Charities meet public benefit requirements by increasing subsidies

Governance | Vibeka Mair | 8 Jul 2010

Two public schools and a nursing home have met Charity Commission public benefit requirements by providing services to those who cannot afford it.

St Anselm’s School Trust, Highfield Priory School and Penlyan House, Jewish Retirement and Nursing Home had initially failed the Commission’s criteria for public benefit when they were assessed in July of last year.

The charities were given 12 months to come up with a plan.

The plans for the two schools used a mix of new or additional bursary assistance financed by fundraising, together with the educational benefits they provide in the local community.

The Commission has also agreed that the trustees of Penylan House, Jewish Retirement and Nursing Home have developed a clear strategy for providing and publicising the assistance it offers to those who could not otherwise afford to use its services.

However, Rest Bay Convalescent Hotel, which also failed the Commission’s assessment last year, has still not met requirements and has been giving a four month extension.

The Independent Schools Council said it welcomed the ruling of the two schools, but it was still seeking permission to apply for judicial review of the Charity Commission’s guidance and expected to hear shortly whether that application has been granted.

Separately, the Commission has published its report into the public benefit of arts charities. It ruled that the charities it assessed – the Royal Opera House Covent Garden, the Young Concert Artists Trust, the Castle Players, and the Gwent Ballet Theatre - all provided public benefit.

The Charity Commission now plans to review a small number of sports and recreation charities.

Directory: Charity Commission

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Name *

Email *

Organisation

Job Title

Comments *

Verification *

* Please read our Community Standards

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

Robust but respectful debate
Strongly held opinions
Intelligent relevant discussion
The sharing of relevant experiences
New participants

We will not publish:

Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
The posting of contact details for yourself or others
Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear

Please:

Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.