Education and Skills

Education and Skills

Schools’ Quality Assurance Policy January 2015

This document details the policies and procedures through which Manchester Local Authority (LA) works with all schools in order to ensure that every child achieves the best possible standards.

Introduction

A strong and positive relationship between the Local Authority and all schools is central to the success of the city and the City Council’s ambition to make Manchester a place where families choose to live and work. To benefit from the opportunities the city offers it is important that children and young people are successful in school, leaving with the skills, qualifications and resilience that will enable them to secure employment, continue with their education or training and to fulfil their learning potential.

In the context of a more autonomous and diverse schools system the Local Authority seeks to work with this greater autonomyin its role as a strong strategic champion of educational excellence, of parents and families and in supporting vulnerable families.

Statutory context

The statutory responsibility for securing services which address the needs of all children and young people remains with the Director of Children’s Services (DCS). Through the DCS and the Lead Member for Children’s Services the local authority retains a clear role for :

• working with partners to promote prevention and early intervention to narrow the attainment gap and promote the well being of children;

• ensuring fair access to schools and promoting high quality places

• working with headteachers, principals, governors and academy sponsors and principals to promote educational excellence for all, tackling underperformance and promoting school to school collaboration.

Schools causing concern

Section 72 of education and Inspections Act 2006 places a statutory duty on the local authority in exercising its function in respect of schools causing concern as set out in Part 4 of the Act. The Department for Education (DfE) regularly updates its statutory guidance relating to schools causing concern, on behalf of the Secretary of State.The guidance relates to the following legislation: School Standards and Framework Act 1998; Education and Inspections Act 2006; Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and learning Act 2009 (ASCL Act); The School Governance (Transition from and Interim Executive Board) regulations; Academies Act 2010: Education Act 2011.

The education Act (2006) sets out that a school causing concern is one which is ‘eligible for intervention’. This is where:

• Performance standards and a safety warning notice have been given and the school has failed to comply
• Teachers’ pay and conditions warning notice has been given and the school has failed to comply;
• A school requires significant improvement
• A school requires Special Measures

The Education White Paper (2010) ‘The Importance of Teaching’ recognises that the ‘primary responsibility for improvement lies with schools’ , as does the responsibility for making the best use of the challenge and support available to them. The Education Act 2011 confirms that the LA has a significant strategic role. Although no longer a provider of school improvement the LA has a duty to secure school improvement and intervene in maintained schools and will work particularly closely with those schools at likelihood of risk and those requiring additional support.

Ofsted

The recent Ofsted Framework for the inspection for Local Authority school improvement services(Education and Inspections Act 2006) confirms the above and has been created with the aim of assisting Local Authorities in their duty.

In the revised Ofsted framework for Schools ‘an acceptable standard of education’ is defined as a ‘good’ standard of education. Any school that is judged less than good is judged as ‘Requires Improvement’. Ofsted’s challenge to schools to improve more rapidly intensifies the level of duty of the LA to secure school improvement.

The role of the Local Authority

The LA’s approach to securing school improvementcentres on the quality assurance of school self – evaluation providing challenge and support leading to a robust and accurate reflection of the school’s outcomes, priorities and next steps for action.The LA uses this evidence to broker support and intervention.There is strong evidence that securing sustainable improvement requires robust self evaluation, strong school leadership, improving teaching and working collaboratively with other schools to build capacity leading to a self improving system. A preventative model of early intervention rooted in local intelligence and evidence of impact is at the heart of the approach.

This approach to quality assuring the school system in Manchester carefully models the new relationship between schools and the local authority. The LA works actively to influence and sustain the development of positive relationships with all schools, irrespective of status, based on trust and respect. Its success is predicated on influencing schools to choose to work with the LA as a partnerand with each other as appropriate because of the benefits this brings to all partners and to the City community as a whole.

This relationship with schools is based on

• a recognition by all partners of the positive impact of school self evaluation and the self improving system
• the importance of raising standards and improving lives for children and young people
• Local authority intervention in inverse proportion to success
• a culture of trust and openness

The Quality Assurance process

All schools have a named Senior Schools Quality Assurance Officer (SSQAO). Senior Schools Quality Assurance Officersplay a key role in the Quality Assurance of the school system. They retain an overview of performance and outcomes across a locality, know the school’s individual strengths and areas for development, work with their schools in the brokerage of tailored support and provide a key point of contact with the LA.

In the Autumn term the LA funds a Quality Assurance meeting and report from each school carried out by a Local Authority commissioned Quality Assurance Professional (QAP). The QAP is an experienced senior leader with a track record of school improvement success including for example former School Improvement Partner accreditation, Additional Inspector status inspecting on behalf of Ofsted and senior leadership experience in schools.Where Academies and Academy chains have their own QA arrangements the LA actively seeks to work with these arrangements.

The Autumn term QA visit involves at least the head teacher and chair of governors and isbased on the school’s performance data. There is a focus on data analysis including the performance of all groups, progression targets within and between key stages, end of key stage outcomes, attendance, persistent absence and exclusions. In addition the school’s key priorities, the self evaluation against the current Ofsted framework and school based contextual issues is taken account of. LA school improvement tools including the Manchester School Self Evaluation Framework, Manchester Governor Briefing document,the Manchester Integrated Data Setare provided to support the focus of the visit.

The QA reports provide analysis of outcomes and trends of attainment and progress over time, an overview of current achievement across the whole school, a review of the evidence base used to judge the school’s self evaluation, confirmation of priorities for school improvement and recommendations for actions by governors. These reports are analysed to confirm and further identify any support and intervention by the LA.The content of the report is used continually alongside other evidence includingprevious inspection outcomes,changes in leadership and staffing,data dashboards and LA intelligenceto inform a bespoke approach. The evidence base enables decision making about the further level of LA challenge, support or intervention. Schools are then placed into three groupings based on the level of additional QA focus . These groupings are universal offer/low risk; targeted offer/medium risk and intensive offer/high risk. (See appendix 1)

The LA works with schools, through its Senior Schools Quality Assurance Officers, to broker effective support for school to school improvement from a range of sources. Support and intervention is brokered, in the first instance, from the six TeachingSchools and their strategic partners within the city. These schools are part of the Manchester Schools’ Alliance.Priority is give to securing support where available from within the City to build capacity for the self improving systemand to broker local solutions.

The Teaching Schools, their strategic partnerswork with the LA to co-ordinate school improvement work across the city through the ManchesterSchool Improvement Partnership (MSIP).MSIP provides strategic oversight for the brokering of school to school improvement support and intervention within the City from the Manchester Teaching School Alliance, the MSATeachingSchool and their partners. Protocols established between the LA and the Teaching Schools include brokered intervention arrangements for the deployment of National Leaders of Education ( NLEs), accredited Local Leaders of Education (LLEs), National Leads for Governance and strategic partners in the Manchester Schools’ Alliance.In addition the LA brokers support and intervention from accredited teaching schools in the region.

All schools receive the universal offer. Beyond this, support and intervention is tailored according to the identified needs of the schools leading to a bespoke approach of either targeted or intensive support and challenge. Schools are informed formally about the group they are placed in during the Autumn term.

The three broad groupings for intervention and support, their rationale and evidence base are outlined in Appendix 1 Tables 1, 2 and 3.

Progress Reviews

Schools identified in the Intensive Offer/High Risk group are requested to attend a termly Progress Review. The purpose of the Review is to assess the impact of brokered support and intervention and the progress made against priorities recorded in the QA report in order to secure improvement. It is an opportunity to discuss and resolve concerns and agree next steps for both the school and the LA. Progress Reviews will normally take place termly and be attended by the headteacher and members of the senior leadership team as appropriate, the SSQA, the LA lead for Schools QA and, in some cases, by the Director of Education and Skills.

Evaluation of the impact of the QA process:

To ensure evidence of impact and inform development all stakeholders are involved in evaluation. This includes evaluation of the impact of the support and intervention brokered through the TeachingsSchools and strategic partners.(see Appendix 2)

The Local Authority QA Boardprovides strategic governance within the Education and Skills service for the Quality Assurance arrangements for schools monitoring, evaluating and reviewing the impact of the QA arrangements across the range of provision.

Summary

This policy supports robust, accurate self evaluation in schools. The LA will continue to build relationships with the diverse range of autonomous schools within the city in order to achieve improved outcomes for children and young people.

Appendix 1 Table 1
What the LA does
Universal Offer/
Low Risk Group / Targeted Offer/
Medium Risk Group
As Universal plus / Intensive Offer/
High Risk Group
As Universal plus / Process of Escalation for Intensive group where progress has not been made
Annual QA professional meeting and report / Termly QA professional meeting and reports / Termly QA professional meeting and reports / Letter of Concern (Pre Formal Warning)
Link SSQA contact / SSQA termly support and review visit and meeting / Additional QA professional time / Formal Warning Notice
SEF tools including Governor Briefing / Brokerage of additional support/challenge against priorities / Additional SSQAmeetings, including meetings with Governors, with a focus on support for improvement / Use of powers of intervention as required; eg
setting up of Interim Executive Board
Hard Federations
Sponsored Academy status
Integrated Data Set / Review of Governance offered / Brokerage of additional support/challenge against priorities
CapacityBuilding Support (eg: MSA) / Learning and Teaching reviews
Head Teacher recruitment and Selection / Termly Progress Review –involving school leadership, Chair of Governors, SSQA, QA Lead, Director of Education
LA Head teacher briefings / Progress reports to QA Board
Vulnerable Pupils’ Networks / Review of Governance
Attendance Monitoring
Safeguarding in Education support
SEN support
Statutory Moderation
School Governance Unit
Employee Relations support and guidance

Table 2

Indicators / Evidence/source of information
Universal Offer/Low Risk Group
The school accurately identifies and addresses any underperformance through robust, accurate self evaluation
Standards and progress compare well with similar schools and are above floor standards on all measures
Quality of teaching is good or better across the school and improving
There are no significant gaps between the progress of particular pupil groups that are not being addressed
Actions from the most recent Ofsted reports have been addressed with a positive impact
Attendance is in line with national averages
Exclusions are at least in line with or lower than national averages
Parents are engaged in and positive about the school
The school identifies areas for development and secures support for improvement
The school has capacity to provide support for system wide improvement / Raise on Line
Integrated Data Set
School Development Plan
QA visit and report
Ofsted report
LA intelligence
LA Dashboard analysis
Attendance Data/ Officers
Complaints ( to the LA and Ofsted)
Parent View
SSQAO
Impact of brokered support/intervention
Targeted Offer/ Medium Risk Group
QA reports evaluate the school as Requires Improvement
Declining overall trends over two years
Current combined attainment is below the floor standard measure
Levels of progress are below the national medians in two of the past three years
Unexpected falls in outcomes
Less impact than anticipated in the actions taken to address issues identified in the most recent Ofsted inspection
Absence and persistent absence rates are increasing
Newly appointed Head Teacher is new to headship
Significant changes in senior leadership
High Turnover of staffing
Safeguarding procedures are not fully in place
The School is judged by Ofsted as Requires Improvement and is making effective progress. / Raise on Line
Integrated Data Set
School Development Plan
QA visit and reports
Ofsted report
LA intelligence
LA Dashboard analysis
Attendance Data/ Officers
Admissions complaints
LA review
Complaints ( to the LA and Ofsted)
Parent View
SSQAO
Intensive Offer /High Risk
QA reports evaluate the school as Inadequate
The school is judged by Ofsted to have serious weakness or to need special measures
The school is judged by Ofsted to Require Improvement and the progress towards improvement is not accelerated.
The school is below the floor standard for more than one year
The school meets the statutory guidance for schools causing concern
Concerns about the effectiveness of the school are raised from a range of sources including parents, governors, staff, pupils and /or leaders / Raise on Line
Integrated Data Set
School Development Plan
QA visit and reports
DfE identification
Ofsted report
LA intelligence
LA Dashboard analysis
Progress review minutes
Attendance Data/ Officers
Admissions complaints
LA review
Complaints ( to the LA and Ofsted)
Parent View
SSQAO

ManchesterSchool Improvement Partnership – Brokered Support Agreement Appendix A

Top of Form

Supporting School/TSADetails / PartnerSchool Details
School name / address / telephone number / email address: / School name / address / telephone number / email address:
Linked TSA:
Headteacher: / Headteacher:
Chair of governors: / Agreed number of days:
Staff deployed in the intervention:
Commencement date:
LA contact / Key areas for support/intervention
SSQA name / tel number / email: / 1.
2.
QA professional name / email address / 3.
4.
5.

Signed ______(Headteacher: Supporting SchoolTSA/*)

______(Headteacher: partner school*)

Date ______

ManchesterSchool Improvement Partnership – Brokered Support Agreement Appendix A

Action Planning

Key Areas / Actions / By Whom / When / Expected Impact/Outcomes
1.
2.
3
4.
5.
Progress review points and dates, expected completion date, arrangements for sustained improvement review
Interim 1:
Interim 2:
Final Review:
Sustained progress review:

ManchesterSchool Improvement Partnership – Brokered Support Agreement Appendix A

Review and Evaluation

Progress review date: / Evidence base
People present / Role
Discussion outcomes
Points to be addressed before the next progress review
Progress review date: / Evidence base
People present / Role
Discussion outcomes
Points to be addressed before the next progress review

ManchesterSchool Improvement Partnership – Brokered Support Agreement Appendix A

Final evaluation date: / Evidence base
People present / Role
Impact of the brokered support (quantitative and qualitative)
Points to be addressed by the partner school in order to sustain the impact
Sustained Progress Review: / Evidence base
People present / Role
Medium to long term impact of the brokered support (quantitative and qualitative)
Future actions, partnerships, developments in order to build upon sustained progress