by Five years ago, a charity fundraising gala at the British Museum organized by model Naomi Campbell was widely hailed as a triumph. It was the toast of London fashion week and a powerful showcase for Campbell’s philanthropic mission to raise money for young people in poverty.
Awash with celebrities (Naomie Harris, Pierce Brosnan, rapper Skepta and Alexa Chung) and wealthy paying guests, he would add a catwalk show to a charity auction of art (drawings by Matisse, Dalí and Tracey Emin, Warhol’s signature print), jewelery and watches luxury
The event was closely reviewed. “The best show of London fashion week, and all for a good cause,” said Grazia magazine. “Saving the world has never looked so stylish,” said Cosmopolitan. Campbell told reporters: “It’s not just about looking good, it’s about being good and doing good.”
Related: King turns to David Beckham to rebuild charity hit by honors money scandal
Behind the scenes, however, all was not so rosy. Even as Campbell was making his bow on stage at the British Museum, his charity was being chased by disgruntled charity partners, angry that they had been left out of pocket and threatening legal action to recover what they believed to be due to them.
This week, a devastating report from the Charity Commission revealed the scale of chaotic management and financial misconduct at Fashion For Relief. Campbell was banned from being a charity trustee or taking a senior charity role for five years. Two other trustees, Bianka Hellmich and Veronica Chou, were banned for nine and four years.
The charity was terminated in December last year by interim managers appointed by the Commission in 2022 to run Fashion For Relief following concerns about its behaviour. The interim managers subsequently paid £250,000 owed by Fashion for Relief to two former partners, Save the Children, and the Mayor’s Fund for London.
One former charity partner of Fashion For Relief described it as a brutal experience to work with. “It was difficult from start to finish,” a senior charity manager told the Guardian. “If we knew then what we know now, we would never have partnered with them.”
Another said they were shocked at how little of the proceeds from Fashion For Relief events went to charity, and how difficult they felt it was to get back the money they were owed: “I felt that a big difference between what they were saying to him. public about what they were doing and what was happening with donations.”
The Charity Commission report reveals that Fashion For Relief raised almost £4.8m five years up to 2020 but only a fraction of the £4.6m it spent on charitable activities – 10% – was given in grants to partner charities. Most of his income appears to have been spent on putting on lavish fundraising events, including huge expense bills.
For one Fashion For Relief 2018 event to support Save the Children in Cannes, Campbell stayed in a €3,000-a-night hotel for three nights. A further €4,000 (£3,332) went on personal security staff. Campbell racked up an €8,000 expense bill, including charges for spa treatments, room service and even cigarettes. All were charged to Fashion For Relief.
A year later, days before the 2019 London fashion week show, Save the Children threatened to take Fashion For Relief to court, claiming it was owed huge sums from fashion stars held in Cannes in 2017 and 2018. It was increasingly frustrated at his ability. to recover donations made in his name.
The commission’s report contains sketchy details about the current administrative mess Fashion For Relief is in. He did not keep track of receipts or invoices and ignored charity rules on conflicts of interest. Anonymous donors were relied upon to cover expenses. He had no full-time staff and one bank account, which was never used.
Sources close to Fashion For Relief said its trustees were surprised when the commission began raising questions about its conduct in 2020. They acted in good faith and blamed outside advisers they relied on for legal advice. and financial. They suggested the report was part of a “vendetta” against Campbell.
Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Campbell said she was “deeply concerned” by the commission’s report. “I wasn’t in charge of my charity. I put control in the hands of a legal lawyer so we are investigating to find out what and how. Everything I do and everything I’ve ever raised goes towards charities.”
Campbell’s charitable initiatives have helped fulfill her ambassadorship roles with Unicef and the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust and have generated a lot of positive publicity (“Naomi Campbell is saving the world one fashion show at a time,” ran one Elle headline). But her credibility as a philanthropist now looks uncertain, at least in the UK.
