WALTHAM FOREST: No charges after education fraud probe

The Met’s Specialist Crime Directorate has announced there is insufficient evidence against EduAction, which used to run education in Waltham Forest, to bring a criminal prosecution.

Two whistleblowers claimed the company siphoned off hundreds of thousands of pounds earmarked for the Youth At Risk programme from the Neighbourhood Renewal Fund (NRF) in 2004.

A secret internal inquiry by the council found the company had failed to provide evidence that it had fulfilled its contractual obligations.

However, an EduAction inquiry found no evidence of wrongdoing.

A police spokeswoman said: “Following advise from the Crown Prosecution Service it has been decided that there is insufficient evidence for a charge to be made in this case. As a result this concludes the police involvement.”

The company was paid £240,000 to help 100 of the borough’s pupils most at risk pupils.

George Mitchell School in Leyton is in one of the borough’s most deprived wards and was supposed to receive support through Youth At Risk.

But headteacher Helen Jeffrey insists vital help was not received, despite documentation showing otherwise.

She said: “With a school that has as many challenges as our school has, I’m still smarting from the fact that we did not benefit from the NRF funding through the Youth At Risk programme when we should have done and were reported to have done.”

The council’s long-term mismanagement of millions of pounds earmarked to help the poorest parts of the borough is currently the subject of an independent inquiry.

Evidence shows council officers, many of whom remain employed by the authority, bypassed rules aimed at preventing the mis-use of public funds.

At least one senior council officer has been suspended as part of the investigation.

Since January 2005, council anti-fraud investigators received 267 complaints of wrongdoing, a Freedom of Information Act request has revealed.

Of those, 65 have not been completed, including allegations classified as corruption, theft, financial wrongdoing, financial irregularity, abuse of position, false documentation, false accounting and breach of contract.