Information for and Discussion by Governors about an opportunity to - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Information for and Discussion by Governors about an opportunity to join a Multi Academy Trust

Some thoughts for Governors to consider before a response is made to the letter from St Neots Learning Partnership Trust

Aims:

• To give an overview of differences

between academies and maintained schools

• To explain the governance of Academies

and Multi Academy Trusts

• To look specifically at SNLP Trust
• To facilitate discussion

What makes an academy different from a maintained school?

• Academies are independent, state-funded schools.
• Academies are free from LA control.
• Likewise, they don’t receive LA support, although

academies can choose to buy LA services.

• Academies are funded directly (from the

Education Funding Agency) so their budgets are not top-sliced to pay for LA services.

What makes an academy different from a maintained school? - continued

• Academies are not required to teach the National Curriculum but are

subject to the same tests and inspections as all state schools.

• Academies can set pay and conditions for staff (subject to employment

legislation).

• Academies can set their own admission criteria (within the school

admissions code) and also set their own term dates and determine the length of the school day.

• Academies have greater freedom over their

governance structures. This last point will determine how any decision to become an academy will impact on our pupils.

How many academies are there?

In England:

• 2,075 out of 3,381 secondary schools are

academies (61%)

• 2,440 of 16,766 primary schools are academies

(15%) In Cambridgeshire:

• All 32 secondary schools are academies (100%)
• 35 of 204 primary schools are academies (17% )

Primary schools haven’t exactly rushed to convert!

2016 White Paper

• White Paper in March announced that all

schools must have plans to become academies by 2020 and have converted by 2022.

• In May the government withdrew this,

saying that schools judged good or

• utstanding could choose whether or not

to convert to academies.

However...

• Coasting schools will still have to convert (as yet

no very clear definition of what coasting is).

• Schools in LAs where the majority of schools have

already converted will have to convert.

• Schools in low performing LAs will have to
• convert. Cambridgeshire is a low performing.

We may not have a choice.

An academy is a charitable company limited by guarantee. It must publish audited annual report and accounts. There are 2 layers of governance:

↓

Governance of a Standalone Academy Trust

Members Board of Trustees

Members

• Academies are based on a business model.

Members can be likened to shareholders or

• wners (although they cannot take a profit).
• They meet once or twice a year.
• There are at least 3 and commonly 5 members

(the DfE recommendation) or more.

• Anyone, except employees of the trust, can be a

member.

• Members give a very limited financial guarantee

(typically £10 or £20).

Members - continued

• Members have ultimate responsibility for ensuring the

academy trust achieves its objectives.

• Members sign off the trust’s Articles of Association (its

constitution).

• Members appoint and remove trustees from the

board.

• In sponsored academies the lead sponsor has the

ability to appoint most of the members.

The members of any existing Academy or MAT will have already been appointed.

Board of Trustees

• Sometimes known as a Board of Directors.
• Effectively the Governing Body of an academy

– the board fulfils the 3 core functions of a GB.

• DfE recommends a board of 6 – 10 people.
• Anyone can be a trustee.
• Currently, at least 2 trustees must be elected

parents (2016 White Paper proposes to remove this requirement).

Board of Trustees - continued

• No more than a third of trustees can be

employees of the trust.

• Proportion of trustees connected with the LA

(either working for LA currently or in last 5 years – including staff of maintained schools) must not exceed 19.9%.

• Boards should be tightly focussed and no larger

than they need to be to ensure they have all the necessary skills to carry out their functions effectively.

Multi Academy Trusts (MATs)

• A MAT contains 2 or more schools, although a single

school may start a MAT with a view to expanding - most likely by sponsoring one or more other schools.

• DfE preference is now for MATs rather than single

converter academies and it is unlikely that any school will obtain an academy order to become a standalone academy.

• At the end of July 2015 there were 846 multi

academy trusts in England.

• Largest MAT - Academies Enterprise Trust - contains

67 schools. (Funding of £274,251,000 in 2015)

• There is a government grant of £25,000 to set up a

MAT (much of this is used in legal fees).

Governance of a Multi Academy Trust

Model 1 ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ Model 2 ↓ ↓ ↓

Members Board of Trustees LGB LGB LGB Members Board of Trustees Resources C&S

Governance of a MAT – model 1

• All control of and responsibility for the MAT lies with

the Trust Board and ultimately the Members.

• The Board may choose to set up Local Governing

Bodies (LGBs) for any or all of the schools in the MAT.

• LGBs are not Governing Bodies! They are more like GB

Committees.

• LGBs may have powers delegated to them by the

board, but they may just have a monitoring and advisory role.

• The LGBs in the same MAT may have different

delegated powers from each other.

Governance of a MAT – model 2

• All control of and responsibility for the MAT lies with

the Trust Board and ultimately the Members.

• The Board may choose to set up any number of

committees with delegated powers to oversee aspects of the Trust.

• Committees for Resources and Curriculum &

Standards are typical but there are many other possibilities.

• The powers delegated to committees can vary from

almost nothing to almost everything.

Governance Structures for a very large Multi Academy Trust

↓ ← → ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓

Members Board of Trustees Regional Board Regional Board LGB Resources C&S LGB LGB LGB LGB LGB LGB LGB

School Leadership in Academies and MATs

• In a standalone academy the Head retains the

same function as in a maintained school.

• In a small MAT there will most likely be an

Executive Head Teacher (EHT) who leads all the schools in the MAT.

• Heads in the individual schools in a MAT will

have whatever powers and responsibilities are delegated to them. Often, they have a role similar to that of a Deputy.

School Leadership in Academies and MATs - continued

• In larger MATs, a Chief Executive Officer (CEO)

is appointed. The CEO need not be a teacher. Other Chief Officers may be appointed.

• The CEO will be on the Board of Trustees but,

in a large MAT, it will not be possible for all Heads of School to be on the Board.

• In very large MATs there may also be an

Executive Board of paid Officers.

Funding of Academies and MATs

• Academies are funded directly (from the EFA)

via an funding agreement which is based on the number of pupils on roll.

• MATs receive the funding for each of the

schools in the MAT but are not restricted to spending the funds in the same proportions as given for each school.

• Budgets are not top-sliced by LAs.
• But a MAT may redistribute funds.

A word about Autonomy

Government has always said that giving schools more autonomy, coupled with accountability, will raise standards. Becoming an academy appears to offer schools greater freedom with the curriculum, staffing, finance, governance etc. But how much autonomy do individual schools in MATs have?

Autonomy in a MAT

The answer seems to be: it depends on the MAT. In many MATs (particularly larger ones) the

• verarching trust does indeed enjoy greater

freedom, but individual schools often have less autonomy than they did under the LA. Either way the situation can change at any time as the Members and Trustees can decide to change the arrangements (subject to RSC approval).

Moral

Choose your MAT very carefully! There is no urgent need for us to join any MAT. Once a school has joined a MAT it cannot reverse the process. The RSC may change the membership of a MAT if school improvement is not sustained or not rapid enough.

Due Diligence

• Before admitting an additional school, a MAT

must carry out DD – especially so if sponsoring a failing school – the MAT needs to know exactly what it is taking on.

• Likewise, a good or outstanding school should

carry out DD on any MAT it might consider joining – what exactly are we getting into? It is essential that we do our homework and that we do it thoroughly.

• A hard federation was formed between

Longsands Community College and St Neots Community College (formally Ernulf) in September 2010.

• The federation converted to academy status in

August 2011.

• VI form provision is entirely on the Longsands
• site. Ernulf VI form was closed in July 2015.
• Prospect House (a provision for pupils at risk of

exclusion) is also part of SNLP Trust.

St Neots Learning Partnership Trust

Longsands

• 11-18 school with Media Arts Status.
• A popular, over-subscribed school.
• Feeder primaries: Barnabas Oley, Crosshall Junior,

Great Paxton, Great Staughton, Kimbolton, Little Paxton, Newton, Priory Junior, Round House.

• Most recent Ofsted (Oct 2014) judged the school

good in all areas.

• Previous inspection (Nov 2009) also judged it

good.

Ernulf

• 11-16 school with Performing Arts Status.
• A very under-subscribed school.
• Feeder primaries: Bushmead, Eynesbury,

Middlefield, St Mary’s and Winhills.

• Most recent Ofsted (Oct 2014) judged the school

to require improvement in all areas.

• Previous inspection (June 2013) judged it

inadequate finding it had serious weaknesses.

• In March 2011 it was judged satisfactory.

How well did SNLP Trust support Ernulf to improve?

• Ernulf went from satisfactory to inadequate

after federating with Longsands!

• HMI monitoring visits following Ofsted’s

judgement of inadequate :

– Oct 2013 judged action plan fit for purpose – Feb 2014 judged reasonable progress being made – Sept 2014 judged reasonable progress being made

SNLP almost became a MAT of 1

• Ofsted Inspection in Oct 2014 judged Ernulf Academy

to require improvement

• HMI monitoring visit March 2015 judged school was

not taking effective action

• Warning Notice issued by RSC March 2015
• HMI monitoring visit Nov 2015 judged effective action

was now being taken: expectations had risen, governors had greater strategic understanding.

• SNLP narrowly avoided Ernulf

being taken away from them and given to a different MAT.

SNLP Report and Accounts 2015

• Total funding: £14,329,654
• Total spend:

– Ernulf £5,113,213 – Longsands £10,363,791

• Pupils on Roll

– Ernulf 690 (PAN = 232) – Longsands 1782 (PAN = 290)

Expansion of SNLP Trust

• Clearly, from the letter received, SNLP is looking

to expand by having successful feeder primaries join.

• It has also put in a bid to open and run the new

primary school proposed for the Wintringham site (currently on hold).

• It has already worked closely with

Eynesbury Primary to put together this bid for the new school.

Which primaries do we know were invited?

• Eynesbury
• Great Paxton

Both of these are church schools (as such a church representative would have to join the Trust Board before Ely Diocese would agree)

• Little Paxton
• Priory Infants
• Priory Juniors

Which primaries weren’t invited?

• Great Staughton
• Kimbolton
• Middlefield
• Round House
• Winhills

These all form the Diamond Learning Partnership Trust

• St Mary’s

Already in DEMAT

• Crosshall Infants
• Crosshall Juniors

Both standalone academies

• Barnabas Oley (CofE)
• Newton

Both are small (4 or 5 classes) judged good Unknown:

• Bushmead

Larger school, judged RtI

What advantages does SNLP say that joining their MAT will offer?

Their letter says:

• The benefits of MAT are strong for high-

performing schools and those in need of more support

• SNLP can provide support for governance and

back-office functions

• It will increase and improve the breadth of

curriculum and extra-curricular activities

• Facilitate sharing professional expertise
• Provide local solutions for local issues

SNLP Current Governance structure

• Annual Report for 2015 lists 16 current governors
• SNLP website lists 22 governors
• The website also lists the following committees:

– Core Group (Strategy Committee), 5 people – Finance & Personnel Audit Committee, 3 people – Context & Community Committee, 11 people – Learning & Evaluation Committee, 11 people – Finance & Personnel Committee, 8 people – Policies & Procedures Committee, 22 people

A bit confused and confusing?

What Governance Structure does SNLP propose?

Trust Members (x3) The Trust Board (x7-13) (including CEO and Chairs of LGBs) Executive Implementation Board Ernulf LGB Longsands LGB Headteacher Headteacher

SNLP Governance and the Trust

Academy Status The Articles of Association set out the key aspects of the manner in which the Academy is run and operated. The St Neots Learning Partnership Trust oversees the work and development of the Ernulf and Longsands Academies.

[This, the previous and the next 3 slides are taken from a brochure produced by SNLP]

SNLP Governance and the Trust

There are 16 governors who come from a variety of

• backgrounds. The Academy’s Senior Leadership Team is able

to draw on a wide range of expertise and skill from within the Local Governing Body for critical friendship and support. The proceedings of the Local Governing Body are supported and administered by the Clerk to the Governors. The governors are the employers of the staff of the academy and this responsibility is given a high priority. Governors are currently reviewing their structure and are moving to the proposed model, supported by the DfE as detailed above. [See previous 2 slides.]

SNLP Governance and Leadership

Our recent governance review sought to ensure:

• A shared vision for the long term strategic plan

for schools in the multi academy trust (MAT);

• A framework for setting out how the governing

body will function. This will comprise skills, effectiveness, strategy, levels of engagement, the role of the Chair and accountability of the Board;

• Forensic analysis of high level school

performance indicators that will encompass all

• utcomes of effective schools within the MAT.

SNLP Governance and Leadership - continued

It is the job of Governors working in partnership with the CEO, the Headteachers and Senior Leadership Team to agree the strategic plan. Our structure outlines the importance of the Trustees’ understanding of where the lines lie between their strategic responsibility and the management responsibilities of the Headteachers and senior leaders in

• ur schools.

The MAT structure ensures that it discharges it three core functions:

• Setting the strategic direction;
• Holding the Headteachers to account for improving the

schools;

• Ensuring financial help, probity and value for money.

Summary

• Academisation is, most likely, on the cards at some
• point. The current Government would like it to

happen sooner rather than later.

• There are various types of MAT structure which we

need to understand.

• MATs are already set up in the local area and we

have been invited to discuss joining one.

• We’ve begun to have preliminary discussions with

the PPP about forming our own MAT.

Questions

• Do we wish to investigate what SNLP are

proposing and what they could offer?

• If so, what more would we want them to tell

us? What do we need to know?

• Do we want to consult with our PPP partners?
• Should we draw up a united reply to SNLP?
• Do we want to contact the other primary

schools to seek their views?

Options for us to Consider

• Remain as we are (an LA maintained school) – this may not

be an option for much longer.

• Convert as a standalone academy – unlikely that the RSC

would agree to this.

• Join an existing MAT:

– SNLP – does it have the capacity to ensure we can continue to improve? – Other MATs – do any other local MATs look attractive?

• Form an “empty” MAT on our own

– RSC will expect us to consider sponsoring other schools to join

• ur MAT.
• Form a MAT with others:

– Our PPP partners and/or others?

The BIG Question

In all our discussions and whatever our decision about the future, there is only one critical question:

How will this benefit the children at Little Paxton School?

Thank you for listening!

Thoughts? Views? Questions? Comments?