1

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF GORSEY BANK PRIMARY SCHOOL

HELD AT THE SCHOOL ON 22ND NOVEMBER 2016

Governors Present: Colin Shepherd (CS) Chair Lisa Woolley (LW) Head Teacher Timothy Munro (TM) Catherine Barber-Brown (CBB) Sally Stedman (SS) Carl Windsor (CW) Estelle Goodwin (EG) Vice Chair Ryan Thompson (RT) Chris Stubbs(CSt) Simeon Mellor (SM) Apologies: Elise Drake (ED) Jeremy Gardiner-Shepherd (JGS) Also in attendance: Linda Magrath (LM) CEO Laurus Trust

Helen Rawlinson Clerk to the Governors Joe Maguire (JM) Observer

PART ONE – NON-CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS

Action

GOVERNOR TRAINING – TRUST GOVERNOR Delivered by Lisa Woolley. The Trust has a governor expense policy that will apply to the LGB, once approved by the Trust’s solicitors. The use of this system will enable governors to access Trustee papers. It was agreed to add in the training records and impact of training. It was noted that there is a skills audit tool available and that maintenance of the website is done by their Clerk and the Head’s PA.

1

APOLOGIES & ADDITIONAL AOB ITEMS Mr Simeon Mellor was welcomed to the meeting and governors introduced themselves. Apologies were received and accepted from ED and JGS. The latter having been expected to join the meeting late.

2 CONFLICT OF INTEREST There were no conflicts of interest declared for the business to be discussed at the meeting.

3 REGISTER OF PECUNIARY INTERESTS

2

All governors present confirmed that they had reviewed the pecuniary interest log and completed and returned a signed declaration as appropriate. A form was received at the meeting from SM.

4 MEMBERSHIP Mr Simeon Mellor was appointed as a Parent Governor wef 11.11.16. No other terms of office are due to expire before the next meeting.

5 BOARD OF GOVERNOR OBJECTIVES The 2016/17 Action Plan was circulated prior to the meeting and will be maintained during the year. Governors were reminded that green highlight denotes the action has been completed and yellow highlight is that it is being progressed. SEN provision. EG was thanked for her report to parents which was issued today to parents and to governors as part of the meeting pack.

6 MAT/LAURUS TRUST AGENDA ITEMS The resolution confirming that Gorsey Bank Primary School will become part of the Laurus Trust was approved. The Laurus Trust Governance Plan was reviewed by governors prior to the meeting and it was noted that it is an evolving document which will need updating as the Trust matures. Governors received the minutes and action log from the Trustee meeting dated 16.09.16. The minutes were taken as read. Q) Trustees will not enter into related party transactions. Is this any stronger than the pecuniary trust submissions we currently do? A) Due to media interest in academies in recent months it was felt that this statement was strong enough. Q) Does it mean we have to change any local processes? A) That is not envisaged. It affects governors only and not parents. Governors are encouraged to declare all directorships/trusteeships irrespective of whether the School is likely to transact with that company/trust or not. A governor noted that the School’s website did not include a directorship previously declared. LW to follow up. LW advised that the letter from Peter Lauener from the EFA to academy accounting officers dated Oct 2016 had been reviewed in detail. Scheme of Delegation (SoD). The Laurus Trust SoD and the Scheme of Financial Authorities have

LW – declaration of

interests

3

been combined. The Chair of the Trustee Board requested that accountability is clear. Accountabilities are denoted in red and are yet to be agreed. The red asterisk denotes who is ultimately responsible. Governors were asked to note that the column headings differ across sections/pages. The financial scheme of delegation was also reviewed with the bad debt write off suggestion forwarded by CS being adopted. The Financial SoD will continue to be monitored and updated to reflect best practice. Q) Financial authority – what about cross Trust expenditure – how is that governed? A) In the Financial section, it shows how the finances are arranged and what is at Trust level and what is not. Due to this being a part financial year for Gorsey Bank and Cheshire East (CE) have up to 3 months to finalise the accounts. With the ongoing transfer of contracts from CE, it is unlikely that a clear picture will be known until Sep 2017 when a full General Annual Grant (GAG) is received for the School for 2017/18. The Trustees, to a large extent, decide the financial aspects for the School and it was noted that there are two governors from Gorsey Bank on the Trustee Board. It was noted that the top slice of 5% is a provisional figure and this may change. It was noted that efficiencies across the Trust and the streamlining of some services can happen quicker than others due to contract timescales. Page number and date to be added to the document for version control purposes.

LW – SoD version control

7 MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING The minutes from the Board of Governors meeting held 27.09.16 were confirmed as correct, signed by the Chair and retained at the School. The action log was reviewed and updated.

7b SCHOOL CHARACTERISTICS a. To note the School Characteristics

Governors were advised that these have not changed substantially. Currently 416 pupils on roll and may be at full capacity soon. The staffing structure remains the same. LW reported that the way pupil attendance data is presented will reflect that shown at the Trustee meeting. Attendance by year group will be tracked and actioned as required. Punctuality continues to be monitored and there are no interventions from the Education Welfare Officer (EWO).

4

Q) Reduced timetable – should their attendance against the reduced timetable be reported rather than the total? A) No, that is not how it should work Q) School Improvement (SIP) report, the increase in additional SEN levels in the new Reception year is not shown in the report, why? A) The report refers to the previous year’s cohort and is not included in the Raise Online (ROL) yet.

b. To note the Vision and Values

These were noted.

c. To note the Staff and Class Structure

These were noted.

8 FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE a. To approve the annual budget (01.10.16 to 31.08.17)

It was noted that revised figures had been issued to governors following the previous meeting. It was noted that projecting figures out to Aug 2017 is in progress. Approval of the budget is to be deferred to the next meeting. The commentary (Finance Update for Governors Autumn 2 2016) received from Mandy Bell (MB), the School Business Manager (SBM) was reviewed.

Asset register – positive feedback from the Trust received and fed back to MB

Next Oct, the School will be audited and it is expected to be rigorous. An interim audit, will be done from within the Trust.

b. To discuss income generation

This was discussed briefly at the last meeting and it was noted that there would be no provision for this in the budget for this year. It was noted that MB’s commentary covered items 8c to 8h inclusive.

c. To review benchmarking data The commentary to governors refers.

d. To review the Inventory report The commentary to governors refers.

e. To confirm insurances The commentary to governors refers.

f. To review contracts and ChESS requirements The commentary to governors refers.

Clerk – agenda item

Clerk – agenda item

5

g. To review School lunches and Free School Meals (FSM)

The commentary to governors refers.

h. To check that the School is adhering to Best Value principles

The commentary to governors refers.

9 STRATEGY a. To note the School Development Plan – 6 core aims

The Core Aims for 2016/17 were noted

b. To monitor progress against the Key Performance Indicators (KPI)

The Trustees, when discussing the strategic aims of the Trust noted that the lead primary and lead high school need to be strong performers and the strategic aim is to maintain and improve these results. LM reported that she is meeting with the Regional Schools Commissioner (RSC) for The Laurus Trust on 28.11.16. It was noted that the RSC for Gorsey Bank is different due to the way the regions have been created. It was also noted that KPIs falls under the remit of the LGB.

10 OFSTED READINESS This is contained within the Senior Leadership Team’s (SLT) action plan. It was noted that the OfSTED changes are discussed with the SIP and included in the School Development Plan.

11 EDUCATIONAL PROVISION To review the latest School Improvement Partner (SIP) report from 15.11.16. EG and CS attended the meeting of the SIP with the Head Teacher and advised that it was very in-depth and recommended it to other governors. It was noted that the choice of SIP going forward may change depending on skills and knowledge within the wider Trust and LW’s performance management, as Executive Head of the Primary arm of the Laurus Trust, may need to be reviewed. Governors commented on the quality of the comprehensive report from the SIP. JM highlighted:

EYFS data which governors had seen previously – a high performing cohort.

Above national levels

6

High percentages at the exceeding level – most able are well supported. Pupils come to school at a high level and the School has to continually challenge them.

Q) Are we are compared to local schools as well as nationally? A) Compared to Schools within CE and within the Wilmslow Education Partnership (WEP) although there is no obvious data to compare to. It was noted that the SIP has done that and an OFSTED inspector would do so too. Self-challenge is good but the external view is also important. It was noted that EYFS has improved the most and this is partly due to reviewing what was needed to provide a blueprint for the new primary school. The School eagerly awaits OFSTED.

KS1 data on p4. KS1 judgements partly from tests and then teacher assessed. Above average in all subjects. English and Maths above expected levels in ‘greater depth’. Writing and CE approach was discussed and agreed that it was moderated too harshly. This has been widely reported in the media.

There has been no drop in standards from last year to this year.

Next year, looking to achieve above national standards.

Progress over KS1 is a management target for all KS1 teachers not just Y2.

Q) What is greater depth and why higher in some subjects than others? A) Received the interim framework late in the academic year. Reading and Maths has test papers whereas Writing was completely teacher assessed and when moderated. The School is confident that it is applying the correct level of rigour and school judgements are in line with all local schools. It is believed that the Writing results will not be included if OFSTED is looking to change the category applied to a School. Issues with the Writing moderation have been raised with Cheshire East. Q) Do we have the confidence that the same thing will not happen again? A) Yes, based on the current framework.

Progress measure in ROL from EYFS to end of KS1 – ‘exceeding’ to ‘greater depth’ was not as high as we would like. The data is not comparable at these 2 data points. Staff of Year 1 and Year 2 are aware of pupils EYFS outcomes.

Greater depth in writing – gender difference is believed to be cohort specific with girls performing higher.

7

Phonics data very strong. National mark is creeping up and staff are encouraged to set the bar higher. Focus this year is on more children achieving 38+.

Q) Free School Meals (FSM) pupils at 0, why? A) There are no pupils entitled to FSM within that cohort.

KS2 – progress scores for all pupils in all subjects have made significant progress.

The combined measure will become increasingly important and are included in the projections.

Maths – would have liked to have more at greater depth which has impacted the combined greater depth result.

Targets are in Appendix 2 of the document

Working on provision that next year’s results will be higher than this years.

Q) What would you expect the correlation to be for ‘above the expected standard’ between reading and writing A) It would be greater. Q) Did you hit your targets for 2015/16? A) Targets for KS1 to be checked.

KS2 FFT projections seem reasonable and looking at top 20% and top 5% and aiming to achieve between the two. Would seek to aim at top 10% but that data is not available.

Q) Is this anything that drives you to target above 5% e.g. Reading at above expected? A) Previously aimed for top 20% as top 5% is setting staff up to fail. Maths needs more airtime. Writing expectations are higher. EYFS can ‘exceed’ with little substance in writing.

It was noted that the reading text was hard but did not adversely impact the School’s results due to the emphasis placed on reading from Reception to Y6.

Pupil Premium Report JM advised that it is on the website and a new template has been used with more emphasis on current barriers as well as spend and the strategies used. Most able disadvantaged pupils are a focus and many are in the current Year 6 cohort. A disadvantaged pupil book moderation has been conducted by LW/JM. Number of pupil eligible for Pupil Premium (PP) is 20 for the School of which 6 are in the Year 6 cohort. TBC element to be updated now Raise data is available – JM. PE and Sports Premium Report

JM – check targets vs

actuals

JM – update PP numbers

8

JM advised that this is spent on specialist teaching and staff are being up-skilled. It was noted that the School can ask the Trust for additional sports coaching. Q) The report does not show the passion shown in the school i.e. the ‘given’ is that sports are not gender specific. It was suggested this is built into the report in future. Q) Would after school provision included? A) It would if the PE grant was used to fund after school clubs. SLT Action Plan LW advised that the blue elements show what has been added in to assist with Ofsted readiness. The approach of having a joint plan is working well. TLR Plans LW advised that having separate TLR plans is working well. RT advised

that CPD is still a priority e.g., Team Teach offered to all staff.

The profile of PSHE has been raised this year.

RESPECT week planned in and the main outcomes is that pupils produce a class portfolio rather than individual ones.

It has included reflection e.g. for children in need – is raising funds for charity worthwhile?

Anti-bullying week – class portfolio looked at a Martin Luther King quote ‘time to speak up’

Q) Review of provision for non-faith? A) It is an Ofsted requirement that pupils are aware of other faiths and non-faith. The RE syllabus of academies is no longer tied to that of their local authority.

Focus on marking and planning in practice

Focus on coverage due to the implications of assessment

Provision mapping and progression in developing depth SEND annual report and Disability Access scheme These are available on the School website. Thanks was given to ED & EG for their work on the report and the report was approved at the meeting. A detailed Record of Visit (RoV) was received from EG on SEND and it was noted that measuring progress of SEND pupils is on the TLR plan however how it is reported back to governors needs to be considered. More Able JM previous report covered More Able children.

12 GOVERNOR REPORTING Records of Visits (RoV) had been conducted for

9

SEND (EG)

Single Central Record of Recruitment & Vetting (SS)

Art & Design (EG)

History (CS). Pupils to make more use of social media. With the following being deferred to Spring 2016

Design Technology (Inc. Cooking) (CW)

Sports Premium (JGS) Governors were reminded of the schedule of visits for Spring 2017

Health & Safety (CSt)

Children Looked After (SS)

RE/SMSC (CBB)

English (EG)

Science (TM)

Computing/eSafety (CW)

Geography (CS) The Laurus Trust and School Policies LW advised:

Worked with Cheadle Hulme High School (CHHS) colleagues and have compared the statutory policies with CHHS and the Trust.

Met with deputy at CHHS and discussed a Policy decision making framework. A paper was issued at the meeting

Trust policies may sit at one of four levels.

Preference is for policies to be transferable between similar schools e.g. primaries

Safeguarding could be at Trust level but due to differing Local Children’s Safeguarding Boards (LCSB) requirements, these may need to be at School level.

Timeline for this year has been defined

Confident that this approach will deliver sustainable results Q) We are behind our policy review process – will this impact the School with Ofsted? A) It is unlikely Q) Liaison with Charles Nevin (Vice Chair of Trustees)? A) Trustees to scrutinise and monitor compliance with policies. Q) Does this cover all policies and schemes of work/guidance? A) Yes, starting with statutory policies and then will include those that are deemed to be guidance

13 HEALTH, SAFETY AND BEHAVIOUR Health and Safety MB had circulated a report before the meeting and it was taken as read. It was noted that the H&S audit has been delayed until start of December as the SBM has been busy with EFA financial information.

10

Behaviour A safeguarding and behaviour update was included in the meeting papers.

14 STAKEHOLDERS AND COMMUNITY Governor engagement with parents Governors currently write an annual report to parents, attend open days, have parent governors and review the minutes of Parent Focus meetings Q) Anything else we need to do? Is there a known gap? A) No, we are reviewing whether we are doing enough. E.g. entry into the School newsletter/Friday issue and/or a stall at the School Fairs. Pupil Voice

LW advised that the School Council had hosted the mayor, participated in a WEP wide writing project and started planning a healthy tuck shop following pupil feedback.

Review website and governor pages

TRUST GOVERNOR negates the need for this. Q) Historical Facebook issue –has this resolved itself? A) There are currently no issues with the social media pages that the School maintains.

15 STAFF Vacancies Part 2 refers. CPD Schedule of CPD has been issued. All elements to date have been delivered. Work/Life Balance The team continues to work really hard and we now have a Welfare Assistant all week to stop the need to use Teaching Assistants for first aid incidents. Teaching Assistants are then able to continue with the Teaching & Learning duties with less interruptions. Q) Do we conduct staff surveys? A) There is an annual survey and then other information is gleaned more informally.

16 GOVERNOR TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT CS & SS had attended Safeguarding training which was reported as being worthwhile. CBB advised:

11

Skills analysis completed

Results are o understanding of financials were low, as was

procurement (now covered with recruitment of SM), estates (CSt is a surveyor) and links to local businesses.

LM advised that Finance now sits at trust level but some of the estates work remains at local level i.e. H&S. Q) Do we not still scrutinise the financials? A) Setting the budget and monitoring it sits at Trust level. Pupil Premium and PE grant would be agreed locally. LGB to focus on T&L and outcomes at school level. Q) Why need business contacts? A) Can be used as governor recruitment, careers advice for pupils and possible income generation. Q) Will training continue as a LGB? A) Yes, CPD for governors whether this is as a Board or as individuals. It was noted that the School had rebranded this as governor learning rather than training. It was suggested that staff provide input into LGB meetings and governors lead training sessions on their professional learning which should include their transferable skills acquired outside of school governance. Governors were asked to consider local business links and if they required FFT/ROL training. KCSiES Part 1 It was noted that governors should confirm annually that they understand KCSiE. RT advised that all staff have had time built into their schedules to do this. It was suggested that this be a subject for governor training and advised that it will include a quiz on the full KCSiES. FFT – outcomes of training. RT advised that from a class teacher perspective it will be used for target setting and this knowledge will be shared with other class teachers. Q) Was it a session that you could do a board session to? A) Yes, but more beneficial to upskill staff members. FFT and ROL training was suggested. It was noted that the SIP report includes this information and that Ofsted do not use FFT data.

Clerk – agenda item

12

17 ANY OTHER BUSINESS None

18 DATE OF NEXT MEETING 7th February 2017 at 18.15 hours for governor training and 18.30 for the LGB. Staff/Governor Training on Tuesday 10th January 17.00-18.30 to review the School Development Plan and to participate in a demonstration of the Trust Governor.

Close of meeting at 21.10 Hours. --------------------------------- Chair --------------------------------- Dated