflicts of interest arising from Mr and Mrs Ingram Moore’s link to each other and the charity’s links to their private companies happened repeatedly and led to direct and indirect private benefit for the family.
Specifically their report found
The report is critical of the Ingram-Moores’ handling of and public communications about publishing deals for books authored by the late Captain Sir Tom.
The inquiry concludes that the public “would understandably feel misled” to learn that sales of his autobiography ‘Tomorrow will be a good day’ have not benefited the charity, given that statements were made which implied donations from sales would be made to the charity carrying his name.
Public statements made by Mrs Ingram-Moore regarding her involvement in setting her salary for the role. The inquiry concludes that it might have been technically accurate for her to state that she was “not offered” a “six figure salary”, as the Commission blocked the initial salary request, and no formal offer was made to her prior to the regulator’s authorisation of a lower salary.
However, the inquiry finds these assertions were disingenuous, as it saw written evidence that she had stated, prior to starting in the role, that her expectations were for a £150k remuneration package.
Mrs Ingram-Moore retaining £18,000 for judging and presenting an award named after Captain Tom.
While she claims she undertook the engagement in a personal capacity, the inquiry does not agree and found no evidence that supports her position. Mrs Ingram-Moore committed the charity’s resources to the event without the non-conflicted trustees’ knowledge or consent.
The handling of intellectual property rights owned by the Ingram-Moore family but offered to the charity for its use without appropriate agreements in place, which led to confusion and possible financial losses to the charity.
The Ingram-Moores’ use of the charity’s name in an original planning application for a building constructed on their private land, which also implied the building would be used by the charity.
They did not inform or seek consent from the unconflicted trustees before using the charity’s name for this purpose. The building was subsequently demolished by order of the local authority. The inquiry finds that the couple used the charity’s name inappropriately for private benefit, and that this amounted to misconduct and/ or mismanagement.
