LF is chair of Bridgemere, and YW is a Partner in a local accountancy firm.

DS ran through the actions agreed at the last meeting and noted:

• Directors had not been in touch and all were happy with Trust Governor
• Training on Trust Governor is being arranged
• DS did write to parents to alert them to BD’s secondment to Ofsted, which was cut short.  BD confirmed that she had been leading inspections and was signed off to lead them.

Outcome: All Directors approved the minutes as a true reflection of the meeting

There were no matters arising that were not already on the agenda

DS had sent out a written update to Directors, and BD gave a verbal update on how the schools has coped to date.

During the first week there had been between 6 - 12 pupils per day, and this was dictated by parents shift patterns.  She said that school can only really plan for the week ahead.  She had asked whether parents would be needing school over Easter, and she explained that there were 4 families that needed provision.

The Trust is running a hub model, with Acton remaining open for all schools in the trust.

Q: Are staff ok and happy with the arrangements?

R: Yes.  We have taken the decision to write to staff to tell them that all staff will get a 2-week break but that they may need to cover Easter.  This doesn't apply to SLT who are happy to come in.

There has been an issue with locking up, but the site manager from Bridgemere will be asked to support Acton.

Q: What about food how have we been feeding the children? 

R: The LA has been covering this as the cooks were self isolating

Directors were keen that provision for SLT to take a break were built in.  

Q: What about the bank holidays, Good Friday and Easter Monday? 

R: One family has requested support for this time, but the union advice is not to open.  The school will consider based on need

Q: There is new Safeguarding Guidance, are compliant?

R: Yes - only 3 families are not in school who it applies to, and we are calling them to keep in touch.  We are also pushing out vouchers for FSM

Directors discussed the need for a cascade ladder for safeguarding matters, and agreed the following:

Actions to the Chair, followed by VC, then LF as safeguarding Governor, then JE, then LMc

Q: Is there anything immediate that we need to do?

R: No all good 

Directors conveyed their thanks and support for the hard work of the SLT and all staff.

Trust on a page
AP presented the Trust on a page document that had been circulated in advance.  She explained that it was built using Autumn Data and so was out of date, but it had helped to develop consistency in reporting in the schools. It will be refined as it becomes clearer what is required from a Director point of view.

JE had given specific feedback after the last meeting, and DS asked if there were any questions on the document.

LD had made comments and observations to simplify the structure, and will send these via email. However she also had two questions on the content specifically:

• There is a high % of SEN children in year 5 - 30 % - is this correct, and if so how are staff supported to provide the right support for these pupils?

R: Yes the figures are correct, provision is planned carefully through the provision map that AP creates and leads. Staff and pupil are supported and there is one to one                          support in some cases.  AP explained that she looks for Quality First Teaching, and monitors this.

• In the areas of need, RLLAT is higher than average in SEH and Speech and Language? How do we know?

R: looking at the SEN Register - across the trust we have a lot of children with S&L, in our First Concern children and universal

Q: Are we better at recognising them or do we have a higher % of them?

R: Yes we are good at identifying but yes we also have a high percentage.

Action: This needs to be reflected in the ‘Trust on a page’ priorities, if it is a growing trend then it needs to be on the Directors agenda.

Directors noted that there was not a SEF available for Calveley and that there was a marked difference between the information for both schools.

BD explained that this was due to her focusing on bringing Acton in line with the new Ofsted areas first, as they are due an inspection.  This had not yet been done for Calveley, but will be now.

Action: Ds asked that comments on the structure were emailed through

Action: Staff to be asked to update the SEF

BD felt that Attendance will prevent an outstanding judgement, with the trust tracking below 90%.  They are changing letter triggers to 95% to get the figures up

However, there is a challenge for FSM and SEN children, and a piece of work to improve and look at the group breakdown.

Trust Strategic Plan

DS thanked SLT for the report and work to develop options.  He asked whether there was a preferred option from the 5 put forward?

AP ran through the options, some of which will be dictated by what is possible with the build and the siting of soil pipes. 

Q: Is the proposed provision 9-3 term time only? 

R: Yes and no.  Nursery would be from 9 - 3 but there would also be wrap around before and after school care.

A discussion took place on the needs and whether this needed to be for 51 weeks of the year 8 - 6 (full time)

Q: Did you investigate the cost of a rental of a mobile unit. 

R: No, but can look at it

Directors agreed that it will be important to model and cost based on what service is to be offered and the numbers that would be needed to make it viable. If we can get a model service provision, we can then see what size of build would be needed. Directors felt that the trust needed to be brave when looking at the building and ensure capacity to scale up to under 2 year olds.

BD explained that they were going to trial it over Easter - but that this is now not possible.

Action: AP to model with YW based on 51 week 7.30 - 5.45.  To meet virtually to discuss this and build on staffing models.

Review Policy Matrix

The schedule had been circulated in advance, however it was noted that this was just for Statutory Policies, and did not include all trust policies.

Now this is created, the plan is to place all of the policies on Trust Governor with review dates,  these can also link to the Trusts Website.

It was noted that there are a lot of responsibilities for Directors contained within the policies, and it was felt a good idea to cross reference them to ensure that the trust can evidence that Directors are fulfilling their responsibilities

Action: DS to put names against each policy in the schedule and then each person to evidence how directors are meeting their responsibilities

A brief overview of the finance was given and that the new School Business Manager needed support to get up to date with her role and what needs doing by when. Directors needed to review management accounts.

Action: AP to provide a list for the SBM, and help her to settle in to the role

There was no update from the Safeguarding Director, she was due to be in Acton but this was not possible.  

The Chaim of reporting list had been agreed ealier.

Q: How to we monitor safeguarding of vulnerable children not in school?

R: This is a weekly call home

AP reported that she had created a solution, in that the agenda is a shared responsibility.  The HOS for each school meets with the parent council rep to create a joint agenda.