Sciennes Parent Council Extraordinary Meeting31 March 2015 at 19.00

Room 16, Sciennes Primary School

Attendees:Claire Wheeler (Chair)Aileen Nimmo (Fundraising and Events Convener)Stuart Sheehan (Sciennes Playground Improvement Group)Nikki Sinclair (Parent)Mary Ross (P2 Class Rep)Angela Christie (Sciennes Business Manager)LeeAnne Boyle (Co-treasurer)Fiona Anthony (Clerk)Tanya Boughtflower (Communications Group, Fundraising and Events Group)Lucy Gallagher (Depute Head Teacher P5-P7, Comms Group)Fiona Denvir (Clubs co-ordinator Co-convener)Kristel Torokoff (Vice Chair)Alison Noble (Head Teacher)Bruce Crawford (Sciennes Playground Improvement Group)Suzanne Halliday (Sciennes staff)Helen Anderson (Sciennes staff and parent)Sean Walker (Parent)Helen Robertson (Sciennes staff and parent)Bethan McEwan (Clubs co-ordinator Co-convener)Jenny McLay (Parent)Kirstin Unger (Sciennes Playground Improvement Group)Carolyn Anstruther (Depute Head Teacher P1-P3)Christine Rednall (Sciennes Playground Improvement Group)Sarah Stephenson (Parent)Helen Ellen (Parent)Leslie-Jane Stewart (Class rep)Charlotte Herthelius (Fundraising and Events Group)

Jo Pike (Parent)Clare Langley (Parent)Jack Cadell (Sciennes Playground Improvement Group)Martin Richardson (Parent)Phoebe Cochrane (Eco Group)

PART I - GENERAL1. Welcome and apologies

The meeting was divided into two parts. Vice Chair, Kristel Torokoff, chaired the first part of the meeting.

Kristel Torokoff opened the meeting and welcomed everyone present.

Apologies:Catherine McCormackClaire MarshallMrs MahmoudFiona SellarIan HoggAngus EvansMarian RichardsonSusie Turpie

2. Minutes and matters arising

Amendment to paragraph 4.1 of the minutes dated 15 January 2015. “5” shall be deleted and replaced with “15”. The Parent Council then approved the minutes.

It was agreed that any matters arising from the previous meeting were to be carried over to the next Parent Council meeting on Thursday 23 April 2015 (“the April meeting”).

3. Finance update

LeeAnne Boyle (Co-Treasurer) presented the finance report to the Parent Council. See attached document titled “Sciennes Parent Council Status as at 31st March 2015”. She reported that: As of 31 March there is £29,376.00 available in

playground funds.

The Eco Group had requested funding for the amount of £100.00 to purchase seeds, compost, seed potatoes, etc for the P3s to plant. LeeAnne recommended that the Parent Council support the request.

The Co-Treasurers had received a request for funding from some football pupils (not Sciennes football club) for financial support for a foreign trip.

The Co-Treasurers were not in support of this request as the funds are not available and they did not want to open the floodgates to such requests.

There was some discussion amongst the Parent Council about such requests and Fiona Denvir (Clubs Co-Convener) suggested that it might be possible after the Swimathon funds had been raised. Kirsten Torokoff said that subsidies to clubs could be a possible agenda item for the April meeting.

MINUTE:The Parent Council approved the Eco Group’s request of £100.00.

The issue of subsidies to clubs shall be included on the agenda for the April meeting.

4. Pressing sub-group matters

4.1 FundraisingAileen Nimmo (Fundraising and Events Convener) expressed her thanks to all of those in the fundraising team for all of their efforts to date. She told the Parent Council that the school discos this year have raised £323.54 compared to £197.00 in 2014 and £83.00 in 2013.

Upcoming events:

P1-P3 ceilidh. Aileen said that a venue and date had not yet been confirmed.Musical Showcase on Wednesday 13 May.Sports Day on Friday 5 June. Refreshments to be sold to parents in the dining hall.School fair on Saturday 6 June.

4.2 SwimathonFiona Denvir (Clubs Co-Convener) updated the Parent Council on the format of the Swimathon on Monday 11 May that it will be the same as last year. A My Donate page will be set up for people to make donations. Parent volunteers are needed.

Fiona Denvir asked whether it was possible for funds raised from the Swimathon could go on items other than the playground. She said that she had received some feedback from parents about where the funds will be used, i.e. would they go to the playground or to other sports such as swimming. This generated some discussion amongst the Parent Council.

Claire Wheeler (Chair) acknowledged there was a perception that all funds this year were going towards the playground. She said that the starting point for this year’s Parent Council Spending Plan had been to identify ‘non-playground’ spends first, prior to any monies being

allocated to the playground. As part of that, all subgroups had been contacted and asked for their input at the beginning of the school year. The school had been asked to identify their priorities for non-playground items – they identified trip subsidies (for Benmore and Lagganlia), club subsidies, swimming, cycling, pupil water cooler and funds towards a music event. Funds had been set aside to attend to all of these costs. The playground fundraising started from a zero position. The school had identified the playground as the key priority and thus fundraising activity had focused on this.

Further discussion took place about the need for better communication by the Parent Council regarding how funds have been allocated. Agreed that further effort would go into communicating how funds had been spent to ensure parents were made aware of the non-playground expenditure as well as the playground fundraising efforts.

Aileen Nimmo told the group that for this year there should be about another £11,000.00 to be raised by future events such as the School fair.

Tanya Boughtflower (Comms and Fundraising) said that the School does not yet know if it will receive matched funding from Sports Scotland. She has held back on submitting other grants until the outcome is known.

Angela Christie (Business Manager) stated that if the School was to succeed in its SportScotland application then for every pound raised by the School this would be matched by the SportScotland funding. It is therefore important for the School to raise as much money as possible. She said that up until June 2015 all money raised should go towards the playground.

Claire Wheeler said she felt the money from the Swimathon is needed for the playground and that further discussion could take place as regards who funds raised from the School fair in June 2015 are used. She said that the treasurers of FSS and the PC had been attending to contingency levels and this would be ongoing to ensure that finances of FSS and the PC were in good shape for the new school year.

Fiona Denvir said that there were a group of Sciennes girls who were raising funds towards a Boroughmuir Thistle trip and said this could have been something that the Parent Council could have looked to support. The FSS and PC Treasurers had been asked to look at this and had said they felt the funds were not available at this time and that further discussion would have to take place as to whether this was an appropriate request. Bruce Crawford (Playground Improvement Group, Friends of Sciennes School trustee) and Aileen Nimmo are to check whether the Friends of Sciennes School trust (“FSS) is able to distribute funds to individuals. This was referred to the next FSS meeting.

Phoebe Cochrane (Eco Group) suggested that it would be a good idea to communicate to parents what money has been raised and what it has been spent on.

Aileen Nimmo proposed that Lucy Gallagher (Depute Head Teacher P4 – P7) express her thanks to the five P6 boys who ran a cake stall on Saturday 28 March and raised £155.00 for the playground. Lucy did so.

MINUTE:The funds from this year’s Swimathon will go towards the playground and further discussion would take place as regards allocation the funds from the Summer Fair.

ACTION:That the Comms group sends a communication to parents to explain the amount of money raised this year and what it has been spent on so far.

4.3 Pupil CouncilA request was made to the group that the Pupil Council (made up of pupil representatives) spends more of its time on other matters than the playground. The Parent Council and staff that were present at the meeting noted this request.

5. April meeting agenda

All matters for the April meeting agenda are to be sent by email to Claire Wheeler.

PART II – PLAYGROUND IMPROVEMENTClaire Wheeler chaired the second part of the meeting. See outline below.

1. Acknowledge feelings/challenge of the processClaire Wheeler opened the second part of the meeting by acknowledging that the process of improving the playground had been challenging for many of the people involved. She said that it was new territory for the Parent Council and that the School and the Parent Council should evaluate the process at the end of the year and to pass on the results to support other schools that may be involved in projects of this kind with large-scale fundraising, tight timescales and pressure to complete.

She acknowledged that people have had all sorts of feelings about how the project was progressing. It had been stressful for many and that lots of effort had gone into it by a number of different people. She was grateful that people had stuck with it and asked people at the meeting to be mindful of how others were feeling when sharing their views.

2. ‘Looking in’ on the process and commentClaire Wheeler gave a brief outline of where the process is and the background to it. The plans for the playground came out in December 2014 and then went straight out to pupils, parents and staff for consultation. The results of the consultation picked up on key themes of concern which were referred to the Playground Group. The purpose of tonight’s meeting was for the Parent Council to hear the Playground Group’s report on how concerns had been addressed and for the Parent Council to indicate if these had been attended to at a satisfactory level.

She drew a diagram showing a ‘Seeking Confluence’ process – this described the scenario of a broad base of opinion at the start of the process. In the course of

consultation, action should be taken to respond to concerns which then bring opinion closer together. The circle in the diagram indicates where good decision making takes place – ie, once you have brought people closer together.

Claire also talked about how there had been a level of frustration about how playground developments had been taken forward – she described this in terms of ‘process and expectations’. She said tonight’s meeting needed to attend to the proposed plans and the Playground Group response. However, in the latter half of the meeting, there would be a section on ‘ways forward’ and that would be an opportunity for people to make suggestions relating to the wider process.

Aileen Nimmo said that there had been a lot of engagement in terms of fundraising.

Charlotte Herthelius told the group that she felt that there should have been more than one option presented to parents and staff.

Martin Richardson felt that if there is too much choice it makes for a very slow process that in turn can lead to fatigue. He felt that as a parent it is easier to be given a plan prepared by professionals and if you feel comfortable to then go with it.

Charlotte Herthelius stated that she was unhappy with the process and there was an acknowledgement by Claire Wheeler that this bad feeling needed to be addressed at the meeting.Bethan McEwan suggested that it would have been preferable to be given concepts before the plan stage.

Aileen Nimmo told the group that there was another option at the beginning of the process and that was the document prepared by Jack Cadell and Ian Hogg presented at the Parent Council meeting on 28 August 2014 (see minutes from that meeting). She felt that the plans that have been presented to the school by the landscape architect where not what she had fundraised for. Kirstin Unger (SPIG) responded that it had been made clear that the SPIG were going for a Cramond Primary School style playground not a playground like the pictures in Jack and Ian’s document.

Claire Wheeler reiterated how challenging the process is. She told the group that the School had been explicit in its support of the playground brief and the plans. She said there was a question as to how much input parents should have in determining the playground. She acknowledged that there was not as much consultation as she would have liked. She then asked the Parent Council to listen to the SPIG presentation of the playground plans.

3. SPIG response to key issuesSchool responseAlison Noble (Head Teacher) on behalf of the School presented the School’s view to the Parent Council. She said that she echoed Claire Wheeler’s views. As Head Teacher she and her staff were very conscious of the anxiety, conflict and rage this development has caused. It has been a source of anxiety to the School. She said that over the years partnerships have developed between the School and parents and that this is part of the special ethos of the School. Alison Noble told the group that the School is committed to being solution focused and that she wants to mend relationships that have been damaged. She believes that there is a collective vision to enhance the experience for the children. She also said that when at a Head Teachers meeting that day the City of Edinburgh Council (CEC) is looking for a pioneer such as the School to share its experience and support other schools.

SPIG responseKirstin Unger responded to the Parent Council on behalf of the SPIG. She started off by saying how useful it had been to have the input from so many different people. She then presented twelve slides to the Parent Council. See link titled “SPIG slides dated 31 March 2015”. In addition earlier in the day the Parent Council had been emailed a document titled “Response to Parent Input on Playground Development” that set out the SPIG’s response to concerns raised by the parent community. See link. Points to note from Kirstin’s presentation.

Slide 1- Since January 2015 the SPIG has meet twice and the School has meet with the CEC. The SPIG is trying to learn as much as possible about the process of improving playgrounds.

Slide 2 – Space.

Slide 3 – Space for running.

Slide 4 – Space for formal sport and cycling.The School is still very committed to cycle training. The cycle trainers are very supportive of the plans.

Slide 5 – Space for parentsThe right entrance into the School will be more channelled. The way the sleepers meet at a certain point in the playground (see playground diagram) means that there will be a point. This is an issue that parents have raised concerns about. Kirstin said that this might need to be looked at further by the SPIG.

Slide 6 – Space for learningThe recommendation from Grounds for Learning is that outdoors learning space is needed within the School’s boundaries. This point was made to address queries about why it was necessary to create an outdoors learning space as opposed to taking children to the Meadows.

Slide 7 – Surfaces and materialsSand. See page 4 of the “Response to Parent Input on Playground Development” document.

Grass. See page 6 of the above document. Kirstin stated that where there are steep gradients there would be no grass.

Drainage.

Slide 8 – Maintenance and DurabilityAnnual costs of maintaining the new playground would be at the upper end of £1500.00 per annum. The School

would meet the maintenance costs. The School does not ask the Parent Council for funding for maintenance costs, it only asks for funding for improvements.

Tunnel – there are some issues with the tunnel at Cramond Primary School as it has earth in it that has caused blockages. The proposed tunnel in the plan will not have any earth in it thereby there should be no blockages.

Slide 9 – Safety and SupervisionSee page 8 of the “Response to Parent Input on Playground Development” document.

Slide 10 – Cost and value for moneySee page 9 of the “Response to Parent Input on Playground Development” document. There is £2000.00 built into the costs for loose parts storage.

Slide 11 – Landscaping for LearningOther schools that have undertaken similar projects did not offer options. The SPIG acknowledged that expectations have not been well managed.

Slide 12 – Kirstin Unger then thanked everyone and said that the SPIG welcomed further questioning and interrogation.

Claire Wheeler thanked Kirstin Unger for her presentation and then gave the Parent Council a short time to ask questions.

Charlotte Herthelius asked how much movement there is on the playground design.Jack Cadell responded on behalf of the SPIG. He said that the SPIG had been driven by the Sports Scotland timetable to submit the funding application by February

2015. He acknowledged that the SPIG probably were rushing. He also said that the playground could only sit between the two entrances to the School. He said that it is unlikely that the School will get the full amount of funding that it has applied for but the cost bar had always been pushed as high as possible with the expectation that it would be brought back down with less money available, therefore the plans will change. He said that with developments like this a lot of the money is unseen because it is underground such as drainage.Mary Ross (Class Rep) asked how the costs are to be split between the playground and the strip south of Sciennes Road (“the strip”).Jack Cadell replied that the strip will be about 17% of the costs, so if the project costs approximately £100,000.00 this would be about £17,000.00.

He told the group that the plans have gone out to tender to three architects and the size and scale will depend on the money available.

4. Parent Council feedbackClaire Wheeler then invited the Parent Council to feed back their thoughts following the presentation from Kirstin Unger (SPIG).

All individuals present were invited to map their feedback using stickers on ‘feedback lines’ that provided a clear visual picture of the overall view of the group. See below.

The results of the group feedback showed that the majority of the group felt that their concerns had been adequately addressed by the SPIG. Claire Wheeler gave the opportunity for anyone to speak who felt that his or her concerns had not been addressed.

Some questions were raised around the timescales for the playground developments. Angela Christie confirmed that the current stage of the process is that the responses to the tender for architects for next stage drawings was due on Monday 30 March 2015 but had been delayed due to the tenderers requesting further information from CEC. The timetable is for the final design to be delivered by the end of April.The tender for contractors will be issued at the beginning of May. The contractor will be appointed by the beginning of June and work is scheduled to start on Monday 29 June 2015. Aileen Nimmo asked who would be the decision makers if the School does not get the Sports Scotland funding. Aileen raised concerns that if the plans were scaled back due to lack of funds then who would decide on the final plan. Would there be any consultation with the parent community?

This generated some discussion among the group and Christine Rednall (SPIG) said she felt it should be up to the School as they are the professionals and know what the children like doing at break and lunchtime when in the playground.

5. Ways forwardClaire Wheeler said that at this point the Parent Council needed to think of ways of moving forward. The group were given a few minutes to discuss with the person sitting next to them how the Parent Council should move forward. The suggestions were recorded on a flipchart – see photo below.

This led to a discussion on ‘ways forward’. Various views from the Parent Council are set out below.

Sean Walker (Parent) told the group that he thought that it should follow the process already underway.Bruce Crawford (SPIG) said that the group should give the School staff its support.Martin Richardson (Parent) said that when the funding is in place it should be in a position so they can be used without need to go back to a committee.

Carolyn Anstruther (Depute Head Teacher, P1-P3) told the group that it would be a good opportunity for the children to be involved in playground fundraising with the Swimathon. She felt that fatigue was an issue. She told the group that she is hearing it daily from the children – when is it going to happen?Kirsten Unger said that the philosophy behind the playground design is fixed.Fiona Denvir felt that it was time to draw a line.Jenny McLay asked if some of the playground improvements could be done this year and some next year.Aileen Nimmo said that this would help the Grants team to ask for specific items such as a safety climbing net.Stuart Sheehan felt that it had been a positive meeting and that the new loose play arrangements were a big improvement.Helen Robertson (Classroom assistant and parent) told the group that 30 children had been into the Care Zone at lunchtime on that day with bumps!Bruce Crawford said that it was important to communicate the progress made at the meeting tonight and that there should be a plan for further communication.

Claire Wheeler then brought this general discussion to an end and asked the Parent Council if they would support the playground improvements proposed by the SPIG.

Martin Richardson said that the huge amount of money raised in such a short time was an indication of the support of parents to the project and he encouraged the Parent Council to support the improvements.

The Parent Council by majority vote agreed to support the playground improvements based on the SPIG’s responses to the areas of concern and to provide funds for the project.

MINUTE:The Parent Council agreed to support the playground improvements subject to the SPIG addressing outstanding concerns raised by the group and to provide funds accordingly.

6 Date of next meetingThe date of the next Parent Council meeting is Thursday 23 April at 7pm.

Online Links to these minutes from Sciennes Parent Council WebsiteSciennes Parent Council Status as at 31st March 2015 (Catherine McCormack/LeeAnne Boyle)SPIG slides dated 31 March 2015 (Kirstin Unger)Playground Group – Reporting Back (photo)

DefinitionsPC = Parent CouncilCEC = City of Edinburgh CouncilSS = Sports ScotlandSPIG = Sciennes Playground Improvement GroupSchool = Sciennes Primary SchoolThe strip south of Sciennes Road = the stripFEG = Fundraising and Events GroupDHT = Deputy Head Teacher