Blue River Academy

School progress monitoring inspection report

p.1

Blue River Academy Sara Park, 160 Herbert Road, Small Heath, Birmingham, West Midlands B10 0PR

p.1

Main inspection findings

Part 1. Quality of education provided Paragraph 3, 3(a), 3(c), 3(d) and 3(g)  At the inspection in March 2016, pupils were not making acceptable progress because teaching, learning and assessment were inadequate. At the time of the last progress monitoring visit, a new system for tracking pupils’ achievement was in the very early stages of implementation.  Teachers are now more confident in using the assessment tracking system to check what new skills pupils have learned. Teachers use assessment information to plan lessons aimed at filling the gaps in pupils’ knowledge. This is helping pupils develop more secure basic reading, writing and mathematics skills.  Nevertheless, teachers are not using evidence shown in pupils’ books to plan work that challenges pupils enough or helps them to move forward in their understanding. Consequently, much of the work expected of pupils is too easy. Pupils’ books show they

p.1

Main inspection findings

work hard when lessons are appropriately challenging. On the other hand, presentation is often sloppy when the work is not hard enough. Two pupils who spoke to inspectors said they felt they were learning little that was new.  Therefore, while teachers are using assessment more effectively than at the time of the last inspection, these standards are not met. Part 3. Welfare, health and safety of pupils Paragraph 7, 7(a) and 7(b)  The standard for safeguarding was checked at the request of the Department for Education. Inspectors found widespread failings in safeguarding procedures. These leave pupils at significant risk of harm.  Recent staff changes and a weak culture around safeguarding have resulted in little oversight by leaders. The safeguarding policy, as shown on the school’s website, is not fit for purpose. It does not effectively support staff in taking the actions necessary to keep pupils safe in school, or to equip pupils with the skills to keep themselves safe

p.1

Main inspection findings

when they leave.  Staff have not been routinely vetted thoroughly when appointed. The proprietor does not ensure that only staff who are suitable to work with children are appointed.  Staff are not vigilant to signs that pupils’ safety may be at risk. Even when information suggesting this may be the case is provided to the school, leaders do not make enough use of it to keep pupils safe from further possible harm. This includes where pupils are known to have expressed extremist views. Leaders do not take these risks seriously enough.  Some of the school’s pupils are in the care of a local authority. Rather than supporting them in overcoming their barriers to learning, these pupils’ experience at the school leaves them vulnerable to further risk.  Where information of a sensitive nature about individual pupils is held by the school, it is not stored securely or treated in such a way as to ensure confidentiality is preserved.

p.1

Main inspection findings

This is in contravention of statutory guidance issued by the Secretary of State.  Pupils’ behaviour, and the way in which it is managed, poses risks to their safety. Sometimes, staff respond to serious incidents in ways that leave pupils feeling unfairly treated or even intimidated.  Pupils are at significant risk of harm. As a result, these standards are not met. Paragraph 9, 9(a), 9(b) and 9(c)  Inspectors checked the implementation of the school’s behaviour policy at the request of the Department for Education. The policy clearly outlines the steps staff should take to respond to unacceptable behaviour. Nevertheless, pupils’ behaviour is not consistently managed well. Often the focus is on containing behaviour, rather than applying the strategies described in the policy.  Records of serious behaviour incidents and the sanctions imposed upon pupils are kept in pupils’ individual files. However, leaders have no strategic view of whether the

p.2

Main inspection findings

sanctions applied for poor behaviour are effective. For example, repeated detentions for smoking on the school site have done little to deter pupils from continuing to do so.  On occasions, staff judge pupils’ behaviour to be severe enough to result in exclusion from school. The policy around this procedure is unclear. Pupils’ records show that several have been sent home from school without notice. Leaders say they attempt to contact parents to inform them of this, but are not always successful in doing so. This approach to excluding pupils is not permitted under the law. By sending pupils home in this way, the school is unable to assure their safety. As a consequence, these standards are not met. Paragraph 10  The Department for Education asked inspectors to check the implementation of the school’s anti-bullying policy. The policy sets out that bullying is unacceptable and that it will be dealt with robustly. Pupils report that the policy is applied fairly and that

p.2

Main inspection findings

incidences of bullying are resolved by staff.  Pupils’ records show that staff tackle bullying in line with the school’s policy. Actions taken are designed to mitigate against the risk of repeated bullying. These are effective. The standard for this paragraph is met. Paragraph 14  The Department for Education requested that inspectors ascertain whether arrangements to supervise pupils are adequate. Pupils are appropriately supervised while on the school premises or when attending local sports facilities. However, pupils are sometimes unlawfully sent home for poor behaviour, even though school staff have been unable to contact parents to let them know their child is not at school. Consequently, pupils are sometimes ejected from the premises during the school day without supervision. For this reason, the standard is not met. Paragraph 16, 16(a) and 16(b)  Inspectors were also asked to check whether an appropriate risk assessment policy is

p.2

Main inspection findings

drawn up and implemented effectively. All school activities, both on and off the premises are carefully considered. Staff meet each morning to discuss pupils’ well-being and to be alert to any issues facing particular pupils that may require specific management.  Nevertheless, the school has not assessed the risks associated with sending pupils home during the school day without supervision. In addition, the proprietor does not thoroughly check staff’s suitability to work with children. This leaves pupils at risk of being taught by unsuitable persons.  Therefore these standards are not met. Part 4. Suitability of staff, supply staff, and proprietors Paragraph 18(2), 18(2)(c), 18(2)(c)(iv) and 18 (2)(d)  As part of the inspection of safeguarding (paragraph 7), inspectors checked the school’s processes for recruitment and the register of checks made on staff prior to appointment. The staff register appears to show robust processes.

p.3

Main inspection findings

 However, this is not substantiated by the sample of staff files viewed by inspectors. These show fundamental weaknesses in checks on the suitability of staff to work with children or vulnerable adults. For example, leaders have not always insisted on seeing proof of candidates’ claims to possess a recognised teaching qualification.  All files in the sample included evidence of enhanced criminal record checks. However, some show these checks to be cursory and not taken seriously. Not all required details are requested. There is evidence of failure to act when the information received suggests further checks are needed to ensure pupils’ safety.  Following the resignation of the headteacher, no member of staff or the governing body is suitably trained in safer recruitment practices. It is imperative that this is rectified immediately and before the appointment of any more staff, including a new headteacher.

p.3

Main inspection findings

 These standard are not met. Pupils are at risk as a result. Part 6. Provision of information Paragraph 32(1), 32(1)(a), 32(1)(b), 32(1)(c) and 32(1)(d), paragraph 32(2), 32(2)(a), 32(2)(b), 32(2)(b)(i) and 32(2)(c), paragraph 32(3), 32(3)(a), 32(3)(b), 32(3)(c), 32(3)(d) and 32(3)(g)  These standards were checked at the request of the Department for Education.  The headteacher is not named on the school’s website. Conflicting information about who the headteacher might be is presented in the safeguarding policy, the behaviour policy and the staff structure chart.  The proprietor is not named. The proprietorial body is named as Blue River Academy. No such company exists. The company that owns the school is called Blue River Support Services Ltd. Muhammed Abdullah is the registered proprietor of the school according to the Department for Education’s records, but is not named on the website. This lack of

p.3

Main inspection findings

clarity may be misleading to parents and placing authorities.  The website contains no reference to the chair of governors. It does not state that the chair of the governing body is also the registered proprietor and is the same person currently carrying out the duties of headteacher. This lack of information hides the limited accountability for the quality of education and safety of pupils that inspectors found to be the case.  Unlawful exclusion is used routinely. The website does not show a policy on exclusions. Therefore parents have no reason to believe this is not acceptable practice.  The school’s website ‘link’ to information about provision for pupils who have special educational needs and/or disabilities does not work. Therefore there is no information about how the school will fulfil its duties towards such pupils. There is no mention of how the school will make provision for pupils who speak English an additional language,

p.4

Main inspection findings

yet this is the case for several pupils currently being educated at the site.  The website contains no reference to how the school will promote pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development. Given that the school has clear evidence that extremist views have been expressed by at least one pupil, this is of concern.  There is no information about the school’s policy for first aid.  The Ofsted report of March 2016 (in which the school was judged to be inadequate) was elaborately hidden on the website. It is very unlikely that parents would find it. The previous report of 2012 (in which the school was judged to be good) is displayed when the ‘Ofsted report’ link is clicked. The subsequent report is added to the bottom of this, with a blank page in between.  The website strapline uses the Ofsted outstanding logo and quotes from the 2012 report to suggest that the school is outstanding. This is not true. The school is not, and has

p.4

Main inspection findings

never been, outstanding. Similar quotes appear in several sections of the website. This is, at best, highly misleading and indicates a deliberate attempt to deceive parents and placing authorities.  These paragraphs are not met. The school meets the remaining standards for the provision of information. Part 8. Quality of leadership in and management of schools Paragraph 34(1), 34(1)(a), 34(1)(b) and 34(1)(c)  The number and significance of the unmet paragraphs show leaders’ lack of knowledge and inability to fulfil their responsibilities and ensure that the independent school standards are met. This places pupils at considerable risk. As a consequence, these standards are not met. Schedule 10 of the Equality Act 2010  Leaders could not demonstrate to inspectors that the school is fulfilling its duty under The Act.

p.4

Compliance with regulatory requirements

The school does not meet the requirements of the schedule to The Education (Independent School Standards) Regulations 2014 (‘the independent school standards’) and associated requirements that were checked during this inspection. This included the standards and requirements that the school was judged to not comply with at the previous inspection. Not all of the standards and associated requirements were checked during this inspection.

p.6

The school does not meet the following independent school standards

Standards that were not met at the previous inspection and remain un-met at this inspection  Part 1, paragraph 3, 3(a), 3(c), 3(d) and 3(g)  Part 8, paragraph 34(1), 34(1)(a) and 34(1)(b).

p.6

The school does not meet the following independent school standards

Standards that were met at the previous inspection, but are now judged to not be met at this inspection  Part 3, paragraph 7, 7(a) and 7(b), paragraph 9, 9(a), 9(b) and 9(c), paragraph 14, paragraph 16, 16(a) and 16(b)  Part 4, paragraph 18(2), 18(2)(c), 18(2)(c)(iv) and 18(2)(d)  Part 6, paragraph 32(1), 32(1)(a), 32(1)(b), 32(1)(c) and 32(1)(d), paragraph 32(2), 32(2)(a), 32(2)(b)(i) and 32(2)(c), paragraph 32(3), 32(3)(a), 32(3)(b), 32(3)(c), 32(3)(d) and 32(3)(g)  Part 8 paragraph 34(1)(c)  Compliance with Schedule 10 of the Equality Act 2010.

p.6

School Details

This inspection was carried out under section 109(1) and (2) of the Education and Skills Act 2008, the purpose of which is to advise the Secretary of State for Education about the school’s suitability for continued registration as an independent school.

p.7

School Details

Annual fees (day pupils) £33.85 per day via pupil placements £2,700 to £2,900 per term via school referring agency Telephone number 0121 753 1933

p.7

School Details

Date of previous standard inspection 2–4 March 2016

p.7

Information about this school

 Blue River Academy caters for pupils aged 14 to 16 who are at risk of permanent exclusion from mainstream school, or who are newly arrived in the country and are unable to gain a school place. Most have missed a substantial amount of schooling. Many have become disengaged from education. Some, however, are highly motivated to learn.  The headteacher, who took up his post in September 2016, has recently resigned and left the school.  The school is located in a former children’s play centre, rented from the local authority. The school has access to two other sites, should numbers require: one based at Tyseley Community Centre, the other at Medley Road. Neither was in use at the time of this inspection.

p.7

Information about this inspection

 This inspection was carried out at the request of the registration authority for independent schools. The purpose of the inspection was to monitor the progress the school has made in meeting the independent school standards and other requirements that it was judged to not comply with at its previous inspection.  The inspection was conducted without notice.  Inspectors met with the proprietor and other staff. Inspectors observed pupils as they worked in lessons, looked at the work in their books and spoke to two about their learning and about how the school keeps them safe.  Inspectors scrutinised documents relating to safeguarding, pupils’ behaviour and their academic achievement.  This was the second progress monitoring inspection since the school was judged to be inadequate in March 2016. Leaders submitted an action plan to the Department of Education. Ofsted evaluated the plan in July 2016. Amendments to the plan and its

p.9

Information about this inspection

implementation were considered in the first progress monitoring visit in December 2016.  In addition to the standards that were not met at the previous inspection, the Department for Education commissioned inspectors to examine: arrangements for safeguarding pupils; implementation of policies for managing pupils’ behaviour and promoting anti-bullying; the provision of information; and the effectiveness of governance.

p.9

Inspection team

Sandy Hayes, lead inspector Her Majesty’s Inspector

p.9

Inspection team

Tim Hill Her Majesty’s Inspector guidance ‘Raising concerns and making a complaint about Ofsted’, which is available from Ofsted’s website: www.gov.uk/government/publications/complaints-about-ofsted . If you would like Ofsted to send you a copy of the guidance, please telephone 0300 123 4234, or email enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk .

p.9

Inspection team

Parent View You can use Parent View to give Ofsted your opinion on your child’s school. Ofsted will use the information parents and carers provide when deciding which schools to inspect and when and as part of the inspection.

p.10

Inspection team

You can also use Parent View to find out what other parents and carers think about schools in England. You can visitwww.parentview.ofsted.gov.uk, or look for the link on the main Ofsted website: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ofsted .

p.10

Inspection team

achieve excellence in the care of children and young people, and in education and skills for learners of all ages. It regulates and inspects childcare and children’s social care, and inspects the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass), schools, colleges, initial teacher training, further education and skills, adult and community learning, and education and training in prisons and other secure establishments. It assesses council children’s services, and inspects services for looked after children, safeguarding and child protection.

p.10

Inspection team

If you would like a copy of this document in a different format, such as large print or Braille, please telephone 0300 123 1231, or email enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk . You may reuse this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open- government-licence , write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk .

p.10

Inspection team

Interested in our work? You can subscribe to our monthly newsletter for more information and updates: http://eepurl.com/iTrDn .

p.10

Inspection team

T: 0300 123 4234 Textphone: 0161 618 8524 E: enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk W: www.ofsted.gov.uk

p.10