Setting

Mr Hugh Greenway Chief Executive Officer The Elliot Foundation Pyramid House 252b Gray’s Inn Road London WC1X 8JT

p.1

Summary evaluation of The Elliot Foundation Academies Trust

Following the summary evaluation of The Elliot Foundation Academies Trust (‘the trust’) in June 2019, I am writing on behalf of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills to confirm the findings.

p.1

Summary evaluation of The Elliot Foundation Academies Trust

Thank you for your cooperation during our visit to the trust on 24 to 28 June 2019. Please pass on our thanks to your staff and other stakeholders who kindly gave up their time to meet us.

p.1

Summary evaluation of The Elliot Foundation Academies Trust

The findings from the summary evaluation and a wider consideration of the trust’s overall performance are set out below.

p.1

Summary of main findings

◼ The trust’s ethos, vision and values are well understood. They inform the work of all of the trust’s schools, and that of the central team. Leaders share your conviction that a school’s context should not be used as an excuse for poor attainment on the part of pupils.

p.1

Summary of main findings

◼ Leaders’ high expectations have helped to promote significant and rapid improvement in the quality of education in most of the trust’s schools, including many that had a previous history of being less than good. Ofsted

p.1

Summary of main findings

Store Street Manchester M1 2WD T 0300 123 1231 Textphone 0161 618 8524 MAT@ofsted.gov.uk www.gov.uk.ofsted ◼ School leaders value the trust’s commitment to ensuring that individual schools retain their distinct characteristics, a high level of autonomy, and the ability to innovate. This approach typically enables schools to meet the needs of the communities they serve effectively. It has been a factor in many schools’ decision to join the trust.

p.1

Summary of main findings

◼ One leader, echoing others, spoke of the ‘open, responsive and sometimes inspirational’ nature of their engagement with the trust’s senior staff. School leaders value the influence they can have on the trust’s development and direction, and describe a culture of ‘reflection rather than recrimination’ when things go wrong.

p.2

Summary of main findings

◼ Since its formation in 2011, the trust has pursued a measured approach to growth. Over time, the work to establish schools’ strengths and weaknesses at the time that they join the trust has become increasingly forensic. This enables both trust and school leaders to set appropriate priorities for improvement.

p.2

Summary of main findings

◼ The trust has helped to increase the effectiveness of leadership and management within its schools. Underperformance is typically tackled quickly and effectively. Most Ofsted reports indicate that leadership has improved since schools have joined the trust and that it is at least good.

p.2

Summary of main findings

◼ Regular checks on each school’s performance ensure that the trust’s central team know their schools well. Much information is gathered about the progress that pupils are making, and this is used to target timely improvements when these are needed. However, despite these checks and balances, on occasion the trust’s response has been too slow when standards have been low.

p.2

Summary of main findings

◼ School leaders value the help that the trust provides to improve provision; a high proportion of Ofsted reports note the positive difference that the trust’s support and challenge have made.

p.2

Summary of main findings

◼ Leaders and staff readily share ideas and resources with each other. The trust’s systems ensure that effective practice is identified and disseminated quickly both within, and increasingly across, the three regions within which schools are grouped. This work is developing the capacity of schools to support each other’s improvement on a continuous and self-sustaining basis.

p.2

Summary of main findings

◼ Staff benefit from high-quality and well-targeted professional development opportunities. These enable individuals to take on new leadership responsibilities with confidence, or to increase the effectiveness with which they support pupils in their learning.

p.2

Summary of main findings

◼ Pupils’ achievement across all performance measures in many schools demonstrates an improving trend over time. This is particularly true in respect of pupils’ attainment in the national tests at the end of key stage 2. Over time, disadvantaged pupils’ attainment at key stage 2 has increased markedly. The difference between their attainment and that of others nationally has reduced. In 2018, the proportion achieving the expected standard in each of reading, writing and mathematics was close to that for all pupils nationally.

p.2

Summary of main findings

◼ In 2018, too few key stage 2 pupils, particularly boys, made sufficient progress in writing. The trust has prioritised efforts to address this, but it is too soon to determine the impact of this work.

p.3

Summary of main findings

◼ The trust has concentrated much of its work on supporting schools to increase the proportion of pupils who achieve the expected standard in reading, writing and mathematics. However, many pupils who are capable of being high achievers are not realising their potential.

p.3

Summary of main findings

◼ The trust works hard to ensure that all pupils, including those who are disadvantaged, enjoy a wide range of life experiences. Evidence from inspections indicates that pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development is promoted well.

p.3

Summary of main findings

◼ To date, the trust’s curriculum development work has predominantly focused on English and mathematics. Work on developing the wider curriculum and sharing expertise in the foundation subjects is less well advanced.

p.3

Summary of main findings

◼ Overall, pupils’ attendance is in line with the national average. The proportion of disadvantaged pupils who are persistently absent, though falling, remains too high. The trust has been successful in reducing the incidence of repeated fixed-term exclusion. The trust’s oversight of safeguarding is effective.

p.3

Summary of main findings

◼ Trust leaders are rightly reviewing the ways in which local governing bodies (LGBs) work. In some cases, LGBs have been insufficiently effective in their work to support and challenge leaders.

p.3

Summary of main findings

◼ Recent appointments to the trust’s central team have significantly strengthened its capacity to help leaders deal with issues relating to finance, governance, premises and staffing matters. This central capacity reduces the need for school leaders to spend time on activities not directly related to pupils’ progress.

p.3

Summary of main findings

◼ The trust board has developed the necessary knowledge, capacity and experience to shape the organisation’s development and strategic direction.

p.3

Range of evidence

◼ Eleven schools were inspected between January 2019 and May 2019. The outcomes of these and previous inspections were considered.

p.3

Range of evidence

ꟷ In the seven section 5 inspections, one school was judged to be outstanding, three schools were judged to be good, two were judged to require improvement and one was deemed to be inadequate and require special measures.

p.3

Range of evidence

ꟷ In the three section 8 inspections, all the schools remained good. One was judged to be improving.

p.4

Range of evidence

ꟷ One outstanding school received a section 8 monitoring inspection and was judged to remain outstanding.

p.4

Range of evidence

During the on-site visit to the trust, discussions were held with you and other senior and operational staff, together with a representative of the board of trustees. In addition, HMI visited nine schools and held telephone discussions with senior leaders and teaching staff representing a further eight schools. A range of relevant documentation was also scrutinised, including strategic plans, case studies from individual schools, information about pupils’ achievement, behaviour and progress, minutes of meetings and safeguarding information.

p.4

Context

◼ The trust consists of 24 primary schools, two infant schools and two junior schools. These schools are located within three regional ‘hubs’, each of which is headed by a regional director. This regional tier of leadership is central to the school improvement work of the trust. Nine schools are located in London, 10 in East Anglia and nine in the West Midlands. Twelve schools are academy converters, six of which were judged to require improvement at the point of conversion. The remaining 16 are sponsor-led academies.

p.4

Context

◼ The trust was initially established in 2012. It has gradually expanded over time, with four schools joining in 2012, nine in 2013, four in 2014, four in 2015, one in 2016 and five in 2017. The most recent school to join was Westwood Primary School in October 2018.

p.4

Context

◼ The trust’s primary schools vary in size, from below 50 pupils to over 800. Seventeen are larger than the average-sized primary school.

p.4

Context

◼ Six schools were inadequate and 11 required improvement at the point at which they joined the trust. Of the remaining schools, nine were good and one was outstanding. One school, John Locke Academy, was opened by the trust as a new school in September 2014.

p.4

Context

◼ The proportion of disadvantaged pupils in the trust is above that found nationally, as is the proportion who speak English as an additional language. The proportion of pupils with special educational needs and/or disabilities (SEND) with an education, health and care (EHC) plan is broadly in line with the national average. ◼ The trust board is made up of 10 trustees. There is a senior central team made up of nine full-time staff. Several members of this team have joined the trust over the past year. This team is responsible for the strategic and operational work of the trust. The trust also makes use of external agencies and consultants to support its schools.

p.4

Main findings

◼ Currently, the inspection outcomes for the trust’s academies, including the most recent focused inspections, are as follows: ꟷ seven schools are judged to be outstanding ꟷ 11 schools are judged to be good ꟷ four schools are judged to require improvement ꟷ one school is judged to be inadequate ꟷ five schools are yet to be inspected since joining the trust. Of these, one of the predecessor schools was judged to be outstanding and is exempt from routine inspections, two were judged to be good, and two were judged to require improvement. ◼ The trust’s strong collaborative ethos, together with its vision and values, are well understood and permeate the work of all of its schools. The trust’s work is underpinned by a commitment that all pupils will leave primary school ‘life ready’ and ‘secondary ready’. This commitment is passionately shared by leaders at all levels, many of whom expressed pride in being part of the trust,

p.5

Main findings

and spoke positively about working in partnership with others across it. One principal spoke for many in commenting that, ‘We are one organisation; all of us are ultimately responsible for all of the pupils in the trust.’

p.5

Main findings

◼ The trust is wholeheartedly inclusive and deliberately non-hierarchical. Trustees have, after a thorough process of due diligence, welcomed schools into the organisation that have, in many cases, had a history of not doing well enough by their pupils. Leaders of schools, most of which are in challenging circumstances, share trust leaders’ conviction that a school’s context is ‘a challenge and not an excuse for underachievement’. The trust is determined to improve the well-being and achievement of vulnerable pupils, including those who are disadvantaged. It is increasingly effective in supporting schools to do so.

p.5

Main findings

◼ School leaders value the fact that the trust’s schools retain their own characters and the freedom ‘to do what is right for our pupils’. This promotes innovation, and the trust has supported schools that have taken distinctive approaches to the wider curriculum. Trust leaders carefully manage the risks posed by innovation, and share that which is effective both within and across the three regional hubs. The words of one governor were typical of the sentiments expressed by other leaders: ‘The trust gives us a chance to be local, and to work with others nationally for the benefit of children and teachers.’

p.5

Main findings

◼ You and your team model the reflective, open-minded approach you expect of others. Schools share their monitoring information with each other so that, as one leader commented, ‘All can see where things are happening successfully, who to learn from, and who needs help.’ Many make a significant contribution to the work of the trust, providing support that helps to promote improvement outside of their own schools. School leaders value their systematic involvement in discussing and setting trust values and priorities, planning for improvements and reviewing the effectiveness of the trust’s work. They share the chief executive officer’s desire for ‘change with conviction and that is sustainable’. School leaders are effusive in their praise of regional directors’ candour and expertise; they value, as one put it, their ‘watchful, open and developmental’ role. However, trust leaders are rightly reviewing the checks and balances in

p.6

Main findings

place so that, when necessary, they step in more swiftly when it is clear that the quality of education in a school is declining.

p.6

Main findings

◼ You, trustees and senior trust staff have a detailed knowledge of your schools, together with their contexts, pupils and staff. With very few exceptions, school leaders consider the trust’s improvement priorities to reflect local and regional imperatives. The trust, through ‘progress partner’ visits, regional director monitoring and annual reviews, checks schools’ progress towards meeting these priorities. Expert guidance, training and support usually help schools to meet them. Where progress is too slow, the trust typically ensures that schools get access to the help that they need through the ‘team around the academy’ intensive support process. Trust leaders have, in response to feedback from headteachers, adjusted the format and focus of ‘progress partner’ visits. However, some school leaders told HMI that there remains too much inconsistency in the level of scrutiny and challenge that these visits provide.

p.6

Main findings

◼ The trust has an impressive record in developing leadership capacity so that improvements that are made are sustainable. Only one in five schools joined the trust with leadership and management that was judged by Ofsted to be good. After subsequent inspections, 19 of the 23 schools with published reports indicate that the effectiveness of leadership and management is good or better. Fourteen have improved their ‘overall effectiveness’ judgement by at least one grade, and five by two grades or more. This has ensured that all schools have in place the right leadership foundations to improve further. School leaders have a clear understanding of the trust’s priorities for improvement. Recent inspection reports have identified the trust’s support as positive.

p.6

Main findings

◼ Principals value the opportunities they have to determine regional priorities and direct school improvement funding in order to meet them. They also direct the work of a number of ‘special interest groups’, forums that are ensuring the rapid sharing of effective practice between regions, including safeguarding and providing support for vulnerable pupils. The work of the trust’s ‘expert teachers’ in providing training for others is particularly appreciated by school leaders and often has demonstrable and significant impact. However, this work – alongside other work to share effective practice regionally – is more embedded in the West Midlands hub than in London or East Anglia. ‘Expert teachers’ who are specialists in subjects other than English and mathematics have been selected, but have yet to start their work.

p.6

Main findings

◼ Overall, the quality of training and development across the trust is a strength. Teachers, leaders and support staff are provided with a systematic programme of courses and high-quality opportunities which develop their skills well. Increasingly, this is promoting the retention of staff within the trust. Newly and recently qualified teachers spoke very positively about the long-term development of aspects of their expertise. A number of current school leaders started their teaching careers with the trust. They were able to discuss the ways in which their precisely focused professional development has helped them to seek and meet the challenges involved in senior leadership. Teaching assistants spoke equally appreciatively about the training that has helped them to support pupils’ learning, personal development and mental health more effectively.

p.7

Main findings

◼ Pupils’ outcomes across most performance measures in many schools demonstrate an improving trend. The proportion of children across the trust achieving a good level of development was below the national average in 2018. However, this represented good progress given children’s starting points when they join the schools. Evidence from inspection reports demonstrates that in almost all schools, provision in early years is good; in eight schools it is outstanding. Pupils’ attainment in reading, writing and mathematics by the end of key stage 1 remains below that found nationally.

p.7

Main findings

◼ The proportion of pupils who achieve the expected standard in reading, writing and mathematics in the key stage 2 national tests and assessments has improved markedly over recent years, and is now close to the national average. This reflects the trust’s particular emphasis on driving forward improvements at key stage 2. Pupils’ progress in writing is below average. The trust is rightly challenging and supporting schools to improve the progress pupils make in writing, for example through the boys’ writing research project. While leaders report that this work is helping improve provision, it is too early to determine the extent to which it is achieving its aims.

p.7

Main findings

◼ Overall, disadvantaged pupils are making good progress and achieving well. The difference between these pupils’ key stage 2 outcomes and those of pupils nationally has reduced significantly. This reflects, in large part, your insistence that context is no excuse, and that each and every pupil will receive the help that they need to achieve highly. It is also a result of ongoing efforts to ensure that all pupils derive equal benefit from high-quality teaching. Disadvantaged pupils also profit to the same degree as other pupils from their immersion in the rich and varied artistic, musical, cultural and sporting activities that take place within the trust’s schools.

p.7

Main findings

◼ Pupils who are capable of being high achievers are not realising their potential in many schools. To date, you have focused on supporting schools to improve the proportion of pupils who achieve the expected standard in reading, writing and mathematics in the key stage 2 national tests. You are rightly turning your attention to improving the progress of pupils who are capable of working at greater depth. However, this work is at an early stage and lacks the cohesion evident in other aspects of the trust’s school improvement work.

p.8

Main findings

◼ In keeping with the trust’s emphasis on improving life chances for the most vulnerable pupils, schools typically provide well for pupils with SEND. The trust’s monitoring information, together with Ofsted’s findings, indicates that most pupils with SEND make good progress from their individual starting points. In some schools, specialist provision, including for pupils with autism spectrum disorder, is particularly effective. Regional SEND leads are being appointed, and the trust has plans to carry out detailed audits of SEND provision on a school-by-school basis from the beginning of the forthcoming academic year. Plans are also in place to appoint regional specialist support workers, such as educational psychologists, to supplement the work of external agencies.

p.8

Main findings

◼ Evidence gathered during a number of inspections indicates weaknesses in curriculum planning within the foundation subjects. In schools where this is the case, this limits the extent to which pupils develop their knowledge and understanding within subjects other than English and mathematics. The trust’s work to support schools’ development of the wider curriculum, beyond that of English and mathematics, is not as well established as it should be. There is a lack of clarity on the part of leaders about the yardsticks that the trust uses to establish the quality of curriculum.

p.8

Main findings

◼ Reflective of many schools’ pressing priorities, much of the trust’s improvement work, including the sharing of good practice, has centred on the core subjects of English and mathematics. The trust has not sufficiently utilised the teaching school and expert teacher programme to develop the wider curriculum. Recently, you and your team have set about correcting this imbalance and you have credible plans to do so. However, this work is not as advanced as it needs to be and remains a priority for the trust and many of its schools.

p.8

Main findings

◼ Trust leaders have a detailed and up-to-date knowledge of pupils’ attendance. Increasing attendance has been a key priority; in 2017, the proportion of pupils who were persistently absent was above the national average in over half of the trust’s schools. The attendance of pupils across the trust is now in line with the national average. The proportion of pupils who are persistently absent is also in line with that found nationally. This reflects the successful sharing of strategies to reduce absence. However, the proportion of disadvantaged pupils who are persistently absent remains too high. Work to share schools’ effective techniques to rectify this is too recent to have the impact that leaders intend. During the current academic year, schools have worked well to reduce the incidence of fixed-term exclusion, with the support of the trust.

p.8

Main findings

◼ The effectiveness of local governance is too uneven across schools in the trust. In some schools, this has limited the pace and extent of school improvement. Trust leaders have recently changed their scheme of delegation, which has clarified those responsibilities delegated to LGBs by the trustees. The recently appointed trust lead for governance is working well to support LGBs where it has been identified that the focus or extent of challenge to school leaders is not as it should be. Plans are in place to change the trust’s governance model.

p.9

Main findings

◼ As the trust has grown, there have been some ‘bumps in the road’ in ensuring that the central team delivers a high-quality service for its schools. However, there have been some strong improvements over time. Schools commented on a noticeable improvement and their ‘new confidence in the finance team’. This is because you have increased the capacity of the central team so that aspects such as estates, finance, HR and governance are now provided for well. Comments from leaders include ‘their [the trust’s staff] belief in every child is paramount; when we talk to the central team, their focus is always on the children.’

p.9

Main findings

◼ School leaders explained that the trust is mindful of its duty to manage leaders’ and teachers’ workload. Trust-led developments of its preferred marking and feedback policy, and the development of online sharing of teaching resources, is being well received. Many leaders explained how this is helping to reduce the unnecessary duplication of work on the part of teachers and subject leaders.

p.9

Safeguarding

◼ The trust provides effectively for pupils’ safeguarding. Stringent audits, regular scrutiny, and timely, well-coordinated training by ‘safeguarding ambassadors’ and others ensure that processes and procedures are secure. Designated safeguarding leads meet periodically and share resources and strategies at the safeguarding special interest group, which is coordinated by them and attended by the trust’s safeguarding lead. This leads to the rapid adoption of the best that is done across the trust to keep pupils safe. All schools follow the safer recruitment processes that are set out by the trust. Safeguarding has been found to be effective during every one of the Ofsted inspections of the trust’s schools. ◼ All schools now record and report safeguarding concerns in a common way. The trust is using this information to support schools in their work to promote and sustain pupils’ well-being. Designated safeguarding leads and other

p.9

Safeguarding

colleagues benefit from training that is designed to help them respond to the most common concerns that staff record. Very many staff have been trained in how to spot the signs that a pupil’s mental health may be at risk, and how to get them the help that they need, for example. Schools are also using their monitoring information to plan so that the curriculum helps pupils understand risks and how to manage these before they are likely to encounter them.

p.10

Recommendations

◼ Improve the trust’s work in supporting schools to develop the curriculum in subjects other than English and mathematics. ◼ Ensure that pupils who are capable of achieving highly realise their potential. ◼ Reduce further the proportion of disadvantaged pupils who are persistently absent from school. ◼ Continue to improve the effectiveness of local governing bodies, so that each holds leaders more rigorously to account for the quality of the school’s curriculum.

p.10

inspections

School Local Authority Date opened as an academy Previous inspection judgement Inspection grade

p.11

inspections

Billesley Primary Birmingham November 2012 Good Outstanding Chandos Primary Birmingham February 2017 Predecessor school: requires improvement Good

p.11

inspections

Claremont Primary Barnet March 2016 Predecessor school: requires improvement Good

p.11

inspections

George Betts Sandwell July 2013 Good Good Nene Infant School Cambridgeshire October 2013 Good Requires improvement Pinkwell Primary Hillingdon April 2014 February 2017: requires improvement Requires improvement

p.11

inspections

Ramnoth Junior School Cambridgeshire October 2013 Good Inadequate

p.11

short or monitoring inspections

School Local Authority Date opened as an academy Previous inspection judgement Inspection grade

p.11

short or monitoring inspections

Cavalry Primary Cambridgeshire March 2017 Predecessor school: good Good

p.11

short or monitoring inspections

George Betts Primary Sandwell July 2013 January 2015: Good Good

p.11

short or monitoring inspections

Parkfield Primary Barnet August 2013 July 2015 Good Tiverton Academy Birmingham May 2013 April 2015: outstanding Outstanding

p.11

Other Trust schools

School Local Authority Date opened as an academy Previous inspection judgement Most recent Inspection grade Croft Academy Walsall September 2012 Requires improvement Requires improvement Elm Road Primary Cambridgeshire November 2015 Requires improvement Good

p.12

Other Trust schools

Eyrescroft Primary Peterborough December 2015 Inadequate Requires improvement Greenside Primary Hammersmith and Fulham April 2015 Good Good

p.12

Other Trust schools

Griffin Primary Wandsworth September 2017 Requires improvement N/A

p.12

Other Trust schools

Highlees Primary Peterborough September 2013 Good Good Hillingdon Primary Hillingdon July 2014 Outstanding Exempt from routine inspection The Hyde Academy Barnet September 2013 Inadequate Outstanding

p.12

Other Trust schools

John Locke Academy Hillingdon September 2014 Not applicable Outstanding

p.12

Other Trust schools

King’s Rise Academy Birmingham November 2012 Inadequate Outstanding

p.12

Other Trust schools

Lena Gardens Primary Hammersmith and Fulham March 2014 Good Good

p.12

Other Trust schools

Millfield Primary Cambridgeshire December 2015 Requires improvement Good

p.12

Other Trust schools

Ramsey Junior School Cambridgeshire April 2017 Predecessor school: good N/A

p.12

Other Trust schools

Ramsey Spinning Infant School Cambridgeshire April 2017 Predecessor school: good N/A

p.12

Other Trust schools

Shirestone Academy Birmingham November 2012 Good Outstanding

p.12

Other Trust schools

Shireland Hall Primary Sandwell July 2013 Good Outstanding

p.12

Other Trust schools

Westwood Primary Cambridgeshire October 2018 Predecessor school: requires improvement N/A

p.12

Other Trust schools

Woods Bank Academy Walsall February 2013 Requires improvement Good

p.12