Yearsley Grove Primary School
Source: data.gov.uk (2018-10-29)

CYC Internal Audit Reports 2017. These reports are presented to the Audit and Governance Committee for consideration, and are also included with the agenda papers for the [relevant meetings](http://democracy.york.gov.uk/ieListMeetings.aspx?CommitteeId=437). 

Reports are also grouped together by calendar year and published at this York Open Data platform. Reports for other years are available at the [__CYC Internal Audit Reports__](https://data.yorkopendata.org/dataset?q=internal+audit&sort=score+desc%2C+metadata_modified+desc) datasets.

1 
  
 
     
 
 
 
 
 
Yearsley Grove Primary School 
City of York Council 
Internal Audit Report 2016/17 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Business Unit: Children's Services, Education & Skills,  
Headteacher: E Morris 
Date Issued: 09/03/17 
Status: Final 
Reference: 15691/004 
 
Overall Audit Opinion 
Substantial Assurance 
Actions 
5 
0 
P3 
P2 
P1 
0 

 
2 
  
 
Summary and Overall Conclusions 
 
Introduction 
This audit was carried out on Wednesday 9th November and Thursday 10th November 2016 as part of the Internal Audit plan for Education, 
Skills and Children’s Services for 2016/17. 
Objectives and Scope of the Audit 
The purpose of this audit was to provide advice to the Governors, Head Teacher and the Authority's Section 151 Officer about the financial 
management procedures and assurance that internal controls of the school were operating effectively to manage key risks, both financial and 
otherwise. The audit covered the following areas in accordance with the specification issued on 5th October 2016: 
 
• 
Governance;  
• 
Financial Management;  
• 
System Reconciliation; 
• 
Petty Cash 
• 
Contracts – Ordering, Purchasing and Authorisation;  
• 
Income;  
 
• 
Capital and Property; 
• 
Additional School Activity Provision; 
• 
Human Resources; 
• 
Payroll; 
 
• 
School Meals;  
• 
Pupil Numbers;  
• 
Voluntary Funds Monitoring Arrangements;  
• 
Data Protection and Information Technology;  
• 
Insurance and Risk Management;  
• 
Joint Use Facilities; 
• 
Inventory Records; 
• 
Security; and 
• 
Safeguarding Arrangements. 
Key Findings 
The audit found that overall there were good procedures are in place for financial management and governance at the school. However 
additional controls are required to ensure delegated authority is appropriately allocated to allow Governors to fulfil their role in overseeing the 
financial management of the school rather than being involved in operational procedures. The audit trail between the collection recording and 

 
3 
  
 
banking of school meals income should be improved and school meals arrears need to be addressed. Inventory controls should include an 
annual check of the inventory record by an officer independent of maintaining the inventory record and the school should ensure that Parent 
Declaration Forms should be in place for all free early education funding claimed. 
Overall Conclusions 
The arrangements for managing risk were good with few weaknesses identified. An effective control environment is in operation, but there is 
scope for further improvement in the areas identified. Our overall opinion of the controls within the system at the time of the audit was that they 
provided Substantial Assurance. 
 

 
4 
  
 
 
1 School Policies 
Issue/Control Weakness 
Risk 
Not all policies adopted by the school had been signed and dated on approval. 
A process for ensuring all policies were promptly scheduled for review was 
being progressed but was not complete. A review of the schools financial 
policies identified that the school does not have a consolidated budget 
management policy. 
Policies may be out of date and may not meet the needs of 
the school and regulatory requirements. In particular the 
financial framework in place may not be sufficient to achieve 
efficient and effective use of the schools resources and meet 
the requirements of the Council’s LMS Scheme. 
Findings 
At the time of the audit the School Business Manager was in the process of compiling a schedule of policies, identifying the next scheduled 
review date and the responsible committee. It was noted that not all current policies had been signed and dated by the Chair of Governors on 
approval, in particular where standard CYC policies were adopted by the school.  
The school does not have a consolidated budget management policy in place. It was confirmed that the school has terms of reference in place 
for its committees, an approved delegation of authority to post holders and a CYC Delegated Authority Scheme, all subject to annual review. 
However, there is no current document clearly specifying the roles and responsibilities of the Governors and the Headteacher and clearly 
setting out the financial framework for individual members of the school staff and the Governing Body to achieve efficient and effective use of 
the schools financial resources. 
Recommendation 
The schedule of policies should be progressed and all policies adopted by the school should be signed and dated by the Chair on approval. 
 
It is recommended that terms of reference, delegated authorities and details of the financial framework to be applied are brought together as 
part of a consolidated budget management policy. This policy should conform to the requirements of the LMS Scheme for the Financing of 
Schools and the City of York Council Financial Regulations and Contract Procedure Rules.  It is advised that the policy is based on the City of 
York Council’s recommended model, subject to annual review and approved by the Full Governing Body. A copy of the model policy has been 
sent to the school. 
Agreed Action 1.1 
A rolling programme of policies for Full Governor’s meetings has been produced by the 
clerk (from CYC Clerking Service).  There is a limit to how many can reasonably be taken 
to each meeting, 7 are going to the next meeting on 13th March, the Budget Management 
Policy is one of them.  We expect all policies will be completed by December 2017. 
Priority 
3 
Responsible Officer 
School Business 
Manager 
Timescale 
31st December 2017 

 
5 
  
 
 
 
 
2 Authorised Signatories 
Issue/Control Weakness 
Risk 
Governors who are not employees of the school are authorised signatories for 
committing expenditure and for making payments. 
The Governing body is unable to fulfil its statutory 
responsibility. Officers who are not members of staff are not 
covered by the school’s fidelity guarantee insurance. 
Findings 
The school has a governor as an authorised signatory on the schools bank account and a governor approved to authorise purchase and 
payment through the CYC delegated authority scheme. Governors have a statutory responsibility for the oversight of the financial management 
of the school and for ensuring adherence to the Authority’s Standing Orders and Financial Regulations and as such governors (who are not 
employees of the school) should not be directly involved in operational procedures. Additionally, it should be noted that non staff members are 
not covered by the schools fidelity guarantee insurance. 
Recommendation 
The school should not include governors who are not employees of the school as authorised signatories on the bank mandate or on the CYC 
delegated authority scheme. 
Agreed Action 2.1 
The relevant governors will be removed as an authorised signatory at the next Full 
Governors meeting on 13th March.  The Bank Mandate form will be signed then and 
forwarded to HSBC to remove the governor. 
Priority 
3 
Responsible Officer 
School Business 
Manager 
Timescale 
13th March 2017 
 
 

 
6 
  
 
 
3 School Meals 
Issue/Control Weakness 
Risk 
The audit trail between the recording of school meals income and payment into 
the bank was not clear and the completeness of the banking was not being 
verified. There were also significant school meal arrears at the time of the audit. 
All income due may not be collected and all income collected 
may not be promptly banked. 
Findings 
School meal charges are collected by the school meals catering contractor who also updates the school meals return.   All payments are made 
by cash or cheque. An electronic income collection system is not in place at the school. The income and the school meals return is passed to 
the school for banking into the schools account. The balances of arrears accumulated prior to September 2016 had not been transferred to the 
current school meals return (these were held as a separate record). As the income included an element of arrears from the last school year, the 
banking did not agree to the current return and the accuracy of the banking was not being verified by the school. 
 
The records for school meals for the current and previous year were reviewed Total arrears were in the region of £2500 with several individual 
debts ranging between £200 and £300 (one being for a child who had left the school). As the school pays the contractor for all meals taken the 
school is covering the cost of arrears. Reminders had been issued to parents and it is understood that further action is being discussed. 
Recommendation 
The arrears balances prior to September 2016 should be brought forward onto the current school meals return. This will highlight where 
significant arrears have built up and also allow all payments collected, including arrears, to be recorded on the current return and matched to 
bankings therefore providing a clear audit trail between collection, recording and banking of income. 
 
The school should consider setting up payment plans with parents with significant arrears which should be regularly monitored. Any further 
arrears should be followed up promptly. It is suggested that the school considers setting a level at which they would withdraw services unless 
special circumstances apply and where possible the school should require pre payment if services continue to be used. It is recommended that 
the current position on arrears is regularly reported to Finance Committee. Council Policy and guidance on the pursuit of overdue payments has 
been sent to the school. 
 
Additionally, it is suggested that an electronic income collection system (such as Parentpay) is considered for school meals and other income 
collected directly by the school eg for breakfast club, after school club and trip monies. This should reduce the need for cash handling at the 
school and provide an alternative method of payment which may reduce the level of arrears overall. 

 
7 
  
 
Agreed Action 3.1 
The arrears balances prior to September 2016 have been brought forward onto the current 
school meals return to improve the audit trail.  A more rigorous programme of chasing 
outstanding debts has been introduced.  A final letter has been sent to relevant parents, a 
report made to the Finance Governors meeting on 6th March.  Small Claims Court 
procedures have been investigated and a decision will be made at the Full Governors 
meeting on 13th March about initiating claim action. 
Priority 
3 
Responsible Officer 
Head / School 
Business Manager 
Timescale 
31st March 2017 
 
 

 
8 
  
 
 
 
4 Early Years  
Issue/Control Weakness 
Risk 
Completed Parent Declaration Forms were not in place for all funded nursery 
children. 
Failure to comply with funding requirements. 
Findings 
Nursery attendance records for Summer term 2016 were reviewed and hours attended supported the funded hours claimed. 
 
The office administrator advised that a number of parent declaration forms relating to the Summer term 2016  had been sent to the Council  on 
request  and only a photocopy of the back of the form retained (this did not include the child’s name and details of funded hours claimed). The 
administrator identified which children the forms related to, however, this left a total of six from the 48 children in the nursery without Parent 
Declaration Forms.  
Recommendation 
The school should ensure that it has completed Parent Declaration Forms for all children for whom funding is being claimed. 
Agreed Action 4.1 
All completed Parent Declaration Forms have been received.  The nursery teacher has 
introduced a more rigorous process to get completed forms from new starters. 
Priority 
3 
Responsible Officer 
Nursery Teacher 
Timescale 
Completed 
 
 

 
9 
  
 
 
5 Inventory 
Issue/Control Weakness 
Risk 
There was no record of an annual check of the inventory record. 
Items which have been lost or misappropriated may not be 
identified and investigated. 
Findings 
An inventory record is maintained by the School Business Manager. Assurance was given that the inventory was last checked during the 
summer break, however no record was in place to evidence the check. Additionally the check was not completed by an officer independent of 
maintaining the inventory record. 
Recommendation 
The inventory should be subject to an annual check by an officer independent of maintaining the inventory record. A copy of the verified 
inventory should be retained and signed by the officer completing the check. If this is not a full check (eg a targeted check towards the most 
vulnerable items, higher value items or particular equipment) it should be clear from this record which items have been checked. 
Agreed Action 5.1 
Future inventory checks will be signed by the person carrying out the check, normally the 
business manager.  A governor is going to be requested to carry out spot checks of the 
inventory and sign against each item checked. 
Priority 
3 
Responsible Officer 
School Business 
Manager 
Timescale 
31st August 2017. 
 

 
10 
  
 
Annex 1 
Audit Opinions and Priorities for Actions 
Audit Opinions 
Audit work is based on sampling transactions to test the operation of systems. It cannot guarantee the elimination of fraud or 
error. Our opinion is based on the risks we identify at the time of the audit. 
 
Our overall audit opinion is based on 5 grades of opinion, as set out below. 
 
Opinion 
Assessment of internal control 
High Assurance 
Overall, very good management of risk. An effective control environment appears to be in operation. 
Substantial 
Assurance 
Overall, good management of risk with few weaknesses identified.  An effective control environment is in 
operation but there is scope for further improvement in the areas identified. 
Reasonable 
Assurance 
Overall, satisfactory management of risk with a number of weaknesses identified.  An acceptable control 
environment is in operation but there are a number of improvements that could be made. 
Limited Assurance 
Overall, poor management of risk with significant control weaknesses in key areas and major 
improvements required before an effective control environment will be in operation. 
No Assurance 
Overall, there is a fundamental failure in control and risks are not being effectively managed.  A number of 
key areas require substantial improvement to protect the system from error and abuse. 
 
Priorities for Actions 
Priority 1 
A fundamental system weakness, which presents unacceptable risk to the system objectives and requires urgent 
attention by management. 
Priority 2 
A significant system weakness, whose impact or frequency presents risks to the system objectives, which needs to 
be addressed by management. 
Priority 3 
The system objectives are not exposed to significant risk, but the issue merits attention by management. 
 

 
11 
  
 
 
Where information resulting from audit work is made public or is provided to a third party by the client or by Veritau then this must be done on the understanding that 
any third party will rely on the information at its own risk.  Veritau will not owe a duty of care or assume any responsibility towards anyone other than the client in 
relation to the information supplied. Equally, no third party may assert any rights or bring any claims against Veritau in connection with the information. Where 
information is provided to a named third party, the third party will keep the information confidential.