From the CGL website:-
Our vision and values
Our vision is to enable people to make the positive changes necessary to lead independent and purposeful lives and create safer, healthier communities. The values of our organisation are focused on achieving this vision. They encompass our belief that the individual is the source of their own motivation and ability to change and we therefore aim to treat all service users with respect, based on a passion and commitment to social justice that will empower them to achieve their goals. Our work is not just a job: it is a vocation.
A learning organisation
Change, grow, live is a learning organisation. We respond to new information and evidence about what works and are willing to change and adapt our service delivery to achieve the best outcomes for our clients. We are also committed to supporting the continued learning and professional development of our staff to ensure that we are at the forefront of developments in our field.
Of course CGL is not a 'proper' charity because it's a defacto business that derives its total income from public sector contracts and like most 'third sector' players so loved by the Tory government, it's keen to take over more work from public servants and cut costs. Despite undertaking more work for the State, there's no public accountability and of course it's immune to those irritating Freedom of Information requests.
I well recall attending a NOMS consultation event in Wales during the lead-up to TR and listening to a representative from CRI on my table confidently predicting that should they be successful bidders for a CRC 'probation officers would be the first to get the chop as being far too expensive'. The person concerned seemingly used to be a PO, and although CRI was not successful as a prime contractor, the words of their eager doom-monger have proved to be rather prescient.
I well recall attending a NOMS consultation event in Wales during the lead-up to TR and listening to a representative from CRI on my table confidently predicting that should they be successful bidders for a CRC 'probation officers would be the first to get the chop as being far too expensive'. The person concerned seemingly used to be a PO, and although CRI was not successful as a prime contractor, the words of their eager doom-monger have proved to be rather prescient.
From Mike Pattinson, Executive Director CRI via Twitter:-
ReplyDelete"you misquote me as you well know. Happy to debate 'accountability' too."
Prior to TR I worked with a probation trusts that had a partnership with CRI. All I can say is CRI was an atrocious organisation that only seemed to be good at cutting corners and shirking its responsibilities.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure it was called something else a few years ago before rebranding to CRI. Now it's rebranded again! Identity crisis or a strategy to avoid some legal matters maybe?
DeleteCRI are in partnership in the midlands and they are a bit non exsistant.
DeleteWhat, exactly, is a "proper" charity? CRI meets all of the legal obligations required of a charity - it exists for charitable purposes and makes no commercial profit. When you say it isn't a "proper" charity, what you really mean is that it doesn't mean your narrow and legally unjustifiable definition. You might not like what CRI does - that is entirely your prerogative - but that is a different matter.
ReplyDeleteIt's a business - "How Britain turned charity into big business" Huffington Post today:-
Deletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/apolitical/how-britain-turned-charit_b_9589852.html
It's a charity. You may not like what it does, but it doesn't make it any less charitable. So it has contracts with government and local authorities. So do Citizens Advice Bureaux - are they not charities either?
DeleteCRI secures contracts and makes profits off working with the vulnerable, huge ones. It gives nothing as its services are crap, and target driven. It's a charity in name only.
DeleteSo CRI secures contracts to work wth the vulnerable. So does MIND, Citizens Advice and many other charities that work with the mentally ill and other vulnerable groups. Are they all just charities in name only? And, of course, none of them make profits, CRI might make a surplus each year - but then all charities should. If they don't, they go bust...
Delete"Charity" is rarely accurately applied these days. The CRI I worked with was known for not providing the service it was reaping the profits for. It was run as a 100% business and their paid staff had hardly any training or experience, and all of their premises were not fit for purpose. Drug and alcohol users received a poor service and the contracting organisation was locked in a battle to get it to keep to the contract which it didn't. It was a shame as before the increase in big contracts and big bucks it was okay, but afterwards there wasn't anything charitable about CRI and "helping the vulnerable" was no longer a priority. It's not just CRI as I've seen many so called charities go the same way.
DeleteCharitable status is a concept so broad as to be meaningless these days. Take Registered Charity Number 1139086, for example - Eton College.
DeleteI don't know enough about CRI, or whatever it's now called, to be able to comment on that particular example, but Jim is right to point to the many examples of charities which are now little more than big businesses in the way they are instructed, and are so concerned with identifying the next big contract that they lose sight of their original purposes. Plus the Government is about to strip any organisation that receives public funds of the right to challenge policy, cutting dissent at a stroke.
Eton College has been a charity since the 15th century, so it's hardly a modern phenomenon. The fact is that the provision of educational is a charitable purpose, whether you like the way that it is done or not. Charities are concerned with furthering their mission. If winning a new contract helps them to do that, then of course they will pursue contracts.
DeleteAs for "charity" not being accurately applied. Charitable status is a fact of law. It is applied exactly the same way now as it was 10, 20 or 30 years ago.
So if I can summarise, your point is "that's just how it is, get over it?"
DeleteInspiring stuff.
CGL are about to decimate the drug support services in Luton. From what I've read (and it's a lot) I predict an increase in homelessness, burglaries and fatalities. No doubt Mike Pattison will brush any like-minded claims off, but why should he care. He gets paid a fortune. He can afford the Teflon suit.
ReplyDelete