Image caption Chris Wormald and Richard Heaton appeared before the Public Accounts Committee

Senior civil servants have denied the collapsed Kids Company charity was given "special treatment", amid allegations of financial mismanagement.

A report into the charity found it had been awarded at least £46m of public money despite repeated concerns.

Richard Heaton - former permanent secretary at the Cabinet Office - said the "unorthodox" charity had been "collectively supported" by government.

Former bosses at the charity have denied it was financially mismanaged.

Mr Heaton and Department for Education (DfE) permanent secretary Chris Wormald were appearing before MPs on the Public Accounts Committee.

Labour MP Meg Hillier, who chaired the committee, said it was "staggering" that some of the questions raised during the session had not been asked "before everything went belly up".

'Special interest'

Both Mr Heaton and Mr Wormald admitted there were lessons to be learned.

But they dismissed the idea that civil servants allowed the charity, which provided support to inner-city children and ran youth centres in London, Bristol and Liverpool, more leeway than other organisations.

They also denied they had been put under any pressure by ministers to continue awarding grants to the charity.

Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption A timeline of the charity Kids Company

Mr Heaton said ministers had "broad" powers to allocate grants to charities.

"It is entirely proper for ministers to decide which charities in which sector they wish to support," he said.

Mr Heaton argued that the job of officials was to ensure that financial support authorised by ministers was "properly implemented in a way that delivered value for the taxpayer".

In that respect Kids Company had received "no special treatment at all", he said.

Mr Wormald agreed and said while successive governments had shown a "special interest" in Kids Company, his department had not acted "improperly" by giving the charity "special treatment".

What was Kids Company?

Image copyright AP

Founded in 1996 in south London by Camila Batmanghelidjh

Relied on donations and government money, and was backed by Prime Minister David Cameron

Financial difficulties first reported to councils in June

Ministers approved £3m grant on 26 June

In July, police said specialist child abuse investigators were looking into charity

The Cabinet Office tried to reclaim the £3m and the charity confirmed it had closed on 5 August

What went wrong at Kids Company?

BBC's Chris Cook: How ministers were 'bullied'

Do Kid Company's sums add up?

The National Audit Office report, published last week, found the charity had received public funding for about 15 years, with at least £42m provided in government grants, including £28m from the DfE and its predecessors.

It also received about £2m from councils and £2m from the National Lottery.

In 2008, Kids Company received 20% of the DfE's grant programme and from 2011-2013, it received twice as much in grants as national children's charity Barnardo's.

Concerns about its financial management were first raised in 2002.

'A punt'

Mr Heaton said the Cabinet Office took action immediately to make the charity a "better case financially" when it came under its watch in 2013.

He said the two main issues were that it "seemed to exist hand-to-mouth" and there was a "lack of decent measures" relating to whether it was value for money.

He described the charity as "well-networked" and "well-liked politically", and said he was aware that it was a "prime minister-favoured charity".

Kids Company was granted a £3m grant in June, despite Mr Heaton having taken the unusual step of requesting a ministerial "direction" on the decision, as he did not feel able to advise that it would represent value for money.

The decision to overrule Mr Heaton's warning came just weeks after an earlier grant worth £4.3m was provided on condition that the charity undertake significant reforms to put it on a sustainable footing.

"Ministers, quite reasonably, took the view that it was a punt that was worth funding," Mr Heaton told the committee.

He added: "I was aware it was an election period and everything was of heightened interest, but no-one put pressure on me to do or not do anything."