BCEN and BVSC investgations

Birmingham Voluntary Service Council (BVSC).
Birmingham Community Empowerment Network (BCEN). BCEN is managed by BVSC and aware grants of up to £2million annually in Birmingham

BCEN notes for Steering Group - 9th November 2004
notes to B:CEN steering group on the 9th November 2004 - these are the notes from Paul Slatter, Manager of B:CEN - they provide an insight into the B:CEN view of the investigation

Preliminary Report in investigation into B:CEN - 17th November 2004
Preliminary Report - page 1 - cover
Preliminary Report - page 2 - contents
Preliminary Report - page 3 - introduction - this provides the background to why the investigation is happening
Preliminary Report - page 4 - employment practices - this investigates the allegation that the partner of a member of the BCEN steering group, and friend of the manager of the BCEN manager, was employed bcause of this connection. The report was unable to find any documentary evidence that proved the reason for the appointment was the friendship although it also shows no evidence that the friendship was declared. This censored version does not make it clear whether or not the BCEN manager participated in the decision to apppoint.
Preliminary Report - page 5 - employment practices continued
Preliminary Report - page 6 - employment practices continued
Preliminary Report - page 7 - employment practices continued
Preliminary Report - page 8 - improper allocation of grants - this investigates the allegation that preferential treatment was given to a grant from Moseley Neighbourhood Forum where the three people investigated in pages 4 to 7 are also members of the Forum management committee.
Preliminary Report - page 9 - improper allocation of grants continued - the final paragraph of section 3.3 shows that the grant was subject to two letters of support being provided. It shows that these letters of support have never been provided, but the monies for the grant have still been paid.
Preliminary Report - page 10 - improper allocation of grants continued. The final paragraph of section 3.4 shows how the grant for Moseley Forum was rushed through. It shows that the minutes of the meeting for 2nd june 2004 in which the grant was approved have still not been written.
Preliminary Report - page 11 - improper allocation of grants continued.
Preliminary Report - page 12 - improper allocation of grants continued. - section 3.10.2 concludes that the grant was speeded through due to the intervention of the B:CEN manager (who is a member of Moseley Neighbourhood Forum)
Preliminary Report - page 13 - Hall Green CAN complaint investigation - this investigates the allegation that a member of the BCEN steering group and friend of the BCEN manager (see page 4) was involved in an investigation into a complaint into the activities of CAN in Hall Green. Was it improper for this person to be involved in this investigation?
Preliminary Report - page 14 - This page refers to a 12 page report that has already looked into this allegation.
Preliminary Report - page 15 - investigation into the practice by BCEN of paying groups to obscure the fact that the money is was being paid to individuals. Section 5.5 shows that the investigation found example of this being done 4 times. This is to get around the financial rules from BVSC which require payments to individuals to go through the payroll with the consequent deduction of tax. Is this tax evasion?
Preliminary Report - page 16 - investigation into the practice by BCEN of paying groups to obscure the fact that the money is was being paid to individuals continued
Preliminary Report - page 17 - cover for Appendix 1
Preliminary Report - page 18 - letter from BVSC instructing Anthony Collins Solicitors to conduct an investigation into the allegations
Preliminary Report - page 19 - letter from BVSC instructing Anthony Collins Solicitors to conduct an investigation into the allegations continued
Preliminary Report - page 20 - cover for appendix 2
Preliminary Report - page 21 - e-mail from Councillor John Hemming listing the allegations
Preliminary Report - page 22 - e-mail from Councillor John Hemming listing the allegations continued
Preliminary Report - page 23 - cover for appendix 3
Preliminary Report - page 24 - e-mail from John Hemming with more details about the allegations of B:CEN activities in Hall Green
Preliminary Report - page 25
Preliminary Report - page 26 - e-mail from John Hemming and Brian Carr (BVSC) listing the allegations
Preliminary Report - page 27 - e-mail from John Hemming and Brian Carr (BVSC) listing the allegations continued
Preliminary Report - page 28 - e-mail from John Hemming and Brian Carr (BVSC) listing the allegations continued
Preliminary Report - page 29 - e-mail from John Hemming and Brian Carr (BVSC) listing the allegations continued

Final Report in investigation into B:CEN - 7th December 2004
Final Report - page 1 - cover
Final Report - page 2 - contents page
Final Report - page 3 - introduction and investigation into the allegation that a contract of £80,000 for the creation of the B:CEN website was improperly awarded. The report refers to the R.A.Lea & Co report of 2002 which is listed lower down this page.
Final Report - page 4 - Investigation in the Hall Green CAN complaint - this shows that Paula Smith wrote to B:CEN complaining about the investigation by B:CEN into it's activities in Hall Green. The report shows that her written complaint was not discussed at any Steering Group meeting. It also shows that the results of the investigation were never communicated in writing back to Paula Smith, who was Chair of Hall Green CAN
Final Report - page 5 - Investigation into the Hall Green CAN continued - this shows that the recommendations of the investigation have most likely not happened. Investigation into B:CEN paying for Coach Trips. This identified two such occasions - one was to send Perry Barr residents to a national conference (cost £500), the other was to send residents from Hodge Hill to places of educational, historic, cultural and general interest. (cost £500). This section was supposed to also investigate the allegation that B:CEN paid members of the public £15 each to attend meetings in Billesley and Brandwood - it didn't
Final Report - page 6 - Investigation into B:CEN paying for Coach Trips continued
Final Report - page 7 - Investigation into a conflict in interest with the Chair of the B:CEN Steering Group, being also a member of Community Unity. The report shows that the Chairperson did declare their conflict of interest at the appropriate meeting.
Final Report - page 8 - Investigation into an allegation that the Chair of the B:CEN visited Chicago on a trip paid for by B:CEN. The report shows that this trip happened between 25 October 2004 and 2 November 2004 and B:CEN paid for eight people to make the trip - one of which was the Chair of the B:CEN Steering Group.
Final Report - page 9 - Investigation into an allegation that the Chair of the B:CEN visited Chicago on a trip paid for by B:CEN continued
Final Report - page 10 - Investigation into an allegation that the Chair of the B:CEN visited Chicago on a trip paid for by B:CEN continued. The report shows that there would be a formal monitoring exercise following the trip - the report found no evidence of this monitoring exercise having taken place. Investigation into B:CEN offering to fund the Selly Oak Squatters.
Final Report - page 11 - Investigation into B:CEN offering to fund the Selly Oak Squatters. The report shows that someone from B:CEN visited the squatters and provided them with a grant application pack so that they could apply for funding.
Final Report - page 12 - Investigation into B:CEN telling people to seize power. Conclusion

Investigation into BVSC contract with Viewpoint - 19th November 2002
Cover page
Viewpoint Report page 1 - contents
Viewpoint Report page 2- Preface - this provides background to the investigation - namely an investigation into a contract with Viewpoint that took place between January 2002 and September 2002.
Viewpoint Report page 3 - Background to Contract - this shows how the contract of £50,000 was broken down into three contracts so as to avoid a tendering process. It shows that this arrangement was agreed by the Government Office West Midlands. All three contracts were awarded to Viewpoint
Viewpoint Report page 4 - Delivery of Contract Objectives - this shows that the contracts and specifications were prepared by one person - Mr D - and the never discussed with anyone else. The report shows deficiences in the contracts eg no reference to sanctions if the contracts were not delivered on time. Paragraph 2.2 (h) shows that the contract was paid in full in May 2002.
Viewpoint Report page 5 - Cover page
Viewpoint Report page 6 - Documentary Information Examined - this lists the documentary evidence examined
Viewpoint Report page 7 - Other Information obtained from Viewpoint - paragraph 5.3 shows how Viewpoint found about the project through meeting Mr D at a seminar in December 2001. It shows that no bids were obtained from other companies.
Viewpoint Report page 8 - Other Information obtained from Viewpoint continued - paragraph shows that during an interview the owner of Viewpoint states that Mr.D had never engaged on any other project. However this is contracted on page , paragraph 6.9. However, she did admit that prior to the contract she had introduced Mr.D to two organisations during 2001 to undertake consultancy work. Paragraph 5.6 shows how the contract had not been satisfactory completed
Viewpoint Report page 9 - paragraph 5.7 shows how the Sustainability Strategy section of the contract was not completed. Paragraph 5.8 shows how the data base section of the contract had not been completed
Viewpoint Report page 10 - Meeting with David Bellamy - Mr D. This shows that David Bellamy resigned from BVSC in September 2002. In paragraph 6.6 David Bellamy states in an interviews that "he mentioned to [blank] that 'I may do some work for Viewpoint on this contract'. He said [blank] accepted that situation and said that would be fine."
Viewpoint Report page 11 - paragraph 6.8 shows that a meeting took place on 27 February 2002 in which concerns about David Bellamy working privately on this contract were raised. A letter was then given to David Bellamy on 1st March 2002 informing him "not to undertake any work on this contract for Viewpoin". In paragraph 6.9 David Bellamy admits that he worked for Viewpoint on a private capacity. He also admits that Viewpoint had introduced him to two organistion
Viewpoint Report page 12 - minutes of meetings
Viewpoint Report page 13 - minutes of meetings continued
Viewpoint Report page 14 - B:CEN perspectives. Paragraph 8.1 shows that the legal staus of B:CEN is unclear
Viewpoint Report page 15 - B:CEN perspectives continued
Viewpoint Report page 16 - BVSC Financial Procedures
Viewpoint Report page 17 - Conclusions - Contract Negotiation Process
Viewpoint Report page 18 - Conclusions - BVSC Control and Management Procedures
Viewpoint Report page 19 - Conclusions - B:CEN Control Procedures
Viewpoint Report page 20 - Conclusions - Viewpoint Use of Subcontractors
Viewpoint Report page 21 - Summary of Conclusions - paragraph 11.1 states "this has been an unsatisfactory process and contract implementation". Paragraph 11.2 asked whether Viewpoint provided value for money? The answer is "no"
Viewpoint Report page 22 - Paragraph 11.3 states that it was "unable to establish any financial collusion between Viewpoint and Mr.D relating to this contract, based on the evidence which we have seen" Paragraph 11.4 states "the legal status of B:CEN is uncertain"
Viewpoint Report page 23
Viewpoint Report page 24 - acknowlegments