Subscribe to Search results

Jan Barlow thought the process of funding single grants was bureaucratic, could take many months and that there were difficulties with communications as people kept being asked for more information.

Published on:

The Trust took account of payments from the Skipton Fund when assessing income.

Published on:

Decisions as to single grants were subjective, depending on the view of the decision-maker at the time, rather than based on policy.

Published on:

The Trust's taking into account Skipton payments when assessing needs associated with HIV was recognised as undesirable but nevertheless persisted with.

Published on:

Child benefit was taken into account when assessing income need for the purposes of the Macfarlane Trust.

Published on:

Jan Barlow thought that one to one meetings with Liz Carroll were very limited, and thought that a meeting on 29 January 2015 between Roger Evans, Liz Carroll and herself was the first to have been formally arranged.

Published on:

Jan Barlow is emphatic that she did not say the words attributed to her (that the Department of Health should wait before making a decision as more people will have died).

Published on:

Jan Barlow did not see any conflict in being chief executive of both the Caxton Foundation and the Macfarlane Trust.

Published on:

Jan Barlow told the Inquiry that when the Caxton Foundation was introduced there had just been one additional staff member who had been brought on to the team to deal with the daily administration.

Published on:

Vouchers as means of grant aid were phased out after Jan Barlow took over as chief executive of the Caxton Foundation.

Published on:

Jan Barlow told the Inquiry that the Caxton Foundation was a much more efficient organisation in 2018 compared to 2013 in terms of turnaround time for grants.

Published on:

The Caxton Foundation abandoned the annual census (which usefulness was questioned by Jan Barlow) until it was reintroduced with the regular payment scheme.

Published on:

Membership of the Caxton Foundation Partnership Group was broadened to include beneficiaries who weren't campaigners.

Published on:

The Caxton Foundation operated a policy of presenting a request to the National Welfare Committee in situations where a beneficiary had already had in excess of £3,000 in grants. Jan Barlow explained that this information fed into other considerations such as the development of the regular payments scheme.

Published on:

Roger Evans sought to ensure that what the Trust board did was in compliance with the wishes of the Department of Health as he understood them.

Published on:

Roger Evans' personal view was that fundraising to substitute for what should have been provided centrally would have been insulting.

Published on:

Roger Evans was reluctant for the Trust to be involved in campaigning as it was not the Trust's role, it did not have the resources and he was concerned what the reaction would be from some of the beneficiaries.

Published on:

When the Department of Health asked the Trust for a statement as to the standard of charitable need applied to applications for grants from reserves, Roger Evans accepted this was none of the Department of Health's business but did not express this to the Department in writing - only orally.

Published on:

Roger Evans' recollection was that only three trustees were prepared to sign a letter to the Department of Health threatening to resign as a board unless it provided better funding to meet the needs of the beneficiaries.

Published on:


Roger Evans stated in his oral evidence that he had a difficult relationship with Russell Mishcon.

Published on: