The Coalition Government took office on 11 May 2010. This publication was published prior to that date and may not reflect current government policy. You may choose to use these materials, however you should also consult the Department for Education website www.education.gov.uk for updated policy and resources.
School Improvement Partner programme
Quality management framework
School Improvement Partner programmeQuality management framework
Edition 1
Curriculum and Standards
Guidance
Local authoritiesStatus: Recommended
Date of issue: 09-2007
Ref: 00505-2007BKT-EN
School Improvement Partners
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies �
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
ContentsSection 1: Managing quality 2
Purposes 2
The aspects of quality 3
Principles 3
The quality management framework 4
SIP quality assurance within the National Strategies regional structure 15
Section 2: Evaluation schedules 16
Schedule 1: Local authority processes 17
Schedule 2: Interactions with schools 20
Schedule 3: Shadowing SIP visits 23
Schedule 4: Criteria for self-evaluation of LA practice 26
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN�
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
Section 1: Managing quality
PurposesThe purpose of quality assuring the programme is to ensure that the School Improvement Partners (SIP) programme has the maximum impact on schools, contributing to their effectiveness and raising the achievement of all learners. A vital component of the programme is to secure the changes envisaged in the New Relationship with Schools (NRwS).
Quality management will seek to ensure that all aspects of the programme are fit for purpose and meet the needs of stakeholders:
the government;
DCSF;
National Strategies (NS);
local authorities;
schools (staff and governors);
pupils;
wider school communities.
In particular it will seek to establish:
the impact of the programme on pupil attainment and achievement, schools and LAs;
confidence in all stakeholders that the programme is robust and delivering its agreed outcomes;
confidence in the personnel involved in the programme: individual SIPs, local authority, regional and national staff;
consistency of quality and standards across LAs and regions in responding to local circumstances and need, without uniformity;
early intervention where standards do not meet the required levels;
a programme of continuous improvement.
There is also an opportunity for local authorities to build on their own practice by comparing their own QM frameworks to this one. This will support their self-evaluation processes towards Joint Area Reviews (JAR). In particular the framework supports overall judgements on the contribution of services to delivering the Every Child Matters five outcomes and the following issues in particular:
action is taken to ensure that educational provision is of good quality (JAR Section 3);
action is taken to ensure that good quality education and training is provided (JAR Section 4);
1.
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies �
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
looked-after children are supported in achieving educationally (JAR Section 6);
steps are taken to meet the educational, health, care and recreational needs of children and young people and to help them lead as normal a life as possible (JAR Section 7);
there is a robust strategy to deliver the priorities (JAR Section 8 and below);
robust action is taken to deliver the strategy;
there is clear accountability and decision-making to support service delivery and improvement.
The aspects of qualityThe aspects of quality to be addressed within the programme are:
quality standards – clarity about the quality criteria or standards for each aspect of the programme – How will we know high quality when we see it? What will it look like?
quality assurance – setting up the processes that will secure quality – How do we secure high quality?
quality control – checking that key aspects of the programme meet the agreed standards – Implementing processes that secure the evidence that will inform improvements in the programme.
PrinciplesIn order for the quality management process to achieve the purposes outlined above it must have underpinning principles which inform how the process is carried out and the conduct of those engaged in it. The key principles are:
proportionality – the focus of the quality management processes will be upon those aspects that will have maximum impact upon the success of the programme;
openness and honesty – the processes of quality management, and the evidence and data collected during the process will be shared and open to scrutiny except where it concerns the performance of individuals;
clarity – when evidence is collected it will be clear for what purpose the information will be used;
partnership – outcomes of the quality management processes will be shared with stakeholders;
informed professionalism – in line with the NS principle this acknowledges that feedback from schools and the NS field force through self-evaluation is an essential component in measuring quality;
performance management (PM) – the success of any undertaking is dependent on the performance of each person who works for it, so PM will be the key to assuring the quality delivery of the programme;
■
■
■
■
■
2.
■
■
■
3.
■
■
■
■
■
■
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN�
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
integration – quality management will be an integral part of the planned SIP programme and not an ‘add-on’;
usefulness – the outcomes of quality management processes will clearly be seen to inform change and identify areas for improvement.
The Quality Management FrameworkOverall responsibility for quality of all the aspects of the SIP programme rests with the National Director for SIPs and with Regional SIP Co-ordinators (SIPCos) taking specific responsibility for quality control of LA implementation.
All aspects of LA delivery of the SIP function should be governed by the overarching principles set out in the NRwS document, the SIP brief and the central importance of ensuring a single conversation for schools and their headteachers in relation to school improvement.
Outcomes of the SIP process
The purpose of the SIP process is school improvement and improvement in pupil outcomes. In particular the SIP programme intends to improve schools and raise standards of attainment by interacting with and producing improvements in the leadership of the school. The key outcome indicators that will show success of the programme over time are therefore leadership and management grades and those for the quality of the school’s self-evaluation in Ofsted inspections, pupil attainment outcomes across all the different groups within the school and outcomes related to Every Child Matters, in particular attendance and exclusion data. In the final analysis this will be the quality standard against which the quality of the programme must be measured.
■
■
�.
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies �
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
Loca
l au
tho
rity
pro
cess
es
Qua
lity
stan
dar
ds
Qua
lity
assu
ranc
eQ
ualit
y co
ntro
l
1.1
Man
agem
ent
of
SIP
s
Con
ditio
ns o
f the
gra
nt a
re fu
lly m
et
SIP
s ar
e ta
sked
in li
ne w
ith th
e S
IP b
rief
Sch
ools
and
SIP
s ar
e ap
prop
riate
ly m
atch
ed
SIP
s ar
e de
ploy
ed to
act
as
the
prin
cipa
l axi
s of
sch
ool i
mpr
ovem
ent f
or s
choo
ls a
nd th
ere
is, w
ithin
the
LA, a
s fa
r as
pos
sibl
e a
‘sin
gle
conv
ersa
tion’
All
SIP
s ar
e fu
lly b
riefe
d on
eac
h sc
hool
to w
hich
th
ey a
re a
ttac
hed,
incl
udin
g al
l sch
ools
’ dat
a in
th
e po
sses
sion
of t
he L
A
All
SIP
s ar
e fu
lly b
riefe
d on
sch
ool i
mpr
ovem
ent
proc
esse
s, p
roce
dure
s an
d se
rvic
es in
rel
atio
n to
th
eir
atta
ched
sch
ools
Effe
ctiv
e co
mm
unic
atio
n ex
ists
at a
ll le
vels
All
SIP
s ex
perie
nce
effe
ctiv
e pe
rfor
man
ce
man
agem
ent l
eadi
ng to
app
ropr
iate
, tim
ely
and
deci
sive
act
ion
by th
e LA
The
PM
sys
tem
pro
vide
s ev
iden
ce th
at S
IP
accr
edita
tion
stan
dard
s ar
e be
ing
mai
ntai
ned
The
PM
pro
cess
iden
tifie
s ne
eds
for
deve
lopm
ent t
hat i
nfor
m th
e pr
ovis
ion
of
Con
tinui
ng P
rofe
ssio
nal D
evel
opm
ent (
CP
D)
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
DC
SF
cond
ition
of g
rant
lett
er o
n S
IP d
eplo
ymen
t
Pol
icie
s re
latin
g to
the
NR
wS
, inc
ludi
ng th
e
SIP
brie
f
The
NS
adv
ice
and
guid
ance
to L
As
LA d
ocum
enta
tion
on th
e S
IP p
roto
cols
SIP
brie
fing
and
netw
ork
mee
tings
hel
d by
LA
LA c
ompl
etio
n of
the
depl
oym
ent r
ecor
d on
M
ange
men
t Inf
orm
atio
n S
yste
m (M
IS)
Reg
iona
l SIP
Cos
’ rou
tine
inte
ract
ions
with
LA
of
ficer
s in
clud
ing
SIP
man
ager
mee
tings
PM
pol
icy
and
proc
esse
s th
at s
uppo
rt p
reci
se
iden
tific
atio
n of
CP
D n
eeds
and
oth
er a
reas
fo
r de
velo
pmen
t
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
SIP
Co
and
SIP
man
ager
eva
luat
e th
e ef
fect
iven
ess
of th
e S
IP m
anag
er n
etw
orks
an
d m
eetin
gs
LA e
valu
ates
its
perf
orm
ance
man
agem
ent p
olic
y an
d pr
actic
e th
roug
h st
akeh
olde
rs’ f
eedb
ack
SIP
Co
mon
itors
dep
loym
ent t
hrou
gh te
rmly
revi
ew
and
MIS
SIP
Co
eval
uate
s an
d re
port
s on
LA
m
anag
emen
t, co
ntrib
utin
g to
the
natio
nal
dire
ctor
’s r
epor
t
■ ■ ■ ■
�.
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN�
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
Qua
lity
stan
dar
ds
Qua
lity
assu
ranc
eQ
ualit
y co
ntro
l
1.2
Ong
oin
g s
upp
ort
and
tra
inin
g f
or
accr
edite
d S
IPs
Ther
e is
effe
ctiv
e in
duct
ion
of S
IPs
SIP
PM
iden
tifie
s a
CP
D p
lan
for
each
SIP
for
the
year
, whi
ch is
rec
orde
d an
d m
onito
red
by th
e LA
SIP
s ac
cess
a s
uita
ble
rang
e of
CP
D a
ctiv
ities
in
orde
r to
mee
t the
ir id
entif
ied
need
s
SIP
s ac
cess
NS
ele
ctro
nic
reso
urce
s as
par
t of
thei
r C
PD
pla
n
The
skill
leve
l of S
IPs
incr
ease
s
Ther
e is
an
incr
easi
ngly
con
sist
ent m
essa
ge
deliv
ered
by
SIP
s to
sch
ools
abo
ut e
ffect
ive
lead
ersh
ip a
nd m
anag
emen
t (L&
M),
scho
ol
impr
ovem
ent p
lann
ing
and
self-
eval
uatio
n re
sulti
ng in
an
incr
easi
ngly
exp
ert a
nd h
ighl
y sk
illed
wor
kfor
ce
CP
D fo
r S
IPs
ensu
res
they
hav
e th
e rig
ht
know
ledg
e, u
nder
stan
ding
and
ski
ll le
vel t
o pr
ovid
e su
ppor
t and
cha
lleng
e to
sch
ools
on
natio
nal a
nd lo
cal p
riorit
ies,
whe
re a
ppro
pria
te to
th
e sc
hool
s’ o
wn
prio
ritie
s
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Ann
ual n
atio
nal C
PD
prio
ritie
s cl
early
iden
tifie
d fo
r LA
s by
NS
NS
pro
vide
s LA
s w
ith m
ater
ials
and
gui
danc
e to
su
ppor
t SIP
CP
D o
n na
tiona
l prio
ritie
s
Ann
ual l
ocal
prio
ritie
s cl
early
iden
tifie
d fo
r N
S
by L
As,
mat
eria
ls fo
r lo
cal C
PD
dis
cuss
ed a
nd
agre
ed w
ith N
S S
IPC
os w
here
add
ition
al s
uppo
rt
reso
urce
is d
eplo
yed
Per
form
ance
man
agem
ent p
olic
y th
at r
equi
res
the
prod
uctio
n of
a C
PD
pla
n
SIP
PM
obj
ectiv
es u
sed
to d
rive
the
proc
ess
NS
SIP
Cos
pro
vide
uni
vers
al s
uppo
rt to
LA
s in
th
e st
rate
gic
plan
ning
of C
PD
for
SIP
s
NS
SIP
Cos
pro
vide
targ
eted
and
inte
nsiv
e su
ppor
t for
som
e LA
s in
ope
ratio
nal p
lann
ing
and
deliv
ery
of S
IP C
PD
A r
ange
of n
atio
nal C
PD
con
fere
nces
pro
vide
d by
NS
NS
pro
vide
s hi
gh-q
ualit
y on
line
reso
urce
s
NS
com
mun
icat
ion
stra
tegy
to e
nsur
e hi
gh-
qual
ity u
se o
f NS
onl
ine
mat
eria
ls in
clud
ing
SIP
W
eb P
orta
l and
onl
ine
prof
essi
onal
dev
elop
men
t m
odul
es (e
PD
s)
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Eval
uatio
n by
SIP
s of
CP
D
Eval
uatio
n by
LA
s of
nat
iona
l CP
D p
rovi
sion
Eval
uatio
n by
SIP
Cos
of l
ocal
pro
visi
on
Eval
uatio
n of
ski
ll le
vel o
f SIP
s
Eval
uatio
n of
con
sist
ency
of S
IP p
ract
ice
regi
onal
ly a
nd n
atio
nally
LA s
elf-
eval
uatio
n vi
sits
by
SIP
Cos
Sch
ool e
valu
atio
n vi
sits
by
SIP
Cos
Impa
ct m
onito
ring
by S
IPs,
loca
l aut
horit
y S
IP
man
ager
s an
d N
S S
IPC
os
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies �
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
Inte
ract
ion
s w
ith
scho
ols
Qua
lity
stan
dar
ds
Qua
lity
assu
ranc
eQ
ualit
y co
ntro
l
2.1
SIP
cha
lleng
e an
d s
upp
ort
Cha
lleng
e an
d su
ppor
t fro
m th
e S
IP r
esul
ts in
ga
ins
in le
arni
ng, a
chie
vem
ent a
nd a
ttai
nmen
t fo
r al
l chi
ldre
n in
the
scho
ol, b
ut in
par
ticul
ar fo
r an
y gr
oups
of c
hild
ren
who
are
und
erac
hiev
ing,
an
d w
ith a
focu
s up
on g
roup
s vu
lner
able
to
unde
rach
ieve
men
t
SIP
s pr
ovid
e a
robu
st b
ut s
ensi
tive
chal
leng
e to
sc
hool
s th
at h
elps
them
to id
entif
y th
e pr
iorit
ies
for
scho
ol im
prov
emen
t and
hig
h-im
pact
st
rate
gies
for
tack
ling
thes
e pr
iorit
ies
SIP
s su
ppor
t im
prov
emen
t in
the
qual
ity o
f sc
hool
s’ s
elf-
eval
uatio
n pr
oces
ses
and
in th
e re
cord
of t
he o
utco
mes
SIP
dia
logu
e re
sults
in im
prov
ed p
lann
ing
and
bett
er o
utco
mes
for
scho
ols
SIP
s co
ntrib
ute
to im
prov
emen
ts in
fina
ncia
l pl
anni
ng a
nd th
e ex
tent
to w
hich
spe
ndin
g m
eets
sc
hool
s’ p
riorit
ies
SIP
s’ m
eetin
gs w
ith s
choo
ls a
re p
art o
f a
cont
inuo
us p
roce
ss o
f im
prov
emen
t. E
ach
mee
ting
eval
uate
s pr
ogre
ss s
ince
the
last
and
id
entif
ies
furt
her
prio
ritie
s, a
ctio
ns to
be
take
n an
d th
e su
ppor
t req
uire
d
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
SIP
brie
f to
spec
ify th
e ro
le
Acc
redi
tatio
n pr
oces
s to
ens
ure
that
all
SIP
s m
eet t
he th
resh
old
stan
dard
of t
he S
IP b
rief
Qua
lity
assu
ranc
e an
d pe
rfor
man
ce
man
agem
ent o
f SIP
s (re
f sec
tion
1.1)
CP
D o
ppor
tuni
ties
(ref s
ectio
n 1.
2)
■ ■ ■ ■
LAs
and
SIP
Cos
mon
itor
the
prog
ress
of s
choo
ls
SIP
Cos
to o
bser
ve a
sam
ple
of S
IP s
choo
l vis
its,
in p
artic
ular
targ
et s
ettin
g m
eetin
gs
SIP
Cos
and
LA
s to
mon
itor
SIP
rep
orts
and
tr
iang
ulat
e w
ith s
choo
l per
form
ance
dat
a, w
ith a
br
ief t
o id
entif
y in
suffi
cien
t cha
lleng
e fo
r sc
hool
s
Eval
uatio
n fe
edba
ck fr
om s
choo
ls
Follo
w-u
p te
leph
one
calls
and
mee
tings
with
sc
hool
s
Feed
back
from
gro
ups
of h
eadt
each
ers
at
regi
onal
and
nat
iona
l con
sulta
tive
grou
p m
eetin
gs, a
nd S
IP m
anag
ers
at n
atio
nal L
A
cons
ulta
tive
grou
p m
eetin
gs a
nd S
IP m
anag
er
netw
ork
mee
tings
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
�.
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN�
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
Qua
lity
stan
dar
ds
Qua
lity
assu
ranc
eQ
ualit
y co
ntro
l
2.2
Targ
et s
etti
ng
Thro
ugh
prof
essi
onal
dia
logu
e w
ith S
IPs,
the
scho
ols
set a
mbi
tious
targ
ets
that
:
acco
rd w
ith D
CS
F gu
idan
ce;
build
on
prio
r at
tain
men
t and
pre
viou
s be
st
perf
orm
ance
;
focu
s on
pro
gres
sion
, ens
urin
g th
at n
o ch
ildre
n ar
e pr
edic
ted
to m
ake
less
than
tw
o le
vels
’ pr
ogre
ss;
repr
esen
t im
prov
emen
t ove
r cu
rren
t att
ainm
ent
for
the
scho
ol;
are
at o
r ab
ove
the
top
quar
tile
perf
orm
ance
fo
r co
ntex
tual
val
ue a
dded
(CVA
) com
pare
d to
sim
ilar
scho
ols
othe
r th
an in
the
mos
t ex
cept
iona
l circ
umst
ance
s;
iden
tify
and
tack
le u
nder
perf
orm
ance
of
indi
vidu
al p
upils
and
gro
ups
of p
upils
;
fact
or in
the
impa
ct o
f sup
port
and
res
ourc
es
avai
labl
e fro
m th
e sc
hool
, LA
and
DC
SF.
The
SIP
has
the
skills
and
exp
erie
nce,
mod
erat
ed
and
qual
ity-a
ssur
ed b
y th
e LA
, to
dist
ingu
ish
betw
een
genu
ine
addi
tiona
l con
text
fact
ors
and
low
exp
ecta
tions
Agg
rega
ted
scho
ols
targ
ets
acro
ss e
ach
LA
indi
cate
cha
lleng
e at
leas
t in
line
with
nat
iona
l ta
rget
s
The
targ
ets
set b
y a
scho
ol s
how
a tr
ajec
tory
of
impr
ovem
ent o
ver
time
■
■ ■ ■
Sop
hist
icat
ed d
ata
prov
ided
for
scho
ols
and
SIP
s by
the
LA/D
CS
F/O
fste
d/L
earn
ing
and
Ski
lls
Cou
ncil
(LS
C)/N
S
Gui
danc
e pr
ovid
ed b
y N
S a
nd D
CS
F on
ana
lysi
s an
d in
terp
reta
tion
of th
e da
ta is
sha
red
effe
ctiv
ely
with
SIP
s an
d sc
hool
s
Gui
danc
e an
d te
mpl
ates
pro
vide
d by
LA
are
fit
for
purp
ose
and
used
con
sist
ently
Per
sona
lised
CP
D o
n th
e se
ttin
g of
targ
ets,
ar
isin
g fro
m p
erfo
rman
ce m
anag
emen
t
SIP
s su
itabl
y br
iefe
d ab
out s
choo
l con
text
and
LA
exp
ecta
tions
by
LA p
rior
to fi
rst c
onta
ct
SIP
s in
terp
ret i
nfor
mat
ion
syst
ems
at th
eir
disp
osal
to c
halle
nge
targ
ets
LA h
as a
pub
lishe
d sy
stem
for
man
agin
g an
d co
ntro
lling
the
qual
ity o
f tar
get s
ettin
g
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
LAs
mon
itor
targ
ets
set a
gain
st e
xpec
tatio
ns
from
dat
a
LAs
mod
erat
e an
d qu
ality
-ass
ure
SIP
s’
judg
emen
ts a
bout
the
ambi
tion
of s
choo
ls’
targ
ets
SIP
Cos
con
trib
ute
to m
onito
ring
targ
ets
set
by L
As
agai
nst c
riter
ia in
nat
iona
l adv
ice
and
guid
ance
Per
form
ance
man
agem
ent i
dent
ifies
SIP
s w
ho
prov
ide
insu
ffici
ent c
halle
nge
to s
choo
ls
The
SIP
mon
itors
the
exte
nt to
whi
ch s
choo
ls a
re
on tr
ack
to a
chie
ve th
eir
targ
ets
with
in th
e LA
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies �
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
Qua
lity
stan
dar
ds
Qua
lity
assu
ranc
eQ
ualit
y co
ntro
l
2.3
Bro
keri
ng s
upp
ort
Bro
kerin
g is
a k
ey fu
nctio
n of
the
SIP
. Bro
adly
the
role
ens
ures
that
sup
port
for t
he s
choo
l is
dete
rmin
ed b
y th
e di
alog
ue b
etw
een
the
scho
ol a
nd th
e S
IP, t
hat t
he
impa
ct o
f suc
h su
ppor
t is
eval
uate
d an
d th
at s
uppo
rt fo
r the
sch
ool p
rodu
ces
the
desi
red
impr
ovem
ents
. The
qua
lity
assu
ranc
e m
echa
nism
s to
ens
ure
alig
nmen
t be
twee
n th
e S
IP d
ialo
gue
and
LA re
sour
ced
supp
ort f
or b
roke
ring
are:
NS
gui
danc
e p
rovi
ded
to L
A o
n br
oker
ing
func
tion
by N
S;
guid
ance
pro
vide
d by
LA
to S
IPs
and
all s
taff
in L
A r
esp
onsi
ble
for
scho
ol im
pro
vem
ent;
brok
erin
g su
ppor
t pol
icy;
scho
ols
caus
ing
conc
ern
(SC
C) p
olic
y;
NS
res
ourc
e de
plo
ymen
t pol
icy;
SIP
rep
orts
gui
danc
e an
d te
mp
late
s;
LA r
ecor
ds o
f SC
C r
esou
rce
and
NS
res
ourc
e de
plo
ymen
t.
This
sec
tion
is b
roke
n in
to th
ree
sep
arat
e co
mp
onen
ts fo
r th
e d
iffer
ent d
imen
sion
s of
bro
kerin
g.
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN�0
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
Qua
lity
stan
dar
ds
Qua
lity
assu
ranc
eQ
ualit
y co
ntro
l
2.3a
The
SIP
’s r
ole
in c
ateg
ori
sing
sch
oo
ls a
nd w
ork
ing
wit
h sc
hoo
ls c
ausi
ng c
onc
ern
Whe
re a
sch
ool i
s ca
usin
g co
ncer
n th
e LA
act
s de
cisi
vely
, rap
idly
and
effe
ctiv
ely
to s
uppo
rt
the
scho
ol in
brin
ging
abo
ut th
e ne
cess
ary
impr
ovem
ents
; the
SIP
is c
entr
al to
any
act
ion
the
LA ta
kes
The
SIP
sup
port
s th
e sc
hool
in a
rriv
ing
at
an a
ccur
ate
self-
eval
uatio
n w
ithin
the
LA
cate
goris
atio
n po
licy
The
SIP
adv
ises
the
LA o
n ca
tego
risat
ion
acco
rdin
g to
the
LA’s
cat
egor
isat
ion
polic
y
The
LA h
as c
lear
str
uctu
res
for
actin
g up
on th
is
advi
ce a
nd p
rovi
des
clea
r fe
edba
ck a
bout
thei
r de
cisi
on a
nd th
e re
ason
s fo
r th
is d
ecis
ion
to th
e S
IP
The
SIP
sup
port
s th
e sc
hool
in m
onito
ring
and
eval
uatin
g th
e im
pact
of t
he s
choo
l and
LA
pla
ns
The
SIP
pro
vide
s cl
ear a
dvic
e to
the
mon
itorin
g an
d re
view
gro
up fo
r the
sch
ool,
and
the
min
utes
fro
m th
ose
mee
tings
dem
onst
rate
the
resp
onse
to
the
SIP
s re
com
men
datio
ns
The
mon
itorin
g an
d re
view
gro
up a
cts
upon
the
SIP
’s a
dvic
e
This
res
ults
in r
apid
impr
ovem
ent f
or th
e sc
hool
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
SC
C p
olic
y
SIP
dep
loym
ent p
olic
y (ri
ght S
IP fo
r th
e rig
ht
scho
ol)
SIP
rep
orts
gui
danc
e an
d te
mpl
ates
Min
utes
of m
onito
ring
and
revi
ew g
roup
and
ci
rcul
atio
n of
thes
e to
all
rele
vant
par
ties
PM
of S
IPs
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
LA s
elf-
eval
uatio
n vi
sits
by
SIP
Cos
Sch
ool e
valu
atio
n vi
sits
by
SIP
Cos
Sch
ool e
valu
atio
n vi
sits
by
RA
s
Impa
ct m
onito
ring
by S
IPs,
LA
SIP
and
str
ateg
y m
anag
ers
and
NS
SIP
Cos
and
RA
s, in
clud
ing
mon
itorin
g of
pro
gres
s of
SC
C u
sing
SIP
rep
orts
an
d O
fste
d m
onito
ring
repo
rts
■ ■ ■ ■
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies ��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
Qua
lity
stan
dar
ds
Qua
lity
assu
ranc
eQ
ualit
y co
ntro
l
2.3b
The
SIP
’s r
ole
in b
roke
ring
Nat
iona
l Str
ateg
ies
reso
urce
s an
d in
eva
luat
ing
the
ir im
pac
t
All
the
LA’s
SIP
s ar
e kn
owle
dgea
ble
abou
t the
ra
nge
of a
vaila
ble
NS
res
ourc
es
The
SIP
mak
es r
ecom
men
datio
ns b
oth
to th
e sc
hool
and
the
LA a
bout
the
appr
opria
te N
S
reso
urce
s
The
LA r
espo
nds
to th
e re
com
men
datio
n
The
LA u
ses
SIP
inte
lligen
ce to
diff
eren
tiate
th
eir
offe
r
The
SIP
sup
port
s th
e sc
hool
in m
onito
ring
and
eval
uatin
g th
e fid
elity
of i
mpl
emen
tatio
n an
d th
e im
pact
of t
he N
S r
esou
rces
and
pro
gram
mes
The
reso
urce
s an
d st
rate
gies
bro
kere
d pr
oduc
e th
e de
sire
d im
prov
emen
ts
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Diff
eren
tiate
d de
ploy
men
t pol
icy
for
NS
res
ourc
e
Man
agem
ent a
nd c
omm
unic
atio
ns s
truc
ture
s to
su
ppor
t goo
d in
form
atio
n flo
w
SIP
rep
orts
gui
danc
e an
d te
mpl
ates
NS
gui
danc
e to
LA
on
reso
urce
dep
loym
ent a
nd
expe
ctat
ions
of t
he u
se o
f SIP
inte
lligen
ce
Gui
danc
e by
pro
vide
d LA
to S
IPs
and
all L
A
stra
tegy
man
ager
s an
d co
nsul
tant
s, in
clud
ing
the
expe
ctat
ion
that
SIP
s m
onito
r an
d ev
alua
te th
e im
pact
of N
S r
esou
rces
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
LA s
elf-
eval
uatio
n vi
sits
by
SIP
Cos
Sch
ool e
valu
atio
n vi
sits
by
SIP
Cos
Sch
ool e
valu
atio
n vi
sits
by
RA
s
Impa
ct m
onito
ring
of N
S r
esou
rce
depl
oym
ent
by S
IPs,
LA
SIP
and
str
ateg
y m
anag
ers
and
NS
S
IPC
os a
nd R
As
■ ■ ■ ■
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
Qua
lity
stan
dar
ds
Qua
lity
assu
ranc
eQ
ualit
y co
ntro
l
2.3c
The
SIP
’s r
ole
in b
roke
ring
ad
dit
iona
l sup
po
rt f
or
the
scho
ol f
rom
oth
er s
our
ces
such
as
oth
er s
cho
ols
, the
LA
, MIS
and
oth
er p
rovi
der
s
All
SIP
s ar
e kn
owle
dgea
ble
abou
t the
ran
ge o
f ad
ditio
nal s
uppo
rt a
vaila
ble
loca
lly, r
egio
nally
and
na
tiona
lly
The
SIP
bro
kers
sup
port
whi
ch is
fit f
or p
urpo
se
and
avoi
ds c
onfli
ct o
f int
eres
t, w
heth
er th
is
may
res
ult f
rom
the
SIP
bro
kerin
g hi
s/he
r ow
n su
ppor
t, th
at o
f his
/her
ass
ocia
tes
or fr
om L
A
trad
ed s
ervi
ces
The
SIP
bro
kers
sup
port
from
oth
er s
choo
ls
with
in a
nd b
eyon
d th
e LA
The
SIP
adv
ises
the
LA o
n th
e de
ploy
men
t of t
he
wid
er c
hild
ren’
s se
rvic
es (C
S) t
o th
e sc
hool
The
SIP
bro
kers
sup
port
from
oth
er p
rovi
ders
in
clud
ing
natio
nal o
rgan
isat
ions
(for
exa
mpl
e Tr
aini
ng a
nd D
evel
opm
ent A
genc
y (T
DA
), N
atio
nal C
olle
ge fo
r S
choo
l Lea
ders
hip
(NC
SL)
), in
depe
nden
t con
sulta
nts
and
such
initi
ativ
es
as N
atio
nal L
eade
rs o
f Edu
catio
n (N
LE) a
nd
Con
sulta
nt L
eade
rs
The
SIP
sup
port
s th
e sc
hool
in m
onito
ring
and
eval
uatin
g th
e im
pact
of t
he s
uppo
rt
Sup
port
bro
kere
d re
sults
in r
apid
impr
ovem
ent
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Gui
danc
e on
bro
kerin
g fro
m N
S
Sup
port
from
NS
for
SIP
s to
bro
ker
a ra
nge
of s
ourc
es o
f sup
port
incl
udin
g th
e S
IPs
Web
P
orta
l, an
d in
Lon
don
a da
taba
se o
f Lon
don
Cha
lleng
e co
nsul
tant
s an
d ad
vise
rs
Sup
port
from
LA
for
SIP
s to
bro
ker
a ra
nge
of
supp
ort s
ervi
ces
incl
udin
g fro
m:
natio
nal a
genc
ies;
inde
pend
ent c
onsu
ltant
s;
othe
r sc
hool
s w
ithin
and
bey
ond
the
LA;
a ne
twor
k of
adv
ance
d sk
ills te
ache
rs (A
STs
).
SIP
rep
orts
gui
danc
e an
d te
mpl
ates
PM
of S
IPs
■ ■ ■
■ ■
LA s
elf-
eval
uatio
n vi
sits
by
SIP
Cos
Sch
ool e
valu
atio
n vi
sits
by
SIP
Cos
Impa
ct m
onito
ring
of u
se o
f sup
port
ser
vice
s by
SIP
s, L
A S
IP a
nd s
trat
egy
man
ager
s an
d N
S
SIP
Cos
■ ■ ■
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies ��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
Qua
lity
stan
dar
ds
Qua
lity
assu
ranc
eQ
ualit
y co
ntro
l
2.4
SIP
rep
ort
s
SIP
rep
orts
avo
id d
uplic
atin
g th
e sc
hool
’s s
elf-
eval
uatio
n fo
rm (S
EF) o
r an
insp
ectio
n re
port
They
are
:
timel
y;
accu
rate
and
pre
cise
, ide
ntify
ing
the
scho
ol’s
re
spon
se to
all
issu
es e
mer
ging
from
the
data
;
info
rmat
ive;
eval
uativ
e;
conc
ise.
Iden
tify
key
stre
ngth
s, p
riorit
ies
and
stra
tegi
es fo
r im
prov
emen
t
Pro
vide
a ju
dgem
ent o
n th
e ro
bust
ness
of
the
scho
ol s
elf-
eval
uatio
n (S
SE
) inc
ludi
ng th
e st
reng
th o
f the
sch
ool’s
evi
denc
e ba
se a
nd o
nly
prov
ide
judg
emen
ts b
eyon
d th
is w
here
the
SIP
ha
s di
rect
evi
denc
e
Form
an
agen
da fo
r ac
tion
for
the
scho
ol, n
otin
g pr
ogre
ss s
ince
the
last
mee
ting
and
agre
ed
actio
n be
fore
the
next
Rec
ord
the
scho
ol’s
targ
ets
and
the
prog
ress
to
war
ds a
chie
ving
them
Are
dire
ct y
et s
ensi
tive,
add
val
ue to
the
scho
ol’s
im
prov
emen
t pro
cess
es a
nd im
pact
upo
n ou
tcom
es fo
r ch
ildre
n
■ ■
− − − − −
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Nat
iona
l gui
danc
e on
rep
ort w
ritin
g fro
m N
S
LA r
epor
t tem
plat
es p
rovi
de s
uita
ble
guid
ance
to
prod
uce
the
requ
ired
outc
omes
out
lined
in th
e S
IP b
rief
LA q
ualit
y pr
oced
ures
iden
tify
area
s of
wea
knes
s in
eac
h S
IPs’
rep
ort w
ritin
g
LA in
duct
ion
prov
ides
firs
t-le
vel t
rain
ing
on r
epor
t re
quire
men
ts
CP
D p
rovi
ded
by N
atio
nal S
trat
egie
s an
d or
LA
on
rep
ort w
ritin
g
PM
of S
IPs
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
LA m
onito
ring
feed
s in
to P
M p
roce
ss
NS
mon
itorin
g of
rep
orts
by
SIP
Cos
:
rand
om s
ampl
e;
any
whe
re th
ere
are
com
plai
nts
from
sch
ool
or L
A;
scho
ols
caus
ing
conc
ern
(Ofs
ted
or L
A);
any
that
the
SIP
bel
ieve
s sh
ould
be
brou
ght t
o th
e S
IPC
o’s
atte
ntio
n.
■ ■
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
Qua
lity
stan
dar
ds
Qua
lity
assu
ranc
eQ
ualit
y co
ntro
l
2.5
Ad
vice
to
gov
erno
rs o
n th
e he
adte
ache
r’s
per
form
ance
man
agem
ent
SIP
s ad
vise
all
LA g
over
ning
bod
ies
and
man
agem
ent c
omm
ittee
s of
pup
il re
ferr
al u
nits
(P
RU
s) in
line
with
regu
latio
ns a
nd g
uida
nce
The
SIP
ens
ures
the
conf
iden
tialit
y of
the
advi
ce
to g
over
nors
Hea
dtea
cher
obj
ectiv
es a
re c
ongr
uent
with
th
e sc
hool
prio
ritie
s an
d ap
prop
riate
for
the
head
teac
her
Gov
erno
rs a
re s
atis
fied
that
they
rec
eive
in
sigh
tful
adv
ice
of g
ood
qual
ity
The
head
teac
her’s
per
form
ance
man
agem
ent
proc
ess
lead
s to
sch
ool i
mpr
ovem
ent
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
The
SIP
brie
f
Acc
redi
tatio
n st
anda
rds
Indu
ctio
n
CP
D (s
peci
fical
ly th
e on
line
mod
ule
for
head
teac
her’s
per
form
ance
man
agem
ent)
■ ■ ■ ■
Eval
uatio
n fe
edba
ck fr
om g
over
nors
and
he
adte
ache
rs a
fter
the
proc
ess
Use
r gr
oups
of h
eadt
each
ers
Feed
back
to L
As
from
gov
erno
rs
■ ■ ■
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies ��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
SIP quality assurance within the National Strategies regional structure
The National Strategies regional structure is at the heart of the National Strategies approach to providing tailored and coherent support to LAs. There is a range of personnel within each region who liaise with specific personnel within each LA.
At the head of each region is a Senior Regional Director (SRD) who leads and manages the National Strategies regional team and has responsibility for liaison with the Director of Children’s Services (DCS) in each LA. The Regional SIP Co-ordinators are part of the regional management team reporting directly to the SRD and will keep the SRD apprised of developments in the SIP function in each LA within the region, and the outcomes of these briefings will form part of the agenda for the SRD with the DCS. The relationships within the QM process for the LA SIP function are illustrated in the diagram below.
�.
QA of LAProcesses
Head of School
Improvement
DCS
SIP
School
Support and challengeof LA using SIP
evidenceSRD
SIPCo-ordinator
Schoolperformance
data
Triangulation of data with SIP report QA of Interaction
QA of SIP report(by sampling)
Alerts about majorconcerns
Oversight andmonitoring of process
Termly notes of visit(including alerts about
major concerns)
School Improvement Dialogue
Briefs SRD onprocess and any
concerns
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
Section 2: Evaluation schedulesThis section comprises a series of tools for use in the evaluation of the SIP function in LAs and schools.
Schedule 1 The core agenda that NS Regional SIP Co-ordinators will use in their meetings with LA SIP managers during the course of the year.
Schedule 2 The core agenda that NS Regional SIP Co-ordinators will use in their discussions with headteachers. Each discussion is intended to cover the whole range of SIP activity described by this schedule.
Schedule 3 An evaluation tool for use when shadowing a SIP visit to a school. Only those elements of the schedule relevant to the specific visit will be addressed.
Schedule 4 Criteria for self-evaluation of LA practice; this schedule provides descriptors of practice against the quality standards, indicating whether practice is outstanding, good or whether it requires some/substantial improvement. These criteria form the basis of the judgements recorded on the regional SIP coordinators note of visit.
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies ��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
Evaluation schedule 1: Local authority processes
LA self-evaluation/regional SIPCo termly report
1.1 Local authority management of the SIP function
Conditions of grant (CoG) are fully met
SIPs are tasked in line with the SIP brief
Schools and SIPs are appropriately matched
SIPs are deployed to act as the principal axis of school improvement for schools and there is, within the LA, as far as possible a ‘single conversation’
All SIPs are fully briefed on each school to which they are attached, including all schools’ data in the possession of the LA
All SIPs are fully briefed on school improvement processes, procedures and services in relation to their attached schools
Effective communication exists at all levels
All SIPs experience effective performance management leading to appropriate, timely and decisive action by the LA
The PM system provides evidence that SIP accreditation standards are being maintained
The PM process identifies needs for development that inform the provision of CPD
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
1.2 CPD for SIPs
There is effective induction of SIPs
SIP performance management identifies a CPD plan for each SIP for the year; this is recorded and monitored by the LA
SIPs access a suitable range of CPD activities in order to meet their identified needs
SIPs access NS electronic resources as part of their CPD plan
The skill level of SIPs increases
There is an increasingly consistent message delivered by SIPs to schools about effective L&M, school improvement planning and self-evaluation, resulting in an increasingly expert and highly skilled workforce
CPD for SIPs ensures they have the right knowledge, understanding and skill level to provide support and challenge to schools on national and local priorities where appropriate to the schools’ own priorities
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
2.1 The quality and effectiveness of SIP challenge and support
Challenge and support from the SIP results in gains in learning, achievement and attainment for all children in the school, but in particular for any groups of children who are underachieving, and with a focus upon groups vulnerable to underachievement
SIPs provide a robust but sensitive challenge to schools that helps them to identify the priorities for school improvement and high-impact strategies for tackling these priorities
SIPs support improvement in the quality of schools’ self-evaluation processes and in the record of the outcomes
SIP dialogue results in improved planning and better outcomes for schools
SIPs contribute to improvements in financial planning and the extent to which spending meets schools’ priorities
SIPs’ meetings with schools are part of a continuous process of improvement. Each meeting evaluates the progress since the last one and identifies further priorities, actions to be taken and the support required
■
■
■
■
■
■
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
2.2 The quality and effectiveness of target setting
Through professional dialogue with SIPs, schools set ambitious targets that:
accord with DCSF guidance;
build on prior attainment;
build on previous best performance;
focus on progression, ensuring that no children are predicted to make less than two levels’ progress;
represent improvement over current attainment for the school;
are at or above the top quartile performance for CVA compared to similar schools, other than in the most exceptional circumstances;
identify and tackle underperformance of individual pupils and groups of pupils;
factor in the impact of support and resources available from the school, LA and DCSF.
The SIP has the skills and experience, moderated and quality-assured by the LA, to distinguish between genuine additional context factors and low expectations
Aggregated schools targets across each LA indicate challenge at least in line with national targets
The targets set by a school show a trajectory of improvement over time
■
■
■
■
2.3 Effectiveness in brokering support
2.3a The SIP’s role in categorising schools and working with schools causing concern
Where a school is causing concern the LA acts decisively, rapidly and effectively to support the school in bringing about the necessary improvements; the SIP is central to any action the LA takes
The SIP supports the school in arriving at an accurate self-evaluation within the LA categorisation policy
The SIP advises the LA on categorisation according to the LA’s categorisation policy
The LA has clear structures for acting upon this advice and provides clear feedback about its decision and the reasons for this decision to the SIP
The SIP supports the school in monitoring and evaluating the impact of the school and LA plans
The SIP provides clear advice to the monitoring and review group for the school, and the minutes from those meetings demonstrate the response to the SIPs recommendations
The monitoring and review group acts upon the SIP’s advice
This results in rapid improvement for the school
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
2.3b The SIP’s role in brokering National Strategies resources and in evaluating their impact
All the LA’s SIPs are knowledgeable about the range of available NS resources
The SIP makes recommendations both to the school and the LA about the appropriate NS resources
The LA responds to the recommendation
The LA uses SIP intelligence to differentiate their offer
The SIP supports the school in monitoring and evaluating the fidelity of implementation and the impact of the NS resources and programmes
The resources and strategies brokered produce the desired improvements
■
■
■
■
■
■
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies ��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
2.3c The SIP’s role in brokering additional support for the school from other sources such as other schools, the LA, MIS and other providers
All SIPs are knowledgeable about the range of additional support available locally, regionally and nationally
The SIP brokers support which is fit for purpose and avoids conflict of interest, whether this may result from the SIP brokering his/her own support or that of his/her associates or from LA traded services
The SIP brokers support from other schools within and beyond the LA
The SIP advises the LA on the deployment of the wider CS to the school
The SIP brokers support from other providers including national organisations (for example TDA, NCSL), independent consultants and such initiatives as NLE and Consultant Leaders
The SIP supports the school in monitoring and evaluating the impact of the support
Support brokered results in rapid improvement
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
2.4 The quality of SIP reports
SIP reports avoid duplicating the school’s SEF or an inspection report
They are:
timely;
accurate and precise, identifying the school’s response to all issues emerging from the data;
informative;
evaluative;
concise.
Identify key strengths, priorities and strategies for improvement
Provide a judgement on the robustness of the SSE including the strength of the school’s evidence base and only provide judgements beyond this where the SIP has direct evidence
Form an agenda for action for the school, noting progress since the last meeting and agreed action before the next
Record the school’s targets and the progress towards achieving them
Are direct yet sensitive, add value to the school’s improvement processes and impact upon outcomes for children
■
■
−
−
−
−
−
■
■
■
■
■
2.5 Effectiveness in providing advice to governors on headteacher performance management
SIPs advise all LA governing bodies and management committees of PRUs in line with regulations and guidance
The SIP ensures the confidentiality of the advice to governors
Headteacher objectives are congruent with the school priorities and appropriate for the headteacher
Governors are satisfied that they receive insightful advice of good quality
The headteacher’s performance management process leads to school improvement
■
■
■
■
■
3 The overall effectiveness of the LA in implementing the SIP programme
Particular strengths for dissemination. Areas for improvement.
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN�0
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
Evaluation schedule 2: Interactions with schoolsSchool visits and telephone calls to the headteacher
Protocols:
LA will be consulted on SIPCo school visits, SIP shadowing and telephone calls in order to ensure coherence and continuity with LA activity and to ensure that it is timely and manageable for the school.
The SIP is informed of the shadow visits and oral feedback is given to the SIP.
For school visits and phone calls there is feedback to the LA on LA processes and to the SIP and LA where there is evidence related to their specific performance.
1.1 and 1.2 LA management of SIPs
How content are you with the procedures for deploying the SIP to your school?
Has the SIP made the agreed visits?
Do you have an opportunity to feedback your view of the SIP’s performance to the LA?
How well prepared was the SIP in their knowledge of the LA and your school?
What is your assessment of the overall skill level of your SIP?
■
■
■
■
■
2.1 The quality and effectiveness of SIP challenge and support
Is your SIP thoroughly prepared for each meeting and clear about the issues the school is facing and the priorities that emerge from the data?
Has your SIP discussed under-performing groups of children with you and have they highlighted groups such as black and minority ethnic (BME), special educational needs (SEN) and looked after children (LAC)
Has your SIP been able to assist you with your SSE and SEF?
Does your SIP extend the challenge beyond the data and into your plans to tackle your priorities and your school improvement plan?
Have you discussed financial planning with your SIP? If so can you give an example of the impact of the discussion?
Are your meetings with your SIP part of an ongoing conversation? Does each meeting start with a review of action since the last meeting and end with agreed actions for the next?
Can you give an example of how your SIP has provided a challenge to you?
In this example can you identify anything you have done differently as a result?
What has been the impact of your action in this area?
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
2.2 The quality of target setting
Do your targets:
build on prior attainment and previous best performance?
focus on progression, ensuring that no children fail to make progress?
represent improvement over current attainment for the school?
Are they at or above the top quartile performance for CVA compared to similar schools?
Do the targets identify and tackle underperformance of individual pupils and groups of pupils?
Do your targets show a trajectory of improvement over time?
■
■
■
■
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies ��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
2.3 Effectiveness in brokering support
Does your conversation with your SIP identify the support resources you will need to achieve your priorities?
Does your SIP assist you in evaluating the impact of the actions you have taken and any external support?
Can you give an example of improvements resulting from external support?
■
■
■
2.3a
Are you clear about the LA’s policy for schools causing concern and the SIP’s role within this?
■
2.3b
Is your SIP knowledgeable about the range of available NS resources?
How does the LA decide upon the level of NS consultant resource your school will receive? What is your SIP’s part in this?
Can you give an example of the impact of NS resources in your school?
■
■
■
2.3c
Is your SIP knowledgeable about the range of additional support available locally, regionally and nationally? Have you purchased or otherwise made use of any support of this nature recommended by your SIP?
Is your SIP able to broker support from other schools within and beyond the LA?
Is your SIP able to advise the LA on the deployment of wider Children’s Services to the school?
Is your SIP able to broker support from other providers including national organisations, independent consultants and such initiatives as NLE and Consultant Leaders?
Can you give an example of the impact of support brokered by your SIP from one of these wider sources?
■
■
■
■
■
2.4 Quality of SIP reports
Do your SIP’s reports provide a useful record and agenda for future action for you and your governors, noting progress since the last meeting and agreed action before the next?
Are they:
timely? So that actions are not delayed;
accurate and precise, identifying your response to all issues emerging from the data?
informative?
evaluative?
concise?
Do they:
identify key strengths, priorities and strategies for improvement?
record the school’s targets and the progress towards achieving them?
provide a useful agenda for action including timescales?
■
■
−
−
−
−
−
■
−
−
−
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
2.5 Effectiveness in providing advice to governors on headteacher performance management
Does your SIP carry out the role of advising the governing body on your performance management?
Are you content that the SIP is fully conversant with regulations and guidance on the PM function?
Does your SIP recognise the appropriate confidentiality of the advice to governors?
Are your objectives congruent with the school priorities and appropriate for you?
Are governors satisfied that they receive insightful advice of good quality?
■
■
■
■
■
3. The overall effectiveness of the SIP in their work with the school
Particular strengths for dissemination. Areas for improvement.
Overall do you think that you, your school and the learners in your school have benefited from your work with your SIP this year? What specific benefits have you experienced?
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies ��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
Evaluation schedule 3: Shadowing sip visitsPurposes of joint visits
The primary purpose of joint visits is to contribute to the overall QA of the programme, thus securing maximum impact on the outcomes for children and young people in the LA.
In conjunction with other QM activities joint visits will contribute to:
the development of LA systems and procedures;
ensuring high-quality challenge and support by SIPs;
an overall evaluation of the effectiveness of the LA’s SIP programme;
the LA’s SIP performance management process;
the national understanding of how the SIP programme works.
LAs receiving intensive support (three days per LA per term per phase)
Joint visits to schools are identified using regional and local intelligence.
The QM framework requires that each SIPCo will conduct a joint visit with a SIP to one school in each intensive LA each term. The visits will be part of an intensive programme for developing the systems and procedures within the LA.
LAs receiving targeted support (two days per LA per term per phase)
Each SIPCo will conduct joint visits with SIPs in each targeted LA. The visits will be part of a targeted programme for developing the systems and procedures within the LA.
Universal support (one day per LA per term per phase)
Joint visits are not essential; however they might be undertaken where discussions about the development of the systems and procedures identify this as a priority.
Protocols for joint visits
The regional SIPCo will:
identify schools in consultation with the LA who will notify the SIP;
seek the permission of the headteacher;
clarify the purpose and the timings of the visit with all parties, giving reasonable notice;
provide brief oral feedback to the SIP, and a written summary of the visit to the headteacher and the LA focused on the purpose of the visit as part of the national QA procedures.
Not all of the areas identified in the following sections will be evaluated in any one visit, where headings are not appropriate for the visit in question this will be indicated.
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
SIP
Loca
l aut
hori
ty
1. T
he q
ualit
y an
d e
ffec
tive
ness
of
SIP
cha
lleng
e an
d s
upp
ort
(2.1
)1.
The
qua
lity
and
eff
ecti
vene
ss o
f S
IP c
halle
nge
and
sup
po
rt (2
.1)
The
SIP
is th
orou
ghly
pre
par
ed fo
r th
e m
eetin
g an
d is
cle
ar a
bout
the
issu
es
the
scho
ol is
faci
ng a
nd th
e p
riorit
ies
that
em
erge
from
the
data
The
SIP
dis
cuss
es u
nder
-per
form
ing
grou
ps o
f chi
ldre
n an
d ha
s hi
ghlig
hted
B
ME,
SEN
and
LA
C
The
SIP
is k
now
ledg
eabl
e ab
out S
SE
and
is a
ble
to g
ive
guid
ance
on
the
qua
lity
of th
e sc
hool
’s p
roce
sses
and
SEF
like
ly to
res
ult i
n im
pro
vem
ent i
n S
SE
over
tim
e
The
SIP
ext
ends
the
chal
leng
e be
yond
the
data
and
into
the
scho
ol’s
p
riorit
ies
and
pla
ns to
tack
le th
em
The
mee
ting
star
ts w
ith a
rev
iew
of a
ctio
n si
nce
the
last
mee
ting
and
ends
w
ith a
gree
d ac
tions
for
the
next
The
SIP
is a
ble
to e
ngag
e in
a fr
uitf
ul d
ialo
gue
with
the
scho
ol a
bout
its
finan
cial
pla
nnin
g an
d th
e ex
tent
to w
hich
sp
end
ing
mee
ts th
e p
riorit
ies
the
scho
ol h
as s
et it
self
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
The
LA p
rovi
des
the
SIP
with
all
nece
ssar
y in
form
atio
n, d
ata
and
advi
ce
incl
udin
g lo
cal a
nd n
atio
nal p
riorit
ies
LA d
ata
incl
udes
info
rmat
ion
abou
t the
per
form
ance
of g
roup
s in
clud
ing
BM
E, S
EN a
nd L
AC
The
LA h
as c
omm
unic
ated
cle
ar e
xpec
tatio
ns o
f the
SIP
’s im
pac
t and
leve
l of
cha
lleng
e in
sup
por
ting
scho
ols
to m
eet t
heir
par
ticul
ar p
riorit
ies
The
LA’s
indu
ctio
n an
d C
PD
pro
vide
the
SIP
with
the
skill
s an
d kn
owle
dge
to
chal
leng
e an
d su
ppor
t the
sch
ool
The
LA h
as d
eter
min
ed a
n ap
pro
pria
te fr
amew
ork
for
mee
tings
with
the
scho
ol
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
2. T
he q
ualit
y o
f ta
rget
set
ting
(2.2
)2.
The
qua
lity
of
targ
et s
etti
ng (2
.2)
Thro
ugh
pro
fess
iona
l dia
logu
e w
ith S
IPs,
the
scho
ols
set a
mbi
tious
targ
ets
that
:
acco
rd w
ith D
CS
F gu
idan
ce;
build
on
prio
r at
tain
men
t;
build
on
pre
viou
s be
st p
erfo
rman
ce;
focu
s on
pro
gres
sion
, ens
urin
g th
at n
o ch
ildre
n ar
e p
red
icte
d to
mak
e le
ss
than
tw
o le
vels
’ pro
gres
s;
rep
rese
nt im
pro
vem
ent o
ver
curr
ent a
ttai
nmen
t for
the
scho
ol; a
nd
are
at o
r ab
ove
the
top
qua
rtile
per
form
ance
for
CVA
com
par
ed to
sim
ilar
scho
ols
othe
r th
an in
the
mos
t exc
eptio
nal c
ircum
stan
ces;
■
The
LA h
as p
rovi
ded
clea
r gu
idan
ce a
nd C
PD
on
targ
et s
ettin
g in
line
with
an
nual
DC
SF
guid
ance
■
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies ��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
iden
tify
and
tack
le u
nder
perfo
rman
ce o
f ind
ivid
ual p
upils
and
gro
ups
of p
upils
;
fact
or in
the
imp
act o
f sup
por
t and
res
ourc
es a
vaila
ble
from
the
scho
ol,
LA a
nd D
CS
F.
The
SIP
has
the
skill
s an
d ex
per
ienc
e, m
oder
ated
and
qua
lity-
assu
red
by
the
LA, t
o d
istin
guis
h be
twee
n ge
nuin
e ad
diti
onal
con
text
fact
ors
and
low
ex
pec
tatio
ns
■ 3. E
ffec
tive
ness
in b
roke
ring
sup
po
rt (2
.3)
3. E
ffec
tive
ness
in b
roke
ring
sup
po
rt (2
.3)
The
SIP
:
iden
tifie
s th
e su
ppor
t res
ourc
es r
equi
red
to a
chie
ve th
e sc
hool
’s p
riorit
ies;
eval
uate
s th
e im
pac
t of t
he a
ctio
ns ta
ken
and
any
exte
rnal
sup
por
t;
is c
lear
abo
ut th
e LA
’s p
olic
y fo
r sc
hool
s ca
usin
g co
ncer
n, h
is/h
er r
ole
with
in
this
and
how
this
app
lies
to th
e sc
hool
;
is k
now
ledg
eabl
e ab
out t
he r
ange
of a
vaila
ble
NS
res
ourc
es;
is k
now
ledg
eabl
e ab
out t
he r
ange
of a
dditi
onal
sup
por
t ava
ilabl
e bo
th
loca
lly, r
egio
nally
and
nat
iona
lly;
is a
ble
to b
roke
r su
ppor
t fro
m o
ther
sch
ools
with
in a
nd b
eyon
d th
e LA
;
is a
ble
to a
dvi
se th
e LA
on
the
dep
loym
ent o
f wid
er c
hild
ren’
s se
rvic
es to
the
scho
ol;
is a
ble
to b
roke
r su
ppor
t fro
m o
ther
pro
vide
rs in
clud
ing
natio
nal
orga
nisa
tions
, ind
epen
dent
con
sulta
nts
and
such
initi
ativ
es a
s N
LE a
nd
Con
sulta
nt L
eade
rs.
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
The
LA:
has
fully
brie
fed
the
SIP
abo
ut:
the
LA’s
NS
res
ourc
es;
othe
r ch
ildre
n’s
serv
ices
sup
por
t;
good
pra
ctic
e in
oth
er s
choo
ls;
exte
rnal
pro
vide
rs.
has
cons
ider
ed th
e S
IP’s
pre
viou
s re
por
ts in
allo
catin
g its
NS
res
ourc
e al
loca
tion;
has
ensu
red
that
the
SIP
is c
lear
abo
ut th
eir
pol
icy
for
scho
ols
caus
ing
conc
ern
and
the
SIP
’s r
ole
with
in th
is;
has
fully
brie
fed
the
SIP
abo
ut th
e ra
nge
of a
vaila
ble
NS
res
ourc
es a
nd
pro
vide
d ap
pro
pria
te C
PD
;
has
fully
brie
fed
the
SIP
abo
ut s
ourc
es o
f ext
erna
l sup
por
t inc
lud
ing
othe
r sc
hool
s w
ithin
and
bey
ond
the
LA;
ensu
res
that
ther
e is
sep
arat
ion
of r
oles
bet
wee
n th
e S
IP a
nd p
rovi
ders
of
add
ition
al s
upp
ort.
■
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
4. T
he o
vera
ll ef
fect
iven
ess
of
the
SIP
in t
heir
wo
rk w
ith
the
scho
ol
4. T
he o
vera
ll ef
fect
iven
ess
of
the
LA
in s
upp
ort
ing
the
SIP
in t
heir
wo
rk
wit
h th
e sc
hoo
l
Par
ticul
ar s
tren
gths
for
dis
sem
inat
ion.
Are
as fo
r im
pro
vem
ent.
Par
ticul
ar s
tren
gths
for
dis
sem
inat
ion.
Are
as fo
r im
pro
vem
ent.
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
Evaluation schedule 4: Criteria for self-evaluation of LA practice All of the criteria within the quality framework should be judged against the overarching policy aims of the New Relationship with Schools and should be driven by the desire to achieve a single conversation and by the guiding principles from the SIP brief. These are:
focus on pupil progress and attainment across the ability range, and the many factors which influence it, including pupil well-being, extended services and parental involvement;
respect for the school’s autonomy to plan its development, starting from the school’s self-evaluation and the needs of the pupils and of other members of the school community;
professional challenge and support, so that the school’s practice and performance are improved;
evidence-based assessment of the school’s performance and its strategies for improving teaching and learning.
Critical criteria are highlighted in bold; these criteria are the key definitions for practice at that level.
When SIPCos report upon the framework then the following vocabulary will be used to describe the standard of practice.
Column 1: Outstanding, highly effective (evaluations of practice in this column must be accompanied by substantial evidence of impact).
Column 2: Good, effective (evaluations of practice in this column must be accompanied by at least emerging evidence of impact to be judged according to roll-out status).
Column 3: Requires some improvement, sound, satisfactory.
Column 4: Requires substantial improvement, requires significant improvement, unsatisfactory, inadequate.
■
■
■
■
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies ��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
AS
PE
CT
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d b
e o
utst
and
ing
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
be
go
od
w
here
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d r
equi
re
som
e im
pro
vem
ent
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
req
uire
su
bst
antia
l im
pro
vem
ent
whe
re
Ove
rall
effe
ctiv
enes
s an
d
imp
act
The
LA
SIP
pro
gra
mm
e d
eliv
ers
upo
n th
e ov
erar
chin
g p
olic
y o
f th
e N
Rw
S, t
he s
ing
le
conv
ersa
tio
n an
d t
he
gui
din
g p
rinc
iple
s fr
om
th
e S
IP b
rief
The
pro
gra
mm
e is
d
emo
nstr
ably
hav
ing
an
imp
act
upo
n th
e p
rog
ress
of
pup
ils,
teac
hing
, lea
der
ship
and
m
anag
emen
t an
d r
esul
ts
in s
ubst
anti
al id
enti
fiab
le
gai
ns in
ach
ieve
men
t an
d
atta
inm
ent
All
crite
ria
for
go
od
p
ract
ice
are
met
w
ith
som
e el
emen
ts
rep
rese
ntin
g e
xem
pla
ry
pra
ctic
e
■ ■ ■
The
LA
SIP
pro
gra
mm
e d
eliv
ers
upo
n th
e ov
erar
chin
g p
olic
y o
f th
e N
Rw
S, t
he s
ing
le
conv
ersa
tio
n an
d t
he
gui
din
g p
rinc
iple
s fr
om
th
e S
IP b
rief
The
re is
imp
act
upo
n th
e p
rog
ress
of
pup
ils,
teac
hing
, lea
der
ship
and
m
anag
emen
t an
d t
here
ar
e g
ains
in a
chie
vem
ent
and
att
ainm
ent
Ther
e is
a c
lear
vis
ion
for
the
SIP
’s ro
le,
effe
ctiv
e le
ader
ship
an
d m
anag
emen
t with
cl
ear
acco
unta
bilit
y an
d de
cisi
on-m
akin
g to
sup
port
se
rvic
e de
liver
y an
d im
prov
emen
t
The
prog
ram
me
is
dem
onst
rabl
y bu
ildin
g ca
paci
ty to
impr
ove
in
man
y sc
hool
s in
the
LA
SIP
s ar
e in
tegr
ated
with
the
LA s
choo
l im
prov
emen
t st
rate
gy
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
The
LA
SIP
pro
gra
mm
e ai
ms
to d
eliv
er u
po
n th
e ov
erar
chin
g p
olic
y o
f th
e N
Rw
S, t
he s
ing
le
conv
ersa
tio
n an
d t
he
gui
din
g p
rinc
iple
s fr
om
the
SIP
bri
ef b
ut
is d
efic
ient
in s
om
e re
spec
ts
The
impa
ct o
f the
pr
ogra
mm
e on
the
prog
ress
of p
upils
, te
achi
ng, l
eade
rshi
p an
d m
anag
emen
t and
gai
ns in
ac
hiev
emen
t and
att
ainm
ent
is d
iffic
ult t
o di
scer
n
Ther
e is
a v
isio
n fo
r th
e S
IP’s
role
but
acc
ount
abilit
y an
d de
cisi
on-m
akin
g to
su
ppor
t ser
vice
del
iver
y an
d im
prov
emen
t may
be
wea
k or
con
fuse
d
Hea
dtea
cher
s ar
e sa
tisfie
d w
ith th
e sy
stem
but
ther
e is
litt
le e
vide
nce
that
the
prog
ram
me
is b
uild
ing
capa
city
in s
choo
ls
Inte
grat
ion
of S
IPs
with
in
the
LA s
choo
l im
prov
emen
t st
rate
gy is
wea
k
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
The
LA
SIP
pro
gra
mm
e d
oes
no
t d
eliv
er u
po
n th
e ov
erar
chin
g p
olic
y o
f th
e N
Rw
S, t
he s
ing
le
conv
ersa
tio
n an
d t
he
gui
din
g p
rinc
iple
s fr
om
th
e S
IP b
rief
Ther
e is
no
disc
erna
ble
impa
ct o
n th
e pr
ogre
ss o
f pu
pils
, tea
chin
g, le
ader
ship
an
d m
anag
emen
t or
ach
ieve
men
t and
at
tain
men
t and
the
stru
ctur
e of
the
prog
ram
me
mea
ns th
at it
is u
nlik
ely
that
th
ere
will
be
Ther
e is
no
clea
r vi
sion
for
SIP
’s ro
le a
nd le
ader
ship
an
d m
anag
emen
t is
not
effe
ctiv
e, w
ith a
lack
of
clea
r ac
coun
tabi
lity
and
deci
sion
-mak
ing
to s
uppo
rt
serv
ice
deliv
ery
and
impr
ovem
ent
Hea
dtea
cher
s ar
e di
ssat
isfie
d w
ith th
e pr
ogra
mm
e an
d th
ere
is
no e
vide
nce
of it
bui
ldin
g ca
paci
ty to
impr
ove
in
scho
ols
■ ■ ■ ■
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
AS
PE
CT
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d b
e o
utst
and
ing
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
be
go
od
w
here
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d r
equi
re
som
e im
pro
vem
ent
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
req
uire
su
bst
antia
l im
pro
vem
ent
whe
re
SIP
s ar
e ce
ntra
l in
chal
leng
ing
and
supp
ortin
g sc
hool
impr
ovem
ent.
Act
ion
iden
tifie
d is
act
ed
upon
and
is e
ffect
ive
The
cri
teri
a in
thi
s b
ox
are
tho
se p
ublis
hed
as
the
RA
G c
rite
ria
for
NS
re
po
rtin
g p
urp
ose
s
■C
halle
nge
and
supp
ort
prov
ided
by
SIP
s is
in
cons
iste
nt a
cros
s th
e LA
and
may
be
conf
usin
g fo
r sc
hool
s as
a r
esul
t of
depl
oym
ent o
f oth
er L
A
staf
f lin
ked
to s
choo
ls
■S
IPs
are
not i
nteg
rate
d w
ith
the
LA s
choo
l im
prov
emen
t st
rate
gy
SIP
s ar
e no
t cha
lleng
ing
and
supp
ortin
g sc
hool
s ef
fect
ivel
y w
ith fe
w if
any
us
eful
act
ions
iden
tifie
d
■ ■
Imp
act
of
the
man
agem
ent
of
SIP
sA
ll el
emen
ts o
f g
oo
d
pra
ctic
e in
man
agin
g
SIP
s ar
e p
rese
nt
The
rec
ruit
men
t,
dep
loym
ent
and
m
anag
emen
t o
f S
IPs
are
hig
hly
effe
ctiv
e,
resu
ltin
g in
sig
nific
ant
and
rap
id g
ains
in s
cho
ol
imp
rove
men
t, a
nd in
o
utco
mes
fo
r ch
ildre
n an
d y
oun
g p
eop
le in
the
L
A
Per
form
ance
m
anag
emen
t p
roce
dur
es
are
par
ticu
larl
y ri
go
rous
re
sult
ing
in s
harp
ly
focu
sed
fee
db
ack
and
rap
id g
ains
in t
he
effe
ctiv
enes
s o
f th
e S
IP
wo
rkfo
rce
■ ■ ■
The
LA
fully
co
mp
lies
with
th
e co
nditi
ons
of g
rant
The
LA
suc
cess
fully
im
ple
men
ts t
he
sing
le c
onv
ersa
tio
n co
ncep
t an
d s
cho
ols
ar
e cl
ear
abo
ut t
heir
co
re e
ntit
lem
ent
and
ad
dit
iona
l sup
po
rt t
hat
mus
t b
e p
urch
ased
The
LA
’s r
ecru
itm
ent,
d
eplo
ymen
t an
d
man
agem
ent
of
SIP
s ha
s an
imp
act
on
scho
ol
imp
rove
men
t in
the
L
A a
nd o
n o
utco
mes
fo
r ch
ildre
n an
d y
oun
g
peo
ple
■ ■ ■
The
LA
co
mp
lies
in m
ost
as
pec
ts a
nd is
mak
ing
b
est
end
eavo
urs
to f
ully
co
mp
ly w
ith
cond
itio
ns
of
gra
nt
The
LA
is s
triv
ing
to
im
ple
men
t th
e si
ngle
co
nver
sati
on
conc
ept
Hea
dtea
cher
s ar
e sa
tisfie
d w
ith th
eir
SIP
s an
d ar
e su
ppor
tive
of th
e LA
’s
recr
uitm
ent,
depl
oym
ent
and
man
agem
ent o
f the
m
but i
mpa
ct is
diff
icul
t to
disc
ern
The
LA’s
QM
sys
tem
pr
ovid
es s
ome
evid
ence
ab
out t
he p
erfo
rman
ce
of S
IPs
but i
s lik
ely
to b
e in
form
al
■ ■ ■ ■
Ther
e ar
e si
gnifi
cant
di
scre
panc
ies
with
the
cond
ition
s of
gra
nt a
nd li
ttle
in
clin
atio
n to
cor
rect
them
The
LA u
ses
SIP
s as
one
of
a n
umbe
r of
mea
ns
of c
omm
unic
atin
g w
ith
scho
ols
abou
t sch
ool
impr
ovem
ent i
ssue
s
Hea
dtea
cher
s ar
e no
t sa
tisfie
d w
ith th
eir
SIP
s or
th
e LA
’s r
ecru
itmen
t and
de
ploy
men
t of t
hem
. The
re
is n
o ap
pare
nt im
pact
on
outc
omes
for
child
ren
and
youn
g pe
ople
If th
e LA
has
a Q
M s
yste
m
it fa
ils to
eva
luat
e th
e in
divi
dual
per
form
ance
of
SIP
s
■ ■ ■ ■
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies ��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
AS
PE
CT
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d b
e o
utst
and
ing
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
be
go
od
w
here
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d r
equi
re
som
e im
pro
vem
ent
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
req
uire
su
bst
antia
l im
pro
vem
ent
whe
re
The
LA’s
QM
sys
tem
pr
ovid
es c
lear
feed
back
for
SIP
s on
thei
r pe
rfor
man
ce
Per
form
ance
man
agem
ent
is e
ffect
ive
and
impr
oves
th
e ef
fect
iven
ess
of th
e S
IP
func
tion
in th
e LA
All
SIP
s pe
rfor
m w
ell a
nd
are
judg
ed to
be
mee
ting
the
SIP
sta
ndar
ds, o
r w
here
they
are
not
bris
k ac
tion
is ta
ken
to c
orre
ct
any
defic
it
Hea
dtea
cher
s an
d sc
hool
le
ader
ship
team
s ar
e fu
lly
enga
ged
in th
e S
IP p
roce
ss
■ ■ ■ ■
Per
form
ance
man
agem
ent
proc
esse
s ar
e in
evi
denc
e an
d m
eet m
inim
um
stan
dard
s, b
ut th
ere
is a
la
ck o
f cla
rity
with
in th
e LA
abo
ut th
e qu
ality
of
perf
orm
ance
of S
IPs
and
abou
t the
ir C
PD
nee
ds
Ther
e is
a la
ck o
f cle
ar
evid
ence
abo
ut w
heth
er
SIP
s m
eet t
he S
IP
stan
dard
s an
d as
a r
esul
t m
anag
emen
t of p
oor
perf
orm
ance
is w
eak
Hea
dtea
cher
s an
d sc
hool
le
ader
ship
team
s la
ck
clar
ity a
bout
the
role
of
SIP
s in
the
LA
■ ■ ■
Per
form
ance
man
agem
ent
proc
esse
s ar
e cu
rsor
y;
ther
e is
litt
le e
vide
nce
of
indi
vidu
al fe
edba
ck o
n pe
rfor
man
ce, o
r w
here
this
do
es ta
ke p
lace
it a
void
s th
e re
al is
sues
. The
re is
no
con
side
ratio
n of
CP
D
need
s
The
LA h
as n
ot c
onsi
dere
d w
heth
er o
r no
t SIP
s ar
e m
eetin
g th
e S
IP s
tand
ards
or
if it
has
it h
as d
one
so w
ith a
n in
adeq
uate
ev
iden
ce b
ase
Hea
dtea
cher
s an
d sc
hool
le
ader
ship
team
s w
ould
pr
efer
not
to h
ave
SIP
s
■ ■ ■
Imp
act
of
the
ong
oin
g
trai
ning
and
dev
elo
pm
ent
of
SIP
s
All
elem
ents
of
go
od
p
ract
ice
in o
ngo
ing
tr
aini
ng a
nd d
evel
op
men
t o
f S
IPs
are
pre
sent
CP
D fo
r S
IPs
prov
ides
the
corr
ect b
alan
ce b
etw
een
natio
nal-,
loca
l- an
d sc
hool
-leve
l prio
ritie
s an
d is
dem
onst
rabl
y m
atch
ed
to th
e ne
eds
of e
ach
indi
vidu
al S
IP
■ ■
Ther
e ar
e go
od s
yste
ms
for
empl
oym
ent a
nd in
duct
ion
Ther
e is
a r
igor
ous
CP
D
prog
ram
me
for
each
SIP
em
ergi
ng fr
om h
is/h
er
iden
tifie
d ne
eds
thro
ugh
the
PM
pro
cess
The
CP
D p
rogr
amm
e fo
r S
IPs
take
s fu
ll ac
coun
t of
natio
nal a
nd lo
cal p
riorit
ies
■ ■ ■
Ther
e is
a s
atis
fact
ory
proc
ess
for
indu
ctio
n in
pl
ace
Ther
e is
a C
PD
pla
n fo
r S
IPs
but i
t lac
ks p
reci
sion
an
d pr
ovid
es a
gen
eral
ap
proa
ch to
CP
D n
ot
tailo
red
to in
divi
dual
nee
ds
SIP
s’ C
PD
bro
adly
m
eets
the
need
s of
the
prog
ram
me
■ ■ ■
SIP
s ha
ve n
o in
duct
ion
or w
here
they
do
it is
in
adeq
uate
Ther
e is
litt
le o
r no
ev
iden
ce o
f CP
D p
lann
ing
for
SIP
s
SIP
s’ C
PD
is in
adeq
uate
to
mee
t nat
iona
l, lo
cal o
r sc
hool
prio
ritie
s an
d fa
ils to
m
eet t
he n
eeds
of S
IPs
■ ■ ■
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN�0
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
AS
PE
CT
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d b
e o
utst
and
ing
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
be
go
od
w
here
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d r
equi
re
som
e im
pro
vem
ent
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
req
uire
su
bst
antia
l im
pro
vem
ent
whe
re
Imp
act
of
chal
leng
e an
d
sup
po
rtA
ll th
e fe
atur
es o
f g
oo
d
chal
leng
e an
d s
upp
ort
ar
e p
rese
nt
Cha
lleng
e an
d s
upp
ort
an
d t
he a
sso
ciat
ed L
A
syst
ems
are
of
such
hi
gh
qua
lity
that
the
re
are
rap
id g
ains
in s
cho
ol
per
form
ance
■ ■
Sch
ools
and
LA
s ar
e sa
tisfie
d w
ith th
e ch
alle
nge
and
supp
ort p
rovi
ded
by
SIP
s an
d th
ere
is d
isce
rnib
le
posi
tive
impa
ct u
pon:
per
form
ance
in s
cho
ols
;
the
qual
ity o
f sel
f-ev
alua
tion
in s
choo
ls w
here
im
prov
emen
t is
requ
ired;
the
qual
ity o
f sch
ool
impr
ovem
ent p
lann
ing
whe
re im
prov
emen
t is
requ
ired;
the
effe
ctiv
e us
e of
re
sour
ces
by th
e sc
hool
w
here
impr
ovem
ents
are
re
quire
d;
thos
e ar
eas
of s
choo
l ac
tivity
targ
eted
as
natio
nal
prio
ritie
s.
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Sch
ools
and
LA
s ar
e sa
tisfie
d w
ith th
e ch
alle
nge
and
supp
ort p
rovi
ded
by S
IPs
but t
here
is li
ttle
evi
denc
e of
im
pact
upo
n:
perf
orm
ance
in s
choo
ls;
the
qual
ity o
f sel
f-ev
alua
tion
in s
choo
ls w
here
suc
h im
prov
emen
ts a
re r
equi
red;
the
qual
ity o
f sch
ool
impr
ovem
ent p
lann
ing
whe
re s
uch
impr
ovem
ent i
s re
quire
d;
the
effe
ctiv
e us
e of
re
sour
ces
by th
e sc
hool
w
here
suc
h im
prov
emen
ts
are
requ
ired;
thos
e ar
eas
of s
choo
l ac
tivity
targ
eted
as
natio
nal
prio
ritie
s.
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Sch
ools
and
/or
LAs
are
diss
atis
fied
with
the
chal
leng
e an
d su
ppor
t pro
vide
d by
S
IPs
and
ther
e is
litt
le o
r no
ev
iden
ce o
f im
pact
upo
n:
perf
orm
ance
in s
choo
ls;
the
qual
ity o
f sel
f-ev
alua
tion
in s
choo
ls w
here
suc
h im
prov
emen
ts a
re r
equi
red;
the
qual
ity o
f sch
ool
impr
ovem
ent p
lann
ing
whe
re s
uch
impr
ovem
ent i
s re
quire
d;
the
effe
ctiv
e us
e of
re
sour
ces
by th
e sc
hool
w
here
suc
h im
prov
emen
ts
are
requ
ired;
thos
e ar
eas
of s
choo
l ac
tivity
targ
eted
as
natio
nal
prio
ritie
s.
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies ��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
AS
PE
CT
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d b
e o
utst
and
ing
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
be
go
od
w
here
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d r
equi
re
som
e im
pro
vem
ent
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
req
uire
su
bst
antia
l im
pro
vem
ent
whe
re
Imp
act
on
targ
et s
etti
ngT
hro
ugh
pro
fess
iona
l d
ialo
gue
wit
h th
e S
IP,
over
95%
of
scho
ols
set
am
bit
ious
tar
get
s th
at:
mee
t th
e D
CS
F g
uid
ance
;
build
on
prio
r at
tain
men
t;
build
on
prev
ious
bes
t pe
rfor
man
ce;
focu
s on
pro
gres
sion
, en
surin
g th
at n
o ch
ildre
n ar
e pr
edic
ted
to m
ake
less
th
an t
wo
leve
ls’ p
rogr
ess;
repr
esen
t im
prov
emen
t ov
er c
urre
nt a
ttai
nmen
t for
th
e sc
hool
;
are
at o
r ab
ove
the
top
quar
tile
perf
orm
ance
for
CVA
othe
r th
an in
the
mos
t ex
cept
iona
l circ
umst
ance
s.
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Thr
oug
h p
rofe
ssio
nal
dia
log
ue w
ith
the
SIP
, ov
er 8
0% o
f sc
hoo
ls s
et
amb
itio
us t
arg
ets
that
:
mee
t th
e D
CS
F g
uid
ance
;
build
on
prio
r at
tain
men
t;
build
on
prev
ious
bes
t pe
rfor
man
ce;
focu
s on
pro
gres
sion
, en
surin
g th
at n
o ch
ildre
n ar
e pr
edic
ted
to m
ake
less
th
an t
wo
leve
ls’ p
rogr
ess;
repr
esen
t im
prov
emen
t ov
er c
urre
nt a
ttai
nmen
t for
th
e sc
hool
;
are
at o
r ab
ove
the
top
quar
tile
perf
orm
ance
for
CVA
othe
r th
an in
the
mos
t ex
cept
iona
l circ
umst
ance
s.
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Thr
oug
h p
rofe
ssio
nal
dia
log
ue w
ith
the
SIP
, 50
–80%
of
scho
ols
set
am
bit
ious
tar
get
s th
at:
mee
t th
e D
CS
F g
uid
ance
;
build
on
prio
r at
tain
men
t;
build
on
prev
ious
bes
t pe
rfor
man
ce;
focu
s on
pro
gres
sion
, en
surin
g th
at n
o ch
ildre
n ar
e pr
edic
ted
to m
ake
less
th
an t
wo
leve
ls’ p
rogr
ess;
repr
esen
t im
prov
emen
t ov
er c
urre
nt a
ttai
nmen
t for
th
e sc
hool
;
are
at o
r ab
ove
the
top
quar
tile
perf
orm
ance
for
CVA
othe
r th
an in
the
mos
t ex
cept
iona
l circ
umst
ance
s.
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Thro
ugh
prof
essi
onal
di
alog
ue w
ith th
e S
IP, l
ess
than
50%
of s
choo
ls s
et
ambi
tious
targ
ets
that
:
mee
t the
DC
SF
guid
ance
;
build
on
prio
r at
tain
men
t;
build
on
prev
ious
bes
t pe
rfor
man
ce;
focu
s on
pro
gres
sion
, en
surin
g th
at n
o ch
ildre
n ar
e pr
edic
ted
to m
ake
less
th
an t
wo
leve
ls’ p
rogr
ess;
repr
esen
t im
prov
emen
t ov
er c
urre
nt a
ttai
nmen
t for
th
e sc
hool
;
are
at o
r ab
ove
the
top
quar
tile
perf
orm
ance
for
CVA
othe
r th
an in
the
mos
t ex
cept
iona
l circ
umst
ance
s.
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
AS
PE
CT
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d b
e o
utst
and
ing
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
be
go
od
w
here
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d r
equi
re
som
e im
pro
vem
ent
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
req
uire
su
bst
antia
l im
pro
vem
ent
whe
re
Imp
act
of
bro
kere
d s
upp
ort
Imp
act
of
the
SIP
’s r
ole
w
ith
scho
ols
cau
sing
co
ncer
n
All
the
elem
ents
of
go
od
b
roke
ring
sup
po
rt f
or
scho
ols
cau
sing
co
ncer
n ar
e p
rese
nt
Sup
port
and
the
LA
syst
ems
for
scho
ols
caus
ing
conc
ern
are
such
that
they
res
ult i
n ra
pid
impr
ovem
ent o
f the
sc
hool
and
rem
oval
from
a
cate
gory
of c
once
rn in
a
shor
t tim
e
■ ■
The
LA
has
an
agre
ed
po
licy
for
SC
C t
hat
com
plie
s w
ith t
he
Ed
ucat
ion
and
In
spec
tions
(E&
I) A
ct 2
006
This
pol
icy
is tr
ansp
aren
t, en
sure
s th
e sc
hool
take
s re
spon
sibi
lity
for
its o
wn
impr
ovem
ent,
is b
ased
up
on th
e S
SE
and
pla
ces
the
SIP
in a
cen
tral
role
SIP
s pr
ovid
e ac
cura
te
advi
ce to
the
LA o
n ca
tego
risat
ion
of s
choo
ls
acco
rdin
g to
the
LA’s
ca
tego
risat
ion
polic
y
The
SIP
eva
luat
es th
e ef
fect
iven
ess
of th
e sc
hool
su
ppor
t pla
n an
d th
ere
is
sepa
ratio
n of
role
s be
twee
n su
ppor
t and
eva
luat
ion
Ther
e is
evi
denc
e of
ef
fect
ive
actio
n ta
ken
by th
e m
onito
ring
and
revi
ew g
roup
ba
sed
upon
the
SIP
’s a
dvic
e
The
scho
ol m
akes
goo
d pr
ogre
ss a
gain
st th
e id
entif
ied
key
issu
es
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
The
LA p
olic
y on
SC
C is
no
t ful
ly a
ligne
d w
ith th
e E&
I Act
200
6 or
has
som
e w
eakn
esse
s
The
polic
y is
not
und
erst
ood
by s
choo
ls o
r SIP
s an
d m
ay
not p
lace
eno
ugh
relia
nce
upon
the
scho
ol’s
SS
E, b
ut
the
SIP
has
an
impo
rtan
t rol
e w
ithin
the
polic
y
SIP
s pr
ovid
e ac
cura
te
advi
ce to
the
LA o
n ca
tego
risat
ion
of s
choo
ls
acco
rdin
g to
the
LA’s
ca
tego
risat
ion
polic
y
The
SIP
eva
luat
es th
e ef
fect
iven
ess
of th
e sc
hool
su
ppor
t pla
n an
d th
ere
is
sepa
ratio
n of
role
s be
twee
n su
ppor
t and
eva
luat
ion
Ther
e is
som
e ev
iden
ce
of a
ctio
n ta
ken
by th
e m
onito
ring
and
revi
ew
grou
p, th
ough
not
all
is
effe
ctiv
e or
wel
l jud
ged
The
scho
ol m
akes
sa
tisfa
ctor
y pr
ogre
ss a
gain
st
the
iden
tifie
d ke
y is
sues
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Ther
e is
no
polic
y fo
r SC
C o
r it
has
sign
ifica
nt w
eakn
esse
s
The
polic
y la
cks
tran
spar
ency
and
co
here
nce
or a
ppea
rs to
ta
ke c
ontr
ol o
f the
sch
ool’s
im
prov
emen
t age
nda
or p
lace
s th
e S
IP in
a
perip
hera
l rol
e
Rec
ords
sho
w th
at S
IPs’
ad
vice
to th
e LA
on
the
cate
gory
of s
choo
ls h
as
been
inac
cura
te o
n to
o m
any
occa
sion
s
The
SIP
fails
to e
valu
ate
the
scho
ol s
uppo
rt p
lan
and
may
be
in b
oth
SIP
an
d ad
ditio
nal s
uppo
rt ro
le
thus
cre
atin
g a
conf
lict o
f in
tere
st
The
mon
itorin
g an
d re
view
gr
oup
fails
to ta
ke in
to
acco
unt t
he S
IP’s
adv
ice
or w
here
it d
oes
actio
n is
in
effe
ctiv
e
The
scho
ol d
oes
not m
ake
suffi
cien
t pro
gres
s or
co
ntin
ues
to d
eclin
e
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies ��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
AS
PE
CT
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d b
e o
utst
and
ing
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
be
go
od
w
here
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d r
equi
re
som
e im
pro
vem
ent
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
req
uire
su
bst
antia
l im
pro
vem
ent
whe
re
Imp
act
bro
keri
ng
NS
pro
gra
mm
e an
d
cons
ulta
nts
All
the
elem
ents
of
go
od
bro
keri
ng o
f N
S p
rog
ram
mes
and
co
nsul
tant
s ar
e p
rese
nt
The
sch
oo
l’s u
se o
f N
S
pro
gra
mm
es is
hig
hly
effe
ctiv
e re
sult
ing
in
rap
id im
pro
vem
ents
in
the
scho
ol’s
pri
ori
ties
The
LA’s
dep
loym
ent o
f N
S c
onsu
ltant
s is
wel
l ta
rget
ed a
nd r
esul
ts
in r
apid
impr
ovem
ent
and
sign
ifica
nt a
nd
dem
onst
rabl
e ga
ins
in
outc
omes
for
child
ren
■ ■ ■
SIP
s ha
ve a
thor
ough
un
ders
tand
ing
of th
e ra
nge
of N
S r
esou
rces
an
d su
ppor
t ava
ilabl
e to
sc
hool
s
SIP
s un
ders
tand
the
LA’s
N
S r
esou
rce
depl
oym
ent
polic
y an
d th
eir
part
with
in
it SIP
inte
lligen
ce a
nd
reco
mm
enda
tions
are
use
d by
the
LA s
trat
egy
man
ager
(S
M) t
o en
sure
max
imum
im
pact
from
NS
res
ourc
e de
ploy
men
t
SIP
and
sch
ool e
valu
ate
the
impa
ct o
f NS
con
sulta
nts
or p
rogr
amm
es e
mpl
oyed
in
the
scho
ol a
nd th
e S
M
uses
this
for
the
over
all
eval
uatio
n of
NS
impa
ct in
th
e LA
NS
pro
gram
mes
and
co
nsul
tant
s pr
oduc
e th
e de
sire
d im
pact
in th
e sc
hool
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
SIP
s ha
ve a
som
e un
ders
tand
ing
of th
e ra
nge
of N
S re
sour
ces
and
supp
ort a
vaila
ble
to s
choo
ls
SIP
s ha
ve s
ome
unde
rsta
ndin
g of
the
LA’s
N
S re
sour
ce d
eplo
ymen
t po
licy
and
that
they
hav
e a
role
with
in it
LA s
yste
ms
sugg
est
SIP
inte
lligen
ce a
nd
reco
mm
enda
tions
are
use
d to
info
rm d
eplo
ymen
t but
th
ere
is li
ttle
evid
ence
that
th
is h
appe
ns
SIP
s ev
alua
te th
e im
pact
of
NS
pro
gram
me
and
cons
ulta
nts,
but
ther
e is
lit
tle e
vide
nce
of e
ffect
ive
use
bein
g m
ade
of th
is
eval
uatio
n
Sch
ools
indi
cate
sa
tisfa
ctio
n w
ith b
roke
ring
of N
S p
rogr
amm
es a
nd
cons
ulta
nts
but i
mpa
ct is
di
fficu
lt to
dis
cern
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
SIP
s ha
ve a
par
tial
know
ledg
e of
the
rang
e of
N
S r
esou
rces
and
sup
port
SIP
s ha
ve li
ttle
un
ders
tand
ing
of th
eir
role
in
NS
res
ourc
e de
ploy
men
t
Litt
le o
r no
use
is m
ade
by
the
LA o
f SIP
inte
lligen
ce
and
reco
mm
enda
tions
in
NS
res
ourc
e de
ploy
men
t or
depl
oym
ent r
esul
ts in
poo
r im
pact
SIP
s do
not
see
ev
alua
tion
of th
e im
pact
of
NS
pro
gram
mes
and
co
nsul
tant
s as
par
t of t
heir
role
or
whe
re th
ey d
o it
is
min
imal
, non
-exi
sten
t or
inac
cura
te
Ther
e is
litt
le im
pact
from
N
S p
rogr
amm
es a
nd
cons
ulta
nts
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
AS
PE
CT
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d b
e o
utst
and
ing
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
be
go
od
w
here
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d r
equi
re
som
e im
pro
vem
ent
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
req
uire
su
bst
antia
l im
pro
vem
ent
whe
re
Imp
act
of
bro
keri
ng f
rom
w
ider
so
urce
s o
f su
pp
ort
All
the
elem
ents
of g
ood
b
roke
ring
of w
ider
sou
rces
of
sup
por
t are
pre
sent
The
LA s
uppo
rts
SIP
s an
d sc
hool
s in
acc
essi
ng
a w
ide
rang
e of
fit-
for-
purp
ose
qual
ity-a
ssur
ed
sour
ces
of s
uppo
rt
incl
udin
g in
depe
nden
t co
nsul
tant
s, o
ther
sch
ools
w
ithin
and
bey
ond
the
LA
and
a ra
nge
of n
atio
nal
prov
ider
s
Sup
port
cho
sen
resu
lts in
ra
pid
impr
ovem
ent
■ ■ ■
LA
sys
tem
s en
cour
age
SIP
s to
bro
ker
a w
ide
rang
e o
f ad
dit
iona
l su
pp
ort
fro
m lo
cal,
reg
iona
l and
nat
iona
l p
rovi
der
s
Bro
kerin
g of
wid
er s
uppo
rt
acce
lera
tes
the
scho
ol’s
im
prov
emen
t of i
ts
iden
tifie
d pr
iorit
ies
The
SIP
and
sch
ool
eval
uate
the
impa
ct o
f thi
s su
ppor
t
Sup
port
resu
lts in
im
prov
emen
t of t
he s
choo
l
■ ■ ■ ■
SIP
bro
kera
ge o
f wid
er
supp
ort i
s ad
hoc
and
de
pend
ent u
pon
the
SIP
, no
t LA
sup
port
for
this
role
■Th
e LA
dis
cour
ages
SIP
s fro
m b
roke
ring
addi
tiona
l su
ppor
t fro
m p
rovi
ders
ot
her
than
the
LA
■
Imp
act
of
SIP
rep
ort
sA
ll th
e el
emen
ts o
f g
oo
d
SIP
rep
ort
s ar
e p
rese
nt
Indi
vidu
al S
IP r
epor
ts
cont
ribut
e to
rap
id
impr
ovem
ent i
n sc
hool
s
SIP
rep
orts
acr
oss
the
LA
are
of a
con
sist
ently
hig
h qu
ality
■ ■ ■
SIP
rep
ort
s ar
e:
tim
ely
so t
hat
rep
ort
cl
eara
nce
do
es n
ot
del
ay a
ctio
ns;
accu
rate
;
sup
po
rted
by
evid
ence
;
able
to
iden
tify
the
is
sues
fo
r ac
tio
n an
d a
ti
mes
cale
;
able
to
pro
vid
e ev
iden
ce o
f th
e ch
alle
nge
pro
vid
ed b
y th
e S
IP.
■
One
or
two
of
the
five
crit
ical
cri
teri
a fo
r g
oo
d
rep
ort
s ar
e m
issi
ng
Rep
orts
pro
vide
the
LA
with
som
e in
form
atio
n ab
out i
ts s
choo
ls p
riorit
ies
and
prog
ress
SIP
rep
orts
hav
e a
clea
r ag
enda
and
form
at,
alth
ough
they
may
tend
to
be o
ver-
pres
crip
tive
or m
ay
be s
o fle
xibl
e as
to a
llow
fo
r w
ide
inco
nsis
tenc
ies
in
repo
rtin
g
■ ■ ■
Thr
ee o
r m
ore
of
the
crit
ical
cri
teri
a fo
r g
oo
d
rep
ort
s ar
e m
issi
ng
Rep
orts
pro
vide
the
LA
with
litt
le u
sefu
l inf
orm
atio
n ab
out i
ts s
choo
ls p
riorit
ies
and
prog
ress
SIP
rep
orts
hav
e no
cle
ar
agen
da a
nd fo
rmat
, or
have
an
agen
da a
nd
form
at th
at fo
cuse
s up
on
mon
itorin
g an
d in
spec
toria
l ju
dgem
ents
con
trar
y to
the
prin
cipl
es o
f NR
wS
■ ■ ■
00505-2007BKT-EN | © Crown copyright 2007 | Primary and Secondary National Strategies ��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
AS
PE
CT
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d b
e o
utst
and
ing
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
be
go
od
w
here
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d r
equi
re
som
e im
pro
vem
ent
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
req
uire
su
bst
antia
l im
pro
vem
ent
whe
re
Rep
orts
pro
vide
a c
lear
ag
enda
for
actio
n fo
r th
e sc
hool
and
res
ult i
n im
prov
ed o
utco
mes
for
child
ren
and
youn
g pe
ople
Rep
orts
ens
ure
the
LA
is w
ell i
nfor
med
abo
ut
its s
choo
ls’ p
riorit
ies
and
prog
ress
The
LA e
nsur
es th
at:
SIP
rep
orts
hav
e a
clea
r ag
enda
and
form
at;
ther
e is
a g
ood
leve
l of
cons
iste
ncy
acro
ss a
nd
with
in r
epor
ts;
ther
e ar
e ef
fect
ive
QA
ar
rang
emen
ts in
pla
ce.
■ ■ ■
Ther
e is
som
e in
cons
iste
ncy
acro
ss a
nd
with
in r
epor
ts
LA Q
A a
rran
gem
ents
lack
rig
our
and
fail
to e
nsur
e S
IP
repo
rts
are
of g
ood
qual
ity
■ ■
Ther
e is
a la
ck o
f co
nsis
tenc
y ac
ross
and
/or
with
in re
port
s
Ther
e m
ay b
e no
LA
QA
ar
rang
emen
ts o
r if
ther
e ar
e th
ey a
re w
eak
and
inco
nsis
tent
ly a
pplie
d
■ ■
Imp
act
of
SIP
ad
vice
to
g
over
nors
on
head
teac
her
PM
All
elem
ents
of
go
od
ad
vice
to
go
vern
ors
are
p
rese
nt
Ther
e is
evi
denc
e th
at th
e S
IP a
dvic
e to
gov
erno
rs
has
resu
lted
in im
prov
ed
outc
omes
for
child
ren
and
youn
g pe
ople
■ ■
SIP
s ar
e p
rovi
din
g a
dvi
ce
to t
he g
over
nors
of
all
scho
ols
wit
hin
the
LA
Hea
dtea
cher
s an
d go
vern
ors
repo
rt th
at:
obje
ctiv
es th
at r
esul
t fro
m th
e pr
oces
s ar
e fu
lly
alig
ned
with
the
need
s of
the
scho
ol a
nd r
esul
t in
impr
oved
out
com
es
for
child
ren
and
youn
g pe
ople
;
■ ■
SIP
s ar
e p
rovi
din
g a
dvi
ce
to t
he g
over
nors
of
all
scho
ols
wit
hin
the
LA
Hea
dtea
cher
and
go
vern
ors
repo
rt th
at:
obje
ctiv
es th
at r
esul
t fro
m th
e pr
oces
s ar
e no
t un
alig
ned
with
the
need
s of
the
scho
ol b
ut m
ay
bene
fit fr
om b
eing
mor
e fo
cuse
d;
■ ■
SIP
s ar
e no
t pro
vidi
ng
advi
ce to
the
gove
rnor
s of
al
l sch
ools
with
in th
e LA
The
head
teac
her
or
gove
rnor
s re
port
that
:
they
are
dis
satis
fied
with
th
e pr
oces
s;
ther
e is
no
disc
erni
ble
impa
ct o
n ou
tcom
es
for
child
ren
and
youn
g pe
ople
;
■ ■
Primary and Secondary National Strategies | © Crown copyright 2007 | 00505-2007BKT-EN��
School Improvement Partner Programme: quality management framework, edition 1
AS
PE
CT
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d b
e o
utst
and
ing
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
be
go
od
w
here
Pra
ctic
e w
oul
d r
equi
re
som
e im
pro
vem
ent
whe
reP
ract
ice
wo
uld
req
uire
su
bst
antia
l im
pro
vem
ent
whe
re
the
SIP
pro
vide
s go
od
advi
ce fo
r th
e go
vern
ing
body
whi
ch s
uppo
rts
and
chal
leng
es th
e he
adte
ache
r;
SIP
adv
ice
iden
tifie
s st
reng
ths
and
area
s fo
r de
velo
pmen
t and
pr
opos
es a
ppro
pria
te
obje
ctiv
es fo
r im
prov
emen
t with
in th
e co
ntex
t of t
he s
choo
l.
SIP
adv
ice
iden
tifie
s st
reng
ths
and
area
s fo
r de
velo
pmen
t an
d pr
opos
es
soun
d ob
ject
ives
for
impr
ovem
ent w
ithin
the
cont
ext o
f the
sch
ool,
alth
ough
impa
ct o
n ou
tcom
es fo
r ch
ildre
n an
d yo
ung
peop
le is
not
cl
ear;
the
SIP
pro
vide
s so
und
advi
ce fo
r th
e go
vern
ing
body
whi
ch s
uppo
rts
and
chal
leng
es th
e he
adte
ache
r.
the
advi
ce p
rovi
ded
for
the
gove
rnin
g bo
dy
does
not
sup
port
an
d ch
alle
nge
the
head
teac
her
suffi
cien
tly
rigor
ousl
y;
the
resu
lt is
that
st
reng
ths
and
area
s fo
r de
velo
pmen
t are
not
id
entif
ied
and
obje
ctiv
es
for
impr
ovem
ent a
re n
ot
appr
opria
te.
This publication is available for download from:
www.standards.dcsf.gov.uk
www.teachernet.gov.uk/publications
Copies may be available from:
DCSF Publications Tel: 0845 60 222 60 Fax: 0845 60 333 60 Textphone: 0845 60 555 60 e-mail: [email protected]
Ref: 00505-2007BKT-EN
© Crown copyright 2007
Produced by the Department for Children, Schools and Families www.dcsf.gov.uk
The content of this publication may be reproduced free of charge by schools and local authorities provided that the material is acknowledged as Crown copyright, the publication title is specified, it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. Anyone else wishing to reuse part or all of the content of this publication should apply to OPSI for a core licence.
The permission to reproduce Crown copyright protected material does not extend to any material in this publication which is identified as being the copyright of a third party.
Applications to reproduce the material from this publication should be addressed to:
OPSI, Information Policy Team, St Clements House, 2–16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ Fax: 01603 723000 e-mail: [email protected]
Disclaimer
The Department for Children, Schools and Families wishes to make it clear that the Department and its agents accept no responsibility for the actual content of any materials suggested as information sources in this document, whether these are in the form of printed publications or on a website.
In these materials icons, logos, software products and websites are used for contextual and practical reasons. Their use should not be interpreted as an endorsement of particular companies or their products.
The websites referred to in these materials existed at the time of going to print.
Tutors should check all website references carefully to see if they have changed and substitute other references where appropriate.
AS
HFO
RD
CO
LOU
R P
RE
SS
LTD
09-
2007
Top Related