Reach Cooperative Trust Consultation report to Governors: Date 4th July 2019

Reach Cooperative Trust

Report on the Consultation of

Bitterne Manor Park School Moorlands Primary School Redbridge Community School Primary School Townhill Junior School and Woodlands Community College.

CONTENTS

1. Introduction ...... 2 2. Executive Summary...... 3 3. Overview of the Consultation Feedback ...... 5 4. Recommended Action...... 7 Appendix A: Response forms received - Summary of responses ...... 9 Appendix B – Consultation documents ( to be added by schools) ...... 13 Appendix C – Notes of key points raised and discussed in consultation meetings ...... 13 Appendix D – Letters of response ...... 14

1 Reach Cooperative Trust Consultation report to Governors: Date 4th July 2019 1. Introduction

1.This consultation report was produced on behalf of the Governing Bodies of Bitterne Manor Primary School, School, Moorlands Primary School, Redbridge Commu- nity School, St Denys Primary School, Townhill Junior School and Woodlands Community College by CSNET (Co-operative Schools network), who also facilitated the consultation.

2.The report summarises the feedback from a public consultation exercise for the Govern- ing Body in respect of a proposal to establish Reach Community Trust (a co-opera- tive education trust).

3.The decision to consult and the process was agreed by governors in line with the require- ments of the guidance on School Organisation for Maintained Schools published in January 2014.

4.The report and the consultation process also take into account the requirement in the guidance for decision makers that the proposal that the school should change status from community to foundation be rooted in a commitment by the Governing Body to continuous school improvement. 5.This guidance states that

• “Decision Makers should consider the impact of changing category to foundation and ac- quiring or removing a Trust on educational standards at the school. Factors to consider include: • the impact of the proposals on the quality, range and diversity of educational provision in the school; • the impact of the proposals on the curriculum offered by the school, including, if appropri- ate, the development of the school’s specialism; • the experience and track record of the Trust members, including any educational experi- ence and expertise of the proposed trustees; • how the Trust might raise/has raised pupils’ aspirations and contributes to the ethos and culture of the school; • whether and how the proposals advance/have advanced national and local transformation strategies; • the particular expertise and background of Trust members. For example, a school seeking to better prepare its pupils for higher education might have a higher education institution as a partner.”

6.Governors have taken these matters carefully into account in developing the proposal and will further consider them before coming to a final decision. The school sees the best route to achieving further school improvement as lying through engagement with a strong education sector of co-operative schools and a formal partnership with partners offering significant expertise.

7.Governors also considered other possible models for school partnership including that of developing a Multi-Academy Trust. On balance, they decided to consolidate the existing education partnership work, through the development of the Cooperative Foundation Trust model.

8.Copies of the consultation documents were published on the school website and dis- tributed widely to consultees including parents/carers, staff, teacher associations and support staff trade unions, local Head teachers and Governors, the appropriate Local Au- thorities served by the school and elected members; additional copies were also sent to a

2 Reach Cooperative Trust Consultation report to Governors: Date 4th July 2019 number of partner organisations and to other service providers in the areas closest to the school.

9.In addition, separate consultation meetings were arranged for Trade Union representa- tives, school staff and for parents, carers of those attending the school and members of the local community. There was also a meeting between the headteacher’s on behalf of the schools and Derek Wyles and Glenda Lane from City Council.

10.These meeting arrangements were all well publicised.

11.The views of the learners at the schools were sought via meetings and discussions with pupil representative groups.

12.This document summarises the responses received for the consultation as a whole.

13.Included within this report are a summary of the views and comments received from in- dividuals.

14.All responses will be made available to the Governing Body for examination when they consider this consultation. Individual responses are also available for examination by con- tacting the school. 2. Executive Summary

15.Bitterne Manor Primary School, Bitterne Park School, Moorlands Primary School, Red- bridge Community School, St Denys Primary School, Townhill Junior School, Woodlands Community College are maintained by and located in Southampton which is in . The school serve approximately 4800 pupils in total from a wide range of ethnic minority backgrounds and higher than average proportion of disadvantaged pupils including those eligible for free school meals.

16.The schools are seeking to strengthen their existing clear values system and to devel- op strong partnerships over time that will also increase the engagement of its learning community and the formulation of a sustainable approach to educational provision; this consultation can be seen as the beginning of that process.

17.Summary information, together with a covering letter and a response questionnaire were issued to all the required consultees and/or made available online.

18.A consultation pack including a detailed explanation of the proposals, the rationale be- hind them, as well as information about the partners and the implications of becoming a Co-operative Trust school was made available to anyone who requested a copy.

19.The consultation process relating to these proposals has involved significant efforts on the part of the governing bodies of the schools and school staff to provide good quality information and an opportunity to comment for anyone with a legitimate interest in the proposed development of a co-operative Trust as a foundation for the schools.

20.It was made clear in the summary letter issued to all stakeholders both how to obtain copies of this information

21.Consultation documents were made available on the school websites and additional copies were also available at the school for collection by visitors and interested parties. 3 Reach Cooperative Trust Consultation report to Governors: Date 4th July 2019

22.The consultation was promoted widely and over 2500 letters inviting participation in the consultation were distributed.

23.Responses could be made during the consultation meetings, through written responses and by email.

24.Staff, parent and public meetings were held at the schools.

25.Two representatives of the local teacher associations and Trade Unions attended a spe- cially convened meeting and were also invited to join the staff or public meetings.

26.In total, around 300 people attended meetings to discuss the proposal, including 35 family representatives, 115 students and 140 staff representatives.

27.The overall tone of the meetings indicated good levels of support for the proposal.

28.In total there were 41 written response forms returned before the consultation closed.

29.A clear majority were fully supportive, with others making constructive suggestions to consolidate the potential impact of the Trust proposal.

30.A number of responses included comments, concerns, questions or requests for further information. These responses tended to address the following main issues of interest, without necessarily rejecting the proposed initial structure: • After land and asset transfer how the responsibility for the buildings would be managed BM/ BPS • Staff wanted reassurance about Terms and Conditions, Staff Contracts, Pensions, Con- tinued Service, Union negotiation, Benefits etc with the Governors becoming the em- ployer (ALL SCHOOLS) • The process for reversal if the trust was not working for a school BM/BPS/ RCS/ ST D • The difference between the foundation trust model and academies BPS • The aims need to include the Foundation Stage Curriculum in Point 14 MPS • The role of the governors in decision making RCS/WCC • The impact on admissions policy if the governors are the admissions authority BPS/ MPS/St D/WCC

31.There was little indication that consultees held a preference for the status quo although there were one or two parental comments keen to maintain the unique features of the individual schools which is also the driving force for school leaders and governors to be pursuing this model. (See Appendix A).

32.A number of contributions questioned Redbridge Community School’s position in the pro- posed trust mainly due to it’s geographical location in comparison with the other schools, however, the explanation is that an established supportive relationship already exists between the three secondary schools named in the proposal.

33.The union meeting was attended by two union reps who were very supportive of the pro- posal. A list of objections from the Southampton National Education Union City Rep were received- these were responded to in full during the consultation See Appendix D Doc 9. and 10. This was followed by a fractious email exchange at the end of the consultation.

34.It is clear from the responses of staff and the views expressed at the meetings that there was generally a supportive response. The main reassurances sought by staff were under-

4 Reach Cooperative Trust Consultation report to Governors: Date 4th July 2019 standably related to any potential impact on their contractual arrangements, or their pay and conditions. It was made clear that there would be no change to contractual arrange- ments following the formal assignment of full employer responsibilities to the governing body. Staff would not be directed to work in other schools but as cooperative schools staff may be asked to share their expertise with others.

35.Additional assurances were provided in the consultation documentation and in the meet- ings with staff that the governing body intend to continue to abide by national and local agreements for pay and conditions for so long as these apply.

36.A number of questions at the consultation meetings also sought to clarify the respective roles and responsibilities of the Trust Board and the Governing Body for the school. It was made clear that the school will retain its own Governing Body and continue to run the school in the same way as previously, each school having it’s own individual budget and that the Trust model is a minority one, in other words that the Governing Body will under- go relatively minor changes and cannot be dominated by the Trust nominees.

37.The work of the governing body will be strengthened by the addition of two trust ap- pointed governors. This means that the composition of the governing body will otherwise be largely unchanged.

38.The proposed initial partners remain committed to the proposed Trust and working within the charitable aims of the Trust to raise standards and promote community cohesion. The Trust and the partners, as well as the mutual co-operative membership dimension, includ- ing the proposed Stakeholder Forum are likely to have a positive impact on the school and its community and further assist in the raising of standards.

39.A meeting was held between the headteachers and Derek Wyles and Glenda Lane from Southampton City Council to discuss the proposed trust. This meeting was well received and Southampton City Council are committed to be a partner in the trust and wish to sup- port it’s development. 3. Overview of the Consultation Feedback

40.As can be seen from the summary above all the statutory requirements were met or ex- ceeded and it was made clear through a variety of channels how further information could be obtained. This information was available in advance of public meetings to allow people to consider the proposal, decide whether or not to attend meetings and ask questions.

41.The nine meetings arranged for parents/carers and the general public were mostly not well attended but those present were clearly reassured there were no adverse implica- tions for the education of the students and were persuaded there were positive opportu- nities to develop positive working partnerships which would support the work of the schools.

42.In this case the attendance at the meetings and the number of formal written responses is in line with other similar consultation exercises; the commentary on the majority of re- turns received was favourable and the feedback during consultation meetings was without exception positive.

43.The consultation process has introduced no significant or substantial concerns around the proposals in responses from the learning community.

5 Reach Cooperative Trust Consultation report to Governors: Date 4th July 2019 44.The majority of questions and queries raised have been addressed during discussion ses- sions or by individual responses (see Appendix D) and the governing body should feel satis- fied that there are no significant issues that have not been addressed or that will not be resolved with further information should the proposed Trust go ahead. General Issues

45.A number of respondents asked how the Governing Body had investigated or explored the background to the Co-operative Trust model. Governors have explored a number of op- tions for the future of the schools during a period of almost two years.

Partnership 46.The current proposal sets out the initial partnerships which will support the Trust at in- ception and indicates that further development will take place over time.

47.The issue of partnership and greater engagement of key stakeholders was a central theme of the discussions at meetings. Working collaboratively is likely to create new op- portunities for shared procurement, better value and best use of resources including training and development. The school has identified this partnership approach as having real benefits to educational improvement work.

48.Developing a Trust partnership will assist the school leadership in working to further im- prove the quality of teaching and learning in the school and this may well encourage other schools, notably local primary schools to collaborate with the Trust. Staff engagement

49.The staff Q&A sessions pointed out that there would be no significant implications arising from the technical change of employer as the school governing body already exercises the key functions of the employer through the existing delegated arrangements from the local authority.

50.In addition, written assurances will be sought from the local authority confirming that the arrangements for continuity of existing terms and conditions will be maintained.

Trust Membership

51.A key theme of the consultation debate was that of democratic involvement. The Trust will provide the school with the opportunity to extend the engagement of members of the school community and wider partnership through membership, to be offered to parents, learners, employees and community groups and individuals.

52.The Trust will be a mutual co-operative membership trust which will be democratically accountable to its members consisting of pupils, parents, staff, local organisations and others interested in supporting the schools. This membership base will strengthen links with the local community and lead to greater involvement with the local community through the co-operative nature of the trust.

6 Reach Cooperative Trust Consultation report to Governors: Date 4th July 2019

53.The three statutory requirements that the Governing Body should satisfy itself that it has met through the consultation process are: 1.That the proposals are likely to enhance (and definitely not adversely affect) stan- dards 2.That the consultation exercise complied with regulations and guidance 3.That the views and comments from respondents have been properly considered.

54.In the view of the writer, on behalf of CSNET as the facilitator for this process, it is clear that all three statutory requirements have been well met. 55. 56.It is reasonable to say that the learners, families and staff are supportive of the propos- als.

4. Recommended Action 57.It is clear that the view of those consulted tends to support the proposal for adopting the Trust, including the local authority who are to be a partner in the trust.

58.No substantive objections have been raised to the proposal.

59.It is recommended that no changes need to be made to the Proposal and that Gov- ernors should consider the following formal resolution:

This Governing Body notes the content of the report provided by CSNET and the predom- inantly positive responses received in written form and during meetings, discussions and debate following the publication of the Proposal to establish a Co-operative Education Trust.

The Governing Body welcomes the additional support indicated by the local authority in agreeing to be represented on the Trust itself and resolves to work closely with officers in taking forward the planning for the Trust.

The Governing Body, having carefully considered its statutory responsibilities hereby re- solves to proceed to implementation of a change of category from Community school to Foundation school and simultaneously acquiring the Foundation to be known as Aspire Community Trust

The Governing Body further resolves to delegate to the Head Teacher and Chair of Gov- ernors, to work in partnership with the local authority and other bodies where appropri- ate in order to complete the work required as set out below.

• To work together with CSNET to develop the necessary documentation and formal registration for

1. The model Articles (legal constitution) for the Trust

2. The reconstitution of the Governing Body, providing for two Foundation Governors to be appointed

3. The appropriate initial arrangements for meetings of the Trustees

4. To confirm the appointment of Stone King as legal advisers to the Governing Body, subject to contract, to undertake: 7 Reach Cooperative Trust Consultation report to Governors: Date 4th July 2019

5. Formal incorporation of the Trust through registration at Companies House

6. Oversight of and guidance for the Governing Body in respect of matters relating to Land and Asset transfer from the local authority to the Trust

They will report back to the full Governing Body on progress towards the proposed imple- mentation date of September 1st 2019.

8 Reach Cooperative Trust Consultation report to Governors: Date 4th July 2019 Appendix A: Response forms received - Summary of responses 58.A total of 42 questionnaires were returned following distribution of consultation doc- uments to parents/carers, staff and governors of the school as well as to a significant number of interested parties. 59.These broke down as follows – 20 from parents; 21 from staff; 1 from ‘others’.

60.Copies of all responses are available for governors’ perusal. The comments are repro- duced verbatim.

61.The number of responses for each question is given below. The background of the re- spondents, where known, is also given.

Summary of response forms returned

Q1. How do you feel about the school changing their legal status and acquiring a Trust? Parents/ Don't Carers Staff Governors Other Know

I support the proposals 15 21 0 0 I am not sure and would like more information … 2 0 0 0

Key Comments received • It is not possible to give a definitive answer based on the consultation information BM • Not sure of the point of it MPS • What if there any cons to joining the trust? MPS • Why can’t we join a trust that is already proven? MPS • Is there a risk of joining something new? MPS I would like to see • Details of how all of the vision/aims will be achieved i.e. process, detailed structure, levels of accountability BM • Closer community links and our values BM • collaboration while maintaining our identity and protecting our staff pay, conditions, pension MPS • Moorlands helping to shape the trust MPS • Short term and long term shared resources - alongside the vision StD • linked community based projects to improve the care that children give to their physi- cal environment St D • This schools values and behaviours continue and be included in the vision St D • The schools individuality and locally community feel/spirit maintained - worried about a loss of identity - I chose this school because of it’s small size and individual care of pupils. St D • Sharing and developing special needs provision WCC

9 Reach Cooperative Trust Consultation report to Governors: Date 4th July 2019 Q2. How do you feel about the proposed partners in the Trust? Parents/ Don't Carers Staff Governors Other Know These are the right initial part- ners 14 19 0 0

I am concerned about the school working with… because… 1 3 0 0

Comments received Concern • Concern over working with Redbridge Community School as it is not a feeder school for any of the other partners and so has no direct interest in improving/ working with primary schools BM1 • Concern over working with Redbridge Community School, they are not local to the other schools and not a feeder school. unsure about how they fit? MPS • Schools that we don’t know much about/ are represented poorly in Ofsted/Press e.g. Redbridge “biggest pregnancy rate” MPS • Redbridge - they do not seem to fit as all other schools are local and we have not had dealings with Redbridge MPS • Not sure why Redbridge is included when it is on the other side of the City MPS • Redbridge - geography seems odd but Mrs TJ explained about existing partnership arrangements St D • Primary schools that aren’t like minded working with Moorlands MPS • Secondary schools - I have limited experience of successful collaborations with sec- ondary schools. MPS Other partners • Southampton University or an ITT provider (Primary) BM • Other like minded schools MPS • Child Minders and St Annes St D • Bitterne Park Primary as they seem left out. St D • College and apprenticeship providers WCC • Q3. How do you feel about the vision for the trust? Parents/ Don’t Carers Staff Governors Other Know This is right for the school 15 21 I do not think….. should be a priority in the vision because 1 0 0 0 I would like to see…….. included in the vision 0 0 0 0

10 Reach Cooperative Trust Consultation report to Governors: Date 4th July 2019

Comments received: • Hypothetically - I would like to see detail. BM • Not sure MPS • I’m not sure how Trust Status adds anything to what we already have? How much say will we have? Will we have autonomy over when holidays are. Moving to Scottish fair terms wouldn’t be a bad idea? I would like to see • Supporting each other in a time of need MPS • coaching opportunities across the schools for staff MPS • more collaboration between schools to work together MPS • outdoor learning and environmental issues included in the vision St D • Specific reference to following best practice in SEND provision WCC

Q4. Trust Forum? Parents/ Don’t Carers Staff Governors Other* Know

This is right for the school 15 21 0 0 I do not think … should be a pri- ority in the vision because 0 0 0 0 I would like to see …Included in the school’s vision. 0 0 0 0

Comments received:

• It is a good idea in principle but it would need to be made clear what community members could expect from this - i.e. are they making decisions, what feedback will they get? BM1 • The only worry I have is pensions going forward x 2 MPS I would like to see • updated information as we go into the trust of what has/ will be changing in light of joining the trust MPS • terms of reference for the trust forum and an understanding of how parents etc will actually be able to have real input to decisions taken St D • Open communication - St D is not so great at selling itself to the wider world. St D • The first clause in the above long sentence spelt out clearly as a separate point WCC

Further Comments received • I believe in a values based education system that works with communities BM • Will it have any impact on admissions criteria when applying for MPS • How can we ensure this does not lead to become an academy? - There are no guaran- tees but this is less likely to lead to an academy than the current school status MPS • I found the open event very helpful and from what I learned there I think parents will struggle to interpret the information here and the questions. As a quick solution, how about putting the presentation sticks on a slideshow and emailing to parents/carers? St D • This is a good positive decision for the school St D • I am for this if it is the best for the growth, development, and future of the school community St D. 11 Reach Cooperative Trust Consultation report to Governors: Date 4th July 2019 • I believe the school management and governors will have given thoughtful and wise consideration to the different options and trust that if they see this as the best way forward then it is a good step to take. St D • Please do not lose the stuff that makes this school so brilliant. Staff, attitudes, values, community spirit, sense of conclusion, and personal knowledge/ relationships with parents/children good luck St D • Translating into a smart action plan the vision for this education trust, to help parents adopt it in their daily life and join the trust in its efforts St D • I am slightly concerned that the running and formation of the trust will add further re- sponsibilities and time pressures on already stretched teachers and resources. St D • I don’t want our beloved St D getting lost in the larger trust and its teaching being merged or changed in the long term St D • Set out the basics of the partnership and model of governance, perhaps in bullet points, on one side of A4 for parents/ carers to refer to x 2 WCC • Valued to go in vision, unity, equality, diversity and inclusion - proposal is very positive and totally supported ! WCC

12 Reach Cooperative Trust Consultation report to Governors: Date 4th July 2019 Appendix B – Consultation documents ( to be added by schools)

The set of consultation documents forms part of this report (published separately) and includes: • Invitation letters to stakeholders; summary of proposal • Statutory Proposal and consultation information pack • Consultation Questionnaire

Appendix C – Notes of key points raised and discussed in consultation meetings

A series of meetings was arranged for discussions with teaching and support staff; parents; school council; general public; trade unions and professional associations.

The meetings took place - some key points in addition to those in Section 2 above

App C Doc 1 - Redbridge Staff Meeting - note attached Key Points • Exploration of the powers of the governing body, e.g. making all decisions re budget • Impact on links with the local primary federation App C Doc 2 - Redbridge Parent/Community Meeting - notes attached App C Doc 3 - Redbridge Pupil Consultation - notes attached Key Points • Wider opportunities for trips - places filled by the trust secondary schools • Make links with the Bitterne Park Sixth Form would be good • Mentoring primary students would be good perhaps making presentations finding out what it is like to teach. App C Doc 4 - Redbridge Parents Meeting - notes attached App C Doc 5 - Moorlands Parent Meeting - notes attached App C Doc 6 - Moorlands/ Townhill Staff Meeting - notes attached App C Doc 7 - Moorlands Pupil Meeting - notes attached Key Points • Moorlands has fantastic grounds it might be able to share • Share doing different clubs in different schools App C Doc 8 Townhill Pupil Meeting - notes attached Key Points • teachers could change schools to teach alongside teachers in other schools • Could have mixed school competitions e.g. Maths challenges • Could do a singing festival over the internet all singing the same songs. App C Doc 9 - Bitterne Manor Pupil Meeting - notes attached App C Doc 10 - St Denys Parents Meeting - notes attached App C Doc 11 - St Denys/ Bitterne Manor Staff Meeting - notes attached App C Doc 12 - St Denys Parents/Community Meeting - notes attached App C Doc 13 - St Denys Pupil Meeting - notes attached Key Points • We could do something together to raise a lot of money for charity • If someone is not doing well in one school they could go to one of the others • We could share things we do well, we’re really good at Handwriting App C Doc 14 - Woodlands Staff Meeting - notes attached App C Doc 15 - Woodlands Parents Meeting - notes attached

13 Reach Cooperative Trust Consultation report to Governors: Date 4th July 2019 App C Doc 16 - Woodlands Pupil Consultation Key Points • Students asked if they would have any input into the vision for the trust • Students asked if they would have to change the name of their collage if they were not community App C Doc 17 - Bitterne Park School Pupil meeting notes attached BPS Key Points • Students saw an opportunity for a trust wide strategy for reducing plastic usage • Students through a trust wide school council meeting could bring together pupil ideas for developing the trust further. App C Doc 18 - Bitterne Park Staff Meeting notes attached BPS Key Points • Staff not having to move from school to school without agreement App C Doc 19 - Bitterne Park/Woodlands Parent/Public Meeting Notes attached BPS Key Points • Reassurance of the admissions policy remaining the same • Opportunity to share special needs expertise • HT of St Johns - attending as Woodlands Gov - gave positive view of coop trusts from a school that has been a Coop Foundation Trust school since 2010. App C Doc 20 - Union Meeting - Notes attached

Where key points are not included the key points are already covered in Section 2

Appendix D – Letters of response App D Doc 1 - Email from Nigel Hollowell/ Response - Key Issues - Land and Assets BM App D Doc 2 - Email from Hannah Craggs/ Response - Key Issue - level of detail in the proposal to be able to make a decision/ challenging whether a change needs to be made. BM App D Doc 3 - Email from NHS supporting formation of trust.BPS App D Doc 4 - Response to staff questions at BPS - included in consultation meeting presentation but noted down for staff reference. App D Doc 5 - Questions from NAS/UWT members at BPS - Tracey Fynan See Key Issues Section 2 App D Doc 6 - Further questions raised by Debra Bajnath BPS NEU Rep App D Doc 7 - Email from Seedlings Montessori to Moorlands PS Key Issues - pointing out an error in the consultation document re Point 14 of the aims - Foundation Stage Curriculum was not included App D Doc 8 - Email fro Jenny Edwards re terms and conditions WCC App D Doc 9 - Southampton NEU Representative - Objections App D Doc 10 - Response to Southampton NEU Representative Objections

14