Democratic Accountability and Scrutiny

DEMOCRATIC ACCOUNTABILITY AND

SCRUTINY

Democratic Accountability and Scrutiny

Purpose

This paper sets out the planned arrangements for ERW’s democratic accountability and scrutiny. It aims to define clearly the expectations for effective joint scrutiny and accountability arrangements to key stakeholders within the democratic accountability processes of each constituent local authority.

The paper seeks approval at Joint Committee to put in place these arrangements and arrange monitoring arrangements.

Introduction

For ERW to make clear for all stakeholders how effective scrutiny includes a broader role that that of a single committee or structure, as outlined by the Auditor General for Wales (AGW) 2014. This includes internal audit, proper monitoring of outcomes, resources and progress; improvement work by inspection and regulatory bodies as well as formal scrutiny arrangements.

The Good Governance Standards for Public Services sets out six core principles which should underpin the governance arrangements for all bodies:

A clear definition of the body’s purpose and desired outcomes;
Well defined functions and responsibilities;
An appropriate corporate culture;
Transparent decision making;
A strong governance team; and
Real accountability to stakeholders.

A clear definition of the body’s purpose and desired outcomes.

The National Model for School Improvement guides the legal agreement between the six ERW authorities. The partnerships’ regional strategic aims are set out in the ERW strategy with the operational actions and priority outcomes set out in the Business Plan 2015-18.

Well defined functions and responsibilities.

In ERW’s organisational designall roads lead to Local Democratic Accountability and Scrutiny. All workstreams and activity both locally and regionally are led by the Joint Committee and are accountable locally. We think this is critically important because the resources and statutory duties lie with the LA.

Last financial year we established a Regional Forward Work Programme for scrutiny- this included unverified pupil performance data as early as possible; verified data once available; progress of ERW Business Plan; ERW governance & categorisation of schools.

Following positive feedback on the Regional Forward Work Plan as operational in 2014-15, we agreed to build on thismodel for the coming three years. The regional FWP is coordinated centrally by the Operational Manager, and overseen by the Managing Director and a group of scrutiny officers from the six LAs. It has been agreed by both by the Executive Board and Scrutiny officers to work towards a common strategy, plan and approach whilst working within local arrangements and schedules.

As a region, we have reviewed other Joint Committee arrangements that we have established eg highways, reviewed current best practice and taken advice from CFPS (Centre for Public Scrutiny funded and commissioned by WG) and WLGA as to the best model.

For 2015-18, the six Local Authorities within ERW have agreed a Regional Forward Work programme 2015-18 andrange of common actions with regard to Scrutiny activity and more general member engagement and development with regard to the regional school improvement service. It is agreed that a RegionalForward Work programme with scope to add to it as required will

provide elected members with the required oversight and scrutiny locally;
secure the effective coordination of regional work
make sure that the local statutory responsibility for school improvement, and the work of locally employed officers is overseen locally;
not add to the bureaucratic burden and the work of both officers and members, and minimise the risk of duplicating roles;
enhance all members’ information on the region’s work
allow high quality challenge and focused accountability of the region’s work

In addition, it is recognised that the function is important not the model, and that we can increasingly share the most effective scrutiny practice between the six local authorities. Each LA’s constitution is slightly different and we do not want to stray unnecessarily to these areas. Geographical considerations do not support working singularly to consider local responsibilities. In the Legal agreement setting up the ERW Joint Committee, it is noted that there is no need to burden central staff unnecessarily with multiple scrutiny arrangements.

An appropriate corporate culture

ERW’s organisational design is that of a partnership governed by a Joint Committee. Developing a constructive culture of cooperation and jointly owned outcomes is complex and requires consistent messaging, effective high level understanding of the principles and purposes of the partnership as well as a joint understanding of both strengths, risks and challenges.

Building and maintaining trust between six large corporate organisations with their own cultures and challenges is pivotal to the success of ERW’s corporate improvement and delivery of the Business Plan. At a more operational level, it is about team building and operational collaboration. Enhancing accountability will add to the trust without adding unnecessary burden by utilising existing structures.

Transparent decision making

Increasingly, through effective committee services support and a new website. Transparent decision making arrangements are now better know and shared between stakeholders and with the public.

Standard arrangements for placing minutes and papers in the public domain are operational and advice and guidance is sought from the Advisory Board. The Board includes the Head of Internal audit; Section 151 officer, Head of Procurement; Head of HR.

Please note that the Joint Committee is open to the public and that Scrutiny Committee members may wish to attend as observers.

A strong governance team

ERW does not have a central team for governance, but all LAs’ officers dovetail their work together well to coordinate and add value to the regional school improvement service.xxxxx provides the support of an ERW governance assistant, managed by the Managing Director.

See annex 4.

The Managing Director will attend each Local Authority once a year.

Real accountability to stakeholders.

Members of the Joint Committee use their local knowledge to represent their LA on issues that are important to our diverse communities. Scrutiny is a process by which decision-makers are accountable to local people via their elected representatives,for improving outcomes. The Scrutiny Committee does not makedecisions but seeks to influence those who do by considering the major issues affecting the areas and making recommendations about how services can be improved.

The Scrutiny Committee has a number of different roles including:

Holding the Joint Committee to account and reviewing its decisions;
Scrutinising the work of the ERW partnership;
Helping to develop new policies and developing existing ones; and
Monitoring the budgets and performance.

This can often lead to recommendations. These are coordinated centrally so that any required actions are captured and managed accordingly.

The work programme for 2015-18 aims to:

build on existing effective practice across the six authorities;
support members by providing high quality, accurate and consistent information on school performance as well as ERW’s performance;
enable members to be fully informed and therefore be in a better position to challenge and question the region’s performance as well as focusing on their individual authority;
provide a stable foundation on which to evolve an increasingly common approach across the region;
provide a clear Forward Work Programme of both information to members and scrutiny topics; and
use a best practice model to set out expectations of scrutiny of ERW’s work.

The main focus of this year’s work will fall into the following aspects – information giving and scrutiny activity.

This year, on request from members, we have added the makeup and performance of the challenge adviser team.
We are also sharing best practice – calling schools to scrutiny where necessary; targeted investigations on key issues.
All 6 chairs of scrutiny are also meeting annually - (NPT hosting 2015) with officers working well together.
We will also provide a seminar to all elected members in the region annually on ERW’s work, highlighting the context in each Local Authority
These common areas in the Forward Work Programme will be performance data; school categorisation; ERW business Plan progress;
All LAs will receive information on cross region performance with details focusing on their individual authority.

All recommendations and reports will be collated to ensure that findings are followed up and any useful feedback shared. These will be reported to Joint Committee. During the year, any themed work or task and finish may be co-ordinated and shared.

The common programme is set out in Annex 2.

Suggest a topic for scrutiny

Each scrutiny committee reviews its Work Programme throughoutthe year to make sure that it is working on topics that it canmake a major impact on. If there is an issue or service which you

think that should be reviewed, please return the form in annex 1 to tell us about it.

Recommendations to Executive Board

To endorse the current arrangements for continued scrutiny of ERW’s work

Annex 1

ERW Scrutiny Work Programme

TOPIC SUGGESTION FORM

Name ………………………………………………………………………………

Organisation or member of the Public? …………………………………………

Tel: ………………………………………… Email: ………………………………..

1. What is the heading for your topic?

…………………………………………………………………………………………

2. What is the background to the issue? What is the current situation/problem?

………………………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………………………..

3. How do you think that Scrutiny can make a difference and add value to

this issue?

…………………………………………………………………………………………..

Thank you for your suggestion

We will make every effort to cover as many topics as possible as thoroughly as possible. We will, however, prioritise those topics we feel can contribute best to improving standards for learners across ERW.

Please return this form to

Annex 2: Forward Work Programme 2015-16

POWYS / Date / Hyperlinks to evidence
ERW BP
Data and commentary on local categorisation
Unverified data on school performance
Verified data on performance and categorisation
Progress against Business Plan priorities
Member seminar general
Challenge adviser capacity
Schools and scrutiny
CEREDIGION / Date / Hyperlinks to evidence
ERW BP
Data and commentary on local categorisation
Unverified data on school performance
Verified data on performance and categorisation
Progress against Business Plan priorities
Member seminar general
Challenge adviser capacity
Schools and scrutiny
PEMBROKESHIRE / Hyperlinks to evidence
ERW BP
Data and commentary on local categorisation
Unverified data on school performance
Verified data on performance and categorisation
Progress against Business Plan priorities
Member seminar general
Challenge adviser capacity
Schools and scrutiny
CARMARTHENSHIRE / Date / Hyperlinks to evidence
ERW BP / 6th July 2015 / The Committee will have the opportunity to monitor the progress made by ERW during 2014/15 and its Business Plan objectives for 2015/16. The Committee has also requested details regarding the role of Challenge Advisers and examples of the types of interventions, their effectiveness and outcomes in terms of supporting schools improving standards and pupil attainments. The Committee has asked that Betsan attends this meeting as well as Alan.
Data and commentary on local categorisation
Unverified data on school performance / 24th September 2015 / Performance in teacher assessments and external exams are some of the measures used to gauge the effectiveness of the county’s schools.
This report will enable the Committee to exercise its role in relation to performance of the Local Authority’s schools.
The Committee will also be able to consider the performance of the Local Authority in relation to regional and national performance.
The Committee will consider an analysis of quantitative and qualitative data in relation to the performance of schools during the academic year 2014/15.
Verified data on performance and categorisation / 21st January 2016 / Annual Report on Standards & Outcomes (Teacher Assessments and Examinations, Attendance and Pupil Exclusions).
Outcomes of School Inspections
Developing value and skills for lifelong learning.
The report will also include how performance and standards in the county’s schools compare with best performing schools across the ERW region.
Progress against Business Plan priorities
Member seminar general
Challenge adviser capacity
Schools and scrutiny
NEATH PORT TALBOT / Date / Hyperlinks to evidence
ERW BP
Data and commentary on local categorisation
Unverified data on school performance
Verified data on performance and categorisation
Progress against Business Plan priorities
Member seminar general
Challenge adviser capacity
Schools and scrutiny
SWANSEA / Date / Hyperlinks to evidence
ERW BP / 18th June 2015
Data and commentary on local categorisation
Unverified data on school performance
Verified data on performance and categorisation / 3rd December 2015 /

Annual Education Performance Reporting including pupil attendance and exclusion data
School Categorisation

Progress against Business Plan priorities / 10th September 2015 /

Overview of curriculum change including implications for schools
Reviewing the work of the School Improvement Service

Member seminar general
Challenge adviser capacity
Schools and scrutiny

Annex 3: Review of Scrutiny FWP 2014-15

POWYS / Date / Hyperlinks to evidence / Recommendations [B1] / Management response
ERW governance / Working Group 15th July 2014
Reported to People Cttee 16th October 2014 / Not in public domain
/ That scrutiny receive the Categorisation of Schools in Jan 2015 / Categorisation received Feb 2015
Data and commentary on local categorisation / Education Scrutiny Group
19th Feb 2014 / Not in public domain
Unverified data on school performance / Education Scrutiny Group
18th Sept 2014
Reported to People Cttee
19th Oct 2014 / Not in public domain
/ Jan 2015 report to include

three year trends identifying the under and overachieving schools at Foundation Phase
Gender breakdown per school for level 2 inclusive
Comparisons between predicted and actual results at level 2 inclusive for each school
Performance of individual schools against FSM benchmarking ( attainment and attendance) and three year trends of performance
Performance of pupils with an identified special educational need and comparison with those who do not
Performance of pupils in receipt of free school meals and comparison with those who are not.
Comparison of performance at higher levels against other LAs
Performance of pupils with English as an Additional Language*
Performance of pupils from Black and Minority Ethnic Groups*
Performance of pupils at Special Schools
To be reported appropriately depending on cohort numbers.

(NB Educational attainment of LAC tracked through Corporate Parenting Group but also on the work programme for Children’s Services Scrutiny to look at who will be inviting Education Scrutiny Members to that meeting)
Categorisation of schools according to the National Model for School Improvement / Addressed in report to Scrutiny Feb 2015
Verified data on performance and categorisation / Education Scrutiny Group
5th Feb 2015
Reported to People Cttee 26th Mar 2015 / Not in public domain
/ Information on attendance and fixed term exclusions to potentially be considered when the principles regarding the PWC report are discussed. / To be considered.
Progress against Business Plan priorities / TBC
Member seminar general / 13th February 2015
CEREDIGION / Date / Hyperlinks to evidence
ERW governance / n/a done previously
Data and commentary on local categorisation / Categorisation model workshop to Learning Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee ‘Standards in schools’ work stream.
6th January 2015 / from work stream at 5th February Learning Communities O&S meeting / from work stream at 5th February Learning Communities O&S meeting
Unverified data on school performance / Learning Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee
24th September 2014 / Document ‘Ceredigion non-verified data for scrutiny 24.9.14’
/ Following discussion it was RESOLVED to:-
(i) note pupil outcomes for 2014; and
(ii) agree strengths and areas for improvement which would form the basis of the ongoing work for the school improvement team.
Verified data on performance and categorisation / Learning Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee
6th November 2014 / Document ‘Final Pupil Outcomes’ Learning Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee - 6th November / Concerns were raised with the term ‘Free School Meals’. It was confirmed that this is a national term adopted.
Following further discussion, it was AGREED:
1.1 To note pupil outcomes for 2014; and
1.2 To agree strengths and areas for improvement which would form the basis
of the ongoing work for the school improvement team.
Progress against Business Plan priorities / TBC
Member seminar general / 25th February 2015 / Betsan presentation
PEMBROKESHIRE / Date / Hyperlinks to evidence
ERW governance / 26th November 2014 / Nothing specific at O & S – was covered by B O’C in seminar on 26th Nov
Data and commentary on local categorisation / April 16th 2015 / “School Categorisation Outcomes” / Following scrutiny, members identified 4 poor performing primary schools who will requested to attend the committee over the next year: Haverfordwest VC; Ysgol Ger y Llan; Monkton Priory; Ysgol Glannau Gwaun
Unverified data on school performance / 10th November 2014 / “School Performance 2014” / Report was noted
Verified data on performance and categorisation / January 27th2015 / n/a
Progress against Business Plan priorities / January 27th2015 / Nothing specific at O & S – was covered by B O’C in seminar on 26th Nov
Member seminar general / 26th November 2014 / Not in public domain
CARMARTHENSHIRE / Date / Hyperlinks to evidence
ERW governance / Briefing session for the Education & Children Scrutiny Committee 18th September 2014
Report to Education & Children Scrutiny Committee 30th September 2014 / Not in the public domain

Data and commentary on local categorisation / 30th September 2014 / As above
Unverified data on school performance / 30th September 2014 / As above
Verified data on performance and categorisation / Report to Education & Children Scrutiny Committee, 22nd January 2015. The report included:

Annual Report on Standards & Outcomes (Teacher Assessments and Examinations, Attendance and Pupil Exclusions)
Outcomes of School Inspections
Developing values and skills for lifelong learning.

The Committee was informed how performance and standards in the county’s schools compared with best performing schools across the ERW region. / / The Committee requested that comparative data from ERW is included in future reports.
Progress against Business Plan priorities / Report to Education & Children Scrutiny Committee planned 6th July 2015
Member seminar general / There has been difficulty in finding dates suitable for all. It is intended to arrange the seminar in 2015/16.
Additional Scrutiny Activity / The Committee has been undertaking a comprehensive school visits programme since 2009 which initially focused on Modernising Education Provision. During the last year, the focus has changed to school standards and Members attending are provided with information relating to specific schools (an example has been provided).
The EBM and Director have also introduced a School Improvement Panel (SIP) led by the EBM and including 10 non-Executive Members. The Panel’s terms of reference can be accessed via the link provided. It will provide an annual report to the Education & Children Scrutiny Committee.
It is also intended to link the Committee’s school visits to the activity of the SIP as an additional “reality check”.
The SIP has its inaugural meeting and is meeting on the 14th May 2015 with QE High School. /

Planned for 9th March 2016
Not in the public domain.
NEATH PORT TALBOT / Date / Hyperlinks to evidence
ERW governance / Cabinet Scrutiny and Cabinet 14th May 2014 / / Members made an amendment to the report as there was a typographical error. Members also queried what input Neath Port Talbot Members would have in the process.
Data and commentary on local categorisation / Children, Young People and Education Scrutiny and Cabinet Board on 4th December 2014 /
/ Members received a detailed report and presentation on performance information including categorisation.
Unverified data on school performance / Children, Young People and Education Scrutiny and Cabinet Board on 15th January 2015 / As below
Verified data on performance and categorisation / Children, Young People and Education Scrutiny and Cabinet Board on 15th January 2015 /
/ A lot of the concerns raised by Members were being addressed through the work being undertaken in support for behaviour management in schools. At Members request a report on this work was presented to 15th January meeting.
Progress against Business Plan priorities / Children, Young People and Education Scrutiny and Cabinet Board on 15th January 2015 / / Progress in regards to the Corporate Improvement Plan was included in 4th December and 26th February meetings
Member seminar general / All Members Seminar 18th December 2014 / No papers
SWANSEA / Date / Hyperlinks to evidence
ERW governance / Councillor Seminar
11th November 2014 / Councillor Seminar
Informal Seminar with Councillors therefore no link in public domain
Data and commentary on local categorisation / Schools Performance Scrutiny Panel
19th February 2015 / / See link to Conveners Letter to cabinet member arising from that meeting: / None
Unverified data on school performance / None / None / None
Verified data on performance and categorisation / Schools Performance Scrutiny Panel
11 December 2015 / / No recommendations made or letter needed for that meeting
Progress against Business Plan priorities / Schools Performance Scrutiny Panel
18 June 2015 / Betsan to attend meeting of the Schools Performance Scrutiny Panel on 18 June 2015
Member seminar general / 11th November 2014

Annex 4 – Local Scrutiny Leads