The family of the late Captain Tom Moore “repeatedly benefited” from the “mismanaged” charity set up in his name, an investigation has found.
Today, the Charity Commission published the findings of its statutory inquiry into the Captain Tom Foundation following a three-year investigation.
Its report finds “serious and repeated instances of misconduct and/or mismanagement” in the administration of the charity concerning the conduct and actions of Hannah Ingram-Moore (Captain Tom’s daughter) and her husband Colin.
It notes that the charity was founded during the Covid-19 pandemic amid “unprecedented national and international media interest in Captain Tom and his family”, which would have been “an extremely stressful situation which was only compounded by the subsequent death of Captain Tom”.
However, it adds: “The commission has concluded that Mr and Mrs Ingram-Moore’s misconduct and/or mismanagement wasn’t an isolated incident but a repeated pattern of behaviour which continued past the worst of the pandemic.”
NCVO warned that the report could “dent public confidence in giving” but said it “doesn’t reflect the hard work of thousands of charities that abide by the principles of ethical decision-making”.
‘Repeated pattern of behaviour’
The regulator opened a compliance case into the foundation, set up in June 2020 after Captain Tom raised over £38.9m for NHS Charities Together’s Covid-19 appeal.
Its engagement with the Captain Tom Foundation escalated to a full inquiry in June 2022 due to concerns including intellectual property and trademark issues not being fully considered upon the charity’s establishment.
Hannah Ingram-Moore was a trustee from February 2021 until her resignation in March 2021 and interim chief executive from August 2021 to April 2022. Colin Ingram-Moore was a trustee between February 2021 and June 2024.
As a result of its investigation, the commission disqualified both Hannah and Colin Ingram-Moore from being trustees or senior managers at any charity for 10 and eight years, respectively.
Its inquiry found Hannah and Colin Ingram-Moore were responsible for a “pattern of behaviour” which saw them repeatedly benefitting personally from their involvement in the Captain Tom Foundation.
The report cites their link to each other and the charity’s connections to their private companies including Club Nook and CTV and repeated failures to manage conflicts of interest which led to “direct and indirect private benefit for the family”.
It also criticises the charity’s other “unconflicted” trustees Stephen Jones and Simon DeMaid (who resigned on 15 March 2021), both of whom it said lacked sufficient oversight and administration control at times.
Numerous instances of misconduct and/or mismanagement
Among the numerous instances of misconduct and/or mismanagement by the Ingram-Moore family, the report highlights an ambassador services agreement with Virgin Media.
On 22 September 2021, Hannah Ingram-Moore signed an agreement with Virgin Media to judge and present the Virgin Media Captain Tom Foundation Connector Awards.
The agreement defined the ambassador as “Hannah Ingram-Moore on behalf of the Captain Tom Foundation” who was personally paid £18,000 while Virgin Media donated £2,000 to the charity.
The commission’s report says the minutes of trustee meetings at that time do not record that Hannah Ingram-Moore had informed all trustees about the details of the project, including her remuneration.
While she claimed to have contracted with Virgin Media in a personal capacity, the inquiry “doesn’t agree” with her assertion and finds “no evidence to suggest that this work was done outside her contracted work hours, or that annual leave was booked to undertake the role”.
The inquiry found that by personally receiving remuneration for the ambassador agreement, Mrs Ingram-Moore created a “conflict of interest which the full board of trustees should’ve been made aware of so that it could adequately be managed”.
Public misled on several occasions
The report says that the Ingram-Moore family misled the public on several occasions, notably in their handling of public communications about publishing deals for books authored by Captain Tom and statements on Hannah Ingram-Moore’s salary.
On the books, Hannah Ingram-Moore signed a publishing agreement with Penguin Books and Club Nook and a tripartite agreement between the charity and both firms.
The family originally indicated that sales from the first publishing agreement would support the charity and/or that it would donate to the charity directly.
However, the report states that no funds have been transferred to the charity from the books’ sales, which instead “turned out to be a purely commercial endeavour that benefited the Ingram-Moore’s company Club Nook”.
It says there was a clear public expectation that by purchasing the books, funds would be received by the charity and that the Ingram-Moores did not seek to correct these expectations.
“The inquiry considers both Mr and Mrs Ingram-Moore’s conduct in respect of the first publishing agreement and the position they have adopted in not seeking to rectify matters has or is likely to have damaged public trust and confidence in the charity and charities generally.”
Findings ‘could dent public confidence in giving’
Commission chief executive David Holdsworth praised Captain Tom’s fundraising achievements for NHS Charities Together but said the foundation set up in his name had failed to live up to his “legacy of others before self, which is central to charity”.
“The public – and the law – rightly expect those involved in charities to make an unambiguous distinction between their personal interests, and those of the charity and the beneficiaries they are there to serve,” he said.
“This didn’t happen in the case of the Captain Tom Foundation.
“We found repeated instances of a blurring of boundaries between private and charitable interests, with Mr and Mrs Ingram-Moore receiving significant personal benefit. Together, the failings amount to misconduct and/or mismanagement.”
In response, NCVO’s executive director Saskia Konynenburg said: “We know this news could dent public confidence in giving, but it shouldn’t.
“This case doesn’t reflect the hard work of thousands of charities that abide by the principles of ethical decision-making, champion integrity and openness while also transforming millions of lives every day.
“Charities need the support of the public like never before, as they’re facing growing demand and higher costs to deliver their services, while funding continues to fall.
“The circumstances of this case are very unique and the outcomes of the investigation are clear.”
In a statement, ACEVO said the case “underscores the crucial role of robust and effective regulation in maintaining the health and integrity of our sector”.
“The trust that individuals and organisations place in charities must be protected, and it is essential that regulators take proportionate action when such rare yet deeply damaging behaviours occur,” it said.
“This not only safeguards the sector but also benefits all those who rely on its support.”
Related articles
