FOI Request: 11 June 2019
Governors’ Minutes

1
Admissions Committee.
Minutes of meeting held on Monday 15th October 2018 at 6:30 PM.
Chairman:
Mr. Mark Hurst (MH)
Members present: Mr. Michael Goldmeier (MG)
Mrs. Anne Shisler (AS)
Mr. David Davis (DS)
Mrs. Rachel Fink (RF)
Others present:
Ms. Maxine Ratnarajah (MR)
Dr Oliver Walton (OW).
1. Apologies
Mr Jamie Peston sent his apologies to the committee.
2. Membership of the committee
Members were confirmed as, Mark Hurst (Chairman), David Davis, Anne Shisler,
Michael Goldmeier and Rachel Fink (Headteacher).
3. Introductions
Dr Walton, the new Head of Sixth Form, was welcomed by the committee.
4. Draft minutes of meeting held on 29.01.18 for approval.
The minutes were agreed and signed by the chairman.
5. Sixth Form statistics 2018 – OW – paper distributed at the meeting.
Demographics – Sixth form numbers were at their height in 2015, reduced after
that and are now rising again. There was a significant drop in the 2016-18 Year
13 cohorts. One reason may be students who get low grades in mocks at the
end of year 12 can panic and switch to another institution to try and raise their
grades by the end of year 13. This can lead to smaller classes in year 13 and
loss of weaker students. To counter this, mock exams this year wil be earlier in
year 12 allowing more time for students to remediate and the school to put
support in place for start of year 13.
1
2
External applications – similar numbers to previous years from other Jewish
schools, particularly those looking for more subject focus away from ‘Yeshiva
prep’. CASH courses are very popular and OW feels vocational courses are an
area for development encouraging more students to move into 6th Form,
especial y a science BTEC for students who may not be able to get the grades
for science A ‘levels.
Places offered are relatively low compared to the number of applications. JFS
interviews all applicants and this may not be necessary. Some applicants could
be offered provisional places based on predicted grades alone and targeted
interviewing could reduce costs and time.
There are a high number of applications withdrawn after results. This needs to
be dril ed down to identify reasons but it may be due to not getting grades
required or grades exceeding expectations. OW noted that JFS only has a
skeleton staff available on results day who prioritise speaking to existing
students, which means they may not be having discussions with external
candidates quickly enough to prevent application withdrawals. OW suggested
that switching to online results rather than calling students into school may be
more comfortable for those who did not get expected grades and would free up
staff to speak only to students (internal and external) who need support and
advice regarding 6th form admission.
Data management – the school is collecting data about where students are
going when they leave, but not the reasons why. OW said offering exit interviews
or questionnaires to understand why and looking at ways to meet the needs of
those students may help with retention.
There was a discussion about the entry requirements for 6th Form. There has
been an understanding that students require 6 ‘B’s at GCSE to gain entry. RF
noted that as a comprehensive school there are no selection requirements to
enter the 6th Form. This is different however from conditional offers for specific
courses which may require particular grades and entry to those courses may
also depend on demand. If a student doesn’t meet the requirement for a
particular course or the course is full, they should be offered an alternative
pathway/ different course in the 6th Form. The only condition for internal students
to move into/stay in 6th form may be to re-take English and/or Maths GCSEs if
they failed in year 11.
There are 20 places available for external students. OW raised that it may be
helpful to ask them to identify a second choice of course or pathway when they
apply and this would help with discussions on results day if they don’t get the
grades for their first choice of course.
.
2
3
Action agreed: Head of 6th Form to collect data on reasons students leave at end of
year 11.
Questions
Q – Does JFS have the same entry requirements for external applicants and existing
JFS students?
A – The entry requirements are not binding and there is flexibility but this can be
seen as inconsistency by parents and students. Having more BTEC courses can
widen the range of alternative pathways for students who can gain entry to the 6th
Form but who do not achieve grades required for particular A’ level courses.
Q – Historically many students have moved to West Herts college for BTECs or
vocational courses. Are there courses there that JFS can’t offer?
A – Yes. West Herts have huge workshops so are able to offer courses such as
plumbing. JFS does not have the facilities for this. It wil be in some students’ best
interests to move to technical colleges if they are interested in specialist courses that
JFS can’t offer.
Q – How do BTECS work with apprenticeships?
A - A Level 3 BTEC wil meet the entry requirement for apprenticeships.
Action agreed: Ensure Admissions policy and related documentation is updated to
reflect there is no minimum required grades to enter 6th Form and MR to send
updated pack to the committee for approval.
6. Report on Prospective parents evening 2018
Jamie Peston provided the committee with some written feedback regarding the
Prospective Parents Evening (PPE) held on 10th October 2018. Feedback is
anecdotal at this stage as it is too early to access information from follow up surveys.
JFS students engaged well with families, tour guides were excellent and the
presentations were short and to the point. The number of families visiting matches
the numbers generally required to fil places available. It doesn’t appear to be a
bulge year this year which matches with PAIES statistics.
Q- Do you anticipate any difficulty fil ing 300 places this year?
A – No. A number of families already know they are going to apply to JFS so don’t
necessarily come to the PPE.
7. Matters arising from the Minutes of 29.01.18
7.1 The working party on the bulge class is no longer required.
3
4
7.2 2019/20 Admissions policy consultation has been completed. With regards to
the issue of ‘Children of Staff members’, it was decided not to include this. The
LA were not in support of it and it was felt there are other ways to manage staff
retention.
7.3 Current appeals statements discussion – no appeals last year or so far this
year. The appeals statement wil be reviewed in light of the circumstances of
the school at the time as necessary".
7.4 Training on admissions process – there was a discussion about what is
available. Brent don’t offer this to governors and there would be a cost
implication if provided by King Stone. It was decided that as long as King Stone
approve all admission and appeals policies, there is no need for training
currently.
8. Review of Terms of Reference (TOR)
There are no updates to the TOR and they were noted by the committee.
9. Review of admissions policy 2020/21 discussion of rationale
MR asked the committee to consider the Upper / Lower Sibling policy and asked if it
should apply equally to places in 6th Form. The PAN can be used flexibly across the
school as long as each year group does not exceed 310 and the total number of
students does not exceed 2065. With the Upper / Lower sibling policy there is always
a risk that the student with the place leaves and the sibling (who receives priority in
another year group based on their sibling having joined the school) stays. There is
no way to get families to commit to keeping all siblings in the school.
Q- What is the downside of applying the Upper / Lower sibling policy?
A – it can result in uneven year groups.
Q – Could JFS use its discretion to allow siblings in without having an Upper / Lower
sibling policy in place?
A –Yes. There would be no risk with entry to year 11 because no schools take new
students into year 11. They either have to go down a year to year 10 or wait a year
and apply to the 6th Form.
Q – Is there a requirement for the Admissions Officer to write to governors seeking
approval for admission of in-year applicants?
A – Yes this is required. The Admissions Officer will write to governors confirming
that the student has met required criteria when seeking approval.
4
5
Decisions:
• The Upper / Lower sibling policy wil not be adopted but the school wil
retain its discretion on a case by case basis regarding sibling
admissions. Decisions wil be taken by the Admissions team in
consultation with the Head teacher.
• The Admissions Policy 2020/21 was approved subject to the wording of
the admissions to 6th Form being amended to remove any reference to
grade requirements in the criteria and other documentation wil be
cross referenced to ensure it complies.
The consultation is due to start first week in November.
10. Mid- terms applications -MR
There were 8 in-year admissions into year 7 and a 9th student wil be joining year
7 from South Africa in the New Year. This wil bring the total in year 7 to 309.
There is no waiting list for year 7 currently.
11. 11+ Statistics 2018 admissions – report distributed at mtg MR.
There were 791 applications and 666 with the Certificate of religious practice (CRP).
The school made 330 offers in the first round (317 offers,10 distance offers and 3
EHP offers) which led to 276 acceptances (185 siblings and 120 new families). In
tranche 2, 56 offers were made which led to 28 acceptances. There were five rounds
in total and all applicants were offered a place in the end. The logistics were
improved this year particularly with forms being completed online.
MR noted that there was an increase in applicants not ranking JFS as first choice
this year and this may be because more scholarships being offered by private
schools expanding places.
Decision: MR proposed for admissions 2019/20 increasing offers in the first round to
350 and this was agreed by the committee
RF said she would like to review the meetings with Year 7 students and parents as
there were concerns about consistency of content across the team offering them and
a number of queries about some issues not being taken into consideration or some
staff not understanding the religious background of some families. Information was
collated incorrectly and not shared effectively at times.
Action agreed: Head or deputy Headteacher to review incoming year 7 meetings.
5
6
Fair Access Panel – JFS recently had to appeal a decision to place a student into
year 9 with a history of permanent exclusions. Communication about the proposed
admission did not reach the Admissions Officer or Head Teacher and the school only
found out when the mother contacted the school. A meeting was held with the
mother and student and it transpired JFS could not meet the student’s needs and he
would miss out on vital Brent provision if he came to JFS so the family rejected the
place. The appeal was held during Yom Tov so no one could attend. The appeal was
rejected but the student was placed elsewhere.
Action agreed: JFS to ensure it can attend Fair Access Panels in future to have
input into decisions.
12. Report on SEN offers 11+ 2018 – Maxine
Three EHCP (Educational Health and Care Plans) students out of seven were
accepted by the SEN department.
13. Assessment of JFS strengths and weaknesses compared to ‘competitor
schools’ – RF.
RF outlined some of the advantages JFS has to offer including;
• Development of vocational pathways
• Size allows for maintaining large range of curriculum choices while smaller
schools may be reducing theirs
• High quality facilities.
Areas for development;
• Improvement in quality of Jewish studies programme to meet needs of
Shomer Shabbat families so they don’t feel the Kodesh provision is something
they have to compromise on
• Need to keep recruiting best quality teaching staff.
14. A.O.B
None.
15. Date of next meeting
Tbc after the meeting as the proposed date is no longer possible.
6
7
Date of Next Meeting: Monday 13th February 2019 (confirmed after the
meeting).
Signed: _____________________________
Date: ________________
7

8
Appendix 1: Committee Meeting Action Table
Committee Meeting Action Summary Table
Committee: Admissions
Meeting date: 15th October 2018
Agenda Item
Action
By whom Target completion
date
5. 6th Form Statistics
Collect data on reasons for
OW
tbc
(exit data)
leaving JFS end of year 11
9. Review of Admissions Ensure Admissions policy and MR
End October 2018
policy 2020/21
related documentation is
(Policy update)
updated to reflect there is no
minimum required grades to
enter 6th Form and MR to send
updated pack to the committee
for approval.
11. 11+ Statistics 2018
To review content and
RF
tbc
Admissions
consistency of meetings for
(Year 7 meetings)
incoming year 7 students and
parents.
11. 11+ Statistics 2018
To set up a mechanism to
MR?
Next meeting?
Admissions
ensure JFS is aware of and is
(Fair Access Panels)
able to attend / contribute to
Fair Access Panels in future.
Minutes Finalised? Y/N
Date minutes sent for filing:
8
Admissions Committee
Minutes of the meeting held at the School on Wednesday 13 February 2019, commencing at
6.30 pm.
Chairperson:
Mark Hurst
Members present:
Mr David Davis,
Mrs Rachel Fink,
Mr Michael Goldmeir
Mrs Anne Shisler.
Others present:
Mr Dan Green.
1.
Apologies
None.
Dan Green a new parent governor was welcomed to the meeting as an observer.
2.
Draft Minutes of meetings held on 15 October 2018.
The minutes were approved and signed.
3.
Matters Arising
3.1 Action point
11+ Statistics 2018 Admissions ‘to review content of introductory
meetings with incoming Year 7 students’ – RF said this is being reviewed to decide the
value of these meetings and if they continue to be necessary. The can be time consuming
and information gathered could be collected via online responses instead. It was noted
some parents found them a positive experience.
3.2 Action point
Review of Admissions policy for 6th Form Entry ‘to ensure any
reference to minimum grades is removed from al literature’. RF said literature for the
different key stages are being reviewed and amended where necessary.
3.3 Action point
11+ Statistics 2018 Admissions (Fair Access Panels) ‘to set up a
mechanism for the school to be aware of engaged in panels going forward’. The school now
has a link with the panel and engagement has improved. It was also noted that JFS works
with other Jewish Schools to ensure a fair access approach and look at managed moves
between schools before reaching exclusions. The only exception is in relation to issues with
drugs.
1
3.4 Item 13
Assessment of JFS strengths and weaknesses compared to ‘competitor
schools’ – RF said that she would like there to be a standing item on the JS Committee
agenda regarding the quality of Kodesh in the school.
Action point: RF to discuss with chair person of JS Committee standing item about quality
of Kodesh teaching.
Questions:
Q – Regarding SEN students, what needs can and can’t be accommodated by the school?
A – This year there are 4 students with an EHCP being accepted in year 7 Sometimes there
are students with really complex needs which the school assesses would be better met by
specialist provision but parents apply to JFS because they want their children to be in
mainstream Jewish education.
Q - How is JFS SEN provision compared to other schools?
A- Generally good. Rabbi Cohen who has just joined the school has experience managing
SEND and working with students with autism. The school has good teaching assistants
(TAs) for SEN. Some provision for SEN K needs reviewing.
Q – Is there a government standard or expectation of the level of SEN secondary schools
should provide?
A- No. For students with EHCPs, the school pays for first 10 hours and the local authority
has to be relied on to pay for the rest and that can vary between different local authorities.
Students’ needs can vary over time. Sometimes in the earlier key stages the school can
meet their needs but as they develop their needs can increase. Some students are not
assessed as having SEN but it becomes apparent over time and they are not funded for
additional support. There is an increase in students with a diagnosis on the autistic
spectrum and more specialist staff are needed to assess and manage their support.
4.
2020/21 Admissions Policy, SIF and CRP Forms for 11+ 2020, In Year Admissions
2019 Year 7-11 and Sixth Form September 2020.
The policy was approved.
MR will send the policy to Brent and add all the forms to the website by 28th February 2019.
There are no changes to the Certificate of Religious Practice (CRP) forms since last year
except for the eligible dates.
Questions;
Q – In order to achieve 3 points on the CRP students have to attend synagogue as wel as
being part of a community organisation. Does the policy say that?
A- The policy just says an applicant must complete the CRP. It doesn’t set out (1.2.1) that
it’s the school’s current JFS CRP.
Action agreed: change admissions policy 2021/22 ‘current JFS CRP’.
Q- Is it stil necessary to have a separate category for children in Jewish Care Homes as
wouldn’t they fall under the category of Looked After Children (LAC) now?
A – Yes, they would be covered under the criteria of children in care.
2
Action agreed:
Amendments to the 2021/22 Admissions Policy to include;
• 1.2.1 – to reference the school’s ‘current JFS CRP’.
• To remove reference to children in Jewish Care homes.
5.
Review of Admissions Policy 2021/22 – consideration to be given to whether to
prioritise students with special guardianship and child arrangement orders
RF said she would like to include students under ‘Child Arrangement Orders’ as a priority
because they are not classified as a ‘child in care’ or subject to ‘special guardianship so are
not considered as a LAC. However, there is potentially a certain level of disadvantage in
that they are not living with their birth parents in the same way as children who are in care,
are fostered or adopted. It is generally an unusual situation so unlikely to impact on many
students but Jewish Schools have a duty of care towards these students. A court order is
required to establish a Child Arrangement Order so it would not create a loophole for any
parents trying to circumvent the admissions criteria.
Decision: The committee agreed to include students subject to Child Arrangement Orders
to the priority criteria in the Admissions Policy.
Action agreed: RF to establish the appropriate definition to add to the admissions criteria.
6.
11+ Offers and Statistics for September 2019 Tranche 1 – MR
Application levels have been similar to last year but there was a slight increase in the
number of applicants putting JFS as their first choice compared to last year. Approximately
15% are from non-Jewish primary schools.
Currently there are 1993 students at the school. The limit for years 7-11 is 1500 and 550 for
6th Form. The school is working hard to retain students in year 11 to transfer to 6th Form and
there have been 80 outside applicants for 6th Form this year. So far approximately 20 year
11 students have given their intention to leave but this may increase as the year
progresses.
Questions:
Q- Does the school track the number of pupils who leave from all year groups?
A – The numbers from years 7-10 are minimal. Its mainly students leaving at the end of
Year 11 and some at the start of Year 13 but work is being done to provide more support at
the end of year 12 to reduce those leaving in year 13.
7. Current Appeals Statement discussion and approval of appeals timetable 2019 for
website
There was a discussion regarding the PAN which can be used flexibly up to 310 students
per year group and the impact this could have on appeals when only 300 places are
offered. Could applicants argue that the school could accommodate more students now the
PAN has been increased to 310? The committee decided that there was a strong argument
3
that 310 places is the maximum (one extra per class) that can be accommodated before
additional resources would be required in terms of additional classrooms and teaching staff
that is not available, not only for year 7 but for the subsequent 5 years as this year group
progress up the school. Rabbi Cohen wil be presenting for the school at any appeals
panels this year. There were differing views as to that the total PAN was for the whole
school, 2065 or 2165 which is in the appeals letter.
Action agreed: The school to check the whole school PAN and amend the appeals letter if
necessary.
Decision: the committee approved the appeals timetable for 2019.
8.
Mid-term applications overview
In-year admissions;
2 in year 7
5 in year 8 – now 290 students in this year,
2 in year 9
1 in year 10.
9.
Any Other Business
9.1 It was agreed that the committee meeting in the Spring term was more useful in
February rather than January as there would be more accurate information available about
the admissions applications that year.
9.2 Governors were advised to refer any queries from parents about applications directly to
MR.
10.
Date of next meeting: tbc
Signed: ……………………………………………….
Date: ………………
4
Appendix 1 Admissions Committee Meeting Action Table
Committee Meeting Action Summary Table
Committee: Admissions
Meeting date: 13th February 2019
Agenda Item
Action
By whom Target completion date
3.3.4 Matters arising To discuss with
RF
Next JS committee
– Quality of Kodesh chairperson of JS
meeting.
teaching
Committee to include a
standing item about
quality of Kodesh
teaching.
4.
2020/21
Amendments to the
MR
Next committee meeting.
Admissions Policy
2021/22 Admissions
Policy to include;
• 1.2.1 – to
reference the
school’s ‘current
JFS CRP’.
• To remove
reference to children
in Jewish Care
homes.
5.
Consideration to
To establish the
RF
Next committee meeting.
be given to whether appropriate definition to
to prioritise students add to the admissions
with special
criteria.
guardianship and
child arrangement
orders
7.
Current Appeals
To check the whole
MR
01.03,19
Statement
school PAN figure and
discussion
amend the appeals letter
if necessary.
Minutes Finalised? Y/N
Date minutes sent for filing:
5
JFS School Curriculum and Student Welfare Committee, Attendance & Behaviour
(CSWAB) Committee.
Minutes of meeting held on Monday 5th February 2018, at 6.30 PM.
Chairperson:
Dr. Charlotte Benjamin(CB)
Members present: Ms Geraldine Fainer (GF)
Mrs Naomi Newman (NN).
Mr. James Lake (JL)
Mrs Anne Shisler (AS)
Others present:
Mr. Simon Appleman (SA)
Mr Daniel Marcus (DM)
Rabbi Dr Raphael Zarum (RZ)
Mr Andy De Angelis (AD)
Mrs Sheri Berg (SB)
Mr. Dharmesh Chauhan (DC)
1. Apologies
Apologies were received from David Wragg and Julia Alberga (JA).
2. Membership
The committee welcomed Mrs Naomi Newman who is now a member of
governing body.
3. Minutes of previous meeting
3.1 Spelling corrections – Edexcel, Jeff Peddie and David Wragg.
3.2 3.1- Review of Terms of Reference – ‘Removal of policy for review entitled
‘Behaviour Principles Written Statement’. The committee was unsure what this
was referring to.
Action agreed: SA to investigate.
3.3 3.1 second bullet point – ‘Updating language to reflect changes to the school’s
current policies and procedures’. This has been superseded now as policies are
1
being reviewed by Chris Ray and he wil update language as appropriate.
3.4 3. ‘Decision: The responsibility for convening discipline committees should
remain with the CSWAB committee who wil find external representation to sit on
the panels. This can be a mixture of governors and associate governors.’
The committee clarified that external representation means within the wider
governing body or associate members not external to governing body. The
discipline committee doesn’t necessarily need to have a member of CSWAB on
it.
4. Matters arising from previous meeting
4.1 Item 41 GCSE – oral report from DM.
At the committee meeting of 13th November 2017, DM presented a paper
considering transferring from the dual faith GCSE to new single religion iGSCE.
From a JS department perspective this was the preferred option in addition to
providing a broad-brush course on major religions alongside. However, the main
disadvantage was that the iGCSE is not counted by the government for state
school statistics in relation to Progress 8 and Attainment 8.
Since the last meeting DM has contacted other Jewish state schools who are
switching to the new iGCSE to see how they wil manage this issue. Al those
schools offer the option of 10 or more GCSE choices (often some taken early or
over 3 years) so they can afford to remove the RS GCSE from their Progress 8
scores as they have a buffer of 9 subjects left to count towards Progress and
Attainment 8.
At JFS only approximately a third of the year do 10 GCSEs as students have to
take triple science to reach 10 GCSEs. Many take either 8 or 9. This would JFS
students with no ‘buffer’ as all exams wil count towards Progress 8 if the iGCSE is
not counted. Historically JS has always had good results at JFS boosting Progress
8 and Attainment 8 scores.
The committee agreed the only way to switch to the iGCSE would be to offer 10
subjects at GCSE which has significant timetabling ramifications so cannot be
implemented quickly. It would make more sense to consider the transfer when
timetables and GCSE choices in general are being reviewed in future.
Q- How many students take additional GCSEs early currently?
A – Students can take astronomy and sociology in year 10. The government is
not keen for students to take GCSEs early however and universities want to see
that students can gain good results in many subjects in one go rather than spread
out over a number of years.
Q- What were the mock results for RS GCSE like?
A – Not as good as previous years because the course is harder, but stil better
than other subjects. RS is still figuring in most pupil’s top 8 grades so raises their
Attainment 8 score and the school’s Progress 8 score. It is also a popular subject
2
with pupils and helps with writing skills.
Q- When was the timetable last reviewed?
A – The timetable was reviewed 12 months ago, changes were made and they are
currently being reviewed. It takes time for changes to bed in and another change
so soon could be unsettling following some many recent changes in the school.
The new headteacher may decide to make further changes.
4.2 Item 4b – Ivrit – DM and SA.
Following the report at the last committee meeting regarding staff issues, a
change was made to transfer 2 lower year 9 Ivrit sets to an alternative curriculum
including extra PE and technology classes, a literacy support group and MFL
support classes. Behaviour has improved and this eased the pressure on Ivrit
staff.
Unfortunately, the staffing issues are ongoing. One member of staff is going on
maternity leave and the department is trying hard to replace her. A JS teacher
who is returning from maternity leave may be able to provide some cover. We are
also trying to identify short term cover. If the situation continues the school may
look to reducing Ivrit provision for the less interested and/or lower ability year 7
and 8 classes and replace with an alternative curriculum as they have done with
Year 9 to enable Ivrit staff to concentrate on the higher ability classes. Once
exams start some year 11 and 13 teachers may be available to provide extra
teaching time.
Moving forward, JFS is in the second round of the PAJES project looking at a
long-term strategy for Ivrit. They have found that each school has different
requirements so a generic model is not appropriate. WZO and PAJES are helping
source teachers. The school was going to use money agreed at the last
Governors’ meeting for recruitment to hire a head hunter in Israel. RZ suggested
they use the money to pay PAJES to assist with recruitment as they wil be doing
this anyway as part of the project.
Questions:
Q- JFS had a bad experience with the candidate placed by the WZO. Does the
school now know how to spot issues earlier?
A -The school knew on day 1 there were issues. They only had Skype interview.
The school has asked WZO about their vetting procedures.
Q- Can the school use the Shiniot for Ivrit teaching?
A – No. They are here for more informal education / as madrachim.
Q- How did the school find leads for next year?
A-There were a couple of direct approaches, then interviews on Skype. Not all
were appropriate / have good enough understanding of role
Q- Is it possible to recruit teachers via Mizrachi as another Jewish school has
done?
3
A – The other school recruited a JS teacher who teaches a higher JS level and
some of those classes are taught in Ivrit. They are not providing Ivrit teachers per
se.
Q – Is there any scope of using Israeli families in the school to identify potential
Ivrit conversation teachers maybe for the lower ability year 9 classes?
A – The school has reached out to the Israeli community in the UK. The school
feels it is more important to have a good teacher than any teacher which could
alienate pupils from learning the language maybe later on.
Q- Has the school applied to JNF for funding?
A – Yes. Details to follow at a later meeting.
Q- what percentage wil do Ivrit GCSE?
A - Excluding the cohort who take the GCSE early (approximately 30), about 60
students. This is higher than most other Jewish schools.
4.3 Item 7.2 – Pupil Premium – report sent by JA.
The Pupil Premium was introduced in 2011 to try and reduce the attainment gap
between children from low income families and the general student population.
Funding has been guaranteed until 2019/20. JFS uses the Teaching and
Learning tool kit.
This year there are 62 students who are eligible for the pupil premium which is a
significant increase from last year. The funding pays for part-time English and
Maths intervention tutors, masterclasses and music lessons. Details are published
on the school website. Pupil premium students have performed well at GCSE and
A level and exceed national averages.
Question:
Q –Why have the numbers increased?
A – Better information from primary schools and research by the school have
identified more eligible students.
5. Action arising from last meeting of FGB
5.1 Intervention Programme (see item 7)
5.2 Governor presences at staff exit interviews
There was a discussion as to which committee should make this decision and
whether this was something staff wanted or whether it related to some exceptional
circumstances last year. Governors receive a regular report outlining the reasons
staff members leave so this information is already available to governors.
4
Decision: Staff members can choose whether to be interviewed by their line
manager, a member of SLT or an HR representative. A governor wil only sit in if
specifical y requested by the staff member.
5.3 Promotion of student welfare parental support group
The SEN team and educational psychologist are considering setting up coffee
mornings for parents of students facing similar issues for peer support.
5.4 Value of the Behaviour reward scheme
The behaviour reward scheme has been very successful (particularly with years 7
and 8). Changes are being made to reduce the cost. Rewards are now based on
conduct points rather than reward points. There are options now to take a lower
reward or hold onto points and work towards a larger reward. Non-monetary
rewards (such as lunch passes) are also being increased.
6. Continuing Professional Development Update -AD
There has been a change to CPD this year away from the whole school approach
to a more bespoke personalised training model. Following a review and feedback
on development needs a CPD menu has been devised and shared with staff.
There has also been an audit of what level each teacher is at and training they
have completed. The benefits of this approach is that staff have chosen their own
options so they are more motivated. There is no cost because in-house staff with
specific expertise run sessions.
Questions:
Q – Who decides what courses teachers can attend?
A – the teachers choose the options that are available at their level and if they
can’t get onto that course they can choose alternatives from the Inset options. It is
also determined through discussions and recommendations by line managers.
Q – How are candidates chosen to take part in the Middle or Senior Leadership
National Programme?
A – If a teacher chooses this option they wil discuss it with AD. Only 3 people
have gone through to the middle leadership programme because JFS now runs its
own in-house middle leadership course. The Aspiring Senior leadership did not go
ahead because of low demand.
Q- Who pays for course and are teachers tied in afterwards for any time?
A – The school can’t legally tie people in. For some courses, JFS pays 50% and
the teacher pays the other half.
Q- Can the school ask for the 50% to be paid back if the teacher doesn’t stay for
an agreed period of time?
A – This is possible and would need to be put in place via HR.
Q- What training is there for internal coaches and mentors and how are teachers
5
selected?
A – AD is now an accredited coaching facilitator. As part of the Outstanding
Teacher Programme there are 2 sessions on coaching. This module can also be
offered as standalone sessions so they can be offered to NQTs and teachers not
on the programme. Next year there wil be 12 people who wil have completed the
Outstanding Teacher Programme who wil be available to help run the module.
This is the first year it has been run at JFS and they hope to be able to market it
externally next year as an additional revenue scheme.
Q – How is the CPD programme reviewed?
A- Al objectives are reviewed mid and end of year with line managers. If the
teacher is taking an accredited programme, achievement of that award would be
one of the review outcomes.
Q- Do teachers get to observe other teachers and have opportunities to mentor
each other?
A-That’s what this programme wil promote. There wil be opportunities for peer
observation and the school is developing a formal mentoring and coaching
programme for staff.
Q – Is the safeguarding training online only?
A – This was looked into but face to face sessions were decided upon instead.
Safeguarding training is differentiated according to role so the safeguarding team
for example are trained to a higher level.
Q- Who decides if a staff member can take a Master’s degree and who funds it?
A - Any teacher can decide to and ask for financial support from head teacher.
The numbers have reduced in recent years due to funding issues. No teachers are
currently doing a Master’s degree. Some non-teaching staff are. It is a
discretionary decision and it depends on the relevance of subject and benefit to
the school as to whether the school wil support it.
Text here has been redacted
Exemption 40: Personal Data
7. Data led interventions – SB and DC presentation
There are progress tracking meetings looking at every student in year 11. The
meetings are multi-disciplinary including the SEN team and heads of year for a
holistic approach. There is a progress tracking proforma for each student. Key
groups which are underperforming are highlighted so department heads and
subject leads know who to target for interventions. Heads of year monitor the
interventions. The programme wil be reviewed next term. If there is no progress,
alternative interventions are devised.
Al the data and intervention plans are on SIMS and it can generate student
intervention report summaries.
Achievement interventions are put in place for year 10 and 11 students. These
can include summer interventions for year 11s, drop down days for intensive
6
maths and English, and after half term a large English language intervention from
8.30-9am is being run for year 11 students.
Parents are invited in for short meetings to encourage buy-in from the whole
family and to help them with strategies to support the student at home. Its
presented as a positive rather than punitive experience. Interventions in English
and Maths has improved Progress 8 scores for 2016/17.
Questions;
Q- How are the predictive grades made?
A- They are based on the mock results and usually go up a grade if the teacher is
confident the student wil put in the extra work. It’s a teacher-based decision. The
minimum expectation is what SISRA generates (government data) based on the
KS2 score and government predictions. Last year, teacher predictions were very
accurate but this may be more difficult with the new 9-1 courses. When the
government benchmark it won’t be the same for English and Maths but for all
other subjects they wil make the same proportion of C, B and A grades this year
and the teachers wil use this for predictions.
Q- If classes progress better than expected are teachers rewarded?
A- Its dealt with in part of performance management.
Q – Can you track progress via teacher or cohort?
A- Individual students are tracked across all subjects and holistical y looking at
behaviour and attendance when identifying the best way to intervene, using an
‘Every Child Matters’ approach. Tracking individual teacher’s results isn’t possible
when teachers share classes. Peer observations can be useful to motivate
teachers however when they see successful teaching methods.
Q – Do students get a letter home when there is evidence of progress?
A -Data reports are sent out but no letters to reward progress. This could be
looked into however in future.
Q- There doesn’t seem to be much preparation for practical exams – comment?
A –Art, DT, PE are all allocating time to practice practical element of exams.
[check wording re: charging for photocopying].
8. Curriculum offer KS4/5 - SA
There has been a change at the Joint Council for Qualification (JCQ) so that
students now have the opportunity to appeal a grade for course work before its
sent to the exam board. It’s a way to avoid appeals to the exam board. It will only
effect subjects with a course work component. JFS is working closely with Yavneh
and JCOSS to develop a joint protocol to set the same timeframes and processes.
One of the possible grounds for appeal is the quality of teaching. JCQ guidance
says however as long as the school is explicit, students can’t appeal on that basis.
If there is an appeal it must be responded to in 5 days. The work has to be re-
marked internally and this can be difficult for small departments. There is no extra
funding for this. Parents wil be charged (appeals to GCSE grades are charged
and refunded if the grade goes up). The school may need additional administrative
7
support during the period.
Action: Governors to check the legality of whether refunds wil be made if grade is
increased on appeal.
Curriculum update.
There are now 4 pathways in 6th Form, CASH – childcare, BTEC programme
business media, food science and art and design. KS4 is increasing the BTEC
and vocational provision. There wil be an update at the next committee meeting
on uptake.
Questions;
Q- Someone from the head boy and girls’ team used to attend curriculum
meetings but this has stopped. Should they be invited again?
A – It’s for governors to decide if want them to attend.
Decision: to invite head boy/girl to attend in future. They can step out if there are
any sensitive topics being discussed.
9.
Jewish curriculum update – covered in point 4.1
10. Behaviour – SA
There have been fewer incidents in January (239), then during December (370).
Jermaine Hay joined the behaviour team and work on the behaviour room should
be finished by half term which wil make interventions easier and provide privacy
for 1:1 sessions. Mr Bruce has been appointed temporarily to SLT until the end of
the year. There has been a change of culture with more respect between pupils
and staff. Pupils now have badges to identify year groups and there is a focus on
correct uniform.
Mr Bruce wil take over as safeguarding lead so wil reduce his work with the
behaviour team. This is part of succession planning for when TT retires. There has
been a safeguarding complaint and recommendations wil be brought to the
governors.
11. Attendance update
In January attendance was marginally better for years 7-11 and 12 than this time
last year at 95.8%, 95.33% last year. Sept 2017- Jan 2018, 6th form – 93.1% and
had been 92.87% last year.
12. Home school agreement
The only update required are the dates and Rachel Fink asked that the spelling of
‘orah veykar’ should be changed to ‘orah viyikar’.
13. Terms of reference
Second half – standard for all committees Points 17-19.
8
Re: respect to student discipline
CSWAB are responsible for convening the panel but it doesn’t need to be made
up exclusively of CSWAB members, but if possible at least one member should be
from CSWAB.
A. In respect of student discipline cont./
The behaviour principles written statement is being reviewed by Chris Wray
Keep 3 bullet points.
Date of Next Meeting: Monday at 6.30pm.
Signed: ________________________________
Date: ____________________
9
Curriculum and Student Welfare, Attendance & Behaviour Committee.
Minutes of meeting held on Monday 30th April 2018, at 6.30 PM.
Chairperson:
Dr. Charlotte Benjamin(CB)
Members present: Ms Geraldine Fainer (GF)
Mrs Naomi Newman (NN).
Mr. James Lake (JL)
Mrs Anne Shisler (AS)
Mrs Julia Alberga (JA)
Others present:
Mr. Simon Appleman (SA)
Mr David Wragg (DW)
Mr. Dharmesh Chauhan (DC).
1. Apologies for Absence
Apologies were received from Dr Rabbi Zarum and Mr Bruce (RB).
2. Minutes of Previous meeting
2.1 A number of spelling corrections were made.
2.2 To delete reference to payment for photocopying.
2.3 Point 6 - Continuing Professional Development Update
Text here has been redacted
Exemption: Section 40 - Personal Data
• A clarification was made in relation to an answer to question 4 regarding
requesting re-payment of course fees if a teacher leaves the school shortly
after completion. This was referring to more in-depth training such as
Masters degrees rather than shorter courses directly related to teaching.
Action agreed: SA to speak to HR regarding about possibility of requesting some
repayment of fees for a course if a member of staff leaves before a specified time
period is completed.
The minutes were approved subject to these amendments.
3. Matters arising from the previous meeting
It was agreed that JFS should mirror the process for appeals to exam boards in that
refunds are made when there is a grade increase but not if there are points
increased which does not affect the grade.
Action agreed: SA to ask Helen Furman (Exams Officer) to check if this is
consistent with other schools.
4. Safeguarding Update (written report circulated)
There were two reviews last week. The first were two visitors arranged via Brent
Schools Partnership, commissioned by the school. The second was a return visit by
Tony Lamport who started his review in February and was checking on progress. His
feedback overall was very positive and the headline is that ‘Safeguarding at JFS is
effective’. He raised a few issues which are documented in the report and SA
reported that 90% of them have been actioned. Issues discussed were:
• Some issues from students regarding bul ying and poor behaviour – to be
discussed in item 6. Behaviour Update
• Inconsistent audit trail when safeguarding concerns are referred, not all are using
the proforma. RB to address this.
• Governors not always triangulating information
• To ensure data backups of safeguarding information is encrypted
• Offices where staff may meet with pupils without viewing windows, need windows
installed in doors
• Recommendations to tackle bullying
• Fire dril s and emergency dril s held annually and wil now be held every term.
• Warning sign to be added to the pond regarding deep water.
SA recognised the huge amount of work completed by Raynn Bruce and Candace
Bertie Candice in addressing safeguarding issues and noted that they have built on
the foundations laid by Talia Thoret over the summer.
Action agreed:
1.
SA to discuss adding glass to relevant office doors with Graham Pocock and 1440
tomorrow.
2. Any posters obscuring existing viewing panes to be removed immediately.
5. Timetabling Update – DW
5.1 Recruitment –
A number of vacancies have been fil ed but the total number of
vacancies for next term won’t be known until the resignation cut off date at the end of
May. The school has recruited good candidates and no agencies have been used for
recruitment this year. 7 teachers are known to be leaving, 4 are retiring, 1 is moving
abroad and 1 is setting up her own business. 3 maternity leaves (in Dance, PE and
English departments) have also been covered. Recruitment has also been
successful in replacing staff on 1-year contracts with permanent staff. There has
been successful recruiting to the English department but insufficient good candidates
for Maths posts.
Questions;
Q- Was the difficulty retaining English staff to do with the structure of the
department?
A – No, it was due to specific difficult circumstances last year.
5.2 Timetabling
There wil be similar challenges to last year because there has been no change to
allocated teacher hours or subject allocations. There are numerous factors to take
into account including p/t teachers, numbers of students for each subject for GCSE
and A’ level choices, number of subject classrooms available and compromises often
have to be made for students in terms of subject choices and for teachers in terms of
how teaching hours are distributed.
Questions;
Q - Last year timetabling was brought in-house and there was a new process which
made it difficult – why are the challenges the same this year?
A – This year we are starting the process earlier because last year we had to wait for
changes to the school day to be approved so that is an advantage. However, there
are stil numerous factors to be taken into account that make it challenging.
Q- How confident are you that the timetable wil be ok for next year?
A- 100% confident it wil be ready for September but it won’t be ideal because there
are no extra staff to provide flexibility.
Q- What type of compromises wil there have to be?
A – For example there wil be split classes with different teachers for the same
subject. If a subject has 3 hours a fortnight, it may be split 1 hour with one teacher
and 2 hours with a different teacher. Students and parents often dislike this. If there
are too many maths lessons running at the same time they can’t all be in the Maths
block so some lessons may be spread out across the school. Science and Maths are
blocked together for years 8 and 9 which builds inflexibility into the system. Sixth
form lessons for some subjects can end up all in the morning or all in the afternoon.
Q- Have A’ level choices been affected by the timetable?
A – Only one student can’t be accommodated because he requested, Maths, Further
Maths, Physics and English. English and further Maths are scheduled at the same
time and there isn’t capacity to change the English timetable for one student.
If students want to change their choices for A’ level after GCSE results, they can only
do so if that course isn’t full. There is some flexibility however with Sociology and
Politics.
6. Behaviour Update – SA for RB
6.1 SA estimated 85% of the time behaviour is excel ent but there are stil some
issues with behaviour in the school that need addressing including in cover
lessons and lunch time. There is an acknowledgement that some teachers are not
applying the behaviour policy consistently and that they may be waiting for the
new Head teacher to address issues with behaviour. But managing behaviour is a
whole school responsibility.
To address the issues, SLT have drafted a Behaviour Action Plan which they are
taking to the Leadership Forum for consultation. It includes use of mobile phones
in lessons, respect for teachers, peers and the school and reviewing the
effectiveness of the behaviour policy. Governors can be assured that SLT are
aware of and are addressing these issues.
Governors comments on the plan included;
• Requiring eye contact from students can be an issue for students on the Autism
spectrum so this requirement should be re-considered,
• It should include respect required from parents/home environment for teachers as
well, although this wil be covered in the Home School Agreement.
Questions;
Q- Why is it an issue if students take their bags into the lunch hall?
A – There can be health and safety issues if there are numerous bags brought in
and left around the lunch hall.
6.2 Questions relating to the Behaviour Report distributed by DW to NN and
GF.
Q- What is the parking system?
A – There is a rota in each faculty, of one teacher being available to supervise any
student who is not able to stay in class, that child is ‘parked’ in another room.
Q- The number of behaviour incidences have gone up. Has behaviour got worse or
recording better?
A – Behaviour has deteriorated around the school in the last 12 months in terms of
frequency and type of incidents. There is also an issue with teachers becoming less
responsive to poor behaviour. Anecdotally some teachers are not bothering because
they say they set detention and there is no follow up or consequences if the student
fails to attend. There is some progress in behaviour management but DW said he
thinks this wil be accelerated when the new Head starts.
Q – SENK students have a disproportionally high number of behaviour points
compared to the rest of the school – is there an aspirational goal for the SEN
department to reduce this gap?
A – Yes. The rate is too high. It is similar to national figures but too high for JFS.
There needs to be a strategy for SENK students who often have behavioural issues
which effects their progress. There is whole school training as part of CPD to
address low level disruption and working with SENK students.
Q- Why are there behaviour issues with Year 7, is this unusual?
Text here has been redacted
Exemption: Section 40 - Personal Data
7. Attendance Update
Attendance figures are slightly better than this time last year. Punctuality figures are
lower. KS4 year 10 and SENK students are a concern and year 11 is relatively
normal for this time of year.
The recording system changed this September and the
new acting head of year 10 didn’t start until the end of February and is stil learning
the system. In 6th Form there is also a new system. Assistant Heads of year are
now monitoring attendance and it is taking sometime to embed. The Attendance
Officer post for 6th form has gone but there is a new administrator who is providing
support with attendance.
Questions;
Q- It appears attendance and behaviour of SENK students is significantly lower.
How is this being addressed?
A – SENK is a particularly disaffected group. This is being addressed by Genice
Watson, deputy SENCO who supports each Head of Year with the educational
welfare officer (EWO) visits to see through actions.
8. Attainment/ Progress Update -DC
• GCSE predictions are lower than in 2017.
• There is a new marking system (9-1) and are new curricula for astronomy
and sociology, so teachers have no experience making predictions for
these exams.
• Maths predictions are not as high as other subjects but stil at a good level.
They are based on last years cohort and can change.
• EBAC scores are slightly lower than last year but well above national
averages.
• Maths and English have 92% pass rate, up from 91% last year. The
national average is 63%.
• Extra interventions were put in place from September to increase the
numbers likely to get a 5 in maths.
• Approximately 10% of students drop down from 9 to 8 subjects (some from
10 to 9) before the exams for a range of reasons
Questions:
Q- what % SEN students don’t get English and Maths?
A – There are 6 SEN E students this year doing better than expected and 8
SENK.
Q-Is the lower level of support available to SENK students impacting on slower
progress than the SEN students?
A-Support is identified on a case by case basis but some SEN K students are on
a reduced curriculum so often can’t get the same scores. Also, school non-
attenders can skew the overall figures. For example, when you remove 2 school
refusers progress is good.
Q- Who identifies a student as SEN K?
A – The SENCO makes that decision. Sometimes the school identifies it rather
than parents. There are set criteria that need to be applied. It includes physical
disability, behavioural issues and learning difficulties.
A’ Levels
Predicted grades are slightly lower this year for A and A*. AS levels have been
removed for some courses and some curricula are new and there are no
exemplars or test papers so grades are harder to predict.
Question:
Q- Why when students ask for test papers are they are told they are being held
back by the school for mocks?
A – Any papers that are publicly available can be downloaded by students. Some
exam boards wil ask schools not to release a past paper or exemplars for new
curriculums. If there is only one exemplar with a mark scheme, it’s important to
hold that back for the mock exam.
9. Policies - SA
9.
1 Internet and School Network Policy
• This policy has been reviewed by Chris Ray.
• It was decided that point 5.1 Publishing on the web, should be
incorporated into section 4.1 Teaching students to validate information
correctly.
• An additional point to be added to 4.1 is that teaching wil be via PHSE and
computing lessons.
• It was agreed that e-safety training for years 7-11 is covered in a separate
E-safety policy.
• It was agreed Appendix 2 p6 should be amended to say, ‘Rules for
acceptable use of the Internet and school network for JFS Workforce’ to
reflect governors now also have access to the school network so it should
not be limited to JFS staff.
• Policy to be reviewed in 2020 but this can be brought forward if there are
changes in technology or the IT contract that would warrant it.
• The wording of the section relating to deletion of files to be updated to
‘reserve the right to delete files’ and reflect that it refers to files saved on
the system.
Action agreed: SA and DH to update the policy and circulate to the
committee for approval
9.2 Curriculum (was the Teaching and learning policy)
• There are some minor changes and spelling corrections.
• Pathways as the school articulates them have been added.
• It was agreed the wording relating to collective worship (section 2) is too
generic and should be changed to something more specific to JFS and the
school’s religious ethos.
• To be reviewed in 12 months.
• In the Home School agreement (appendix), to change the section title from
Behaviour, to ‘Behaviour and Respect’ and make it the first section.
• Home School Agreement – to add a bullet point about wellbeing.
9.3 Sex and relationships Education Policy
• There have been no changes to this policy. It wil be reviewed in 2020.
• There was a discussion regarding the last sentence in the section on
definitions ‘[SRE]…is not about promoting orientation or sexual activity’ as
to whether it was required or not.
Action agreed: To approve the policy as is and CB wil raise the query
discussed with the Office of the Chief Rabbi (OCR).
9.4 Special Educational Needs and Disability Policy.
• Majority of changes are to reflect JFS language.
• It was agreed that section 4 on the SEND budget should move to section
1.1.4.
• Section 15 wording ‘social problems’ to be replaced with something more
appropriate.
Policy approved subject to the aforementioned changes.
Action agreed: SA to update with changes discussed above.
10 A.O.B
10.1 CSWAB invitation to Head Boy/Girl team
Although discussed at the last meeting and FGB, it was decided not to invite
representatives from the Head boy/girl team to this meeting due to the
Safeguarding and Staffing update agenda items.
10.2 Training on Critical Incident Policy
The policy has been disseminated to all staff and the SLT members identified in
the Critical incident group are receiving specific training.
Signed: ___________________________________
Date: _________
JFS School Curriculum and Student Welfare Committee, Attendance & Behaviour (CSWAB)
Committee.
Minutes of meeting held on 12th November 2018 at 6.30 PM.
Chairman:
Dr. Charlotte Benjamin (CBenj)
Members present:
Ms Geraldine Fainer (GF) ( in chair for first hour)
Mrs Julia Alberga (JA)
Mr. James Lake (JL)
Mrs Anne Shisler (AS)
Mrs Naomi Newman (NN).
In attendance:
Ms Caroline Bunder (CBund)
Mrs Rachel Fink (RF)
Mr Simon Appleman (SA)
Mr. Dharmesh Chauhan (DC)
Clerk:
Ms Louise Fox
1. Apologies for Absence
None received.
2. Minutes of previous meeting 30.04.18
The minutes were agreed by those present.
3. Matters arising from the previous meeting
3.1 Item 2.2.3
Repayment of fees for a course if a member of staff leaves before a
specified time period is completed SA confirmed this has been discussed with the Headteacher and wil be instigated when
necessary. This is standard practice in schools and the amounts wil depend on the type
and cost of the course and at what stage the member of staff leaves.
3.2 Item 3 – Refund practice for appeals to examination boards
SA confirmed this is being addressed and is in progress. A student has to pay to appeal
a grade. If the overall grade goes up, they wil get a refund. Staff are careful not to
1
advise appealing grades to ensure this is an independent decision by the student.
3.3 Item 4 – Adding glass to some office doors
SA responded. This arose as part of the safeguarding review; it was decided it was not
necessary for the offices in question.
Action agreed: SA check it does not apply to any other offices.
3.4 Item 4 – removal of posters obscuring viewing panes
This has been actioned.
3.5 Item 6.2 – Review of extended transition for SEN E pupils
This is under review by Gail Rosten (GR) SENCO and she is trialling some new processes
to make sure the transition from year 6 to year 7 goes smoothly for this group.
3.6 Item 9.1 -Review of internet and school network policy for committee consideration.
Action agreed: SA to check what this relates to.
3.7 Item 9.3 -requirement in SRE Policy for sentence on promotion of orientation or
[and?] sexual activity
In light of the Chief Rabbi’s booklet, RF said she will check if information in the Bullying
Policy needs to be updated. In terms of education, the school needs to review what
information is made available to both the lower and upper schools with regards to sex
and relationships.
3.8 Item 9.4 – Updating of SEND policy
This has been completed.
4. Headteacher’s report – Paper circulated to the Committee.
RF said that her main report wil be presented at FGB but she wil structure the reports
in future around the CSWAB aeiceda, to ensure reports presented at each meeting are
relevant to that time of year.
Questions
Q – What changes are coming in for Ofsted?
A – The arrival of a new headteacher no longer triggers an inspection so if results remain
where they should be and don’t fal below the national average and there are no other
reasons to trigger an inspection (for example if there aren’t a number of substantiated
complaints going through) its unlikely JFS wil be inspected before 2020 which provides
time to plan and prepare. There will also be a new framework from September 2019
separating Welfare and Wel being from the main inspection and there wil be less focus
on data and more focus on a holistic education which wil be good for JFS with the
development of more vocational courses planned.
Q – Is the curriculum widening?
A – The School needs to develop a bespoke curriculum that reflects the School’s intent and
values. JFS is developing a curriculum booklet with a brief summary of the curriculum
2
for each subject including PSHE and British Values. It wil include the depth and breadth
of the curriculum and how it wil be made accessible for all abilities within the School.
JFs wil be ensuring that one of its key objectives to improve literacy in the School starts
at KS3.
Q – How is the organisation Prospects involved in the School?
A – Prospects is a careers advisory service. The school has to have independent careers
advice and Deepa meets with year 11 about A’ level choices and careers, she also meets
with Year 10 and some Year 9’s who may benefit from help to focus on where they
want to get to.
5. Safeguarding and Student Wel -being Update
There was a discussion about the safeguarding list and vulnerable students list. The
numbers on the safeguarding list are currently low because it is early in the academic
year. There are 87 students on the Vulnerable students list based on information gained
from their primary schools, which is approximately a third of the year group. They are
discussed fortnightly with the transition team. There is some overlap between the two
lists.
Any member of staff who has a safeguarding concern completes a form and sends it to
the Head of Safeguarding and the information is kept on the safeguarding register. This
does not mean there is always active safeguarding interventions with social services for
each case. If the issue is resolved then the student comes off the School’s safeguarding
register. This list can only be accessed by the DSLs, the Headteacher and Rabbi Howard
Cohen (HC) who wil be joining JFS as Deputy Headteacher, Wellbeing, Safeguarding &
Behaviour. It is not necessarily pupil premium students on the list as issues can arise for
students of al backgrounds.
Questions
Q- It sounds like safeguarding training for JFS staff is well covered but what do we know
about the training staff from 1440 have?
A – The school has access to the DBS’s for all 1440 staff and JFS has agreed to train the 1440
staff but this is our biggest vulnerability currently. Staff can do level 1 online
safeguarding training and HC may be able to run the training as he has experience in
safeguarding training. The School wil also be introducing different coloured lanyards so
staff and students are aware of visitors who need to be accompanied and who have
clearance to visit the School unaccompanied.
Q – How have the lanyards been received by the students?
A – It’s been mainly positive and is common in many schools now.
6. SEN and Inclusion
The committee received the fol owing reports;
6.1 The SEN report
6.2 2017/18 Inclusion report
6.3 The current Inclusion register.
3
Action agreed: One report sent to the Committee contained some identifying
information by accident and all committee members agreed to delete that report
immediately.
Questions;
RF was asked for an update on two students with whom the School is having issues .
Student 1 is in year 8 and has a working age of approximately 7 years. Staff are
struggling to meet his needs and manage his behaviour and the school believes he is in
the wrong setting but his parent wants him to remain at JFS. He was recently excluded
for one day. Unfortunately, his parent did not attend the re-integration meeting. An EP
assessment has been completed and emergency review meeting with Brent LA has
been arranged. The student has an EHCP and was accepted because JFS was the school
named on the statement and the school cannot refuse at that point. The only way to
move the student without parental support is via a permanent exclusion and JFS has to
explore all other options first.
Student 2 is receiving a bespoke one to one programme in an effort to develop a
relationship with the student. There is no additional funding for this and there is an
impact on other students when so much of the Pastoral team’s time is taken up on one
student. The school needs to go through the processes in the Behaviour policy step by
step in terms of any fixed term exclusions, increasing the time period if escalation is
required and using the Right Track alternative provision when the student is out of
school. This is unpopular with parents as the provision is further away in Brent.
7. Behaviour – report presented to the Committee.
RF reported that behaviour is discussed regularly by SLT. The number of behaviour
issues are declining because teachers are working hard to develop better relationships
with students and are dealing with issues at the time they arise rather than referring to
the behaviour team. Teachers who are struggling are much more open to asking for
support. Jason Bookatz is helping to support staff, doing observations and training.
Marcia Jones is running the internal exclusion room and is using her mentoring
experience. The on-call system is working well. Distribution of behaviour points are
being monitored to see which staff are giving out the most positive and negative points.
Questions;
Q- How has the mobile phone policy impacted on behaviour?
A – It has had a positive impact in the classroom and there are very few issues with
mobile phones now. Phones are rarely being seen outside of class either. Parents have
been very supportive of the policy.
Q – What’s happening with the Rewards Scheme?
A – Rewards should be as immediate and low cost as possible and available to as many
students as possible. The scheme has been reviewed introducing ‘Light and Honour’
awards for highest achievement points per year group and ‘Students of the month’ for
4
each department. Students wil have their achievements recognised via letters home,
certificates and SLT postcards home as well. There are plans to run parties for
achievement for whole cohorts and develop more awards for non-academic
achievements including volunteering, progress, contributions to the school.
Q – Is it still the case that internal exclusions are mainly SEN K students and is there
training for teachers who find it difficult to make reasonable adjustments?
A – No teacher can send a student to internal exclusion now, it has to be a decision by
the Head of department. The school recognised the need for a measure of judgement
from teachers. Teachers need to have read the SEN register for children in their classes.
SEN training is going on in departmental meetings to support teachers to build
relationships with these students. This is an area of weakness in the school and it is
being addressed. The next step is to be able to evidence that teachers have read the
SEN register and are aware of needs of students in their classes. Information is being
gathered about teachers’ training needs and improvements are showing already.
Q- Is it possible to have a focus on SEN K students in CSWAB this year with regards to
managing behaviour?
A – Yes. Managing differentiation comes into the Learning and Teaching programme.
8. Attendance
Since the report, attendance is at 96.5% for years 7-11 and 89.4% for years 12-13 which
is a slight improvement. Attendance in Year 13 is bringing down the 6th Form
attendance figures. Year 13 students are missing JS and PE and they are registered in
these classes in the afternoons so they are now ‘gated’ on those afternoons.
Attendance letters have been sent to parents. There needs to be a 6th Form behaviour
policy linked with attendance and then sanctions such as detentions or exclusions for
significant non-attendance can be put in place. Currently the only sanction for non-
attendance is to not enter a student for exams.
The target of 95% attendance for years 7-11 and above 90% for years 12 and 13, were
agreed by the committee.
Questions:
Q- Does the 6th form need its own dedicated Attendance Officer?
A – There is capacity among current Attendance Officers to manage 6th Form
attendance as wel . Staff are currently focused on ensuring attendance records are
correct. The aim is to make the system more effective and accurate.
Q- Wil the SIMs parent app where parents can see their child’s attendance record,
improve attendance?
A- Feedback so far has been good.
5
9. Analysis of Results of National Examinations
9.1 GCSE – report was received by the committee.
The Progress 8 Score is 1.02. On average students gained one grade higher than
expected for GCSE and above national expectations. The EBAC scores were in line
with last year and Progress 8 scores were positive for all groups but lower for SEN.
There is no prior data for some of the SEN K group and some were non-attenders or
were fol owing a different curriculum which is why the figures are negative. If you
remove the non-attenders the figures move into positive progress scores. Progress
for the SEN group does need to be improved however.
Heads of departments can identify from the data which classes performed best, any
groups that are underperforming use this to share best practice. The data is discussed
with Heads of department and the Head teacher.
RF said she has completed most of the meetings now and has been impressed by the
level of professionalism of Heads of Faculty and Subject leads and their analysis of the
data, in terms of the departments’ strengths, weaknesses, plans of action and taking
on board lessons learnt. It is possible to dril down to individual questions on a paper,
looking at the national average score compared to the JFS scores, identify which topics
need development and which teachers.
The governors wanted to thank the Heads of Faculty and their departments for al
their hard work.
Action agreed: Committee to draft a letter of thanks to the Heads of Faculty for the
Headteacher to circulate.
Questions
Q –Last year there were concerns about the RS results with the new GCSE. How were
the results?
A – They were the best scores this year and made a large contribution to Progress 8
score.
Q- Are you expecting similar GCSE grades for the second year of the new 9-1 syllabuses
this year?
A- It is very hard to say but all schools are in the same situation. JFS is in the to 50
schools for GCSE and top 100 for A’ Levels for Progress 8 but attainment is higher than
other schools. There are only 2 schools above JFS in the rankings that 200+ in their 6th
Forms.
Q- Do you think there are undiagnosed learning difficulties with are resulting in
negative progress of SEN K students?
A – (Written response from GR) The school is fully aware of SEN K making poor progress
but we don’t think there are undiagnosed learning difficulties. Some have diagnoses but
the funding for support is limited. Many new interventions have been put in place at KS
3 and 4 to try and identify issues and intervene earlier which hopefully wil improve
progress for SEN K students. RF commented that SEN K students’ progress should be
6
compared with other SEN K students national y, not with the general school population.
She said that SEN funds should not be used for SEN K students and lack of funding for
this group is an issue. It may be an area for fundraising in future. Thresholds for funding
and extra time in exams are so high that many SEN K students don’t meet them but do
experience a high level of social or behavioural issues.
Q- How do you benchmark SEN students who don’t take exams?
A -They are benchmarked by a national average of 0, so anything above 0 is ok.
Q – What is the school aiming for if students are taking exams? Is 0.18 good or are you
aiming higher?
A – The school can benchmark from early stage and so can identify a target and if the
student reaches it you know they are doing ok. This year there are 6 SEN K students so a
small cohort and you almost have to use them as individual case studies to learn from
for future students and add the narrative to the scores to show progress.
Q- Can parents fund extra support?
A – No. There needs to be equal opportunity available to al students and transparency
about how resources are allocated. Parents can pay for additional support privately
outside of school only
9.2 A’ Level Report.
SA reported that the School was not happy with results in a couple of places. Some
were down to individual students and others that were nationally problematic subjects
and the School challenged the exam board e.g. A’ Level Theatre; al but one student had
their exams remarked and went up a grade. The School is lacking exemplars so they are
looking into other ways to provide support such as discussions with moderators to
understand what is required. It would be helpful to get teachers trained as examiners at
each key stage and it can bring significant learning into the School.
Questions;
Q- Has the positive results led to better retention of year 12 students?
A -234 students out of 285 moved into the 6th Form which is slightly higher than
previous year. There are more alternative pathways available now if students don’t
want to or can’t take A’ levels. The school is developing the range of options such as
BTEC in applied science for those that want to continue with sciences but did not get
the grades to study at A’ level. This doesn’t generate any capital cost to the school as
resources are already in place. So far 12 year 11 students have shown and interest in
the course and it may be attractive to external candidates.
Q – Are BTECs going in to be replaced with T’levels in a couple of years?
A – T’levels are being trial ed in some schools but it’s not certain if they wil be
introduced or not. The school is looking at T’Levels to check the BTEC courses offered
are in line with them for a smooth transition.
Q- Is JFS considering any catering courses?
A – It’s a question of resources. The school needs to make sure courses offered attract
7
the broadest range of students and keep finances in shape. There will always be some
students with such specific requirements/interests that the 6th Form can’t meet them.
Q – What are the minimum numbers to make any course viable?
A – At KS5 less than KS4. It can depend on the subject and teacher availability and
impact on rest of that department. A’ Level classes at JFS tend to be large but there is a
cost implication of splitting up into smaller groups in terms of more resources required
but also a risk of students leaving because other 6th Form provision can offer smaller
classes.
9.3 Student Destinations
The previous year 13 destinations are;
Apprenticeships – 4
Gap year 35
University / Higher education – 177
Working -3
Unknown – 5.
9.4 In year leavers - Year 13
Students leaving at the end of year 12 is indicative of issues relating to not getting exam
results in early enough in year 12. There is a plan in place to hold the year 12 exams
earlier so results will be available in the summer term and plans can be discussed and
put in place with students before they start in year 13 so they are less likely to panic
and feel the need to move out of JFS.
The committee thanked Dharmesh Chauhan, Angela Fernades and Reuben for their
reports and appreciated the speed and clarity of analysis which the committee found
very helpful.
10. Curriculum development
10 .1 Curriculum plan -this has been completed by al heads of faculty and includes
PSHE, British Values, and JiEP. SA working on this with Gail Rosten to ensure it is in line
with expectations of Ofsted.
Questions:
Q- Any chal enges?
A – Mainly working out what can be afforded. The school is looking into a work skills
programme for KS4 student who are not achieving academically and seeking advice
from Binoh. It wil depend on the cost, whether the school can run the programme and
if there will be external demand as well. Clear pathways are being developed in 6th
Form including BTECs, A’ levels, a mix of both A’ levels and BTECs and one year only
programmes. Everyone is entitled to enter the 6th Form but conditional offers wil be
made for particular pathways depending on grades required for each programme.
10.2 Teaching and learning chal enges
8
Anna Joseph is doing great job developing and implementing the Teaching and
Learning Programme. She is identifying training needs of every new member of staff in
the school and monitoring the impact of the support. The anonymised learning walks
are helpful because it makes it a departmental issue rather than individual teacher and
develops a culture of improvement.
Questions:
Q- Can teachers who are identified as needing more support choose not to engage in
the programme?
A – Its moving in that direction but the staff are encouraged to take up the support.
Most of the staff identified as needing support are taking it up. If a more directive
approach is needed it wil be taken up via informal performance management initially.
Q- Is it just for teachers or also for tutors?
A – The school is looking into this as there is some variation in quality of tutors. The
school is looking at who are the best people or departments for PHSE delivery for
example.
10.3 British values
Sharon Kreiger reported back to SLT and the work done so far is very impressive. She is
fol owing up a lot of leads about where there needs to be greater impact. The school
need to be more explicit about which content comes under British Values so students
are aware of it and can articulate this. Other staff need to be encouraged to get
involved to widen the impact. SK may come to a CSWAB meeting in future to report
back.
11. Spiritual, Moral, Social and Cultural Development
PSHE and British Values are now both line managed by Daniel Marcus and they are
working closer together to ensure the right topics are being covered.
The school has also introduced ‘Pause for Thought’ a daily 3-minute podcast presented
by tutors, teachers and students on weekly themes often linked to current events. It
seems to be having a positive impact.
12. Careers education
A careers supervisor has been appointed. Careers education is good at KS5 but requires
improvement further down the school. The school is in conversation with Max Barney
to see if they would be able to fund development of careers education.
Questions:
Q- Can future reports link to Gatsby 8 benchmark?
A – yes.
13. School surveys
The staff survey has been completed and is very positive based on comments reviewed.
It reflects that the school is in a very different place from a couple of years ago.
The student survey wil be out in a couple of weeks and the Parent/Guardian survey was
sent out this week with 2 weeks to respond. Responses wil be analysed, perspectives
9
wil be triangulated and the response wil be in the format of ‘You said, we did…’.
Questions:
Q- What is the typical number of responses from parents?
A – Approximately 350 out of 1400 families which is a standard level of response to
these types of surveys.
14. A.O.B
14.1 Caroline Bunder needs to be approved as a member of CSWAB at FGB –
Action agreed: GF to discuss with the Clerk to the Governors.
14.2 Staff Chanukah party wil be on the last day of term – Governors are invited.
14.3 New Structure and Roles
Action agreed: RF to circulate the new structure and roles document to the Committee.
Date of Next Meeting: 19th February 2019 at 6.30pm.
Signed: _______________________________________ Date: ____________________
10
Minutes of the meeting of the Curriculum and Student Welfare, Attendance and Behaviour
Committee,
held at the School on Monday, 25th February 2019
Governors present were:
Dr Charlotte Benjamin (chairperson)
Ms Geraldine Finer
Mrs Anne Shisler
Mrs Naomi Newman
Mrs Julia Alberga
Ms Caroline Bunder
Mr James Lake
Others present were:
Mr Simon Appleman
Mrs Anna Joseph
Mr Geoff Peddie.
1. Apologies for absence
None received.
2. Minutes of Previous Meeting 12.11.18
Minor amendments were made and the minutes were approved and signed.
3. Matters Arising from Previous Meeting
3.1 Item 3.3 Action: SA to check that for safeguarding purposes it would not be necessary
to add glass to some office doors – this has been completed.
3.2 Item 14.1 Action: Discussion re: the appointment of Caroline Bunder to the Committee
– completed at FGB.
3.3 Item 9.1 Action: Committee to draft a letter of thanks to Faculty Heads re: GCSE
results – this has been completed.
3.4 Item 14.3 Action: Headteacher to circulate the new structure and roles document to the
Committee – completed. Copy to be sent out again.
4. Head teachers report - RF
RF explained that they know more about the Ofsted curriculum requirements now and can
start to understand the four key areas. There is less focus on outcomes and more on a
bespoke curriculum and personal development.
4.1 British Values update – From Sharon Kreiger (SK)
The school is trialling the ‘Loving classroom’ which brings together PSHE and British Values.
The Loving Classroom is based on developing a culture of respect which aligns with the
school’s values, Jewish values and British values of respectful interaction with others. SK is
also working with curriculum leaders to map where British values fit into al curricula.
1
Questions:
Q- What is the ‘Wings of Hope Achievement Programme’?
A – It makes students aware of educational limits in the developing world and provides an
introduction to social action through development of skil s such as public speaking,
fundraising and PR and teams compete to raise funds through events. The winning team
gets to visit India for 10 days. There needs to be a strategy in JIEP and vision for social
action to see how current programmes fit together as it is quite disjointed currently.
4.2 Spiritual, Moral, Social and Cultural development (SMSC) update
Written report received from Daniel Marcus (DM).
The school has started to prepare for a Pikuach inspection and SLT is starting a self-
evaluation in JS and other areas of the curriculum. For Ofsted it falls under personal
development and behaviour and also includes some of British Values and PSHE.
Questions;
Q- Do some areas stil need developing or just fine-tuning?
A – It is difficult to say without some feedback from DM. SLT is looking at the underlying
strategy and there wil be more of a focus on social action in JIEP.
4.3 Curriculum update – SA
The new Ofsted Framework looks at the 3 I’s, intent, implementation and impact.
The curriculum booklet now has statements of intent for each subject. Subject leaders are
working through a number of questions to be able to provide a rationale for the curriculum.
The aim is to build resilient learning.
Questions;
Q- Is Ofsted asking schools to describe what good teaching looks like, i.e. the quality of
teaching?
A – There is an enhanced focus on subject knowledge and therefore includes a focus on the
quality of teaching and learning within that.
Q- Can you fit this work into the current Inset times available or does the school need
additional time?
A – AJ wil explain more about the use of Inset time in her presentation but there is a CPD
session booked for April to work on curriculum design.
4.4 Careers education - GP
Developing the careers education has become a priority this year and a development lead
has been appointed. This year the aim is reach compliance and meet the benchmark
(Gatsby have 8 different benchmarks to be met) and next year cost effectiveness wil be
reviewed. In the third year the school wil apply for accreditation in careers development. The
current provider Prospects wil deliver the programme this year. The aim is also to work with
some community organisations such as Work Avenue to develop the project. Careers
provision in 6th form is good but from years 8-11 improvements are needed. The school wil
pilot a model for years 8-10 to establish the best approach. A careers fair for years 10 and
12 is being held at the end of March and there has been strong support from parents who
have agreed to participate in the event.
Funding is required to achieve this. The school is approaching key funders to see if they wil
support development of careers education including those already involved with the school..
Questions;
Q- Wil funders bring someone in to develop programmes?
2
A – The school wil design what they are looking for and hopefully investors wil fund it.
Q- Do Prospects have a way of evidencing their success?
A – Yes, they provide a report on outcomes.
Q- If the school stops using Prospects in the future how wil outcomes be measured?
A – The school may continue to work with Prospects or a different organisation. This wil be
a school decision not investors. Prospects are a holding pattern until the school can
benchmark other providers going forward.
4.5 6th Form Destinations –
written report from Dr Walton
Retention for this year 11 to year 12 year is likely to be high.
Questions;
Q- Are any of the apprenticeship destinations, higher apprenticeships at banks or accounting
firms this year?
A –Anecdotally one student at Oxbridge level or just below, decided to take an
apprenticeship in an insurance firm rather than go to university as it is a more cost-effective
way to gain qualifications.
4.6 Pupil Premium (PP) and CLA – GP
Overall the statistics are in the school’s favour. There are 15 PP students currently. There is
a spike in years 8 and 10 and the school is trying to address this by funding an assistant
head of year for those two years. Any physical items required come through the necessities
fund, for example laptops. Money can be used for tutoring which is effective but very costly.
It is difficult to find tutors who wil accept the rates the school can offer and if an agency is
used costs increase further. It can be hard to establish the cost benefits for pupil premium.
Questions;
Q- Could the school employ an in-house tutor?
A – This can be very difficult to timetable as the hours can be odd. In school, some staff may
offer tutoring at lunchtime or after school but some limitations.
Q- Are internal staff interested in tutoring during school hours?
A -Staff generally prefer not to do this because they can get higher rates out of school. Using
a tutoring service can increase the cost by 100%.
4.7 KS 3 Action plan -GP
The action plan stems from responses to the last Ofsted inspection in the School
Improvement plan. No items can be signed off until the end of the summer term because
they have ongoing actions going forward. The Accelerated Reading (AR) programme is up
and running and has been reviewed. The next step is to measure outcomes. Staff can
already see rapid progress having AR in English lessons rather than form time. The
programme also links with Ofsted’s curriculum on reading.
Pastoral care and behaviour are being managed by Rabbi Cohen. There is a research
project about what works for academically high achieving students.
The governors thanked GP for the report which they found clear and very helpful.
Questions;
3
Q- One of the red sections flags up issues with SEN K which is difficult to manage because
of funding cuts. Should more money be allocated for SEN K students and what can
governors do in collaboration with staff to give more support to SEN K students?
A – Rabbi Cohen has raised the issue of whether the school is identifying SEN K students
effectively and if there may be many more students who meet the criteria in terms of social
and emotional needs. Some are already identified at primary school but some are not.
Should the school re-define SEN K students? There are questions about how they are
supported to access the curriculum and make progress.
Q- So should the process be, that needs are assessed and then the support they would
benefit from should be identified, then funding should be looked into to meet those needs?
A – There are a few options that could be explored. Wembley High has is a good model of a
school with a high number of SEN K students who are identified early on as likely to struggle
in mainstream classrooms on transfer to secondary school. They have a class which
provides continuity from primary school with a teacher who supports them with the transition.
The teacher attends lessons with them for basic curriculum subjects such as English and
Maths. They have this intensive input for up to 2 years.
Another idea is to have a special needs class that transfers from one school to another each
year to share the burden across a number of schools, this might be an option for a group of
Jewish schools. There also needs to be better alternative provisions for students who can’t
manage a full day of academic lessons and would benefit from support in the morning and a
special practical/ vocational type programme in the afternoon. If money was no object a
specialist wing could be set up and shared with other Jewish schools to meet needs.
Q- Would parents of those children receive this idea positively?
A – There can be resistance from parents as they fear their child is being marginalised or
labelled but if they can see their child’s needs wil really be met by suitable alternative
provision you can get buy in from parents/carers. The aim would be to make JFS more
accessible to them and get those students back into mainstream schooling. Getting funding
for a building is manageable but getting ongoing year on year funding for staff and running
costs is very difficult.
Action point: Rabbi Cohen to provide a report to the committee at the next meeting
following his talks with Gesher.
4.8 Teaching and Learning – AJ
There is a bespoke CPD programme at JFS including 15-minute staff forums, learning and
development groups with a menu of options, which tie into the school improvement plan.
There is also a large teacher training programme with approximate 20 staff and a PGCE
training in collaboration with three other local schools. There is also an outstanding teacher
programme which helps develop skil s and retain staff and a Reflective Teacher programme.
This is an in-house course, with a dedicated coach for teachers needing development and
learning walks. It provides an intense way of improving specific areas of practice and has
been positively received so far. Since January this year there have also been formal
observations of teaching practice. The programme provides a more developmental and
supportive model than before. The school is exploring an Incremental coaching programme
going forward. It wil need to be discussed with the unions. The first phase is to train the
coaches and the school is looking at some different coaching models with the aim of
launching in September.
4
Questions;
Q- Are the NQTs likely to stay on after training?
A – In the main yes. Last year all the NQTs stayed expect one and the same is expected this
year. There are approximately 11 NQTs currently, 8 or 9 on the School Direct programme
and 3 are applying for the assessment only route as they have some experience and can
submit a portfolio to get QTS status relatively quickly. There are also some unqualified
teachers so the total is 20+ staff requiring mentoring.
Q- Where are the unqualified teachers?
A – They are probably in JS or Ivrit, or going through the assessment route. The aim is to get
everyone qualified and unqualified teachers are given contracts on the basis that they must
get onto a course and qualify in order to retain their contract going forward.
Q- Can you explain what an observation entails?
A – A team/individual watches a lesson. Al the information goes onto Blue Sky to show
progress for individual teachers. Further observations can be done if there is a need to follow
up that feedback given has been implemented.
Q- Who does the observation?
A – It can be by a line manager and member of SLT for quality assurance.
Q- Do teachers get to sit in on other teachers’ lessons?
A – There is a peer support option to sit in on other lessons but there are time issues which
means it is not taken up as widely as it could. A different model could be to make it essential
to observe another lesson at least once every half term for example. It can be inspirational to
observe others but not always helpful if the teacher needs to develop their own style of
teaching. The aim is to reach a point where everyone feels comfortable being observed.
Q- How many free periods does the average teacher have?
A- A regular teacher has 42 lessons timetabled out of 50 in a fortnight. But it varies for some
teachers.
Q –Teachers who were considered outstanding ended up only being observed once in the
past. Wil this continue?
A – The model has changed and now and everyone wil be observed twice this year.
Q- What are the career prospects for ‘challenging teachers’?
A – With the right approach, the vast majority of teachers can improve themselves but it
needs to come from them. The aim is to create an environment where there is modelling of
reflective practice so this can be passed on to students. There needs to be a developmental
culture that everyone buys into.
Q- What is the proportion of challenging teachers?
A – There are not many at JFS. There has been a recent turnover of staff and the majority
are keen to develop and improve. It can be hard to turn around teachers who are resistant to
development but coaching is often an effective approach to create improvement.
Q – How do you get teachers to feel you are there to support their development rather than
passing judgement on them?
A – Through coaching. The formal observations are separate from performance
management. Coaching can help teachers visualise the improvements they want to make.
Q – How do you performance manage if this is not linked to the observations?
A – Performance management is based on objectives which should be linked to the school
development plan. The content of coaching sessions remains confidential but a coach may
be asked about the level of engagement of a teacher.
Q- What are the costs of the coaching programme?
A – It could be very expensive but the school is keen to invest in this as it wil develop the
quality of teaching and help attract and retain good staff. The school wil approach donors for
funding if possible.
AJ was thanked by the governors for her presentation and also congratulated her on
receiving her PAIJEs award recently.
5
4.9 SEN report
Written report received from Gail Roston, Head of SEN. The difficulties caused by a
reduction in funding was noted. There were no questions.
5. Safeguarding and Wellbeing Update - Raynn Bruce (RB)
The multi-disciplinary structure is working well with a central referral system that now includes 6th
form. The new social worker is now in post. A second counsellor has been appointed 3 days/week
and this is being funded with some additional money from the Wohl foundation for a trial period.
The new counsellor has a lot of experience working with teenage boys. She wil join the MDT
meeting and wil decide with the existing counsel or how referrals wil be al ocated. The DSL has
monthly supervision off site from Norwood to provide support with challenging cases. The school
hopes to provide similar support to Heads of year and PSOs on a less regular basis when they
deal with challenging cases.
The governors extended their thanks to RB for all his hard work noting he has managed very well
whilst stepping into a difficult role.
6. Behaviour Update - written report from Rabbi Cohen (HC)
HC is reviewing the systems and working on building effective relationships with parents. He is
focusing on expanding the rewards system currently.
Questions;
Q-What are the next steps for Behaviour?
A – HC wil present to the committee in the summer term once he has had time to develop his
ideas but he is focusing on embedding a culture for learning. He has been looking at the start of
lessons and wil do a learning walk next week. After this he wil review the ending of lessons to
ensure consistency across the school.
Q -Were there any outcomes in response to the email sent out about behaviour out of school at
the weekends?
A – It identified some other challenging students. Although students are not in uniform at the
weekends the school is still concerned about the welfare of these students. The school is
planning a series of parenting events to support and advise parents, with the PTA.
7. Attendance Update – SA.
Years 7-11 are above 95% but this is a slight reduction from last year. The snow day has made
and impact on the percentage. Year 12 has had good attendance so far but year 13 is letting the
6th form down. 6th formers often don’t sign in even though they have been told it is their
responsibility and poor attendance could prevent them from being entered for exams. Year 13
students often don’t attend on Thursday afternoons when they have non exam subjects such as
JS or PE.
Question;
Q– Often anecdotally we know the attendance records are not always accurate so what impact is
that having in distorting the figures?
A – Work is being done to try and ensure the records are as accurate as possible.
8. Attainment /Progress Update
6
This item was not discussed as it was added to the agenda for this meeting in error.
9. Policies
9.1 Visits policy - The policy is being reviewed by SA and DM currently and an update wil be
discussed at the meeting next term.
10. Any Other Business
10.1 School survey –the headlines are available but meetings stil need to be held with
students, with staff and parents to discuss the key themes and issues.
Action point: School survey to be discussed at the next committee meeting.
Date of next meeting:
Monday 29th April 2019 at 6.30pm.
Signed: …………………………………………………………. Date: ………………………….
7
Appendix 1 Committee Meeting Action Table
Committee Meeting Action Summary Table
Committee: Curriculum and Student Welfare, Attendance and Behaviour.
Meeting date: 25th February 2019
Agenda Item
Action
By whom
Target
completion
date
4.4 Matters Arising
To circulate the new structure RF
31.3.19
and roles document to the
Committee again.
4.7 KS 3 Action Plan
Rabbi Cohen to provide a
HC
29.04.19
report to the committee at
the next meeting following
his talks with Gesher
10.1 AOB School
Results of School Survey
SA?
29.04.19
Survey
to be presented at the next
committee meeting
Minutes Finalised? Y/N
Date minutes sent for filing:
8
JFS SCHOOL
MINUTES OF FINANCE & PREMISES COMMITTEE MEETING HELD
ON MONDAY, 12TH MARCH 2018
Present:
Chairman:
Mr John Cooper
Governors:
Mr David Davies
Mr Richard Martyn
Mr Andrew Moss Mr Paul Millett
Mr Simon Appleman
In Attendance:
Mr Dharmesh Chauhan (Assistant Headteacher)
Mr Jamie Peston (Director of Operations)
Mr Graeme Pocock (Estates Manager)
Mrs Mary Nithiy (Financial Controller)
Clerk:
Dr Alan Fox
1.
APOLOGIES
Apologies for absence were received from Mr Mark Hurst.
2.
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
No declarations were made.
3.
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING
The minutes of the previous meeting held on 19th February, 2018 were approved.
4.
MATTERS ARISING
Al matters arising were covered later in the agenda.
5.
PREMISES UPDATE
In amplification of the written report by the Estates Manager, and in response to
questions by the following points were made:
• There was nothing new to report about the Gesher School Project following
the Private meeting between the Executive Headteacher before her departure
and Lee Portnoi. It was clear that for its long-term future Gesher would prefer
to work with a primary rather than a secondary school. In the interim, there
was no cost to JFS because the project team and architect were being paid
out of the escrow account funded by Gesher. It was agreed that the Chairman
would make further informal enquiries.
ACTION CHAIRMAN
• There was nothing new to report respect of the land issues. This was not
urgent but resolution would be required if it were decided to move to Academy
status. There shouldn't be any difficulty in these circumstances provided that
the Academy was United Synagogue sponsored.
In further discussion of the operation of the PFI contract, there was a general feeling
that on-site management of the contract was improving and that the site team was
now trying as hard as it could to provide the service required. However, there was
stil a problem with the back office reporting. Progress was being made with the
planned software upgrade but introduction might be delayed a little longer whilst the
Schools Asset Register was prepared in the appropriate format. A further meeting
with the contractor was due on 23rd March; the School would be represented by
Local Partnerships and it was hoped that all outstanding matters would be resolved,
including historic costs and also the benchmarking for soft services.
The Committee agreed that lawyers should be instructed to seal the TPI buyout
arrangements negotiated. However, there remained a staff related issue to be finally
resolved in respect of the security buyout and the profit compensation rate was stil
being debated.
The Committee requested Mr Peston to circulate the terms to members when the
negotiations had been completed.
ACTION MR PESTON
6.
RISK REGISTER
The Committee continued its discussion of the draft Register started at the previous
meeting. The Headteacher explained that to avoid a number of manuals, the
Register itself concentrated on strategic matters only. He was pleased to say that at
the first review no items were flagged up as red.
The Committee approved the Register and requested that the GB should be
informed but copies provided only to governors who so requested. The Register
should be updated annually and a report thereof made to the Committee.
7.
GENERAL DATA PROTECTION REGULATION
Mr Dharmesh Chauhan, the Assistant Headteacher with responsibility for Data, gave
the Committee a PowerPoint briefing on the new EU regulation and the preparations
that the School, assisted by Brent School Partnership, had made to be ready when it
came into force on 25th May 2018.
The Committee noted that all the necessary actions were proceeding satisfactorily
on time and thanked Mr Chauhan for his clear presentation. A copy of the
PowerPoint slides was subsequently supplied to the Clerk for circulation to any
Governor who requested.
2
8.
MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTS
The Committee had seen the Accounts to end January and was provided at the
meeting with the Accounts to end February. In discussion the following points made:
• The main difference was the variance of £150,000 in the provision for unfiled
vacancies partly due to cover being provided internally and partly because of
lower supply charges.
• Donations were lower than previously forecast because some had been
accrued to the following financial year.
• Donations from the Trusts had been restricted to £150,000, the estimated
income from its investment together with special items agreed on a case-by-
case basis. Donations were, therefore, now in a more sustainable position.
9.
JFS BUDGET 2018/19
The Director of Operations introduced the second draft of the Budget and explained
the following changes introduced since the Committee have considered the earlier
draft at its previous meeting:
• Income received via the Local Authority for Years 7-11 was 0.5% higher than
previously forecast.
• However, funding for the Sixth Form was now a little lower and a firm figure.
• The SEN funding notified was also a little lower but this was being queried.
• The net result was that the budgeted income from public sources had been
reduced by £205,000
A number of assumptions had been made in drawing up the budget, including:
• The costs of the Security Buy-out would be balanced by the benefits.
• Insurance would increase slightly
• Intake in Year 7 would be 300.
The Committee noted that major uncertainties inevitably remained especially with
regard to the effect of RPI and of staff salaries rates. It nevertheless agreed to
recommend to the GB that the second draft budget should be approved at its
forthcoming meeting.
10. ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS
There was none
3
Signed: ______________________
Date: _______________________
(Chairman)
4
JFS SCHOOL
MINUTES OF FINANCE & PREMISES COMMITTEE MEETING HELD
ON MONDAY, 14TH MAY 2018
Present:
Chairman:
Mr John Cooper
Governors:
Mr David Davis
Mr Mark Hurst (Items 1 – 8)
Mr Richard Martyn Mr Paul Millett
Mr Simon Appleman
In Attendance:
Mr Dharmesh Chauhan (Assistant Headteacher) (Items 1 – 9)
Mr Jamie Peston (Director of Operations)
Mr Graeme Pocock (Estates Manager) (Items 1 – 8)
Mrs Mary Nithiy (Financial Controller)
Mr Rob Leahy (Facilities Manager,1440) (Items 1 – 5 only)
Clerk:
Dr Alan Fox
1.
APOLOGIES
Apologies for absence were received from Mr Andrew Moss.
2.
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
No declarations were made.
3.
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING
The minutes of the previous meeting held on 12th March, 2018 were approved.
4.
MATTERS ARISING
4.1
Item 5 – Gesher - the Chairman reported that Gesher was now firmly settled
in Wil esden and was no longer interested in coming onto the JFS site.
Arrangements would be made to close the Escrow account.
4.2
Item 5 - TPI and Security Buyout – the formalities were being completed.
4.3
Item 8 – PFI Contract - a brief report was given on the continuing progress in
improving the management of the contract. Compass was working more closely with
the School to establish an accurate up-to-date asset register but, if it became
necessary, the Committee was prepared to contemplate commissioning an external
consultant to assist. So far as day-to-day management was concerned it was agreed
that fault response times needed to be established and used for performance
management.
5.
CYBER SECURITY
An oral presentation supported by printed PowerPoint slides on Cyber Crime in
general and security measures at JFS in particular was given by Mr Leahy, who
drew attention specifically to:
• introduction of email and Internet filters
• daily reporting of attempts to access inappropriate websites
• design of ISP to provide protection against cyber threats
• use of the latest antivirus protection
• maintenance of account security, and
• promotion of best IT practice
Text here has been redacted
Exemption: Section 41 – Confidential Information (not the School’s own).
6.
ACCESSIBILITY POLICY
The Committee agreed that it should recommend to the GB that it should have
delegated authority to review and approve the Policy triennial y, noting that Appendix
1 (the Accessibility Plan) should be reviewed annual y
7.
PREMISES UPDATE
In amplification of the written report by the Estates Manager and in response to
questions by governors, the following points were made:
An LCVAP allocation for 2018 of £195,000 was being confirmed but there were
prospects that this could be increased to £250,000, which would al ow the shopping
list in the report to be expanded.
Further decisions about the Wolfson Technology Project were awaiting the arrival of
the new Headteacher.
The Disaster Recovery Plan should be brought up to date and referred back to the
Committee for approval
ACTION MR POCOCK
8.
SINAI SCHOOL
It was explained that Sinai had no formal interest in the JFS land and vice versa, but
that it was a condition of the JFS planning permission that Sinai should have access
to its site through JFS land. There was close day-to-day cooperation between the
2
two security teams and Sinai pupils used the JFS sports facilities on an unofficial
basis.
9.
GENERAL DATA PROTECTION REGULATION
Mr Dharmesh Chauhan, the Assistant Headteacher with responsibility for Data,
confirmed that the final preparations for the introduction on 25th May 2018 of the new
EU regulation were wel in hand. The new required Policies and Notices, the drafting
of which had been assisted by Browne Jacobson and the Brent Schools
Partnerships, would be posted on the JFS website by that date. In response to
questions from governors, the following points were made:
• The general principles and the procedures to be followed had been covered in
training sessions with staff and would be included in inductions.
• Privacy notifications would be sent to parents, staff and third-party
processers.
• There would be a systematic programme of data disposal In accordance with
the new policies.
The Committee thanked Mr Chauhan for the reassurances given.
10. MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTS
The Committee considered the 2017/18 end year accounts, which appeared
satisfactory. It was explained some elements appeared unfamiliar simply because of
required reallocations between lines. At this stage of the process there was always
some flexibility between accruals and allocation to reserves
The Committee also considered the recently provided accounts to end April. In
discussion the following points made:
• Inevitably there were significant uncertainties at the beginning of a financial
year. On this occasion, this was particularly so in respect of staff costs
because of potential changes in the structure of the SLT.
• The forecasts of staff costs allowed for the uplift of 3% in teachers’ salaries
from September onwards
• The level of SEN funding had been challenged and the School was awaiting a
reply.
• As previously forecast the Parental Voluntary Contributions continued to rise.
• The general fundraising forecast did not include any pledges that had not yet
been fulfil ed.
• However, agreement had been reached with the JNF to fund an Israel
focused worker for four years under the auspices of JIEP.
3
11. INDICATIVE BUDGET FOR 2019/20 – 2020/21
The Committee approved the indicative budget, which it recommended for approval
by the GB ex-Committee in time for submission by the end of May. ACTION CLERK
12. ANNUAL AUDIT
It was reported that following a pre-audit meeting, the audit of the 2017/18 accounts
would start on 4th June with the aim of completion in time for consideration by the
Committee at its last meeting in the Summer Term.
13. CHARGING POLICY
Subject to a minor amendment, the Committee approved the Policy. It agreed to
recommend to the GB that it should be granted delegated authority to review and
approve the Policy annually.
14. ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS
14.1 Refurbishment - it was reported that the Astroturf would be refreshed during
the summer holidays.
14.2 Date of Next Meeting - it was agreed that it would be desirable if possible to
change from.2nd July to avoid a clash with a prospective parents meeting.
(NOTE: it was subsequently agreed that the next meeting would be held on 3rd July).
Signed: ______________________
Date: _______________________
(Chairman)
4
JFS SCHOOL
MINUTES OF FINANCE & PREMISES COMMITTEE MEETING HELD
ON MONDAY 3RD JULY 2018
Present:
Chairman:
Mr John Cooper
Governors:
Mr David Davis
Mrs Rachel Fink
Mr Richard Martyn
Mr Paul Millett
Governor Observer: Mr Michael Goldmeier
In Attendance:
Mr Jamie Peston (Director of Operations)
Mrs Mary Nithiy (Financial Controller)
Clerk:
Dr Alan Fox
1.
APOLOGIES
Apologies for absence were received from Mr Mark Hurst, Mr Andrew Moss and Mr
Graeme Pocock
2.
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
No declarations were made.
3.
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING
The minutes of the previous meeting held on 14th May, 2018 were approved.
4.
MATTERS ARISING
4.1
Item 4.1 – Gesher - it was confirmed that Gesher was now firmly settled in
Wil esden and was no longer interested in coming onto the JFS site.
4.2
Item 5 - TPI and Security Buyout – Mr Peston reported that there had been
several meetings with the contractor and with the CST since he last reported to the
Committee. There were two significant issues remaining. First, examination of the
contractor's records indicated that over a period of 10 years and possibly due to the
complicated and divided bil ing arrangements, the School might have been
overcharged. The Contractor's reaction was awaited, but in pursuing recovery care
should be taken not to jeopardise the settlement agreement and Mr Mil ett would
consider this further.
ACTION MR MILLETT & MR PESTON
Text here has been redacted
Exemption: 43
Commercial Interests
ACTION MR PESTON
4.3
Item 7 - Disaster Recovery Programme - in the absence of the Estate
Manager the Committee requested that he be invited to provide a paper outlining the
latest position at its next meeting.
ACTION MR POCOCK
4.4
Item 8 – PFI - the signed Settlement Agreement had been received from the
contractor and was now awaiting signature by Brent. However, it was essential for
the proper management of the contract over the final 10 years that there should be
an up-to-date and accurate Asset Register. Because of its importance and the
difficulties envisaged, the Committee had previously questioned whether it might be
desirable to obtain the assistance of external consultants to produce the Register
and this was currently under consideration by the School.
ACTION MR POCOCK
5.
PREMISES UPDATE
The Committee considered the written report provided by the Estates Manager. In
discussion there was agreement that, although there had been improvement over
the past year, the day-to-day management of the site remained over bureaucratic,
slow and generally unsatisfactory. Unfortunately, the School’s legal powers for
enforcing proper commercial standards position were weak.
It was noted that the LCVAP allocation for 2018/19 had now been increased to
£250,000 and that the report provided a list of potential projects adding up to this
sum. Whilst indicating the School’s preferred priorities, the Estate Manager was
requested to provide possible options for further Committee consideration at its next
meeting.
ACTION MR POCOCK
Mr Goldmeier said that he was concerned about the difficulties that might arise at the
end of the PFI contract in 10 years time. The contract did not require the building to
be restored to its original state but simply to be maintained in the interim and this
could leave JFS with a large bil to bring the site up to standard. He wondered,
therefore, whether it might be prudent to plan to create a reserve for this purpose.
The Clerk reminded the Committee that a PFI Working Party established by the GB
to explore some of the financial implications of the contract produced a final report in
December 2013. This report had been updated in 2015 and again in 2017. The
2
Committee requested that the Working Party should be reconstituted to provide a
further report before the end of 2018 with special concentration on the end of the
contract and recommendations for related actions in the interim.
6.
GENERAL DATA PROTECTION REGULATION
The Committee noted from the report provided by Mr Dharmesh Chauhan, the
Assistant Headteacher with responsibility for GDPR, that there had been one breach
of confidentiality since the regulation came into effect and that appropriate action had
been taken. Briefing of staff on the general principles and the procedures to be
followed would be undertaken whenever necessary and would be included
automatically in the induction programme for all new staff.
7.
MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTS
The Committee considered the end May Management Accounts, which, although
very early in the year, indicated a satisfactory position. In response to questions from
governors and in discussion, the following points were made:
• The Year to Date surplus was better than budgeted for.
• A part reforecast had been undertaken and would be completed in good time
before the next meeting of the Committee. An advance copy would be sent to
the Chairman as soon as available.
• Income for the Sixth Form was higher than expected but an explanation would
not be available until October.
• The forecast for Non-voluntary contribution funding received by the Trust had
risen and the bulk of the anticipated donations had already been received.
• Travel in the new minibuses would save other transport costs but these
savings might be taken up by the costs of travel to more events.
• At the time of the approval of the budget RPI of 4% had been assumed and
the current figure of 3.6% meant that payments to 1440 would be marginally
lower. Part of the saving, however, would be taken up by the need to continue
paying for the shomer until the additional catering in the pod started in
September.
In further discussion, Mr Goldmeier said that he had raised at the GB meeting on 4th
June the issue of the reliability of the income incorporated in the three-year budget;
he was grateful for the opportunity to attend this meeting of the Committee to
investigate the matter further. In the interim, however, the Director of Operations had
provided him information that gave greater assurance that the budget was soundly
based on rational assumptions.
It was clear that the only way of increasing income was through grants made by the
Trust that collected parental voluntary contributions and other donations. The Trust
had taken steps to improve the collection procedures and documentation, but the
eventual outcome remained uncertain.
3
Mr Peston pointed out that the PVC collection target had increased from 55% of the
theoretical maximum 69% in 2020/21, which he felt was quite achievable. Equally,
the assumption that had been made that the 17% of donations gift aided in 2017/18
would rise to 21% in 2020/21 was equally practicable.
In further discussion, It was pointed out that the level of parental contribution
requested was lower than by most other Jewish schools and there could be scope
for a general increase of a few percent per annum without causing some some
parents to stop paying. Moreover, those parents who could genuinely il afford to pay
anything, might be encouraged to offer their skil s and services as an alternative.
It was felt that income might be further increased by the engagement a more
sustained fundraising programme for the Trust. It would be very helpful if a parent or
governor were to be found with the skil s to identify and access Charitable Trusts
working in the education field. The key to raising very large sums would also be to
find and motivate a group of public spirited wealthy individuals who had the access
and influence to open doors.
The Committee concluded that significant levels of fundraising were so important to
the future well-being of the School that governors should be made aware of the key
points and that the GB should be encouraged to place Fundraising as a standing
item on the Agenda for each of its regular meetings. The Chairman was invited to
incorporate these ideas in his report on the activities of the Committee to be given to
the next GB meeting.
ACTION CHAIRMAN
8.
ACCOUNTS 2017/18 AND AUDIT
The Committee noted the very satisfactory Audit Findings Letter leading to one
recommendation only. It approved transmission to the Governing Body and
recommended that authorisation should be given to sign the draft Letter of
Representation.
Unfortunately, the Committee had received only a very short time to study the
Accounts and members were therefore invited to send any questions of detail they
might have as soon as possible to the Director of Operations. Subject to any major
issues arising from this, the GB should be recommended to approve signature of the
Accounts.
The Committee thanked Mrs Nithiy and her staff for the excellent work undertaken to
achieve a very satisfactory conclusion to the Audit in very good time.
9.
STATEMENT OF INTERNAL CONTROL
The draft Statement was approved and endorsement should be recommended to the
GB.
10. ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS
There was none
4
Signed: ______________________
Date: _______________________
(Chairman)
5
JFS SCHOOL
MINUTES OF FINANCE & PREMISES COMMITTEE MEETING HELD
ON MONDAY, 29TH OCTOBER 2018
Present:
Chairman:
Mr John Cooper
Governors:
Mr David Davis
Mrs Rachel Fink (Headteacher)
Mr Mark Hurst
Mr Richard Martyn
In Attendance:
Mr Jamie Peston (Director of Operations)
Mrs Mary Nithiy (Financial Controller)
Mr Graeme Pocock (Estates Manger)
Clerk:
Dr Alan Fox
1.
APOLOGIES
Mr Andrew Moss was not present.
2.
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
No declarations of material interests were made.
3.
MEMBERSHIP
On behalf of Committee, the Chairman expressed thanks to Mr Paul Mil ett for the
work he had done whilst a member.
4.
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING
The minutes of the previous meeting held on 3rd July, 2018 were approved.
5.
MATTERS ARISING
5.1
Item 5 – Reconstitution of the PFI Working Party - the Committee confirmed
the importance that it placed on the School keeping up-to-date with the work
required to deal with the final 10 year period of the PFI contract and to ensure that
the buildings wil be in good condition at the end of this term.
It was agreed that the Director of Operations and the Estates Manager should
reconvene the Working Party under the chairmanship of Mr Davis. The Working
Party should consider whether to tap further into the resources and expertise of
Local Partnerships and possibly to recruit assistance from any parent with relevant
expertise in the PFI area. An interim report should be made to the next meeting of
Committee
ACTION MR DAVIS, DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS AND ESTATES MANAGER
6.
PREMISES UPDATE
The Committee considered the written report provided by the Estates Manager under
a number of individual subject headings.
6.1
Security
It was noted that Mr Hurst had been appointed as the Security Link Governor and
would shortly be meeting Mr Appleman and Mr Pocock to review the current state of
affairs. The school site grant provided to JFS had been reduced by nearly a half over
the last three years and, as reported, there was stil not a meeting of minds with the
CST and discussions were on going. The school had put forward the case in respect
of the claim for overcharging for a nighttime guard and now awaits the formal
response
The Committee agreed that, in the interests of limiting sensitive information on
security matters, its concerns should normally be concentrated on the financial
implications.
In the light of recent events, offers had been accepted from a number of CST trained
parents to assist in patrolling the School to Kingsbury Station route at key times.
Other parents who had not been trained were offering to assist in defraying the costs
of additional professional patrolling.
6.2
Disaster Recovery Programme
Mr Pocock introduced the top level risk register, already circulated to the Committee,
that listed the areas of concern that could adversely affect the School if not actively
managed. It showed the risks identified and their assessed probability and impact,
early warning indicators and the mitigating controls and actions already in place. The
Committee agreed that this register, properly percolated down to those who would
be responsible for actions if necessary, would obviate the need for a separate
Disaster Recovery Plan. Rather than being made aware of the detail in each area,
Governors would then simply need to be satisfied from time to time that the register
was kept up to date and necessary preparatory work was in hand.
However, the Committee noted that the procedures for dealing with incidents such
as flood, fire, bomb threat, IT collapse and evacuation and invacuation needed to be
formalised and advised to the committee.
ACTION HEADTEACHER & ESTATES MANGER
6.3 Settlement Agreement
2
The agreed works and associated paperwork were largely completed but it was
agreed that steps should be taken to ensure that its signature would not compromise
the School’s claim for reimbursement of security costs.
6.4
Quality of Service
Mr Pocock reported on the problems stil being experienced. Mr Appleman held a
monthly meeting with the company at director level and unsatisfactory matters could
be elevated to the Project Board that met every six months. The School had the
impression that the company's staff on the ground were keen to do a good job but
were not receiving the necessary support from their senior management. The
Helpdesk reporting system was inaccurate and there was no sign of progress being
made to provide an accurate Asset List. Discrepancies between forecast utilities
costs and unreconciled utilities costs were causing major budgeting problems.
ACTION ESTATES MANAGER
6.5
Academy Status
Text here has been redacted
Exemption: Section 43 Commercial Interests
ACTION HEADTEACHER
6.6
Capital Projects
The Operations Director explained the changes to be made in the LCVAP scheme
proposed by the DfE and was the subject of a paper by its Central Capital Unit that
had been discussed at a recent PaJeS meeting. There were currently two schemes
open to JFS to join:
• the Condition Improvement Fund with bids allowed up to £4 million. However,
the JFS building was in far too good a condition ever to be likely to qualify.
• the Schools Condition Allocation scheme similar to the current arrangements
with further options regarding allocation control.
The only sensible choice was to opt for the latter and then to choose between
• Joining a Jewish school wide communal SCA overseen by PaJeS
• Join a US/OCR group SCA overseen by the United Synagogue
• Create a separate SCA group with a minimum of five schools and 3000
students
The Committee approved the strong recommendation to choose the third SCA option
and to notification of this preference to the DfE by 7th December. It authorised
negotiations to be started with Sinai and three other schools not due to enter an
Academy Trust. At least one governor should participate.
ACTION DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS
The LCVAP projects funded by 2017 monies were largely complete and it had been
confirmed that £250,000 was available for JFS in 2018. A list of suitable projects was
currently under consideration and the Committee requested that the School’s
3
recommendations should be available for its next meeting.
ACTION ESTATES MANAGER
Whilst the donor charity was generally favourable, as part of the School’s review
Phase II of the Wolfson Technology project was being scaled back. The planning
consent application was proceeding.
6.7 Health & Safety
Good progress was being made in working through the 37 areas for improvement
identified during the recent Fire Risk Assessment and more than half of them were
now complete.
It was agreed that the Committee’s Health & Safety sub-Committee should be
resurrected to meet at least termly to review progress and assist in management of
related matters affecting the School. It was suggested that Mr Andrew Moss should
be invited to act as Chairman with membership by the Estates Manager and another
member of the School staff assisted by Compass.
ACTION MR MOSS AND ESTATES MANAGER
The Committee noted the Accident & Incident Report and First Aid Box update for
the last academic year. As requested by the Committee, the Report was more
comprehensive than in previous years but showed no need for any remedial action.
6.8
TPI and Security Buyout
Mr Peston explained that, since the major security overcharging claim would not be
readily or speedily resolved, the School now felt that it would be more appropriate to
await resolution before proceeding further with the buyout previously in
contemplation. In the meantime, the School wished to take a more direct role in
driving up TPI income by deploying a colleague with relevant experience, increasing
the marketing budget and making appropriate accounting adjustments with 1440.
The Committee approved the proposal with a review of the situation at the start of
2020/21.
ACTION OPERATIONS DIRECTOR
6.9 GDPR
The Committee noted with approval that the recent audit of the School’s systems
had been very satisfactory. The report noted a few areas for improvement and the
work would be put in hand. Dharmesh Chauhan, the Assistant Headteacher with
lead responsibility for GDPR, was to be congratulated and the Committee would
welcome a report from him at the next meeting.
ACTION MR CHAUHAN
7.
MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTS
The Committee considered the end September Management Accounts and 2018/19
reforecast. In response to questions from governors and in discussion, the following
points were made:
4
• The income was less than budgeted for at this stage in the year. Expenditure
was also less, but by a smaller amount, leading to a lower surplus forecast.
• There were inevitably uncertainties and risks in the forecast but the budget
had been drawn up on a prudent basis, particularly in respect to staff costs.
The major risk seen at the moment was the extent of staff sickness, but a
buffer for this had been built into the sum budgeted.
• There was also risk in respect of student numbers. They were currently 40
higher than last year but the income forecast had been based on a further 10
on the roll.
• Income was particularly sensitive to the size of the Sixth Form and it was
being made clear to potential recruits that there were a variety of alternative
pathways available if GCSE grades were lower than expected.
• The figures shown in line I13 relating to donations including from the Trust
could be misleading and required careful interpretation. Unless and until
advised otherwise, it would be better in future if the assumption were made
that the Trust would simply donate during the year the sum agreed at the
start. Any detailed accounting for Voluntary Contributions should be shown
only in separate accounts maintained by the Trust.
• The sum shown as outstanding for roof repairs referred to a joint venture
outside the PFI contract.
• A very substantial decrease in photocopying costs had been achieved as an
economy measure, but it was now clear that this was causing functional
difficulties and some easement had been be introduced.
The Committee thanked the Financial Controller and her staff for the prompt
production of the Management Accounts.
12. FUNDRAISING
The Committee considered a paper circulated by the Director of Operations
discussing the strategy to be adopted for future JFS fundraising. Ideally, fundraising
should follow and be shaped by the determination of needs and an understanding of
the priorities by potential donors. This would be more effective in the long term rather
than attempting to raise money in individual activities in isolation. It would be helpful
if parents and others could be made to understand the extent to which the School
had additional facilities because of generous donations and what was needed for the
future to continuously improve. Individual fundraising events, such as the Gala
Dinner, would then be seen as an integral part of an overall strategy.
Unfortunately, a person suitably qualified and wil ing to take charge of this work had
not yet been identified and suggestions made by individual governors should now be
followed up.
13. FINANCE HANDBOOK
5
Subject to amendments to reduce certain levels of delegation to members of the SLT
and the updating of the Governor’s Register of Interests and the Committee's Terms
of Reference, the draft Handbook was approved and GB endorsement sought.
14. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
Bursaries for Trips - the bursary application process was to be amended to simplify
the detail required from those on the lowest income scales while stil requiring
greater demonstration of need at higher levels. Instead of grants, it would be
possible to make repayable interest-free loans, where appropriate
Signed: ______________________
Date: _______________________
(Chairman)
6
JFS SCHOOL
MINUTES OF FINANCE & PREMISES COMMITTEE MEETING HELD
ON MONDAY, 17TH DECEMBER 2018
Present:
Chairman:
Mr John Cooper
Governors:
Mr Mark Hurst
Mr Richard Martyn
Mrs Rachel Fink (Headteacher) (by telephone)
In Attendance:
Mr Jamie Peston (Director of Operations)
Mrs Mary Nithiy (Financial Controller)
Mr Graeme Pocock (Estates Manger) (Items 1 - 8)
Clerk:
Dr Alan Fox
1.
APOLOGIES
Apologies were received from Mr David Davis and Mr Andrew Moss.
2.
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
No declarations of material interests were made.
3.
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING
The minutes of the previous meeting held on 29th October, 2018 were approved.
4.
MATTERS ARISING
4.1
Item 6.5 – Land Issues - the previously envisaged further meeting with the
United Synagogue on the land ownership issue that prevented any possibility of
Academy Status had, in the event, not been arranged. This left uncomfortable
uncertainty about the School’s position when the PFI contract expired, and the
Committee was were anxious that the matter should be resolved in good time. It
requested that the PFI Working Party, recently reconstituted under the chairmanship
of Mr Davis, should make recommendations in addition to its continuing work to deal
with the final 10 year period of the PFI contract and to ensure that the buildings
would be in good condition at the expiry date.
ACTION PFI WORKING PARTY
5.
PREMISES UPDATE
The Committee considered the written report provided by the Estates Manager under
a number of individual subject headings.
5.1
Security - Mr Hurst reported that he had recently attended a liaison meeting
with the CST at which the possibility had been contemplated that the School might
receive additional funding up to the previously imposed cap. It might also be possible
to apply for further one-off funding for individual security projects.
The Committee agreed that arrangements should be made for the Liaison Meetings
to be put back onto a regular schedule.
A response was stil awaited from KSSL/Compass about the School’s case for
refunding of overcharging for a nighttime guard.
Reports on the invacuation and evacuation programmes, both of which had been
successfully dril ed had been provided to the Chairman, who asked that they should
be circulated to the Committee for consideration at its next meeting.
ACTION MR POCOCK
5.2
Settlement Agreement - Mr Pocock reported that the Independent Third Party
had now confirmed completion of the Remedial Works Deed. Signed copies of the
Settlement Agreement had now been returned to the School. The signature on
behalf of the Governing Body had been earlier performed by Paul Mil ett, a governor
who had subsequently left the GB but at the time had full delegated authority from
the GB. The Committee confirmed that, if required to remove any doubt, it could also
be signed by Mr Cooper.
5.3
Roof - VAT issues having been resolved, the separate roof repair fund
settlement was also complete.
5.4
Quality of Service - Mr Pocock reported on the problems stil being
experienced, mainly due to poor quality staff. Discrepancies between forecast
utilities costs and unreconciled utilities costs were causing major budgeting
problems.
5.5
Asset List - There was no sign of any progress on the provision of inaccurate
Asset List and pressure was being kept up at regular meetings.
5.6
Utilities
Analysis of the bills was in progress and it appeared likely that the School had been
overcharged by 1440.
5.7
Fire Risks - A number of members had been unable to access full progress
report , which should therefore be recirculated. In the meantime, Mr Pocock reported
that 45% of the recommended risk reduction measures had been completed.
ACTION CLERK
5.8
Capital Projects - The Committee thanked Mr Pocock for providing the more
2
detailed schedule of the LCVAP projects for 2018/19.
Mr Peston confirmed that the School’s preference for a separate Schools Condition
Allocation group had been notified to the DfE. He had been organising preliminary
meetings between the schools concerned.
6.
PFI
A line having been drawn by the Settlement Agreement at March 2018, the
Committee agreed that further thought should be given to the rundown to the end of
the PFI agreement. Confirmation should be sought that funding was stil available for
assistance from Local Partnerships and then an exploratory meeting arranged.
ACTION ESTATES MANAGER
7.
BENCHMARKING
The PFI agreement provided for a quinquennial benchmarking exercise that would
next be undertaken in 2022. However the Committee considered that it would also
be useful for the School, to the extent that it was possible and meaningful, to conduct
an informal annual comparison of elements of its running costs with other similar
schools. This could be used to inform the construction of the Annual Budget
ACTION DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS
8.
MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTS
The Committee considered the end October Management Accounts. In response to
questions from governors and in discussion, the following points were made:
• Broadly speaking, income and expenditure were in line with the budget.
• The staffing budget had been drawn up on a very conservative basis and this
allowed any surplus in the provision to be applied to unexpected overspend in
other areas, such as utilities.
• Cash flow was continuously monitored but there was always a sufficient buffer
to cope with the timing differences between income and expenditure. The
possibility of calling forward donation income provided a further buffer.
• As previously agreed, the figures shown in line I13 represented the amount of
donations pledged by the Trusts. How those funds were collected was a
matter for the Trustees.
Text here has been redacted
Exemption: Section 43 Commercial Interests
• Expenditure on examination fees was usually underestimated. This was due
to the budgetary provision being based on the previous year’s experience.
This year individual fees had been increased and additional uncertainty
introduced by the changes in the examination structure.
3
• As previously reported, it had been calculated that SEN grants were too low
and it could now be confirmed that additional sums would be received this
year, some backdated.
The Committee thanked the Financial Controller and her staff for the prompt
production of the Management Accounts.
9.
FUNDRAISING
It was intended shortly to invite a suitably qualified person to take charge of the work
of realising the very significant fundraising potential, possibly one of the candidates
in the recent parent governor election.
10. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
11.1 - Security of Service Provision - concern was expressed about a possible
disruption to the School should the service provider experience major financial
problems in the current difficult financial climate.
11.2 - Meeting Arrangements - it was agreed that, in principle, the Committee would
be prepared in future to start the second meeting in each term at 7 PM to follow
immediately upon meetings of the Trustees.
Text here has been redacted
Exemption: Section 43 Commercial Information
Signed: ______________________
Date: _______________________
(Chairman)
4
Minutes of the Finance and Premises Committee Meeting
at 8.00 pm on Wednesday, 13th February 2019.
Those present were:
Chairman:
Mr John Cooper (JC)
Members:
Mr Richard Martyn (RM)
Mr David Davis (DD)
Mrs Rachel Fink (RF)
Mr Andrew Moss (AM)
Mr Dan Green (DG)
Mr Mark Hurst (MH)
Others:
Mr Jamie Peston (JP).
1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies were received from Mary Nithiy.
2. WELCOME
Dan Green, who had recently become a governor, was welcomed to the meeting.
3. DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
There were none.
4.
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING The draft minutes of the meeting held on 17th December 2018 were approved subject to
one amendment by JP.
5. MATTERS ARISING NOT COVERED BY SUBSTANTIVE AGENDA ITEMS
Item 7 – Annual benchmarking of running costs with other similar schools – this hadn’t
been started yet but was planned for the future.
6. PREMISES
The Committee considered the Report from the Estates Manager and noted the following
points:
Item 1 Security – There may have been an overcharge for the night-time guard. Graeme
Pocock was addressing this with Compass.
Item 3
Text here has been redacted
1
Exemption: Section 43 Commercial Interests
There was an ongoing issue regarding the role of the helpdesk in logging issues with
Compass. There had been disagreement as to whether all or just some issues should be
logged via the helpdesk, but at a recent meeting a wil ingness was shown to address the
issues and some areas of miscommunication were identified.
Overall, engagement with the PFI has improved but it remains to be seen if efficiency
would improve.
There were no major risks in relation to health and safety and a way had been found to
store gases in the science block in a safe and cost-efficient way. Some progress has
been made with repairs to the gym floor, but this was an ongoing issue.
The testing of invacuation and evacuation procedures is proceeding satisfactorily.
6. LCVAP
JC said that Alan Tibber was moving forward on behalf of the five schools in the
consortium to apply for funding for capital projects which, from 2020/21, wil come
directly from government. The consortium had received government approval. Hopefully,
funding for each school would be allocated on the basis of pupil numbers but it was
unclear currently what sum was being considered.
7. PFI The Committee considered the report from DD on progress with the working party and
assistance from Local Partnerships.
DD and JP were planning to meet Rosie Pearson of Local Partnerships in connection
with planning for the end of the PFI. RF was encouraged to speak to a potential donor
about funding this service.
Questions;
Q- What is the PFI working party aiming to achieve?
A – The aim is to get the School back in 10 years’ time in a fit state and have a strategy
in place to ensure everything that is the responsibility of the PFI contractor is paid for by
the end of the contract. Once the PFI ends, the School wil be responsible for managing
the building and paying a facilities management company. Although the School wil no
longer need to service the debt, currently 70% of the costs are covered by the
government and this wil end with the end of the PFI so the School wil need to cover
this.
8. SECURITY MH reported that the Security and CST Liaison Committee wil meet at least twice a year
with the CST to review security. The CST can provide checklists to help set the agenda
and ensure relevant areas specific to JFS are being reviewed. The School can also
apply to CST for grants for specific security projects. The next meeting wil be in May.
9. HEALTH & SAFETY REPORT
The Committee reviewed the updating report presented at FGB and link governor’s
report from AM. There were no questions.
10. LATEST MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTS
2
MN and JP were thanked for presenting the December 2018 accounts. The new forecast
was slightly over budget, but the year was reasonably on target. JP said the main
variance related to staffing. Whilst there was some long-term sickness, figures had been
fairly stable and less than previous years. In the forecast, the provision for utilities had
increased significantly but hopefully in future there wouldn’t be such a long lag time
between forecasting and receiving the utility bil s from Compass.
The budget for recruitment costs (EO 8) had been reduced because hopefully the
number of permanent staff would increase. There was a fixed cost for the TES
subscription where most jobs were advertised. SLT jobs were normally advertised
elsewhere but the School was not anticipating recruiting in this area.
Less income would be used in the current year but could accrue for the following year.
Text here has been redacted
Exemption: Section 43 Commercial Interests
Questions:
Q – Is there any unusual expenditure this year?
Yes, there is extra expenditure on legal fees for advice for the Governing Body of
approximately £12k. This was not budgeted for but was a one-off and was under-
written by the Trust.
Q (I01) - A positive variance was being forecast in the October accounts due to
"allocation' which had now reduced to zero. What was it and why has it gone - or is it part
of the I02 positive variance?
A-Yes, it is part of I02 positive variance.
Q (I06) -What is the Teachers Pay grant and why was it unbudgeted?
It is an additional grant from the government to make up the shortfall from
September pay increases. It had been hoped for but not certain enough to be
built into the budget.
Q (I08)- How much TPI is in the forecast?
A - £33k showing no increase on the previous year for 2019/20. The higher figure was
due to the recharge of most of Shomer fees to Caterlink.
I13 - Do I recall correctly that we agreed that the GCT line would not show a variance as
the Trust has to pay us what was agreed at the start of the year i.e. the budgeted
amount?
A -Yes, unless they don’t have the income in which case we agreed they would write to
us and tell us they have to reduce the grant – we believe such a letter may be
forthcoming so have prepared accordingly.
11. DRAFT BUDGET FOR 2019/20 AND DRAFT PRESENTATION
JP presented the draft budget and PowerPoint presentation.
There would be a decrease in income in real terms of approximately 1% from the Local
Authority for Years 7-11. Brent wil benchmark everything again to funding two years ago
in relation to increases and decreases. Last year they added a £2m top up for schools,
which was the equivalent of a 2% increase. Sixth Form income was based exclusively on
the number of students. Next year the 6th Form should be full so funding wil be higher
compared to the last couple of years when student numbers had dropped. However,
there was a lag time between students starting 6th Form and receipt of the funding.
3
Fortunately, with the new funding formula Brent schools wil be better off with a 1%
increase.
There was a small increase from last year in SEN income has but this was money that
was owed from last year. There has been a reduction in Statemented Students with
statements, so funding had decreased.
Text here has been redacted
Exemption: Section 43 Commercial Interests
There was a 3% increase in forecast personnel expenditure. Teachers had just had a
salary increase and there would be a further 3% increase next year. There was a
government grant to cover this increase for one year. Salary increases are starting to
rise to catch up following years of pay freeze.
Questions:
Q - At the last FGB meeting the point was made that the budget must be produced in line
with the SIP. Can you provide reassurance on that general point?
A – Yes. The plan aimed at improving KS3, teaching and learning and mental wellbeing
and having a balanced budget. The School had funded an assistant head of year for
Years 7 and 8 to focus on these areas as well as improving behaviour. Additional
pastoral staff wil contribute towards improved mental wellbeing.
Q(I08) - How much TPI is in the budget?
A – for Y1 no increase
Text here has been redacted
Exemption: Section 43 Commercial Interests
Q (E08) - Is the big drop in recruitment costs realistic?
A - Yes because we have a much lower turnover. As always, that could change.
Q - There is a 6% increase to cover spine point increases and teachers’ pensions. But
the budget was only showing an increase of 6% for teaching salaries, which is 3% for
salaries and 3% for spinal drift (promotions).
A – The issue is the phasing of salary increases. Teaching staff increases are in April
and spinal drift in September and for non-teaching staff it is in September. Pensions for
teaching staff wil be lower until August and then wil increase to 8% in September. The
bare figures don’t look like enough of an increase but there were three new
appointments last week at a lower pay rate than was forecast in the budget and one
appointment today that was at a higher salary rate than anticipated.
Q - Are you anticipating staffing levels to remain the same this year?
A – Yes but numbers have increased since September.
Q-Have the pension contribution increases been correctly budgeted for?
A – Yes.
Q - The amount forecast for the reunion fundraising event to raise is £75k. Is there
enough time to organise an event that wil raise that much?
A - Hannah has taken over managing the voluntary contributions, so Tamar is now able
to focus on fundraising and is aware of the target.
4
Q - Next year is showing a fall of £13k in the capitation budget despite there being more
students, how does this work?
A - Capitation relates to subject specific resources for Heads of Department to spend on
extras they need. Whole school funded items such as paper has not reduced. More
funds have been made available for technology and computing.
Q- Why have administrative costs (E22) increased by 17%?
A -The cost of telephone and broadband has increased and this wil be discussed with
BT; the School may change systems. There has been an increase of £10k to put on
fundraising events. The budget for community liaison has gone up to £30k to get the JFS
name out there. This budget had been cut in previous years.
Next steps
Discussions regarding fundraising and voluntary contribution levels wil continue outside
of the meeting and the recruitment section wil be updated. Then the budget wil be
approved at the next committee meeting before being presented to FGB.
Decision: The draft budget was approved at this point subject to decisions due to be
made regarding fundraising.
12. FUNDRAISING
The Committee considered a report by the Director of Operations.
A parent of the school met with DG, JC, Tamar, RF and JP to discuss fundraising
strategy. He then wrote a report for the school. The GB considered that a tendering
process would be necessary if a consultant were going to be appointed to develop the
fundraising strategy. The parent produced the report free of charge but if any further
work would be in a paid capacity.
There was a discussion regarding the ‘pre-funding stage’ mentioned in the report where
the ethos, aims and objectives of the strategy needed to be decided and the selling
points of the School identified possibly through a survey or workshop with governors,
trustees and maybe the SLT, before agreeing the fundraising strategy. However, it was
agreed that the one-year time frame suggested in the report was too long.
The Committee considered that the perception of the School needed to be changed to a
charity needing support, as opposed to a state school funded by government with
voluntary contributions. The School needed to identify its unique selling points and
promote the idea that investing in JFS was investing in the future of Anglo-Jewry. This
could be attractive to donors with no direct connection to the School as well as families
with students in the School or alumni. Large donors and trusts often focus on reducing
assimilation and promoting a strong Jewish identity.
Questions:
Q – Would it be the fundraising manager’s job to decide the strategy?
A - Just recruiting a professional fundraiser wouldn’t help at the moment. The School
needed the right trustees to be in place to be the face of fundraising, to make contacts
and to bring in potential donors. However, the GB did not currently include governors
with sufficient experience and understanding of what needed to be done, so someone
needs to be brought in quickly to advise. JF and RF had identified three lay people who
had experience in fundraising who have connections with the School.
5
Action agreed:
The Committee agreed that:
the existing trustees should be recommended to bring in new blood
RF should develop a vision document to circulate to governors for comment prior to the
development of a scoping document either for an away day or to guide a fundraising
nsultant.
Timeframe: 3 weeks’ time (week before next meeting and 2 weeks before FGB).
13. GDPR
The report from Dharmesh Chauhan was received by the Committee. Brent provided the
school’s data protection officer (DPO)) and this has been quite helpful. There had been
one GDPR complaint and the DPO found JFS had followed the correct procedures.
Because JFS was a beacon school for GDPR it was planned to continue with the Brent
DPO and for Dharmesh to go to other schools to teach about GDPR. AM had made a
GDPR visit and found everything was in order.
14. ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS
The Audit Engagement letter was agreed and JC authorised to sign it.
15. DATE OF NEXT MEETING
It was agreed that:
the next meeting should be moved from 11th March, to 18th March at 7pm following the
Trust meeting at 5.30pm.
the 13th May meeting should remain at 6.30pm.
the meeting scheduled for 1st July should be moved to 8th July, to start at 7pm after the
Trust meeting.
Signed: ______________________________________ Date: _______________
6
Minutes of the Finance and Premises Committee Meeting
at 7.00 pm on Wednesday, 18th March 2019.
Those present were:
Chairman:
Mr John Cooper
Members:
Mr Richard Martyn
Mr David Davis
Mrs Rachel Fink
Mr Andrew Moss
Mr Dan Green
Mr Mark Hurst
Clerk:
Dr A M Fox
Observer:
Mrs Geraldine Fainer
In attendance:
Mr Jamie Peston
1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies were received from Mary Nithiy and Graeme Pocock
2. DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
There were none.
3. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
The draft minutes of the meeting held on 13th February were approved subject to
three amendments, including a correction of the figure given in Section 10 for
additional legal fees for advice to the GB to £12k.
4. MATTERS ARISING NOT COVERED BY SUBSTANTIVE AGENDA ITEMS
4.1 - Item 5 – it was agreed that the annual running costs benchmarking should
take place during the Autumn Term.
4.2 - Item 6 – it was reported that the new LCVAP consortium would be meeting
in the following week to agree the appropriate method for distributing funds
between the participating schools.
5. PREMISES
1
Mr Pocock had been unable to attend but had circulated his Estates Manager
Report a few hours prior to the meeting. The Committee requested that, in future,
it should have longer to read his Report before meetings.
ACTION ESTATES MANAGER
The Committee discussed the Report and noted the following points:
Text here has been redacted
Exemption: Section 31 Confidential Information
5.1 - Item 1.5/1.6 - Night-time Guarding - Compass had repudiated the claim for
the refund of an overcharge for the night-time guard and the matter would not be
resolved easily. The Chairman would respond to Mr Pocock’s request for
governor assistance with the School’s case.
ACTION CHAIRMAN
5.2 - Item 2.1 - Settlement Agreement – in the absence of Mr Pocock it was
believed that the refund calculations had been completed.
5.3 - Item 5.1 - Helpdesk - in the absence of Mr Pocock it was not known whether
there had been any improvement.
5.4 - Item 5.4 - Damage - to reduce incidents of deliberate vandalism in the
toilets, consideration was being given to installing glass doors at the toilet
entrances and to employ CCTV cameras.
5.5 - Item 7.2 - Health & Safety - a report was awaited from Compass into the
recent incident when a heavy magnet fell from an external door hitting a student.
5.6 - Item 7.4 – Evacuation - consideration of ways in which the Evacuation Plan
could be improved and in particular by reducing the time lost due to false alarms
was stil in progress and would be tested in due course.
6. PFI
Mr Davis said that the meeting with Rosie Pearson of Local Partnerships in
connection with planning for the end of the PFI had been arranged.
7. SECURITY
It was reported that the Home Secretary had announced an increase to £14
mil ion in the government grant for Jewish community security, but because a
wider range of buildings and organisation was now being covered, the amount
allocated to JFS would not necessarily increase
8. LATEST MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTS
2
The Committee thanked Mrs Nithiy in her absence for the report on the accounts
to end February. In discussion, the following points were noted:
• since the end December accounts had been provided there had been a
presentational reallocation of the cost of educational support staff
employed on short-term contracts or provided on a supply basis. Because
their use in this way was planned it was now considered more appropriate
to post the costs in the mainstream staff heading.
• The submission of utilities costs from the PFI contractor that had been
running about 18 months late was now becoming prompter. The School
specified the utilities supplier but had little or no control over the quantities
consumed, so there would be a continuing forecasting difficulty.
• Incidence of long-term sickness had reduced in the current year, but a
saving would not necessarily be carried forward into the following year,
both because of the inherent unpredictability and because it was known
that a number of members of staff would be taking maternity leave.
In conclusion, noted that at this time of the year the outturn forecast should be
very accurate and that the satisfactory anticipated surplus for 2018/19 of £27,790
could be taken forward to the next financial year.
9. DRAFT BUDGET FOR 2019/20 AND DRAFT PRESENTATION
Text here has been redacted
Exemption: Section 43 Commercial Interests
Mr Peston presented a final version of the draft budget, as amended following the
detailed discussion at the previous Committee meeting and in accordance with
this latest change and in further discussion of detailed elements in the budget
and in response to questions from governors the following points were made:
• The significant increase in "Other Government Grants" represented the
refund of rates previously improperly charged.
• Provision had been made for a security grant but no advice had yet
been received on CST intentions.
• There had been a small reduction in the forecast DfE Unitary Charge
Reclaim which was linked to RPI in February.
3
• The provision for staff salaries included the significant addition required for
higher employer pension contributions. It was not clear how much of this
might be offset by a corresponding initial Government contribution.
• The lower provision for agency supply SEN staff simply represented the
reclassification of the expenditure discussed earlier.
The Committee:
agreed to postpone final approval of the increase in rate of PVC until further
information became available during the Summer Term
approved the final draft budget for recommendation to the GB in accordance with
a similarly updated PowerPoint presentation.
10. FUNDRAISING
The Committee was advised that the DCT trustees had agreed on the necessity
of bringing in new blood as a prerequisite to enhanced fundraising for the future
and that work was continuing to identify suitable persons.
The Headteacher said that she had started to sketch out the content of a Vision
Document intended, following approval by the GB, to form the basis for
fundraising planning. To attract donors this needed to specify, in terms likely to
resonate with different ranges of individuals, the areas to which additional funds
would be applied and she was likely to recommend:
• educational excellence
• enhanced Jewish identity
• positive well-being.
Overall, the message would be:” if you want Anglo-Jewry to have a strong future
you need to help to provide assistance for the educational efforts of our largest
and oldest Jewish secondary school.
The Committee agreed that further efforts were required to identify suitable
persons in the parent body (and the grandparent body) to lead and to assist
fundraising and to identify the community’s lay leaders of the future.
11. ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS
There was none.
Signed:
Date:
4
Minutes of the Meeting of the Governing Body (GB)
held at 7.45PM on Tuesday 10th April 2018
Note: the meeting was preceded at 6.30 p.m. by a training session
for Governors conducted by Dr Chris Ray.
Chairman:
Ms Geraldine Fainer
Governors:
Mr Simon Appleman
Rabbi Daniel Epstein
Mr John Cooper
Dr Charlotte Benjamin
Mr Michael Goldmeier
Mrs Anne Shisler
Mrs Julia Alberga*
Mr Richard Martyn
Mr Andrew Moss
Mr David Davis
Mr Mark Hurst
Mr James Lake
* until 20.37.
1.
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies were received and accepted from Mr Paul Millet, Mrs Naomi
Newman (attended training only). Apologies were also received from Mr
Daniel Marcus and Rabbi Dr Rafi Zarum.
2.
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
Rabbi Epstein reminded the GB that he is an employee of the United
Synagogue.
3.
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
The minutes of the meeting held on 26th March 2018 were confirmed.
4. MEMBERSHIP
Mrs Anne Shisler was congratulated on her re-appointment as a Foundation
Governor for a further three-year term.
5. CHAIRMAN' S REPORT
A parental complaint recently sent to OFSTED, the local authority, parents’
MP, Norwood and an organisation that promotes children’s educational
welfare did not meet the threshold for LADO intervention.
Text here has been redacted
Exemption: Section 40 Personal Data
6.
POLICIES
6.1
The GB noted that some School policies had been reviewed and re-
written by Dr Chris Ray in order to assist the SLT and offload work from them.
6.2
The GB considered drafts of the following policies:
(i)
Accessibility policy
(ii)
A section had been added regarding access to public exams. The current
accessibility plan is Appendix 1 and as an appendix it can be updated as
required without having to review the whole policy. The policy is to be
reviewed every 3 years and the accessibility plan to be reviewed annually
by the premises manager.
It was agreed that review dates wil be added and a sentence including
involvement of the SEN governor as well as the Finance and Premises
committee in completing the audit.
Subject to these changes the policy was approved.
(iii) Anti-bullying policy
SA suggested the policy extended to staff and not just pupils and had
drafted an extra section to that effect. The policy could then provide an
alternative to the Whistle Blowing policy. The policy was approved with
SA’s additions and two typos being amended (SA to action) and will be
reviewed every 2 years.
(iv) Safeguarding Policy
The policy had been updated by Chris Ray with links to current legislation
and statutory guidance. Chris highlighted that some of the names of the
“team” conflated safeguarding and pastoral and only those suitably trained
in safeguarding should be on the safeguarding team.
There was a discussion regarding the need to add direct email addresses
and telephone contact details of the safeguarding team. It was queried
whether it was appropriate to give out the mobile telephone numbers or
private emails of the safeguarding link governor or the Chair of Governors.
It was agreed that the Chairman should check with Brent Council if 24/7
telephone access to governors is required and how this should be
implemented.
[ AFTER NOTE John Galligan from Brent said no need to give out private
numbers and emails of governors but advisable for staff to have direct
numbers and individual emails specific to safeguarding eg DSL@jfs etc;
DeputyDSL@jfs etc]
ACTION CHAIRMAN
The safeguarding policy was approved subject to the above changes.
It was also agreed that the updated safeguarding policy should be flagged
in the School newsletter to alert parents/guardians. It should also be
placed on school website.
ACTION OPERATIONS MANAGER
(v)
Complaints Procedure
There was discussion whether to include a section suggested by Mr
Appleman relating to blocking vexatious and/or persistent complaints,
which he said was not unusual for this clause to be added to complaints
procedures. Mr Goldmeier said the issue was discussed at recent Brent
training on complaints. It was decided to retain the section in the
Procedure.
There was a discussion about whether the number of different stage
complaints should be made publicly available. It was decided that
information would be made available to governors as part of the Head
Teacher’s report in order to understand the types of issues and trends.
That information would be accessible on FOI requests.
The Complaints Procedure, with Mr Appleman’s additions, was approved.
(vi) Home School Agreement
Review of this agreement put over until the next meeting on June 4 so that
the incoming Headteacher could have input prior to approval.
(vii) Whistle-blowing policy
The Whistle-Blowing policy was approved and it was noted that, as part of
the Safeguarding suite, the review period should be in line with the annual
review of other policies in the suite.
It was noted since the policy was last circulated by email to staff in January
2017 a large number of new staff had joined the School. Mr Appleman
confirmed that all recently reviewed and updated policies wil be circulated
to all staff.
(viii) Allegations of Abuse against Staff Policy
Mr Appleman had added operational guidance to the policy. Some
language inconsistencies (“child” in some parts and “students” in others)
remained to be amended and subject to those changes the policy was
approved for biennial review.
Mr Goldmeier agreed to assist with the elimination of language
inconsistencies.
ACTION MR GOLDMEIER
(ix) Critical Incident Policy
The minor amendments requested at the meeting on 26th March were
approved.
It was also agreed that
Dr Benjamin would send Mr Appleman wording for
additional point concerning analysis whether a critical incident was one-off or
whether likely to be recurrent, necessitating changes to operating systems in
the School.
ACTION DR BENJAMIN
6.3
The GB noted that the following policies had also been reviewed and
revised by Dr Chris Ray but not yet considered:
• Admissions Policy 2017-2018
• Admissions Policy 2018-2019
• Educational Visits Policy Spring 2016 to Spring 2019
• Equality Objectives 2017-2018 April 2018
• E-Safety Policy 2017-20
• Grievance Procedure
• Health & Safety Policy Summer 2017 - 2020
• Internet and School Network Policy April 2018
• JFS Teaching and Learning Policy
• Relationship Education Policy 2017-19
• Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND) Policy
• Medical Policy
6.4
The GB noted that the following policies would be reviewed when the
new Headteacher took up her post.
• Behaviour
• Capability
• Staff disciplinary.
6.4
The GB noted that the Leave of Absence Policy due for review by the
Pay & Personnel Committee and by the GB in the Summer Term was not yet
available.
6.5
In further discussion concerning policies generally the following points
were made by governors:
• The policies needed to be living documents that are understood by all
staff who have to implement them on the ground
• Governors need to be reassured that policies are being implemented
correctly
• An induction checklist that is signed by new members of staff would be
a way of ensuring they have received and understood core policies and
procedures
• Case examples of the application of policy can be helpful to ‘bring the
policies alive’ when reviewing policies for governors who may not work
in education
• The JFS policy webpage needed to be updated with the new policies.
• The SEND offer on the website needed to be updated.
7.
BRITISH VALUES - SA
The GB considered a paper by the Acting Headteacher and the Deputy
Headteacher Jewish Life & learning. Mr Appleman thanked Mr Marcus (in
absentia) for producing the first part of the document within the JS department.
Much of the content reflected the information on the JFS website on British
values and links to the curriculum although this might not be completely up to
date. The School’s strengths in this area had been noted by Ofsted
particularly in the Sixth Form with its active politics society. The Headgirl/boy
team was very keen to be involved in diversity issues as well.
Nr Appleman had attended a meeting with the Chief Rabbi on British Values
and found him to be very aware of and open to the issues facing Jewish
schools. However, the Office of the Chief Rabbi is working on how to
articulate its position on gender and sexuality. There was also the inherent
tension in providing sufficient time to include both JS at a high level and
teaching about other faiths.
8.
ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE
The following report and minutes were noted:
a.
the Committee Termly Report
b.
the draft minutes of meeting held on 29th January 2018.
It was reported that the second round of offers had been dispatched on 29th
March. The School was speaking to Brent about introducing its own bespoke
rounds 3 and 4.
9.
CSWAB COMMITTEE
The following report and minutes were noted;
a.
the Committee Termly Report
b.
Draft minutes of meeting held on 5th February 2018.
10. FINANCE & PREMISES COMMITTEE
The following report and minutes were noted;
a.
the Committee Termly Report
b.
the minutes of the meeting held on 19th February 2018
c.
the draft minutes of the meeting held on 12thMarch 2018
The GB also noted that the Committee had approved the Risk Register (a
copy was available on request) and proposed to review it annually.
A question was asked about achievability of the draft budgets for 2019/20 and
2020/21.
11. PAY & PERSONAL COMMITTEE
The draft minutes of meeting held on 5th March 2018 were noted.
12. LINK GOVERNORS
The GB noted written reports from Link Governors as follows:
Safeguarding - Charlotte Benjamin
Attendance and Behaviour - Geraldine Fainer
Security - Mark Hurst
Health & Safety - Andrew Moss
SEN – Anne Shisler
In addition a verbal training report was given by Mr Lake, who asked
governors to check a written record of training that was circulated and
reminded them that they should inform him of future training for record
purposes.
In discussion of the reports the following points were made:
Safeguarding – Dr Benjamin was asked whether additional support with
safeguarding responsibilities would be helpful at this time in light of issues
raised in the training earlier in the evening. She said as the team was new to
the role she would first like a few weeks to meet with the safeguarding team
and take stock to identify the priorities; offers of support would then be most
welcome. There would be a Safeguarding Peer Audit with Brent on 25th April
that should provide useful feedback.
Behaviour – Mr Appleman said that he was aware of some behaviour issues
and would be making recommendations to tackle these issues to Rachel Fink
when she joined the school. The behaviour policy was not always being
followed consistently and some areas needed revision. Efforts also required to
improve staff student relationships. JFS had subscribed to Right Track, which
could provide alternative interventions to exclusions. Mr Appleman also
requested to be noted that JFS continued to receive positive feedback about
its students’ behaviour.
Security – the GB was informed that CST funding for this year was slightly
less than was budgeted for. The amount was being queried in parallel with
some invoicing issues.
13. ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS
Mr Appleman confirmed that that the safeguarding posters in the School with
out of date information would be updated and changed the following day to
reflect the names of the current safeguarding team.
Signed: ______________________________ Dated: _______________
Minutes of the Meeting of the Governing Body (GB)
held at Monday 4th June 2018
Note: the meeting was preceded at 6.15 p.m. by an Office 365
training session for Governors conducted by Mr David Wragg.
Chairman:
Ms Geraldine Fainer
Governors:
Dr Charlotte Benjamin
Mr John Cooper
Mrs Rachel Fink
Mr Michael Goldmeier
Mrs Anne Shisler Mrs Julia Alberga
Mr Richard Martyn
Mr Paul Millet
Mr David Davis
Mr Mark Hurst
Mr James Lake
Associate Member
Rabbi Dr Raphael Zarum
SLT Mr Simon Appleman Mr Jamie Peston Mr David Wragg
Clerk: Dr Alan Fox
1.
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies were received and accepted from Rabbi Daniel Epstein and Mr
Andrew Moss.
2.
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
There were none.
3.
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
The minutes of the meeting held on 10th April 2018 were confirmed as
amended.
4. MEMBERSHIP
The GB noted that the current term of office of Dr Charlotte Benjamin as a
Parent Governor would end on 5th July 2018, but that she had been
appointed as a Foundation Governor for a further three-year term from that
date. An election would be held shortly to fil the vacancy for a Parent
Governor.
In discussion, the GB acknowledged that the appointment of Foundation
Governors was entirely for decision by the United Synagogue, which had a
very legitimate interest in the maintenance of its ethos in all schools for which
it was the Foundation Body. Governors hoped that nevertheless in making its
selection the US would take account of the desirability of maintaining a spread
of age, background, experience and skil s across the entire GB and were sure
that it would wish to note any suggestions that current governors wished to
make.
5.
MATTERS ARISING FROM MINUTES OF MEETING
5.1 – Item 6(i i) Safeguarding Policy – it was reported that the updated policy
had been flagged up to parents and placed on School website.
6.
CHAIRMAN'S REPORT
The Chairman introduced her summary written report and, on behalf of the
whole GB offered sincere thanks to Simon Appleman who had been holding
the fort as Acting Headteacher. She also welcomed Mrs Rachel Fink who had
taken up post as Headteacher earlier in the day.
7.
HEADTEACHER’S REPORT
Introducing the report she had provided whilst still Headteacher designate,
Mrs Fink said that she wished to add her thanks to Simon Appleman for his
interim leadership during a difficult period and, since her selection, for
involving her with important developments as far as had been practicable.
Mrs Fink and advised governors that were to be a number of departures from
the SLT at the end of the Term, namely Talia Thoret and Sheri Berg, both of
whom would be retiring, and two Assistant Headteachers, Anthony Flack and
Andy de Angelis, both of whom had been appointed Deputy Headteachers in
schools closer to their homes. In the previous week, she had sat in on
interviews for replacements and two internal candidates had been selected as
Assistant Headteachers, as had Dr Walton who was moving over from
Hasmonean Boys School. These changes in personnel provided an
opportunity that she would be taking for some rebalancing of SLT
responsibilities.
Mrs Fink said that before her arrival she had, of course, attended a couple of
GB meetings as an observer and had also met the SLT both collectively and
individual y. Earlier in the day she had addressed all members of staff and
arrangements were being made for meetings with parents over the coming
weeks. More than a hundred parents had already signed up or two of these
meetings and consideration was being given to arranging for a short video clip
of key sections of her address to be placed on the website.
In discussion and in response to questions, the following points were made:
• In normal circumstances it was unhealthy for members of staff to
approach governors directly with any issues they might have and Mrs
Fink had reminded them of the appropriate protocols. She requested
that governors should refer any approaches made to them back to the
School, except where urgent safeguarding matters were concerned.
• The whole SLT would not normally be expected to attend GB meetings
and the Headteacher would arrange for attendance by those
concerned with the business of each meeting.
• Similarly, parents should be discouraged from raising grievances
directly with governors if they had not previously followed the wel -
established procedures for raising and resolving matters with School
staff. Governors’ Surgeries had ceased some time earlier and there
were no plans to reinstate them.
• Visits to the School by individual governors in a structured way would
continue to be encouraged. The Headteacher proposed to this indicate
where the School might find this most useful, but it was expected that
Link Governors would be seen at least once a term.
• In addition, all Governors would be sent a diary of events at which their
presence would be welcomed and this would help informing a closer
staff/governor relationship.
• The Improvement Programme flowed naturaly from the School’s Self
Evaluation and would, of course, take account of views expressed by
the GB during the process. Part of the purpose of its presentation to
the GB would be to establish the extent to which governors could assist
with particular elements.
8.
ACTING HEADTEACHER’S REPORT
Mr Appleman drew attention to the key points in the termly report drawn up
whilst he was stil in an Acting capacity. In discussion and in response to
questions from governors the following points were made:
• Some pupils who were leaving during the year had applied to return to
the roll in September.
• There were currently 308 acceptances for the Year 7 entry in
September and a waiting-list that was small but judged to be genuine.
It was likely that actual entry would be marginally over 300.
• It was likely that places would be available in Jewish secondary
schools for more or less all of those seeking them, which cast doubt on
the viability of plans to open another school. A Local Authority would
not agree to new schools unless the promoters could demonstrate that
there would be a continuing demand for places.
• The last term had been overshadowed by the tragic suicide. A great
deal of support for students and staff had been provided both from
internal resources and from outside. Whilst there were always lessons
to learn and plans needed to be constantly reviewed and updated, it
was believed that the School had done everything reasonably possible
both before and after the event.
• Having passed the resignation deadline of 31st May, it was now known
that 11 permanent staff would be leaving, four on retirement. In
addition, it was not intended to retain a few teachers currently working
on one-year contracts. This turnover was much lower than the previous
year and the School should be entering the next academic year in a
much more stable position and carrying only two vacancies which it
was expected would be fil ed.
• The School was in the process of being assessed for highest level of
the SSAT Framework for Excellence in Education quality mark.
Concluding, Mr Appleman said that the recent external reports and complaints,
whether justified or not, had caused immense emotional stress. He hoped that
these issues had been managed reasonably to the satisfaction of the
Governing Body during the interim period. He ended (as he had started ion
April 2016) by thanking the Governing Body for its trust and support and by
committing to working with Mrs Fink, with whom he looked forward to working
closely for the benefit of the whole School.
The Governing Body expressed its appreciation to Mr Appleman for
everything that he had done during the period of his leadership and looked
forward to a continuation of its close relationship with him.
9.
SELF-EVALUATION REPORT - MAY 2018
Mr Appleman said that, as requested by the GB, he had reduced the size of
the latest version of the SEF. He drew attention to the areas for improvement
it identified and the overall judgement that effectiveness was Good and
improving, with the Sixth Form remaining as Outstanding. The one area of
comparative weakness was Behaviour, for which there were plans moving
forward.
10. GOVERNING BODY PROGRAMME
The GB approved the Chairman's proposal that it should hold two regular
meetings in the Summer Term (thus legitimising the de facto position).
The GB also decided that the two-year-old experiment of managing without a
Jewish Studies Committee and replacing it with a priority position on the
agenda at each of its regular meetings had not proved satisfactorily. The
Clerk was invited to formulate proposals for a Committee structure for
2018/19 including a JS Committee, and to make recommendations for Terms
of Reference and membership for consideration at its next meeting.
ACTION CLERK
11. JEWISH LIFE & LEARNING
The GB noted with regret that the Deputy Headteacher (Jewish Life &
Learning) was currently unwell and unable therefore to attend to provide his
report. It sent its best wishes for a speedy recovery.
12. POLICIES
The GB approved the schedule of policies and review arrangements prepared
by Mr Appleman. It agreed that, except for policies that statutorily required full
GB approval and any others it specially designated, Committees should be
delegated full powers of review and approval, simply reporting to the GB when
this had been done.
It was further agreed that any policies that had not been reviewed by the
intended review date would be considered to stil be current.
13. HOME SCHOOL AGREEMENT
The GB approved the text of the updated Home School Agreement as
reviewed by the CSWAB Committee.
14. FINANCE
In the context of a paper provided by Mr Martyn, the GB considered the
viability of the second and third years of the Budget it had recently approved,
and, in particular, the extent to which funding provided by the Trust via
Parental Voluntary Contributions and various fundraising events could be
relied on. In discussion the following points were made:
• The budget was based on the prediction of an additional 65 students
next year and thereafter and that total income was heavily dependent
on pupil numbers.
• The projected increase in income from voluntary contributions was
based on the more effective collection processes that had been put in
place and initially experience with its operation.
• The Fundraising Dinner had been aimed at large donors and was
probably not repeatable on an annual basis in the same form. It was
important that thought should be given to a sustainable fundraising
programme incorporating more projects.
The Finance & Premises Committee was requested to consider these issues
in more detail and to provide advice for the GB on the reasons for shortfalls in
2019/20 and 2020/21 between budgeted expenditure and regular income and
also an indication of the strategies to be employed to provide confidence that
the gap could be fil ed sustainably by donations.
ACTION FINANCE & PREMISES COMMITTEE
15. GOVERNOR TRAINING
Mr Lake requested governors to inform him of training as it was undertaken so
that an up-to-date record could be maintained. He agreed that together with
the Chairman he would provide an analysis of areas where there were
currently training deficiencies.
ACTION CHAIRMAN AND MR LAKE
16. ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS
The GB thanked the SENDCo for her 2017/18 report on Inclusion including
SEN/EAL/vulnerable students and requested the Clerk to place it on the
agenda for discussion at its next meeting.
ACTION CLERK
Signed: ______________________________ Dated: _______________
Minutes of the Meeting of the Governing Body (GB)
held at 6.30 pm on Monday 16th July 2018
Chairman:
Ms Geraldine Fainer
Governors:
Mrs Julia Alberga
Dr Charlotte Benjamin
Mr John Cooper
Mr David Davis
Rabbi Daniel Epstein
Mrs Rachel Fink
Mr Michael Goldmeier
Mr Mark Hurst
Mr James Lake
Mr Richard Martyn
Mr Paul Millett
Mr Andrew Moss
Mrs Naomi Newman Mrs Anne Shisler
Associate Member Rabbi Dr Raphael Zarum
SLT
Mr Simon Appleman Mr Jamie Peston Mr David Wragg
Clerk: Dr Alan Fox
1.
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
No apologies were received.
2.
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
Mrs Alberga advised the GB that she worked for the Jewish Leadership Council
conducting research in mental health.
3.
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
The minutes of the meeting held on 4th June 2018 were confirmed.
4. MEMBERSHIP
4.1
The GB noted that the term of office of Dr Charlotte Benjamin as a
Parent Governor ended on 5th July 2018 and that she had been appointed as a
Foundation Governor for a further three-year term from that date.
1
4.2
The GB noted that the ballot to fil the Parent Governor vacancy and
had resulted in the election of Mrs Caroline Bunder for a three year term of
office starting on 16th July.
4.3
To GB appointed Rabbi Dr Raphael Zarum as an Associate Member
for 2108/19 and as a member of the CSWAB and Jewish Studies Committees.
5.
MATTERS ARISING FROM MINUTES OF MEETING
There were none.
6.
CHAIRMAN'S REPORT
The Chairman said that she had not needed to use her emergency powers
since the last meeting. However, she wanted to mention that she had spoken
on the telephone to Mr Adrian Lyons, an HMI conducting research and who
had provided some unofficial but enlightening insights on the current JFS
Teaching and Learning Standards.
7.
HEADTEACHER’S REPORT
Mrs Fink introduced her report outlining some of her findings she had made
since taking up post at half term and the work she had undertaken during this
period.
Expanding on the Chairman's comments about the research visit by Mr Lyons
and a postgraduate student, Mrs Fink explained that he has spent a day at JFS
and had met the Heads of a number of Departments and two groups of
students of varying abilities. Mr Lyons’ feedback about Teaching & Learning
had been very useful and indicated once again that, whilst there were pockets
of excellence, some staff continued to have problems in clarifying their
expectations both for themselves and for pupils. As a result many pupils didn't
understand properly what was required of them or what progress they were
making. The Inspector had expressed surprise at the academic results being
achieved at JFS, given the shortcomings he found. Mrs Fink confirmed that her
major focus for the next term would be Teaching & Learning and that she trying
to establish the best ways of building on the very good examples already set by
some members of staff.
Mrs Fink said that she had significant concerns about the existing Behaviour
Policy and had undertaken some major re-drafting, the outcome of which had
been approved by Stone King. There had been some consultation with
students. While she apologised for the late circulation of the draft to governors,
she was anxious to obtain the GB approval of the revised policy so that it could
be implemented on the return to School in September.
A detailed explanation of the changes in the Behaviour Policy had been
provided in her written Report but Mrs Fink added that at the moment
behaviour management was over complex and focused on particular incidents
rather than on their effect on teaching and learning. The new system was
aimed at rewarding good behaviour earlier and encouraging staff to
2
concentrate less on sanctions and more on elimination of the causes of poor
behaviour, particularly where pupils had known educational and behavioural
needs. Some staff were using the Behaviour Room and other sanctions as a
crutch instead of establishing how to prevent similar incidents in the future.
Whilst appreciating the desirability of training staff and introduction the new
policy in September, some Governors expressed concern that they had been
given insufficient time to consider the terms of the new policy with the
Headteacher. The GB approved the policy in principle subject to resolution of
any questions or comments sent to the Headteacher within the following seven
days.
ACTION ALL GOVERNORS
[AFTERNOTE: The Chairman sent comments on the form of the policy on 19th
July].
The Headteacher explained that she had taken responsibility for Personal
Development and Well-Being pending the appointment of a Deputy
Headteacher in January. She assessed that there were a number of talented
individuals working in pastoral care but that across the board practice was
inconsistent. Al the JFS staff she had encountered worked with due regard for
safeguarding procedures but improvement was necessary in the style of
communication with parents and in the efforts to finding education solutions for
supporting students with behavioural difficulties.
Mrs Fink expressed her gratitude to Mr Simon Appleman for the expert
assistance and information he had provided during her first few weeks to
ensure a smooth handover. In the coming term he would oversee the
remaining recommendations from the 2016 Ofsted Report and would work with
her to develop the new SEF and SDP. The Governing Body expressed its
appreciation to Mr Appleman for everything that he had done during the period
of his leadership for his assistance with the transition.
• In further discussion following points were made:
• There was an indication that the new tone of newsletters was being well
received by parents.
• Parents needed to be encouraged to praise staff where this was due as
well as to complain when problems arose.
• Governors had a continuing responsibility for staff Well-Being. In recent
times there had been differences between the GB and the SLT and,
without overstepping the boundary of interfering in operational matters.
many governors wished to assist further with the improvement of staff
morale, The Headteacher said that she would be happy to make a
number of suggestions for further governor activity in the School.
Pending these, it was strongly recommended that if convenient
governors should attend the first INSET session of the new academic
year at 8.00 am on 3rd September, giving governors the opportunity to
3
mingle and meet staff at the light breakfast which would be available at
the start of the day.
8.
ANNUAL INCLUSION REPORT
The GB considered the Annual Inclusion Report prepared by Gail Roston, the
SENDCo, which provided a statistical analysis by year group of pupils of
varying degrees of vulnerability. The SEN team was now receiving reports from
SIMS to help them with assessments of the impact of their interventions on
pupils’ outcomes.
It was clear that staff need to be encouraged further to use each student’s ECH
Plan to work out how best to assist them. As a general principle, vulnerable
pupils’ work should be marked first and care taken with the provision of
feedback.
The GB thanked the SENDCo for her full and informative report and for her
painstaking work for the pupils throughout the past year.
9.
JLC MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAMME
Governing Body received a report from Mrs Julia Alberga on the Jewish
Community Well-Being Project set up to address the mental health issues
affecting Jewish children and young people. JFS would be one of the pilot
schools in the project and as the project leader Mrs Alberga would be working
very closely with the Headteacher. To maximise the benefits of this project,
which was being largely funded by the WOHL Foundation, progress needed to
be carefully monitored and evaluated and it was hoped that this would allow it
to be rolled out to all schools during the next academic year.
10.
BUDGET 2019/21
Mr Cooper presented the paper requested by the GB at its previous meeting
containing Finance & Premises Committee’s updated assessment of the
potential shortfalls between expenditure and public income and the strategies
to be employed to fil the gap over the next three years. Mr Cooper said that the
Committee recommended that an updated assessment should be a standing
item on the agenda for the second GB meeting of each term.
Mr Goldmeier said that he had been grateful for the opportunity to attend the
last Committee meeting as an observer. The comprehensive paper provided
following that meeting showed that JFS over the next few years faced
considerable financial challenges which, if not met, would translate directly into
educational challenges. Much more non-public income would be required and it
was no longer possible to fil the gap by calling on the capital of the Trusts. This
degree of fundraising required would not happen by itself and could only be
achieved if the GB took positive steps.
The Governing Body agreed that a search should be made amongst parents or
stakeholders for an experienced person to take charge of fundraising strategy
and organisation, assisted by a separate fundraising committee. Governors
4
were invited to consider whether any of their personal contacts might have the
skil and time and to notify Andrew Moss and Jamie Peston.
ACTION ALL GOVERNORS
11.
ANNUAL AUDIT AND ACCOUNTS
Mr Cooper reported that the Finance & Premises Committee had thoroughly
examined the Accounts to end March 2018 against the background of the Audit
by Littlejohn LLP. It was pleasing to be able to report that there was a clean
audit report, the credit for which must go to the Mr Peston and the Finance
Staff..
The GB approved and authorized signature of:
• the Audit Findings Letter (incorporating the Letter of Management
representation).
• the Annual Report and Financial Statements for 2017/18.
• the Statement of Internal Control.
11.
POLICIES
In view of the significant work during the term on many of the policies and the
changes of approval authority agreed, the GB postponed review of the updated
schedule being prepared by Mr Appleman until its next meeting.
ACTION: MR APPLEMAN
12.
COMMITTEES
12.1 The Governing Body approved the Terms of Reference for all
Committees as proposed by the Clerk, subject to:
• amendment of the ToR of the Pay & Personnel Committee as discussed
at the meeting of the Committee a few days earlier
• amendment of the ToR of the CSWAB Committee to reflect priorities.
12.2 The GB approved the membership of Committees for 2018/19 as
listed in the paper circulated by the Clerk.
13.
SCHOOL TERM DATES 2019/20
The GB approved the 2019/20 Calendar as proposed by Mr Appleman
following ful staff consultation.
14.
SCHEDULE OF GB AND COMMITTEE MEETING DATES
5
Mr Appleman provided a list of proposed dates and governors were invited to
send comments as soon as possible after the meeting so that a final draft could
be circulated for approval.
ACTION ALL GOVERNORS
15.
ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE
Responding to a question from Mr Goldmeier, Mr Hurst said that there were
currently 300 acceptances for Year 7 in September, with a further 28 pupils
with Certificates of Religious Practice on the waiting list. It was difficult to
assess the reality of this figure because of the almost certain some overlap of
acceptances and waiting lists with other Schools that remained to be resolved.
However, there was an informal understanding between Jewish Schools that all
possible efforts would be made to find a place for those qualified and wanting a
place.
16.
CSWAB COMMITTEE
The GB noted the draft minutes of meeting of the Committee held on 4th May
2018.
17.
FINANCE & PREMISES COMMITTEE
The GB noted:
17.1 the Committee’s Termly Report
17.2 the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 14thMay 2018
17.3 the draft minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 3rd July
2018
18.
PAY & PERSONAL COMMITTEE
The GB noted:
18.1 the Committee’s Termly Report
18.2
the draft minutes of meeting of the Committee held on 4th July
19.
LINK GOVERNORS
The GB noted the following reports from link Governors:
• Safeguarding
• Attendance and Behaviour
• Security
• Training and Training Analysis
• Pupil Premium
• Health & Safety (oral)
• SEN
6
• GDPR (oral)
In discussion the following points were made:
• A meeting had been arranged to confirm, mainly in relation to building
related risks, that the Risk Register was being kept up to date by
Compass/1440
• The Link Governor was satisfied that Mr Dharmesh Chauhan,
the SLT
lead, had GDPR properly operating and under control.
• The Governor Training Record was inaccurate and Governors were
requested to send necessary amendments to Mr Lake as soon as
possible.
ACTION ALL GOVERNORS
• It was probable that, even after updating, the training record would
reveal some skil s and knowledge deficiencies within the GB. In
conjunction with the Headteacher, Mr Lake was requested make
recommendations about further training to individual governors.
ACTION HEADTEACHER & MR LAKE
20. ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS
20.1 School Website – Mr Wragg advised Governors that the School
website was unlikely to available for the next few days whilst some serious
technical issues were being resolved.
20.2 Bereavement Policy – during the holidays the Headteacher and Mr
Appleman would examine whether the policy should be incorporated within
the Well-Being Policy.
ACTION HEADTEACHER & MR APPLEMAN
20.3 Valete – The Chairman said that a substantial generous donation had
been made by a Governor to fund the presentation of Gift Vouchers to some
longstanding senior members of staff who were retiring or who had been
promoted to more senior posts in other schools. Any other governor who
wished to be associated should contact the Chairman as soon as possible.
ACTION ALL GOVERNORS
Signed: ______________________________ Dated: _______________
7
Minutes of the Meeting of the Governing Body (GB)
held at 6.30 pm on Monday 17th September 2018
Chairman:
Ms Geraldine Fainer
Governors:
Mrs Julia Alberga
Dr Charlotte Benjamin
Ms Caroline Bunder
Mr John Cooper
Mr David Davis
Mrs Rachel Fink
Mr Michael Goldmeier
Mr Mark Hurst
Mr James Lake
Mr Richard Martyn
Mr Andrew Moss
Mrs Naomi Newman
Mrs Anne Shisler
Associate Member Rabbi Dr Raphael Zarum
SLT: Mr Simon Appleman
Clerk: Dr Alan Fox
1.
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies were received from Rabbi Daniel Epstein.
2.
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
There were none.
3.
MEMBERSHIP
3.1
Parent Governor - The Governing Body welcomed Ms Caroline Bunder
recently elected as a Parent Governor.
3.2
Foundation Governors - The Governing Body noted the resignation of Mr
Paul Millett as a Foundation Governor with effect from 16th September, 2018 and
offered its thanks for the work he had done for the School.
4.
ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN AND VICE-CHAIRMEN
1
Only one nomination having been received for each position, the Clerk declared
Ms Geraldine Fainer elected as Chairman and
Mr Michael Goldmeier and Mr
Andrew Moss elected as Vice-Chairmen.
5.
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
The minutes of the meeting held on 16th July 2018 were confirmed.
6.
MATTERS ARISING FROM MINUTES OF MEETING
6.1 – Item 7 - Behaviour Policy – the Chairman had submitted comments and
these were being incorporated in a final version approved by the GB.
6.2 – Item 10 – Fundraising – governors considered a number of individuals
recommended as possible members of a fundraising committee and where
judged appropriate authorised initial approaches
6.3 – Item 14 – 2018 -19 Dates - as a result of comments received from
Governors, the inaugural meeting of the Jewish Studies Committee had been
brought forward. The Clerk would circulate an updated comprehensive list of GB
and Committee meeting dates for the academic year.
ACTION CLERK
6.4 – Item 19 – Governor Training - it was agreed that Mr Lake should recirculate
the training record to be checked by all governors.
ACTION MR LAKE
6.5 – Item 20.2 – Bereavement Policy – it was agreed that a report on the
consideration by the Headteacher and Mr Appleman of the appropriate place for
a school Well Being Policy should be postponed until the following meeting.
ACTION HEADTEACHER & MR APPLEMAN
6.6 – Item 20.3 – Valete – the Chairman said that she had received a number of
expressions of appreciation for the presentations made to departing members of
staff and expressed thanks to Mr Goldmeier for his facilitation of this.
6.
CHAIRMAN'S REPORT
The Chairman said that she had not needed to use her emergency powers since
the last meeting.
7.
HEADTEACHER’S REPORT
Mrs Fink introduced her written report supported by initial analyses of the GCSE
and A-level results. In response to questions by governors and in general
discussion the following points were made:
• Overall a good standard had been maintained in the public examinations
and collectively results have been outstanding. Mrs Fink wished to thank
Mr Appleman and the remainder of the staff for this achievement.
2
• Progress 8 figures would not be available until November but the early
indications were that they would be higher than last year in all areas and
for all groups despite changes in syl abus and marking schemes.
• The assessment indicated that JFS was in the top 10% of providers for A-
levels nationally and in the top 10% for teaching that improves students
progress.
• Whilst above the national average, Business and Drama results had been
disappointing and would be looked at in greater detail to try to establish
where problems had arisen and what might be done about it.
• Whilst the results gained by SEN pupils remained lower than the main
cohort the differences were narrowing, particularly if those unable to take
examinations were removed from the figures. Very few Year 13’s had not
obtained their first or second university choices. Al those who wished to
go to university and did not propose to resit examinations had been
assisted to find places through clearing within 24 hours.
• There was not much to be gained in trying to establish the reasons for the
differences in overall male and female examination attainment. Digging
deeper into the results in individual subjects would be of greater interest
and potentially greater benefit, as would be the introduction of more
vocational courses at Key Stage 4
• Considerable careers guidance was provided for Sixth Form pupils but it
might additionally be helpful to invite parents working in particular fields
and professions and recent JFS students to provide briefings.
• It would also be helpful for pupils to be coached in interviewing techniques.
In further discussion, the Headteacher confirmed that, whilst the numbers
inevitably fluctuated, there were currently just over 2000 pupils on the School roll.
Year 7 was full but with no applicants remaining on the waiting list. It was agreed
that the Admissions Committee should give further consideration to the number of
places to be offered for the first tranche for entry in September 2019, consulting
Brent as necessary.
With the departure of Mr David Wragg, the opportunity was being taken of
considering whether a further deputy headteacher recruitment would be
necessary or whether his responsibilities could be redistributed amongst the
remaining members of the SLT. In the meantime, at the closing date some 30
applications had been received for the post of Deputy Headteacher - Wellbeing.
After sifting, the intention was to invite four applicants to the School on 8th
October to undertake a variety of tasks and meet members of the SLT. Although
a courtesy and not a requirement for the process, a Brent representative to
participate but was not available
Two candidates would be invited back for the following day for final selection by a
panel consisting of Ms Fainer, Rabbi Epstein, Mrs Newman and Mr Moss
together with the Headteacher. The GB approved these arrangements and
3
agreed that the panel’s recommendation should immediately be circulated to all
governors by email, requesting approval or otherwise by the end of that afternoon.
8.
LEADERSHIP & MANAGEMENT
The GB adjourned for 20 minutes for governors to consider individually their own
assessments of the state of leadership and management. These were provided to
the Headteacher to inform the preparation of proposals for Key Improvement
Themes for 2018/19 for the Governing Body and to ensure that governors
received the information they needed to facilitate systematic and constructive
challenge, focusing on important strategic activity and not on operational detail.
ACTION HEADTEACHER
9.
POLICIES
The Headteacher said that both staff and their unions had been consulted on the
draft Absence Management and draft Leave of Absence Policy. The Chairman
reminded governors that although the texts had received the benefit of scrutiny by
the School’s solicitors had reviewed the texts, it nevertheless remained the
responsibility of governors to satisfy themselves in detail prior to giving approval.
Governors having confirmed their satisfaction accordingly, the GB approved
these policies.
In response to question by governors, the Headteacher said that she would be
examining all relevant school policies to establish whether they met fully the
safeguarding guidance recently issued by the Chief Rabbi
concerning the
inclusion of pupils who were part of the LGBTQ community.
ACTION HEADTEACHER
Noting that it had agreed at its previous meeting that, where statutorily permitted,
Committees would in future normally be delegated full powers to approve as well
as review policies, the GB requested that the updated Policy list and 2018/19
Review Plan be further annotated to show where full delegations applied.
Governors were requested to advise Mr Appleman and the Clerk by the end of
September of any policies where they would prefer this delegation not to apply.
ACTION ALL GOVERNORS
10.
COMMITTEES
The GB approved the draft Terms of Reference for the CSWAB Committee.
11.
LINK GOVERNORS FOR 2018/19
Following earlier correspondence, Governors were invited to advise the Chairman
as soon as possible after the meeting of any particular preferences for
appointment as link governors.
ACTION ALL GOVERNORS
The Headteacher would circulate a template for Link Governors indicating in each
area the aspects that would be of particular interest to Ofsted Inspectors.
4
ACTION HEADTEACHER
12.
GOVERNOR TRAINING
Governors were reminded of the importance placed by Ofsted on proper training
and requested to ensure that any courses attended were notified promptly to Mr
Lake.
ACTION ALL GOVERNORS
13. ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS
Governors were invited to advise the Chairman if they were prepared to attend
for a period during the prospective parents evening on 11th October.
Signed: ______________________________ Dated: _______________
5
Minutes of the Meeting of the Governing Body (GB)
held at 6.30 pm on Monday 17th December 2018
Chairman:
Ms Geraldine Fainer
Governors:
Dr Charlotte Benjamin
Ms Caroline Bunder Mr John Cooper
Mr David Davis
Rabbi Daniel Epstein Mrs Rachel Fink
Mr Michael Goldmeier
Mr James Lake Mr Richard Martyn
Mr Andrew Moss
Mrs Naomi Newman Mrs Anne Shisler
Associate Member Rabbi Dr Raphael Zarum
Clerk: Dr Alan Fox
1.
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies were received from Mrs Julia Alberga, Mr Dan Green and Mr Mark
Hurst.
2.
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
There were none.
3.
MEMBERSHIP
3.1
Parent Governor - The GB noted the election of Mr Dan Green as a
Parent Governor for a three-year term of office with effect from 11th December
2018 and looked forward to welcoming him at its next meeting.
3.2
Local Authority Governor - The GB ratified the nomination by the London
Borough of Brent of Mr Richard Martyn as the LA Governor for a further three-
year term from 14th December 2018.
3.3
Congratulations - the GB offered its congratulations to Dr Charlotte
Benjamin on her appointment as Chairman of the Barnet Clinical Commissioning
1
Group and to Rabbi Raphael Zarum on the award by OFSTED of an Outstanding
rating following inspection of the LSJS teacher training programme.
4.
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
The minutes of the meeting held on 17th September 2018 were confirmed.
5.
MATTERS ARISING FROM MINUTES OF MEETING
5.1
Item 9 - Behaviour Policy – al governors who wished had submitted
comments.
5.2
Item 10 – Fundraising – a meeting had been arranged with potential
recruits to take charge of fundraising activities.
5.3
Item 19 – Training - the governor training record was distributed and
members were invited to notify Mr Lake of any errors or omissions.
5.4 Item 19 – Training - recommendations for further training were being
formulated, including for OFSTED and Pikuach inspections.
6.
CHAIRMAN'S REPORT
The Chairman said that she had no items to report at this meeting.
7.
HEADTEACHER’S REPORT
Mrs Fink introduced her written report and in response to questions by governors
about the recent opinion surveys the following points were made:
• the report showed comparisons with the corresponding surveys in 2016
and 2017 in those areas where the same question had been asked.
• 368 parents had responded to the survey. Although this represented a low
percentage of the theoretical maximum, it was nevertheless more than in
the previous year and provided a statistically significant sample.
• The response rate of staff and students was better than that of parents.
Further consideration would be given to arranging more meetings with
parents on particular topics.
• The staff responses were very positive and more so than those of students
and parents. It was normal for staff to appreciate changes for the good or
the bad earlier than other survey groups.
Governors were particularly pleased to see the massive improvement in staff
morale and congratulated the School in providing the outcome of the surveys
quickly whilst they were stil fresh.
In further discussion of the Headteacher’s Report the fol owing points were made:
2
• Mr David Davis had agreed to take on responsibility for the future of the
PFI contract and preparations for its completion in 10 years time. There
were a number of highly technical issues and the possibility of seeking
further assistance from Local Partnerships was being explored.
ACTION MR DAVIES/HEADTEACHER
• The Headteacher’s Report showed the structure of the SLT from January
2019 at the point when the new Deputy Headteacher (Safeguarding,
Behaviour & Well-being) would take up post. Mr Wragg having left, the
structure of the SLT was now that of 3 deputies (Jewish Life and Learning,
Teaching and Learning & Curriculum and Safeguarding, Behaviour &
Wellbeing). If experience showed that the SLT was overloaded, it was
more likely that a further Assistant Headteacher would be recruited rather
than another Deputy
• Full communication and the building of bridges were some of the keys to
the improvement in staff morale and the Headteacher met all Deputy
Headteachers at least weekly.
• The survey had shown a much more positive staff perception caused by
the hard work by the SLT to reflect on their interactions with staff.
• The Associate Senior Leader posts shown in the structure table were
being used to give middle ranking staff a one-year taste of leadership. It
was understood that this appointment was normally for one year only and
that the occupancy would be rotated to give others a similar opportunity.
To give Governors an indication of the scale of activity, the Report showed the
number of external meetings and the events in which the Headteacher had
participated in the term and listed a small sample of student events.
8.
POLICIES
8.1
Chief Rabbi’s Guidance for the Wellbeing of LGBT+ Pupils - the
Headteacher reported that she had examined all relevant school policies and
could confirm their consistency in basic terms with the Guidance recently issued.
She was proposing to re-examine them during the holidays to see whether, with
minor amendments, it would be possible to make some of the messages more
positive.
8.2
Wellbeing Policy - the introduction of a whole school Wellbeing Policy
had been postponed until the arrival of the new Deputy Headteacher.
8.3
Policies General - discussion of the latest policy schedule and decisions
on those policies that the GB wished to retain for final approval was postponed
until the January meeting when Mr Appleman could be present.
8.4
P & P Policies - Mr Goldmeier explained that the proposed terms of two
policies had been considered by the Pay & Personnel Committee at its recent
meeting. However, the Committee had been inquorate and so, before a decision
3
could be formalised, it would be necessary for another member to give
agreement, which had not yet been done. The policies would then come to the
GB for approval, unless in the meantime, the Committee was given full delegated
authority as at paragraph 8.3 above.
The draft Grievance Policy had been sent for staff consultation and could not
therefore yet be approved.
9.
GOVERNOR SELF ASSESSMENT
The GB considered a self-assessment form kindly provided by Mrs Julia Alberga
and agreed that it would in principle be useful to complete something along these
lines to permit a better assessment of governor views and capabilities and, in
particular, to establish where more information and training might be required. It
was felt that could only usefully respond as individuals and agreed that the
questions should be reformulated accordingly and then turned into a Survey
Monkey questionnaire.
ACTION HEADTEACHER
10.
COMMITTEES - GENERAL
10.1
Pay & Personal Committee - Mr Goldmeier explained the amendments
considered by the Committee required to reflect the proper procedure for the
setting of targets for the Headteacher and for the annual appraisal process. The
GB approved the revised Terms of Reference.
Mr Goldmeier added that the process had recently been completed. Whilst it was
not practical for the entire GB to be involved in detail, two of the target setters
were governors and therefore aware what the GB was looking for. The targets
that had recently been set for Mrs Fink were aspirational for the next few years
and were tied into the School Improvement Plan
10.2
Committee Membership - the GB appointed Mrs Caroline Bunder as a
member of the CSWAB Committee and the Pay & Personnel Committee.
10.3 Committee Chairmanship - The GB appointed Mr Richard Martyn as
Chairman of the Pay & Personnel Committee.
11.
ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE
The GB noted the written summary of the Committee’s Activities supported by
the draft minutes of its meeting held on 12th November.
The Headteacher drew attention to her recorded concern about the pre-arrival
meetings held with all Year 7 students and their parents and the consistency
across the team conducting them of content. Some information was collated
incorrectly and not shared effectively. In future, although it created a substantial
workload, she proposed that interviewers be restricted to the members of the SLT
and the Associate Senior Leaders.
Mrs Shisler requested that her view that the Admissions Officer was amazing
should be recorded in the minutes.
4
12.
CSWAB COMMITTEE
Dr Benjamin introduced the draft minutes of the Committee meeting held on 12th
November 2018 and referred in particular to the following matters that had been
clarified:
• It had been confirmed that, if a student's overall grade were raised after
remarking, a refund of the appeal fee would be made.
• The numbers of pupils on the safeguarding list was currently low because
it was early in the academic year. There had been clarification of the
process to be used by members of staff for reporting safeguarding issues.
• There were insufficient funds to cope properly with all vulnerable students
and the Committee had asked for an estimate of the shortfall to be
prepared so that it could be considered by the GB against other priorities.
• As a safeguarding measure, posters obscuring the viewing panes in
classroom doors had been removed.
• Steps were being taken to promulgate more widely best practice in
identifying early those students with potential behavioural problems and
developing strategies, short of sanctions, for dealing with matters before
they became critical.
• SEN training was in process in departmental meetings. There were many
mainstream adjustments could be made but weren’t at the moment.
In discussion of behavioural matters, the following points were made:
• The new behaviour policy had now been fully implemented and the
number of issues was declining because teachers were working hard to
develop better relationships with students.
• It was, however, clear that the policy needed strengthening in respect of
rewards that should be more immediate, low-cost and available to as many
students as possible.
• More support was being given and the staff experiencing problems were
more open to receiving it.
• The new mobile phone policy had achieved a positive impact in
classrooms and had been well supported by parents.
• Internal exclusions were not the same as the old Room 17 process.
Referral decisions could only be made by senior staff and this sanction
was restricted only to the most challenging students. Space and resources
were limited and the opportunity was taken for providing individual
mentoring that was followed up a few weeks later. Very few students
returned.
5
• There was a certain amount of low-level disruption concentrated in Year 8
but fewer than 10 pupils were responsible for most of it. Attempts were
made to engage the parents concerned but unfortunately they were not
always cooperative.
• Use was being made of referrals to the Brent Right Track Centre but this
was unpopular with parents, some of this whom refused to send their
children there.
In discussion of attendance the following points were made:
• A target of 95% attendance for years 7–11 had been agreed by the
Committee.
• Attendance for Years 12-13 was slightly improved at 89.4% and a target of
90% had been set.
• Attendance in Year 13 was lower than in Year 12 and, in particular, a
number of pupils were regularly missing JS and PE. Attendance letters
were being sent to parents.
• Absence due to visits to universities or seminaries and yeshivas were
recorded as Educational Visits
• The Behaviour Policy applied to the Sixth Form and its sanctions. e.g.
detentions, could be imposed for a poor Year 13 attendance record.
Ultimately the School could decline to enter a student for examinations.
13.
FINANCE & PREMISES COMMITTEE
The GB noted the Committee’s Termly Report and the draft minutes of its
meeting held on 29th October 2018.
The GB approved the draft of the Finance Handbook as recommended by the
Committee and also its proposal that approval of future versions be delegated to
the Committee.
14.
JEWISH STUDIES COMMITTEE
Rabbi Zarum gave an oral report in amplification of the draft minutes of the
inaugural meeting the Committee on 22nd October. He explained that Mr Daniel
Marcus, the Deputy Headteacher (Jewish Life & Learning) had advised the
Committee of the various current plans, achievement and challenges of JS at
JFS, including staffing, unification of the JiEP & JS Departments, funding from
partnerships, and various programme and curriculum development updates. A
strategic plan for Jewish Life in the school was also in development.
In consideration of the policies for which the JS Committee had responsibility, the
GB decided that the Sex & Relationships Education Policy should be reviewed at
a joint meeting with the CSWAB Committee. Responsibility for the final approval
6
of the Kashrut Policy and the Jewish Life & Learning Policy (including Collective
Worship) was delegated in full to the JS Committee.
15.
PAY & PERSONAL COMMITTEE
The GB noted the draft minutes of the Committee’s inquorate meeting held on
26th November 2018.
16.
LINK GOVERNORS
16.1
General - the GB considered the experience to date with the enhanced
Link Governor arrangements that had been in operation for the Autumn term. The
scheme was judged to have been very successful in improving amongst
governors collectively knowledge of the School and its activities. It was confirmed
that use of the template circulated for individual reports was not obligatory and
simply provided a standard format that governors could employ if appropriate in
the particular field.
16.2 Wellbeing & Mental Health – Mrs Newman, the Link Governor, said that
she had met staff and had received a range of suggestions for promoting the well
being of staff that she had included in paragraph 4 of her report. From her
canvassing their appeared to be a range of views amongst governors about these
possible initiatives.
The Chairman made the further suggestion that a number of Governors might
come in to School to make breakfast or tea for staff once a term.
The Headteacher said that the listed suggestions all came from information
gleaned about activities undertaken at other schools; the suitability of each at JFS
was of course for consideration.
16.3
PHSE – in discussion of the Report the value of preparing students for
the financial practicalities in their working life by providing an understanding of
matters such as the tax system and mortgages was stressed.
16.4
Governor Training - it was requested that once the training record had
been updated, should be examined to establish whether any important areas
were being missed across the GB.
ACTION HEADTEACHER/MR LAKE
16.5
Other Link Governor Reports - the GB took note of all of the other reports
provided by Link Governors and it was agreed that, based on preliminary
experience there would be some minor adjustment in responsibilities for the
Spring Term including the appointment of Mr John Cooper as Link Governor for
Effectiveness 16 - 19.
17.
GOVERNOR BUSINESS
It was reported that some governors were continuing to have problems accessing
JFS internet facilities. The Headteacher said that the problem might be with the
requirement to change personal passwords at least once every two months and
that this was being examined.
7
ACTION HEADTEACHER
18.
ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS
There was none.
Signed: ______________________________ Dated: _______________
8
Minutes of the Meeting of the Governing Body (GB)
held at 6.30 pm on Monday 21st January 2019
Acting Chairman:
Mr Andrew Moss
Governors:
Mrs Julia Alberga
Dr Charlotte Benjamin
Ms Caroline Bunder
Mr John Cooper
Mr David Davis
Mrs Rachel Fink
Mr Michael Goldmeier
Mr Dan Green
Mr Mark Hurst
Mr Richard Martyn
Mrs Naomi Newman Mrs Anne Shisler
Associate Member: Rabbi Dr Raphael Zarum
In attendance:
Rabbi Howard Cohen (Deputy Headteacher
(Safeguarding, Behaviour & Wellbeing))
Clerk:
Dr Alan Fox
1.
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies were received from Ms Geraldine Fainer and Mr James Lake.
Rabbi Daniel Epstein was also not present.
2.
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
2.1
Mrs Alberga declared that she was paid employee of the JLC with whom
the School had a contractual relationship.
2.2
The GB noted with approval the Clerk’s statement that all Governors
properly had an interest in its business and, provided any private interests that
might impinge were noted in the annual declarations, it was only necessary for
further oral declarations to be made prior to any particular discussion if a
reasonable observer might have a perception that there could be a conflict or
bias.
3.
MEMBERSHIP
1
3.1
The GB welcomed Mr Dan Green who had been elected as a Parent
Governor for a three year term of office with effect from 11th December, 2018.
3.2
The GB also welcomed Rabbi Howard Cohen, newly appointed Deputy
Headteacher (Safeguarding, Behaviour & Wellbeing).
4.
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
The minutes of the meeting held on 17th December 2018 were confirmed.
5.
MATTERS ARISING FROM MINUTES OF MEETING
5.1
Item 7 - PFI – Mr Davis reported that he was meeting representatives of
the PFI contractor to run over those matters that would be of importance in the
run-up to the end of the PFI contract in 10 years time particularly in respect of
repairs and renovations. He would also be meeting the Local Partnerships
organisation to explore the extent to which it would be able to assist the School
with expert advice over this period.
5.2
Item 17 – School Email - a number of governors and the Clerk had
reported continuing problems using the JFS Internet facility and it was agreed
that further advice and assistance should be sought from the School’s IT
providers.
6.
CHAIRMAN'S REPORT
There was nothing to report at this meeting.
7.
HEADTEACHER’S REPORT
Mrs Fink distributed a document summarising the progress that was being made
against five SIP objectives. She said that whilst OFSTED had commented very
favourably on the School's achievements at Key Stages 4 and 5, the inspectors
had been less impressed by Key Stage 3. One of her main immediate objectives
was to strengthen all aspects of Key Stage 3 education and organisation.
Together with the staff concerned, close attention was being paid to setting
standards of behaviour for learning both in and out of class and the provision of
an improved and stretching academic experience for Year 7 students. An
updated plan, covering success criteria and deadlines and the impact of
intervention programmes would be shared in detail with governors at the CSWAB
Committee.
Mrs Fink was also concentrating more on the development of consistent excellent
Teaching & Learning across the School. In her view, more needed to be done to
ensure greater consistency of practice in all faculties and in classroom
observations and their feedback. Governors were particularly pleased to see the
major improvement in staff morale in recent months.
There would always be some turnover in staff, and indeed promotion to more
senior posts outside, might be regarded as a sign of JFS success in developing
and encouraging junior teachers. In the meantime, Mrs Fink was taking a closer
2
interest in teacher recruitment to ensure that JFS would employ only high quality
staff. Together with Anna Joseph, the Assistant Headteacher for Teaching &
Learning, she would be attending the recruitment fair the following week at the
Institute of Education.
In discussion and in response to questions from Governors, the following points
were made:
Attractive for academic achievement as many initiatives were, a close eye
needed to be kept on the effect on the School budget. A review would shortly
take place of all staff salaries as part of the planning for 2019/20.
Concern was expressed about the lack of synchronisation between JFS and
other Jewish schools over holiday periods, which caused childcare problems for
parents with children both at JFS and Jewish primary schools. Further problems
were created for non-Jewish staff because the JFS holidays did not coincide with
the holidays of mainstream non-Jewish schools.
The Headteacher said that there were always going to be some difficulties
because of the requirement, as a maintained school, to have 190 school days in
an academic year but as a Jewish school to avoid all of the Yomin Tovim. There
were particular problems when Rosh Hashanah fell on a Monday and Tuesday
but there would be some amelioration if JFS resumed the practice at Camden of
using the intermediate days of Succot as working schooldays.
Whilst the most orthodox members of staff might be concerned by the proposal,
this did not apply to the large majority of JFS pupils, some of whom would not
have the experience of eating in a Succah unless this happened at school.
Governors needed to weigh the needs of the majority of pupils against those of a
minority of the staff. If this change were to be put in place in future years, care
would have to be taken with planning the educational strategy and the provision
of adequate physical facilities.
The GB requested that the School should consider the matter further and
circulate a position paper that could be discussed at its next meeting and
subsequently used for wider consultation with parents and others.
ACTION HEADTEACHER
8.
GOVERNOR SELF ASSESSMENT
The Headteacher explained that governors had been invited to complete an
online anonymous self-assessment questionnaire. Unfortunately, the
questionnaire might not have reached all and she invited any governor who had
not participated to have a word with her after the meeting and arrange to have
their own assessment incorporated.
An initial analysis had been conducted of the 11 responses so far received and
two sets of pie charts were circulated at the meeting based on questions where at
least one response was at the lowest level or where at least two governors
responded "don't know". When more responses had been received, the
Headteacher would circulate a further analysis and an executive summary of the
3
outcome. This should inform the establishment of priority areas for further
governor training, including an in-house training session during the Summer Term.
ACTION HEADTEACHER/MR LAKE
9.
ISRAEL RESIDENTIAL SCHEME
The Headteacher introduced a report containing a brief history of the JFS Israel
Residential Scheme that had been running for many decades and a summary of
a major formal review undertaken in 2016, including interviews with more than
500 former participants and parents. The review had confirmed that the Kibbutz
Lavi programme had provided an extremely positive experience for the
overwhelming majority of its participants. However, it also found some evidence
to suggest that the 12 week programme had more of an impact than the current
nine week equivalent.
Based on this report and the main recommendation to review's the provision of
secular education and the price and the length of the scheme, outline tenders had
been invited for the 2019/20 scheme of a minimum of 12 weeks for a group of
between 40 to 60 students with the cost limited to $7200. Four responses had
been received.
Of the tenders, the School’s preferred option was that received from the
Alexander Muss High School in Israel (AMHSI). The main reasons for this
preference were that AMHSI was mainly a school and prioritised teaching and
learning and had much experience delivering residential programs of this nature.
The School was located centrally and had the best facilities for both living and
learning. The staff included a number of British Olim who were qualified teachers
with UK classroom experience and finally the tender was at the best price for the
longest scheme.
Mrs Fink said that Jamie Peston (Director of Operations) would be in Israel from
3rd to 5th February to carry out due diligence and to conduct a risk assessment
of this option. In addition, the School would produce a paper setting out the
educational rationale and a time/cost analysis. It was hoped that a final decision
could be taken at the beginning of March so that detailed arrangements could be
agreed in time for launch meetings in April.
In response to questions from governors and in further discussion, the following
points were made:
• Whilst this was not a criticism of the current Lavi nine-week scheme that
cost £7000 per head, the new proposal was cheaper and longer and had
educational advantages.
• It would be open to more students - up to 60 – and could certainly not be
regarded in any way as cutting back.
• The research showed that twelve weeks had more impact on the
subsequent Jewish lives of its participants when compared to the nine-
week programme. Whilst the students would be away from home for a
longer period, this would probably have a smaller impact on them than on
4
their parents.
• There had been past criticism that some students found that educational
reintegration at JFS had been difficult and insufficient help being provided
by teaching staff, who tended to be unsympathetic. Assistance should be
made readily available for those who needed and requested it.
• Even though the proposed new scheme was cheaper, it would stil be this
unaffordable for the majority of parents and the limited bursary
arrangements were insufficient to change the position. However, the
longer residential scheme was a flagship programme for JFS and had
provided great benefit for generations of students. It was regrettable that it
could not be extended to a larger number but there was also the shorter
Taste of Israel programme that attracted nearly 200 students a year.
• Input should be obtained from Rabbi Epstein on the relevant elements of
the proposed AMHSI programme.
• As soon as the risk assessment was available it should be shown to Dr
Benjamin and Mrs Shisler to look at the safeguarding aspects.
Summarising the discussion, the Chairman said that advice from Daniel Marcus
and an outline of the GB discussions should be provided to Jamie Peston to
inform his further discussions in Israel. The proposal was to use a new provider
abroad for the equivalent of complete term and the GB had a heavy responsibility
for making sure that it had the best chance of success. Whilst a final decision on
the new scheme was essentially an operational matter, the GB would therefore
wish to have the opportunity to see and comment on the proposed further
analysis and risk assessment, no later than its next meeting on 25th March and
prior to any final decision by the Headteacher.
10.
POLICIES
10.1 The GB approved the terms of the following policies, as recommended by
the Pay & Personnel Committee:
10.1.1 Harassment Policy
10.1.2 Staff Equal Opportunities & Diversity Policy
10.1.3 Grievance Policy
10 .1.4 Discipline Policy
10.1.5 Capability Policy
10.2 As recommended by the Headteacher, the GB also approved the minor
amendments to the following previously approved policies to ensure consistency
with the guidance issued by the Chief Rabbi on the Well-being of LGBT+ Pupils:
10.2.2 Code of Conduct for Staff
10.2.3 Equal Opportunities Policy & Equality Objectives
10.2.4 Sex and Relationship Education Policy
10.2.5 E-Safety Policy
10.3 The GB also considered the revised terms of the Safeguarding & Child
5
Protection Policy & Procedures document and requested that it should be
amended to separate out more distinctly the respective responsibilities of the
School and the PFI contractor, making it clear that the former should have an
oversight of the vetting and training of contractors’ staff and visitors.
ACTION HEADTEACHER
10.4 The GB approved the updated Policy Schedule with review dates, subject
to reservation to the GB itself of final approval to the terms of the following
policies (following detailed consideration by the appropriate committees):
10.4.1 Admissions
10.4.2 Curriculum
10.4.3 Governors’ Expenses
10.4.4 Kashrut
This full delegation of the remaining policies would be reviewed from time to time.
11.
FUNDRAISING
The GB considered an outline fundraising scoping document produced on a
voluntary basis by a parent. He took the view that professional assistance would
be required to set a major programme and to train staff on a gradually reducing
basis until sufficient in-house capability had been created.
In discussion, it was agreed that one of the problems in the past had been that
the School did not really perceive itself to be a charity and that, therefore, the
Community did not see JFS as a charity that it was important to support. Work
was needed to change these perceptions and make JFS saleable in this highly
competitive field.
It was also agreed that external professional assistance was necessary to plan,
research and create the necessary infrastructure and that significant funds would
be required to prime the process in this way. Some work has already been
carried out on a pro bono basis and given the scale of the work it would be
unreasonable to expect him to continue on this basis for the next year or so. The
likley level of funding required a proper tender process.
The GB requested that with assistance, in particular from Mr Dan Green and the
parent, if he were prepared to give more pro bono time to the project, the School
should carry out an initial cost/benefit analysis and prepare proposals for a tender
process. This should be considered by the Finance & Premises Committee
before being put to the Governing Body for a final decision.
ACTION HEADTEACHER
12.
COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP
The GB appointed Mr Dan Green to be a member of the Finance & Premises
Committee.
13.
GOVERNOR TRAINING
6
In Mr Lake’s absence, governors agreed that Governor Training should be placed
high on the GB Agenda for its next meeting.
ACTION CLERK
14.
ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS
13.1
Admissions – the Headteacher reported that 350 first tranche offers had
been made for places in Year 7 for entry in September 2019. She estimated that
the eventual uptake would be 310 students.
The deadline for acceptance of offers of places in the Sixth Form was the end of
the week.
13.2
‘A’ Level Achievements – the Headteacher said that the JFS results were
in the top 1% of comprehensive schools in the country.
13.3 University Places – The Headteacher reported that only 12 Year 13
students had not yet received an offer for entry in the coming Autumn Term.
However, many had multiple offers from which to choose. Unusually four students
had offers of places for medicine at Oxford but only five places had been offered
to the 14 Cambridge applicants. The School was seeking feedback on this low
result. Interestingly a large number of places had been offered by both
Birmingham and Nottingham Universities.
14.4 Holocaust Memorial Day – The Headteacher reported that a high profile
speaker would be addressing various assemblies during the week after HMD and
that each form would have at least one Holocaust related session.
14.5 Communications – the current format and content of the Headteacher’s
weekly newsletter to parents had attracted much approval and consideration was
requested whether the same concept might be used to strengthen the
relationship between parents and governors.
ACTION HEADTEACHER
14.6 Quiz Evening - 7th April - Governors were requested to let Mrs Fink know
as soon as possible if they would be attending the forthcoming fundraising
evening.
Signed: ______________________________ Dated: _______________
7
.
Minutes of the Meeting of the Governing Body (GB)
held at 6.30 pm on Monday 25th March 2019
Chairman:
Ms Geraldine Fainer
Governors:
Mrs Julia Alberga
Dr Charlotte Benjamin
Ms Caroline Bunder
Mr John Cooper
Mr David Davis
Mrs Rachel Fink
Mr Michael Goldmeier
Mr Dan Green
Mr James Lake
Mr Richard Martyn
Mr Andrew Moss
Mrs Naomi Newman
Mrs Anne Shisler
Associate Member: Rabbi Dr Raphael Zarum
In attendance:
Mr Simon Appleman (Deputy Headteacher)
Clerk:
Dr Alan Fox
1.
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies were received from Rabbi Daniel Epstein and Mr Mark Hurst.
2.
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
There were none
3.
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
The minutes of the meeting held on 21st January 2019 were confirmed.
4.
MATTERS ARISING FROM MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
item 5.1 - PFI – it was reported that Mr Cooper had attended a meeting with the
contractor in place of Mr Davis which became very detailed. There would be a
further meeting, now arranged for 9th April, at which Mr Davies would be
accompanied by Mr Appleman.
1
5.
CHAIRMAN'S REPORT
The Chairman said that a primary school had recently been downgraded by
OFSTED from "Outstanding" to "Inadequate". She noted that this was despite the
recording of above-average attainment by pupils, a rating of good in all categories
in all but leadership and management and moreover that the pupils felt safe and
behaved well.
This should provide a reminder that JFS could be inspected at any time between
now and November 2020 and that a poor result in any single aspect of an
inspection could lead to downgrading, notwithstanding excel ent achievements
elsewhere.
6.
HEADTEACHER’S REPORT
Mrs Fink introduced her Spring Term report under a number of headings.
6.1
Admissions
At the time of the meeting, 271 places for entry to Year 7 in September 2019 had
been taken up and a further 29 places would be offered very shortly. At the
moment there were 70 on the waiting list, although these might well be on waiting
lists for other schools as well.
6.2
Attendance
Efforts to improve attendance were continuing. A new attendance policy had
been drafted and an "end of year" projected attendance for individual students
was being implemented. Initiatives were also being introduced to improve Sixth
Form attendance, which had always been a particular problem. One problem was
the support given by parents to absence prior to the public examinations.
6.3
Governor Training
Governors suggested that there were a significant number of gaps in the records
entered into the table provided by Mr Lake. It was agreed that the establishment
of an accurate database should enable the identification of any significant gaps
and the way to fil them. It was agreed that the Headteacher would recirculate the
table and invite governors to correct errors.
ACTION HEADTEACHER & GOVERNORS
The Headteacher said that it was important that new governors should have a
proper induction and that all governors should have up-to-date safeguarding
training. There were many excel ent training courses available both in-house and
available online and also provided by Brent. It was noted that, not only was
training important in its own right, but OFSTED inspectors would certainly be
examining whether the Governing Body had sufficient expertise in key topics to
act as a critical friend.
The GB requested that the Clerk should resume responsibility, previously
transferred to the Headteacher, for ensuring that all new governors received a
basic pack of key documents and met key personnel as early as possible.
2
ACTION CLERK
6.4
School Day Timings
A number of possible adjustments in the School day had been discussed in some
detail at the last CSWAB Committee meeting and were stil under discussion by
the SLT. In making such a change there were a number of considerations to bear
in mind, including:
• the provision of opportunity to incorporate incremental coaching for all
teachers, part of the strategy to enable rapid improvement in teaching
and learning;
• the impact on punctuality to class of 5 minute changeovers;
• the impact of 60 minute lessons on student focus and behaviour (noting
that there were fewer behavioural issues during winter months when
lessons were only 45 minutes long);
• increasing numbers of students with ADD/ADHD;
• the potential benefits of an afternoon registration including the provision
of additional pastoral support and mincha opportunities in the lower
school.
Although there was as yet no SLT final consensus, there was focus on an early
finish at 3.00 pm on Wednesdays with all students dismissed no later than
3.15pm. This would be achieved by reducing tutor time by 10 minutes, reducing
lunchtime by 10 minutes and reducing Period 4 and Period 5 each by 5 minutes.
This would then provide the time between 3.15 and 4.15 pm for staff incremental
coaching to be introduced. In addition, maintenance of the Friday winter timetable
for the entire school year would enable additional CPD for staff during the
summer term.
Although there was no formal requirement, there should be consultation with both
staff and parents about major changes of this kind, which might well not be
attractive to many parents. In explaining what was intended the educational
benefits would have to be carefully explained. To ameliorate any problems that
an early finish might cause for some parents, a homework club could be
organised and it would be necessary to arrange for late buses.
In further discussion, it was confirmed that the loss in actual learning time would
be only 10 minutes per week. Staff would not be going home early on the weeks
when they were not coaching or being coached, but would be expected to use the
time to improve their subject knowledge. Fifteen staff coaches were being trained
for the new role, for which each would have a timetable allocation equivalent to
one teaching period for fortnight. The notional resource penalty across the board
would be half a teacher per annum. It was anticipated that OFSTED would be
very happy with the incremental staff development proposals, replacing the
current inspection philosopy.
The GB gave its approval in principle on the changes in Wednesday timetables to
come into effect in September, subject to the outcome of the planned consultation.
However, the GB did not accept at this time the additional proposal to maintain
the Friday winter timetable across the entire school year (which would provide
additional time for staff continuing professional development).
3
6.5
New Israel Residential Scheme
The Headteacher reported the that the recent tender had secured a new Israel
Residential Programme for Year 9 JFS students, hosted by the Alexander Muss
High School in Israel (AMHSI). Due diligence had been undertaken and a risk
assessment made. Rabbi Epstein had informed the Office of the Chief Rabbi of
the changes to the programme.
In response to questions from governors and in further discussion the following
points were made:
• Mr Goldmeier was satisfied with the financial status of the new contractor;
residual questions relating to cover had been put to the insurers.
• AMHSI was working closely with the School on safeguarding and Mr
Raynn Bruce would give training to its entire staff.
• The Dean of Secular Studies at AMHSI would be visiting JFS shortly for
the launch and would spend two days with staff discussing the curriculum
content to be covered during this scheme. In addition, during the visit
Charlotte Benjamin as the lead safeguarding governor would be speaking
to the Dean about appropriate procedures. Mrs Ann Shisler was not
available at that time.
• Consideration was stil being given to enhancements to the Jewish Studies
curriculum to take greater advantage than previously of living in Israel to
enhance education in Judaism and Ivrit. Support was being arranged from
Tribe educators who now live in Israel both in terms of Jewish Studies
delivery and “in-house” Shabbatot programming. In addition, hosted
Shabbatot would be arranged in specific communities.
• Together with a bespoke brochure, a video had been made to enhance the
launch of the new programme in the following week. There would be a
concentration in the application process on the reasons why pupils wished
to participate and what they expected to get out of it.
6.6
Other Matters
In response to further questions from governors about the Headteacher’s Report,
the following points were made:
• The only BTEC course that had really taken off at JFS so far had been
Business Studies at KS4, but staff were attempting now to establish
which Year 9 pupils might be better suited to follow and would benefit
more from a BTEC rather than a more academic GCSE course.
• To make BTEC's more attractive required a cultural shift to overcome the
obstacle of parents who were unrealistic about their children's capabilities.
Funding would be needed for additional help to deal effectively with
pupils with significant behavioural issues and those with other needs not
4
sufficiently acute to attract LA additional funding. The Headteacher
estimated that to start on a small scale with, say, two more teachers
would cost annual y up to £80,000. This might be a suitable project for
focussed alumni fundraising.
• A review of the English Department by Mr Appleman had just been
completed. There were some areas where improvements could be
introduced and a time bound action plan was being implemented and
reviewed weekly.
• Attracting sufficient attendance for the morning service remained a
problem that would be exacerbated when the Year 13 study leave started.
The principal purpose was to provide a religious morning prayer
experience for pupils and consideration of how to make it more attractive
and serve as an additional educational experience was required. It might
be that the service should start a little later and be made shorter in length.
7.
BUDGET 2019/20
Mr Cooper summarised the principal features of the draft Budget for 2018/19, as
recommended by the Finance & Premises Committee (and circulated as a final
revise version earlier in the day). It was supported by an explanatory PowerPoint
presentation provided in advance.
The Chairman drew attention to the critical role in fil ing the annual gap between
income and expenditure in the School Budget played by donations from the
Development Charitable Trust. The Trustees had not felt able to accede to the
original request for 2019/20 because of their concern about the level of income
they could derive from Parental Voluntary Contributions (PVC) and some were
concerned that increasing the rate per pupil might result in lower total income.
However, it had been agreed that, after being frozen for two years, if a final
assessment in June indicated that this was necessary, the level of contribution
requested per pupil could rise by £10 per month.
PVC collection efforts had been hampered by GDPR restrictions, but the
additional resources and the improvements in methodology now being applied
gave some confidence that sufficient funds would be raised in this way.
In discussion of other fundraising, concern was expressed that despite months of
discussion little firm progress was being made on the ground. It was noted that
the Headteacher was drafting a Vision document outlining the key areas in which
the school wished to advance and which would be used as the basis of a
fundraising programme. As reported to the previous GB meeting, a parent had
undertaken a pro bono scoping study, but a decision remained to be taken
whether to proceed with a paid contract. To ensure that matters moved forward at
a reasonable pace, it would be important also to identify and during the course of
the Summer Term meet with a group of people, both parents and others, who
wished to support the school materially.
Before employing a fundraising consultant, Mr Moss preferred first to take matters
further himself and it was agreed that he, Mrs Alberga and Mr Green would meet
5
the Headteacher to flesh out a more detailed plan and report back with their
recommendations to the next GB meeting.
ACTION MRS ALBERGA & MESSRS GREEN & MOSS
The GB approved the Budget for 2019/20 as recommended by the Finance &
Premises Committee and the Chairman offered the thanks of governors to all
those responsible for the work leading to this successful conclusion
8.
SAFEGUARDING POLICY
The GB approved the terms of the draft Safeguarding Policy, updated as it had
requested with an addition covering 1440 staff in Section 13.
9.
LINK GOVERNOR REPORTS
The GB took note of the following reports by Link Governors:
Attendance & Behaviour
David Davis
Careers Education
Julia Alberga
Ivrit
Rabbi Zarum
Governor Training
James Lake
Leadership & Management
Geraldine Fainer
Jewish Studies and Life
Rabbi Zarum
Pupil Premium and Year 7
& Catch Up Funding
Julia Alberga
Security
Mark Hurst
Safeguarding
Charlotte Benjamin
SEND
Anne Shisler
Student Outcomes
& Effectiveness 16-19
John Cooper
SMSC & British Values
Michael Goldmeier
Wellbeing and Mental Health
Naomi Newman
The GB noted that the following reports were not yet available and requested
that they should be circulated by the end of the current term.
Teaching Learning & Assessment
Caroline Bunder
Curriculum
Caroline Bunder
GDPR
Andrew Moss
Health & Safety
Andrew Moss
ACTION MS BUNDER AND MR MOSS
The GB further noted that some link roles did not conveniently coincide with
membership of the most relevant Committee and invited Mr Moss to make
appropriate recommendations for the GB’s annual review of Committees at the
final GB meeting of the current academic year.
6
ACTION MR MOSS & GB
11.
DATES FOR 2019/20
The GB approved the proposed meeting dates for the Governing Body and its
Committees as recommended by Mr Appleman. Any governor who, on reflection,
perceived a potential problem was invited to advise Mr Appleman before the end
of this term.
ACTION ALL GOVERNORS
12.
ANY OTHER BUSINESS
12. 1 Award - The GB offered its congratulations to the School on the award by
the Schools, Students & Teachers Network of its Framework for Exceptional
Education kitemark.
12.2
Thanks – Mrs Newman asked that thanks should be recorded to
Anna McDonald, who was responsible for staff wellbeing.
Signed: ______________________________ Dated: _______________
7
JFS SCHOOL
MINUTES OF JEWISH STUDIES COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON
MONDAY, 22ND OCTOBER 2018
Present:
Chairman:
Rabbi Dr Raphael Zarum
Governors:
Dr Charlotte Benjamin
Rabbi Daniel Epstein
Mrs Rachel Fink
Mrs Naomi Newman
In Attendance:
Mr Daniel Marcus (Deputy Headteacher Jewish Life & Learning)
Clerk:
Dr Alan Fox
1.
APOLOGIES
Apologies for absence were received from Mrs Julian Alberga.
2.
PURPOSE OF COMMITTEE
The Chairman explained that two years earlier the GB had abolished the Committee
dedicated to the specifically Jewish aspects of JFS and the education it provided.
Instead it planned to give these topics added prominence by reserving a period for
consideration at each GB meeting. This experiment had failed because, in the event,
insufficient GB priority and time could be allocated. The GB had therefore recreated
this Committee and, at its meeting in July, had approved the Terms of Reference
circulated to all members. The Committee now needed to decide how it was going to
proceed to fulfil its demanding remit.
Mr Marcus said that he had some amendments to proposed to the Terms of
Reference. He was asked to circulate a revised version for Committee consideration
and, subject to any views expressed, it would subsequently be submitted to the GB
for ratification.
ACTION MR MARCUS
In discussion it was agreed that the functions of the committee should be:
• to be a critical friend to the Jewish Studies (JS) Department
• to assist in ensuring that JS priorities and their consequential requirements for
resources were understood by the GB
• to satisfy itself that the JS programme properly reflected the School ‘s overall
strategic plan and support management in its fulfilment by listening to its
concerns and providing practical assistance.
Functioning in this way would enable the Committee to play a significant role in
raising performance levels.
3.
POLICIES
The GB had allocated review responsibilities to the Jewish Studies Committee for
three policies:
3.1
Kashrut Policy - this policy was due for review in the current term and was
under active consideration in the School. There was currently concern about more
non-supervised food being brought onto the premises since pupils had been al owed
to bring their own packed lunches.
Text here has been redacted
Exemption: Section 43 Commercial Interests
ACTION MR MARCUS
3.2
Jewish Life & Learning Policy (incorporating Collective Worship) – this policy
was due for Committee review in the Spring Term and it was proposed to incorporate
the currently separate Collective Worship Policy. The School was planning to expand
worship of some kind to achieve a much wider coverage. The first step was the
introduction of the "Pause for Thought", a two-minute recorded piece by a member of
staff or a member of the Sixth Form and available to be played under the auspices of
Form Tutors in their classes. It would also appear shortly in everyone's outboxes.
Not all Tutors were currently using this facility but the list was growing. The two
minutes of quiet reflection on a topic was short enough for attention not to wander
and some students were finding the presentations fascinating. In future prominent
members of the community might be invited to join the list of presenters.
A draft of the policy would be made available to the Committee in time for its January
meeting.
ACTION MR MARCUS
3.3
Sex & Relationships Education Policy - this policy was due for a review in
Spring 2020 and would be carried out in conjunction with the CSWAB.
4.
JEWISH LIFE AND LEARNING OVERVIEW
Mr Marcus gave a presentation on current work and plans under various headings.
4.1
Jewish Informal Education Programme (JIEP) - He said that the JIEP team,
which previously operated semi-independently, was starting to work more closely
with the JS Department. This was facilitated by the move of the JIEP Lounge next
door to the JS staffroom and the creation of the combined Jewish Education
Leadership Team (JELP). JS staff were becoming involved in social action.
The informal lunchtime learning sessions were now attracting around 100 pupils and
efforts were being made to increase this number. Governors suggested that more
2
community rabbis and youth leaders and schlichim should be invited to participate as
speakers and tutors.
4.2
Staffing - Helped by external funding from various agencies with which JFS
had good relationships, including UJIA, JNF and Tribe, staffing of JIEP was nearly
complete. Compared with last year the JS Department was now stable and consisted
of 19 full-time and part-time members. If anything, it was now slightly overstaffed but
this could change rapidly.
4.3
Lavi - The Headteacher and Operations Director would shortly be looking to
see what alternative suppliers for the six week trip had to offer, before committing to
another year with Lavi, which was safe and provided kibbutz life experience but did
not provide the best education. Governors noted that there was prestige in being
chosen by JFS and recommended that the JFS requirements should be made clear
to alternative suppliers. There was concern to keep the cost down.
4.4
Poland Trip - There would be greater emphasis on pre-preparation, both for
staff and students. Six adults were being allocated to each coach of pupils.
4.5
Curriculum Development – Mr Marcus reported that this work was making
good progress and the Key Stage 3 curriculum should be finished by the end of the
academic year, thus then covering Years 7 to 9. The new Year 7 cohort and its
successors would, therefore, have a continuous year-by-year programme to look
forward to. More funds, however, were needed for printing the course books.
4.6
GCSE - Years 10 and 11 had achieved very good examination results and
there was value in having external validation of this kind. However, there remained
the problem that text was taught up to Year 9 and then abandoned.
4.7
Hebrew Reading Programme - this had started wel using the Koren Junior
Siddur. However, this involved further cost and governors suggested consideration
might be given to adding a Siddur to the list of items to be acquired by parents for
incoming Year 7 pupils.
5.
ANY OTHER BUSINESS
5.1
British Values & PHSE - it was confirmed that these subjects were being
brought under the auspices of the Deputy Headteacher Jewish Life & Learning, thus
enabling the introduction of specifically Jewish attitudes into their teaching.
5.2
Atmosphere - Governors confirmed that an enhanced Jewish ethos was
detectable in the School.
Signed: ______________________
Date: _______________________
3
Personnel and Pay Committee
Minutes of Meeting held on 5th March 2018 at 6:30 PM.
Chairman:
Mr Paul Mil ett
Members present: Mr John Cooper
Mr Michael Goldmeier
Mr. Richard Martyn
Others present: Mr. Simon Appleman
Mr. Jamie Peston
Clerk:
Dr Alan Fox
1.
Apologies for Absence
Apologies were received from Mrs Geraldine Fainer.
2.
Minutes of Previous Meeting
The Committee approved the draft minutes of the meetings held on 20th November
2017.
3.
Matters Arising
3.1 Item 2.2 - Assistant Headteacher appointments - written details of the recent
appointments and confirmation of conformity with the Pay Policy had been provided
to the Committee.
3.2
Item 9 - Staff Discipline and Capability Policies - it was noted that the drafts
policies together with comments by Stone King, were currently under review by Dr
Chris Ray.
4.
Restructuring
The Headteacher reported that this term there would be a further review of
restructuring. Initially, some members of staff had left rather than move into the new
structure and some areas were only just reaching proper stability. The Central Office
had just achieved full staffing for the first time. However, Mr Appleman’s overall
impression was that generally the new arrangements introduced from the beginning
of the academic year were settling down and staff feeling was broadly positive.
1
There remained questions about role responsibilities in certain posts and Mr Peston
was in discussion with the members of staff concerned to resolve these.
5.
Staff Morale
In response to questions from members of the Committee, the Headteacher said
that, whilst it was difficult to ascertain staff morale precisely while the restructuring
was being completed, nevertheless, it was undoubtedly substantially better than a
year ago
. As well as the support staff
, this was not the easiest time of the year for
teaching staff who were under the strain of building up to the examination period and
with the inevitable uncertainties introduced by a further change of Headteacher.
However, it was clear that the previous intense staff negativity had dissipated.
Continuing, Mr Appleman said that last year the School had lost at least a dozen
members of staff who found the atmosphere such that they really didn't want to stay.
It was interesting that three of these had now approached him to establish whether
they could return. So far the only intimations given of staff intending to leave at the
end of the academic year had been from those seeking promotion by applying for
posts at a more senior level in other schools. Nevertheless, because of the
continuing staff dissatisfaction, albeit at a much lower level, he anticipated that there
would inevitably also be some morale related resignations effective at the end of the
academic year. If there were to be a correlation between staff dissatisfaction and
resignation, there should be fewer resignations than last year.
As had previously been mentioned, teaching staff continued to suffer stress by too
high an incidence of low-level student disruptive behaviour. But there also remained
problems with the pressures caused by difficult and sometimes aggressive parents.
In each year there seemed to be at least half a dozen students who together with
their parents took up a disproportionate amount of staff time.
Mr Appleman did not consider that there was anything he would wish governors to
do on a day by day basis to improve staff morale, but it was quite right they should
continue to seek information and monitor progress.
6.
Attitude surveys
The Headteacher said that the data collection for the Student, Parental and Staff
attitude surveys had all been completed last term. However, insufficient progress
had been made in the analysis to draw any reportable conclusions, even of a
headline nature. The problem was the lack of in-house capability to apply to this
important task.
Citing examples from other fields, members of the Committee enquired whether the
analysis needed to be carried out in-house and whether it might be appropriate to
seek a quotation to obtain assistance from, for example, the School’s auditors.
Whilst acknowledging that the later the outcome was known, the less relevant it
might be, Mr Appleman said that the exercise had always been conducted in-house
and there was a certain amount of confidentiality to be considered in respect of
named parents and members of staff.
2
The Committee requested that a report on progress should be given to the
Governing Body at its meeting later in the month including a firm timetable for
completion. A final report would have to be available for the June meeting of the
Governing Body but should be circulated in advance as soon as it was ready.
ACTION HEADTEACHER
6.
School Improvement Plan (SIP)
The Headteacher confirmed that the results of the attitude surveys would be one of
several inputs considered during the preparation of the SIP. The Plan’s priorities
were also heavily influenced by the outcome of consultations with middle level
management and the SLT, who would be aware of governors’ views expressed
during the year at the meetings of the GB and its Committees. He expected also that
the next iteration would be heavily influenced by the views of Mrs Fink when she
arrived.
The Committee noted that it was planned for a presentation on the SIP to be given to
the GB in the Autumn Term but requested that a senior member or members of the
GB should also have the opportunity of sitting in on discussions at a late stage in its
preparation.
ACTION HEADTEACHER
7.
Science Technicians
The Committee considered an email from a member of staff.
Text here has been redacted
Exemption: Section 40 Personal Data
8.
Pay Policy and the Performance Management Policy
The Committee noted that the review of the two policies scheduled for this meeting
and for subsequent consideration by the GB at the end of the month had been
postponed pending advice from Dr Chris Ray.
9.
Performance Related Pay
The Committee noted that, in accordance with the system for non-Teaching Staff
approved by the Committee in June 2016, the first performance review against
previously agreed indicators and targets intended to lead to individual pay
recommendations would take place in September. A summary of the outcome would
be reported to the Committee in due course.
The Chairman asked for a private briefing on the process of performance related
reviews for both teaching and non-teaching staff in schools in the intervening period.
ACTION DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS
10. Staffing and Recruitment
3
The Headteacher explained that the recruitment log circulated to members
represented a snapshot on the day it was produced and since then there had been a
number of changes. In particular, an additional mathematics teacher had been
recruited for September and there had been several applications for a further post. It
looked as if Ivrit would also be better staffed in September and although there were
stresses in various departments he was generally optimistic about staffing in
2018/19.
The major problem area remained the English Department, which was currently
being kept afloat by agency staff. This was largely the legacy of last year's events
and Mr Appleman believed that new recruitment and the return of staff on maternity
leave was gradually stabilizing the position.
11. Succession Planning
The Headteacher confirmed that efforts were made regularly to identify probable
future medium and senior leadership needs and to update succession plans.
12. Any Other Business
There was none.
Signed: _______________________
Date: ______________
4
Personnel and Pay Committee
Minutes of meeting held on 4th July 2018 at 6:30 PM.
Members present: Mr. Paul Millett - Chairperson
Mrs. Geraldine Fainer (GF)
Mr. Michael Goldmeier (MG)
Mr. Richard Martyn (RM)
Mr. John Cooper (JC)
Others present: Mrs. Rachel Fink (RF)
Mr. Simon Appleman (SA)
1. Apologies for absence
None.
2. Previous minutes
Approved.
3. Matters arising not otherwise on the agenda
3.1 Item 4 Restructuring Update
SA reported that things are settling down. He has met with any colleagues who
still had concerns and has worked towards removing or reducing those concerns
where ever possible. There is a sense now of moving forward.
Questions
Q-
Update on the finance department?
A – The team is now at full strength with two new junior appointments made and
the department is running more effectively.
Text here has been redacted
Exemption: Section 40 Personal Data
3.2 Item 5 - Staff morale – this was dealt with under item 4.3 below.
1
3.3 Item 6 – Surveys
The number analysis has been completed but SA said he is aware changes have
occurred since the information was collected and therefore the validity of the
findings will have reduced. The information can still be used for benchmarking.
In terms of future surveys, there is an annual survey of students, parents and
staff. RF said she wants the school to work towards a mental health kite mark
which includes an audit and there may be significant overlap in survey questions
so it may be possible to use the data collected for both purposes.
Action agreed: RF to compare the school survey with the MH audit and see if
there is sufficient overlap to provide data for benchmarking.
3.4 Item 9 Performance related pay
Action agreed: PM to meet with Jamie Peston to understand how performance
related pay works.
4. Staffing
4.1 Turnover and recruitment – RF
A number of staff leaving are people who have come to the end of 1-year fixed
term contracts. Two staff members are moving to the School’s Direct programme,
a few staff are retiring, there have been a couple of promotions, some staff are
not returning from maternity leave and only one staff member is moving to a new
school. Looking at the reasons staff are leaving can be helpful in gauging how
settled the staff group is. There is more movement among non-teaching staff and
there is a risk that the pastoral team may not be fully staffed by September. They
are only being given 1-year contracts because there is going to be a review of
pastoral care next year, so flexibility is needed if changes are going to be made.
Yesterday there was an induction day for new staff.
Questions:
Q- What is happening in the English department, there appears to be ongoing
change?
A – The English department will be fully staffed with permanent staff next term.
The school feels the new staff being recruited t will be a good fit for the
department.
Q- On the school website you invite applications to a staffing ‘pool’. Do you get
many applications?
2
A. Just a few.
Q- How is the SLT recruitment going?
A – There is one deputy head post to be recruited to and its unlikely anyone will
start before January 2019. There isn’t time currently to hold interviews so they will
be held in Sept/Oct 2018.
Q – How are numbers compared to previous years?
A – Short term contracts accounted for a lot of movement last year. There were
34 staff changes last year and 14 so far this year.
Q – Has anyone requested a governor attend their exit interview this year?
A – No. Last year there were exceptional circumstances however if it was
requested it would be considered. RF said that she is going to offer to complete
the exit interviews for SLT members who are leaving because she is new and can
be considered as more independent as she has not worked with them.
Action agreed: RF to send PM a copy of her proposed management structure
going forward and a description of each role.
4.2 Absence and Cover Costs – RF
RF said she would like this to be a standing item of this committee’s agenda. She
said it is difficult to manage as the current systems for monitoring are not very
effective. RF showed the committee a template of a monitoring system she has
used before which better monitors by department, how cover is used and includes
reasons for absence. It can also be used to look at particular time periods and
identify patterns. Better monitoring can help anticipate any difficulties and often
reduces the need for cover. It will take a couple of years to build sufficient data to
compare year on year. The committee welcomed this new approach.
Questions:
Q – Does the spreadsheet feed into any software?
A – Not yet. It will be presented at every P&P committee meeting.
Q
- Is there an issue with non-medical absences?
A – Not many people abuse the system but the cover requirements for legitimate
reasons are still too high. RF said that currently staff don’t need to speak to a
manager or member of SLT to report absence and this can be changed on an
individual basis if necessary.
Q- Is there any benchmarking material to compare with a school of similar size?
A – The school can explore if there is.
4.3 Morale and wellbeing
This item was not discussed separately but was felt it should be standing item on
the P&P Committee agenda.
5. SADR /GDPR
3
It was agreed that SADR and GDPR will remain with the Finance and Premises
Committee.
6. Single Central Record
This committee agreed this item should go to the Curriculum, Student Welfare,
Attendance and Behaviour Committee (CSWAB).
7. Policies (circulated prior to the meeting)
7.1 Staff Teaching Private Lessons
Update: Staff cannot teach current JFS students any subject privately that is offered
as part of the school curriculum. Any other arrangements are subject to agreement
by the Head teacher.
Policy approved.
7.2 Staff Bringing Own Children into School
Update: Permission required from the Head Teacher.
Policy approved.
7.3 Long Service Award
Update: Long service award to be given after 20 years rather than 25 years as its
very unusual to hit 20 years and rare to make it to 25 years. The award is £500 and
a certificate. It is to mark 20 years at JFS rather than 20 years in state education.
Policy Approved.
7.4 Eye Care
Update: The amounts towards the cost of glasses for DSE use remain the same.
Policy approved.
7.5 Pay
It was noted that there are discrepancies between the Pay Policy and the Terms of
Reference in relation to who completes the appraisals and sets pay for the Head
Teacher and the Deputy Heads. One says the Chair and Vice Chair of governors,
the other says the P&P Committee. Historically an external reviewer provided by
Brent acted as a mediator for the Head teacher’s appraisal but Brent is no longer
offering this service. It was felt that point 3.1.3 of the Pay Policy provided the
discretion within the P&P Committee to decide who carries out the appraisals and
pay review. The following actions were agreed:
• The committee to include a statement to say that the Chair and Vice Chair of
Governors and an external reviewer will carry out the Head Teacher’s
appraisal. The Head Teacher can delegate the appraisals for the Assistant
Head Teachers to a Deputy Head Teacher and the Head Teacher will sign it
off.
• The 5th bullet point of the TOR– remove and change with the 7th bullet point to
say ‘including annual objectives, headteacher does it on behalf of governing
body.’
4
• Points 5.1 and 5.2 of the TOR and points 3.1.1, 3.1.3 and 3.2.3 of the Pay
Policy to be aligned.
The Pay Policy was approved subject the changes outlined above.
Questions:
Q- Who decides the Head Teacher’s pay review?
A – Whoever completes the appraisal will look at how the objectives have been
met and then make a recommendation to the P&P Committee for sign off.
Q – How will objectives for the Head Teacher be set?
A – As it’s a new appointment the job specification will probably be used as the
basis for objectives. There will need to be an external person involved to devise
objectives with the Head Teacher and the governors involved. In
October/November the objectives will be brought to the P&P Committee for
comment. There will also be a mid-term appraisal.
Q -
Who sets pay for the Deputy and Assistant Head Teachers?
A – The Head Teacher signs off the appraisal and makes the pay review
recommendation and it is signed off by the P&P committee (Pay Policy p3 3.2.3).
Q –
Is there anything in the Pay policy about termination payments ?
A – There is no policy on this. There are sometimes settlement packages at the
discretion of the Head Teacher but this is not referred to in the policy.
Q-
Are retention payments reducing?
A – The retention payments are reviewed each year with performance
management.
7.6 Performance management policy
Update: The most significant change is the acknowledgement of non-teaching
staff in the policy. Some more language needs to be updated with references to
‘teachers’ to be changed to ‘staff’. These changes will also be made to the TOR. It
was agreed these changes do not need to come back to the committee.
Other changes agreed:
• Remove point 5.2 as it duplicates 5.1
• Amend policy to reflect that the governing body delegate the setting of
objectives to the Chair and Vice Chair of Governors and the external link
person.
Both the Performance Management Policy and Pay Policy have been taken to the
Unions for consultation and there were no comments.
The Performance Management policy was approved subject to the changes
outlined above.
Questions:
Q – Is the policy being applied thoroughly and consistently?
A – Generally performance management is done well across the school but there
is more work to do on quality assurance of performance management. The
challenge for next year is how performance management works for non-teaching
staff. The school will also be doing quality assurance on objective setting. JFS
5
uses software called Blue Sky which is an online tool for recording lesson
observations, applying for CPD and setting objectives. It can also be used for non-
teaching staff. RF said the software can be used better, alongside training in
completing appraisals and reviews, to improve practice. Anna Joseph will be
driving forward the work with Blue Sky.
Q- Who can input information and who can see data on Blue Sky?
A – Senior management and line managers can see information relating to staff
they manage and managers and staff can input information. It is a useful source
of data to demonstrate to Ofsted effective performance management. It can also
provide evidence for pay increase decisions providing more accountability.
7.7 Staff leave of absence
7.8 Absence management
Update: RF said the current policies are very complex and lack clarity about the
circumstances when time off will be allowed and whether it will be paid or unpaid
leave. RF circulated an alternative policy proforma which the committee in
principle agreed would provide this clarity and greater transparency and equality.
If it is adopted it will not need to be consulted on but out of courtesy it would be
sent to the Unions for comment.
Action agreed: RF to revise the policies and bring them back to the P&P
Committee for approval.
7.9 Capability, Discipline and Health and Attendance Policies
It was noted that these policies are still being redrafted and will be considered at
the next committee meeting.
8.
Purpose and function of committee
Action agreed: To include Turnover and Recruitment, Absence and Cover Costs
and Morale and Wellbeing as standing items for future meetings.
9. AOB
9.1 Update on change of dress code for 6th Form students
RF said there have been some complaints but the code has been generally
accepted. Parents who raised concerns have been responded to.
Signed: _____________________________
Date: ______________
6
Personnel and Pay Committee
Minutes of meeting held on 26th November 2018 at 6:30 PM.
Members present: Mr. Michael Goldmeier (MG) acting Chairman
Mr. Richard Martyn (RM)
Others present: Mrs. Rachel Fink (RF)
Mr. Simon Appleman (SA)
Mr. Jamie Peston (JP)
Ms. Caroline Bunder (CB) Observer.
1. Apologies for Absence
Apologies were received from John Cooper (JC) and Geraldine Fainer (GF).
It was noted that the meeting was not quorate and agreed that all decisions
reached would be considered by GF and JC, who would be invited to ratify them.
2. Previous minutes 4th July 2018
The minutes were approved subject to a redaction in section 3.1 ‘Matters arising
not otherwise on the agenda – Item 4 Restructure update’.
Action agreed: Clerk to make amendments to minutes and submit changes to
SA.
3. Matters arising not otherwise on the agenda
a. Item 3.4 Performance Related Pay Meeting
This item is no longer relevant so was not discussed.
b. Item 4.1 Proposed Management Structure – on agenda
RF explained the new structure. There are now 3 deputy heads (one joining in
January 2019), 5 assistant heads and 3 associate leads. The associate leads
programme is for one year to help develop staff by managing a project and
taking on extra management responsibility.
1
Questions:
Q- Is the TLR guaranteed?
A – No TLR 3 is on a temporary basis that needs to be reviewed annually and
staff are aware of this.
Q – At previous meetings there was an expectation that the number of
Recruitment & Retention (R&R) payments would reduce and end. Has there
been any savings made? Expecting number of R&Rs to end – saving being
made?
A – No additional savings because the reduction has already been included in
the budget. There are stil some R&Rs but they have been used correctly to
recruit to hard to recruit posts.
4. Committee Membership
There was agreement that the membership of the committee needs to be
increased and three governors is not sufficient to cover the workload and ensure
meetings are always quorate.
Action agreed: A recommendation wil be made by GF to the FGB that
membership of the Committee should be increased.
Q – Should a parent governor be present for discussions about staff pay, terms
and conditions and if any individual staff circumstances are discussed?
A – [from AF Clerk to Governors following the meeting] - There is no reason why a
parent governor should not participate in discussions about staff pay, terms and
conditions or if any individual staff circumstances discussed, unless there is a
potential conflict of interest that differentiates that governor from other members of
the Committee.
5. Staffing
5.1 Turnover and recruitment
There were 26 new starters in September and the school is now fully staffed.
There were no resignations this term. The new deputy head wil start in January
2019. There are 14 fixed term contracts and recruitment to those posts for
September 2019 wil begin in January. There are some on fixed term contracts
who may be recruited to permanent roles. RF said that they are looking at a
positive recruitment strategy to attract the best teachers and looking at making
links with the Institute to find the best graduates. The recruitment section of the
website is also going to be improved. The committee commended the school for
taking the initiative and being proactive in recruiting the best candidates.
5.2 Absence and Cover Costs – paper presented by JP.
RF suggested this should be a standing agenda item going forward. JP wil be
reviewing the processes managing absence and arranging cover to make them
more efficient and streamlined. Cover costs have come down but there needs to
2
be a more robust analysis of the need for cover by department and focus on
improving the quality of cover provided. In order to agree absence for training for
example, managers need to be aware of the options for cover and who else in the
department may be available, before making decisions rather than after. Last year
there were two members of staff as cover supervisors. This year, this system has
been changed with five staff members with 50% of their timetable free in order to
be able to cover classes, which is the equivalent of 4¼ staff. This also means
internal permanent JFS staff provide cover with knowledge of the school
processes. There is stil some emergency external day cover used especially for
medium term absence so that a subject specialist cover teacher can be sourced.
The budget is broadly on target. The more significant overspend is in relation to
administrative/clerical staff as there are a couple of staff on maternity leave with
long term agency cover in place.
Questions;
Q – How do you allocate cover to permanent staff and do you do it by specialism?
A – A regular class teacher is timetabled for 42 out of 50 lessons. If for any reason
they have a reduced number then those hours are used to provide cover by
specialism if possible.
Q- Can you say how many cover staff on average are in school per week?
A – It depends if there are trips going on, then maybe 2-3, on other days possible
no external emergency cover as we have up to 8 staff available internally to
provide cover.
Q- So it’s a very small number?
A – Yes but it doesn’t mean that each student has same experience each week or
term. The school needs to be able to track and anticipate gaps before agreeing
leave/ timing of trips/training.
Q – What cover is arranged if a teacher calls in sick?
A – If it’s likely to be just a day internal cover wil be used. If we know it is for a
week, we would set up specialist external cover.
Q – If staff absences are reduced, what would you do with spare capacity?
A – Teachers can then do their own work in the spare time if no cover is required.
5.3 Morale and wellbeing – Paper presented by RF
The staff survey has been completed and al responses related to staff morale
have been included. There has been a good response which shows that staff
have things to say and all comments were positive. Morale in the school is much
improved and there were lovely comments about staff feeling proud to work at
JFS, that the gap between SLT and the rest of the staff has narrowed and it feels
like there has been a significant buy in to the new direction of the school. Issues
raised are those raised in all schools whilst previous concerns had been specific
to JFS at the time in the last couple of years. The Committee thanked the School
for completing the surveys and getting the results out so quickly.
Questions:
3
Q – Is this the normal time to do this survey?
A – Yes usually in November.
Q – One of the contributory factors to the national crisis in teaching has been
reported as issues of ‘overload’. What can school do to counter this?
A – RF acknowledged this is an issue. JFS Staff are now working more lessons
that were used to so when the changes came in many experienced overload.
However, the number of lessons and size of classes is on a par with secondary
schools national y. Locally the school need to manage this change. Daniel
Marcus is going to be doing a focus group with a range of staff from new less
experienced staff to some who have been with JFS a long time to discuss morale.
Common issues that come up relate to workload, pressures of work, pressures of
marking, parents and student behaviour. They wil see if there are reasonable
adjustments that can be made to address some of these issues but there may be
cost implications. If retention improves and the costs of recruitment come down
some of the savings could be directed towards improving conditions and that may
also have a positive impact on retention. There is now a staff wellbeing group
looking at a number of issues and support has been set up for example for yoga
and mindfulness after school. Naomi Newman is the link governor for Well-being
and she is completing a report reviewing ideas to identify which wil have the
greatest impact.
Professional members present left the meeting for the next item.
6 Headteacher’s Pay review
The process for reviewing the Headteacher’s pay was discussed. The Chair and
Vice Chair of governors and an external advisor meet with the Headteacher to set
the objectives for the coming year. Once the objectives are set the Pay and
Personnel Committee ratifies the reviewers’ decision but are not privy to the
specifics of salary. The role of the committee is to satisfy itself that the process
has been followed correctly. The process outlined in the Committee’s Terms of
Reference (TOR) does not follow current government guidance, so the following
reformulation was recommended:
“To consider and approve the annual objectives set with the Headteacher by the
Chairman and a Vice-Chairman of the Governing Body and an external advisor, to
note the outcome of the annual review by the Chairman, a Vice-Chairman and the
external advisor of the Headteacher’s achievements against those objectives and,
subject to satisfying themselves as to the integrity of the process, to ratify the
reviewers’ decision on the Headteacher’s pay and other terms and conditions of
employment with effect from 1st September each year (to be completed by 1st
January) .”
Action agreed: With the approval of the GB, the Clerk to update the ToR to
reflect the change outlined above.
7 Staff Pay Review
4
There was a discussion on the role of the Committee in relation to staff pay review
as outlined in the ToR. The Committee interpreted this to mean that is role is to
satisfy itself that reviewing of staff pay and terms of condition of employment is
completed in line with the guidelines and it is not for the Committee to become
involved in the detail of the Headteacher’s recommendations on these issues.
RF confirmed that the correct process has been followed to review staff pay and
terms and conditions of employment and all the bullet points in the Pay
Progression paper had been held in mind during the process.
JP presented the Pay Progression paper. Every line manager undertakes a
performance review with staff and checks that objectives set in the appraisals
have been met before they recommend a pay increment. Generally, staff go up an
increment each year until they reach the top of their scale unless there is a
recommendation not to. Those on the UPS (upper pay scale) may take two years
to move up increments. There is also a review of staff on UPS 3 to check they
have made a broader contribution to the school which is required at that pay
scale. The deputy heads then review all the recommendations and submit them to
the Head teacher for approval. The school is using an online system called Blue
Sky which helps evidence a robust appraisal system for Ofsted.
Decision: The committee noted the pay progression report and further
explanations provided by the Headteacher and approved staff pay review for
September 2018.
8 Policies
8.1 Work place harassment policy
This is a standard policy that just needs amending to reflect the JFS context.
Questions:
Q - Where do you go to make a resolution?
A -It starts with an informal resolution with the line manager. If this is not possible
the person can go to a member of SLT or the Head teacher and if this is not
possible, they can go to the Chairman of Governors.
8.2 Staff equal opportunities and diversity policy
This policy covers ensuring equal opportunity and avoiding discrimination and
routes to address issues if they arise. It covers the responsibilities of staff, SLT
and the governing body. A 3-year review period is recommended with next review
being in Autumn 2021.
These two policies are non-statutory. They have not been checked by Stone King
but have been checked against standard model policies.
Decision: Both policies were approved by the Committee.
5
8.3 Grievance policy
This is based on a model policy and has been seen and commented on by Chris
Ray and Stone King. SA said he is happy to accept the Stone King
recommendations and has a couple of questions for the Committee regarding
some of Chris Ray’s comments.
- 2.1 of draft policy - Issues that could cause a grievance by way of ‘
oppressive or
insulting behaviour by line mangers or senior leaders’ is covered by other bullet
points so is not necessary. This change was approved by the Committee.
- 2.2 ‘The procedure shall not apply to grievances relating to: a matter that is the
subject of a collective agreement
‘unless the approach to that matter is applied in
an inconsistent manner’. It was proposed and accepted that the second clause be
removed.
- 2. 19 ‘If an employee raises a grievance during a disciplinary or capability
process, a decision wil be taken
in consultation with the person raising the
grievance as to whether it is appropriate to run both processes concurrently
particularly where the cases are related’.
The committee agreed the following form or words as a replacement: ‘…taking
into account the views of the person raising the grievance’.
- 4.11 The following form of words was accepted by the Committee - ‘designate a
Governor or an adviser or independent person acting on behalf of the governors
to investigate’.
This policy is to be reviewed every 3 years.
Decision: all the recommended amendments were accepted by the Committee
and the policy was approved subject to those amendments.
8.4 Staff Capability Policy
Capability is to do with competency and performance not conduct. The original
policy was from Stone King. It clearly lays out the 3 stages of the capability
process, starting with informal evidence gathering through to the formal process. It
explains the process, timeframes and documentation required. It needs the
removal of the term ‘executive head teacher’.
8.5 Staff Discipline Policy
Historically staff discipline and capability were dealt with in one policy but the
school has been advised to create two separate policies. It has been reviewed
and approved by Stone King. It provides a step by step guide to the process and
defines the purpose, scope and principles in the policy and when it applies. It
6
includes a number of appendices giving examples of different types of
misconduct.
8.6 Health and Attendance Policy / Absence management policy
This policy has been superseded by Absence Management policy which has been
approved at FGB.
The Staff capability and Staff discipline policies wil need to go through a
consultation process and there wil be a meeting tomorrow to start the process.
Decision: The Committee approved all three policies to go forward for
consultation.
Action agreed: SA to bring the policies back to the committee following the
consultation. The deadline for consultation is 17th December so this wil be
concluded early in the new calendar year.
8 . AOB
None.
Date of next meeting: Monday 4th March 2019 at 6.30pm.
Signed: ___________________________
Date: ______________.
7
Appendix 1 Committee Meeting Action Table
Committee Meeting Action Summary Table
Committee: Pay and Personnel Committee
Meeting date: 26th November 2018
Agenda Item
Action
By whom
Target
completion
date
4. Committee
To recommend to FGB
GF
17.12.18
membership
that membership of the
P&P committee should be
increased
6. Headteacher’s pay To up date the committee AF
17.12.18
review
TOR to reflect the changes
recommended by the
committee
8.3 Staff Capability
Policies to be sent to the
SA
Early
policy
committee for review
January
8.4 Staff Discipline
following any changes
2019.
Policy
made after the
consultation.
Minutes Finalised? Yes
Date minutes sent for filing:
8
Personnel and Pay Committee
Minutes of Meeting held on 4th March 2019 at 6:30 PM.
Chairman:
Mr Richard Martyn Chairman
Members present: Ms Caroline Bunder
Mr John Cooper
Ms Geraldine Fainer
Mrs Rachel Fink
Mr Michael Goldmeier
In attendance:
Mr. Simon Appleman
Clerk:
Dr Alan Fox
1. Apologies for Absence
There were none.
2. Committee Membership
The Committee welcomed Ms Caroline Bunder, recently appointed as a member.
The Committee also noted that at its meeting on 17th December the Governing Body
had appointed Mr Richard Martyn as the Chairman of the Committee.
3.
Terms of Reference
The Committee noted that at its meeting on 17th December the Governing Body had
approved amended ToR for the Committee as recommended
4.
Minutes of Previous Meeting
The draft minutes of the meeting held on 17th December 2018
were approved
5. Matters Arising Not Otherwise on Agenda
5.1 – Item 6 – Headteacher’s Pay - it was noted that Mr Andrew Moss was a
member of the Review Panel but not a member of the Committee and thus
arrangements would be necessary to ensure that he could attend a meeting to
satisfy the Committee that the approved process for settling the Headteacher’s Pay
had been properly fol owed. It would be most convenient if Mr Moss were to become
a member of the Committee.
1
6.
Staffing
6.1 - Turnover and Recruitment
The Headteacher gave the Committee an oral report on the latest staffing position.
Changes had been relatively few with the arrival of the new Deputy Headteacher
being the only change in January. Two new assistant Heads of Year had been
recruited to enhance pastoral support capability, funding being available from the
Pupil Premium grant. These appointments were temporary whilst the effectiveness
was evaluated, but Mrs Fink judged that there was a clear need and anticipated
making permanent appointments in due course.
There were a number of resignations notified to take effect in at the end of the Spring
Term and in the Summer Term, nearly all for reasons such as moving from the area
or achieving promotion elsewhere. Recruitment for these positions was in progress
and several new members of staff had been accepted to start in September.
In response to questions from Governors, Mrs Fink said that no outcome had
resulted from the January recruitment fair at the Institute of Education. However, the
School had good contacts in a number of the major London Training Colleges and
always advised them when vacancies became available.
6.2 - Staff Absence and Cover
The Headteacher introduced the report she had provided analysing the percentage
absence of teachers in each department during the Autumn Term. Removing the
distortions caused by long-term absences and double recording of the SLT, the
average overall absence figure was 1.36%. In future terms Mrs Fink hoped to
enhance such records and make them more meaningful by providing the numbers of
teaching sessions lost as a result of the absences.
The Headteacher had also provided an analysis of the absences by the reasons
recorded. This was the first attempt at a table of this kind and Mrs Fink hoped that in
future it would be significantly improved by a meaningful breakdown of the very large
catchall category of "Other paid authorised absence". Teaching and non-teaching
staff absences would be separated so that management could ascertain how much
learning time was lost through staff absence.
In response to questions from governors, Mrs Fink said that the absence levels
seemed in line with those of other schools but would not want to comment further on
the size to be expected from an organisation like JFS until data collection
improvements had been effected. She agreed that training was an important and
acceptable reason for absence, provided that it was managed to minimise loss of
learning time and that to decline too many requests could lower morale.
6.3 - Pay Allowances
The Chairman said that it became evident some years ago that JFS expenditure on
Recruitment and Retention allowances was higher than at most other schools and
governors had asked for greater scrutiny of their application leading to an overall
reduction. The report provided by the Headteacher was the first such report and
showed that the number of allowances held had dropped to 30 and that expenditure
in this category had dropped significantly.
2
7.
Policies
7.1 - Pay Policy
The Committee had received the draft of an updated version of the Pay Policy. It
noted that ideally the Policy should be given final approval in the Spring Term.
However, because it was necessary to send an approved draft to staff for
consultation, the next opportunity it would have for approval would be at the June
meeting.
The Committee then considered the draft in detail and agreed amendments covering
both points of substance and issues of drafting. It authorised the Headteacher to
open into consultation based on the amended draft with the local recognised unions.
7.2 - Performance Measurement (Staff) Policy
The Committee had also received the draft of an updated version of the Performance
Measurement Policy and noted with approval the intention to change the emphasis
from formal lesson observation to engagement in incremental coaching.
The Committee then considered the draft in detail and agreed amendments covering
both points of substance and issues of drafting. It authorised the Headteacher to
open into consultation based on the amended draft with the local recognised unions.
7.3 - Code of Conduct for all Employees
The Committee noted that the Code of Conduct was stil in preparation and wil be
available for scrutiny at the June Meeting.
8.
Any Other Business
There was none.
Signed: ___________________________ Date: ______________.
3
Appendix 1 Committee Meeting Action Table
Committee Meeting Action Summary Table
Committee: Pay and Personnel Committee
Meeting date: 26th November 2018
Agenda Item
Action
By whom
Target
completion
date
4. Committee
To recommend to FGB
GF
17.12.18
membership
that membership of the
P&P committee should be
increased
6. Headteacher’s pay To up date the committee AF
17.12.18
review
TOR to reflect the changes
recommended by the
committee
8.3 Staff Capability
Policies to be sent to the
SA
Early
policy
committee for review
January
8.4 Staff Discipline
following any changes
2019.
Policy
made after the
consultation.
Minutes Finalised? Yes
Date minutes sent for filing:
4
Document Outline