On Oct 23, 2012 10:23 PM, "Gordon Joly" <gordon.joly@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> On 23/10/12 17:45, Thomas Dalton wrote:
>>
>>
>> What do you want to ask the charity commission? I think the guidance is pretty clear. You just need to have it written down somewhere what their role is and what authority they have (ie. none).
>>
>
> I would ask them, given the current age of the charity, the budget, the relationships with stakeholders, the number of staff, the relationship with the Foundation, recent resignations, the work balance between Trustees and staff.... would an advisory board be of positive benefit.

That's not something they will be able to answer from just a phone call. That's pretty complicated advice, which isn't something the charity commission's helpline can give. They would need to know a lot about the charity to know what would and wouldn't be appropriate for us.

>>
>> What is the difference between the CIC approach and our approach of having members that hold the board to account?
>>
>
> Members of charities exercise their choices at AGMs and EGMs. Stakeholder groups for CICS might meet on a regular basis (e.g. quarterly?). Scrutiny roles can be defined in various ways, like the CIC model. Housing associations (all registered providers of housing) used to be subject to (tenant) scrutiny, before the TSA was abolished!

We could have quarterly general meetings if we wanted to. We don't need to change legal structure for that.