Glemsford Primary: Head and Governors suspended in laptop fraud case

Glemsford's website

I reported on my blog back in January about the leasing fraud that Glemsford Primary School had fallen "victim" to possibly exposing Suffolk taxpayers to up to half a million pounds of liabilities. At the time it was announced that Suffolk County Council had launched an investigation and today the EADT report that the schools governing body is to be removed.

Headteacher Elizabeth Steele has been suspended since January.

IT Technician James Loker-Steele who was the staff member who negotiated the contract for the supply of the "free" laptops wrote a post on his blog back in March 2011 entitled Microsoft, expensive and doesn’t work where he says:

At work, we have been given 100 laptops as part of a promotion for olivetti. Great, how cool you might be thinking. It would be but I am the one who has to deploy the laptops and maintain them along with the fixing the problems of the current infrastructure.

In February he used Twitter to send this:

How can it be right to be left so much in the dark about things that affect you?
— James Loker-Steele (@jamesloker) February 24, 2012

It is clear that the school's Governors and Head feel unsupported by the County Council, In the EADT article Chair of Governors Duncan Grafen is quoted as saying:

We can find no justifiable reason for this perceived lack of support and we believe that at all times we have acted in the best interests of the school, and in accordance with our duties, to ensure proper accountability for, and control over, the use of public funds.

The governing body responded to that warning notice with a detailed monitoring and action plan proposal that addressed all the points raised by the council. We requested guidance and advice from council officers in preparing the final proposal, but those requests were refused.

 And the Headteacher Elizabeth Steele said:

I was very shocked to receive a copy of the letter sent to my governors. They are all very hard working and loyal members of the public and have put the school first in every way 

My main aim was, and still is, to return to work at the school that I love. The school is not under investigation by the police – we are merely victims.

I do have sympathy for the School and its Head and Governors but there are two things in the comments above that concern me and might be the reasons the County have decided they need to act to replace the Governors. Firstly it seems bizarre the Governors expect to be given help from the LA responding to a notice that they are to be replaced. The whole issue is that the Council is concerned about the competency of the Governing Body and this only seems to re-enforce that.

Secondly whilst the school is clearly the victim of a fraud I don't think they are merely victims and also they have clearly not always acted in the best interests of the school. They might have intended to but that is not the point. They could have acted in a different way and that would have prevented the fraud. That is of course easy to say after the event but the fact that even after this has happened they still do not seem to realise and admit this is a serious cause for concern.

In this case I am not sure the Council is left with many options but to replace the Governors. This is just the sort of case (rather than forcing Schools to become academies) that these provisions were designed for. The Interim Executive Board can come in and sort the leasing issue out and get the school back to normal governance arrangements as soon as possible.

It is a hard lesson for the school and its staff and governors and a cautionary tale for other schools to  ensure due diligence and obtain appropriate professional advice before signing this kind of a contract and for Governors to ensure this happens.

Just who is Margaret Read and why does nobody seem to know her?

As I reported earlier someone calling themselves Margaret Read has been emailing information about the Stoke by Nayland free school proposal to local head teachers and discussing the school with Graham Newman, Cabinet Member for Education making disparaging remarks that "SbN Freeschool will also help to 'kick up the backside' coasting neighbouring schools with inexcusable poor performance"

Here is an extract of an email she sent to lots of schools in the Stoke by Nayland area:

The Seckford Foundation who are behind the Stoke by Nayland proposal have already claimed not to know her and now Cllr Graham Newman has said that he doesn't know her either giving this somewhat curious answer:

I cannot control the e-mail communications I receive from people and unfortunately the sender of an e-mail, or the creator of a blog, can call themselves anything they wish. I have not met or spoken with the said "Margaret Read". 

I attended the meeting at Stoke by Nayland Golf Club on 21st February, and actually asked to be introduced to her, without success.

He later gave more details about what happened at the Golf Club meeting telling me that:

When I asked a member of the parent group at the subsequent Stoke by Nayland meeting to be introduced to her, I was told she was not known to the group. This doesn't mean she doesn't exist. 

I have never written to any school to endorse her communication.

Newman attached a spreadsheet to his email of GCSE results for Suffolk with the Great Cornard and Sudbury Upper School results highlighted. He adds the comment:

Might I draw your attention to the attached spreadsheet, which perhaps suggests from where people get their idea that something needs to change... Look at row 31 and row 41.

But when these same results were first published Newman told the EADT:

“The schools organisation review is one of the things we are doing which will change the education in the county for the better. We want to do that and know that this time there has been 3% less achievement in the three tier schools than in two tier.”

So if something needs to change it is Newman's own view that the something is a move to two tier. Or maybe Newman doesn't believe his own policy any longer? After all most of the free school proposers are actively opposed to the move to two tier and are wanting to "save the middle schools" the very things Newman wants to see closed to improve standards!

Click to Enlarge - the GCSE results spreadsheet sent by Cllr Newman
The full sheet can be downloaded here as a PDF

As I reported earlier as soon as I emailed her for a comment the email her Yahoo mail address suddenly vanished. All very mysterious. It seems to be something quite common in free school proposals for those proposing the schools to appear to want to conceal their identities. I have no idea why. 

This person has been emailing schools and asking them to circulate information but neither Cllr Newman nor the Seckford Foundation seem to see any problem with this nor do either appear to have taken any steps to confirm her identity. Newman states:

I don't see how or why I, SCC or anybody else, should prevent members or supporters of any Free School group campaigning to attract parents to their proposals. It is equally impossible to prevent people hiding behind the anonymity afforded by the internet from making statements which appear to imply my support for their actions. It should be borne in mind that, for all the free school proposals in Suffolk, there appear to be solid bodies of parental support (which obviously vary numerically) and they have a right to their opinions.

So if anyone does know who Margaret Read is please can you contact me. I am beginning to wonder if she actually exists!

Petition to Suffolk County Council on Free Schools

I have submitted a petition to Suffolk County Council on Free Schools calling on them to end the "presumption" of support for Free Schools.

SUFFOLK FREE SCHOOLS PETITION

We the undersigned call upon Suffolk County Council to amend its policy on Free Schools to end the “presumption” of support for free schools and to support new free schools only on the basis of need. We call upon the Leader of the Council to make representations to the Secretary of State for Education to ensure that need and impact on existing schools are considered for all free school applications in Suffolk. 

Please sign the petition online here if you live, work or study in Suffolk
Note that the petitions website looks a mess currently, the County Council are fixing it.

The "presumption" of support for Free Schools can be seen in the Council's policy on Free Schools and Academies:

We will have a presumption of support for the creation of academies and free schools, and will take our responsibility to actively manage their introduction into the existing system of schools.

The petition calls on the Council to amend this and only to support proposals for free schools where there is genuine need for such a school.

The petition also calls on the Leader of the Council, Mark Bee, to make representations to the Secretary of State to ensure that the need for free schools and their impact on local schools is considered (as the law demands).

By making representations what I mean is that the Leader of the Council should in public ensure this is done. I am not talking about secret meetings or a quiet word in his ear although that might be useful in addition.

The petition is cross party and can be signed by anyone concerned about the proposed free schools in Suffolk whatever their overall view of free schools is. People opposed to all free schools are welcome to sign as are those who are in favour of free schools but have concerns about some or all of the proposals for Suffolk.

You can also download paper petitions for signing, please return to the address on the bottom of the petition.

If more than 3700 people sign the petitions this will ensure a debate by the County Council.

Suffolk Libraries: Where now for the IPS?

Suffolk Libraries IPS has certainly had a difficult birth. No doubt the County Council would claim that "doing things differently" is always difficult and there is an element of truth in this. For the IPS to work effectively it needs to both stand on its own and have a constructive relationship with the County Council. If the County Council appears to be pulling the strings it is likely to fail. If it is constantly at war with the County Council it is also likely to fail.

Establishing that balance is what the IPS seems to have been doing and there are signs that it is starting to make its mark as an independent organisation.

In response to earlier comments from a reader of this Blog I promised to post outlining what my personal strategy is for the future of Suffolk's libraries. This post is an attempt to do that.

I have already clearly stated that I would prefer it if the County Council had continued to run the service but as an arch pragmatist I now feel that the best way to secure the success of the service is to get behind the IPS and try and make it succeed. This is what I wrote back in February:

So that is why it is vital that everyone who wants to see Suffolk's libraries stay open makes sure that the IPS succeeds. Staff and campaigners may well continue to have mis-givings about it (I certainly do) but I think they should get behind the IPS and try and help it to succeed. 

This means the IPS does need to ensure that it is a strong and independent voice for Suffolk libraries and I agree with the excellent Wordblog article that it would help to drop some of the more "nasty" policies such as cutting pay for newly appointed staff. This would not cost much but would send a strong message to staff and library users that the IPS means business.

IPS General Manager Alison Wheeler has made much of the fact that the IPS is a membership organisation and that local library groups are a part of the IPS. She has been right to do this.

The new IPS Chairman Shona Bendix has also impressed local groups during visits to the pilot groups with a clear understanding of the need to get practical issues such as property sorted out and her professional and well organised approach. Her "day job" as CEO of the Suffolk Association of Local Councils helps too giving her an establish relationship with the County Council but also with local town and parish councils.

I will admit to having some initial misgivings about Alison and Shona due to some things that happened in the library campaigns last year and this was probably mutual however both have clearly drawn a line under those events and are establishing positive working relationships with local library groups. I think campaigners have done this too.

But there is still much to do and here are a few of my own ideas as to what the IPS should be doing:

• Staff morale is still a key issue so moving to clarify the position of staff is vital. I think the IPS needs to establish itself as a different (as in better) employer than the County Council
• Thought needs to be given to the role of the pilots. After the collapse of the largest one in Ipswich I would be inclined to put them on hold and focus on getting the IPS up and running
• I would like to see all staff and buildings transferred to the IPS initially for at least a year with thought given to if and when they might be transferred to local groups.
• The IPS needs to establish its own identity distinct from the County Council with logo, website etc
• The IPS needs to ensure that "Suffolk Libraries" still continues to exist as a coherent countywide service but allow local groups to "add" to this offering but (a bit like a franchise) they would need to do some things in the same way
• The IPS should encourage as many local libraries as possible to establish their own local groups as soon as possible - another reason not to focus just on the pilots
• Thought needs to be given to the constitution of local library groups that can be members of the IPS. Do they all need to be expensive limited companies? Some may want or need to be but in places where the IPS will employ staff and own the buildings it seems overkill.
• As part of this there needs to be a clear IPS policy on issues such as the use of volunteers

If the IPS does something like this - importantly not trying to do everything all at the same time - it has every prospect of success. If it tries to create a complicated system of local devolution without first taking hold of the services and running and knowing them for itself I think it will fail. As ever the key to success is pragmatism.

Suffolk Free Schools: My Views

This week I published a number of articles about free schools in Suffolk as a result of the response I received to a freedom of information request. If you missed the articles you can see them all here. You might be surprised to hear that actually I am not opposed to free schools. I just think that the schools proposed for Suffolk, in particular the Seckford Schools are unnecessary. It is not that they are free schools, I would be just as unhappy about them if they were proposed by Suffolk County Council.

Suffolk is a county, as I have already reported with some 10 600 excess secondary school places. It is also a county where a very high percentage of parents get their first choice of secondary school. 97.2% in Suffolk compared to a national average of 85.3% and as low as 67.2% in London.

Commenting this week on percentage of parents getting the secondary school places they wanted, Schools Minister Nick Gibb said:

I am pleased that year-on-year more pupils are being offered a place at their preferred school. Unfortunately, whilst progress is being made, we are still some way short of making this a reality for all pupils. Around 74,000 children are still unable to attend the secondary school they want. 

Parents are faced with an extremely competitive and stressful process for securing a place for their children. We want to ease this pressure by creating more good school places, which is the driver behind all our reforms to the education system. 

The new admissions code will make it easier for the best schools to create more places. We have given teachers the power to curb bad behaviour, enabling them to concentrate on teaching. Academies and Free Schools have given parents more choice of good school places and their innovative approach to education encourages other schools to raise academic standards. 

We are focusing on tackling underperformance in those schools that parents seek to avoid in their list of preferences.

The thing is that by and large parents in Suffolk don't have a "competitive and stressful" time getting their first choice of school. This, like much Government policy and its explanation, sounds like the experiences of London.

Which is I think a huge part of the problem. Nick Gibb and others seem to at least understand the issues in London but I do not think they do in Suffolk. Far from encouraging other schools to raise academic standards the proposed Suffolk free schools are likely to have the opposite consequence. Staff will need to be shed, less choice of subjects offered and even sixth forms closed. Some schools might close all together as a consequence which is hardly enabling choice.

The reasons for this are simple and predictable. There just aren't enough children to sustain extra schools.

I think that competition between schools can mean they up their game and improve standards but that does not mean it always has this consequence. It could just as easily make schools get worse. And the numbers make that much more likely in Suffolk.

But it is on the issue of transport that really shows that the DfE have no clue about rural education. They have constantly told Suffolk County Council they must pay for transport to the new Stour Valley Community School, the only free school actually open in Suffolk even if they don't meet the county's criteria.

But this just won't scale and without transport to actually get to the schools there will be no choice for a great many children. Those, for example in the North of the Thuston pyramid might be forced to attend a new free school in Ixworth even if they would rather attend the outstanding Thurston Community College due to transport issues.

It's frustrating to read emails where experienced local authority officers that understand the situation in Suffolk are either ignored by the DfE or worse still asked to change information for political reasons.

I think the local authority is better placed than the DfE in London to continue as the principal commissioning body for schools. Indeed ironically Boris Johnson, Mayor of London, now the only place in England where decisions about schools are actually made in the same place as the schools are situated is actually campaigning to have strategic oversight of London schools.

This does not mean I think the LA need to run all schools. They don't. But they need to ensure there are schools to meet the needs of Suffolk's changing populations. And practical circumstances, not ideology, should determine what kind of school should be built with the LA retaining the right to open schools where necessary.

In some areas there are ageing populations. It would make more sense, to be honest, to turn Stoke by Nayland Middle school into a care home rather than a secondary school. That's what is needed.

And in the Moreton Hall area in Bury St Edmunds there has been considerable housing development and there is space to build a new secondary school but if the free school in Ixworth goes ahead this may not be viable as it is only some four miles to Thurston from the proposed school site and just about seven miles to Ixworth.

The County Council know all this. They own land there expressly to build a school. The DfE probably do not have a clue and why would they?

It is clearly the availability of Middle School sites that has caused the glut of free schools proposed for Suffolk with parental demand to save the middle schools in some cases appearing to be deliberately manipulated to show a demand for free schools that doesn't exist.

In Beccles some 530 people "expressed an interest" in a free school but this lead to just over 80 actual applications.

Indeed Portfolio Holder for Education Graham Newman writes that:

personally I think the Free School issue will go away in Suffolk as soon as SOR is delivered, so will cease to be a problem for us

I think he is probably right.

Far from promising innovation many of the schools proposed with their narrow curriculum and "grammar school" ethos are very similar. They are almost premised on not being innovative.

Personally I think there is a place for free schools as part of the overall education system but it is a nonsense to make all schools free schools or even as now all new schools.

Free schools should in my view be opportunities to genuinely do something different. It should not be necessary for a group of parents to campaign for a free school because of insufficient school places in an area. The LA should meet basic demand. Free schools school be able to do something different, to add an extra real choice.

In fairness the IES Breckland school at least looks to be doing this to some extent. It will be interesting to see if their approach "translates" from Sweden! So far too many of the applications appear to be using their freedom to be the same!

I will publish the full response I received to the FOI on the Wikisuffolk site shortly