Subscribe to Search results

Caxton Foundation staff had reference guidelines on what items beneficiaries could receive grants for.

Published on:

The Caxton Foundation was proactive in helping beneficiaries manage their debts.

Published on:

The National Welfare Committee and Caxton Foundation staff aimed to be consistent by checking what had been awarded previously in similar circumstances.

Published on:

At a meeting to discuss service provisions for Alliance House operations, one option proposed was to "Flip the power and have (the in future likely to be much larger) Caxton instead of MFT as the service provider to the rest of 'the group.'"

Published on:

The draft Statement of Financial Procedures set out the "the governance, accountability and funding arrangements agreed between the Department of Health (DH) and the Trustees of the three Charities."

Published on:

Margaret Kennedy was appointed as a Caxton Foundation trustee.

Published on:

Grants were initially paid by means of a "voucher system". This exposed those using a voucher to the risk that they would be identified as suffering from Hepatitis C.

Published on:

The Caxton Foundation began to operate a broader regular payment scheme in 2014/15. The payments were designed to top up the income of a beneficiary to 60% (later 70%) of a median income.

Published on:

The objective of the Regular Payment Scheme changed after the Department of Health's decision not to provide additional funding. As a result of this, the Department of Health had to take account of household income in its entirety including Skipton Stage 2 regular payments and child related benefits.

Published on:

It was arranged that the Caxton Foundation would employ all of the staff working at Alliance House.

Published on:

Christopher Pond stated that: "DH [Department of Health] did not seek to influence the decisions...with respect to the policy for allocating grants, how the CF should discharge its responsibilities to the beneficiaries, the kinds of applications the CF [Caxton Foundation] should grant or the quantum of the grants/payments it should make."

Published on:

The smaller number of Eileen Trust registrants enabled the Eileen Trust trustees to develop a much closer knowledge of each individual registrant's circumstances and give a more personal service to its beneficiaries.

Published on:

The trustees of the Eileen Trust arranged that the Department of Health should contact potential beneficiaries who had not yet registered.

Published on:

The Eileen Trust trustees questioned whether registrants were sufficiently aware of the benefits they could approach the Eileen Trust for and agreed in January 1999 to create a handbook to circulate to registrants about this.

Published on:

Following the provision of increased funding in response to Lord Archer's report, the Eileen Trust Board decided to adopt a minimum level of income which registrants should have in order to apply to the Trust for funding, determined by taking into account whether they were single, lived with a partner and had children.

Published on:

Minutes of a Eileen Trust Board meeting noted that the Board did not consider that support from the Trust should necessarily be secondary to that from state benefits.

Published on:

A scheme of payments for those "infected with HIV through blood or tissue transfer" in England, Wales and Northern Ireland was set up on 24 April 1992. It provided for the payment of fixed sums to people infected and "infected intimates" in different categories, depending on whether they were adult or younger, were married, and whether they had dependent children.

Published on:

Peter Stevens stated in his oral evidence that the Eileen Trust always suggested to registrants to try other fund options so that the Eileen Trust was a fallback.

Published on:

Although the Eileen Trust was administered by the same people as administered the MacFarlane Trust, the Eileen Trust's Board made the decisions which it thought best for the Eileen Trust and did not strictly follow the MacFarlane Trust's policies.

Published on:

Regular contact with office staff and case workers allowed registrants of the Eileen Trust to know what they could apply for and although there were subsequent handbooks that were budgeted to be produced from 2002 - 2011, from around 2001/02 the Board decided that newsletters and speaking to caseworkers were the best way to keep in contact with registrants.

Published on: