AIS Conference

1. AIS Conference June 2018 Paul Ferris CEO Association of Proprietors of Integrated Schools

2. Let’s talk about … APIS Our world view and a changing political landscape. The session will explore the shifts we have observed in the change of the administration and how this might impact on our work. It will look at some of the drivers for change in the review of Tomorrow’s Schools and the review of Integration. It will provide opportunity for discussion about priorities for Proprietors in changes that are proposed. The landscape we work in Strategic Intention of APIS Possible trends for the Review of Tomorrow’s Schools The focus for the review of Integration 2019 The priorities that members see for integrated schools.

3. Section 6 APIS Strategic Plan

5. Section 1 The Landscape we work in…

6. Change of government with a strong focus on State Schools. Concern for parents and the costs of education.eg AIG article NZ Herald. Donation vs Attendance Dues. Minister Salesa has delegation for Integrated Schools but Minister Hipkins will make all decisions re. roll increases etc. Concern about access to integrated schools. Are there barriers created by cost? What is legal – voluntary purchases e.g. Camp.

7. Section 2 Part 33 Section 418 (4)Application to negotiate integration

8. What do we watch around Pt 33 of the new legislation?1. Mandatory reporting by Proprietors every five years. 2. The concern of the MoE about maximum rolls and school networks. APIS Where integrated schools have had higher maximums for some years and not achieved them. Implications to buildings and funding.3. Undertaking for 85% of future growth funding.

9. Review of Tomorrow’s Schools.

10. Tomorrows Schools. 1989 Excellence in administration will deliver better educational outcomes. The reform delivered better use of resources and better administration but it distracted Administrators and Principals from the important tasks. The terms of reference for the review include a review of all the agencies. APIS is represented on the review but as yet there are no indicated changes. This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA

11. Hugh Burkhardt “Education is like jelly. When you stick your finger in it changes shape but when you take it out it goes back to where it was.” Contestable funding Limited funding Strengthening MoE and Compliance. Shared funding Since 1989 there have been many attempts at changing education but they have tended to be like interventions in the jelly. Once you remove the funding or the resource it goes back to what it was.

12. The challenges for APIS in 2018-19 • The impacts of the Tomorrow’s School review. • Possible impacts on Part 33 of the Education Update Act 1989. • Implications to governance and the role of Prop Reps. • Implications to the governance of small schools. • Implications to the appointment and appraisal of Principals.

13. Delays to applications for integration and maximum roll increases. Part 33, Section 418(4) Education Act (1989) - Application to negotiate integration • The Minister has the power. • “Without limiting the factors that the Minister may consider, the Minister must, in considering an application, consider the nature, character, and capacity of the existing network of schools.”

14. Section 157 The Minister shall not— (a) establish a school under section 146(1); or (aa) declare a school to be a boys’ school, a girls’ school, or a co-educational school under section 146A(1); or (b) establish or disestablish an intermediate department under section 149; or (c) determine under section 150(1) that a primary school is to be or cease to be a contributing school; or (d) limit under section 151 the education given at a composite school; or (e) change under section 153(1) the class of a school; or (f) close a school under section 154; or (fa) redesignate, or remove a designation from, a school under section 154A; or (g) merge any school or schools with another under section 156A,— unless subsection (3A) applies, without first consulting the boards of all State schools whose rolls might, in the opinion of the Minister, be affected if the Minister takes that action.

15. Section 4 Preparing for financial independence and security within our funding streams.

16. How do we ensure that we can continue to operate when confronted with a major crisis over property? MoE Funding Policy One Funding Policy One Funding. Proprietor receives funds and makes 10 year plan. Most proprietors hold back a percentage to have an emergency fund. Rarely, there is a large capital maintenance item that is greater than the Policy One lending available. Attendance Dues may be used to fund these items but cannot be recovered / on-charged using future Attendance Dues. equals • Depreciation fund for MoE* • Approx. 35% to school (5YA) • Learning Support/ Special Needs/ Unforeseen 13% • CSR (Chch) 14% • Redevelopments/ Remediations 37% • All but 5YA are shared as per need across the country *2016/2017

17. How prepared is your network to deal with a major building crisis?How does your current Proprietor structure prevent or support some sharing of resource in a crisis?

18. Section 5 The MoE Review of Integration 2019

19. Reviewing Integration • Little appetite for further review following update of the Act. • Labours focus is on Access. ie- the cost of attending. Is it a barrier? • MoE invited comment from the sector to help shape a briefing paper to the Minister. • Possible enhancements for the review to consider: • APIS suggested that government assume the responsibility for insurance and fire levies as it does for state schools. • APIS noted the cost of buildings and the impact on Attendance dues.

20. Section 7 APIS WEBSITEwww.apis.org.nz

22. Website Refreshed Renewed Important for sharing information Combined with the e-newsletter Tracking use of site so we can improve both content and discoveryHow does it meet your needs?