Recent inquiry work reinforces governance lessons for Trustees
· Posted on: April 13th 2026 · read
Charity Commission inquiry work and related regulatory coverage have once again brought governance standards into focus. While each case arises from its own specific facts and circumstances, the themes that emerge are familiar: safeguarding, conflicts of interest, trustee conduct, poor record-keeping and a lack of effective challenge or oversight at board level. These are not new issues, but recent casework shows that they remain highly relevant across the sector.
The Charity Commission has opened a statutory inquiry into an international children’s charity after identifying serious concerns about its safeguarding arrangements. The regulator said the investigation will focus on whether the charity trustees have properly discharged their legal duties and responsibilities in relation to safeguarding and governance.
As part of the inquiry, the Commission has also appointed an interim manager to oversee aspects of the charity’s safeguarding work. This step suggests that the regulator considers the concerns significant enough to require external intervention while the investigation is ongoing.
The case is a clear reminder that safeguarding is not just an operational matter but a core trustee's responsibility. Trustees are expected to ensure that appropriate policies, reporting lines, and oversight mechanisms are in place, particularly where charities work with children or other vulnerable groups.
Recent scrutiny has also highlighted the continuing importance of managing conflicts of interest properly. This found two closely linked addiction charities found serious governance failings, resulting in a married couple being disqualified from holding trustee roles. The two charities shared premises, staff and financial management, and the regulator found misconduct and mismanagement in how they were run.
The inquiry identified several conflict-of-interest concerns and related-party payments that were not properly documented or managed. These included payments to one trustee who was also the charity’s CEO, rental payments to a trustee’s parent, and payments to other trustees, with no clear written agreements or board minutes showing how conflicts had been considered and resolved.
The regulator also found poor record-keeping around payments made from one charity’s bank account, including more than £34,000 in payments to the couple. Some of these were said to be salary payments made after one charity had closed, which the Commission concluded were unauthorised. As a result, one trustee was removed and disqualified, while the other was disqualified for 10 years.
This links closely to the wider issue of trustee for record-keeping and decision-making. Minutes, declarations and formal approvals may sometimes be seen as administrative matters, but they are often the first place a regulator will look at when assessing governance. Good records help demonstrate that trustees considered relevant factors, recognised risks, managed conflicts appropriately, and reached decisions through a robust process. Weak records, by contrast, can create the impression that governance was informal, passive, or ineffective, even where trustees believed they were acting responsibly.
Taken together, these recent cases reinforce the importance of active governance. Trustees should be engaged, informed, and prepared to ask questions, particularly in areas involving risk, related parties, or vulnerable beneficiaries. They should also be able to provide evidence that oversight through clear documentation and consistent board processes. In a more demanding regulatory environment, strong governance is not just about having the right policies on paper; it is about demonstrating how those policies are applied in practice.
