Devon Association of Governors - Run by Devon Governors for Devon Governors
Area Meetings Autumn 2007
Feedback
Issues raised at Area
Meetings Autumn 2007
List of main topics:
- Introduction
This report is a summary of points raised by governors at the
Area Meetings held earlier this term in the following Local
Learning Communities: Clyst Vale, Crediton & Exeter : Culm
Valley & Tiverton : Barnstaple, Bideford, Braunton, Ilfracombe &
Torrington : Axe Valley, Exmouth, Honiton, Ottery-St-Mary &
Sidmouth. These meetings were attended by governors, clerks and
headteachers from many schools in these areas. Discussion
focused initially on the termly 'Checklist' of current issues
sent to all Devon schools at the beginning of each term and also
available on the Devon Governor Services web site:
www.devon.gov.uk/governors . Further discussion
embraced other issues of current concern raised by those
present. The sections
- in normal type indicate points from the Checklist or
made by me at the meetings
- in italics indicate comments made by governors at the
meetings
- in bold indicate the questions with responses in red
(where received) from LA officers, NGA and others to the
points raised.
- This is a very detailed report which will almost
certainly have items of immediate relevance to your school /
GB. It offers answers to questions that may have been
concerning your GB as well as providing an insight in to
what fellow governors are thinking about topics of current
concern. Please share this report with your GB, in
particular committee chairs. There are also cross-references
to the Devon Governor and a parallel document sent to GBs of
all schools in February which covered further aspects of
some of these issues.
- As a general observation this round of meetings seemed
to be less contentious and to generate fewer questions than
previous ones. Is this a genuine turning point on a road to
a period of greater calm … or a false dawn?!
- Ivan Godfrey 14.11.07 Contact at
- David Tall, DAG’s Executive Officer
^top-
- 1. Performance
Management
- There are 3 separate, related issues.
- GBs should have agreed the new Performance Management
policy for staff, reflecting the new regulations as of the
beginning of September 2007. There is a model policy
available on the Governor Support
website:
www.devon.gov.uk/governors . The performance
review of teaching staff should have been completed by the
end of October. This is the responsibility of the Head,
monitored by the GB.
- The Performance Management of the Head Teacher needs to
be completed by the end of December. Primary and special
school GBs must recruit the services of an external adviser
prior to School Improvement Partners coming on board during
2008. Primary Advisers within Devon Education Services ( DES
) offer this support as a purchased service.
- School Improvement Partners ( SIPs ) will be in place
for primary and special schools in 2008.
- Governor comment
- the overwhelming majority of secondary schools gave
very positive feedback about the role played by the SIPs
with comments such as ‘ a great school improvement partner
‘, ‘ a good experience – our SIP was well briefed and wide
ranging in his observations ‘, ‘ very supportive and easy to
talk to ‘
- SIPs fulfilled a variety of roles in giving coherent
support to the school combining issues such as the Annual
Review Visit, the SEF, the School Profile and PM for the
head teacher
- one school said its SIP was an OfSTED inspector who ‘
initially followed the OfSTED mould and appeared to think
only OfSTED-speak … but was now becoming more flexible and
useful! ‘
- most governors had been fully involved with their SIP
although one GB had as yet had no contact
- one governor reported that Roger Fetherston ( DES )
had told him governors must feed back comments on SIPs to
DES
- Governor questions
- Are SIPs for primary and special schools going to
be in place for 2008 - please?!!
- Roger Fetherston ( Head of DES
): For primary and special schools they will be in place for
April 08. Recruitment is going well and there will be
induction next term for the new teams. David Chaplin has
been leading on an excellent recruitment and preparation
process for Primary SIPs, rated good with outstanding
features by the Regional SIPs Co-ordinator from the National
Strategies who meets with us at least termly.
- Are very small schools going to get a SIP who is
familiar with such schools or people from large schools
who know little about small schools?
- RF: All SIPs are accredited to
work with the full range of schools. However we will do our
best to match the background of SIPs to the needs and
contexts of schools. When SIPs are allocated to schools
there will be details of their experience. Schools will have
the option of requesting an alternative SIP if they consider
the SIP allocated is unable to fulfil the national SIP
brief. We will provide guidance about the reasons why a
school might consider a SIP unable to fulfil the role in a
particular school. If we recognise the difficulty that the
school has with the original allocation we will allocate a
different SIP. There is no negative preference available to
schools for the second SIP allocated.
- NB Further feedback on this topic can be found in the
Spring Meetings document on the DAG website.
^top-
- 2. School Profile
- This should have been completed on the School Profile
website for the year ending July 2006.
The School Profile Team, DCSF,
comments: “NB, this is not correct – see answer to question
1.”
Details of all schools (
including ones in locality ) can be found at
schoolsfinder.direct.gov.uk .
Governor comment
- there were a number of schools that had not yet
completed their profile for the year in question : the
reason for this seemed to lie with the initial introduction
of the profile in the summer term 2006 when schools were
completing a profile for the year ending 12 months
previously. This had led many to leave completion until the
summer term or later
- the Profile provoked lots of discussion and a fair
bit of criticism. Governors were very sceptical about this
exercise, feeling there were other, and better, ways to find
out about schools and that the exercise had little
relevance. Governors disliked the fact that it deals with
retrospective information and fails to offer the chance to
speak about the future. Governors need to be looking ahead
and not back – i.e. ‘ this is what we have achieved, now
this is what are aims are ’
- one school had set up an ‘alternative ’ parents
evening because parents and governors missed having one
- there is a parents’ website,
www.parentcentre.co.uk , that has a
direct link to the School Profile
- it is important to check each time that the DCSF
input is accurate!!
- Governor questions
- Is it possible to access and complete the 2005/06
profile now we are into the new school year?
-
DCSF: “No!!! This question does not
reflect the fact that towards the beginning of this academic
year a new ‘ rolling ‘ School Profile was introduced. This
means that the Profile is no longer a locked document and
schools / governors can update it at any time that they
wish. Current reporting will be for the year 2006/07, but
more recent updates for the year 2007/08 can be added.
Schools may want to do so to highlight a particular
achievement or to correct an error. Schools will be alerted
by e-mail when the validated statistical data for the
academic year ending in July has been posted on their
Profile. As there is a considerable delay between a school’s
receipt of Key Stage results and the ending of the final
validation process schools can enter their own provisional
results if they so wish until such time as the validated
results are available. In all of this it is important to
remember that the legal requirement remains that schools
complete and publish a profile once a year. It is up to the
individual school / GB if they wish to do more.”
- Is there a limit to the time it is available after it
is written?
-
DCSF: “At the top of the Profile is a date to indicate when
it was last updated. This date now changes each time the
school makes an alteration to its Profile with the result
that any reader can know whether the information is
up-to-date or not.”
- Who is the Profile aimed at?
-
DCSF: “Principally existing
parents, although prospective parents may also be
interested. Remember that the Profile replaces the original
Annual Report to Parents. It can, however, be more flexible
than that document. Schools could consider informing parents
in their newsletter whenever the Profile has been updated.”
- Is there any indication of how many parents actually
look at it? How can schools tell who and how many are
actually accessing the information?
-
DCSF: “We have commissioned an
independent evaluation from Parents Involved in Children’s
Education (PICE) on the value parents place on the Profile.
The initial report is expected in early December with the
full feedback from the report published in the new year. We
have also just introduced a hit counter at the bottom of the
Profile for each school … though that will not tell you
whether the person who has accessed it is a parent or not!”
- Is there any way of projecting / writing about the
future?
- DCSF:
“That is not the primary function of this document as the
profile is designed to let parents know the current
situation of the school.”
- Why can’t everything be condensed down in to one task
– profile, prospectus etc.?
-
DCSF: “When it comes to information
about a school, there are a number of different target
audiences – existing parents, prospective parents, the local
authority, OfSTED etc. We do not believe it is possible to
envisage one single document that would meet those varying
needs.”
- Do the new Admissions’ advisers use profiles to
advise parents?
-
DCSF: “We cannot give a definitive
answer but feel it would be highly unlikely that Admissions’
Advisers would see the Profile as a key document.”
- Does Ofsted look at past profiles and come to schools
with preconceived ideas?
-
DCSF: “There are no longer any past
profiles. In any case, OfSTED is primarily interested in the
SEF. If, however, a SEF was poorly produced and the school
had failed to update its Profile within the previous
12-month period this might be seen as further evidence of
weak practice.”
- DCSF final comment: “All the
recent changes indicated above are the result of direct
feedback from schools and governors so that the Profile can
best suit schools’ needs. If any governor has any problems
with any matters relating to the Profile they can contact
the National Support Line by email at or by telephone on 0845 6009506.
Guidance and a FAQ section can also be found both on the
School Profile website and at
www.teachernet.gov.uk.”
^top-
- 3. Gender and
Disability Equality Duty
- Guidance is available from the Equal Opportunities
Commission at
www.eoc.org.uk/default.aspx?page=20177 .
Chapter 7 relates to the role of GBs. Primaries and special
schools need to have a Disability Equality scheme in place
by the end of December. Advice is to encompass the
requirements within a single ‘equality plan’ to include
disability, gender, race and age. Talk to your link HR
officer for advice.
Governor comment
- a pity that these requests have come piecemeal rather
than as a single approach
- Jo Hooper ( Corporate Equality
Officer, DCC ): The EOC and DRC ( now united in the Equality
and Human Rights Commission ) have both produced guidance
for schools on meeting their Gender and Disability equality
duties. Although large organisations with equality officers
may be able to cope with a single equality scheme approach,
I don't think this is a sensible way forward for small
schools who really need to 'get their heads around' what
each of the duties mean - as there are differences as well
as common elements. The duties have come in a staged
approach. Where schools considered the disability duty when
it came out they should be in a good enough position to
complete that area of work and then move on to gender, and
then the new community cohesion requirement.
- a number of governors felt more guidance was required
- model policies are really helpful on issues such as
this although schools need to consider content for its
relevance to their own school. DCSF say schools should be
doing their own because circumstances will be different in
each school.
- one primary school had difficulty persuading disabled
people to become involved in drawing up the policy
- Governor questions
- Who checks these policies from a legal point of view
so that the wording is correct?
- JH: Schools are more likely to
have legal action taken against them for having no scheme,
or doing nothing.
- How much should governors be involved in the detail
of this?
- JH: Schools ( ie Heads,
governors ) need to take the time to review the guidance and
go on the training courses that we offer. Burying their
heads in the sand and saying ' we need a model policy to
adopt ' is not the way to deal with this requirement. The
disability equality duty specifically requires schools to
involve people ( all stakeholders - governors, staff, pupils
etc ) in developing its disability equality scheme, which
can be a separate document, part of a single equality
scheme, or part of the school improvement plan ( whatever
fits the school ). Different schools will need to take
different actions - some may have more physical access
issues to address than others for example. DCC have
developed Template documents for the schemes, but cannot
produce anything more than a template.
- The guidance that is available
is sufficient for getting started. By working with the
guidance and going on the training, governors will be able
to develop a compliant scheme. It's not rocket science, it
just takes a bit of time and awareness raising and perhaps
for one person ( such as a governor ) to become the 'expert'
for the school and help the school develop its scheme.
SENCOs have a good grasp of disability issues relating to
pupils and can be useful for the working group … but they
should not be expected to lead on this because it’s an
overall management/governance issue, and about meeting needs
of parents, staff and governors, not just pupils.
- At Starcross Primary ( where I
am a governor ) we have set up a working group to carry out
the consultation and develop the 'scheme' for disability (
this will form part of the improvement plan ). We've
developed a survey and consultation information sheet. When
we have completed our disability work and updated our
Improvement plan, we will then look at the other duties.
- Is the Accessibility Policy 2005 the most recent
model?
- JH: Accessibility Policy does
not cover duties. Access is just one small part of the
disability equality duty. Relationships with accessibility
policies are included in the guidance.
- Would it be useful if schools shared access to
policies?
- This is something that DAG
could consider facilitating as it reviews its work.
- Could there be a one-stop shop for model policies for
governors and a regular reminder of which policies should be
in place and where to find them?
- It was pointed out that the CD
of the Guide to the Law gives an updated list of policies
for the ‘average’ school and that Devon Governor Support
also details this in the Effective Governing Body Folder
- Alice McShane ( Governor
Support ): Some further details and useful websites can be
found in this term’s Devon Governor ( page 13 ).
^top-
- 4. CRB Checks
- Mandatory enhanced CRB checks for all prospective
governors will be required from next year.
Governor comment
- some governors felt this whole issue was a sad
reflection on the society we now live in, that children were
far more at risk out of school and in the home and that
there was a developing paranoia about this fuelled by an
over-zealous media
- others pointed out that the checks are really only
valid on the day they are done and that it is simply
impossible to develop a watertight system
- Governor questions
- Why do governors need to have an enhanced check?
- Maria Chakraborty ( Recruitment
Manager, DCC ): Ahead of the new Independent Safeguarding
Authority ( originally called Vetting & Barring ) Scheme,
the Secretary of State for Education and Skills announced in
June 2006 that regulations would be tightened and new
guidance introduced to clarify responsibilities for safer
recruitment. The guidance document ' Safeguarding Children
and Safer Recruitment in Education ' has been produced which
came into force in January 2007 and is a consolidated
version of earlier guidance material. In this document it
specifically states that ' in line with other volunteers,
governors in positions that include regular work in the
presence of children, or who care for, train, supervise or
are in sole charge of children should be asked to obtain an
Enhanced Disclosure from the Criminal Records Bureau. In
addition, any governor giving cause for concern should also
be asked to obtain an Enhanced Disclosure '.
- What is meant by ‘ prospective ‘ … surely not all
those considering becoming governors?
- MC: ' Prospective ' will
incorporate all those who make a formal application to
become a Governor.
- For existing governors do the checks have to be done
now or on re-appointment?
- MC: There does not appear to be
any national guidance available on this currently,
suggesting this would be a local level decision. DCC policy
is being updated and will incorporate a review of this.
- Jane Lucas (
Governor Support ):
Existing governors who have never had a CRB check are likely
to be first in line.
- How often should they be re-done?
- MC: The existing policy does
not currently require re-checking although this is under
review, and an updated policy is likely to be published in
the new year.
- JL: It is likely that the
frequency will be in line with appointment and
re-appointment.
- What is the Vetting and Barring Board that has been
mentioned?
- MC: The new Independent
Safeguarding Authority ( ISA ) Scheme is being introduced in
Autumn 2008 and is supported by the Safeguarding Vulnerable
Groups Act 2006. The scheme is aimed to reform current
vetting and barring practices and will provide the following
key improvements:
- Integration of lists - there
will be a single list of those barred from working with
children and a separate but aligned list of those barred
from working with vulnerable adults.
- These will supersede the
current POCA list, POVA list, list 99 and the existing
system of Disqualification Orders.
- Pre-employment vetting - the
scheme will ensure those who are known to present harm to
children and/or vulnerable adults are prevented from
entering the workplace.
- Independent and consistent
decision making - An Independent Barring Board ( IBB ) will
be set up to make all decisions on individuals.
- Introduction of continuous
updating - relevant information of those on the scheme will
be made available to the IBB and if necessary the Board will
re-consider the original decision not to bar.
- Any employee or volunteer
wishing to work with children or vulnerable adults will be
required to register on the scheme and if accepted by the
IBB they will be issued with a registration number.
- Otherwise if they are deemed
unsuitable their name will be included onto the barred list.
There is a fee to register but this has to be paid only once
on application and future on-line checking is free.
- The criminal records bureau
will provide the administrative support for the scheme and
will be responsible for the updating of information. Further
information can be obtained from
www.everychildmatters.gov.uk
- Is there any truth that a new charge of £40 per
person for enhanced checks, including for volunteers, will
be coming in?
- MC: There has been no
communication from CRB that the charge for an enhanced check
the price will rise to £40. It has been confirmed that
prices will not rise from the current £36 in 2007/2008.
Similarly there has been no communication that there will be
any change from volunteers being free of charge.
- JL: At this stage there is no
stated intention to charge for CRB checks for volunteers but
there may well be a charge for membership of the ISA ( a
one-off charge, but no figures decided on yet ). CRB checks
will be portable under the new scheme, so if a governor has
had one for a different area of work etc, they will not need
another one. At appointment a governor will have to join the
ISA ( if not already a member ) and at reappointment, a
governor’s status will be checked with the ISA to ensure
that they are still a member. A lot of this is still not
finalised or clear, including whether or not prospective
governors will need to be checked from day one. It is a
massive programme and will roll out only as fast as the
administrative processes can manage it.
- Alice McShane: There is an
article in this term’s Devon Governor on page 6 which
explores how this new scheme will affect governors.
^top-
- 5. Safer
Recruitment online training
- GBs need to ensure that at least one member of the GB
involved with interviewing for new staff has completed this.
It is due to become mandatory. Headteachers also need to
complete this training. There is no charge. Headteachers
need to complete the registration on behalf of the governor,
this will be processed by NCSL within 3 -4 days, the log-in
details are sent through the post. Heads can register
governors
click here
Governor comment
- many GBs had not yet met this requirement because of
the initial difficulties of registering
- many questioned why only one governor should be
involved
- one governor who had undertaken it commented that
much was common sense, that it had taken her about 5 hours
to do the training in her own time and at her own pace and
that she had done well in the test … but not as well as her
HT!!
- a number commented that they had accessed a shorter
version and recommended that all governors involved in
interviews should be encouraged to do this
- Governor questions
- When will this become mandatory?
- Helen Dickson ( School's
Personnel Team Manager, DCC ): It has only been suggested
that it will become mandatory, and we are currently unaware
as to when this may happen.
- Can there be clarity as to how many should undertake
the full training? Can it be more than one per GB? Should
all other governors look at the short version? Should the
trained governor ‘ cascade ‘ information to other governors
involved in interviews?
- HD: The full training ( the
five hour version ) needs to be undertaken by the
Headteacher and one Governor. The shortened version can be
accessed by all governors and we would encourage as many
governors as possible to do it. Yes, the trained Governor
can cascade but also encourage governors to do training as
well.
- Does it need to be a governor who is involved in
interviewing who has to undertake this online training?
- HD: Ideally at least one
governor should have undertaken the training if they are
involved in interviewing.
- Where can the ‘ short version ‘ be found?
- HD:
safer-recruitment/howtoapply.cfm#governor
- see 'Public training
materials'
^top-
- 6. FMSiS for
primary/special school governors
- There will be further training next term. The national
deadline for the implementation of FMSiS in these schools is
2010 but Devon wishes to proceed as quickly as possible and
has set a challenging self-imposed target of all primary
schools being able to meet the requirements by March 2008.
With this in mind Devon Audit is sending out a Toolkit form
to be returned by the end of November which would indicate
school’s current position. Finance governors need to give
this urgent attention and be prepared to complete the ‘
matrix of competency ‘.
- David Curnow ( Senior Audit
Manager, Devon Audit Services ): The Schools Forum agreed
that Devon’s proposal that all schools should AIM to meet
the FMSiS for March 2008 was a good idea and gave schools
the best opportunity to succeed. National targets require
40% of schools in each authority to achieve it this year.
Delaying starting will only make achievement more difficult.
Schools needing longer than 31st
March 2008 will be able to have longer. However it is hoped
that schools will be equitable where those that can meet the
FMSiS sooner will do so. This will allow more time and
effort to be focused by us to support those schools that
need help after 31st March 2008. Ofsted has already started
to include a question in the schools SEF asking of progress
against the FMSiS.
Governor comment
- a fair number of governors from secondary schools as
well as those who attended training sessions felt that, once
understood, this requirement did not impose huge new burdens
on schools and governors : one said that it demonstrates
good governance and asks no more than a good organisation
should be doing anyway DC:
Good!
- there was a substantial minority, however, who felt
daunted by the task, and a number who felt the training
sessions had been rushed and far too ‘ jargon-led ‘
- DC: That is unfortunate as we
tried to give assurance that schools are meeting most of the
requirements already. Most of the satisfaction surveys said
it was well pitched and very helpful. More training is being
rolled out to Headteachers and administrators. Model answers
have been provided by audit to all for this statutory
requirement from DCSF.
- some felt that all governors needed to become aware
of their financial responsibilities but others that chairs
and heads are being asked to sign papers that are really in
an auditor’s domain
- DC: The Statement of Internal
Control is part of FMSiS and does not ask any more of the
governors
- ( with the exception of a risk
assessment ) than is expected of them already in their
responsibilities.
- some felt that governors are amateurs and that it is
unreasonable for them to have to complete the matrix whereas
others suggested that governors should expect to pick up
roles and responsibilities
- DC: We expressed our concerns
to DCSF as part of the consultation about this. Please see
this as a training opportunity to enable governors to meet
their ambitions as a governor.
- governor minutes are vital evidence – don’t
underestimate the time it takes to put the papers together
for this process
- DC: Agreed, but some schools
have said that evidence gathering took just a few
afternoons.
- although all secondary schools should have FMSiS in
place a significant number in Devon are still not ‘ up to
speed ‘
- DC: Schools Forum have agreed a
reminder and chasing process for this.
- a representative from a federated school pointed out
that finance governors have to go through the process for
each school within the federation
- DC: This is not exactly correct
and will depend on the structure. Much of the FMSiS is about
leadership and governance, so with one governing body and a
collective staff structure, there is only need for one
assessment. Additionally all schools should already be
working to the standards, so there should be little
difference between one school and another.
Governor questions
- Will schools which need assistance have to pay extra
for help?
- DC: Free training has been
offered to Governors, Headteachers and Administrators.
Further free training is about to be offered via LLCs to
Administrators. Model answers have been provided free to all
schools together with a guide on the way forwards to meet
the standard. This guidance and advice is available on Devon
Audit Services Website for any school to access. Update
information is also provided via the Audit Bulletin and the
Finance Need to Know. Any further assistance will have to be
procured from Audit or sought from the schools buy-in to
Finance and Support Officer Services.
- Do all governors have to complete the matrix or just
governors on the Finance Committee?
- DC: No. The competencies matrix
is expected to be completed by the CoG, Chair of Finance and
a nominated Finance Governor as a minimum and not restricted
to Finance Committee Governors. Schools are expected to
consider which governors need to complete it. Clearly if the
Premises Committee have delegated responsibilities with
financial implications there is an argument that they should
complete it too.
- Are schools informed as soon as they have achieved
the required FMSiS level?
- DC: Yes, schools will know they
have achieved it from their self assessment and will be
assured they have met it when they receive their external
assessment e.g. by Devon Audit Services.
- What happens if schools feel unable to return the
document by the end of November?
- DC: All schools are encouraged
to return the draft assessment by the 30th Nov. This should
take no longer than 1 – 2 hours. Schools do not have to pull
evidence together at this stage to be able to return this
draft assessment. Collecting evidence can take place after
this. The “Key Timelines” document provided to all schools
does provide for a school which feels it will have
difficulty in meeting the FMSiS through self assessment to
inform Devon Audit Services by the 30th November on that
document
- Will future training be available in North Devon?
- DC: Yes, it has been already
and more will be on offer as mentioned above via the LLCs.
We would seek any support we could get to help encourage
support for these sessions as the take-up from schools at
some events to date has been low.
- Final general comment from DC:
I do empathise with governors about their concerns over the
requirements of the FMSiS. This is a Standard that is
mandatory and set by DCSF not Devon Audit Services. Our
training has tried to allay governors and other fears but I
guess one cannot meet everyone's concerns. I hope my
responses are helpful. If governors have requests or ideas
to help improve understanding and achievement of the FMSiS I
will be very grateful to receive them at
.
^top
- 7. Exeter's unitary
bid- latest update from DCC
- In very brief summary form:
- The relevant received Royal
Assent on October 30.
- The Secretary of State, Hazel
Blears, has yet to make a final decision on Exeter’s unitary
proposal
- There should be a decision by
the end of November / early December.
- Following this the Government
must lay implementation orders for the new unitaries in
Parliament. These are subject to Parliamentary challenge and
debate. This will probably happen in December.
- On October 1 Exeter City
Council provided the Government with their resubmission
- Following an invitation from
Communities and Local Government (CLG) DCC submitted a
detailed 34-page analysis of Exeter’s response on October
23.
- DCC has had 6 meetings
of the Shadow Joint Implementation Team with the
City Council.
- DCC has lodged an
application for judicial review with the High Court.
- DCC is continuing to
meet with MPs and Peers who have an interest in this
issue
- Please find the full details on
the attached sheet. This is, of course, the perspective from
DCC : there is no obvious link with Exeter on education
issues at the moment.
Governor comment
- the majority of governors expressed concerns about
the financial implications for their schools if
Exeter’s bid is successful
- at the Exeter area meeting there were some strong
governor voices in favour of unitary status
- some felt that past experience from Torbay and
Plymouth showed good people and services would be lost along
the way : Devon’s experience with Torbay and, to a lesser
extent, Plymouth suggested that unitaries tend to choose to
go their own way until the hard realities of budgets hit
them by which time the established services have been
reduced
- Exeter needs to talk to schools about the services
from Devon that they really value
- Governor questions
- Who will pay the cost if DCC seeks a Judicial Review?
- PD: If the County Council won
its case the judge will quash the decision and refer it back
to the Government and the applicant, DCC, will almost
certainly have its costs paid for by the defendants, CLG.
Should the County Council lose its case it will almost
certainly have to pay the Government’s costs ( probably
about £20,000 ) and the matter may end there. However, the
County Council could seek and obtain leave to appeal and in
which case the matter can be heard by the Court of Appeal –
as is the case with Shrewsbury & Atcham -- and, ultimately,
by the Lords.
- Governors from Children’s Centres asked at what point
they would be likely to get information from a shadow CYPS
if the bid is successful? Will there be people in Exeter who
know about these things? When can we expect to have these
shadow people in place?
- PD: This is a question for ECC
to answer. From a DCC perspective it would appear that there
is unlikely to be clarity on this in the near future. Even
if the unitary proposal does go ahead it is unlikely that
ECC will have a CYPS Director in place for some time and as
far as we know City Council does not have specific expertise
in this area. Up to now the City Council has been using
consultants.
- To what extent were staff who will be affected
consulted?
- PD: There was no specific
consultation by CLG with affected staff. CLG conducted a
low-key consultation with stakeholders and partners which
included a general invitation to anyone to respond,
commenting either on a specific proposal affecting their
area, or more generally.
- What impact is it anticipated that Unitary status
would have on those services where the funding is still
centrally retained or negotiated outside the formula for
mainstream schools?
- PD: We estimate that a unitary
Exeter would be allocated around 23% of the schools budget
not directly delegated to schools. The budget disaggregation
was based on 2006-07 data, which worked out at £6.7m. This
is higher than the % of delegated schools budget
attributable to Exeter (14%), due to the level of SEN
provision in Exeter. The 23% figure represents gross
provision in the city, some of which will be for children
resident outside Exeter, which would have to be paid for by
a residual County Council. Dismantling unified countywide
structures risks serious impairment to the planning,
commissioning and delivery of children’s services vital to
delivering the Every Child Matters agenda. We believe that
the loss of economies of scale and the dissipation of
expertise in high performing teams e.g. Admissions, will
affect both authorities operationally and there is a threat
to specialist support services, particularly for children
with special needs.
- While an independent Exeter might eventually buy in
some services from Devon, what thought is being given to the
identification and retention of key staff and services in
the period of transition?
- PD: No final decision yet and
we have no clarity from ECC on shared services at this time.
^top-
- 8. Federation
- HT recruitment and succession planning ties in with an
increasing amount of interest in Federation. The figures
relating to the number of applications for HT posts during
this last year has been generally very low ( this is a
national trend ). Debate is needed about options for
leadership of schools. This could include federation,
management partnership etc. Devon is leading the way in all
of this with a number of NCSL funded projects and has an
agreed federation protocol and support materials following a
piece of work led by Sue Clarke.
- The NGA/NCSL Conferences on Succession Planning during
last term proved very successful. Governors had the
opportunity to learn more about the issues surrounding
recruiting headteachers in the future and to explore ways of
meeting the challenge ahead. It is proposed to gather
together the issues raised and the solutions discussed into
a publication which will be available in the autumn.
Governor comment
- a very enthusiastic governor at one meeting had gone
to the federation presentation a sceptic but come away a
convert as had two other governors she had taken with her :
she felt this was a fantastic opportunity for schools and
that to opt for federation now would allow schools to do it
by their own rules before central government begins to
exercise pressure : schools need to understand this is not a
predatory threat : neither is it a money saving exercise as
it is cost neutral and has many benefits : she felt
governors should take back this positive view, have a very
thorough look at federation and, above all, go to the
briefings!
- at another meeting a representative from the West
Exmoor federation of 3 small schools outlined their
arrangements : there is one executive, non-teaching HT, a
head of teaching and learning in each school and a single
governing body with 6 governors from each school meeting in
each school in rotation : each school has kept
administrative staff and currently teaching staff, though
this will change with natural wastage as staff retire : with
time staff will be expected to work / share skills around
all three schools. The representative felt it already was
and, in the future, would be a much better service for all
schools with expertise spread around. The governing body is
currently very happy - however, the community response has
been mixed
- a HT at one of the meetings had relocated from his
previous school in an urban authority because he did not see
federation as viable in the school he left : he had sensed
lowered morale and point-scoring comparisons between the two
schools involved
- Governor questions
- Why not address the shortage of HTs instead of moving
towards federations?
- Sue Clarke ( Strategic Lead for
Achievement through Collaboration, DCC ): “ Concerns around
the recruitment of headteachers might move some schools
towards exploring federation but it certainly wouldn’t be
the only reason why schools would or should consider
federation. Governors looking at formal partnership
arrangements ( and options will include federation ) should
first and foremost consider the benefits and opportunities
such arrangements would bring for students and staff.
- Securing strong and sustainable
leadership in schools is a national priority and one that
Devon actively promotes through its leadership programmes
and the headteacher appointment processes.
- A leadership succession
planning project is currently underway with Devon County
Council working in partnership with the National College of
School Leadership, school clusters and both the Anglican and
Catholic Diocese. This pilot project has supported the
development of school based training programmes for teachers
whose leadership potential and talent has been identified.
The pilot has concentrated on developing leadership
programmes through partnerships of schools which have
included a federation, the Pathfinder Trust schools, a
cluster of small rural primary schools and faith school
leaders.
- Governors are instrumental to
the development of our next generation of school leaders.
Governors might wish to consider how their schools,
individually and in partnership with others, promote
succession planning through active talent spotting and by
prioritising training opportunities.
- Active succession planning is a
responsibility we all share as it is our collective
investment for our children’s future.
- Is it right that administrative heads are valued more
highly than heads of teaching and learning?
- SC: Staffing structures within
federations or other formalised partnership arrangements are
decided by the governors following consultation with
professional associations. Staffing structures for
federations ( like all schools ) should be constructed so
that they promote both high quality learning and teaching
and the efficient running of the schools concerned. The
resulting structures will be decided by governors to
maximise outcomes for children.
- Just one footnote to add for
those governors interested in all things federation! CATS (
Consortium of All Through Schooling ) is a national advisory
and networking organisation that works closely with schools
and the DCSF Innovation Unit. They have been very interested
in Devon’s work on federations and as a result we are
contacted on a weekly basis by schools and Local Authorities
across the UK asking for copies of our publications and
materials. Governors might be interested in the work of CATS
click here
^top-
- 9. Community
Cohesion / Extended Services
- There is a new duty from 1 September for schools to
promote ‘community cohesion’, i.e. working towards a society
in which there is a common vision and sense of belonging by
all communities, and in which similar life opportunities are
available to all. More guidance at:
www.teachernet.gov.uk/wholeschool/Communitycohesion
- OfSTED will be reporting on the contribution made by all
schools to community cohesion.
- In many ways linked to this schools should have received
booklets from the DCSF and NGA about Extended Services (
formerly Extended Schools ) and should look out for Devon’s
Prospectus for Extended Services which is being developed by
a team led by Philippa Court
Governor comment
- some governors were unclear about these terms – it
was suggested that they referred to schools reaching out in
to the community in other ways such as morning clubs, after
school clubs and making cohesive provision for community
extension of Every Child Matters : there was also a
suggestion that the decline of the role played by churches
was leading to schools performing a similar role
- some felt the policy is more pertinent to urban areas
than rural ones and that there is a problem in this if there
is no real requirement for it in rural areas
- some schools reported in detail problems sorting out
after school provision, in particular difficulties with
companies who, in spite of initial promises, have let them
down with the result that agreed arrangements fell apart
- others felt that too many obstacles and too much ‘
red tape ‘ were put in the way
- it was felt there is a real danger if extended
schools money goes through the school funds
- one secondary school had been congratulated for its
extended school provision
- these discussions also led to questions and advice on
linking with other providers ( e.g. health services ) where
there were clearly different experiences in different areas.
One special school reported it was successfully working with
Social Services but not with health professionals. Another
governor commented that at the Children’s Trust
organisations were all working well together, but that this
is taking a while to filter down through the system. It was
suggested that schools tell School Improvement Partners of
problems they are encountering with other agencies and that
officers at county level need to be aware of log-jams.
- Governor questions
- What help is available and how can governors
access it?
- Sue Turner ( Childcare
Development Manager, Early Years and Childcare Service, CYPS
): We provide local support and advice through the Early
Years and Childcare Service District Co-ordinators who are
based in each of the districts across Devon. They can help
governors with a range of advice on identifying the need for
childcare, funding streams, advice on staffing issues,
information provision. Fuller details of the services we
provide can be found in the Extended Services Prospectus
which went out to schools before half term. The three main
contacts which you will find in the prospectus are:
- Nikki Phillips, Senior District
Co-ordinator for Exeter, East and Mid Devon, 01392 385380
- Melissa Filby, Senior District
Co-ordinator for North Devon and Torridge, 01271 388901
- Sue Bolt, Senior District
Co-ordinator for South Hams, Teignbridge and West Devon,
01392 384926
- How can small rural schools be helped to provide
these services?
- ST: As above, District
Co-ordinators will be able to help small rural schools to
identify if there is a need for childcare services. The
Early Years and Childcare Service are currently undertaking
a sufficiency assessment of childcare across Devon which
will help to inform this decision. For small rural schools
where sustainability is an issue the key to extended
services is that the school is not required to provide the
service itself, but can provide access to childcare with
safe transport. This should be based on the identification
of need through consulting with parents, children and the
local community. Access to childcare can be provided through
linking with private or voluntary providers, such as
childminders or pre-schools providing out of school care.
- During 2006-07 a pilot
School-childcare Link Scheme was run in East Devon linking
schools to their local childcare providers. This scheme has
been evaluated and recommendations have been made for
improvements. It is hoped to roll out an improved scheme
across the rest of Devon in the near future, enabling
schools to make that linkage more easily.
- Alice McShane:
Some further
updates on Community Cohesion can be found in the Devon
Governor this term – especially regarding the Schools
Linking Network ( this aims to help schools to fulfil the
duty ). There are also some helpful websites.
^top-
- 10. School
Admissions
- There is currently a vacancy for a parent governor on
the Local Admissions Forum which meets once a term to review
the operation within Devon of the new admissions’
procedures. Any parent interested should contact David Tall.
- Governor comment
- examples were given of instances where pupils in
nurseries did not get a place in that school’s reception
class because parents failed to understand the new system
- Lisa Boon ( Schools Access
Services Manager, DCC ): There have been instances,
relatively few in number, where parents/carers have failed
to apply for a school place within the required timescales
and this has led to some children being allocated places at
non-preferred or non-designated schools. The primary
co-ordinated admissions arrangements were introduced for
admissions in September 2006/January 2007 although a pilot
was undertaken in Exeter a year prior to that. In realising
the scale of huge cultural shift the admissions team have
invested significant time and effort in trying to raise
awareness - for example we send information to nurseries and
pre-schools regarding the process, we have attended a series
of Early Years provider talks to try and raise awareness of
the change, we have advised Headteachers and Governors of
the changes on numerous occasions through attendance at area
meetings and correspondence, and we have attended many
school administrator events to explain the process and what
it means in terms of 'in school' process and advice to
parents.
- Alongside this we have also
collected from schools their 'notes of interest' lists and
have written direct to all families identified through that
process to ensure they are aware of the need to make an
application and the support available if needed. I
understand that in a few cases things haven't quite gone
according to plan and that has been particularly distressing
for the individual families involved. Can I suggest that
should schools encounter parents who are struggling with the
admissions process in any way that they ( the parents ) are
encouraged to contact the admissions team who can provide
advice and support on what needs to happen. I would be very
glad to receive any suggestions on ways to try and reach
these few families for future admissions rounds in order to
ensure that we avoid these difficulties as far as possible -
please let me know if you have any ideas.
Governor questions
- Can steps be taken to ensure that primary schools are
aware of the allocation of pupils to their school
before letters are sent to parents?
- LB: The primary co-ordinated
scheme does build in to the timetable that schools will find
out their allocation in advance of parents receiving written
notifications. For the most recent admissions round we
aimed, within the primary scheme to advise schools on 26th
March 2007, with parents’ letters/emails being posted / sent
on 30th March. Unfortunately we did not manage this this
year for every school - some notifications did not go out to
schools until 28th March. I realise this is a tight window
and am happy to revisit the timescales if that would be
helpful?
- It may be possible to advise
schools of allocations at the end of March, with parental
notifications being made in mid-April for example, allowing
a longer period for schools to digest the allocation lists.
Unfortunately it is not realistic to bring the primary
process any earlier given the demands of the secondary
transfer process which you will know peaks at the beginning
of March. Any change to the scheme in this sense will need
to be supported by the Local Admissions Forum and then
consulted on with schools as part of the formal consultation
on admission arrangements which will happen early in the
spring term for 2009/10.
- Can the current age priority for children on the
waiting list for a place in an oversubscribed school be
reconsidered?
- LB: Yes we have already decided
to revisit the age tie-breaker with a view to removing it
from 2009/10 onwards. I intend to recommend this to LAF as
part of the admission arrangements for 2009/10.
^top
- 11. Finding and
Keeping Effective School Governors
- There is a new folder, booklet and CDROM produced by
Governor Support in association with DAG and sent to all
schools that have bought in to Governor Support. It is a
comprehensive guide to the recruitment and retention of
governors, together with model recruitment literature on the
CD for schools to personalise.
Governor comment
- this material received a very positive response from
all who had seen it, particularly the CD with its highly
practical information - all GBs were urged to give it
high priority
- Jane Lucas ( Governor Support
): We are delighted by the positive response to Finding and
Keeping Effective Governors and would love to hear from
governing bodies who have used it and found it to have made
a difference to their current practice ( and indeed their
vacancy data! ). The importance of headteacher recruitment
and induction is recognised by the authority and other
colleagues are looking at this, in particular at developing
induction for headteachers.-
- some governors also commented on areas where
they had difficulties recruiting governors … this varied
considerably depending on the location and size of school
- it was felt that schools should avoid seeking to fill
too many community / LA vacancies with parent governors,
thereby giving an imbalance to the GB
- Governor questions
- Could a similar publication be produced on how to
recruit HTs? A CD would be more useful than the current
package.
- How do GBs deal with ineffective governors?
- IG recommending adopting the Code of Practice for
Governing Bodies ( to be found in the Effective Governing
Body folder ) and referring back to it in the event of an
individual governor transgressing.
- JL: Being an ineffective
governor can mean anything from being uncommitted and
uninvolved to being uncooperative and obstructive. Different
tactics would be needed for different situations, although
adopting a code of practice is a good place to start. The
reasons would need to be analysed before an appropriate
course of action decided upon. Some governors are
ineffective because they don’t understand their role and
don’t know how to get involved. Induction and a review of
how individual governors contribute can help with this.
Those who are more obstructive probably need a more direct
approach by the chair to help them understand how governance
works. ( Phone Governor Support for more ideas! )
^top-
- 12. Guide to the
Law
- All governors should have received this on CDROM. This
replaces the previous paper version which should be
destroyed. However, if you have paper versions of the
Statutory Instruments you will need to retain them, as they
are not on the CD. The intention is that there will be two
updates per year now that it is relatively simple to
re-issue the complete Guide. The CD has other documents as
well as the GttL and has been formatted so that you can
click on the menu to select the item you want.
Don't be daunted by the new method of working, it's
really a lot easier to use than the paper version because of
the search facilities.
- Governor comment
- generally welcomed, though it was pointed out that,
at a time when schools were being urged to be inclusive,
actions such as this excludes governors who are not computer
literate
- Governor questions
- Is it possible to have a single paper copy of the
Guide available in schools for those who do not use a
computer?
- Jane Lucas ( Governor Support
): Unfortunately if you want a paper copy you will have to
print one out. DCSF will not supply them.
- Could the correct number of CDs be sent to each
school as some schools had too many and some too few?
Alternatively, could a local arrangement be set up for
passing the surplus CDS to those schools with a shortfall?
- JL: I think probably the
logistics for the DCSF’s distribution to mail out the
correct number to each school in the country would be
impossible, but see what they say. They will supply
additional ones if you request them. The issue of the local
arrangement is interesting. It is difficult to see this as
something Governor Support could manage though, especially
with two updated versions per year planned. Keeping on top
of it could be a full time job!
- David Tall: I am happy to act
as the conduit for the too few / too many issue.
^top-
- 13. Core Values
and Aspirations for Devon’s Local Learning Communities
- A letter from the LA circulated at the beginning of term
referred to a recent meeting with chairs of LLCs where it
was agreed that the draft Core Values and Aspirations
document be formally adopted. These principles now form the
basis for an ongoing commitment and shared understanding
between schools and the LA about the purpose and role of
LLCs. The Core Values will provide a cornerstone from which
we can together continue to build successful partnerships
for learning.
Governor comment
- many governors would welcome the opportunity to work
through and support developing activities in Local Learning
Communities
- Governor questions
- Where is the governor input? Please can governors be
involved?!
- Debbie Clapshaw: Governor
Support has been involved in the LLC meetings to discuss and
shape the core expectations and the role of governors has
featured in many of the discussions, as has the recognition
that LLCs are also a great vehicle for taking forward
cluster training for governors for example. DAG has formally
requested involvement and it is likely that DAG’s AGM will
feature a workshop on this theme in the spring term. In the
meantime be assured that there has been governor input and
this should be reflected in the final agreed documentation.
^top-
- 14. Litigation
Governor comment
- examples were given of cases where the school / LA
were being recommended to reach a settlement on financial
accident claims from parents which the GB had considered
unreasonable : there was concern about the implications of
the apparent success of such claims might give to others
- a number of governors quoted Bristol’s example where
a decision by the LA to challenge all claims had resulted in
an almost total decline in such claims
- Governor questions
- Can / should anything be done to address this issue?
- David Doble ( Insurance
Manager, DCC ): DCC's view is very clear. With regard to all
claims ( and not just those involving pupils ) if the loss,
damage or injury has been caused by negligence on the part
of DCC ( i.e. we are legally liable ) we will settle the
claim on the best terms. If, however, there was no
negligence on the part of DCC, the claim will be vigorously
defended.
- Unfortunately, people these
days are becoming increasingly reluctant to believe that
there is any such thing as an accident and if they have
suffered a loss or injury they feel that someone must be to
blame and that they should, therefore, receive compensation.
This approach does not, however, alter DCC's approach or, in
deed, the law!
^top
15. Other issues
- a) Exclusions
- Ernie Lloyd ( AEO, Exclusions &
Alternative Provision ): From 1st September, 2007 for all
fixed period exclusions amounting to more than 5 days the
school must provide permanent education for the young person
off-site. It is vital that the model letters are used
because these letters advise parents of their responsibility
to supervise their children at home for the first five days
of any exclusion. The LA is currently re-writing its
Exclusion Website to take account of recent changes. In the
meantime you can find guidance at:
here
- The LA will be producing on the
Website letters of exclusion tailored to Devon’s
requirements. For the time being use model letters provided
on Teachernet Website for exclusions whether fixed period or
permanent at:
here
- For further advice or support
telephone Sue Meachan (South and West) 01392 383944 or David
Archer (North and East) 01392 383940.
- b) Alternative Portfolio
- DAG was closely involved in the latest Alternative
Portfolio kite-marking processes and looks forward to
further participation in future schemes. David Tall holds a
“bank” of names of Governors who wish to be involved in such
matters, but there is always room for additional volunteers.
Please contact him for details.
- The whole question of providing services to schools is
overseen by the Schools’ Support Services Board
- ( SSSB ) on which DAG members play a significant role.
Next April the portfolio of services to schools will arrive
in schools in a new format with both ‘ in-house ‘ and
alternative providers. The recent process of ‘ kite-marking
‘ providers to ensure that they meet strict Devon-wide
criteria has shown
- the quality of current provision by in-house services
- that despite considerable initial interest only a fairly
small number of alternative providers offered themselves for
the kite-marking process … and many of these did not meet
Devon’s requirements
- c) Safety Issues
- The SSSB has also given careful consideration to very
important communications soon to be sent to schools about
trying to bring together / make tighter arrangements to
comply with Construction and Design Management Regulations,
Asbestos Risks, Legionella Risks + Fire Safety Management.
This may sound very boring but has enormous implications for
governors as well as for HTs and staff. The Health and
Safety at Work Act 1974 makes employers responsible for
managing health and safety. Recent amendments make us all
more vulnerable and ultimately failure to manage health and
safety could result in charges of Corporate Manslaughter. We
are now required to provide a paper trail with those
ultimately responsible for each aspect to be named and for
the HT and the CoG to sign. The SSSB is trying to ensure
that information from DCC is both clear and realistic.
Governors will need to help in the response to this
information as it is important for DCC to know schools are
complying with legal requirements. This is sufficiently
serious for the LA to consider £174,000 to be the estimated
cost for the relevant training!!
- d) DAG
- At a meeting last term DAG discussed the way ahead for
the next 5 years. It has produced an Action Plan to support
its determination to be an impact driven organisation in an
effort to develop an increasingly professional approach
without losing the wonderful ethos, characteristics and
skills of an amateur / volunteer organisation. It has also
developed Standing Orders and is reviewing its Constitution.
The next Away Day will take place on November 24th.
It would be good to have some additional non-Executive
support for and at this event. Anybody interested contact
David Tall. Refreshments and lunch will be provided and
mileage @ 20p / mile can be considered. Of particular
interest are your views on communication from and to
ordinary governors to DAG.
- e) Teaching Awards
- Now is the time to be thinking about nominations for
next year’s awards. This is a very positive process for all
involved as those Devon staff nominated for the both
regional and national finals will testify!! Details can be
found at
www.teachingawards.com/nominations/
and nominations should be in preferably by the end of
this term. Making a nomination is a unique opportunity to
give teachers, teaching assistants, governors and schools
the recognition they deserve. Nominating is a quick and
easy process which only takes a few minutes. If you have any
queries about making a nomination call 020 7776 2340 or
e-mail
.
- f) Parent Governor Representatives - updated
information since the meetings
- DCC recently invited
nominations for a ballot of eligible serving parent
governors from among primary school and secondary/special
school parent governors to serve on the relevant committee
of the Council.
- Nominations were sought from
among parent governors with a closing date of 15 October
2007 with a view to a ballot being held on 5 November 2007.
However, only one eligible nomination was received for each
sector – Mrs Liz Wilson of St Michael's CoE Primary School,
Kingsteignton and Mr Richard Allen of St James' School,
Exeter - which means that there will be no need for a ballot
for the primary and secondary/special governor
representatives. Mrs Wilson and Mr Allen are therefore
appointed automatically for the period up to 31 July 2009.
They will take their places on the CYPS Overview / Scrutiny
Committee with immediate effect.
- g) Effective Governing Body folder
- Many positive comments were made about this document
produced by the Devon Governor Support Team
- h) Checklist
- The coloured version was not popular as it proved
difficult to photocopy with clarity.
- i) DfES no more!
- We now have the DCSF - Department for Children, Schools
and Families, and the DIUS - Department for Innovation,
Universities and Skills. The DCSF is led by new Secretary of
State Ed Balls, and the DIUS by Secretary of State John
Denham. In the new DCSF, Jim Knight remains as Schools’
Minister and Lord Adonis as Parliamentary Under-Secretary of
State. The DAG Chairman has written to
Ed Balls to welcome him to his new appointment and to
highlight some concerns. Similarly he has written to Ben
Bradshaw, the new Minister for SW Region. Rumour has
it that staff members refer to the Department as the
Department for Cushions (Curtains) and Soft Furnishings!!!
- j) Toxic Childhood – Sue Palmer
- Visit her website at
www.suepalmer.co.uk:80/toxic.php Her
book is a ‘must read’ recommendation to all governors from
IG.
- k) CYPS: Mediation Service -
updated information since the meetings
Introducing the Mediation Service, a new support service
being offered by CYPS, on a pilot basis, to Headteachers and
Governors who are managing conflict with parents. For
further details go to:
www.devon.gov.uk/sc-oct0731038.pdf
^top
