2014/2015 Meeting 1
Minutes of the Local Governing Body meeting
Thursday16th October, 5 pm
AGENDA ITEMACTION
Present: Robert Harris (RH), Pat Glover (PG, Chair), John Swan (JS), Andrew Bailey (AB), Belinda Barten (BB), Sharon Marshall (Ht), Alison Homa (AH),Pete Godber (Gr),Jim Bridges (JB), Colin Turner (CT),Laura Nias (Clerk, Ns)The meeting commenced with a presentation from the Headteacher regarding the latest on the Priority Schools Building Project.
1. Opening Items (PG)
Apologies for absence -none.
Absent but no apologies: none.
Declarations – none made.
Confidentiality – PG reminded governors to treat information confidentially where necessary.
2. Training
Covered under item 5.
3. Approval of Previous Minutes (PG)
The minutes of the previous meetings (10thJuly) were agreed as a true record and would now be published on the school website. /
- Ns to arrange.
4. Matters Arising (PG)
Staff social/official school opening – 12th November was the proposed date for the official school opening event. Ht explained the date was planned to coincide with the final transfer and hand over of the land as a Church School. Invitations were yet to be issued once final completion of the remaining legal aspects was confirmed. RH explained the Bishop would attend for a tour followed by a service and commissioning of the Headteacher. The timings of the school day would need to change as they sometimes are for special events although there were also exams to accommodate.
The school already had approval from the EFA but completion of the final legal document was holding the overall process up. It was agreed that unless the school received an absolute guarantee that everything would legally be in place in time for 12th November, by 23rd October, the event would need to be pulled and rearranged.
Regarding a staff social, it was agreed to reconsider what to do once plans for 12th November were confirmed. Gr agreed to find out what type of event staff would like in order to socialise with governors. This idea had arisen out of a suggestion box entry a while ago to help staff get to know Governors better.
Governor Biographies – outstanding biographies would be sent to Laura.
Secure website area - Ns explained that the online area was now up and running. Governors wishing to access the internet during meetings needed to book their device into the IT technicians. /
- Gr to follow up with staff.
- Governors to send to Ns by 3rd November.
- Ns to issue contact details for Network Manager, with meeting minutes.
5. Review of Good to Outstanding for Leadership and Governance (PG)
Much ground had been covered over the past year. A second look at the audit carried out some time ago would be taken at the next meeting
The suggestion of formulating terms of reference for each of the portfolio groups had been made in the past, the purpose of which was to help define the difference between strategic and operational responsibilities. Could we see what other schools have drawn up?
Ofsted would want to see whether governors have recorded the impact of training undertaken. PG had drafted a protocol to cover governor training/development requests and circulated copies.
Did all governor CPD expenses come from governor budget and who holds this? Who should approve an individual attending a course/who is the budget holder?
Ht explained that although minimal funds were allocated to staff for CPD, Ofsted evidence had revealed that attendance on courses had minimal impact on staff development.
PG distributed a new Training and Development record and explained that Governors should use this for all training undertaken. An exemplar of how to complete the form was also distributed. These forms would be made available on the governor site. Governors were welcome to attend any staff training events during the year.
Governors were asked to complete the new forms retrospectively for training undertaken over the past year or so.
Governor Audit – Ns had investigated the audit offered through Babcock and it was agreed to book this in as soon as possible. The £480 charge would be paid from the school improvement budget.
Online Training - Gr had revisited the Gel training site. He enquired as to how to access the Optimus Education site. Ns explained there were a set number of log ons available and agreed to find out whether Gr could be added. /
- Ns to investigate via Chulmleigh.
- Ns to investigate via the Business Manager.
- Ns to add to site.
- Ns to circulate staff CPD calendar.
- Governors to complete forms as necessary.
- Ns to follow up Optimus enquiry.
6.Housekeeping (RH)
Declarations –all governors signed their annual declaration of interest form, and the ICT declaration from the new school ICT policy.
8. MAT Membership update (RH)
RH distributed an updated Structure of Governance and talked to the document.
Vacancies - There was currently no Finance portfolio holder (Director). RH had however recently met the new Primary MAT Finance Director who had offered to become a Director of the Secondary MAT also. RH was delighted and governors welcomed this addition in order to fill Steve Scoffield’s shoes as finance director.
Sean Sweeney would also be joining the Board of Directors and had an interesting background in education and school improvement. Standards was Sean’s area of expertise. Availability of Diocesan Officers for attendance at the standards group and Director meetings was discussed. It was anticipated that Sean would be able to slot into the standards portfolio group as portfolio holder. He was currently handing over a school but by the end of December would be based in the south west and available to take on a position within the MAT. RH would arrange a meeting for Sean to visit the Academy as soon as he could.
BB was prepared to fill the vacancy of parent Director which would need following up with the Members.
Ht added that membership of EDEN (one of the Members) had only just been established.
Ht explained that the Diocese had undergone a health check from the Regional School Commissioner and been given the go ahead to continue as an academy sponsor. Our MAT model was considered as the way ahead by the government, but the St Christopher’s MAT needed more external directors, two of whom were now ready in the wings. Some large national sponsors with strings of academies were now failing. Ht had attended a meeting recently with the Regional School Commissioner, David Carter. Although the school had ignored the first entry rule which labelled us as having concerning standards, the government liked the way the school was improving.
Angela Walsh had resigned as a governor so a replacement was needed on the Curriculum and Christian distinctiveness portfolio group. It was agreed to wait and see who was appointed as a new staff governor.
RH summarised that the DfE had given consent for the school to seek a change of status and RH would be very surprised if the consent wasn’t given. Ht added that the school had been signed off by the EFA and met all the DfE requirements for the change in status. The difficulty was waiting for the final document to be signed off after scrutinising. /
- RH to arrange.
- RH to follow up at Member level and confirm appointment of BB.
7. Reports from Portfolio Groups (RH)
Community
Admissions - Ns explained that the new 2016/17 document needed approval from the LGB and sending to the Diocese by 31st October. This was agreed, subject to the portfolio group finding anything of concern. The document had only been received at 5.30 pm today.
Admission Protocol - The protocol used by the admin office needed updating giving the Headteacher delegated power to agree to each new in year admission, as long as the school is under PAN (Planned Admission Number). Ht explained that a school could only refuse to admit a new pupil in extreme circumstances such as special medical needs the school could not accommodate. It was also agreed to include within the protocol that admissions would be referred to the committee if ever the Headteacher had a concern about the child. Ns would email the committee after each new admission is approved. Ns explained there was also a procedure related concern from DCC surrounding one or two points within our protocol. Ns would speak to Ht regarding this.
Curriculum
Approval was given to adopt the new Curriculum Statement 2014/15.
Premises – AB explained the school had undergone an external H&S audit last year which hadn’t picked up some non compliance later identified. As a result, an internal audit had begun with the findings expected to be fed into the premises group. Ht suspected there may have been an omission in general. Looking at the self audit tool available to schools, two issues had stuck out. Firstly most of the documentation was in place but records of people having seen and read documentation wasn’t there. Secondly the level of detail in risk assessments; further detail needed to be included on specific tasks. Caretakers would be undertaking training on how to actually complete these.
The new MAT H&S policy was adaptable for different sites with individual school arrangements included. A big thank you was recorded to AB for his work in this area. Secondly thanks was recorded to the governors who had sat on the panel at a recent hearing, out of which useful areas to address had been identified.
CT added that foolishness now needed to be covered in risk assessments.
More rigour and control was definitely needed with task orientatedrisk assessments. The law took the angle of what was reasonable.
Supporting Students with Medical Needs policy – Htexplained this was a new statutory policy. The policy was adopted.
SEN/Safeguarding – a new SEN policy had been written based on latest code of practice. The policy was adopted.
Personnel – could the staff survey information be sent to governors? Directors would be agreeing termsof reference for the pay and appeals committees. The committees would be formed using governors from the LGB.
Finance – the latest monitor had been circulated but there had been no portfolio meeting. Ht was concerned about the lack of an external eye on school finances which as an academy are complex.
Supply costs were the biggest area of concern. Ht felt that taking on another cover supervisor from October until May could be a suitable solution.
Photocopying and printing was also a huge expense. An alternative source of copiers was being looked into as the current machines regularly went wrong. There was definitely wasteful printing going on.
Show My Homework helped with work being available online, but not all children had access. CT was aware of technology based access through CDRoms for science but was aware this was not the choice of students. Ht agreed to look into this.
SIMG –
Results - Htpresented a summary of the 2014 results to the meeting.
SIMG had had a more detailed breakdown of the results and also an update on PP1
- Value added was about looking at progress children make and was the second stage of analysing results. Whilst progress in English was above national averages this was not the case in maths and this needed to be looked into carefully. Maths attainment was in line with national averages and PP students had done very well but progress was static. A full review of maths leadership and teaching has been commissioned
- Post 16 results were well above floor standards on all the measures used for standards.
- The school average point score per entry at A Level was the second best in Devon, after Kingsbridge.
- Final GCSEs – to achieve 52% A*-C inc English and Maths with last year’s cohort represented a great success. This was slightly below the national average at 54/55%. However in first entry we would be below floor. Using last year’s measures we would be 54%. It is very hard to compare between years.
- The weak spot was the Maths 3 levels of progress measure which was below the Devon and National averages by some way. Ofsted’s focus would be on progress and in particular in Englishand Maths. Consequently it was possible the school could be graded as a 3. Furtheranalysis enabled intervention in the relevant areas.
- The results were a real mix with lots exceeding targets, including for the higher grades, but also some taking a surprising dip. For example Geography
- EVER6 students – we were way above the Devon and regional averages for the 5 A*-C figure.Devon last year 32%, us this year 49% There was real progress on this particular indicator. But PP students not yet at national average or better for “all” and this was our aim.
- General comments: There had been national turbulence in GCSE results but this would not lead to complacency within the Academy. Subjects with unsatisfactory results were being scrutinised, challenged and supported to improve. A particular concern was Maths where levels of progress were too low, even though attainment continued to be above the national average.
- Next Steps – in the absence of an Ofsted inspection, EdisonLearning and someone from the Learning Institute had carried out an external review against the Edison 5 strands of an effective school yesterday. The school had come out with a good (Proficient in Edison Language) against these strands. An external Maths review had been commissioned for tomorrow with 2 senior leaders from the Learning Institute in Cornwall. These personnel were outstanding practitioners inMaths and had been good leaders.
- PP1 – first data set of the year. Many subjects were close to or ontarget. The new Year 11 was a very different cohort to last year; not significantly more able butthe ethos of the year group was very different. The overall picture was positive. Thefigure for 3 levels of progress in Maths for the endof the year was high (76%). The constituent parts of making things take off for the best were there. Early intervention in the department through support for more effective teaching would be appropriate and avoid the situation of staff being under siege at the end of the year. The current year11 were quite young for their age but keen to get things right. The overall picture was looking pretty healthy.
- Ns to forward new admissions document to portfolio group by 24th October and onto the Diocese by 31st October.
- Ns to follow up changes to the protocol.
- Ns to follow up with Ht.
- Ht to make survey results available for distribution to governors.
- Ns to update policy records re all policies adopted following portfolio meetings.
9. Update regarding Church Academy Status
Nothing further to add.
12. Regular Items (RH)
Training and governor development – covered under item 5.
Correspondence–
Governor Vacancies – covered under item 8
Annual cycle– not yet in use but being drawn up by Ns.
Staff Well Dones –
Chris Tucker – for covering absences within the caretaking team and carrying out a lot of the recent furniture survey.
Gary Ball and the DT department - to acknowledge the progress made in DT this year.
Paul Roberts - for the outcome of/co-ordinating the work with Pupil Premium children this year.
Suggestions Box -via UNISON, a letter had been sent about Performance Related Pay for support staff. The recent inset day had involved a training session for all staff on PRP yet this did not apply to support staff. Htagreed she should meet with the TAs to explain the differences between teaching and non teaching staff pay.
It was suggested that new staff should be informed that the suggestion box existed.
Safeguarding – Ht wished to minute that there would be a huge number of contractors on site over the next few months and several had already visited. Ht had raised with the EFA that they should not be sending anyoneto the school with no DBS check, plus they should be sending information ahead of anyone arriving so the school knew to expect correct contractors. The recent tree surveyor did not hold a DBS check so a risk assessment had been drawn up the day before along with arrangements to use supervision where necessary. One group had been turned away altogether. Htfelt that the main contractor ECHarris should be checking out arrangements with each subcontractor ahead of anyone visiting the site. HT had contacted EFA and ECHarris and both had responded to say they were on the case.
Health & Safety – AB asked questioned whether a question should be asked of the EFA regarding the rebuild, and asbestos. Htassured the meeting that this was in hand and that each contractor would be required to sign to say they had seen the register. The new H&S policy needed properly implementing with all contractors with sufficient drilling down to detail.Ht suggested allowing 2 hours for the next Premises and health and safety portfolio meeting. /
- Ns to add to new staff information.
11. Future Dates
The meeting closed at7.35pm.
Page 1 of 5
Signature of ChairUploaded to website __