Summary Notes from a Meeting of the
Association of Sandwell Governing Bodies (ASGB)
held at 6.00pm on Wednesday
18TH April 2012 at the TDC, Oldbury
Tony Harvey welcomed everyone to the meeting and thanked them for attending.
Property Maintenance and Landlord Responsibilities - Martin Garrington, Property Maintenance Manager
Martin introduced himself and gave an overview of his presentation. He told governors that there were three basic arrangements available to schools:
The Holdback Arrangement:
School are consulted, through Schools Forum, about the services provided under this arrangement. A proportion of the schools budget is held back to fund the holdback arrangement. It provides the core technical support required to support schools in relation to statutory and regulatory duties that apply to buildings. A small number of technical office staff specialise in health and safety aspects covering such issues as asbestos, water hygiene, gas and electricity. These are always difficult issues and schools welcome the support from Martin’s team, who have great deal of experience in dealing with them.
Every school in Sandwell (excluding academies) is entitled to access the services provided under this arrangement. Academies would have to purchase these services under a separate arrangement. A list of the technical support provided under this arrangement is attached.
Additional Technical Support:
Schools have the option to pay a lump sum in order to benefit from the technical support not already included under the holdback arrangement e.g. structural engineering, building surveying.
Payment into the Schools Repair Account:
Schools can chose to pay their delegated funds back into the schools repair account (which will also cover the services provided by the additional technical support option).
Currently, only primary schools pay into the school repair account, no secondary schools have elected to take up this option, mainly due to the impact of the Building Schools for the Future programme (BSF) and moves to Academy status.
Martin explained that three years ago, it was evident that that the school repair account was unsustainable without council support in the form of capital funding. Consequently, the council agreed to allocate an initial £600k from the Primary Capital Programme to be used for essential planned maintenance and allocated this money subject to match funding (50% from the capital monies and 50% from either the school repair account or the schools own delegated funds.). The council has continued to allocate £600k per annum since this initial allocation.
The schools repair account remained sustainable because of the council support and schools would need to know as soon as possible if it was to be withdrawn, in order to consider alternative arrangements.
Governors were then given an opportunity to ask questions, summarised as follows:-
- Insurance claims for property damage are managed on behalf of schools. The council insurance scheme usually covers virtually all losses less a £300 excess.
- Asked about the implications of the Industrial and Providence Society (IPS) on property maintenance, Martin admitted that he was not ‘up to speed’ and this issue was discussed later in the meeting.
- With regard to PFI schools, the LA role is to make sure the PFI provider provides what they are contracted to deliver. Meetings take place between the Local Authority, primary schools and PFI providers and any maintenance issues can be referred to the LA representative or to Martin, although Martin’s team themselves do not have a direct input.
- A member raised the matter of Glebefield’s roof which had been ‘patched up’ several times at a cost £75k. He asked at what point the LA decide that the sensible solution would be to put on a new roof. Martin responded that health and safety compliance was his first priority, ‘reactive maintenance’ followed and consequently, planned maintenance programmes like the replacement of a roof were often ‘squeezed out’ although the capital funding did facilitate funding of some of these larger schemes.
- The member pressed the matter, stating that the £600k capital fund was insufficient, given the number of ageing school buildings in Sandwell and schools themselves could not afford to pay for expensive repairs from their own budgets. Another member stated that there had to be a balance between reactive maintenance and planned maintenance. Martin agreed and advised that he had made the appropriate representation to this effect but the current financial climate meant it was unlikely that this £600k provision would be increased.
- Asked if contributions from schools would have to increase in the event of a shortfall in the next financial year, Martin replied that this was not a consideration.
- A member asked why it had taken 21 months for a fire escape to be fixed in Shenstone Lodge. This highlighted the situation governors could find themselves in when Health and Safety representatives reported issues that needed property maintenance failed to respond within the necessary timescales. It was established that the responsibility in such circumstances, remained with the Duty Holder (i.e. Head Teacher) who should have escalated the matter to the Central Schools Safety Committee. This encouraged further debate about risk assessments and funding.
- Martin advised that in the event of a major incident, he would have to make representations to the council for additional funding.
- Approximately 56% of primary schools have bought into the Schools Repair Account in 12/13 and a further 16% of primary schools purchased the additional technical support option. Martin was asked why Property Maintenance had not been included in the IPS consultation which had been set up to protect services. He explained that his team supported both schools and other buildings in Sandwell and it was not, therefore, a service that could be easily transferred but that did not preclude further discussions and consideration.
- A member enquired whether Sandwell had considered following Birmingham council and setting up a wholly owned company (WOC). Martin stated that this was not an alternative at this present time but no-one could predict what might happen in two or three year’s time.
- Governors attempted to discover which cabinet member they should contact to raise issues about property maintenance and landlord responsibilities. It proved difficult to pin this down. Ultimately, it was Cllr. Ealing but under the operational area of Cllr. Ian Jones, with schools under Cllr. Badham. Eventually it was decided any issues should be referred to Cllr. Jones and Cllr. Badham.
- Siddique Hussain, the Vice Chair and Regional Director of the National Governors’ Association (NGA) confirmed that the NGA was a lobbying organisation and was ‘beating the same drum’ about the changing landscape and impact on governing bodies – that had less resources and more to manage.
- A member asked how governors could be assured that schools were getting value for money from Property Services. Martin reassured him that a competitive process and/or bench-marking was employed but that long term continuity was an important factor especially with regard to health and safety.
- It was suggested that ASGB should invite a representative from Legal Services to attend a meeting to explain how governors’ duty of care and legal responsibilities differs depending upon the numerous different types of school, especially with regard to trust schools and academies.
Martin concluded by inviting governors to contact him if they had any operational issues and promising he would support them where he could.
Updates from ASGB Executive
i. Siddique Hussain advised members that he had arranged for Adrian Bailey, MP for West Bromwich West to meet with Sandwell governors on 22nd June 2012 at 6.00pm. The venue had yet to be confirmed but governors were urged to make a note of the date in their diary.
ii. An Executive member brought an article in the Express and Star 16th April 2012 to the attention of governors. It stated that Griffin Schools Trust would have to take on primary school pupils if they wanted to open a Free School on the old Langley site in Moat Road. Governors discussed the impact this would potentially have on surrounding schools that were, in some cases, being encouraged to increase their intake. It was acknowledged that the article may not be accurate but if it was, there was concern about the lack of meaningful communication with Smethwick schools. Janet Wyer, Vice Chair of ASGB had emailed Cllr. Badham in an effort to establish the facts.
Issues from ASGB Representatives
No issues were raised by ASGB representatives.
The Role of the ASGB
The Express and Start article had already started a debate on the role and membership of the ASGB.
Our constitution (copy enclosed) states that we were established to support all Sandwell governing bodies but this raises issues with regards to impartiality, the different structures of governing bodies (not all establishments will have governors as such) and funding.
Members asked Siddique Hussain to seek advice/guidance on our constitution and the issues discussed from the NGA. The NGA is a national organisation and can hopefully share ‘the bigger picture’ with us. Members felt this would also pre-empt some of the questions that the ASGB will face from representatives in the near future.
Given that these issues are fundamental to the future of the ASGB, members felt that the next meeting on the 16th May 2012 should be devoted entirely to reviewing our constitution and future role and responsibilities. A working party agreed to convene before the meeting to thrash out some of the issues for discussion.
With regard to funding, the Chair confirmed that all schools and academies (with the exception of Sandwell Academy, Shireland and George Salter) had been included in the ‘top slicing’ of funding for this year’s ASGB budget.
Any Other Business
Next meeting for all ASGB representatives is the AGM on 27th June 2012 at 5.45pm – 7.45, please make a note in your diaries!
Please share these Summary Notes with your colleagues at your next governing body meeting. Contact the Support Officer on 0121 569 8376
if you would like any hard copies or other information.