On the alleged ‘Trojan horse’ conspirators
A number of “key individuals, predominantly men of Pakistani heritage ... are encouraging and promoting certain Islamic principles in schools in the Birmingham area, and the evidence suggests a pattern of these individuals moving between schools in the area”. This included governors, deputy headteachers, teaching staff, trustees and parents, with some swapping between roles or holding a number of different posts across several schools.
The individuals sought to “promote and encourage Islamic principles in the schools with which they are involved” by introducing Islamic collective worship, or raising objections to elements of the school curriculum that were viewed as anti-Islamic, such as sex education, mixed PE classes or citizenship teaching.
A number of witnesses told investigators that they were concerned about the motives of these individuals, and told of discrimination against female members of staff and pupils. These individuals used “inappropriate methods, including the improper manipulation of school governance” to achieve their aims. At one school, governors were said to have attended the school prom to monitor the music and see how male and female pupils were mixing.
On the conduct of governing bodies
Improper processes were said to have been followed by individual governors and governing bodies in the appointment and removal of governors, possibly in an attempt to secure a majority or influence the governing bodies’ approach. “Evidence also suggests that the change in the membership of governing bodies is often followed by an increased desire to promote Islamic principles,” the report noted. Once in place, individuals “sought to intervene in the delivery of education, but by using inappropriate methods, including the improper manipulation of school governance”, leading to conflict with staff and other governors.
In some schools, teaching posts were offered to individuals if their approach to promoting Islam chimed with those making the appointments, despite any lack of experience. Individual governors and governing bodies were found to have used “improper processes” in the appointment and removal of other governors, with evidence that changes in membership were often followed by an “increased promotion of Islamic principles” by school boards. At Moseley school, one witness said that, over a short period of time in 2007, a Muslim majority was achieved, and that “there was a lot of behind-the-scenes activity to make sure this happened”.
On the role of the Department for Education
Witnesses reported “huge pressure” from the DfE for failing schools to be turned into academies; resources were directed to the academy agenda, which resulted in council staff being distracted from their other work in school improvement. The report also identified failings in oversight by the DfE as well as the council and Ofsted, saying: “It is not possible to discern a relationship between Birmingham city council (BCC), Ofsted, the DfE and the Education Funding Agency in the process of sharing critical data and intelligence.”
On the infiltration of school boards by key individuals, the report observed: “Evidence suggests that the DfE was aware of the connections between some of the individuals and the potential risks that this posed.”
The DfE also failed to identify potential risks associated with conversion to academy status, in some instances. “We have also seen evidence to suggest that the support provided to schools in relation to the process of converting to an academy is inadequate,” the report said. Witnesses said that the DfE encouraged the Park View trust to take over nearby schools soon after Park View was granted academy status and without the capacity to do so. One witness commented that “the government is to blame partly for allowing schools to be put in a position where they can’t cope”.
Impact on affected schools
A “pattern of disruptive behaviour by governors” was reported, with the most serious allegations involving “explicit campaigns to remove specific members of staff, or by the general behaviour of certain governors, or a governing body, to bully or harass a headteacher or to seek to remove them”. Other evidence included governors interfering in operational matters. One head said governors raised “so many petty problems” that she felt unable to run the school. But some witnesses said the conflicts were “linked to anger at underperformance, perceived community disenfranchisement and cultural misunderstanding”.
The report was highly critical of poor or damaging governance, saying: “There are some serious governance issues that exist in a small number of schools in east Birmingham as a result of, at best, poor skills, and at worst, serious malpractice by members of certain governing bodies.”
Financial regulations and employment laws were ignored, while some governors failed to act transparently or understand what their roles involved. At Anderton primary school, a witness reported that one governor was described as “extremely difficult”, particularly during meetings when they would raise “the same questions relentlessly ... in an intimidating and bullying fashion”. Governors were reduced to tears and at least three (possibly four) clerks have resigned.
On Ofsted
In some schools and academies, Ofsted “failed to identify dysfunctional governance and instances of the manipulation of a balanced curriculum when conducting routine Ofsted inspections, prior to the most recent inspections”, and that Birmingham city council cannot rely on Ofsted to assess governance in its schools. Ofsted inspections focus on the ability of governors to support and challenge the leadership of schools with little, if any, scrutiny of financial management, the quality, breadth and balance of a school’s curriculum, or the adequacy of governance generally.
There was a “fundamental gap in the gathering and sharing of information between stakeholders”, with council witnesses complaining that there was a “long history of Ofsted ignoring our concerns” following complaints. The report concluded that the council needs to work with Ofsted about reviewing their procedures, given that Ofsted no longer bears responsibility for this in the way that it has previously.
On Birmingham city council
BCC “failed to respond” to complaints by heads and staff of pressure and intimidation. At one meeting at Golden Hillock school, a council representative said that there was nothing the council could do and told staff to “grow a pair”.
BCC was also at fault for its poor oversight and appointment of unsuitable candidates as local authority governors in maintained schools. “We have seen evidence that many of the individuals identified to us in the course of the investigation as having influenced schools through improper manipulation of school governance were local authority governors,” the report notes.
BCC also failed to spot concerns when it should have done, owing to a failure to join up the intelligence to the complaints it did receive. “In some cases, BCC was actually a vehicle for promoting some of these problems, with headteachers being eased out through the profligate use of compromise agreements, rather than supported,” the report stated.
BCC’s inability to address the problems has been exacerbated by a culture within BCC of not wanting to address difficult issues and problems with school governance where there is a risk that BCC may be accused of being racist or Islamophobic.