1



|[pic]

BOARD MEETING

Monday 17 October 2005

Minutes

Present:

1.

Clerk’s matters

2.

Minutes

3.

Matters arising

4.

Principal’s Report

5.

Finance Report

6.

Project Report

7.

Committee Reports

8.

Risk Management

9.

Exam results

10.

Governance SAR

11.

Dates of next meetings

12.

AOB

Business Members:

I. Hockman (Chairman)

S.Agathangelou

S.Appleman

Co-opted Member:

K. Sage

H. Savla

M. Stanier

Staff Members:

M. Djemili

M. Junnor

Student Member:

G. Sami

Parent Member:

M. Fernando

Community Members:

I. Cheetham

Principal:

A. Robinson

Senior Managers (by invitation):

C. Kirkland

A-M. Robinson

J. Rubinstein

College Accountant:

C. Winter

Clerk to the Governors:

G. George

| |

|1. |Clerk’s Matters | |

| | | |

| |Apologies for absence: H. Freeman, P. Hammond, I. Phillips, M. Seager, A. Wootton, K. Murdoch. | |

| |No Members declared any interest . | |

| |The Chairman welcomed the new Student Member, Galal Sami, to the | |

| |meeting. | |

| | | |

|2. |Minutes | |

| | | |

| |2.1 Minutes of Meeting of 11.07.05 were agreed. |Minutes signed |

| |2.2 Minutes of Extraordinary Meeting of 19.09.05 were agreed. |Minutes signed |

|3. |Matters Arising | |

| | | |

| |There were no matters arising, other than matters on the agenda. | |

|4. |Principal’s Report | |

| | | |

| |The Principal reported that the Annual Assessment Visit on 1st November would be conducted by Vincent Ashworth, | |

| |HMI. He would be looking at any areas for improvement highlighted in the last Inspection and in the College Self | |

| |Assessment Report to ensure that the College was addressing these issues. | |

| | | |

| |A-M. Robinson indicated that it had been difficult to recruit students for German, Geography and Applied ICT. | |

| |There were now 443 UCAS applications on the system, with some 150 nearing completion. The College was working | |

| |towards renewal of its Investors in Careers award. The proposal that | |

| | | |

| |the Board of Governors fully endorses the College’s application for renewal of its Investors in Careers Award | |

| | | |

| |was proposed by M.Stanier, seconded by I.Cheetham and approved nem con. | |

| | | |

| |I. Cheetham congratulated the College on its outstanding sickness record, which he said would be the envy of most | |

| |institutions. |Investors in Careers |

| | |endorsed |

| |In response to a question from H. Freeman (e-mailed in his absence), C. Winter explained that some | |

| |charges for utilities had been attributed to ‘Catering’ so that the deficit appeared to be more than the agreed | |

| |‘cap’, also it had been necessary to purchase some basic equipment (not of sufficient value to capitalise). | |

| | | |

| |The Principal expressed her thanks to Carol Kirkland for all her hard work with regard to ‘Premises’ and in | |

| |particular for her efforts in negotiating a successful bid with the LSC for the DDA application. | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | |Matters for report and |

| | |questions |

| | | |

|5. |Finance Report | |

| | | |

| |5.1 | |

| |Members had received the draft end-of-year Management Accounts for the year 2004-05. C.Winter reported that he | |

| |had responded to various accounting details that H.Freeman had raised. The Chairman drew Members’ attention to the| |

| |Key Performance Indicators, which met the College’s target figures and confirmed the sound financial status of the| |

| |College. They showed the College to be in Indicative Financial Health Group A. The proposal that | |

| | | |

| |the final Management Accounts for the year 2004-05 should be accepted | |

| | | |

| |was proposed by M.Stanier, seconded by S.Appleman and approved nem con. | |

| | | |

| | |Management accounts |

| |5.2 |accepted |

| |The Principal explained that it was too soon into the year to produce any meaningful management accounts for | |

| |2005-06. However, student numbers (1006) were 36 above target thus ensuring that the anticipated LSC income would| |

| |be achieved. Staffing costs so far were as forecast, although the long term absence of a member of staff could | |

| |adversely affect the staffing budget. This would be monitored. | |

| | | |

| |C.Winter tabled the cashflow up until July 2006. He confirmed that a further £50k would be due from the LSC on |Matter for report |

| |completion of the DDA works (expenditure for which had been included in the cashflow) and so the balance was in | |

| |effect about £420k at the end of the year. | |

| | | |

| | | |

|6. |Project Development Plan Report | |

| | | |

| |G.George, as Consultant to the College for the Project, referred Members to the Notes of the Premises Group and | |

| |their recommendation that the College should re-tender for the Sports Hall and Classroom Block, following the | |

| |design-and-build route. Although the traditional-build route would possibly result in a more competitive tender, | |

| |the initial architects fees (estimated by AJK to be in the region of £120k + VAT) would be wasted if the sale of | |

| |land did not materialise and the project did not go ahead. The College could not afford this risk. The cost of | |

| |re-tendering as proposed would be about £3k. | |

| | | |

| |Richard Kennard, of AJK, had suggested that it might be more advantageous for the College to wait until the sale | |

| |of land had been confirmed before inviting tenders. S.Appleman rejected this on the grounds that the College must | |

| |honour its contract with Laing Homes and that any delay that this would cause would be unacceptable. K.Sage did | |

| |not think that there would be much to be gained in any case. | |

| | | |

| | | |

| |G.George drew Members’ attention to the Cost Plan that he had tabled, in conjunction with the cashflow. Despite | |

| |the increase in Dean & Dyball’s contract price to £2.5M, the project was still just about financially viable as | |

| |the Refectory Extension had been completed, and paid for, whilst the cashflow had recovered to the balance of just| |

| |over £400k of two years ago, on which the Cost Plan was based. The cost of the Refectory (£200k) and about £50k of| |

| |the allowance for equipment could therefore be removed from the cost plan. There was also a substantial | |

| |contingency of over £200k | |

| | | |

| |The proposal that | |

| | | |

| |the College should engage Adams Johns Kennard to invite Design-and-Build tenders for the Sports Hall and Classroom| |

| |Block without further delay | |

| | | |

| |was proposed by S.Appleman, seconded by K.Sage and approved nem con. | |

| | | |

| | |GG to action on behalf of |

| | |the College |

| | | |

|7. |Reports from Committees | |

| | | |

| |Audit Committee: Members accepted, without further questions, the (unapproved) minutes of the Audit Committee, | |

| |which included the Internal Audit Report and the Audit Committee’s Annual Report to the Board. The latter | |

| |concluded that | |

| | | |

| |‘the Audit Committee expresses the opinion that the College’s systems of internal control and its arrangements for| |

| |risk management, control and governance processes, and for securing economy and efficiency are adequate and | |

| |effective’. | |

| | | |

| |M.Stanier congratulated the Audit Committee for the contribution that they had made towards such excellent | |

| |reports. |Audit reports accepted |

| | | |

|8. |Risk Management | |

| | | |

| |The Principal reminded Members that the minutes of the College Risk Management Group (the SMT + College Accountant| |

| |and MIS Manager) reflected an update of the high priority risks, as annotated in red in the minutes. | |

| | | |

| |In response to discussion regarding Harrow schools opening sixth forms, J.Rubinstein informed Members that only | |

| |about 5% of the College’s intake was from Harrow, mostly from Park High School which would not be having a sixth | |

| |form. | |

| | | |

| |The Principal indicated that the SMT had discussed the Premises Disaster Management Plan in the light of recent | |

| |terrorist activity. She would be writing to parents to assure them that the College was as well prepared as it | |

| |could be for any such contingencies. Parents would be kept up to date by news flashes on the College web site. | |

| | | |

| | |Risk Management report |

| | |accepted |

|9. |Examination Results | |

| | | |

| |J.Rubinstein explained that the main considerations were | |

| |Pass Rates: 99% for A level, was about the same as last year; although the % of A grades remained constant, there| |

| |had been a shift from the % getting B grade towards C grade, resulting in the %A/B falling from last year’s all | |

| |time high of 67% down to a very respectable 61%. AS grades were better than last year, which bode well for next | |

| |year’s A level results. There was encouraging improvement in the GNVQ Business and AVCE IT results. | |

| |Retention: percentage rates in the high 90s, with many subjects at 100%, were well above the sixth form sector | |

| |average. | |

| |Success Rates: these were determined by multiplying the pass rate by the retention and were again well above the | |

| |sector average. | |

| |Value Added: this remained very high, being statistically significantly positive for the fourth year in | |

| |succession, which put the College in the top 15% nationally. No subject at A level was significantly negative – | |

| |those which were negative would be carefully monitored. The only significantly negative AS level was Music | |

| |Technology – this was being addressed by LBB, who had responsibility for teaching it at the LBB A level Music | |

| |Centre (on the College premises). | |

| |Trends: these showed value added averaged over a 3-year period; no less than 11 subjects showed a significantly | |

| |positive average at A level, with no subjects significantly negative. | |

| |He and the Principal met with each Head of Department to discuss their results and to set priorities for | |

| |improvement, where necessary. These would be reflected in the Departmental SARs. | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | |Matter for report and |

| | |questions. |

|10. |Governors’ Self Assessment | |

| | | |

| |The Clerk had drafted a Governance SAR based on the feedback from discussion at the self-assessment meeting held | |

| |on 19th September. This had been sent to Members. The Board agreed that it was an accurate reflection of their | |

| |opinions and approved its adoption. |Governance SAR approved |

|11. |Dates of next Meetings | |

| | | |

| |The following dates were confirmed: | |

| | | |

| |14th November 2005: F&P Committee | |

| |28th November 2005: Audit Committee |To be noted |

| |12th December 2005: BOARD | |

|12. |Any Other Business | |

| | | |

| |The Chairman reported that he had agreed to H.Freeman changing form F&P to Audit and I.Phillips vice-versa. A full| |

| |review of Committee membership would be undertaken by the Search Committee during the course of the year. |Matter for report |

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download