Clapgate Primary School Governing Body

CLAPGATE PRIMARY SCHOOL GOVERNING BODY

Minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 15 May 2013 at 4pm

PRESENT / J Rush (Chair) / J Norton (Acting Headteacher)
L Simpson (Acting Headteacher)
M Bartholomew
J Jewkes / E Hallas
A McCoy
D Picken / M Rider
E Shield / L Spirrett
P Truswell / M Voller
K Whitfield

IN ATTENDANCE:Karen Clay - (Clerk, Governor Support Service)

1.00 / APOLOGIES AND MEMBERSHIP ISSUES / ACTION
1.01 / Resolved: that apologies were received and accepted from N Maxfield.
1.02 / No apologies were received from N Ambler
2.00 / MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING
Resolved:

that the minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 20 March 2013 were agreed as a correct record and the Chair was authorised to sign the minutes.

3.00 / MATTERS ARISING
3.01 / P Truswell asked that it be specifically minuted that he did not vote in favour of going against the guidance from Leeds City Council’s HR department regarding setting the ISR for the Executive Head.
4.00 / COLLABORATION UPDATE
4.01 / The Chair informed governors that she and Martin Bartholomew had met with a working party from Westwood Primary to discuss the joint committee for the collaboration. It was agreed that the joint committee would be set up solely to deal with the performance management of the Executive Head and to share information.
A McCoy joined at this point
4.02 / The Chair stated that a social event would be arranged for governors from both schools to meet each other.
4.03 / It was reported that the Chair and Martin were part of the recruitment panel for the Deputy Head post. It was noted that there were not many applicants for the post but the two candidates interviewed were both very strong. It had been decided to appoint Bryan Roberts as Deputy Head teacher as he had more experience but the other candidate, Alexis Habib, had also been appointed as Assistant Head teacher; they will both join the school from September.
E Shields joined the meeting at this point.
4.04 / It was reported that both Zoe Adams, the Executive Head, and Fran Bowman, the Head of school, would start their roles from 1 June 2013 but they had been into school on numerous occasions recently. Governors were aware that this had caused some issues recently. Governors were pleased to hear from Emily that staff members were feeling happier about the situation following a meeting with Fran and Zoe immediately prior to the governing body meeting.
4.05.1
4.05.2
4.05.2
4.05.3
4.05.4
4.05.5 / The Chair informed governors that the current constitution of the governing body meant that there was only one seat for a Head teacher. Governors were asked if they wanted to keep the constitution as it stood and have either the Head of school or Executive head on the governing body and the other as an associate member or whether they wanted to reconstitute the governing body so that both would have voting rights.
Governors discussed the options and stressed that if the governing body were to reconstitute it was key that parents would still have a strong voice. Governors stated that they had decided to form a soft federation rather than a statutory federation so that the schools could separate at anytime; they felt that it was important that the governing body should have the interests of this school solely in mind.
It was noted that the wording on the Constitution and Instrument of Government would need to be changed to make it clear which Head teacher had a place on the governing body.
Governors asked what the chair’s reservations were regarding having only one head with voting rights. The chair explained that concerns had been raised regarding the signing off of things such as the budget and whether the person, in this case, the Executive Head, who was signing off such things should have voting rights. Governors did not feel that this was a problem as the Executive Head would not be able to sign things off without governing body approval anyway.
Governors asked what Westwood Primary were doing regarding this and it was noted that they had not decided yet.
Governors stated that they would like the constitution to remain as it was and felt that the matter should be reviewed if the Executive Head wanted to put a case to the governing body arguing that she should have voting rights.
Resolved:

that the current governing body constitution should remain and
that the Head of Clapgate School should take the Head teacher’s seat on the governing body.
that the Executive Head teacher should be co-opted onto the governing body as an Associate Member and
The matter should be reviewed at the next meeting.

/ Agenda
5.00 / COMMITTEE REPORTS
5.01 / Resources Committee
Martin Bartholomew informed governors that the meeting held had not been quorate so the committee had been unable to approve the budget for 2013/14; this, therefore, needed to be approved by the full governing body at this meeting. Martin told governors that he and Neil Maxfield had met with Lesley Simpson and the Finance Officer to set the budget and they were happy with all the information and allocations put in to the budget at that time. Copies of the proposed budget were tabled for review and discussion.
5.02 / It was noted that the balance carried forward from 2012/13 was £151,910 which was 11.96%; the projected contingency for 2013/14 was £167,720 so the budget was healthy.
5.03 / Lesley informed governors that the budget was healthy due to rising pupil numbers and reductions in staffing costs. It was explained that the school had sought to keep money in the budget in order to be able to spend it on roof repairs. Governors asked for assurance that all staffing costs from June were built in to the budget. It was clarified that this was the case and that figures had been amended recently to make the budget presented tonight more accurate.
5.04 / Governors asked if the school had lost out due to the new funding allocation for Funding For Inclusion. Lesley explained that the school had lost out because the school would no longer be receiving money previously allocated for children with language difficulties. In response to a further question it was reported that funding had been topped up through the minimum funding guarantee but governors were warned that this would be reduced next year. It was noted that the needs of children entering school in September were not known yet.
5.05 / Governors were made aware that the school was now funded retrospectively for children on free school meals which would affect the catering income budget. Governors asked how the catering income had increased by approx 25% this year. It was noted that this included money for Free School Meals and it was explained that the income and expenditure for catering should balance out; due to funding being done retrospectively now, however, this may not be the case next year.
5.06 / Governors highlighted the large increase in funding through Pupil Premium and it was clarified that this money was for children who qualified for free school meals regardless of whether they took this up or not. It was explained that the information for these figures were given to the LA from the DfE, the school had no influence over these figures.
5.07 / M Bartholomew proposed that governors approve the proposed budget; this was seconded by the chair.
Resolved: The budget for the financial year 2013/2014 indicating a projected balance brought forward from 2012/13 of £151,910 leaving a contingency for 2013/14 of £167,720 was approved by full governing body.
5.08 / A governor asked why the allocation for buildings repairs and maintenance was at £10,000 for the next three years but the school had spent £52,880 in 2012/13. Lesley explained that this would be topped up throughout the year.
5.09
5.09.1 / Best Value Statement
The school’s best value statement was circulated for review and approval. It was explained that two areas had been identified for review this year. To review the service provided by the current ICT support provider and to review the impact of Lexia on children’s progress in Reading.
5.09.2 / Governors challenged the best value statement and argued that the school needed to look at other providers and compare the value. Governors asked that the office manager looked at other ICT providers to compare services and costs to prove that the school was getting best value.
5.09.3 / Governors agreed that it would be good to review the impact of Lexia to prove that this was good use of spending pupil premium money but again argued that this did not show best value as the school were not comparing it to other resources. It was suggested that the school compare the impact against the previous reading scheme.
5.09.4 / It was also suggested that the school could review the catering agency contract to ensure that they were getting best value in this area.
5.09.5 / Governors asked that the wording of the best value statement be changed to state that the school would review Lexia in terms of ensuring the best spending of pupil premium funding. / L Simpson
5.09.6 / Resolved: that governor approved the best value statement subject to amendments as above.
5.10 / SFVS - It was noted that the school had missed the deadline for completing the School Financial Value Statement (SFVS) as the governing body still needed to complete some areas. Governors were assured that this was in hand and that it was not a problem.
5.11 / Health and Safety Inspection – It was reported that Martin and Neil had conducted a Health and Safety inspection of the site with the site superintendent. All minor problems had been identified and addressed but the boiler house needed to be looked at again in more detail.
5.12 / Fire Safety Inspection – It was noted that Martin and Neil had to draw up new plans of the building as the inspection had not been carried out for some time and plans did not include the new building. Concerns were raised over the placement of some smoke detectors and it was not clear where fire sounders were positioned in the new build. Lesley assured governors that fire sounders were present in the new build. Lesley agreed to contact Bev Spooner from the LA to arrange for someone to come out to school and carry out formal fire checks. / HT
5.13 / It was noted that the Lettings Policy needed to be approved by the governing body. It was reported that the policy remained the same but the school had suggested that the cost for the hire of the hall to one group, who were predominantly adults, be raised by £1 per hour. Lesley explained that prices had not been increased for three years and the school did not want to increase costs for community groups for under 19s. It was suggested that the cost of lettings could be included in the school best value statement and governors asked that the school benchmark costs against other local schools.
Resolved: that governors approved and adopted the Lettings Policy with a £1 increase for the hire of the hall but governors asked that the school carry out benchmarking checks on the letting rates.
5.14 / Teaching and Learning Committee
5.15 / E Shields gave a verbal report on the last meeting highlighting the following points that had been discussed:
5.15.1 / The committee had looked at progress pathways for foundation subjects; these broke down the levels of development and showed what children were expected to know at each stage.
5.15.2 / The Ofsted report had been reviewed. It was agreed that the school had received the best outcome that it could but it was felt that some of the comments had been harsh. Governors were informed that out of 24 lessons observed 21 were judged as good or outstanding; under the old framework the school would have been judged good. Governors were told that the acting heads had challenged the identification of inconsistencies and it was noted that these were very small numbers for each area. An action plan had been drawn up and was already being implemented; governors were informed that the school was expecting a monitoring visit soon. Action plans had been circulated to governors with the Head teacher’s report. Julia Norton informed governors that the school had redesigned monitoring forms to tie in with pupil progress so that issues could be identified easier. Governors were encouraged to read the action plans and ask challenging questions regarding progress on the plan at future meetings.
5.15.3 / The Chair circulated ‘Questions that governors might like to ask when evaluating the school improvement plan’ to aid governors in scrutinising matters further in the future.
5.15.4 / It was noted that the inspectors had said that the school did not need to write an action plan following the inspection as matters were already being addressed within the school development plan but the school had decided to write the plan in order to be able to focus clearly and address issues identified.
5.15.5 / Data progress from January up to the most recent data was scrutinised with particular attention to points progress. Data was included with the Head teacher’s report for all governors to review prior to the full governing body meeting. Governors were pleased to hear that this year’s Year Six were expected to reach government floor targets. The ways that schools could meet floor targets were explained and it was noted that the school was confident that floor targets for children gaining level four or above had already been met in Writing as this was teacher assessed; the school felt secure with teacher’s judgements. Floor targets should also be met for the percentage of pupils making two levels progress as 97% of pupils should make two levels progress in Reading. Governors were happy to hear that the SAT’s were going smoothly so far.
5.15.6 / Governors were made aware that Year Two children had not made as much progress as expected this year as there had been a number of new pupils entering the school in this cohort who were working at very low levels. Attendance was also a problem in this year group. Governors asked if Ofsted would be aware of this. Julia confirmed that inspectors would be made aware of the movement and particular problems in this year group.
5.16 / The Chair circulated committee terms of references. Governors were asked to read the terms of reference so that they could be approved formally at the next meeting. / Agenda
6.00 / HEAD TEACHER’S REPORT.
6.01 / Julia presented the Head teacher’s report, copies of which were circulated to governors prior to the meeting. Questions were invited.
6.02 / Standards, Achievement and Progress- Governors asked if progress in year two was acceptable. It was explained that the school was struggling to get the percentage of pupils working at the same levels as last year. Governors were made aware that there had been a number of pupils entering this year group working at P level or level one and these numbers had increased during the year. Governors were warned to keep an eye on this cohort as they progressed through school. Governors were assured that new tracking forms would contain information on who joined the cohort at what time and how this had an impact on results for this year group.
6.03 / Ofsted - Governors attention was drawn to the Ofsted report included with the Head’s report. It was felt that some comments had been harsh but overall the school was pleased with the judgement given as this gave a sound base for the new leadership team to build from.
6.04 / Self Evaluation - It was noted that the school improvement advisor had agreed with the schools judgements on lesson observations and a new proforma for linking feedback on lesson observations to progress was in place as recommended by Ofsted.
6.05.1 / Staffing – It was reported that the new leadership team wanted to review staffing before any staff were repositioned for the new academic year.
6.05.2 / Governors noted the appointments made for the Deputy Head and Assistant Head roles and also two new temporary teaching appointments to cover maternity leaves. Governors were pleased to hear that three Newly Qualified Teacher’s had completed their second term’s induction assessment successfully and they had all been offered permanent contracts. Governors noted that a teaching assistant had returned from long term sick and was doing well. Governors also noted the appointment of one part time and three full time teaching assistants who also cover a lunchtime shift who were all reported as doing well.
6.06 / Governors gave formal thanks to the two Acting Head teacher’s, the chair and all staff members for the successful Ofsted inspection which showed that the school was on an upward trajectory. Governors felt that the school should be proud of where it was heading. Governors recognised that comments in the report on the quality of teaching at the school were unfair.
7.00 / GOVERNOR TRAINING
7.01 / The Chair asked governors to approve signing up to on line GEL training at a cost of £50.
Resolved: that governors approved the chair to sign the school’s subscription to GEL.
Paul Truswell left the meeting at this point.
7.02 / It was noted that Martin Bartholomew and Neil Maxfield had attended Raise Online training part one; it was reported that the training had been very useful. Julia suggested that Martin, Neil and the chair get log in’s for Raise online when the next data was published in November.
7.03 / The chair informed governors that she had attended a refresher training course on handling complaints.
7.04 / The clerk highlighted extra training modules that were on offer this term.
7.05 / The chair stated that it would be useful for governors to attend performance management training as new guidelines meant that teacher’s pay progression was linked to performance management. It was noted that the responsibility for the performance management of staff lay with the Head teacher but the governing body should have a policy in place on how to monitor this. It was suggested that governors look to get in house training for this once the government had confirmed the rules for this; it was noted that standard policy documents would most probably be produced by the LA and unions. Governors noted that they would still be responsible for the performance management of the Head of School and that new objectives would need to be set for the Head and Executive Head for their new roles.
8.00 / CHAIR’S BUSINESS
8.01 / Governors were reminded to complete the governor skills audit and return them to the school.
Julia and Lesley left the room at this point.
8.02 / The chair invited governors to join the leaving assembly on 24 May when thanks would formally be given to the two acting heads.
8.03 / The chair informed governors that Alison McCoy’s term of office was due to expire on 1 July and that Alison had decided not to continue on the governing body due to work commitments. Governors thanked Alison for all her hard work on the governing body and particularly for her commitment and work undertaken when the school was investigating moving to sponsored academy status.
10.00 / DATE OF NEXT MEETING
10.01 / Full governing body – Wednesday 3 July at 4pm.
10.02 / Pupil Support Committee – 18 June at 4pm
10.03 / Resources Committee – 12 June at 4.30pm
Lesley and Julia rejoined the meeting.
11.00 / Lesley thanked Alison for her work on the governing body for helping to move the school on.
12.00 / Governors thanked Lesley for all her fantastic work at the school stating that she would be missed. Governors also thanked Julia for her work since joining the school. Parent governors gave thanks to both Heads on behalf of the parents stating that children had adjusted well to the changes seen at the school recently.