Cynghrair o 6 awdurdod lleol yw ERW a reolir gan gyd-bwyllgor cyfansoddiadol cyfreithiol.Y nod yw gweithredu strategaeth a chynllun busnes rhanbarthol cytunedig a chefnogi gwelliant ysgolion.

ERW is an alliance of 6 local authorities governed by a legally constituted joint committee.Its aim is to implement the agreed regional strategy and business plan to support school improvement.

ERWLadder of Support‘17

1

Section 1

Managing Director Foreword Introduction

Section 2 Categorisation

Section 3

ERW : Entitlement and Expectation Reducing the Impact of Poverty on Attainment Building on Self Improving Systems Support, Challenge and Intervention

Section 4

ERW Ladder of Support, Challenge and Intervention – Myth Busting

SECTION 1

Managing Director Foreword Dear all,

Thank you for your work last academic year. As we move towards a self improving system of support for schools, accurate knowledge of schools and appropriate levels of support will be key. This process is pivotal to securing that knowledge on an ongoing basis.

This document aims to set out clearly the entitlement of support to schools and the arrangements for undertaking our core work for the coming year.

Sincerely

Betsan O’ConnorManaging Director ERW

2

IntroductionERW strives to delivers a single consistent and integrated professional school improvement service for children and young people aged 3-19 in a range of settings within the six Local Authorities. ERW’s vision is for a consistently high performing school network across the region with every school a good school offering high standards of teaching with all learners achieving their maximum potential.

The ERW Ladder of Support is well established across the region, and the guidance document has been refined annually to reflect national and local priorities and expectations. This document should be read in conjunction with the Core Support Visit Guidance and the Challenge Adviser Handbook.

It will provide a framework for schools and advisers to work within and enable a focus on key regional, local and national priorities.

In order to enable all learners to achieve their potential in this region, we need to ensure that we provide support for good schools to become excellent and build capacity for schools to improve themselves. We also need a collective agreement to support and intervene in underperforming schools. This includes a continuum of support and intervention that ranges from informal sharing of practice to formal notices of collaboration. Increasingly in ERW, as we develop a self improving school system, we will provide facilitated and brokered support between schools and support an infrastructure based on collaboration. It is envisaged that more support between schools will be included as part of the support menu in coming years. There is now a clear expectation that schools collaborate to strengthen their provision.

The purpose of this document is to articulate as clearly as possible, the level of support facilitated for those schools placed in the agreed four national support categories. However, it must be noted that each case will be considered on its merits and individual school improvement will be brokered accordingly, informed by school self-evaluation and development planning. The levels of support and identified resource will inform a focussed brokered programme of action to raise school standards across the region and according to the needs of each individual school. Our challenge is to accelerate improvement for all schools and to ensure that underperforming schools make the necessary changes as early as possible and affect the improvement of all schools. In strengthening school led improvement in and by other schools, we recognise that the capacity to engage in such activities can be difficult on occasion. Our challenge will be to manage capacity with portability of practice and expertise, and support innovation and technology based solutions.

3

SECTION 2 Categorisation

The scope and level of support and intervention for each school is determined by the National School Improvement and Categorisation System.

In order to drive improvement for learners, and to recognise the schools which raise standards and those who do not quickly and consistently, key representatives of WG and regional consortia have co- refined the categorisation model.

During the Core Support Visits 1, each school in ERW will be engaged in a dialogue with the Challenge Adviser to come to an agreed judgement on capacity to improve (letter) and a support category (colour). This will be combined with the judgement on standards (number) produced centrally by WG.

The categorisation system leads ambitious transformational change, and drives school improvement from the inside out.

The aim of the national school improvement and categorisation system is:

• to enable consortia to identify quickly the support, challenge and intervention required to raise standards for learners;

• to be a reliable, objective profile of schools across Wales;• to be an improvement tool for schools and consortia to measure performance and improvement; • to make sure that the right, timely challenge and intervention secures improvement in outcomes

for all learners; • to build the capacity and resilience of the school to improve itself and to facilitate school to school

support through a partnership approach;• to empower schools to become more resilient with the capacity for self-improvement;• to ensure the effective, efficient and economical use and deployment of resources;• to be a transparent, easily understood method of discussing overall school performance and its

capacity to improve.

The core principles are:

• to be a jointly constructed and collaborative process starting with the school’s self-evaluation; • to be based on comprehensive current performance data – both end of key stage and in year

progress; • to be an effective tool for improving standards of achievement and attainment;• to be a diagnostic tool to improve leadership, learning and teaching;• to be based on an early-action intervention where required; and• to have clear accountability arrangements at all levels – school, consortia and local authority. • to have a common categorisation, common diagnosis, with regional flexibility on the use of

resources to bring about improvement to maximise innovation, take appropriate risks and meet local needs.

National categorisation serves two complementary purposes. Firstly, it ensures an agreed point in a school’s improvement journey based on a consistent and nationally agreed assessment of a school’s performance and a judgement of a school’s capacity to improve according to nationally agreed criteria.

4

This assessment should be agreed between the adviser and the school leaders1. Secondly, it allows the region, LA and senior school leaders to prioritise actions and resources to secure improvement. While we will broker and tailor support and intervention on an individual, school by school basis, nationally, there is an expected requirement of Challenge Adviser days against each support category.

All ERW’s schools can expect a negotiated programme of support and intervention according to need. A bespoke programme built and brokered by the Challenge Adviser in collaboration with the school should follow the identified need. Based on a continuum of a school’s capacity to self improve, there will be an increased responsibility on schools to lead their own support and this will be aligned with accountability. This is a move away from a common entitlement to a bespoke and focused use of resources to raise standards.

Each school will be categorised annually and the information published on My Local School. Regionally we will also provide a support category for Schools will not be able to move to higher categories unless outcomes improve – judgements for leadership will be closely linked to improving outcomes for learners.

The system is based on three steps:

1. Intelligent data driven categorisation as well as local knowledge, and intelligence of standards in schools

Reduces and eventually removes subjective nature of initial judgement Is clear and consistent Makes sure that the focus is on standards for learners

2. Further analysis of areas for improvement based on the ability of school to bring about improvement

Leadership Learning and teaching

The following factors will influence the judgement on leadership:

self-knowledge and self-evaluation effectiveness/ track record in addressing underperformance in outcomes for learners and staff leadership ensuring quality provision of literacy, numeracy and inclusion middle leadership readiness, resilience and capacity to engage in school to school support safeguarding governance

The following factors will influence the judgement on learning and teaching:

• learning – in class progress, scrutiny of pupils’ work, feedback for learners to bring about improvement

• quality of teaching,

1 *If in exceptional cases negotiation does not result in agreement, the LA and or the region reserves the right to categorise a school according to its judgement.

5

• quality of provision for the development of literacy and numeracy• consistency and accuracy of teacher assessment, consistent with national reading and numeracy

tests

Regions have existing intelligence on the school’s ability to bring about improvement, and will be able to act quickly to provide appropriate support, challenge and intervention whilst strengthening their knowledge.

Other risks may trigger a change of support, challenge or intervention

• New Head teacher• School reorganisation• Financial arrangements• Estyn inspection• Lack of confidence in school

3. Bespoke support, challenge and intervention to ensure maximum yield

Moving away from entitlement and days allocation without focus Brokering the best intervention for the situation Regional flexibility for innovation Deploy resources to achieve the best outcomes for the greatest number of learners

The finding on standards combined with the judgement on the ability to bring about improvement determines the category (colour) of the school and most importantly the character and extent of support, challenge and intervention.

The first step and guidance on implementing both the second and third step will be common across all regions. However, the implementation methodology of the third step will be devised and implemented at a regional level. Regional consistency and quality assurance for these steps are critical to the success of the model.

A national moderation group for the National School Improvement and Categorisation System has been established in order to secure consistency across Wales and to standardise the use of the model.

Schools will be categorised by colour. The colour signifies the quantity of support but its use and content bespoke and made up from a possible menu of support and intervention available locally. It is envisaged that for the schools with mature arrangements for self-knowledge and evaluation, the nature of the support and intervention will be jointly agreed. However, there is likely to be an increasing level of non-negotiable aspects for those schools which underperform.

The colours of the categories should not be attributed directly to Estyn judgments or language. The colours signify a level of support.

During the 1st Core Support Visit, each school in ERW will be engaged in a dialogue with the Challenge Adviser to come to an agreed judgement on capacity to improve (letter) and a support category (colour). Schools in the 4 support categories will have the following characteristics.

Green Schools

6

Schools in a green support category are likely to have the following characteristics:

• a very clear strategy and vision that has improved outcomes for all learners• leaders with a very strong capacity to plan and implement change successfully and to sustain

improvement • robust, systematic and well established self evaluation • highly effective in their use of all available performance data and evidence about the quality of

learning and teaching• a very good track record in raising the achievement of all groups of pupils• leaders and staff work very successfully with other schools and partners to enhance

significantly their own and others’ capacity to bring about improvement and build resilience • governors have an excellent understanding of the school’s strengths and areas for

improvement and are highly effective in supporting and challenging the school’s performance • the school’s leaders give a high priority to developing the workforce: performance

management and professional development are highly successful in fostering effective practice and in dealing with underperformance

• all staff have a shared understanding of the characteristics of excellent and good teaching• teacher assessment is consistent and accurate

Yellow Schools

Schools in a yellow support category are likely to have the following characteristics:

• a shared vision and a clear strategy that has improved outcomes for most learners • leaders who plan and implement change and sustain improvement successfully in most

respects• self evaluation is regular and thorough in most areas • good use of performance data evidence about the quality of learning and teaching• a good track record in raising the achievement of most pupils, including vulnerable learners• collaboration is developing well and opportunities to work with schools are used effectively • governors have a good understanding of the school’s strengths and areas for improvement • performance management and professional development make a strong contribution to

improving practice and raising standards. The school challenges underperformance effectively and are largely successful in securing improvement

• most staff have a shared understanding of the characteristics of excellent and good teaching • teacher assessment is consistent and accurate in the main

Amber Schools

Schools in an amber support category are likely to have the following characteristics:

• there are inconsistencies in how a vision and strategic objectives are shared • leaders manage change successfully in few areas• processes for monitoring and evaluating the work of the school are not implemented

consistently

7

• school improvement activity with other schools and partners does not fully impact on standards and provision

• performance management and professional development are not always linked closely enough to priorities. The impact on improving performance varies. The school does not always challenge underperformance effectively

• the characteristics of good and excellent teaching are well defined but applied inconsistently• there are some inconsistencies in the reliability and accuracy of teacher assessment

Red schools

Schools in a red support category are likely to have the following characteristics:

• work to establish an agreed vision is underdeveloped and there is a lack of clarity in the school’s strategic direction

• leaders do not demonstrate sufficient capacity to plan and implement change successfully • a few processes for monitoring and evaluating the work of the school have been developed

but these lack rigour and breadth • there are wide variations in how performance data and evidence about the quality of learning

and teaching and pupils’ work are used to secure improvement • does not have a strong track record in improving outcomes including for vulnerable learners • leaders and staff have limited involvement in worthwhile collaborative activity with schools• performance management and professional development have limited impact on improving

performance. The school does not challenge underperformance effectively • there is little shared understanding of the characteristics of excellent and good teaching• there are significant inconsistencies in the reliability and accuracy of teacher assessment

SECTION 3 ERW Entitlement and Expectation Support Category

As set out in the previous section, each school is allocated a basic level of support, challenge and intervention. This is monitored regularly and based on an analysis of need.

The core support days to schools as described in the National Categorisation guidance notes that schools should receive a maximum of days support from the Challenge Adviser.

8

Green support category

A school in this category may receive up to 4 days of Challenge Adviser time.

Yellow Support Category

A school in this category may receive up to 10 days of Challenge Adviser time.

Amber Support Category

A school in this category may receive up to 15 days of Challenge Adviser time.

Red Support Category

A school in this category may receive up to 25 days of Challenge Adviser time.

The school will automatically receive a letter from the Local Authority where appropriate statutory powers may be invoked.

In ERW, the support may exceed or be less than the allocation noted but will include support from other staff in LAs, ERW or other schools. This will include a proportionate response according to school need and size.

In line with national and regional priorities, we will focus support on:

building a self improving system; reducing the impact of poverty on attainment; capacity to respond to Successful Futures and new curricular and pedagogy including literacy,

numeracy and digital competence; and leadership.

9

Building a Self Improving System

ERW will focus support on building reliance and capacity on schools to build a self improving system. This may on occasion be perceived as additional requirements on schools. Nevertheless, as we increase the resources available for school to school work and reduce the capacity of specialist advisers – schools will need to build the capacity to respond to pupil needs and drive self improving organisations.

Reducing the Impact of Poverty on Attainment

Each school in ERW should receive the same level of challenge and analysis on the performance and progress of FSM pupils and other vulnerable pupils. The professional discussion between the school and the adviser should always analyse the impact of poverty on attainment and achievement.In reviewing the impact of poverty on attainment advisers should judge the extent to which schools:

mitigate the impact of deprivation in the early years and throughout their school careers so that learners are ‘school ready’ and have well developed early language skills

engage families effectively in children’s learning and school life so as to impact on their outcomes

better equip the school’s workforce to understand and overcome the challenges faced by learners from deprived backgrounds

ensure that learners from deprived backgrounds access the highest quality learning and teaching consistently and benefit from targeted interventions according to need

provide high quality digital learning experiences for learners to ensure they are equipped with skills to excel

engender high aspirations

raise expectations for learners from deprived backgrounds

All schools in ERW should: place tackling the underachievement of learners from deprived backgrounds at the heart of

school development planning, thinking about how to use resources and how to develop the workforce to meet the challenge

plan effectively for the use of the PDG in the context of taking a whole school approach to tackling disadvantage. The PDG should be targeted at learners, so as to reduce the impact of poverty on attainment interventions and programmes should be sustainable and have an impact in both the short and long term

set the highest expectations for all learners and be clear with learners that they can achieve high outcomes and realise their ambitions. Ensure learners know how they are progressing, their targets and what they need to do to achieve those targets. Use effective tracking to monitor progress against targets and provide feedback

teach children to plan, monitor and evaluate their own learning. This has been shown to result in between seven and nine months’ additional progress. It is particularly effective for lower achieving learners and those from deprived backgrounds. The Welsh Government has published resource materials on the Learning Wales website to support schools to use metacognition in the classroom http://learning.wales.gov.uk/learningpacks/pisa/introduction-to-metacognition/?lang=en

consider how digital learning may be used to support learning in school and at home for all learners

Primary schools / challenge schools and special schools also:

10

establish provision for, and promote take-up, of free breakfast, particularly for learners from deprived backgrounds. Hungry children have lower concentration and are more likely to display poor behaviour. Universal breakfast provision has been found to disproportionately improve dietary behaviours of children from lower socio-economic status schools and families. Free breakfast in primary schools is intended to help improve the health and concentration of children to assist in raising the standards of learning and attainment, by providing children with a healthy start to the school day. All primary schools that request it should receive funding to provide all learners of primary school age registered in maintained primary schools in Wales with a free, healthy breakfast at school each day

Non-maintained settings and all schools should: plan for effective transition. Poor transition can damage progress and confidence

work in partnership with parents / carers, families, early years settings, Flying Start and other schools to plan transition between settings / schools into Foundation Phase, and onto Key Stage 2

form good links between schools and monitor the ongoing progress of learners

key features of good transition may include:

o sharing information about achievement and specific needs

o joint curriculum planning and or teaching across Key Stage 2 and 3

o joint moderation of standards in cluster groups of primary / secondary schools at the end of Key Stage 2

The effective use of PDG and the value for money demonstrated in impact on outcomes should be noted in every core visit.

Synopsis of Estyn PDG Guidance

Using the PDG to reduce the impact of poverty on educational attainment

Schools must:

Use PDG funding primarily to improve attainment for eFSM or LAC learners; other learners may benefit also from PDG-funded provision but they should not be the primary target for the provision

Publish their plans for the use of PDG either on their own website, on the consortium website or on paper

Schools should not:

Use PDG funding to support the procurement of ICT infrastructure or connectivity costs Use PDG funding to sustain permanent roles in respect of a school's core activity or use PDG funding to

cover the cost of redundancies

The PDG may be used for whole-school initiatives that will particularly benefit learners who are e-FSM and LAC. (This needs careful consideration as it does give a little wriggle room if interpreted incorrectly and could lead to the same issues as RAISE funding, i.e. the benefits to eFSM pupils become lost in the overall RAISE-funded provision).

The grant does not have to be tracked to individual learners.

11

Impact

In order for the school to claim positive outcomes/impact in relation to the PDG, the school should be able to demonstrate in one or more of the following areas that:

The gap in attainment between eFSM pupils and other pupils has decreased over the 3 year period; The gap in attainment between LAC and all pupils has decreased over the 3 year period: The attendance levels of eFSM and LAC Ieamers supported by the grant have improved;

Provision

Schools should be able to provide evidence that the following practices are in place and that leaders and managers know the impact that they have had on outcomes for pupils.

Adopted a whole-school, strategic approach to tackling disadvantage, which may include using CPD to improve specific approaches to teaching that will benefit eFSM and LAC pupils (the grant can be used for this)

Made effective use of data tracking systems to identify eFSM learners’ needs, to target interventions and to monitor impact

Adopted strategies that involve parents/carers in learners‘education;

Engaged communities in the life of the school and the school in the life of the community through effective partnership working, especially in particular in Communities First areas

Worked in partnership with each other and with other organisations;

Employed interventions that have had a positive effect on the standards and/or wellbeing of eFSM pupils

Practicalities

Ensure that the school provide you with evidence to show what difference the money is making for each area of the school's spend and is included in the SDP.

Capacity to Respond to Successful Futures

As we broker support to schools, we should consider how we support them to build sustainable capacity to respond to the needs of Successful Futures.

http://gov.wales/docs/dcells/publications/150317-successful-futures-en.pdf

Our commitment to securing effective leadership, teaching and learning and support for learning is clear in our plans and menu of support, and as we establish sustainable arrangements to change curriculum and pedagogy for the future we will respond proactively to the principles of Qualified for Life and the Furlong report. We are committed to leading a changing climate in education.

Enabling the concept of an all through education system for learners 3-16 or 3-19 is key to facilitating a learning continuum for all learners. The aim of reducing the impact of unnecessary transitions in delivery styles and pedagogy at age 11 means that schools will need to work more closely together. Teachers will need to teach across traditional boundaries and learn new methods and pedagogy to respond to digital learning needs of learners and a skills based curriculum.

12

Learners should progress through a continuum of learning, gaining skills in literacy, numeracy, digital competence and the Welsh language. Ultimately, gaining detailed subject specific knowledge on top of a solid foundation in the expressive arts; health and wellbeing; humanities; languages, literacy and communication; maths and numeracy; science and technology.

Teachers will need professional learning and development as they embrace new system change. For most, this will be welcomed and will build on work in the Foundation Phase and in embedded cross curricular work in digital competence, literacy and numeracy.

As we broker support for identified Pioneer Schools and others, we envisage that the effective practice we see in curriculum design in some of our most effective schools will lead us to building evidence based practice. ERW is confident in tackling identified challenges and building on our strengths. Responding proactively to the objectives set out in Qualified for Life and the curricular changes ahead post Donaldson will require a significant focus on workforce support and development. The New Deal and the Furlong recommendations are welcomed. These key drivers of education in Wales currently, reflect well the direction in which ERW has been steered in recent years. As a region we are strengthening existing partnerships with higher education and supporting school staff to rebuild confidence and morale whilst re-skilling for a digital future. Improving our digital competency across all areas of delivery is key to more efficient and effective working. The role of technology in pedagogy becomes increasingly essential and developing effective methodologies will be key to success in schools. Curriculum planning and developing an evolving new and innovative pedagogy which is fit for a new curriculum will be a national challenge. Regionally, we are committed to seeking solutions and enable opportunities to plan and learn together. 

The self improving system for education will require strategic partnerships between schools to work together creatively so that the system shapes its own dextrous workforce. Raising standards of teaching for all will be a key priority for the region. We strive for every teacher to be a good teacher over time, and for pupils to receive good or better teaching every day in every lesson. Supporting and delivering the Minister’s New Deal to develop teachers and school leaders will dovetail with our work on improving teaching. ERW will support teachers to strive for excellence and implement and deliver new areas of work and curricular changes. We know that most of our teachers are good, and teach well consistently, but we continue to offer support in our drive for excellence. The potential New Deal Pioneer schools are already working with us and others as enablers of professional learning within the school community.

Support, Challenge and Intervention

13

This section outlines the basic expectation. Support will cascade from one colour to the next with all schools being able to expect what is described for higher categories.

School support category - Green

Level of support Level of intervention / brokered support

Support The Way forward

Three annual Core Support Visits (as per core entitlement of LSCI) comprising of Autumn core monitoring visit (and HT Performance Management) and a second visit to review provision according to the regional focus (e.g. teaching and learning)

Schools submit SER, SDP and other relevant documents to LA.

Challenge adviser scrutinises relevant documentation and provides written response.

Jointly agreed brokered support according to SER and SDP where necessary.

4 core support days:

Core entitlement, including preparation and recording of:

Core Support Visit 1 (in most cases this will be a full day since the challenge adviser will also be part of the head teacher’s Performance Management panel which is normally scheduled on the same day);

Review of provision; Review of relevant

school documentation;

Bespoke support according to need

Schools may be commissioned to support schools in the other categories as appropriate.

Schools will be expected to and encouraged to become engaged in aspects of and provide school-to-school support.

In addition, schools may be in a position to release staff to support developments, such as lead practitioner or leaders of learning. In 2017, schools must demonstrate that their support is having an impact on other schools.

School support category - Yellow

14

Level of support Level of intervention/ brokered support

Support Way forward

Schools will be advised and supported on key priorities for improvement.

Schools submit SER, SDP and other relevant documents to LA.

Challenge Adviser reviews the documentation and provides feedback to the school’s SLT and Chair of Governors as appropriate. Specific areas for improvement are agreed.

Improvement planning to include LA minimum support and, where necessary, additional commissioned support from existing school resource.

A bespoke programme of support agreed between the school and Challenge Adviser according to areas for development identified in CSV1.

School improvement planning will be monitored to ensure that it identifies actions and resources that will lead to improved standards and / or leadership and provision as appropriate

Jointly agreed brokered support according to SER and SIP where necessary.

10 support days, to include:

the core entitlement as outlined for green schools; and

an agreed programme of follow-up support, challenge and intervention work which is focussed on improving pupil outcomes and / or leadership and provision as appropriate.

NOTE

Where there is a mis-match between the first and second judgements (standards and capacity to improve respectively), the programme of support must be planned according to the main areas that need to be improved, i.e. the weakest judgement.

Schools will be challenged to become self-improving schools and move into the green category.

These schools may be used to provide school-to-school support.

In some cases, these schools may receive school-to-school support from schools in the green category to support their ongoing improvement.

School category: Amber Schools at risk of causing concern

15

Level of support Level of intervention Support Way forward

Schools will be advised on key priorities for improvement where they are not accurately identified.

Schools submit SER, SDP and other relevant documents to LA;

Challenge adviser reviews the documentation and provides feedback to the school’s SLT and Chair of Governors as appropriate.

Improvement planning to include LA minimum support and where necessary, additional commissioned support from existing school resource.

Dedicated leadership support and challenge will be provided as necessary. This is likely to include governors and wider leadership group.

Support and/or intervention to be provided for underperforming teachers.

School improvement planning will be monitored to ensure that it identifies actions and resources that will lead to improved standards.

SEG and PDG funding may be withheld until the LA is satisfied that school improvement plans identify actions and direct resources appropriately.

Mid-cycle or leadership review may be required; LA maintains the right to instigate a school review as required at any point in the inspection cycle.

An accelerated improvement board may be utilised to support the pace of improvement in the school

15 support days, to include:

the core entitlement as outlined for green and yellow schools; and

follow-up support, challenge and intervention work which is focussed on improving standards and /or the quality and impact of leadership and/or provision.

NOTE

Where there is a mis-match between the first and second judgements (standards and capacity to improve respectively), the programme of support must be planned according to the main areas that need to be improved, i.e. the weakest judgement.

Schools that are unable to improve over a reasonable period, or who fail to manage their improvement effectively, will by default become schools causing concern.

In such instances, the Director of Education may consider issuing a statutory warning notice under the provisions of the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013.

Schools that have been in the amber support category for over a year will be assessed carefully to understand how barriers to improvement can be removed.

16

School support category – Red: Schools causing concern

Level of support Level of intervention Support Way forward

In addition to the support provided for the other categories:

Headteacher and Chair of Governors meet with Education Directorate / Learning Service’s SMT and relevant members of the School Improvement Team to discuss performance and improvement.

LA intervention to support improvement is confirmed.

A LA action plan of co-ordinated support is drawn up, detailing the nature and level of support, timetable for action and expected outcomes. The programme will dovetail with the school’s own improvement programme.

Half-termly evaluation on progress provided to the Director of Education or equivalent.

Intensive:

Two day SCC visit. Recommendations must be included in the SDP

The Director of Education or equivalent will consider issuing a warning notice under the provisions of the School Standards and

X

Organisation (Wales) Act 2013. Only in exceptional circumstances will this not be actioned.

Warning notices will include:

the grounds for intervention;

the reasons why the authority is satisfied that the grounds exist;

the action which the governing body is required to take in order to deal with the grounds for intervention;

the period in which the action is to be taken by the governing body ('the compliance period’); and

the action the local authority is minded to take if the governing body does not take the required action.

All schools causing concern will be required to receive additional days from challenge advisers to support and accelerate improvement.

25 support days, to include:

the core entitlement;

follow-up support, challenge and intervention work which is focussed on improving pupil outcomes, the quality of leadership and/or provision;

regular visits, e.g. half termly to monitor action plan and collect evidence to report to the Director of Education or equivalent; and

mandatory challenge adviser support days

The LA will closely monitor to ensure that sufficient progress is being made to bring about a rapid improvement in outcomes, leadership and provision. A key indicator of this will be the urgency and rigour with which the head, SLT and governing body implement actions for improvement.

If urgent intervention is required, the local authority can action.

Intervention may include:

Requirement to secure advice or collaborate

The appointment of additional governors

The appointment of an IEB - a specially constituted governing body which replaces a school's existing governing body.

The suspension of delegated authority for the governing body to manage a school’s budget

Power to give directions and take steps.

17

Where it is deemed necessary further specific leadership support will be considered on a case by case basis. This is likely to include an accelerated improvement board.

Failure to secure improvement will result in further intervention processes being applied, including, where necessary, application to Welsh Ministers to direct the federation of a school causing concern or that a school in special measures be closed.

Note Headteacher performance management

This allocation will include the following support for Headteacher performance management.

Green schools 1 session

Yellow schools 1 session

Amber schools 1session + 1 monitoring visit + Governing Body discussion

Red schools 1session + 2 monitoring visits + Governing Body discussi

18

Appendix 1: ERW Ladder of Support, Challenge and Intervention Visits 2017 – 2018 – Myth Busting

ERW Ladder of Support, Challenge and Intervention Visits 2017 – 2018

ERW’s work in schools is….

an opportunity to work collaboratively alongside schools to support their school self-evaluation;

an opportunity to discuss the school’s strengths and areas for development in Teaching and Learning and Leadership;

an opportunity to validate the school’s own evaluation; an opportunity to agree further ongoing support;

ERW’s work in schools is not….

a mini or mock-inspection; to prepare schools for inspection; we will not allow schools to use evidence from these visits as a basis for, or as part

of, any informal or formal competency procedures; aiming to take teachers beyond three lesson observations per year.

19