Tuesday, December 15, 2015

# 175 Scott Neeson plays fast and loose with the truth....again!

Scott Neeson is the penultimate PR man. He will say whatever he needs to say in any particular situation to achieve whatever goal he has set for himself. And he is very good at it and the media, by and large, laps it up.

In Scott Neesonland truth gets mixed up with fiction and no-one, unless they look very closely and ask a few questions, will be able to figure out where truth ends and the fiction begins.

“At a meeting held this week in Phnom Penh, His Excellency Vong Soth, Minister for Social Affairs, Veterans and Youth Rehabilitation (MoSVY) and CCF Founder and Executive Director Scott Neeson discussed the importance of setting rigid guidelines for NGOs dealing with vulnerable children.

The Minister expressed his appreciation at CCF’s support of the Royal Government’s regulations regarding residential care for vulnerable children.  The Minister said that all NGOs need to apply this new policy and meet the standards that have been set, and congratulated Scott and CCF on their efforts to help vulnerable people.  

Neeson congratulated the Minister on the residential care policy, saying enforcing it will go a long way to protecting the rights of vulnerable children and safeguarding against unscrupulous people opening residential care facilities for their own personal gain.

According to Scott’s own figures, as presented to the IRS in 2013, it costs CCF $2,000 a year to provide accommodation to one child in residential care and another $2,000 per year to educate this child. That’s $4,000 a year for a child who is in residential care and going to school. This is is more than double, often triple and sometimes four times as much as this child’s family earns in a year working in the rubbish dump.

Neeson committed to make CCF a model NGO that the ministry can use as a standard for how the residential care guidelines should be implemented by other NGOs.

In the last two years, CCF has built more than 360 homes for families in the Steung Meanchey community.  CCF’s extensive child care, community support and healthcare programs enable children to live at home with their families while attending CCF’s award-winning education program.

CCF has not built 360 homes. The number is 180. And the houses, owned by whoever owns the land, have only been built ‘for families’ in the sense that families get to rent the houses from the owner of the houses and land. Who this person is, is a closely guarded secret.

A number of basic services encourage school attendance, starting with the provision of subsidized rice.

Subsidized rice amounts to $120 a year for the family of a child in residential care – not much compared to the $2,000 or $4,000 a year CCF is pulling in per child whilst the rest of the family survives on $1,000 a year.

CCF’s support increases in line with the family’s commitment to regular schooling, providing safe domestic situations and preventing the child from undertaking labor.

Some children attending CCF schools are also working in the rubbish dump to help support their families.

Families who prioritise their child’s education, provide safe living conditions free from domestic violence or drug and alcohol abuse are provided the option of moving into a World Housing home.

Although a more complex approach to ensure regular school attendance, this model keeps the child and family together. Most of all, it works, with remarkably low absentee rates, increased parental engagement and a new sense of hope.

CCF does not keep families together. I have met parents who ask for their children to be returned to their care who are told that they have signed their parental rights away with the contract they put their thumb print to. The parents are not allowed to keep a copy of the contract and Scott Neeson refuses to allow anyone to see or read it.

Of the more than 2,250 children in CCF’s education program, 88% stay with their families each night or, if in higher education, at least twice a week.

Some basic arithmetic is required here. CCF claims to be spending $2,000 per year on the education of one child. Given that the majority of 2,250 children are going to free government schools, for half a day at least, and sleeping with their families, how is this $2,000 a year being spent?

For children who come from outside of Phnom Penh, CCF arranges regular transport back to their families once or twice a month. Parents are encouraged to visit their children and, if necessary, CCF will pay for their transportation.

CCF encourages children to live with their families, and re-integrates children from residential care if changes in their family situation make it safe for them to move home.  Children learn more and function better when part of the community.

CCF refuses to return children to their families if parents ask to be re-united with their children

The Minister congratulated CCF on its commitment to finding resources and supporting families to keep children living at home.  He praised the CCF Granny Program, which not only provides care for elderly people in the Steung Meanchey community, but also builds connections between the younger generation of CCF students and the wisdom of older people in the community.

In the meeting, Minister  H.E. Vong Soth, “expressed his endless support to the organization for carrying out its duty so far on the development of the whole society, especially on helping to further promote the construction of houses for poor families in the community.”
Accepting an invitation to attend a World Housing opening, the Minister said MoSVY will fully cooperate and support CCF in its efforts to assist the impoverished children in Cambodia.

CCF is not constructing houses for poor families. CCF is using donor and sponsor monies to buy houses which it then rents to poor families. The houses are owned by whoever owns the land upon which they are built.

Sponsors, donors and members of the 4th Estate should ask Neeson who owns the land.


Everything Neeson says about CCF needs to be taken with a huge grain of salt.

44 comments:

  1. I’ll try again, maybe one of the CCF “key personnel” would like to answer this question:

    Would the Ministry of Education and Scott Neeson conclude that children would be better off being raised in an institution, or better being raised with their father who is a convicted felon, a corrupt former policeman who stole drugs at gunpoint and sold drugs?

    Sok Channoeurn, Country Manager
    Morm Sopheak, Head of Finance
    Taing Sotheara, Operations Manager
    Trina Capps, Organizational Development Manager
    Tracy France, Head of Education
    Ryan Witcombe, Marketing and Communications Manager
    Kram Sokchannin, Education Manager
    James (Jim) Weyers, Head of Sponsorship
    Asha Griffith, Manager Partnerships & Volunteers
    Ly Sophea, Head of Facility
    Ouk Sochenda, CCF1 Manager
    Chum Vichheka, CCF2 Manager
    Voeun Sivleng, CCF6 Manager
    Ngoy Hen, CCF Community Center Manager
    Thim Sokha, Childcare Manager
    Hoy Leanghoin, CCF Community Outreach Manager
    Nhem Rithy, Child Protection Manager
    Keo Sidanin, Internal Auditor
    Kang Chamroeun, Sponsor Communications Manager
    Chhem Saron, Sponsor Engagement Manager
    Sok Phearak, Sponsor Relations Manager
    Khoy Radeth, Vocational Supervisor

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sorry, but I do not understand the question? Can you rephrase it so that what you are asking is clear

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Would McCabe's children be better off raised in an institution or with that scumbag?

      Delete
    2. What a dumb question - McCabes children aren't poor and having to sift through rubbish to find their dinner. The children that CCF has helped do exactly that and most of them, without CCF intervemtio would still be snapping the streets for a feed.. What a low life cunt you are anon 11.27pm. Its a safe bet that the only assistance you have provided a Khmer child is when you pay a bar fine at your local bar.

      Delete
    3. Hey low life cunt aka Anonymous 4:50, POVERTY is not a reason to take children from their families, it is a reason to help the family. Why would you want to creare permanent harm to the children by raising them in institutional care?

      Delete
    4. Yes Pathological Liar is correct. He can not even spell the name for his organization correctly...ha-ha!

      Delete
  3. What does Mc Cabe's conviction have to do with his suitability as a parent?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is that who you would want your children to be raised by? He violated the peoples trust when he was a Police officer. He stole drugs at gunpoint. He sold drugs. Very nice role model for children! Trustworthy, reliable, honest?

      Delete
    2. Are you suggesting that men with criminal convictions shouldn't have children? That they would be better off being brought up in an institution? I have known some criminals that were terrific parents and some pillars of the community who were lousy parents. Your logic here is flawed. Mc Cabe and his wife might be terrific parents.

      Whether or not Mc Cabe is either suitable or qualified to run a Child Protection Unit is another question. And a more important questions, I would suggest.

      Delete
    3. I think it should be looked at by a qualified Sociologist to decide. If there were a real economy in Cambodia, a woman with other financial resources, might well keep the children herself. McCabe is no role model for raising a family!!

      Delete
    4. Dear Anonymous 2.32

      God forbid that 'a qualified Sociologist' should adjudicate who is a good parent and who is not! Mc Cabe may not be a good 'role model' in certain areas of his life but may be a great dad. You are making presumptions that I do nit think are valid.

      Delete
    5. Tell me which of these are not true about McCabe. Is he a liar? Is he a thief? Has he sold heroin and large volumes of methamphetamine? Is he a womanizer and a drunk? Now which of these qualities do you think would make him a great Dad?

      Delete
    6. I have no idea whether Mc Cabe is a good dad or not. I don't think that a decade old conviction helps answer this question. I am confused as to why you are belabouring this point? Are you suggesting that his kids would be better off being brought up in an institution run by sociologists than with their own mum and dad? Be clear here.

      Delete
    7. His actions show his character!

      Delete
    8. But I really was wondering what the CCF people think as they have clearly taken children with much less cause than McCabe represents.

      Delete
  4. So Cambodia is going to use one of the biggest violators of children's rights, and use them as a model for dealing with vulnerable children? Now this is a joke right?

    ReplyDelete
  5. It looks to me as though Neeson got info that the Cambodian Gov. was about to end the foreign NGO Business Model of institutionalising Khmer Kids (in
    essence locking them up) ahead of the press releases by the Cambodian
    Government.

    How quick he reacted is a perfect example of how "flexible" his PR
    Machine Works.

    My imagination sees this picture:

    The Board Meeting Room at the CCF.

    Neeson:

    "We've got a thunderstorm coming, better be prepared to sell the CCF as a
    Role Model of a Childcaring NGO. How fast can we get the kids out of the
    dormitory to regular meetings their families ? Action , Action please !!

    Secretary did you get that meeting arranged with the Minister for this
    afternoon ?

    Where is the Powerpoint Demo on how we, the CCF tackle the problem
    without being trashed by the international. press or that cunt Rickets ? Don't forget:

    We're the ROLE MODEL !! Got that! We are the future.

    Is the Transparency Report for 2013 ready ? We need to present figures
    and 2013 is far behind us already, thereby suits our cause well.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Scott ('grifter') Neeson

    A grifter is someone who swindles you through deception or fraud.

    Synonyms include fraudster, con artist, cheater, confidence man, scammer, hustler, swindler, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Neeson's got the money to do what he likes. 'Impunity'. Its not just corrupt government officials who are immune

    ReplyDelete
  8. Your a cunt Rickets. Always have been, always will be. Your jealousy of Scott Neeson is out of bounds

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have a feeling that ex-employee Jason Thatcher has a lot to do with the shit that Rickets writes on this blog. He has been feeding him shit ever since the blog started, ad it is no secret that Thatcher hates Lemon and McCabe.

      Delete
    2. If Thatcher hates Lemon and McCabe, he likely has some very good reasons! I don't hear people say anything good about them, except Neeson, and we know he is a liar.

      Delete
  9. rickets also never provides sources for his "facts" and is always saying"well if you want to you can go and check my facts" these posts he writes are stupid and have not progressed in the last 6 months. each post is a regurgitation of a previous post without substance or documented facts. pathetic.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Dear Graham Brewster, Scott Neeson & members of the Cambodian Children's Fund board

    You continue with your World Housing scam.

    You continue to use the worlds 'gift' or 'gifting' to describe the process whereby donors and sponsors give homes to the owner of the land upon which they are erected; these homes then rented to poor Cambodian families.

    You refuse to divulge the name of the owner of the land in Cambodia. Whoever it may be, she or he must be laughing all the way to the bank.

    The cost of these homes has almost doubled what it was a few months ago, standing now at $5,000 - for houses cost around $1,000 to manufacture.

    You are both scoundrels of the first order, Graham and Scott - exploiting both the poverty of the Cambodian and Philippino people and the generosity of sponsors and donors who believe they are giving homes to poor familie. You should be exposed as fraudsters in the mainstream media.

    best wishes

    James Ricketson


    ---------- Forwarded message ----------
    From: xxxxxxxxxxxx
    Date: Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 1:01 AM
    Subject: world housing
    To: James Ricketson

    Begin forwarded message:
    From: Graham Brewster
    Date: 16 December 2015 1:01:11 pm AEST
    To: xxxxxxxxxxxxx
    Subject: Re: Info pack

    Hi xxxxxx,

    Great to hear from you, and thanks for reaching out. Not too sure what happened on the first go-round, but I will look into it for sure. If it was around December 1 there was a short period of time when some emails were lost as we were having the new website/domain go live. If that was the case the best I can do is apologize!

    As for sponsoring a home, we would be extremely grateful. The cost to gift a home in your name is $5,000, and more information can be found on our website at worldhousing.ca. I encourage you also to watch the video that shared more on our Legacy Community Project. If you have any additional questions - I'm always happy to answer.

    In terms of programs on the ground (in Cambodia specifically), we are working with the Cambodian Children's Fund, who provide life-changing support and community services to the families that move into the new homes. More information can be found on their website here.

    A home gifted would make an incredible impact. I thank you in advance, and would love the opportunity to meet you to thank you for your (and your husband's) generosity.

    Thanks!
    Graham Brewster

    --
    Graham Brewster
    Managing Director
    World Housing
    M: +1.778.989.3226
    www.worldhousing.ca
    Twitter | Facebook | Instagram

    ReplyDelete
  11. The scam doesn't just continue, it GROWS!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Come on Scott, don’t keep us in suspense any longer. Who is the lucky person who is getting all these free homes on their land? You know the ones I mean, ‘gifted’ (nudge, nudge, wink wink) to poor families.

      Delete
    2. And Scott where does all of the $5,000 go? Are you buying more land so you can give more houses to yourself?

      Delete
  12. "Penultimate"?

    The second to last PR man? I don't think that word means what you think it means.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, a poor choice of word. I suspect that I have been using it wrongly most of my adult life.

      Scott is definitely not the second to last PR man. He is a master PR man and deserves an Oscar for his performance. I wonder if His Excellency Vong Soth, Minister for Social Affairs, Veterans and Youth Rehabilitation (MoSVY) believes what Scott tell him about (for instance) CCFs World Housing scam?

      Delete
    2. Im pretty sure the Minister would take Scotts word over yours Ricketson. Come to think of it, I doubt you would get any audience with any Minister in Cambodia after all the bullshit you have been writing.

      Delete
    3. The problem for Neeson is that the FACTS don't support his lies.

      Delete
    4. Dear Anonymous 10.47

      The important questions is:

      "Who owns the land upon which the World Housing homes are erected?"

      There is no reason why the Minister need necessarily have asked this question. He may well be of the opinion that these homes are being 'gifted' to poor families. After all, this is what Neeson and Brewster say tin their publicity releases.

      I wonder what the minister would think if he knew the truth about World Housing and just who is being 'gifted' the homes?

      Delete
  13. THE EXPRESSION "PATHOLOGICAL LIAR" SPRINGS TO MIND

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The expression 'Ricketson and his cronies are bottom feeder losers, full of jealously, stale piss and wind' comes to my mind. keep up your bullshit blog fuckwits - you have previously and will have in the future zero effect on CFF, McCabe, Neeson and anyone else you are trying to defame.

      Delete
    2. And to correct myself, that should read CCF, not CFF.

      Delete
    3. Yes he is certainly a Pathological Liar!

      Delete
    4. Based on who's assessment anon 11.37pm? Yours? Show us some hard facts that show that Scott Neeson has lied. Put your name to the accusations on this blog you weak prick!

      Delete
    5. Scott Neeson ‘gifting’ homes to poor families is a big fucking lie you half wit.

      Delete
    6. Some basic mathematics are in order here. The figure I have been given to construct one World Housing home is $1000.

      Let's add another $500 to that for construction etc.

      So, $1,500 per home.

      The profit to CCF and World Housing in Canada is $3,500 her hoome.

      CCF hasn't actually constructed 360 of these homes yet but let's say it does eventually construct this number.

      360 multiplied by $3,500 = $1,260,000

      That's more than $1 million in profits to CCF and World Housing - both of them claiming to be non-profit organisations.

      If the funding model that CCF and World Housing are using takes off worldwide, they stand to make 10s of millions of dollars - exploiting sponsors and donors who believe they are buying homes for poor families; exploiting the poverty and powerlessness of Cambodians to line Scott Neeson and Graham Brewster's pockets.

      Both men should be facing criminal charges for this scam.

      Delete
    7. Yes you are right James!

      Delete
    8. Thew problem, Anonymous 4.29, is that no-onje cares. Neeson can engage in whatever scam he chooses and no one is going to call him on it. Mind you, he is not alone amongst NGOs in this. For the most part they are a law unto themselves,with no-one providing any oversight at all. There are a lot of people from the developed world earning good money exploiting the poverty of the Cambodian people.

      Delete
    9. Rickeyson your dummy dropped on the floor!

      Delete
  14. What an idiot Anonymous 12/18 who cannot spell your name correctly nor make an intelligent statement.
    makes me sick, it's Despicable, what a scoundrel Scott Neeson is and how is it possible that his organization is not exposed to stop people from donating to them..?

    ReplyDelete
  15. What an idiot Anonymous 12/18 who cannot spell your name correctly nor make an intelligent statement.
    makes me sick, it's Despicable, what a scoundrel Scott Neeson is and how is it possible that his organization is not exposed to stop people from donating to them..?

    ReplyDelete