Allegations of bullying, stormy eight hour board meetings and a lack of adequate skills at the very top are among the findings of a major investigation into Scotland's leading advice charity.
Citizen's Advice Scotland almost lost its £7.5m public funding after several years of turmoil at the top, which culminated in the suspension last October and departure five months later of chief executive Margaret Lynch.
She was the sixth appointment to the troubled role in just seven years, and her departure saw the charity forced to hold a governance review with the UK government withholding part of its funding for this year until changes were made.
Read more: UK Government withholds funding from crisis-hit Citizens Advice Scotland
Deloitte, which was appointed to carry out the independent review has now made 32 recommendations for change, all of which have been a
accepted by the current board which is to publish the findings today.
The shake-up will see more trustees elected from outside the organisation, and a new independent chair, after the report was severely critical of the outgoing chair Dominic Notorangelo, who resigned in June ahead of its publication, after six and a half years in the role.
Deloitte interviewed staff at the umbrella charity, and its related bureaux around the country - which are members of CAS, but independent charities - and other stakeholders. The former chair had been described as lacking strategic and leadership qualities, it said.
"The CAS Board has exhibited dysfunctional dynamics and inappropriate behaviours driven by cliques and personal interests," the report said, adding that board meetings sometimes lasted for eight hours, with members shouting at each other.
"It was felt that Trustee challenge is not always constructive and has strayed into bullying, with open criticism being seen as acceptable," the report says.
The review says only some board members operated in a cliquey way or dealt with conflicts inappropriately, but other trustees were unable to stand up to them and Mr Notorangelo had not been able to control them.
While trustees were not meant to "represent" their own bureaux, " there was a perception that some acted out of "self-interest" rather than the wider needs of the organisation. If board members overstepped the mark, there was no mechanism to remove them.
Meanwhile a rift between the board and the senior management team (SMT) contributed to the loss of key staff, the report concludes, saying: "The Board’s relationship with the SMT was described as 'unhealthy', 'tense' and 'poor' during our review, with a clear lack of trust between the two groups... a high turnover of CEOs and senior staff ... is perceived to be symptomatic of deeper issues in the relationship between the Board and SMT."
The report does not blame Mr Notorangelo for all of these problems, but concludes that an independent chair with no previous connection or involvement with CAS would benefit the body.
Read more: UK Government withholds funding from crisis-hit Citizens Advice Scotland
It makes a total of 32 recommendations, 13 of them "high priority", including changes to the way board members are elected, recruiting more trustees from outside the bureaux network and preventing anyone from serving more than two three year terms.
Decisions should be more transparent and a structure which involves eight committees, plus sub committees and working groups, should be slimmed down. One, such group, the Development Committee, was responsible for spending £500,000 of public money with very little accountability or transparency, the review team found.
The acting chair, Agnes Robson, formerly vice chair, is leading a transition committee - set up to implement the report's recommendations in full. She cannot be replaced by an independent chair until CAS amends its own rules.
She said this would happen by spring of next year, while members would get to vote on the proposed changes before the end of the year.
However a consultation will take place between then to allow CABs and other stakeholders to influence the way changes are made.
She said the organisation "simply hadn't evolved" during a period when it had almost doubled in size, but insisted there was no bullying culture at CAS. "People on the board feel very passionate about things and debate can be heated at times," she said. "A few lines were crossed but it was not unchallenged."
Staff, board members and other stakeholders were passionate, committed and hard-working, she said. "There are many positives, and CAS has achieved some remarkable things in recent years. But the board has unanimously backed all 32 recommendations. These changes are in the interests of the board and the organisation, member bureaux and clients."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel