Unofficial Christ's Hospital Forum

Some of you may be aware of recent discussions around certain types of charity proving their public benefit in order to keep their charitable status.Independent/prviate schools are now having to answer two questions to illustrate their public benefit and therefore why they should be charities.
There was an article about this in Third Sector which is a weekly charity sector magazine, the picture they used was one of CH, mentioning them as one such school. I dont agree with them using CH as an example, had they done their research they would realise that really against many other schools they are doing a public benefit with only a small proportin of pupils paying full fees!!!

anyway i just wanted your thoughts

It depends on exactly how they portrayed CH in the article.

If they showed it as an example of a genuine charitable independent school then I'd say that's a good thing and good publicity.

If however it was simply lazy journalism and they grabbed the first decent photo they found then I'd agree that it was inappropiate.

Hard to be sure having not read the article myself.

If you are unhappy with the article why not write to the editor and put them right?

The Sunday Times had an interview with Dame Suzi Leather in which she says that many of the public schools were founded to educate paupers "but that was hundreds of years ago". She has obviously never heard of CH.

There ought to be little doubt that CH is a charity in the true sense of the word. In the 2007 school year parental contributions were 14% of the cost of running the school and in 2006 they were 16%.

It is true that many of the pre-Victorian public schools were originally charitable in practice but now they are largely supported by fees. There was talk in Council on September 27th, 1557 of CH going that way but it was decided that the school would stay true to its mission and remain devoted to "the virtuous bringing up of the miserable youth"!

The first paragraph of CH chapter of the 1816 Ackermann History of the Public Schools says "This institution has no rival, even in a country abundant above all others in charitable establishments."

Long may it remain so.

they refer to it as an indpenedent school-not mentioning how it works or anything.

I totally agree, CH should have no problem in showing its charitable status- the likes of schools such as Eton, Oundle, Alleyns who i think will be hard pushed to show their public benefit.

midget wrote:The Sunday Times had an interview with Dame Suzi Leather in which she says that many of the public schools were founded to educate paupers "but that was hundreds of years ago". She has obviously never heard of CH.

Have just seen your letter of reply to the Sunday Times in today`s issue. Midget!

For those of us who do not subscribe to/buy The Sunday Times is it possible for some kind soul to scan the letter and post it here, please?

Foureyes wrote:For those of us who do not subscribe to/buy The Sunday Times is it possible for some kind soul to scan the letter and post it here, please?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/commen ... 689801.ece

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/commen ... 689801.ece

"FREE OF FEES: Sian Griffiths writes of schools in the private sector: “Okay, some might have been set up to educate paupers, but that was centuries ago.” She overlooked Christ’s Hospital, which opened its doors in 1553 to educate paupers, and still does. Few parents pay full fees, many pay none at all, and there is an upper limit on parental income. When my father was unemployed, no fees were required. Please do not tar all schools with the same brush.

Maggie O’Riordan
Barnstaple, Devon "


Oops, I see Mrs C. just beat me to it!

Nice one, Midget

I actually wrote "the shining example of Christ's Hospital", but they edited out the shining! I was so furious when I read the original article that I couldn't resist a reply.

Maggie

Thanks - did not realise letter to the editor appeared on website. Well done Maggie!
It's a bit worrying that somebody in the position of Head of the Charity Commissioners shoulkd take such a blinkered and ignorant view.

Well done Maggie!

Lazy journalism really annoys me!

Foureyes wrote:Thanks - did not realise letter to the editor appeared on website. Well done Maggie!
It's a bit worrying that somebody in the position of Head of the Charity Commissioners shoulkd take such a blinkered and ignorant view.

and she pulled out of the orginal debate around it as her children are or have been privatly educated.

One interesting reality of this new debate is that many schools are now trying to copy CH. Many well known schools have visited CH for advice about setting up schemes that will offer bursaries (means tested) rather than scholarships (which are academic, musical etc ) but not always means tested. The challenge for CH is to remain different - after all if many schools offered good numbers of means tested bursaries then the schools USP would diminish. We will always be the grand daddy but our days as the only kid on the block with large numbers of means tested bursaries may be numbered. I think that a wel known school near Slough has raised £50m so far for such a purpose!

We shall see.

What would really put the cat amongst the pigeons would be if the next Conservative government extended the voucher scheme for nursary education to all schools. This would mean that all parents could come to schools such as CH with c. £6K in their pocket and just pay any difference. That would lead to a rapid expansion of private day schools as many parents could stomach the cost minus £6K off, particularly if they got a bursary on top. For instance, a parent who was awarded a 25% bursary based on income would be able to put £6K plus this 25% as a discount. On a fee of £12K at a day school, this would lead to a annual fee of £3K. This is manageable for many in this country who are on or around £25-35K.

There's an article about it in today's Independent, although it doesn't mention CH:

http://tinyurl.com/5c8pwe