Former CEO Expresses Shock Over Captain Tom Foundation Practices

Jack Gilbert, the former chief executive of the Captain Tom Foundation, informed the BBC that he was “shocked” and “gobsmacked” by his discoveries within the charity. In his initial interview, Mr. Gilbert stated that he identified what he perceived as questionable practices and suggested that Captain Sir Tom Moore’s daughter was partly driven by self-interest. This revelation follows findings by the Charity Commission that Hannah and Colin Ingram-Moore profited from their involvement with the charity established in Captain Sir Tom’s honor. This included funds from a £1.4 million book deal that was directed to a family company rather than the Foundation itself. Mrs. Ingram-Moore has been approached for a statement. Captain Sir Tom, a veteran of World War Two, gained widespread recognition in 2020 amid the pandemic. He raised millions for NHS charities by completing laps of his garden during lockdown. Following his death in February 2021, the charity watchdog initiated an inquiry into the Captain Tom Foundation. Mr. Gilbert, an experienced professional in the charity sector, was appointed to succeed Mrs. Ingram-Moore as chief executive. He managed the charity for five months until it was suspended due to the ongoing Charity Commission investigation. He informed BBC News: “When I came in, I must admit, I was gobsmacked.I was shocked at the number of systems that just did not accord with best practice.One of my first exercises was, of course, to get trusted charity status for the foundation, which meant going through a whole range of different hurdles. And the fact was that although we had done many of them, there were lots of key practices that simply were not in place.” Mr. Gilbert stated that while he was establishing management accounts in the appropriate format for a charity, a task that had not been completed before his tenure, he found a cancelled invoice addressed to Virgin Media. The Charity Commission determined that Mrs. Ingram-Moore received £18,000 for her presence at the Virgin Media O2 Captain Tom Foundation Connector Awards. She asserted that this appearance was personal and conducted in her own time, but the commission disputed this, citing a lack of supporting evidence and noting that the charity itself only received £2,000. “If you’re a chief executive for a charity and you are representing that charity, it is very unusual, unheard of, for the charity not to benefit from activities you’ve done during your working day,” Mr. Gilbert commented. He expressed his opinion that it was “deeply unethical” for a charity chief executive to personally gain at the expense of the charity’s activities. Mr. Gilbert mentioned becoming “quite suspicious” and subsequently reported this payment, along with other discoveries made while reviewing the accounts, to the chair, who then informed the board. He concluded that, in his view, there was a “level of self-interest.” The commission’s report identified a “pattern of behaviour” where the couple personally benefited from their connection to the Captain Tom Foundation, stating that individuals “would understandably feel misled.” The commission urged the Ingram-Moores, who are already barred from serving as charity trustees, to provide a “suitable donation” to the charity as a resolution. It was stated in a press release, various marketing materials, and the prologue of Captain Sir Tom’s memoir that the proceeds from the books would be utilized to support the foundation. A spokesperson for the foundation conveyed that they are “pleased with the Charity Commission’s unequivocal findings regarding the Ingram-Moores’ misconduct.” Mr. Gilbert further remarked that the foundation represented a “lost opportunity.” He elaborated: “The point of the idea that we had was to create a charity that would address ageism, that would enable people to work when they were older, to create connections between older people who are isolated in the wider community.” In their response to the charity watchdog’s report, the Ingram-Moores contended that the Charity Commission’s disclosure of the book deal constituted a “breach of privacy.” They also stated that “significant fees” were paid to the literary agent, legal, and PR professionals, and that portions of the funds were used to support the Captain Tom Foundation. The Ingram-Moores asserted that no misappropriation of funds from the charity had occurred and that they had been treated “unfairly and unjustly” throughout the inquiry. Additional reporting by Jon Ironmonger. Copyright 2024 BBC. All rights reserved. The BBC bears no responsibility for the content of external sites. Information regarding our approach to external linking is available.