BWA: Follow the Money (Again) — Accounts Filed, FOIs Blocked, Trustees Silent

BWA: Follow the Money (Again) — Accounts Filed, FOIs Blocked, Trustees Silent

It’s that festive moment where organisations usually publish goodwill messages, thank volunteers, and wrap the year up neatly.

Instead, with the Bangladeshi Women’s Association (BWA), we’re unwrapping something else entirely:

📂 newly filed accounts
📧 unanswered emails
🧾 blocked FOIs
🖥️ unanswered questions about capital spending
🤐 trustees saying nothing
🎄 and yes… people getting Haqued Off

Let’s go through it — calmly, factually, and with a little seasonal cheer.

📊 The New Accounts: What’s Changed (and What Hasn’t)

BWA’s latest accounts (year ending 31 March 2025) are now filed.

Headline figures:

• Income: £475,924 (down from £512,645)
• Expenditure: £479,601 (up from £415,023)
• Result: £3,677 deficit (after a £97k surplus the year before)
• Total reserves: £318,788
• Unrestricted reserves: £177,021
• Cash at bank: £344,179
• Staff costs: £276,092 (↑ ~£63k in one year)

So despite income falling, spending — especially staffing — rose sharply, wiping out last year’s surplus.
Yet cash at bank increased, and unrestricted reserves remain substantial.

That combination alone warrants explanation.

🎁 The Reserves Question (Still Not Answered)

This is now year two of asking:

Why is a publicly funded community organisation holding £177k in unrestricted reserves while continuing to draw council and grant funding?

Reserves are legitimate.
Large unrestricted reserves plus continued public subsidy plus rising staffing costs require explanation.

No explanation has been provided.

🖥️ The IT Suite, Capital Spend & Asset Transparency

Well before the accounts were filed, concerns were raised in writing about potential capital spending, including the possibility of replacing a fully functional IT suite.

To date, there is still:

• ❌ no published asset register
• ❌ no disposal log
• ❌ no centre-level capital breakdown
• ❌ no clarity on historic capital grants
• ❌ no explanation of what assets exist, were replaced, or written off

For an organisation operating two community centres with years of public funding behind it, this is not a trivial omission.

It’s precisely why asset registers and disposal policies exist.

📧 Emails Sent. Silence Returned.

Since the last blog:

• Detailed governance questions were emailed to the CEO
• Trustees were copied directly
• Clear deadlines were set
• Polite chasers were sent

The response?

• One generic paragraph from the CEO
• No substantive answers
• No response at all from trustees

Trustees are legally responsible. Silence is not neutrality — it’s a governance choice.

✈️ The CEO Was Away. She’s Now Back.

For a time, the lack of response was attributed to the CEO being out of the country.

That explanation no longer applies.

The CEO is now back in the UK.
The accounts are filed.
The emails remain unanswered.

Which raises a simple question:
When does accountability begin?

🧾 FOI Update: Transparency, But Make It Impossible

A Freedom of Information request was submitted to Sandwell Council seeking:

• funding agreements
• monitoring reports
• asset records
• disposals
• conflicts of interest
• safeguarding and compliance incidents

The Council confirmed it does hold relevant information — but refused to provide any of it, citing Section 12 (cost limits).

Notably, the response also warned against breaking the request into smaller parts — a curious approach to a law designed to promote transparency.

An Internal Review is now underway, alongside narrower replacement FOIs.

What’s particularly striking is the Council’s admission that it does not have a single system linking grants, monitoring, underspends and assets.

That’s not an FOI issue.
That’s a governance issue.

🍞 Food Donations & Fairness

Concerns have also been raised locally about how donated food is collected and distributed.

No allegations are made here — but at a time of rising hardship, fairness, transparency and need matter.

These are exactly the kinds of questions trustees should welcome clarifying.

🗞️ What the Sandwell Skidder Has Said

This isn’t happening in a vacuum.

Local political blog The Sandwell Skidder has, over several years, raised questions about transparency, overlapping roles, and accountability involving BWA and Syeda Khatun.

Those posts form part of the public record and reflect long-standing community commentary — not proof of wrongdoing, but evidence that concerns about openness are not new.

❓ What We Still Don’t Know

Despite months of polite, documented correspondence:

• Why unrestricted reserves remain so high
• How staffing expansion is funded
• What assets exist at each centre
• What has been disposed of or replaced
• How capital grants were monitored
• Why trustees will not respond
• When — or if — transparency will improve

People notice these things.

And yes — some are getting Haqued Off...as Gregg might say! 

⚖️ Legal / Accuracy Notice

Legal / Accuracy Notice:
This blog contains commentary, observations and analysis based on publicly available records, correspondence and published material. Opinions are clearly identified as such. No allegation of wrongdoing is made beyond what is supported by public documents. If any party believes information is inaccurate, they are invited to provide evidence so corrections can be made.

🎄 Season’s Closing Thought

Transparency shouldn’t require FOIs, blogs, or festive persistence.

Accounts are filed.
The CEO is back.
The trustees remain silent.

The questions remain.

Watch this space.

#BWA #BangladeshiWomensAssociation #Sandwell #Tipton #JubileePark #PublicMoney #FollowTheMoney #CharityAccounts #CharityGovernance #Transparency #Accountability #FOI #Audit #Trustees #CommunityCentres #LocalGovernment #SandwellCouncil #Governance #SeasonOfQuestions #HaquedOff