Unofficial Christ's Hospital Forum

Do let me know if there's any other data you'd like visualised.

Well we have 22 signatories from Canada according to Graham and BC is where all this started so I wonder via Katharine how this could be addressed? Also a proposed Governance Chart maybe? David

Foureyes wrote:First, many thanks to Katherine for such diligent and very valuable work. Greatly appreciated!
The graph (above) showing the breakdown by years at CH is particularly interesting. One of the charges made against the Petitioners is that we are a load of old fuddyduddies, harking back to the school as it used to be in our (distant) youths. BUT, what that graph shows, quite conclusively, is that no less than 198 of the signatories left in or after 2000. In other words the preponderance of concern is among the YOUNGER Old Blues.
I rest my case,
David
PS I am a little surprised by the fact that only 6 signatories are shown as based in Canada. I got the impression from the quantity of e-mails that there were rather more.

Could I offer an alternative take on the graph? Those at CH in the 50s may still have absorbed the Queen, Country and Empire propaganda that was current in the wake of our triumph in the second world war. By the 60s, we see the coming of the end of the age of deference - satire, Peter Cook, etc. In other words my generation had sussed out the nationalistic crap (and the public schools) for what they were. And this went on for a decade or two, through psychedelia, punk, etc. Then came legislation that the boarding schools had to up their game and start treating their young charges with a degree of comfort and civilisation. And so recent Blues will have had a better experience than we did. The trouble is that now, apparently, it has to be paid for. The school has been living above its means. Christ's Hospital is facing the same problem that the country is facing. But not quite. A nation state (assuming it isn't Greece) can raise cash by going to the bond markets. CH can't.

Maps now updated to include the original offline signatories, where data is available:-

http://chforum.info/php/viewtopic.php?f ... 64#p137264

The discussion is becoming well energized on new ideas. And the maps and graphics assembled by Julian are most beneficial. This Campaign 1552 movement is gathering extra steam in the week of the key meeting of the Council of Almoners - on March 17 - to discuss the whole matter of Petition 1552. I hope all the Almoners are following the Forum discussions. My guess is that the Council might need to convene an extra meeting of the Almoners to discuss the petition and the ideas that have been variously raised by over one thousand Old Blues world-wide. Indeed an early, wide-ranging CHOBA Conference on the future strategy of Housey would be appropriate?

As usual, many thanks for the update, David.

For anyone who has not seen the role description for the new Head of CH, this is available on the CHOBA website at http://www.chassociation.org/wp-content ... hanges.pdf

crowdpac.com is the new organization headed by Old Blue Steve Hilton - possible a new think-tank link for Campaign 1552. Anyone had experience/knowledge on crowdpac? David

Please find linked below the response from the Council of Almoners, following the Petition being received by Council on 17th March 2016.

Download PDF

The response of Council has now been received. This is in the form of a letter signed by Guy Perricone, Treasurer & Chair of Council & Dominic Fry, Deputy Chair of Council. This response is very troubling. Julian has assembled an important quantitative analysis addressing the facts on FFP/Needy Admissions 2005-2015 supporting the qualitative analysis in Petition 1552 and the presentation by the "Five" on March 7 2016. This will be posted shortly. "Campaign/Petition 1552" will now assemble a formal response to the Perricone/Fry letter on both Governance and FFP.

I have some factual numeric analysis of the FFP, "Needy", and "Assisted Places" numbers from 2005/06 to 2014/15, which I've been working on on behalf of the 1552 Petition team.
I'll post this later this afternoon once I can upload it at home...

This is a very important quantitative document worked on assiduously by Julian and others. Please examine this alongside the qualitative arguments of "Petition 1552" and the ethical & pragmatic presentations of the "Five" on March 7 2016. Basically the numbers and percentages of support for needy children has indeed been reduced substantially during 2005-2015. This is in contrast to the assertions of CH Management and this breaches the charitable ethos of Housey.

Here's the factual data analysis, worked on in conjunction with the Petition 1552 team:-

Download pdf of data analysis
(minor updates to the data source names, and addition of Version tracking page 10, compared to the version some may have received by email.
Further minor update to remove CH Crest, by request.)

The goal of this analysis has been to gather the factual information available, and present it in a manner which allows the open sharing of the factual information regarding the number of "Assisted", "Needy" and "Full Fee" places, as well as the remainder "Other" places.

We are committed to this being factual and accurate, so please do let me know if you have confirmed additional data which can be added or corrected.

Julian

Do you have any graphs relating the increase in FFP's to annual running deficit or variation in funding requirements?

I can't get a feel as to whether this strategy is helping the school keep its head above water.

Unfortunately not - but I'd welcome any factual data sources which are public and available, as I'd love to be able to show the benefit and positive consequences of the FFPs, to therefore show the size of the hole which fundraising/cost savings would have to fill in order to reduce the number of FFPs.