section 1: the school review and development (srd)...

School Review and Development (SRD) Procedures

2013 – 2017

All documentation related to School Review and Development is available on the SRD website at http://srd.dbbcso.org; password = srd

School Review and DevelopmentSRD Procedures (revisions 1/7/2013; 14/11/2013; 13/1/2014; 16/4/14; 5/02/2015; 3/6/15; 13/3/16; 6/5/16; 17/1/17)

Sc

ho

ol

I

mp

ro

ve

me

nt

/

S

ch

oo

l

Re

vi

ew

a

nd

D

ev

el

op

me

nt

http://srd.dbbcso.org/

ContentsSection 1: The School Review and Development (SRD) Program (principles and purpose)....................................................................................1

1.1. The Purpose of School Review and Development..........................................................................................................................11.2. Principles Underpinning the Program.............................................................................................................................................1

1.3. Scope of Accountabilities................................................................................................................................................................11.3.1. NSW Government Accountabilities................................................................................................................................................1

1.3.2. Australian Government Accountabilities........................................................................................................................................21.3.3. Catholic Schools Office Accountabilities.........................................................................................................................................2

1.3.4. Annual School Report......................................................................................................................................................................21.4. The NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA) and Catholic Schools Office (CSO) Focus Areas................................................3

1.5. Compliance Certification.................................................................................................................................................................3Section 2: The Structure of the School Review and Development Program (SRD)..................................................................................................4

2.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................................................................................42.1.1 Regulatory Requirements (Tier 1)...................................................................................................................................................5

2.1.2 Organisational documents (Tier 1).................................................................................................................................................62.1.3 Quality Assurance (Tier 2)...............................................................................................................................................................7

2.2 Review Reports (Externally validated schools)...............................................................................................................................72.2.1 School Self-Evaluation Report.........................................................................................................................................................7

2.2.2 School Review and Development Report.......................................................................................................................................82.3 Post review – Strategic Planning.....................................................................................................................................................8

Section 3: Monitoring non-curriculum requirements..............................................................................................................................................93.1 Staff (S5.2 NESA Manual)................................................................................................................................................................9

3.2 Premises, Buildings, Facilities (S5.4 & S5.5 NESA Manual).............................................................................................................93.3 Work Health and Safety (S5.5 & S5.6 NESA Manual)......................................................................................................................9

3.4 Child Protection (S5.6.1 NESA Manual)........................................................................................................................................103.5 Student Welfare (S5.6.2 NESA Manual)........................................................................................................................................11

3.6 Managing Risk (S5.5 & S5.6.2 NESA Manual)................................................................................................................................113.7 Handling Complaints (S5.6.2 NESA Manual).................................................................................................................................12

3.8 Management and Operation of the School (S5.9 NESA Manual).................................................................................................123.9 Financial Accountability (S5.9 NESA Manual)...............................................................................................................................14

Section 4: Returns to the NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA).................................................................................................................15Section 5: Provisional and Initial registration/accreditation..................................................................................................................................16

5.1 Process for Placing a School on Provisional Registration/Accreditation......................................................................................165.2 Process for New Schools...............................................................................................................................................................16

Section 6: Roles and Responsibilities.....................................................................................................................................................................176.1 Roles in the Process of School Review and Development............................................................................................................17

6.2 Role of the School Principal..........................................................................................................................................................176.3 CSO Roles in School Review and Development............................................................................................................................17

6.4 Role of the Assistant Director School Improvement....................................................................................................................176.5 Role of School Consultants...........................................................................................................................................................17

6.6 Role of the Leader School Review and Development...................................................................................................................186.7 Role of the External Validation Chair............................................................................................................................................18

6.8 Role and selection of the School Review Panel............................................................................................................................186.9 Role of the NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA).............................................................................................................19

6.10 Role of the NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA) Inspectors............................................................................................19Section 7: Ethical Framework.................................................................................................................................................................................20

Section 8: Appendices............................................................................................................................................................................................218.1 SRD component map....................................................................................................................................................................22

8.2 SRD component overview.............................................................................................................................................................238.3 SRD key documents.......................................................................................................................................................................23

8.4 SRD program school groups 2015-2020.......................................................................................................................................248.5 SRD program cycle 2015-2020......................................................................................................................................................25

8.6 School audit and compulsory PL schedule (2015-2017)...............................................................................................................268.7 Review follow-up: Corrective Action Plan....................................................................................................................................27

8.8 Focus Areas...................................................................................................................................................................................288.9 Responsible Persons Induction Checklist......................................................................................................................................29

8.10 School Improvement Plans: Statutory requirements...................................................................................................................30

Section 1: The School Review and Development (SRD) Program (principles and purpose)

1.1. The Purpose of School Review and Development

The fundamental purpose of the School Review and Development program is to provide support to diocesan systemic schools to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements and to provide the framework for self-evaluation and school development. Processes within the program include external validation and critique of the school’s improvement journey. The framework for the program is articulated into three (3) domains:

Mission Learning and Teaching Pastoral Care

The program is informed by the diocesan Leading Learning (https://leadinglearning.dbb.org.au) initiative which aligns leadership and professional learning with school development.

1.2. Principles Underpinning the Program

The School Review and Development program will:

provide opportunities for schools to clarify their core Mission, Vision and Catholic Worldview ensure alignment with the school improvement priority of the diocese, Leading Learning strive for excellence in learning and teaching foster a climate of school self-evaluation contribute to continuous school improvement identify strengths and areas for improvement which inform short and long-term goals enable a process for review that is developed collaboratively with teachers and principals facilitate effective personal and whole school reflection provide opportunities for schools and their communities to celebrate their achievements support and enhance the effectiveness of leaders in schools fulfil accountability requirements to regulatory bodies and stakeholders.

1.3. Scope of Accountabilities

The scope of the accountabilities encompasses the NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA) regulatory requirements under the NSW Education Act 1990 (the ‘Act’), Commonwealth government funding requirements and additional diocesan requirements. The following section details the requirements of each of these sectors.

1.3.1. NSW Government Accountabilities

The Act provides for the registration and accreditation of individual non-government schools within a system of non-government schools formed under the Act such as the Broken Bay Diocesan Schools System (DSS). The NESA, as the regulatory body, needs to ensure that a non-government school meets the requirements of the Act and is responsible for making recommendations to the Minister concerning the registration or decisions concerning the accreditation of non-government schools. Therefore, the NESA is involved in setting both the regulatory and accountability requirements of the Act for non-government schools and for systems of non-government schools, and the oversight of compliance with these requirements. These requirements are outlined in the NESA Registration Systems and Member Non-government Schools (NSW) Manual (the ‘Manual’) and relate to:

The Proprietor and Principal of the School (Section 5.1 Manual) Staff (Section 5.2 Manual) Curriculum (Section 5.3 Manual) Premises and Buildings (Section 5.4 Manual) Facilities (Section 5.5 Manual) Safe and Supportive Environment (Section 5.6 Manual)

School Review and Development Procedures Page 1

Mission is the

philosophical core of each of the

three domains of the program.

http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/manuals/#regaccredsystemsmanuals

https://leadinglearning.dbb.org.au/

Discipline (Section 5.7 Manual) Attendance (Section 5.8 Manual) Management and Operation of the School (Section 5.9 Manual) Educational and Financial Reporting (Section 5.10 Manual)

The maximum period for registration/accreditation is generally five years. Areas of compliance are continually reviewed at the system level in response to new NESA requirements and other legislative requirements. The current NESA registration/accreditation cycle is 2013-2017.

1.3.2. Australian Government Accountabilities

For the current funding cycle schools must comply with the following requirements annually:

National student assessments Participation in national reports on the outcomes of schools Publication of information by schools (Annual School Reports) Provision of student reports to parents Provision of individual school information to ACARA Financial viability Implementation of the Australian Curriculum (from 2014) [The Australian Education Act 2013 (part 6

division 2, paragraph 77 (2) (b); The Australian Education Regulation 2013 (part 5, division 3, section 42)]

Implementation of a framework for School improvement planning (from 2014) [The Australian Education Act 2013 (part 6 division 2, paragraph 77 (2) (d) parts (i) and (ii); The Australian Education Regulation 2013 (part 5, division 3, subdivision D, section 44)] [see Appendix 8.9 for details]

In addition to the specific commitments listed above, schools also need to meet their reporting requirements regarding the collection of information requested by DEEWR (for example, school census information) as well as information being collected by ACARA for the annual National Report on Schooling.

DSS processes will provide the means for monitoring a school’s compliance with the educational accountability requirements listed above.

1.3.3. Catholic Schools Office Accountabilities

The Catholic Schools Office (CSO) requires schools to have effective processes in place to meet system accountabilities. Each school is required to have a strategic school improvement planning process in place that engages it in an ongoing cycle of evaluation, goal-setting, implementation, monitoring and adjustment.

These accountabilities include the 3-year School Improvement Plan (SIP) and the implementation of systemic policies and procedures. In addition to this a range of DSS guidelines and other documentation have been developed for schools to assist the implementation of these accountabilities and to embed the elements of these requirements into their practice.

1.3.4. Annual School Report

An Annual School Report (ASR) is required from each school. The report provides general information pertaining to the school’s educational performance over the reporting year, summary financial information and an overview of key school policies. The completed report is published on the school’s website and made available in at least one other form by 30 June of the subsequent reporting year. Additionally, the report’s availability must be advertised publicly, for example, via the school hoarding, community notice board, school website.

Schools use a web-based program to write their ASR by logging onto https://asr.dbb.org.au (password = password).

Reports are due to the CSO by the end of Term 1 of the subsequent reporting year. Principals are asked to submit their completed report using the submit feature on the web-based form. A comprehensive review process is undertaken before the reports are given to the School’s Consultant for final sign-off, who liaises with the School Principal if further editing is required.

CSO Financial Services and CSO Educational Services manage and provide the respective data for the report. This data is automatically populated into the report for schools. This data includes relevant demographic, attendance


https://asr.dbb.org.au/

and assessment data. The CSO publishes the reports to the NESA website (RANGS) and to the CSO public website.

1.4. The NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA) and Catholic Schools Office (CSO) Focus Areas

Whilst schools are required to be compliant across all areas all of the time, NESA sets particular areas for further focus within the 5-year registration and accreditation cycle. These focus areas are determined in negotiation with the DSS and can be influenced by state, federal and diocesan priorities. The full scope of focus areas for the current registration cycle is provided in Appendix 8.8.

1.5. Compliance Certification

Certification by schools of NSW state regulatory requirements and commonwealth government funding requirements is achieved by completion of the Compliance Certificate. The completion of this certificate may be accompanied by a school visit with the School’s Consultant and the Leader (SRD), usually during term 4 of any academic year. Discussion relating to the evidence of compliance listed on the school’s Compliance Checklist (a word document filed on the school’s O-drive), as well as implications for schools if new requirements or revisions to existing requirements eventuate, is fundamental to these meetings.

Certification of Australian Government funding requirements is managed by the NSW Catholic Education Commission (CEC). Each year the CSO certifies to the CEC that schools within the diocese have met their accountabilities for the specific Australian Government funding requirements.

All documentation is available on the SRD website http://srd.dbbcso.org; password = srd



Section 2: The Structure of the School Review and Development Program (SRD)

2.1 Introduction

The Broken Bay SRD program is constructed on a two-tiered model over a 6-year cycle. Tier 1 describes the processes involved with regulatory requirements across curriculum and non-curriculum areas. Tier 2 describes the processes involved with quality assurance. Two models of Tier 2 review operate, the Tier 2 external panel review and the Tier 2 school self-review. The model of Tier 2 review in which the school engages is dependent on the placement of the school’s review phase.

Tasks associated with the components of review include the completion of documentation by schools, panel members and CSO personnel. Schools complete the CSO Compliance Checklist (Tier 1), the CSO School Self-Evaluation Report (Tier 2 external panel review) or the National School Improvement Tool (NSIT) rating tool (Tier 2 self-evaluation review).

The outcome of the Tier 2 review informs the school’s next 3-year planning cycle culminating in the development of the School Improvement Plan (SIP). Respective documentation related to each review stage are made available to respective reviewers and/or panel members at the time of school review (see SRD website, http://srd.dbbcso.org; password = srd; school review tiers tab).

The School Principal in consultation with the School’s Consultant and the Leader School Review and Development manage the components of the program. The specific tasks within each component are executed through a collaborative planning approach; however, particular tasks within components can be predominately labelled as CSO tasks and school tasks.

The overview of the structure of the SRD components is provided in the graphic below and further detailed in the appendix 8.1.

Selected aspects of the school’s improvement journey are formally documented in the Annual School Report.



informsTier 2

Quality assurance review: external panel review

OR

school self-review

informsTier 1

Regulatory requirements review: curriculum review

AND

non-curriculum review

School Improvement

Plan



2.1.1 Regulatory Requirements (Tier 1)

The Tier 1 process is used to determine the status of the school’s compliance with regulatory requirements across all mandated curriculum and non-curriculum requirements. Due to the scope of the requirements a sampling approach is taken with documentation.

All schools maintain/complete a compliance checklist to record and track of local and contextual evidence. Curriculum requirements: All schools attend a School Review Curriculum Focus Day (CFD) annually to review

curriculum requirements in specific KLAs. Schools are split into groups A, B, and C to facilitate the CFD organisation. School groups are listed in Appendix 8.4

Non-curriculum requirements: Selected schools (15 per year) are reviewed by personnel with subject matter expertise every 3 years in non-curriculum areas. The schedule of reviews is available on the SRD website and also included in Appendix 8.5.

The information provided in the following table describes the monitoring practice with schools.

All schools: Curriculum review Selected schools: Non-curriculum review (approximately 15 per year)

Preparation for a Curriculum Focus Day (CFD) All schools are reviewed in 2 or 3 KLAs annually Dates for the CFDs are scheduled and the communication of

these dates is provided to schools at least 6 months prior (CSO task).

Schools complete a compliance checklist to record their evidence of compliance, hyperlinking evidence to school documentation (school task).

The checklist and related documentation is located on the DSS O-drive – a dedicated drive which can be accessed by the Leader SRD.

Attendance at the CFD On the scheduled CFD, peer review of curriculum documentation

takes place; discussion results in the determination of the school’s status of compliance based on the documentation provided by participating schools. Table facilitators document their findings by completing relevant checklists.

Post CFD A report on the panel’s findings is provided to the school on the

analysis of the checklists.

The review of non-curriculum requirements for schools may be conducted at a time conducive to the respective reviewer and no less than within two weeks of a scheduled quality assurance panel review or school self-review (Tier 2) .This involves areas related to: Student attendance Premises, Buildings, Facilities Safe and Supportive Environment

(encompasses Child Protection, Student Welfare, WHS, Risk Management)

Staffing and NESA teacher accreditation Financial audits

Schools are externally audited in WHS and Finance on a cyclical basis (see section 3 and Appendix 8.6)The results of all reviews are summarised in the complete review report.

The review panel includes key DSS personnel who are responsible for specialised areas related to the requirements. Panel members complete relevant checklists related to curriculum and non-curriculum requirements.

In the case where concerns are raised about the school’s compliance, the school is asked to develop a corrective action plan to address these concerns. A follow-up visit to the school is organised to assess the school’s progress on its plans and a further report is prepared for the Director of Schools (see further detail section 5.1 and Appendix 8.7 for a sample corrective action plan template)



2.1.2 Organisational documents (Tier 1)

Document Link

SRD review checklists and support documents

A number of documents are available for schools to manage their regulatory requirements. They include the

Document Management Guide – a ‘how to’ and ‘what’ relating to evidence

School’s Compliance Checklist – the document used by schools to list their evidence of compliance

Page link (SRD website)

Reference (this document)

SRD component map

A document that describes the components of the SRD program inclusive of regulatory and quality assurance components



SRD program school groups 2015-2020

This document lists the school groupings for the Curriculum Focus Days (Group A, Group B, Group C) and (Group A, Group B) for primary and secondary schools respectively. The groupings are determined to ensure that an even spread of schools are represented across clusters.



SRD program cycle (2015-2020)

This document describes the placement of each school on the review cycle, encompassing both regulatory and quality assurance reviews. The placement of the school within the cycle has been determined to ensure representation of the school cluster and Consultant is equitable.



School audit and compulsory PL schedule (2015-2017)

Schools are impacted not only by the formal review program but also by the diocesan professional learning (PL) program. This document lists schools by audit and PL type and frequency of these activities.





http://srd.dbbcso.org/school-review-tiers.html








2.1.3 Quality Assurance (Tier 2)

The second tier of the SRD program has a strong focus on quality assurance and improvement and is a key component of the strategic planning process.

It provides a formal opportunity for the school to evaluate its effectiveness at a particular point in the planning cycle both in terms of its own goals and within the broader framework of system and government expectations.

By identifying the school’s strengths and areas for development the review findings inform the annual and longer term planning processes, through the SIP and SSP, respectively, and help validate planning priorities.

External review schools (approximately 7 to 8 schools per year)

Self-review schools (approximately 7 to 8 schools per year)

Preparation for School Review

The selection of schools takes place and the review panel is determined (CSO task).

Dates for school review are scheduled and the communication of these dates is provided to schools at least six (6) months prior to review. (CSO task).

Review schools complete the School Self-Evaluation Report (SSER) hyperlinking evidence to school documentation (school task).

The SSER and the most recent Annual School Report are provided to Tier 2 panel members in preparation for review days (CSO task).

Review day

On the scheduled external review days, the external review panel provides critical comment on the school’s learning journey based on the evidence provided through documentation, dialogue and classroom visits.

Post review

A report on the panel’s findings is provided to the school on the analysis of the evidence.

The school then engages in further discussion with key diocesan staff to develop the school’s next 3-year SIP.

All schools are encouraged to engage in school self-review on an ongoing basis. They are also encouraged to use the existing review school documentation for their self-evaluation.

A smaller group of schools, approximately 7 to 8 schools each year engage in structured opportunities for school self-review. These schools:

use the National School Improvement Tool (NSIT) in selected domains to evaluate their learning journey for the current SIP.

participate in a professional learning and sharing day Celebration of Learning during Term 4 to:Þ invite other self-review schools to

comment and provide feedback relating to their shared experiences along their learning journey

Þ develop their next 3-year SIP

2.2 Review Reports (Externally validated schools)

Note: This section applies to schools that are reviewed by an external validation panel:

The school’s Self-Evaluation Report completed in preparation for external review by the school, and the CSO’s School Review Report completed on the outcome of the external review by the review panel, are important documents which provide a complete picture of the school’s journey and the evaluation of that journey. The purpose and content of these reports is described in the following section.

2.2.1 School Self-Evaluation Report

The school’s Self-Evaluation Report is prepared by external review schools in collaboration with key diocesan officers and is structured according to the three domains Mission, Learning and Teaching and Pastoral Care. Each domain is framed by a guiding principle and a set of indicators that underpin the principle.

The activities associated with the preparation of this report enable the school to reflect on the effectiveness of initiatives and developments along their journey in each domain. The audience for the Self-Evaluation Report is the school community, staff, school board (where applicable) and the school review panel. The panel refers to the school’s Self-Evaluation Report to further their understandings about the school’s learning journey and to pose questions related to that journey and future directions.


The school’s Self-Evaluation Report consists of two sections, the Principal’s Report and the Domain Reports. The Principal’s Report is a key section of the school’s Self-Evaluation Report and sets the scene for the Domain Reports which form the remainder of the complete document. The Domain Reports articulate school strengths, challenges and future directions. The school considers the following questions in the respective domain for both current achievements and future directions:

Current Achievements: Future Directions:

What has the school achieved since the last school review that has led to furthering school improvement?

What is the evidence for these achievements? What opportunities and challenges does this

present for the school?

What does the school wish to sustain/transform? What are the school’s 3-year goals from this

reflection?

Further information about the structure of the Self-Evaluation Report can be accessed from the School Review and Development website at http://srd.dbbcso.org; password = srd).

2.2.2 School Review and Development Report

The review report is prepared by the Leader School Review and Development based on the outcome of the review. The review report describes the findings of the panel based on the evidence provided. The review report includes commendations and recommendations for the school’s consideration.

This report is comprised of separate Tier 1 and Tier 2 reports. The Tier 1 report provides information to schools on the status of compliance with regulatory and diocesan requirements. The Tier 1 report is provided to Tier 2 panel members on the day of review. The Tier 2 report articulates the panel’s validation of the school’s learning journey since their last review and provides recommendations for future planning.

The final report is presented to the school and a copy is kept in CSO files. The report consists of the following sections:

the Chair’s overview and overarching recommendations detailed overview of the school’s status of compliance strengths validated by the panel for each domain strategic directions validated by the panel for each domain other considerations that the panel recommends for each domain.

Signatories to the report include the Chair and the Assistant Director School Improvement.

2.3 Post review – Strategic Planning

Following the external validation on the Tier 2 days, the school leadership team meets with key CSO personnel, to refine the school’s validated future directions into a small number of high priority 3-year strategic goals. A similar process is followed with self-review schools but takes place during Term 4 at the professional learning and sharing day Celebration of Learning. This process leads the school to develop a new 3-year SSP. The strategic goals are then further refined into annual school improvement goals, which are documented in the annual SIP. The processes associated with review provide opportunities to affirm the school’s strengths and successes and to identify areas for future development. These processes enable the school community to engage constructively in school life and to contribute collaboratively in the future development of the school.





Section 3: Monitoring non-curriculum requirements

3.1 Staff (S5.2 NESA Manual)

The CSO Human Resource (HR) team manages the requirements relating to staff employed in diocesan systemic schools which include Child Protection screening for all staff (see section 3.5 below) and NESA teacher accreditation requirements. With respect to the latter, support is provided to schools by the respective HR Education Officer to ensure the completion of particular documentation. This documentation tracks information about NESA requirements as it relates to full time, part-time and casual teaching staff. This includes:

staff working towards accreditation at the level of Proficient staff maintaining accreditation at the level of Proficient the provision of supervisor/mentor support financial currency with NESA accurate details on NESA accounts.

The CSO Broken Bay Induction Planner 4th edition 2016 (CuriaNet Þ Catholic Schools Office Þ Human Resources Services Þ Professional Learning ) provides schools with information relating to NESA accreditation requirements and support provided by CSO.

3.2 Premises, Buildings, Facilities (S5.4 & S5.5 NESA Manual)

The CSO Facilities team regularly monitors the repair and maintenance of schools within the system. The team supports schools in the design and construction phases of school building projects and by responding to emerging issues. The written evidence includes the school's occupation certificate, which is held by the CSO. All schools are visited over a 3-year cycle by CSO facilities staff to ensure schools meet their obligations with this requirement. The CSO Senior Facilities Officer completes the Facilities Checklist for those schools scheduled for a Tier 1 review. The CSO Procurement Officer ensures that schools have an up-to-date fire safety statement and that this information is communicated to the relevant authorities.

The school facilities unit also prepares individual 10-year maintenance plans for schools, provides asbestos management plans and maintains data concerning the available facilities for each school. The school is required to follow the schedule of repairs and maintenance as listed in their 10-year maintenance plan with the expectation that costs for minor repairs and maintenance will be met by the school. All schools are required to have systems in place for general repairs and maintenance. The manner in which this is administered is determined by the school.

Requests by a school for general repairs and maintenance above approximately $5000 are directed to the CSO Facilities team and the Diocesan Building Control Group as they arise. Consideration of these matters and the related action is based on a needs and risk-management approach. Shortfalls in functional areas as a result of Curriculum changes identified by both the school and the facilities team may result in a project being forwarded to CSO for capital funding.

3.3 Work Health and Safety (S5.5 & S5.6 NESA Manual)

A Safety Management System compliant with AS/NZ Standard 4801:2001 (the ‘Standard’) has been adapted and implemented across schools to support compliance with the relevant WHS legislation, WHS Codes of Practice, Standards and Guides, and to provide safe and supportive school environments.

Systematic implementation of the Safety Management System by schools is conducted according to an Annual WHS management plan self-assessment tool, which is completed by all schools.

Schools are externally audited for compliance with the Standard on a cyclical basis – approximately every 6 years. Identified issues of non-compliance are routinely addressed and monitored.

The CSO Broken Bay WHS website provides schools with up-to-date information relating to current issues and concerns.


https://whsonline.dbb.org.au/bb/Pages/home.aspx

https://curianet.dbb.org.au/Catholicschoolsoffice/HR/Professional%20Learning/Pages/ProfessionalLearning.aspx

https://curianet.dbb.org.au/Catholicschoolsoffice/HR/Professional%20Learning/Pages/ProfessionalLearning.aspx

3.4 Child Protection (S5.6.1 NESA Manual)

The CSO Child Protection team provides school based Child Protection (CP) Professional Learning (PL) on an ongoing basis as well as conducting site checks linked to the School Review and Development (SRD) program.

Three approaches to CP PL are currently in place,

i) Child Protection Professional Learning 1 (applies to schools on Tier 2 external panel review; approx., 7 to 8 schools annually)

Schools scheduled for external review are targeted for CP PL in the year of their review. Staff will complete two CP PL sessions at their school delivered by the CSO Child Protection Officer to ensure that they are informed of their child protection responsibilities under the Ombudsman Act 1974, Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 and the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012.

These sessions are:

Session 1: Promoting Child Safety – Addressing Complaints Against Staff : this relates to professional conduct of staff and how to identify and respond to ‘reportable conduct’ allegations against staff under the Ombudsman Act and the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012.

Session 2: Promoting Child Safety – Managing Risk of Harm Concerns: this relates to identifying when a child or young person may be at risk from abuse and neglect and how staff and schools manage mandatory reporting responsibilities and wellbeing concerns under the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act.

ii) Child Protection Professional Learning 2 (applies to schools scheduled for Tier 2 self-review; approx., 7 to 8 schools annually):

Schools scheduled for self-review will be offered a 45 minute Upskilling Session at their school, delivered by the CSO Child Protection Officer who will present information and scenarios intended to revive and build on previous learning in relation to promoting child safety.

All staff present at the CP PL sessions mentioned above (i) and (ii), will sign an attendance sheet verifying their presence at the CP PL and Upskilling Sessions. This information is maintained centrally and may also be maintained by schools.

iii) Child Protection Professional Learning 3 (applies to schools not scheduled for a Tier 2 review; 30 schools annually):

Schools not participating in a Tier 2 review will be offered CP PL via interactive eLearning modules. Staff will be allocated two (out of a possible five) CP PL online tutorials. The objective of these tutorials is to ensure that staff are provided current information with regard to their obligations according to the Ombudsman Act 1974, Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 and the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012. Staff are required to pass a simple quiz at the end of each module which includes the capacity for the CSO to verify staff that have completed the tutorial and therefore concluded their obligations regarding eLearning for this year.

The five online learning modules are as follows:

Session 1: Introduction To Child Protection Session 2:Understanding Mandatory Reporting - Risk Of Significant Harm Session 3:Working With Children Check – The Check Session 4:Complaints Involving Employees And The NSW Ombudsman Act Session 5:Other Important Child Protection Issues

The CSO CP PL does not prevent schools from conducting any school based CP PL. Any staff member unable to attend a CP in-service at their school is listed on the attendance sheet for follow up sessions with the School Principal or to attend an in-service at another school.


Site checks

In addition to the CP PL provided, schools involved in either a Tier 2 self-review or an external panel review are reviewed by the CSO Child Protection Officer in a formal way. The CSO Child Protection Officer will:

check that the school’s Staff Handbook contains sections outlining procedures for: o handling allegations against staff of inappropriate behaviour towards childreno mandatory reporting students at risk of significant harmo employment screening requirements for paid staff, external service providers and volunteers

check that the Child Protection Resource Manual (including the Professional Guidelines for School Staff in their Relationships with Students) is accessible in hard copy to all staff

check that the Parent Handbook contains a section informing parents of the school’s child protection responsibilities

ensure that all schools have available, in their reception areas, a pamphlet for parents explaining to the community what the school does in terms of meeting legal child protection responsibilities

ensure that staff induction manuals/packages outline child protection procedures and refer to key documents such the Child Protection Resource Manual and the Professional Guidelines for School Staff in their Relationships with Students.

sight any school based CP PL records check that the School Principal maintains confidential student records involving risk of significant harm or

wellbeing concerns in a lockable, restricted access filing cabinet check that appropriate Working With Children Check documents are collected at the school for all external

service providers and volunteers and that their details are recorded in a database check samples of teacher personnel files for evidence of Working With Children Check clearance and

referee checking.

Annual Child Protection Compliance Reports

The CSO Child Protection Officer prepares annual compliance reports for the CSO Director’s Group providing statistics and analysis relating to allegations against employees, reports relating to risk of significant harm and wellbeing concerns and professional learning. These reports help to identify anomalies in expected reporting from schools, potential gaps in knowledge and understanding of child protection requirements, as well as other emerging trends/issues which may need to be addressed.

3.5 Student Welfare (S5.6.2 NESA Manual)

The CSO Pastoral Care and Wellbeing team (PCW) manages the requirements related to Student Welfare. The website http://wellbeing.dbbcso.org/ contains information relating to the practices of the team and also contains links to support materials for schools. A number of documents are also available on the CSO public website (policies section). These include the Pastoral Care Policy, Anti-Bullying Policy, Cyber Safety Guidelines for Schools and the Behaviour Management and Student Discipline Policy. The Team Leader (PCW) takes responsibility for and leads school audit teams to ensure that schools meet their legislative responsibilities as set out in S5.6.2 of the NESA Manual.

3.6 Managing Risk (S5.5 & S5.6.2 NESA Manual)

The Diocesan Schools System has implemented a Risk Management Framework and Policy consistent with the ISO 31,000 Standard for Risk Management. Principals should ensure that all Risk Management practices within the school are aligned with the Framework and Policy and that risk management principles as outlined in the Framework are embedded within school activities where appropriate. The School Principal oversees risk management and determines whether or not the level of risk posed by an activity is acceptable.

This will involve ensuring that a comprehensive and documented risk assessment is undertaken before major school events (on and off site) and projects are commenced and that all day to day operational activities are underpinned by systematic and ongoing risk management. Where responsibility for activities such as outdoor education has been outsourced, it is the responsibility of the School Principal to ensure that these agencies have undertaken the necessary steps towards risk management.


http://www.csodbb.catholic.edu.au/about/dsp-collection.cfm?loadref=125

http://wellbeing.dbbcso.org/

The role of the DSS Risk Manager is to ensure that schools adhere to the Risk Management Framework and Policy and to support principals and staff in the development of appropriate risk management tools and related resources.

3.7 Handling Complaints (S5.6.2 NESA Manual)

Diocesan systemic schools are committed to providing a happy, safe environment for all staff and students. There are occasions however, when a member of staff, a student, a parent or a member of the wider community can be concerned about something that is happening at a school that appears to be unsatisfactory or unreasonable.

The resolution of complaints and grievances should be handled in the first instance by schools. If a complainant is not satisfied with the outcome of the school based process or the complaint relates to the principal, the matter is referred to the School’s Consultant via the CSO. If there are concerns about the complaints process, the outcome of a complaint,

or that concerns have not been addressed by the School’s Consultant, the complainant may ask the Director of Schools to review the matter.

Records of complaints, interviews and other documentation handled by the CSO are maintained in a separate comprehensive database. This database is managed by the CSO Manager Executive Support who also provides an annual report to the CSO Director’s Group. This report summarises the number and type of complaints and the resolution of such complaints. Schools are advised to maintain similar documentation of complaints and grievances including records where matters have been referred onto the CSO.

The Complaints Handling Policy and Procedures for Diocesan Systemic Schools is available from CuriaNet (CSO intranet; CuriaNet Þ Catholic Schools Office Þ DSS Resources ) and the public website Community of Catholic Schools. The policy details the framework established for the handling of complaints that relate to the operation of diocesan systemic schools.

3.8 Management and Operation of the School (S5.9 NESA Manual)

The Act requires that a system of non-government schools nominate a ‘responsible person’, defined as a person within the DSS who can direct the principal in relation to aspects of governance and management of the school upon which the Minister’s approval of the system is based (section 4.6 Manual).

The Act defines a ‘responsible person’ as

a) the proprietor of the school and, if the proprietor is a corporation, each director or person concerned in the management of the school, or

b) a member of the governing body of the school, or c) the principal of the school.

Broken Bay Diocesan ‘responsible persons’ include Trustees of the Diocese of Broken Bay, Diocesan high office bearers and all school principals. The Diocesan ‘responsible persons’ organisational chart is available on CuriaNet (CuriaNetCatholic Schools Office System DocumentationGovernance; https://curianet.dbb.org.au/Catholicschoolsoffice/dssresources/Pages/SystemDocuments.aspx). The Diocesan Director of Schools has particular responsibility in the execution of governance requirements under section 47 of the Act.

On an on-going daily basis, the nominated Diocesan ‘responsible persons’, and the Leader School Review and Development, significantly support the Director of Schools in the exercise of this role and have procedures in place to support school principals in the exercise of their role. Further, with regard to particular initiatives, the educational and other professional staff members of the CSO assist principals, as part of their ministry of leadership and service.

Performance appraisal and contract renewal of school principals

The Performance Appraisal for Leaders (PAL) process comprises an annual cycle that includes a series of interviews with the School’s Consultant to identify priorities and goals, develop and monitor action plans and evaluate achievements. It is directly linked to achieving improved educational outcomes for students. The data used in PAL informs the process of contract renewal. Contract renewal for school principals occurs at the end of a contract period (initially three and then every four years) and provides an opportunity for principals to reflect on their leadership over the contract period. A panel is appointed consisting of the Head of Human Resource


https://curianet.dbb.org.au/Catholicschoolsoffice/dssresources/Pages/SystemDocuments.aspx



https://curianet.dbb.org.au/Catholicschoolsoffice/dssresources/Pages/default.aspx

http://www.cso.brokenbay.catholic.edu.au/resources/polproc.html

Services (chair), the School’s Consultant and a peer principal from within or outside the diocese. The School Principal completes a detailed self-reflection and, using a 360⁰ process, data is gathered from stakeholders in the community. The purpose of contract renewal is for principals to reflect on their leadership; gather critical feedback on their performance; be affirmed for their strengths; provide an action plan for future development; and to ensure a robust process of accountability for their leadership of the school.

Supervisory and reporting requirements of ‘responsible persons’

The School’s Consultant has primary responsibility for the supervisory arrangements of the School Principal. This is managed in a number of ways including through the PAL process and as co-signatories to the Principal’s ‘responsible persons’ declaration. The declaration is signed at the beginning of each school year and outlines a principals responsibilities under sections 47 and 83C of the Education Act (1990) (NSW) and section 18 of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012). The original is to be kept by the principal and a copy forwarded to the CSO Office of the Director. The declaration also requires that the School Principal state their position in terms of any actual, potential or perceived conflict of interest and that the school’s compliance checklist is a true and accurate record of the school’s status of compliance with the regulatory and diocesan requirements. The declaration can be accessed from the SRD website at http://srd.dbbcso.org/annual-declarations.html (password = srd).

The School Principal must adhere to the reporting requirements of the CSO in terms of any breach of legislation and/or contractual obligations. This full list of reporting requirements to NESA is listed in Section 4 Returns to NESA (this document). The Policy for Addressing Performance of Principals and Disciplinary Matters sets out important information in response to situations of unsatisfactory performance and in alleged cases of serious misconduct and outlines the roles, responsibilities and key accountabilities of principals in the execution of their role. The Diocesan Code of Conduct sets out key responsibilities of all staff including ‘responsible persons’ (both documents are available on CuriaNet: (CuriaNet Catholic Schools Office System Documentation Employment)

Delegations of Responsible Persons

Information about the rights and responsibilities of diocesan ‘responsible persons’ is provided the Diocesan Delegations Policy. Financial and legal delegations are listed in the related delegations schedule (CuriaNet (Catholic Schools Office System Documentation Contracts and Licence Agreements) .

Maintenance of registers and external audits related to governance matters

The Act requires that registers of ‘responsible persons’, conflicts of interest and related-party transactions be maintained. This information is lodged with the CSO Office of the Director. The CSO and member schools undergo financial audits annually (see section 3.9 Financial Accountability).

Professional learning

The Act requires that ‘responsible persons’ must engage in 12 hours of professional learning (PL) (over 3 years) related to governance. The CSO is a NESA approved provider of governance PL (approved March 2016) and is approved to deliver the following modules: (i) Diocesan Governance Structures and Processes, (ii) Conflict of Interest and Related Party Transactions, (iii) Risk Management and (iv) Financial Governance. The CSO also accesses other BOSTES approved governance training providers, for example, the Catholic Education Commission as listed on the NESA governance webpage, to supplement the approved Diocesan program. The CSO maintains a register of PL for all its ‘responsible persons’ and asks that these persons also maintain their own log of such PL.

‘Responsible persons’ new to the role must undergo induction within 3 months of becoming a ‘responsible person’. As stated om S5.9.3 of the NESA Manual, the induction process must include, at a minimum, the mandatory successful completion of a NESA approved training program and for school principal, must include the provision of key documents including:

a copy of all the school’s documents, policies and procedures specified at 5.9.3.1 of the Manual and any other key policy document for the school

the school’s most recent audited financial statements recent minutes of meetings of the school’s ‘responsible persons’.


http://rego.bostes.nsw.edu.au/governance-training

https://curianet.dbb.org.au/Catholicschoolsoffice/dssresources/Pages/SystemDocuments.aspxhttps:/curianet.dbb.org.au/Catholicschoolsoffice/dssresources/Pages/SystemDocuments.aspx







https://curianet.dbb.org.au/Catholicschoolsoffice/dssresources/System%20Documents/Performance%20and%20Discipline%20-%20Principals.pdfhttps:/curianet.dbb.org.au/Catholicschoolsoffice/dssresources/System%20Documents/Performance%20and%20Discipline%20-%20Principals.pdf

http://srd.dbbcso.org/annual-declarations.html


The Diocesan process for the induction of newly appointed ‘responsible persons’ is as follows:

Trustees for the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Broken Bay

Catholic Schools Office Leadership Team

Schools

Diocesan personnel [Bishop, Consultors (x8)] (as at June 2016)

CSO personnel [Director, Assistant Directors (x2), Heads of Service (x4), Consultants (x3)] (as at June 2016)

School principals (x46 as at June 2016)

Meeting with the Diocesan Director to discuss the requirements of the role in regard to Governance.

Meeting with the Diocesan Director to discuss the requirements of the role in regard to Governance.

Meeting with the school’s consultant to discuss the requirements of the role.

Completion of the Diocesan governance training scheduled for the respective calendar year.

Meetings with Leader SRD to discuss the regulatory framework for compliance of schools and in their role as ‘responsible persons’.

Meeting with key CSO officers focusing on key operational aspects of the role encompassing a range of areas including governance.

Completion of the Diocesan governance training scheduled for the respective calendar year.

Handover of key documents as listed in section 5.3.9.1 of the Manual (and listed above) and as listed in Appendix 1 Diocesan Handover Guidelines for Principals

Completion of the Diocesan governance training scheduled for the respective calendar year

3.9 Financial Accountability (S5.9 NESA Manual)

Diocesan schools are audited financially by an external auditor. All secondary schools and approximately 50% of the number of primary schools are externally audited by Pitcher Partners annually.

The Diocesan Head of Internal Audit supplements the work of the external auditor on a cyclical basis. The internal audit function is an independent and objective activity that provides assurance to the Bishop and Diocesan Finance Committee that the whole Diocese including the CSO and schools operate transparently, comply with policies and procedures and are accountable for their use of resources. The work of the external auditor and other assurance providers through their reviews of operational, financial and administrative aspects of schools largely follows the SRD cyclical program. This is achieved by conducting field audits at schools and providing recommendations arising from the audit in the form of a report back to the School Principal, Director CSO, School’s Consultant and SRD Leader. Matters for action are monitored and reported upon until finalised by Internal Audit through quarterly reporting to the Diocesan Audit & Risk Committee and the Director, CSO.

The requirements of Section 83C of the Act ‘Financial Assistance not to be provided to schools that operate for profit’ largely form the basis of the internal audits. Section 83C relates to common payments and financial transactions, the management of school assets and related party transactions.


https://curianet.dbb.org.au/Catholicschoolsoffice/HR/Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx?RootFolder=https%3A%2F%2Fcurianet.dbb.org.au%2FCatholicschoolsoffice%2FHR%2FDocuments%2FAdditional%20resources%20for%20new%20school%20leaders&FolderCTID=0x01200037C88AF5FEEF764084433F35B2D60CAA


Section 4: Returns to the NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA)Sections 4.6, 5.9.3 of the NESA Manual state that the approved authority for a registration system must provide, and document its process for providing, a return to NESA in the particular circumstances. The Leader SRD takes responsibility for these returns. The mechanism for and timeframe for these returns is detailed in the following table.

Return Time frame Mechanism for notification to NESA

Breach of any of the legislation (section 4.6 NESA Manual) Ombudsman Act 1974 Child Protection (Working with Children Act) 2012 NSE Teacher Accreditation Act 2004 Disability Discrimination Act 1992 Work Health and Safety Act 2011 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Food Act 2003 Explosives Act 2003 Building Code of Australia.

Within 14 days of the breach

Written notification

Notification in relation to a ‘responsible person’ (section 4.6 (1), (2) of the NESA Manual)(1) The Act requires that the NESA be notified if a person defined as a ‘responsible person’ under the Act:

is convicted of an offence that is punishable by imprisonment for twelve (12) months or more, or

becomes bankrupt, applies to take the benefit of any law for the relief of bankrupt or insolvency debtors, compounds with his or her creditors or makes an assignment of his or her remuneration for their benefit, or

if the person is a corporation – is the subject of a winding up order or has had a controller or administrator appointed

(2) The Act also requires the BOSTES be notified if the ‘responsible person’ becomes a mentally incapacitated person and becomes a

patient at an institution because of that capacity or a protected person under the NSW Trustee and Guardian Act 2009

(There is no notification requirement for the above if the person concerned ceases to be a ‘responsible person’ (1) or takes leave from the position or ceases to hold the position (2).

As soon as practicable after the breach occurs.


Appointment of a new principalWhere there is an appointment of a new principal (or equivalent) NESA must be notified within one (1) month of such change(s) occurring. Where the approved authority has management responsibilities for member schools, notification could be made by the approved authority in an annual return to NESA at the beginning of each school year. Where, due to unforeseen circumstances, throughout a year a variation occurs to the information contained in an annual return from a registration system, for example a new principal is appointed, the approved authority must notify NESA within one (1) month of such change occurring

Within one (1) month of the change occurring

Notification through RANGS

Sale of a school Within seven (7) days of completion of the sale

Written notice by the purchaser

The school’s proprietor changes for any reason Within seven (7) days of the change

Written notice by the new proprietor

Change of name of a school Within one (1) month prior to the change taking effect


A school ceases to operate Within one (1) month of the change


Staffing of a member school: Where there is a turnover of half or more of the teaching staff during any twelve (12) month period.

Commencement of the next new term


Curriculum: Where a member school intends to deliver all or a significant part of students’ courses of study by means of distance education. This excludes situations where a member school that does not normally deliver courses by means of distance education provides units of work/activities for a student who has been granted leave by the principal

At least nine (9) months prior to the implementation of such a change


Premises and buildings: Where a member schools intends to add another campus Within three (3) months prior to the change

Written notice

Premises and buildings: Where a member schools intends to close or cease operating a campus

Within one (1) month of the change

Written notice

notifying the NESA if the contract or arrangement with an external auditor is terminated by the school or external auditor prior to the expiry of the term of the contract or arrangement and the reason(s) for that termination

As soon as practicable after notice has been given.



Section 5: Provisional and Initial registration/accreditation

5.1 Process for Placing a School on Provisional Registration/Accreditation

Member schools are monitored for compliance through the external validation component of the SRD program. External validation is conducted by the SRD panel who consider documentation provided by the school during the Tier 1 school visit. If, in considering the evidence, the SRD panel forms an opinion that there are concerns that the school may not comply with some of the requirements for registration and/or accreditation, the following steps will be taken:1. The panel Chair and the School’s Consultant discuss the concerns with the School Principal and provide an

opportunity for the member school to provide further evidence of compliance. Following the meeting the Principal will be informed in writing of the matters of concern discussed and the agreed action to be taken in relation to each matter and the time frame for completion.

2. A meeting of the SRD panel may be convened by the panel Chair to consider the further evidence of compliance provided by the school. This evidence will be provided through additional documentation forwarded to the office and/or a further visit to the school.

3. If, following consideration of this additional evidence, the panel forms the opinion that there are matters of concern that are still not adequately addressed, the panel prepares a report that includes the recommendation that the school be placed on conditional registration and/or accreditation.

4. The report from the panel is forwarded to the Principal for comment and then provided to the Director of Schools for consideration.

5. If, following consideration of the SRD panel report, the Director of Schools is satisfied that there are matters of concern regarding the school’s compliance with requirements for registration and/or accreditation, the Director will notify the Principal of the intention to recommend to NESA that the school be placed on provisional registration and/or accreditation. In this notification the Principal will be informed of the reasons for the proposed recommendation and of the school’s right to appeal the decision.

6. If the school wishes to lodge an appeal against the proposed recommendation, the Director of Schools will convene an appeal committee with the School’s Consultants and education experts not involved in making the original recommendation. If appropriate, the Director of Schools may ask for a NESA Inspector to join the appeal committee.

7. The appeal committee will consider all evidence provided during the original validation process and any further evidence the school may provide.

8. Following consideration of the appeal committee’s report the Director will either confirm the decision to recommend provisional registration/accreditation or will make a recommendation that the school is now fully compliant and should receive full registration and/or accreditation. The Director’s decision is final and the school has no further right of appeal.

9. If the Director of Schools confirms the decision to recommend provisional registration/accreditation the Director will inform NESA within 14 days of the recommendation, the process used to arrive at the recommendation and the reasons for making the recommendation.

5.2 Process for New Schools

Occasionally, new systemic schools are established within the diocese. When a new systemic school is established within the diocese, the following processes are actioned:1. An application is made to NESA for initial registration/accreditation of the new member school by 31 March

in the year before the year the CSO intends to commence operating the school.2. The new member school will be supported each year of the registration period in their documentation and

processes relevant to the new school’s context. These processes reflect the requirements for initial registration/accreditation as detailed in Section 6 of the Registration Systems and Member Non-government Schools NSW Manual.

3. The Leader School Review and Development and the School’s Consultant will lead the processes pertaining to the school’s status of compliance with regulatory requirements each year until the school reaches its full cohort, for example, if the school is a Year 7-10 school only, assistance and interventions will take place every year for four (4) years. After that time, the school will join the regular SRD cycle along with all schools within the diocese.

4. A log of the support provided will be maintained for diocesan records each year of the school’s development cycle.


Section 6: Roles and Responsibilities

6.1 Roles in the Process of School Review and Development

All members of the school community are invited to contribute their views throughout the School Review and Development program: This includes the principal, teachers, parents, students, schools consultant and the Parish Priest.

6.2 Role of the School Principal

The School Principal:

gives visible and active leadership in the School Review and Development Process ensures ongoing communication with the Assistant Director School Improvement, School’s Consultant

and Leader School Review and Development with regard to school review negotiates calendar dates for all school review activities with CSO personnel works effectively with the School’s Consultant in planning and leading school review ensures that the school review process and the final report are comprehensive and address key aspects

in context of both Tier 1 and Tier 2 communicates the processes and outcomes of school review to the school community actively involves the school community in the school self-evaluation process selects and develops appropriate review processes and instruments with the support and direction of

the School’s Consultant manages the progress of review according to the agreed timeline for both the annual Tier 1 compliance

audit and the school review external validation process promotes the findings of the review and ensure that the future school improvement plans and strategic

plan reflects these findings.

6.3 CSO Roles in School Review and Development

The CSO works collaboratively with the school leadership teams in planning and supporting the review and to discern the appropriate level of support required to assist the school in its preparation for review. The CSO:

establishes a framework that defines clear standards, criteria and processes for school review conducts school reviews in a professional and collaborative manner provides timely and appropriate feedback to schools against the stated standards reports annually to NESA, the DSS Director’s Group and the Director of Schools on the compliance

status of the DSS schools, and makes recommendations for the registration and accreditation of schools as appropriate

involves, where appropriate, the expertise of School’s Consultants, Education Officers and other professional staff from within the CSO, principals and school leaders, students and community members, and those with expertise from outside the local system

maintains a system of policies and procedures relevant to NESA registration and accreditation requirements via the SRD website (http://srd.dbbcso.org; password = srd).

6.4 Role of the Assistant Director School Improvement

The Assistant Director School Improvement:

has oversight of the complete SRD program approves the final composition of the review chairs and panel members is the final signatory to the review report.

6.5 Role of School Consultants

The role of the school consultants in the SRD Program is to assist the School Principal and the school community in its preparation for review, including the development of the Self-Evaluation Report, and in the ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the school’s SSP and SIP. The School’s Consultant supports and guides the Principal to ensure that the review process is authentic and developmental. Furthermore, they assist the Principal in engaging in appropriate review processes and self-evaluation instruments. The School’s Consultant works with



both the school and with personnel from the CSO to monitor the implementation of the SRD program. They have an ongoing role in ensuring that the school continues to meet regulatory requirements and that the school has in place and implements the required policies and procedures.

6.6 Role of the Leader School Review and Development

The Leader School Review and Development:

leads and implements the SRD program prepares school panels for review conducts the Tier 1 and Tier 2 school review visits leads, develops and facilitates professional learning sessions related to the program facilitates staff meetings, with the School’s Consultant, to assist schools in their preparation of review

documentation prepares the final review reports in close liaison with the School’s Consultant and the Chair liaises with NESA and Assistant Director School Improvement on processes associated with the program facilitates the development of the school’s next School Improvement Plan (SIP) based on the outcome

of the findings of the review panel provides on-going assistance and feedback to schools, with the School’s Consultant, in the development

of their (SIP) provides annual reports to the DSS Director’s Group on the outcome of annual school reviews.

6.7 Role of the External Validation Chair

The school review panel is chaired by a senior DSS leader. The primary role of the Chair, appointed by the Assistant Director School Improvement, is to lead the validation of the review by providing authenticity to the processes undertaken by the Principal and the school and to confirm the findings and recommendations arising from the review.

The Chair leads the validation panel in ensuring that the school has engaged in an authentic consultation and discernment process during the self-evaluation phase. The Chair also ensures that determinations made by the external review panel on the outcome of review are an accurate reflection of the data gathered as evidenced through dialogue with key school and community personnel and through documentation provided by the school.

The Chair oversees both the Tier 1 and Tier 2 review and ensures that:

recommendations arrived at by individual panel members are faithful to the discussions held in the course of the process

recommendations are couched in language that is professionally and culturally sensitive to the local situation

recommendations are substantive and appropriate in assisting the school formulate a strategic plan the panel exercises corporate responsibility for its work assisting the school.

6.8 Role and selection of the School Review Panel

The ideal panel member is a person who brings expertise and objectivity, is a good listener and has good communication skills. In addition he/she has a demonstrated the capacity to think critically and analytically and to function within a whole-school perspective.

The role of the Tier 1 panel members is to make a determination on the school’s status of compliance based on the documentation provided at review. Panel members are drawn from classroom practitioners and complete KLA checklists to determine the status of curriculum compliance at the particular review school. Non-curriculum requirements are managed and assessed by CSO personnel with relevant expertise, who also form the panel. Reports relating to this area, for example, Child Protection, Work Health and Safety, are forwarded to the Leader School Review and Development prior to the scheduled Tier 1 review date.

The role of the Tier 2 panel is to provide critical comment on the school’s learning journey since their last review and to provide recommendations for strategic planning. This is achieved through an investigation of documentation provided, through dialogue with school personnel, students and other stakeholders (parents, parish priest) and through educational walks and talks. Panel members are drawn from principals of diocesan systemic schools and can also include one member who is external to the diocese and in a senior education role in their particular context.

In general, panel members are selected according to:


the requirements of the task the likely availability of desired panel members within the timeframe of the program overall resource demands of the process.

6.9 Role of the NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA)

The NESA:

provides detailed specifications to the DSS about the requirements for registration and accreditation of schools under the terms of the Act

approves the DSS process for ensuring each school’s compliance with the requirements for registration and accreditation

following advice from the DSS, recommends to the Minister for Education that a school be registered for a specified period and for specified Years of schooling

following advice from the system, accredits schools for the Record of School Achievement and/or Higher School Certificate.

6.10 Role of the NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA) Inspectors

The NESA Inspectors:

annually monitor the DSS process for ensuring that its schools are complying with the requirements for registration and accreditation (this usually involves two Inspectors observing a review team in action in one or more of the DSS schools)

reports to the NESA School Registration Committee on the findings from the annual monitoring provides regular updates on NESA policies and procedures for DSS representatives.


Section 7: Ethical Framework

Any review process has the potential to heighten anxieties and bring into higher relief matters of fairness. The issue of confidentiality is also vital. It is therefore important, if a review process is to be regarded as fair, that all participants feel that the process is safe for them. One way to achieve this objective is to clearly state an ethical framework for the process.

The key values and ethical requirements of review processes are:

1. The process be seen as one of confidentiality and trust and be safe for all participants.

2. The evaluation is carried out with thoroughness and in a timely manner with wide participation by staff and the school community. Documentation for the school review and development process and the selection of domains needs to be owned by the Principal and staff.

3. Discussions between the Principal, the School’s Consultant and the Leader School Review and Development relating to the documentation provided and the processes for engagement with review is done in a timely and transparent manner.

4. The choice of panel members is negotiated between the Assistant Director School Improvement, School Principal, the School’s Consultant and Leader School Review and Development.

5. Support documentation and training for the School Review and Development Program will be available so that all participants can be effectively inducted into the process and the tasks they will be asked to carry out are clearly stated.

6. Discussions within the panel in the course of the school review are confidential to the panel.

7. The Chair is the formal liaison person between the panel, the school, Assistant Director School Improvement, the School’s Consultant and the Leader School Review and Development. If panel members have concerns regarding matters relating to the operation of the review they liaise with the Chair who will seek to have them resolved.

8. The panel is empowered to make recommendations in its own right with reference to the material and issues put before it.

9. If in the course of the school review, the School Principal believes that an aspect of the process is not in accordance with the process as set out in the formal documentation, or if someone is behaving outside the ethical framework outlined above, then he/she will discuss these concerns privately with the Chair and seek resolution of any issues that have arisen. If a resolution is not possible the matter will be referred to the Assistant Director School Improvement.

10. Final responsibility for completing the draft Review Report on behalf of the panel rests with the Leader School Review and Development and is validated by the Chair.

11. Signatories to the final report are the Assistant Director School Improvement and the Chair; the final report is returned to the school within one month after the review.

12. The final report is presented to the Director of Schools.

Confidentiality agreements are signed by panel members of review schools to action this ethical framework.


Section 8: Appendices

Documents contained in this section:

8.1 SRD component map

8.2 SRD component overview

8.3 SRD key documents

8.4. SRD program school groups (2015-2020)

8.5. SRD program cycle (2015-2020)

8.6 School audit and compulsory PL schedule (2015-2017)

8.7 Review follow-up: Corrective Action Plan

8.8 SRD focus areas

8.9 School Improvement Plans: Statutory requirements


8.1 SRD component map

ComponentActivity in external

review year

Activity in self-review

year

Activity in non-review

yearDetail

Main document

Component 1aCurriculum

review (Tier 1)

(conducted annually)



Involves Attendance at a Curriculum Focus

Day (CFD) for specific KLAs (dates, venues & KLAs to be determined).

KLA coordinator (or KLA ‘expert’) from each school engaging in a peer review of KLA documentation.

Documentation required relates to: Timetables Scopes and sequences List of resources/equipment by KLA used to deliver the curriculum Assessment plans/policies outlining how student progress is assessed, monitored, recorded and reported Teaching programs Student work samples (includes assessments)

Tracking document:

Compliance Checklist

Component 1bNon-curriculum review (Tier 1)

(conducted

every 3 years)

(conducted

every 3 years)

Involves CSO officer reviews school non-

curriculum documentation. Determination of review date by

school and reviewer; date to be organised at least 2 weeks before the Quality Assurance (Tier 2) external panel review.

Documentation required relates to:

Staff (teacher qualifications, documented plan for relief staff, outside tutors/external providers, teacher accreditation)

Premises, Buildings, Facilities, WHS (property maintenance and compliance with relevant legislation) Risk Management Child Protection (mandatory reporting, screening, reportable conduct) Student Welfare (security, supervision, codes of conduct, complaints/grievances, pastoral care,

communication, discipline) Student enrolment and attendance

Tracking document:Compliance Checklist

Component 2a School self-

review (Tier 2)

(conducted

once in 6 years)

Involves Participation in a professional

learning and sharing Celebration of Learning day, held for all self-review schools

School Leadership Teams invited

Documentation required relates to: School SIP Evaluation of one SIP domain against the National School Improvement Tool (NSIT) performance levels

School Improvement Plan (SIP)

Component 2bExternal

validation (Tier 2)

(conducted

once in 6 years)

Involves Visit to school for 2 days by an

external validation panel for each diocesan domain (Mission, Pastoral Care (PC), Learning & Teaching (L&T))

Documentation required: Self-evaluation report (comprised of Principal’s Report and Domain Reports) Principal’s report (about 4-6 pages) provides contextual information about the school, reports on

initiatives, past successes, future plans (this may also include information about the achievement of any numerical targets set) and trends in assessment data.

Domain report provides information about the school’s strengths, evidence of these strengths, and future plans (articulated as a 3-year goal). The report compiled with all staff in the 3 diocesan domains (Mission; PC; L&T). The equivalent of 1 SDD is to be set aside to develop the domain reports with staff; CSO staff to lead session.

School Self-Evaluation Report

Component 3SIP facilitation

(conducted

every 3 years)

(conducted

every 3 years)

Involves visit to the school for 3 hours approx., one month after review to develop the school’s next 3-year SIP.

The school’s consultant, Leader SRD and a representative from CSO Mission, PC and L&T work with the school’s leadership team to develop the SIP overview. The overview documents goals, targets, key improvement strategies, baseline data.

School Improvement Plan (SIP)


1. CFD (Tier 1)2. Non-curriculum

review (Tier 1)3. School self-review (Tier 2)

2020

1. CFD (Tier 1)2. Non-curriculum

review (Tier 1)3. External panel review (Tier 2)

2017

CFD (Tier 1)

2019

CFD (Tier 1)

20182016

CFD (Tier 1)

2015Sample timeline of

school involvement over 6 years

CFD (Tier 1)

8.2 SRD component overview

SRD component overviews

Information about each component of the SRD program is detailed in the component overviews. Information includes the purpose of the particular component and summary procedures for each component

8.3 SRD key documents

Compliance checklist and support document (Component 1) School Self-Evaluation Report (for externally validated schools) (Component 2)

School Improvement Plan (SIP) templates and support documents (Component 3)

All documentation related to School Review and Development is available on the SRD website at http://srd.dbbcso.org; password = srd



8.4 SRD program school groups 2015-2020

T i e r 1 : S c h o o l G r o u p s f o r C u r r i c u l u m F o c u s D a y s

Primary Schools Consultant Group for CFDs

1. ASQUITH, St Patrick's Catholic School Diann Hynes A

2. AVALON, Maria Regina Catholic School Anne Duncan A

3. BALGOWLAH, St Cecilia's Catholic School Anne Duncan A

4. BEROWRA HEIGHTS, St Bernard's Catholic School Diann Hynes A

5. CARLINGFORD, St Gerard's Catholic School Diann Hynes A

6. CHATSWOOD, Our Lady of Dolours Catholic School Diann Hynes A

7. DAVIDSON, St Martin's Catholic School Anne Duncan A

8. DEE WHY, St Kevin's Catholic School Anne Duncan A

9. EAST GOSFORD, St Patrick's Catholic School Frances Reynolds A

10. EPPING, Our Lady Help of Christians Catholic School Diann Hynes A

11. KINCUMBER, Holy Cross Catholic School Frances Reynolds A

12. WYOMING, Our Lady of the Rosary Catholic School Frances Reynolds A

13. WYONG, St Cecilia's Catholic School Frances Reynolds A

1. LAKE MUNMORAH, St Brendan's Catholic School Frances Reynolds B

2. LINDFIELD, Holy Family Catholic School Diann Hynes B

3. MANLY VALE, St Kieran's Catholic School Anne Duncan B

4. MANLY, St Mary's Catholic School Anne Duncan B

5. NARRABEEN, St Joseph's Catholic School Anne Duncan B

6. NARRAWEENA, St John's Catholic School Anne Duncan B

7. NORAVILLE (TOUKLEY), St Mary's Catholic School Frances Reynolds B

8. NORTHBRIDGE, St Philip Neri Catholic School Diann Hynes B

9. PENNANT HILLS, St Agatha's Catholic School Diann Hynes B

10. PYMBLE, Sacred Heart Catholic School Diann Hynes B

11. TERRIGAL, Our Lady Star of the Sea Catholic School Frances Reynolds B

12. WOY WOY SOUTH, St John the Baptist Catholic School Frances Reynolds B

1. COLLAROY PLATEAU, St Rose Catholic School Anne Duncan C

2. FORESTVILLE, Our Lady of Good Counsel Catholic School Anne Duncan C

3. FRESHWATER, St John the Baptist Catholic School Anne Duncan C

4. MONA VALE, Sacred Heart Catholic School Anne Duncan C

5. SHELLY BEACH, Our Lady of the Rosary Catholic School Frances Reynolds C

6. ST IVES, Corpus Christi Catholic School Diann Hynes C

7. TUMBI UMBI, St John Fisher Catholic School Frances Reynolds C

8. WAHROONGA, Prouille Catholic School Diann Hynes C

9. WAITARA, Our Lady of the Rosary Catholic School Diann Hynes C

10. WARNERVALE, MacKillop Catholic Primary Frances Reynolds C

11. WEST PYMBLE, Our Lady of Perpetual Succour Catholic School Diann Hynes C

12. WILLOUGHBY, St Thomas' Catholic School Diann Hynes C

Secondary Schools Group

1. CHATSWOOD, Mercy Catholic College Diann Hynes A

2. EAST GOSFORD, St Joseph's Catholic College Frances Reynolds A

3. LAKE MUNMORAH, St Brigid's Catholic College Frances Reynolds A

4. MANLY, St Paul's Catholic College Anne Duncan A

5. TUGGERAH, St Peter's Catholic College Frances Reynolds B

6. WAHROONGA, St Leo's Catholic College Diann Hynes B

7. WARNERVALE, MacKillop Catholic College Frances Reynolds B

8. WARRIEWOOD, Mater Maria Catholic College Anne Duncan B

8.5 SRD program cycle 2015-2020

Tier 2 planningTotal

schools / Consultant

No. of schools / Consultant by calendar yearNote: The most recent review year is in brackets beside school name (e.g. 2011). The school group for the CFD is indicated in brackets beside the school name.

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Diann Hynes 14 2P+1S 3P 3 2P 2P+1S 2P

Anne Duncan 12 2P 2P+1S 2 2P+1S 2P 2P

Frances Reynolds 12 2P 2P 2P+1S 2P+1S 2P 1K-12 + 1S

Total schools 45 7 8 8 8 7 7 (2 x Warnervale)

Formal review by external validation panel: schools complete the Self-

Evaluation Report external validation panel

selected by CSO report written on the outcome

of the review.

Note: The last review is in brackets beside school name.The school group for a CFD is also written in brackets beside the school name.

1. BALGOWLAH, St Cecilia’s (2011) (A)

2. EPPING, Our Lady Help of Christians (2011) (A)

3. NARRAWEENA, St John's (2011) (B)

4. PYMBLE, Sacred Heart (2010) (B)

5. TERRIGAL, Our Lady Star of the Sea (2011) (B)

6. WYOMING, Our Lady of the Rosary (2010) (A)

1. BEROWRA HEIGHTS, St Bernard's (2011) (A)

2. FRESHWATER, St John the Baptist (2012) (C)

3. LAKE MUNMORAH, St Brendan's (2011) (B)

4. MANLY VALE, St Kieran's (2012) (B)

5. NORAVILLE (TOUKLEY), St Mary's (2011) (B)

6. ST IVES, Corpus Christi (2011) (C)

7. WEST PYMBLE, Our Lady of Perpetual Succour (2011) (C)

1. AVALON, Maria Regina (2012) (A)

2. CARLINGFORD, St Gerard's (2012) (A)

3. COLLAROY PLATEAU, St Rose (2012) (C)

4. NORTHBRIDGE, St Philip Neri (2011) (B)

5. SHELLY BEACH, Our Lady of the Rosary (2012) (C)

6. WAITARA, Our Lady of the Rosary (2012) (C)

7. WYONG, St Cecilia's (2012) (A)

1. CHATSWOOD, Our Lady of Dolours (2012) (A)

2. EAST GOSFORD, St Patrick's (2013) (A)

3. KINCUMBER, Holy Cross (2013) ((A)

4. LINDFIELD, Holy Family (2013) (B)

5. MANLY, St Mary’s (2013) (B)

6. MONA VALE, Sacred Heart (2013) (C)

1. ASQUITH, St Patrick's (2014) (A)

2. FORESTVILLE, Our Lady of Good Counsel (2014) (C)

3. NARRABEEN, St Joseph's (2013) (B)

4. TUMBI UMBI, St John Fisher (2013) (C)

5. WILLOUGHBY, St Thomas' (2014) (C)

6. WOY WOY SOUTH, St John the Baptist (2013) (B)

1. DAVIDSON, St Martin's (2014) (A)

2. DEE WHY, St Kevin's (2014) (A)

3. PENNANT HILLS, St Agatha's (2014) (B)

4. WAHROONGA, Prouille (2014) (C)

5. WARNERVALE, MacKillop (2014) (C)

7. WAHROONGA, St Leo's College (2011) (B)

8. WARRIEWOOD, Mater Maria College (2011) (B)

8. EAST GOSFORD, St Joseph's College (2012) (A)

7. MANLY, St Paul's College (2013) (A)

8. LAKE MUNMORAH, St Brigid's College (new) (A)

7. CHATSWOOD, Mercy College (2013) (A)

6. TUGGERAH, St Peter's (2014) (B)

7. WARNERVALE, MacKillop (2014) (B)

School self-review Self-review in 2018 Self-review in 2019 Self-review in 2020 Self-review in 2015 Self-review in 2016 Self-review in 2017

Non-curriculum review frequency Twice in 6 years,2015 and 2018

Twice in 6 years,2016 and 2019





Curriculum review frequency (new model in 2015)

Curriculum reviews are held annually at the scheduled School Review Curriculum Focus Days (CFD); all schools will take part in the CFD program each year, irrespective of a scheduled self-review, external-panel-review or non-curriculum review.

8.6 School audit and compulsory PL schedule (2015-2017)

This document maps the schedule of school audits against the recommended professional learning schedule. A screen shot of the document is provided below as it is an internal document and accessible from the School Review and Development O-drive folder using the following path: Office of the Director School Improvement School Review & Development School Review SRD Dates Schedules

Internal document (screen shots only provided in these procedures)

8.7 Review follow-up: Corrective Action Plan

The Corrective Action Plan is implemented where it is deemed that the concerns or issues raised at the time of the respective review are of a substantial nature and require further follow-up. The decision to implement this plan is made by the Leader, School Review and Development in consultation with the school principal, the school’s consultant and the respective auditor. The plan is completed by the school principal and monitor by the school’s consultant.

School: Date:

What

Enter the item that requires follow-up

When

Enter the agreed time frame required for completion

Who

Enter name of the person responsible for this action at the school

Sign-off

Consultant signature when the item has been completed to the standard required

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Comments:

This space is provided to provide information about the steps the school has put in place to ensure that it has met and will continue to meet legislative obligations with respect to the identified concerns. It can be completed by the principal, consultant and/or reviewer.

Principal Certification

Based on the actions taken by the school to address the identified issues, I confirm that processes are now in place to ensure that the school now meets and will continue to meet legislative obligations.

Signature (Principal): Date:

8.8 Focus Areas

A report on the outcome of the monitoring activities related to these focus areas is provided to the Assistant Director School Improvement annually.

Year Focus Area 1 (BOS) Focus Area 2 (BOS) Focus Area 3 (System)

2012 Curriculum (S5.3) Discipline (S5.7) & Attendance (S5.8)

New Attendance Policy and procedures and use of new attendance codes.

Development of support materials and SRD website (http://srd.dbbcso.org; password = srd)

2013 Safe and Supportive environment (S5.6.1)

Educational and Financial reporting (S5.10)

Extension of and evaluation of Tier 1 pilot Development of KLA checklists for school self-

evaluation Management of the opening of St Brigid’s Lake

Munmorah for Year 7

2014 Curriculum (S5.3 & S7) Staff (S5.2) Trial and evaluation of Curriculum Focus Day Management of the opening of St Brigid’s Lake

Munmorah to Year 8

2015 Safe and Supportive environment (S5.6.2)

Management and operation of the school (S5.9)

focus on implementation of the new School Review and Development (SRD) Cycle

support schools with the revised attendance register codes for implementation beginning 2015

continue to oversee the registration and accreditation requirements for St Brigid’s Lake Munmorah (first operating year, 2014).

work with NESA to determine new regulations for Governance (S5.9 NESA Manual) as they apply to registration systems

2016 Curriculum (S5.3) Premises/Buildings (S5.4) & Facilities (S5.5)

WHS audits of TAS areas in all secondary schools continue to oversee the registration and

accreditation requirements for St Brigid’s Lake Munmorah (first operating year, 2014).

2017 Curriculum (S5.3, S7) Discipline (S5.7) & Safe and supportive environment - student welfare (S5.6.2)

Follow up on secondary schools TAS audits (conducted late 2016) with regard to machinery

All schools: Investigate documentation and procedures in place by schools where o students access outside tutors & external

providers for NESA courses o schools contract work to service providers

for activities

2018 Safe and Supportive Environment - child protection (S5.6.1)

Educational and Financial reporting (S5.10)

Secondary schools: Conduct secondary school audits of Science areas with regard to chemical labelling and storage

Review governance PL and induction procedures implemented 2015

2019 Curriculum (S5.3 and S7) Staff (S5.2) TBD

2020 Attendance (S5.6.2) Management and operation of the school (S5.9)

TBD

2021 Curriculum (S5.3 and S7) Premises and buildings (S5.4) & Facilities (S5.5)

TBD


8.9 Responsible Persons Induction Checklist

This table sets out key documents and processes that are to be included in the induction program for Responsible Persons under the Education Act (NSW) 1990. Induction must take place with 3 months of the Responsible Person taking up the role.

Trustees for the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Broken Bay

Catholic Schools Office Leadership Team Schools

Diocesan personnel [Bishop, Consultors) CSO personnel [Director, Assistant Directors, Heads of Service, School Consultants)

School Principals

□ Requirements of responsible persons (set out in Responsible Person's Declaration (non-school persons)



□ CSO organisational structure □ CSO organisational structure □ CSO organisational structure and school organisational structure

□ Diocesan Governance Structure of Responsible Persons under S47 of the Act



□ CSO improvement plan □ CSO improvement plan □ CSO improvement plan and school improvement plan

□ CSO policies/procedures □ CSO policies/procedures related to their role within the Diocese

□ CSO and school policies/procedures

□ Requirements for notifications to the NESA for particular matters (see Section 4 SRD procedures )



□ Financial information of the CSO including the reports of any recent internal/external audits

□ Financial information related to budgets respective to the role

□ Financial information related to the school’s budget including the reports of any internal/external audits

□ Compliance requirements of schools and key CSO resources to support schools [SRD website, SRD procedures (this document), Schools Compliance Checklist]

□ Compliance requirements of schools and key CSO resources to support schools [SRD website, SRD procedures (this document), Schools Compliance Checklist]

□ School Compliance Checklist and key CSO resources to support schools [SRD website)

□ An understanding of the Commonwealth v State funding and compliance requirements (respectively) of schools

□ An understanding of the Commonwealth v State funding and compliance requirements (respectively) of schools

□ CSO principal’s handover guidelines Appendix 1

□ Recent CSO Leadership Team meeting minutes

□ General information about the school (e.g. history, school song, vision/mission statements)

□ Outcome of any internal and external review reports in relation to curriculum and non-curriculum matters

□ Student performance in internal and



http://rego.bostes.nsw.edu.au/

http://www.cecnsw.catholic.edu.au/dbpage.php?pg=programs

http://rego.bostes.nsw.edu.au/

http://www.cecnsw.catholic.edu.au/dbpage.php?pg=programs














http://www.csodbb.catholic.edu.au/about/Organisational-Structure









external awards and assessments

8.10 School Improvement Plans: Statutory requirements

Note: the approved authority is the Catholic Education Commission NSW & the authority is the CSO

*****************

The Australian Education Act 2013 [part 6 division 2, section 77 (2) (d) parts (i) and (ii)] specifies that the approved authority ensures that

i) the authority has a school improvement framework in accordance with the regulations andii) each school develops, implements, publishes and reviews a school improvement plan in accordance

with the regulations.

*****************

The Australian Education Regulation 2013 [part 5, division 3, subdivision D, section 44] states that a school improvement plan

(1) (a) must include the following

i) contextual information about the school;ii) a description of the process for conducting a self-assessment of the school;iii) information about the school’s performance based on the school’s self-assessment, having regard to

the National School Improvement Tool or any equivalent document (whether or not prepared by the Ministerial Council);

iv) a description of the process for reviewing the school improvement plan and

(1) (b) focus on strategic planning, including on areas of the school that may be improved.

(2) In developing the school improvement plan, the approved authority for the school must ensure the school has regard to the following:

a) the results of the school’s self-assessmentb) how the 5 national reform directions apply to the school (that is, quality teaching, quality learning,

empowered school leadership, meeting student need, and transparency and accountability)c) the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan 2010-2014;d) the National Safe Schools Framework or any equivalent document (whether or not prepared by the

Ministerial Council).

(3) The approved authority must ensure that the school improvement plan is developed in consultation with persons responsible for students at the school and others in the school community.

(4) The approved authority must ensure that:

a) the school’s progress against the plan is reviewed each year and, if necessary, the plan is updated; andb) a report is prepared describing the school’s achievements in relation to, and progress against, the plan

in the previous year.

(5) The approved authority must ensure that the school improvement plan, and the report mentioned in paragraph (4) (b), are published:

a) promptly after the plan has been developed or updated, or the report has been prepared, (as the case requires); and

b) in a form that is readily accessible to the public.