The chief executive of the Captain Tom Foundation reportedly left the charity in October 2022, according to a report in the Times.
The Times reported that Jack Gilbert left his post four months after being appointed and that the charity “has been without a chief executive for months”.
Gilbert, a founding trustee of Holocaust Memorial Day, was appointed as chief executive of the Captain Tom Foundation on 1 June 2022, succeeding Captain Tom’s daughter Hannah Ingram-Moore.
Civil Society has approached the charity for comment.
Appointment
Ingram-Moore and her husband Colin both became trustees on 1 February 2021 but Hannah resigned a month later when she applied to become the charity’s chief executive.
The charity initially proposed to pay her a salary of £60,000 a year for a three-day week role, which it later proposed to increase to £100,000 for a full-time role.
The Charity Commission intervened in July 2021, saying that a proposed £100,000 was “neither reasonable nor justifiable”. A month later, the regulator permitted her appointment as interim chief executive on a salary of £85,000 a year for a maximum of nine months.
The charity then appointed Gilbert as chief executive on 1 June 2022 but he is said to have left in October.
Investigation
The Charity Commission opened a compliance case into the Captain Tom Foundation in March 2021, which escalated to a full statutory inquiry in June 2022 because of fresh concerns about arrangements between the charity and a company linked to Moore’s daughter’s family.
The Commission also has ongoing concerns about the trustees’ decision-making and governance at the charity.
Last week, the charity announced that it was no longer accepting donations after family members of the late fundraiser were accused of using the organisation’s name to build a spa and pool complex.
According to the Sun, Hannah and her husband told planners they wanted an office for the charity at their £1.2m home, and then built a 50ft by 20ft pool house with changing rooms, toilets and showers.
The Sun said the couple “had applied in their own names for planning permission but used the foundation’s name in the design and access and heritage statement”.
Related articles
