Sophie Lee (Clerk to Governors) – Page 2

What governing board diversity data should be published online?

The DfE “encourage” both maintained schools and academies to collect diversity data about their governing boards and publish it online.

This recommendation was brought in during April 2023. It was added to the DfE lists of what governing board information should be published online.

It is not a requirement to publish diversity data, just a recommendation. Boards need to think very carefully before publishing this data, for reasons I explain on this page.

“We encourage schools to collect and publish governing board members’ diversity data.”
What maintained schools must publish online

“We encourage academy trust boards to collect and publish diversity data about the board and any local committees.”
What academies, free schools and colleges must or should publish online

What diversity data should be collected?

The DfE have provided no guidance about the specific data they are encouraging schools to collect.

However, the National Governance Association (NGA) provide a diversity indicators form free to non-members.

The NGA diversity indicators form asks for the following data:

gender identity (but not sex)
age group
disability
sexual orientation
ethnicity
religion
how close you live to the school
your experience of the school as a parent or carer
the type of secondary school you attended
your experience of the care system
your education after leaving school
whether you were eligible for free school meals.

What data should be published online?

The DfE have provided no guidance on the specific data that should be published after it is collected.

The NGA are recommending that age, gender and ethnicity are published as a starting point, but say that other data could be published depending on the make-up the school’s local community.

“Not all diversity information will be relevant to publish – as a starting point, we recommend boards report on the age, gender and ethnicity of their membership although other data may be relevant depending on the characteristics of your local community.”
National Governance Association

Your gender identity section on the school website could look like the table below. The NGA provide a template for presenting all the data at the end of their guide on evaluating and reporting diversity responses.

Gender Identity of Governors
Male	5
Female	4
Other gender identity	0
Prefer not to say	1

Why should schools be very careful if they publish diversity data online?

Some of the diversity questions in the NGA form count as special category data under data protection regulations.

This means data must be handled very carefully, with explicit permission gained from governors to collect or publish it. There are also 10 conditions that must be fulfilled to allow you to process the data.

“The UK General Data Protection Regulation defines special category data as:

personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin;

personal data revealing political opinions;

personal data revealing religious or philosophical beliefs;

personal data revealing trade union membership;

genetic data;

biometric data (where used for identification purposes);

data concerning health;

data concerning a person’s sex life; and

data concerning a person’s sexual orientation.”

Special Category Data, Information Commissioner’s Office

Boards must also avoid identifying any individual when publishing this data. This is where I see a real problem, as many schools have small boards. Even if a governor decides not to share their own data, might they be identifiable from the responses the other governors share?

Say you publish gender identity data, collected using the NGA form. Your website shows you have five governors who identify as male and five as female. But then a new governor joins the board and they record their gender as non-binary. You update your website. Can anyone guess which governor is non-binary?

Or perhaps a school publishes sexuality data (which I would not recommend). Nine governors have recorded that they’re heterosexual. One governor has opted out. Nine governors sometimes mention a husband or wife. One never talks about their personal life. Which governor do you think opted out and why?

How can we avoid identifying individual governors?

You can make a judgement call about the size of your board, but if you are in a single school I would suggest it is very likely you could identify an individual if you choose to publish diversity data.

Therefore you could instead ask governors for permission to collect the data, but not publish it. Data can be collated by the clerk and examined internally. It can be shared with the board as anonymously as possible, with the clerk ensuring that no-one can be identified personally.

On your website you could post a note that explains why you do not publish diversity data for governors. Below is a note you are welcome to use.

The governors of Malory Towers School believe it is important that boards reflect the diversity of the school communities they serve. Diverse boards promote inclusive school environments and provide diverse role models for staff and young people.

The governors are currently collecting data on the diversity of the board, including data on age, gender and ethnicity. They will use that data to inform their recruitment and training needs and ensure there is a diverse range of perspectives around the table to support robust decision making.

Due to our relatively small governing body we do not publish this diversity data online as individual governors could be identified and we have a legal obligation to protect their personal data.

Why do the DfE want the data to be published?

They say they want boards to be “increasingly reflective” of the communities they serve. For example, a board where all governors are white will not reflect a pupil and parent community where a significant percentage of people are black or Asian.

Collecting the data internally makes sense to me, because boards can then act on any gaps. For example, if you find that no governor has experience of the care system you could arrange for training on looked after children. I am less convinced of the value of publishing this data.

Can schools insist that governors share their personal data?

Definitely not. Schools must allow governors to opt out of sharing personal data, including data on any of the protected characteristics from the Equality Act 2010.

The protected characteristics are age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.

Written Resolutions

In academies the members and trustees make decisions by passing resolutions. A resolution is a vote in favour or against a proposal.

This page explains written resolutions. It also provides example written resolutions for both members and trustees.

The ability of members to pass written resolutions comes from the Companies Act 2006. The ability of trustees to pass written resolutions comes from the articles of association for each academy trust.

The advice on this page is based on the current model articles of association, but please check your own articles as they may differ.

The usual rules about conflict of interest apply to all resolutions. If a member or trustee has a conflict of interest they cannot vote.

What is a written resolution?

A written resolution is a decision that is taken outside of a meeting. Instead of voting during a meeting by a show of hands or verbal agreement the members or trustees are sent a document that explains the proposal and asks them to sign if they agree with it.

For example, the members might wish to appoint a new member via written resolution. Written resolutions are particularly useful for members’ decisions because members rarely hold meetings.

If a member wishes to appoint the new member they sign the document and send it back to the clerk. If a member doesn’t want to appoint the new member they don’t need to do anything, because the lack of a reply is taken to mean that they disagree with the resolution.

What are the different types of written resolution?

Members have two different types of written resolution, ordinary or special. Your articles tell you whether a decision should be passed via ordinary or special resolution.

Written ordinary resolutions are passed if 51% of members vote in favour.

Written special resolutions are passed if 75% of members vote in favour.

Trustees have one type of written resolution, written board resolutions. Written board resolutions are passed if 100% of the trustees eligible to vote are in favour.

Example Written Resolutions

Below you can download some examples of written resolutions for both members and trustees.

This is a members’ written ordinary resolution to appoint a new trustee.

Download members’ written ordinary resolution (.docx file)

This is a members’ written special resolution to change the articles of association.

Download members’ written special resolution (.docx file)

This is a trustees’ written resolution to appoint a local governor to a local governing body.

Download trustees’ written resolution (.docx file)

How do members pass written ordinary resolutions?

Members’ written ordinary resolutions are passed if 51% of the members who are entitled to vote agree. This is known as a simple majority. As long as more members vote in favour than against, the resolution has passed.

So if you have three members in total, all of whom are entitled to vote, a written ordinary resolution needs two out of three members voting in favour (66%). If you have five members then three out of five need to vote in favour (60%).

“An ordinary resolution of the members (or of a class of members) of a company means a resolution that is passed by a simple majority.

“A written resolution is passed by a simple majority if it is passed by members representing a simple majority of the total voting rights of eligible members.”
Companies Act 2006 (Section 282)

How do members pass written special resolutions?

Members’ written special resolutions are passed if 75% of members entitled to vote are in favour.

So if you have three members you actually need all three to vote in favour to pass a written special resolution (100%). If only two vote in favour you only reach 66% agreement, which of course is less than 75%.

If you have five members then you need four out of five members voting in favour (80%).

“A special resolution of the members (or of a class of members) of a company means a resolution passed by a majority of not less than 75%.

“A written resolution is passed by a majority of not less than 75% if it is passed by members representing not less than 75% of the total voting rights of eligible members.”
Companies Act 2006 (Section 283)

When are members forbidden from using written resolutions?

There are two situations where members cannot make a decision using a written resolution. Instead they must call a members’ meeting.

Members cannot use written resolutions to remove a trustee before the end of their term of office or remove an auditor before the end of their term of office.

“The following may not be passed as a written resolution—

(a) a resolution under section 168 removing a director before the expiration of his period of office;

(b) a resolution under section 510 removing an auditor before the expiration of his term of office.”
Companies Act 2006 (Section 288)

How do trustees pass written resolutions?

The current model articles allow trustees to pass written resolutions outside of meetings. These are often called board written resolutions.

The model articles say written board resolutions must be “signed by all trustees” who are entitled to vote on trust board decisions.

Therefore, trustees’ written resolutions pass if 100% of trustees entitled to vote are in favour. They must be unanimous, in other words.

If it is a committee decision then the written resolution must be signed by all the trustees on that committee who are entitled to vote.

Because trustee written resolutions must be unanimous they are not massively useful. It may be easier to hold a virtual trust board meeting instead, where decisions only need a simple majority to pass.

“A resolution in writing, which includes a resolution in electronic form, signed by all the trustees entitled to receive notice of and vote at a meeting of trustees or of a committee of trustees, shall be valid and effective as if it had been passed at a meeting of trustees or (as the case may be) a committee of trustees duly convened and held.

“Such a resolution may consist of several documents in the same form, each signed or authenticated by one or more of the trustees.”
Model Articles of Association (June 2021)

Do members or trustees have to sign the same copy of the resolution?

No. The model articles say that resolutions of both members and trustees can be formed of more than one copy of the same document. (For members the wording is “several instruments in the like form” and for trustees it is “several documents in the same form”, but these two phrases mean the same thing.)

There’s no need to circulate just one document to collect all signatures on the same sheet of paper.

Can written resolutions be emailed and signed electronically?

Yes, if you have adopted the June 2021 model articles, as they specifically allow resolutions in “electronic form” for both members and trustees. They also specifically allow electronic signatures. This means a resolution is valid even if completely digital, for example an email attachment signed with a digital signature.

If you have older articles please check the wording to see whether electronic resolutions and signatures are allowed.

If your articles do not specifically allow for electronic resolutions or signatures you could email the resolution document and ask members/trustees to print it, sign it and post it back or drop it off at the academy.

“A resolution in writing, which includes a resolution in electronic form, agreed by such number of members as required if it had been proposed at a general meeting shall be as effectual as if it had been passed at a general meeting duly convened and held provided that a copy of the proposed resolution has been sent to every member.

“A resolution in writing, which includes a resolution in electronic form, signed by all the trustees entitled to receive notice of and vote at a meeting of trustees or of a committee of trustees, shall be valid and effective as if it had been passed at a meeting of trustees or (as the case may be) a committee of trustees duly convened and held.

“References to a document being ‘signed’ includes those signed electronically.“
Model Articles of Association (June 2021)

Members, Trustees, Directors and Governors

This page explains the difference between members, trustees, directors and governors in academies.

It also explains what local governors are in multi-academy trusts.

The Structure of Academy Governance

First we need to look at the structure of academy governance.

Single academy trusts (SATs) only contain one academy. In a single academy trust the members sit at the top of the structure. Below the members are the trustees.

So from top down, the structure of a SAT looks like this: members > trustees.

Multi-academy trusts (MATs) contain two or more academies. In multi-academy trusts the members sit at the top of the structure. Below the members are the trustees. And below the trustees, in the majority of MATs but not all, are local governors based at each individual academy.

So in a minority of MATs, the structure has two tiers: members > trustees.

And in the majority of MATs the structure looks like this, with three tiers: members > trustees > local governors.

Let’s start at the top of the structure and explain the role of members.

Members

Members are sometimes called the “guardians” of the academy trust. They set up the trust by signing the memorandum of association and after that have a limited but important role in checking that governance is working well.

Members may be required to attend just one meeting per year, the annual general meeting (AGM), although more members’ meetings may be held depending on the trust.

The main role of members is to hold the trustees to account and oversee their work. They have a look at the accounts, ask trustees questions and make sure there are no serious problems they need to address.

Members have the power to:

appoint some trustees
remove all trustees
appoint or remove other members
direct academy trustees to do things, which means formally order trustees to address a problem like a safeguarding concern
change the articles of association
change the name of the trust
appoint or remove auditors
receive and review (but not sign off) the annual audited accounts.

Members have an eyes on, hands off role, which means they keep an eye on the work of trustees but are nowhere near as involved in governance as trustees. They do not usually visit the academy or attend trustee meetings.

Trusts generally have a small number of members, often three or five. The minimum number of members for any trust is three, but the DfE’s preference is for trusts to have at least five members.

Members must not be employed by your academy trust.

(Academy members should not be confused with associate members in maintained schools – they are totally different roles.)

Trustees

(Note: I’m going to refer to trustees here because that is the name used in documents like the Academy Trust Handbook, but in your own trust they may be called either trustees, directors or governors. I’ll explain why later.)

Next up are the trustees. The board of trustees is where most of the power lies in an academy trust. Trustees have three core functions:

ensuring the academy trust has a clear ethos, vision and strategic direction
holding senior leaders to account for the educational performance of the academies
overseeing the budget and ensuring value for money.

The board of trustees meets far more regularly than members and is the main decision-making body for the trust.

It is the trustees who:

hire the Principal or CEO
sign off the annual accounts
check the trust is following its funding agreement
have responsibility for safeguarding children
have legal responsibility for health and safety, equality and other legal duties
approve the statutory and non-statutory policies (unless they have been delegated down to staff or committees)
visit academies to monitor how policies are put into practice and talk to staff and children
establish or abolish committees, including local governing bodies.

The number of trustees depends on the number allowed by your trust’s articles of association. The powers that trustees choose to delegate will be explained in your trust’s scheme of delegation.

Can a member also be a trustee?

Yes, a person can be both a member and a trustee at the same trust.

However, the DfE’s preference is for most members not to be trustees, to make sure there is significant separation between the tiers of governance.

Members hold trustees to account and they obviously can’t do that effectively if the members and trustees are mostly the same people.

“The majority of members should not also be trustees.”
Academy Trust Handbook

Local Governors

Local governors only exist in multi-academy trusts, not single academy trusts. They sit on local governing bodies (LGBs), which are committees of the board of trustees. Usually each academy in a MAT will have its own LGB, based on site at that academy.

Local governors only have the powers that the trustees have delegated to them. These powers can vary considerably. In some trusts the LGB may not have any powers to take decisions, only to discuss issues and make recommendations. These LGBs are known as advisory bodies.

Local governing bodies may also be known as local governing committees, local academy committees, academy advisory councils or academy councils.

Can a trustee also be a local governor?

Yes, although again it is considered best practice for a majority of trustees not to be local governors in order to separate the tiers of governance. This is just a best practice recommendation though, not a requirement of the Academy Trust Handbook.

Trustees Versus Directors Versus Governors

If you look at the articles of association for your academy trust you may see a section about trustees or you may see a section about directors or governors.

Trustee, director and governor are three different names for the exact same role. They all refer to the people who sit on the main decision-making board directly below the members.

Malory Towers Academy Trust might call them trustees, Hogwarts Academy Trust might call them directors and St Trinian’s Academy Trust might call them governors, but they are all doing the same thing.

Why are trustees called directors or governors at some academies?

Some academies, particularly church academies, couldn’t say their trust board was made up of “trustees” because they already had trustees. Their existing trustees sat on the board of the trust that owned their academy’s land.

So secular academies could have a board of trustees, but some church academies needed a board of directors in order to avoid confusing the two different boards.

Directors was a suitable name because academies are charitable companies and so the people on the trust board are company directors.

This doesn’t explain why some academies use the name “governors” instead of trustees or directors though. To be honest I’m not sure why they do. If anyone does know please get in touch!

What questions should the safeguarding governor ask?

This list of questions for the safeguarding link governor to ask was produced by my local authority’s safeguarding team.

It can help the safeguarding governor check that policies and processes are robust and that the board does not just rely on what they are being told by the Headteacher in meetings.

Questions Your Safeguarding Governor Should Ask

How do governors really know safeguarding is effective?
Is your evidence of effectiveness based on what you are told or what you have observed and checked first-hand through monitoring?
Do you receive, read and ask questions about the safeguarding updates provided to Headteachers and Designated Safeguarding Leads, including updates from the LA, police, health and the Local Safeguarding Children’s Partnership?
Do you review first-hand information or observations on the progress against actions identified through the annual LA safeguarding self-evaluation or external safeguarding audits?
Have you read documents such as Keeping Children Safe in Education (KCSIE) and Working Together To Safeguard Children, published practice reviews and their recommendations and then considered what questions may be appropriate to ask your own setting as a result?
Do you know what Early Help services are available locally and do all staff know how they might refer to Early Help as set out in KCSIE?
Are staff proactively seeking early intervention within and beyond school?
Do you know how effective safer recruitment processes are?
Are all the required recruitment checks completed for all staff?
Do you know what checks or assurances (depending on employment status) are undertaken for visitors? Or before and after school provision? Or volunteers? Or offsite provision?
Do you know how assurance for offsite trips is undertaken?
Do you know how effective online safety considerations are and how secure systems are?
Are online filters set up and effective?
Do you know how you check pupils feel safe at school and who they could talk to if they had any worries?
Do you consider if you always ask the same questions? Consider who selects pupils for you to speak to on school visits – is it governors, the school or is it random? What are the limitations of this approach?
How do you know that records of concerns are kept securely? Or information is shared appropriately on a need-to-know basis with staff?
Are records dated with the relevant staff member identifiable?
Is there a clear record and timeframe of actions and chronology of events and outcome?
Do you know what the process is for managing peer-on-peer abuse? Is it in line with government guidance? Is there sufficient consistency in implementation, clear records and timeframes for actions but also evidence that young people are supported effectively?
Do you know how many allegations of sexual abuse or harassment have been recorded by the school, what patterns, trends or themes have been noted and what actions have been taken as a result? How will the effectiveness of this be monitored?
Do you check whether your complaints policy and processes clearly indicate what constitutes a complaint versus an allegation of harm? Do they identify a clear process for managing complaints or allegations when these are made against the Headteacher or Chair of Governors?
Do you know what safeguarding training governors have undertaken this academic year? What impact has that training had?
Do you know that all governors have read the whole of KCSIE?

Can governors use WhatsApp?

Yes, but it should only be used to share basic factual information like reminders about meeting dates or seeing who can attend upcoming training. An app like this should never be used to make decisions or discuss governor business.

Some clerks set up an admin-only WhatsApp group. Only the group admin can send messages, so the clerk can contact governors quickly without the danger that everyone starts discussing topics that should be raised at meetings.

Alternatively, a standard WhatsApp group allows all group members to send messages. This could allow governors to, for example, send apologies and ask where to find documents, but governors must understand the group cannot be used for discussions.

Why use WhatsApp instead of email or GovernorHub?

Many schools prefer their governors to use school email addresses rather than a personal email address. This is because they worry about GDPR and freedom of information or subject access requests.

Using a school email address avoids these possible problems but it also creates a new problem, because governors now have yet another email account to check when most people have at least one or two already.

GovernorHub offers an alternative to using school emails, but if your school does not pay for a subscription you won’t have access to GovernorHub.

What could WhatsApp be used for?

The governing body or clerk could use a WhatsApp group to:

check which governors are available to attend short notice extraordinary meetings or panels (eg: exclusions or complaints panels)
give apologies for absence or lateness
ask governors to log in to their school email accounts – this sounds daft but it can be an effective way to flag urgent emails without using personal email accounts or expecting governors to check their school email account every day
help people log into virtual meetings
check how many governors are coming to a meeting to ensure you will be quorate
cancel meetings at the last minute
send reminders of training dates or governor visits
share an emergency message saying OFSTED are coming.

Remember that governors are volunteers and must be allowed to mute notifications for periods of time. No-one should expect instant replies or anything close to that and WhatsApp must not be the only way information is shared as not everyone has a smartphone or will wish to use the app.

Consider not adding school employees to the group, as governors who are also school employees will likely check work emails much more frequently than others and probably won’t need the extra alerts.

Make sure the group is named appropriately, so something like “Governor Reminders” rather than “Governor Discussions”. Add a note to say how the group should be used.

You should also make sure it does not cause extra unpaid work for the clerk, as most clerks are paid for a very limited number of hours and any extra communication can eat into that time.

What should WhatsApp not be used for?

Boards and clerks should not use WhatsApp to:

make decisions
discuss any governor business – anything that would usually be discussed in a meeting must still be discussed in that meeting
share confidential information or data
bombard people with messages or constant requests for action.

If governors do start slipping into discussions or trying to make decisions on WhatsApp the clerk or chair should step in to point out the many pitfalls of this.

Pitfalls include the lack of a quorum, the lack of minutes, the lack of recorded actions and assigned responsibilities, the possibility of a freedom of information or subject access request and the fact that any governor who doesn’t happen to read those messages will be unfairly excluded from the discussions.

Do freedom of information requests really apply to personal accounts?

Yes. If you think about it this makes sense because otherwise organisations could hide all kinds of nefarious doings just by using a personal email address or WhatsApp group on their personal smartphone.

Section 84 of The Freedom of Information Act defines what is meant by “information”. The definition is “information recorded in any form“, so there is no difference between an email a governor sends from a school email account or from a personal Gmail or Yahoo account.

The Information Commissioner’s Office specifically say that a WhatsApp group or private email account could contain information that might be requested under FOI law.

“This means that official information held on a public authority’s behalf could be contained in a number of non-corporate channels or locations, including:

in private email accounts, eg: Gmail, ProtonMail or Yahoo Mail

in private messaging accounts, eg: WhatsApp, Signal or Telegram

direct messages sent on apps such as Twitter or via Facebook messenger

on private mobile devices, including text messages on mobile phones and voice recordings.”

ICO Guidance on Official Information Held in Non-Corporate Communications Channels

The Circle Model of School Governance

The circle model of school governance lets schools hold full governing body meetings but scrap most of their committee meetings.

This article explains how governing without committees works in practice. It also provides a comprehensive annual planner that can be used to adopt the circle model in your setting.

Can we really abolish all committees?

In maintained schools there is no legal requirement to run any committees at all. However, it is good practice to keep a pay committee so that some governors are not involved in pay decisions and are therefore free to hear pay appeals. All other committees can be abolished.

In academy trusts the Academy Trust Handbook says that each trust must have an audit and risk committee and should have a finance committee. It is also considered good practice to run a pay committee. All other committees can be abolished.

In multi-academy trusts the local governing bodies (LGBs) are committees of the trust board, so trustees have the power to scrap any LGB. This would be a significant step though and more radical than abolishing committees at the trust board level. This page assumes you are considering scrapping committees that are not LGBs.

Committees Versus Panels Versus Working Groups

Before we discuss the circle model I need to explain the difference between committees, panels and working groups. There is some overlap in how schools use these terms, but here are the most common definitions.

Committee: a small group of governors with delegated decision-making powers. It meets regularly to discuss the same subject, eg: finance or the curriculum. Committees are sometimes called standing committees, with “standing” meaning “permanently in place”.

Panel: a small group of governors with delegated decision making-powers. It meets rarely and only when a need arises, eg: to consider the later stage of a parent’s complaint. Panels are sometimes called ad hoc panels.

Working group: a small, informal group of governors. It meets to talk about a particular issue, for example a policy, but has no decision-making powers.

The circle model gets rid of most committees.

You still need panels so that governors can hear complaints, consider staff disciplinary matters and so on.

You are free to use working groups for any purpose, but there is never a requirement to use a working group for any reason.

Why is it called the circle model?

No decisions are delegated down to committees, so all the power stays within full board meetings. Picture a circle of meetings around a calendar year, each full board meeting feeding into the next one.

If you had committees the circle would be broken because power would be delegated down from the full board to each separate committee, so the structure would look more like a flowchart than a circle.

Funnily enough some schools refer to the circle model as a flat model rather than a circle, because all the power is kept on one flat level – the full board level – rather than delegated down.

I don’t really know how a structure can be both flat and circular at the same time, but that’s one of the great mysteries of school governance…

How does the circle model work?

The work of the scrapped committees is incorporated into an increased number of full board meetings. Each full board meeting will often have one main focus, such as the budget or educational standards.

Meetings are planned to match relevant dates, so a finance-focused meeting is held when the budget needs approval. The policy schedule can also be planned so relevant policies fall into the most relevant meeting.

Rather than a wide-ranging headteacher’s report that covers absolutely everything, the head can be asked to produce shorter, more focused reports that just cover the subjects on that meeting’s agenda.

Individual or pairs of governors are then assigned to monitor areas that would have been covered by committee work. They need to visit school regularly, speak to staff in charge of areas like SEND or safeguarding and then produce written reports to feed back to the full board.

Circle Model Annual Planner

A fellow clerk has very kindly given me permission to share her annual planner for the circle model – many thanks to the clerk in question! This Excel planner was used in a maintained school.

Section one shows the meeting schedule for the year, with full governing body meetings and pay committee meetings planned. One FGB per year is dedicated to the budget in April and one FGB to admin tasks in September (electing the chair, assigning link roles and so on).

Section two provides comprehensive agendas for all meetings across the year. Section three lists the link governors and their areas of expertise.

Section four records the working groups the school used, which in this case included a group discussing the school improvement plan and a group creating a risk register.

Before you download the file here’s a tip from the clerk who shared it with me – it is important that governors keep on top of monitoring under the circle model, including both carrying out the visits or discussions and reporting them back to the board. This may need chasing by the clerk or chair.

The clerk also noted that her school runs three governors days each year where governors can walk round the school, conduct monitoring tasks and take part in training. This lets them cover much of the monitoring that is needed.

Download Circle Model Annual Planner (.xlxs Excel file)

Advantages of the Circle Model

The circle model comes with both pros and cons. Let’s look at some of the advantages first.

Everyone knows everything! Because all governors are attending all meetings they have a much broader view of what is happening in school. It can be easier to follow discussions because they hear about all aspects of school life.

No repetition of committee work. A common pitfall under a committee model is that a decision is made at committee level and then rehashed all over again at a full board meeting. This wastes time and defeats the purpose of delegation.

No clashing of committee work. A decision made in one committee can easily impact the work of another. This is avoided if all decisions come to FGB.

Full board decisions may be made more urgently. This will depend on how many FGB meetings you have, but many schools who run committees only hold one full governor meeting per term, which can delay decisions that can only be made by the full board.

It can suit smaller governing bodies. If you struggle to recruit governors you may not have enough people to form multiple successful committees. I’ve worked in a school where we could just about form committees but the meetings were often inquorate because just one governor couldn’t attend.

Agendas can be easier to plan. All subjects are the business of the full governing body and do not need to be shared among multiple committees according to their terms of reference.

It may be easier for busy governors. Rather than needing to attend committee meetings at times convenient for all committee members, governors can arrange to conduct their monitoring visits at times that suit them (as long as the times suit the school staff too, of course).

It avoids delegation confusion. Most clerks will have had a conversation with governors about a decision they are trying to make in a committee that actually requires the approval of the full board. If all decisions go to the full board this problem is avoided.

Disadvantages of the Circle Model

Here are the downsides of the circle model, along with some ideas on avoiding these challenges.

Lack of time for really detailed discussions. When committees work well they allow for a forensic look at a specific subject, for example the budget. Some schools call committees the “engine room” of governance because that’s where they feel the most important work is done.

Solution: Make sure you hold enough full board meetings throughout the year. Form working parties if needed. Encourage governors to read all papers, reports and data before the meeting so they can ask informed and challenging questions.

Governors must commit to school visits. In all schools governors must visit regularly, but this is vital when using the circle model as a lot of monitoring previously done by committees will now be done by individuals or governor pairs. Written reports must then be discussed at the full board.

Solution: Make sure governors understand the commitment required for the circle model. Work with the clerk to write a monitoring plan that accommodates governors’ schedules. Provide governors with an example visit report. Ask the clerk to chase visit reports.

It can be daunting for new governors. They may be more comfortable starting out in a committee with their colleagues rather than visiting a school alone.

Solution: Assign people into monitoring pairs or give them a more experienced governor buddy. Make sure they have access to training and support from the clerk or outside organisations.

You need a strong chair. The chair will have no back-up from committee chairs and will be responsible for approving all draft agendas and minutes. They may also need to encourage governors who are not undertaking the necessary monitoring.

Solution: The only solution to this one is electing a good chair, but the board can help itself by ensuring a succession plan is in place for the chair and giving them access to training. Also make sure the vice-chair is giving support.

Danger of long meetings. The circle model can result in very long meetings as nothing is delegated down. Two hours is considered a rough maximum for a full governor meeting, with two and a half hours absolute maximum. After three hours everyone is asleep.

Solution: The clerk and chair should work together to plan out annual agendas. Working parties can look at subjects in detail and bring a recommendation to the full board. Get anything operational off the agenda and remember that most policies do not need annual approval and some do not need governor approval at all.

It may not suit large boards. If you have a larger than average board ditching committees may make it harder for all governors to be heard in meetings and make discussions less manageable.

Solution: Jettison half your governors. (Just kidding.) Consider that a structure that includes committees may suit your board better.

How many full governor meetings do you need under the circle model?

It is up to the board to decide, but a standard minimum under the circle model seems to be six full governor meetings per year, so one meeting each half-term.

(The absolute minimum number of full board meetings for both maintained schools and academies is three per year, but three meetings will not be nearly enough under the circle model.)

Between each meeting individual governors or governor pairs visit the school and write a report that is discussed at the next meeting.

Does the full board need terms of reference under the circle model?

Strictly speaking the answer is no, because terms of reference describe how power is delegated and in this model all the power remains with the full board.

However I would recommend agreeing terms of reference that describe the circle model, how many meetings per year will be held and the responsibilities of the full board. This avoids any confusion and reminds you that if you do set up committees in the future those committees will need terms of reference themselves.

The terms of reference should also explain how many monitoring visits governors are expected to undertake per term.

Prevent Duty Training For Governors

The Prevent Duty is the responsibility placed on everyone in education to stop children from being drawn into terrorism.

This page explains whether all school governors need Prevent training, where they can find courses and how often their training needs updating.

What is the Prevent Duty?

The Prevent Duty comes from the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015. This law places a responsibility on a number of “specified authorities” to prevent people becoming terrorists or being radicalised into extremism.

“A specified authority must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to prevent people from being drawn into terrorism.”
Section 26 of the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015

Does the Prevent Duty apply to both maintained schools and academies?

Yes. The definition of a “specified authority” in the law includes both maintained schools and academies.

Do all school governors need Prevent training?

This isn’t crystal clear, but in my view the answer is yes.

Keeping Children Safe in Education (KCSIE) is the statutory guidance on safeguarding that all schools must follow. It says that all governors should receive “appropriate safeguarding and child protection (including online) training at induction”.

“Governing bodies and proprietors should ensure that all governors and trustees receive appropriate safeguarding and child protection (including online) training at induction.

“This training should equip them with the knowledge to provide strategic challenge to test and assure themselves that the safeguarding policies and procedures in place in schools and colleges are effective and support the delivery of a robust whole school approach to safeguarding.”
Keeping Children Safe in Education

KCSIE does not mention Prevent training for governors specifically. However, it does make clear that the Prevent duty is part of the “wider safeguarding obligations” that apply to schools.

“The Prevent duty should be seen as part of schools’ and colleges’ wider safeguarding obligations.”
Keeping Children Safe in Education

Therefore I would argue that all governors need to take Prevent training because it is part of their required safeguarding training.

Where can we find Prevent duty training for governors?

The Home Office provide free online Prevent duty training for school governors. This is how the Home Office describe the course.

“This e-learning course provides an understanding of what radicalisation, extremism and terrorism are. It covers how to identify and explore concerning behaviours and how to raise concerns.”
Home Office

Governors who have never completed a Prevent course before should take the Awareness Course.

Governors who have taken a Prevent course in the past and are updating their knowledge can take the Refresher Awareness Course.

(There are two other Home Office courses available which are not applicable to governors: one on referrals for your Designated Safeguarding Lead who will be a member of staff and one on Channel panels which are not run by governors.)

If your school pays for a subscription to GovernorHub Knowledge they also offer governor training on the Prevent duty.

How long do the Prevent courses take?

The Home Office say their Prevent course should take around 30 to 40 minutes. I would allow a maximum of 30 minutes to be honest as it is quite straightforward. Their refresher course takes 20 to 30 minutes.

GovernorHub Knowledge say their Prevent training takes up to two hours.

How often does Prevent training need to be updated?

Keeping Children Safe in Education (KCSIE) says that all governors/trustees should receive safeguarding training that is “regularly updated”.

“Governing bodies and proprietors should ensure that all governors and trustees receive appropriate safeguarding and child protection (including online) training at induction.

“Their training should be regularly updated.”
Keeping Children Safe in Education

KCSIE does not define the term “regularly” so I asked governance colleagues who follow my Ask A Clerk Twitter account how they would define “regularly” in this context.

Out of over 100 votes the consensus with 86% of the vote was that safeguarding training for governors should be updated annually.

Almost 10% said that training should be taken twice a year or more. Only 4% said safeguarding training should be taken every two years or every three years.

Should the clerk keep certificates of completion?

Yes, it’s a good idea to collect the certificates. Anyone who completes the Home Office or GovernorHub Knowledge Prevent duty course is given a certificate of proof.

There’s no statutory duty to keep training certificates for school governors, but for any safeguarding training I would recommend keeping hold of certificates. This is because you may be asked to show proof of attendance to OFSTED or during a safeguarding audit.

In fact the clerk may wish to keep all training certificates because it helps them compile the training record and remind governors when their training is coming up for renewal.

Where can governors read more about Prevent?

The DfE provide non-statutory advice for schools on the Prevent duty.

OFSTED Inspection and Governance Webinar: Summary and Transcript

OFSTED held a webinar on Inspection and Governance in December 2022.

It explained the questions OFSTED will ask governors, which governors should attend the inspection and offered advice on how boards can fulfil their roles.

Below you can find the video and my summary of the most useful points made. I have also created a pdf transcript of the whole video which includes the substantive slides. This can be downloaded below and shared with colleagues.

Download OFSTED Inspection and Governance Webinar December 2022 (.pdf)

OFSTED Inspection and Governance Webinar: Summary of Key Points

Note: The following paragraphs are direct quotes from the webinar. Wording in bold highlights points I think are particularly useful.

Understanding Governance

Inspectors will look at the school’s website as one of the first activities they do, often before they even contact a school or have spoken to the Headteacher. The information that’s available on a school’s website can really help a lead inspector understand how a school’s governance is structured.

For example if you are part of a multi-academy trust then certainly inspectors will be looking for example for the scheme of delegation, so that document that outlines what different levels of governance, if there are different levels within the trust, are responsible for.

We try to make sure that the arrangements ensure as many people come and meet with inspectors as possible. We recognise that that’s not always possible and sometimes while a face-to-face meeting is always preferable it might be that lead inspectors have to pick up the phone and speak to the Chair of Governors for example.

The other element we discuss is obviously that invitation to the wider governing body, not just those that we’ve managed to speak to throughout the course of the process but every governor can come and listen to the final feedback meeting which comes at the end of the usually two-day process.

What is effective governance?

It’s important to note that when inspectors are looking at statutory duties they’re not just checking compliance, they’re seeking to ascertain how governors ensure that the school is compliant.

For example we wouldn’t expect governors to be checking the school’s single central record of recruitment checks themselves, we’d look to see whether they’re seeking assurance from the school that they’re keeping it up-to-date and that the Designated Safeguarding Lead is carrying out their duties.

The initial notification call is made by the inspection support team. They also send a list of information that schools must make available to inspectors by eight o’clock on the first day of the inspection on site and part of this is strategic documents about the school.

So examples for maintained schools are minutes of governing body meetings. For academies, minutes of trust board meetings and any other relevant strategic documents about governance or the trust that the school may have.

Our inspectors look at the documents to triangulate how governors carry out the three core functions and their statutory duties. The documents don’t need to be in any specific format, they can be digital or paper. What I would say is time is limited, we wouldn’t want to see the last 12 copies of governing body minutes; one, two or three is quite sufficient.

Some examples of how a trustee or governor fulfils their role:

by governors addressing a range of educational issues within the school including disadvantaged pupils, pupils who’ve got special needs, staff workload and teacher recruitment (you could be asked about all of these, we could read about them in your minutes)
checking on the school’s performance, looking at data when where necessary to ask questions about standards and having challenging conversations with school leaders about the school. Just because OFSTED doesn’t look at internal data doesn’t mean that governors shouldn’t be looking at it. Governors need to review performance data in key areas to ensure that they have an oversight of the school
governors need to engage with pupils, staff, parents and the school community.
in your governance meetings think about the information you access, what is it telling you and what else do you need to understand about what is going on in your school.

Meeting Governors On Inspection

We will encourage the school to invite as many governors or trustees as possible to meet inspectors during the inspection. We like to meet governors as part of a group but again we’ll be flexible according to governor availability.

What inspectors are doing, we’re wanting to explore how governors carry out the individual functions, so we might be asking questions such as:

how do you ensure that the core functions of governance are carried out effectively in your school?
what is your strategic vision for your school?
how do you hold executive leaders to account?
how do you ensure that this school complies with its statutory duties?

So we’re wanting to know how governors ensure that the right things happen. We’re wanting to know about those processes that are in place, how you know what’s working well in your school.

It’s worth us saying that the single central record is part of the statutory duties and when it comes to those statutory duties we expect governors to perform a strategic function not an operational one.

So the governors’ duty is to make sure that the processes are happening and that the school is fulfilling its duties, but it’s not the governors’ role to actively maintain a single central record for themselves. Governors need to assure themselves that it is being kept up-to-date and it is compliant, but they are not the ones responsible for actually doing so.

For example governors might assure themselves that these things are happening by regularly talking to leaders about the processes they go through and how leaders themselves ensure that the records are up-to-date. It’s the strategic level that governors are responsible for.

Questions From Viewers

What are the key documents governors need to look at to prepare for inspection?

We do not expect anybody no matter what role you play within your school to produce something solely for OFSTED. So please don’t have reams of documentation in files that sit on a shelf and often gather dust just waiting for that time when an inspector might call.

Because actually we want to know what do you find most useful as governors, what is it that you use day to day, week to week to support you in your role in holding leaders in school to account.

Something that is a really effective bit of evidence is the Headteacher’s report to governors, because governors you’re in charge of that and what goes into that so that’s a really good bit of evidence for us to have a look at, it’s got lots of information in.

Then we see the questions in the minutes that you’ve asked of the Headteacher and senior leaders, really effective.

In terms of the role of a governor in an inspection it’s essentially one meeting you’re requested to attend, a 30- to 40-minute meeting which is a discussion. So the inspector will be coming with questions that they want to ask in terms of what they’ve seen around the school, what they’ve already spoken to leaders about.

They’ll be coming with that list of the three key functions and the effectiveness of governance and it is essentially a conversation about exploring all of those elements with you. Other than that there isn’t other than attending feedback if you can make it and the option is always there, there isn’t anything else that you need to do as a governor or a governing body.

We look at minutes, but that’s just to get a sense of what you’ve discussed previously and if inspectors have managed to look at those minutes before they meet with you then you can expect some questions around, oh it was interesting that I noticed that in your last meeting you challenge the Headteacher about…can you just tell me a little bit more about why you did that, what’s happened as a result.

It’s preparing for that conversation and being confident that you know the school as a governor, you know the priorities that the Headteacher is setting because hopefully they’ve shared and agreed them with you.

Then you can evidence the influence that you’re having in terms of why you’re asking the Headteacher a particular question, why you’re asking for a particular piece of evidence and therefore what you’ve done with that and hopefully what has come from that as an impact or as a result.

Please do not worry that you may say the wrong thing because actually it takes quite a bit of evidence to tip an inspection judgement one way or the other.

Local Authority Associated Persons (LAAPs)

Academy trusts must ensure they do not have too many local authority associated persons (LAAPs) among their trustees and members.

The limit on LAAPs is set at 19.9% of trustees and 19.9% of members. There are also additional limits on voting rights which I will explain later.

This page explains who qualifies as an LA-associated person, how many LAAPs each academy trust is allowed to have among its members and trustees and what happens if that limit is exceeded.

This article only applies to academies because LAAPs do not exist in maintained schools.

Rules From Articles Of Association

The rules on LA-associated persons are found in the final section of the current model articles of association.

The section is called Avoiding Influenced Company Status. An “influenced company” is one where the LA holds significant power or control and academy trusts are not-for-profit companies.

Check the last few pages of your own articles to find the relevant part. There are three basic rules:

no more than 19.9% of trustees can be LAAPs
no more than 19.9% of members can be LAAPs
LAAPs cannot hold more than 19.9% of voting rights at any meeting of trustees or members.

So LA-associated persons must never make up one-fifth or more of your trustees or one-fifth or more of your members.

The articles also say that LAAPs who are trustees or members must hold less than 20% of the voting rights at any meeting. In practice, as long as you limit the number of trustees/members to less than 20% of the total people in post you should not have to worry about the voting rights limit.

Technically it would be possible to hold a members’ meeting where, for example, only five out of seven members attend and one of the attendees is a LAAP, giving them voting rights of 20%, but that seems fairly unlikely.

It would be even less likely in a meeting of trustees because you will usually have significantly more trustees than members in place.

Who qualifies as an LA-associated person?

A trustee or member is an LA-associated person if any of the following apply:

they are currently a councillor
they have been a councillor in the last four years
they are currently employed by the LA
they are both an employee and either a director, manager, secretary or similar officer of a company controlled by the LA.

To see where that definition comes from we first need to check the model articles of association. At the start of the articles is a section called “Interpretation” which contains definitions for terms used in the articles. Below is the definition given for a LAAP.

“‘Local Authority Associated Person’ means any person associated (within the meaning given in section 69(5) of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989) with any local authority by which the academy trust is influenced.”
Model Articles of Association (June 2021)

So next we need to check section 69(5) of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 which tell us when someone qualifies as a LAAP.

Section 69(5) explains that someone is a LAAP if they:

are a member of the local authority (a “member” means a councillor)
have been a member within the last four years
are an officer of the authority (an “officer” means an employee)
are both an employee and either a director, manager, secretary or other similar employee of a company which is under the control of the authority.

“For the purposes of this section, a person is at any time associated with a local authority if—

(a) he is at that time a member of the authority;

(b) he is at that time an officer of the authority;

(c) he is at that time both an employee and either a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of a company which is under the control of the authority; or

(d) at any time within the preceding four years he has been associated with the authority by virtue of paragraph (a) above.”
Local Government and Housing Act 1989 (Section 69)

Can local governors be LA-associated?

No. Only members and trustees can be LAAPs. If someone is a local governor in a multi-academy trust they cannot qualify as a LAAP. They also cannot qualify as a LAAP if they sit on any other academy committee but are not a trustee.

It may seem odd that the DfE places no limits on local governor LAAPs in their model articles, as you could in theory have a local governing body stuffed to the brim with LAAPs but a 19.9% limit at trustee and member level.

However, I assume the reasoning is that the trustees and members hold the real power in each trust. The local governors only hold powers that have been delegated down to them.

What counts as a local authority?

The definition of a local authority is found in section 67 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989. It is a very wide definition so check the Act to see the full list, but it includes:

county councils
county borough councils
district councils
London borough councils
parish councils
community councils
fire and rescue authorities
policy authorities.

What if someone is associated with an LA that is not close to the academy?

They still qualify as an LA-associated person, whether or not the LA they are associated with is geographically close to the academy trust. The definition of a LAAP in the model articles refers to any person associated with any local authority by which the trust is influenced.

For example, if a trustee at an academy in London is also employed by Devon county council they are still considered a LAAP.

Do LA-associated persons need permission from the LA to join the board?

The current model articles say that any trustee joining the board needs permission from the LA they are linked to. They do not say that someone who is joining your trust as a member needs permission from the LA. (Check your own articles to confirm this.)

“No person who is a local authority associated person is eligible to be appointed or elected to the office of trustee unless their appointment or election to such office is authorised by the local authority to which they are associated.”
Model Articles of Association (June 2021)

Can elected trustees count as LAAPs?

Yes. The rules on LAAPs apply equally to both appointed and elected trustees, so a parent trustee elected by the parent body could be a LAAP, as could a staff trustee elected by members of staff.

Do school employees count as LAAPS?

If they are employed by a maintained school then yes, they count as a LAAP. If they are employed by an academy trust then no, they are not a LAAP.

Example Calculations

Remember that 19.9% is the maximum number of LA-associated persons allowed among your members and the same limit is placed on your trustees. Here are the calculations of how many LA-associated persons an academy trust can have.

Member Calculations

A trust with five members or fewer cannot have any LAAP members, because you would immediately breach the 19.9% limit. Just one LAAP member would make up 20% (or more) of members by themselves.

A trust with six to 10 members could have only one LAAP member, who would form between 16.6% to 10% of the total members.

Trustee Calculations

A trust with five trustees or fewer cannot have any LAAP trustees (but in reality all academy trusts will have more trustees than this).

A trust with six to 10 trustees could have only one LAAP trustee, who would form between 16.6% to 10% of the total trustees.

A trust with 11 to 15 trustees could have only two LAAP trustees (18% to 13%).

A trust with 16 to 20 trustees could have only three LAAP trustees (18.75% to 15%).

What happens if a member or trustee becomes a LAAP during their term of office?

The model articles say that if a member or trustee becomes a LAAP during their term of office, for example they get a job working for the council, they are “deemed to have immediately resigned”.

In other words, they immediately stop being a member or trustee and have no choice in the matter. Notice that in this clause it doesn’t matter whether your new LA-associated person takes you over the 19.9% limit or not; they are deemed to have resigned either way.

“If at the time of either their becoming a member of the academy trust or their first appointment or election to office as a trustee any member or trustee was not a local authority associated person but later becomes so during their membership or tenure as a trustee they shall be deemed to have immediately resigned their membership and/or resigned from their office as a trustee as the case may be.”
Model Articles of Association (June 2021)

If we have an LA trustee are they a LAAP?

Only if they meet the definition of a LAAP described above, for example they are employed by the LA. They are not an LA-associated person just because they are an LA trustee.

Current model articles of association don’t contain the role of LA trustee, but some academy trusts will have LA trustee vacancies in their articles, particularly if their articles have not been updated in many years.

These LA trustees may be either nominated or appointed by the LA but beyond that they do not have any links with the LA or vote on behalf of the LA. Once they are on the board they function in the same way as any other trustee.

What happens if we have too many LAAPs in post?

The articles of association have been written so that it is not possible to accidentally appoint or elect too many LAAPs. The wording says that the extra trustees or members who are LAAPs are “deemed to have resigned immediately before” their appointment or election.

In effect, therefore, the extra LAAPs never joined your academy trust at all, so it’s not possible to accidentally breach the limit.

“If at any time the number of trustees or members who are also local authority associated persons would (but for articles 139 to 142 inclusive) represent 20% or more of the total number of trustees or members (as the case may be) then a sufficient number of the trustees or members (as the case may be) who are local authority associated persons shall be deemed to have resigned as trustees or members immediately before the occurrence of such an event.”
Model Articles of Association (June 2021)

The model articles also explain what would happen in the unlikely event that two LAAPs have recently been elected or appointed but only one needs to resign to keep the academy trust under the 19.9% limit – the person who has joined the trust most recently must leave.

“Trustees or members (as the case may be) who are local authority associated persons shall be deemed to have resigned in order of their appointment or election date the most recently appointed or elected resigning first.”
Model Articles of Association (June 2021)

Why is it important to limit the numbers of LA-associated people?

If an academy trust has too many LA-associated people it becomes an influenced company. The law places a number of restrictions and burdens on influenced companies that influenced academy trusts would have to fulfil.

Part II of The Local Authorities (Companies) Order 1995 explains what influenced companies must do. I won’t list all the requirements here, but to give you a flavour an LA-influenced academy trust would have to:

write that it is an LA-influenced company on documents like its letters
remove a trustee if they were disqualified from being a member of an LA
provide information requested by the Audit Commission
provide information requested by local councillors.

Can school governor vacancies be shared?

In the majority of cases governor positions cannot be shared, so you must have one person filling one vacancy. The only exception to this is when you have co-headteachers in a job share, who both share the role of headteacher governor.

In all other cases the rule is one vacancy, one volunteer. So if you have one parent governor vacancy, for example, you can only fill it with one parent rather than two people sharing the position. It’s not possible to serve as half a governor!

People sometimes ask to share governor positions so they can reduce the amount of time spent volunteering but unfortunately this is not possible.

What happens if we have a co-headteacher?

This is the only exception to the rule that governor positions cannot be shared. If you have two co-heads they will share the one position of headteacher governor.

They will have one vote between them so will have to decide who can cast that vote at meetings, or perhaps decide to alternate using the vote. This shouldn’t be too much of a problem as you would hope the co-heads will agree on most issues!

It may sound unfair that the co-heads don’t get a vote each, but each school only has one headteacher governor position on its board (or one chief executive officer/principal position in academy trusts) so there is only one vote allocated to the head.

If both co-heads were given a vote each it would double the power of the headteacher governor position for no reason other than a job share is in place.

Assuming the co-heads would agree on most votes this would just add an extra vote in favour of the headteacher viewpoint each time. This would be problematic because one of the core functions of the governing body is to hold the head(s) to account.

Can link governor roles be shared?

Yes. Link governor roles can be shared, so you could have two link governors for SEND for example. They would need to agree how to share the work between them, perhaps using written terms of reference to record this.

It’s up to the governing body to decide how it distributes its work between all the link governors and committees, so it’s free to decide that there will be two link governors for a particular area and just one for another.

Can the role of chair of governors be shared?

Yes. Both the chair and vice-chair roles can be shared. It’s uncommon for the vice-chair role to be held jointly but fairly common for schools to have joint chairs. You could also have joint chairs or vice-chairs of committees.

Why can link roles and the chair be shared when governor positions cannot be?

When governors carry out link roles or chairing they are sharing out work that must be completed by the governing body as a whole. There are no rules that say the chair must be one person only or that link roles must be carried out by individuals. The governing body itself controls how the work gets done.

However, when a person joins the governing body they must fill a vacancy that exists in either a maintained school’s instrument of government, an academy trust’s articles of association (for the board of trustees) or an academy’s terms of reference (for local governing bodies).

These documents list the total number of governor positions available. A maintained school’s instrument of government might say for example that the board will consist of two parent governors, one LA governor, one staff governor, one headteacher governor and five co-opted governors.

The instrument will also list the total number of governors the school can have, so in the example in the previous paragraph the school’s instrument would say “the total number of governors shall be 10”.

If the school tried to allocate two people to the LA governor position that would not match the “one LA governor” that is set out in their instrument, nor the total number of governors they are allowed, because they would now have 11 governors rather than 10.

Even if the legal documents allowed for shared positions it would be very difficult in practice. If a governor only came to every other meeting they would miss a huge amount of information. If they came to all meetings and tried to cut down on school visits they would miss learning first-hand about the school.

The people sharing the position would also have to agree on how to cast their one vote each time. It’s likely that co-heads will agree most of the time but much less likely that two parent or LA governors will always agree.

Finally, even with just one vote between two people you could argue that they would still have more power over the board than a single person, because there would be two different voices to be heard and exert influence.