(usb) -- Both Models Driver 440cdt

Harm

I have again a message from Mieke Small Spill Lie of The Stentor. And guess what it is about, yes, 'Crisis Management to free school . It will not look like that. Do you remember Saturday, May 22, 2010 with " Riots?

"Mieke Little Lie Mors De Stentor comes this morning with the message " Independent schools in uproar ":

" The merger between the superstructure of the Zutphen-free schools, the Berkel and De IJssel is not running smoothly . The merger is necessary because the pupil numbers on the IJssel is too low to finance something. "

In ' Parent Bulletins "three days later the soup is not to be eaten as hot as it was served. But today is different. Now there is really going on. Read with me:

"The board of the Foundation Free School North and East of the Netherlands is under heavy fire. According to a letter the joint councils (GMR) are sent to all teachers, pupils and parents of the member schools, including the private schools in Zutphen. The new professional management structure which has been extensively discussed, the current (voluntary) directors disappear, but after the critical questions of GMR Group, the Board unilaterally dissolved.

The GMR thus feels insulted and thinks the cause is a strong difference of opinion about how the GMR will pass from the current situation to the desired transparent situation. The GMR in the letter would not unquestioningly go along with the proposal that a portion of the current board supervisor is automatically in the new situation. However, the Board considered the claim of continuity is so heavy that other options than dissolution of the group were hardly discussed.

A second issue that the GMR will clarify the management fee. In 2009 that cost 48,136 euros. The administration refuses to open about fees under the cloak of privacy that gives priority over regulation. "

It's a bit much at once to understand exactly what is involved. So, here is some explanation. The board of the Foundation Free School North and East Netherlands (NON-US) is the same as what I ' Riots' described Leo Stumpf, and Toon van Ommen Gert Hilbolling. May 22, 2010 I reported that a problem in the past with the spelling of his name. Now that I However, the 'School VSZutphen 2010-2011.pdf ', I see something much stranger. On the last page, 23, says this:

"The board of the foundation is the authority of the schools and there from

- Mr. LJ Stumpf, president and treasurer

- Mr. AFJ van Ommen,

Secretary - Mr. G. Hobel, paragraph "

What is it that the games are so difficult to free schools? Or is there suddenly a new member but the board ended up? - In any case directed the displeasure of the joint councils apparently this administration. When I went to the last " Parent Bulletin No. 5 of January 15 2011.pdf 'on the website of the Free School Zutphen go, I find there on pages 3 and 4 the following message from the' Participation Council (Eric Buijs) ':

"The parent members of the participation council consists of two people: Erica van den Buijs and Sebastian Hanekroot.

part of a division of labor has Sebastian in January the presidency of the MR acquired from Erica. Erica, the deputy in the GMR (MR-school) Secondary Education and is also the secretary of that body. Both are accessible via the central MR e-mail address: dmr-ijsselberkel@vszutphen.nl

What is going on? At MR =

school level:

0. MR has agreed to the proposed student status with a number of recommendations for improvements.

1. MR has approved the appointment of Mr. P. Lenses as new Vice Principal Management & Organization.

2. MR has extensive discussions with the Rector of the (long) financial policy and budget for 2011. In response, the MR opinion. The core of this advice is that we insist on achieving a short-term multi-year financial plan and school policy. For those interested, the advice can be requested via dmr-ijsselberkel@vszutphen.nl.

parent members as we continue our focus on the next time the subject of school development. The central question is "How can the school to the much needed improvement of school organization while preserving the valuable elements of Waldorf education? "The next six years it is very important so that the preparations for the new school and a number of important decisions about the educational structure.

Another issue that will play is the voluntary parental contribution. We will keep you informed.

On GMR = upper schools:

1. Alignment control structure: the group of board members and GMR hopes to complete its work in late January, resulting in a detailed proposal for a new governance structure, its statutes and administrative regulations and procedures for the transition from the old to the new governance model.

2. Long-term financial policy and fiscal 2011: what plays well here at school level plays a long-term perspective is missing which makes it unclear when the new budget is based. Here too the GMR's consistent with the board to speed up a multi-year foundation plan and financial policies. In addition, we expressed our concern about the weak financial control systems which monitor the available budget is insufficient and too much risk of setbacks.

3. Research is being launched to assess Widar, a junior school in Groningen, could be added to the foundation so that in Groningen a continuous learning can occur. Point of focus is primarily the impact on financial position of our foundation.

We're always open to suggestions, will be prosecuted. "

A month later, in the most recent ' Parent Bulletin No. 6 16 February 2011.pdf " directly to the homepage of the Waldorf school in Zutphen find is on the last page, in April, but now this 'Message from the joint participation (GMR) (Eric the Buijs)':

"A lot has happened during the meeting between GMR and Board of the VSNON, including administration of our school:

The Foundation board ends unilaterally and without consultation, participation the Joint Working Group "Adaptation control structure". The process to achieve a better separation between Management and supervision is thus unnecessary delay.

The Foundation board of directors' fees received in 2009 € 48.136. The GMR has asked for details of that amount. The board opts for privacy regulation over (!) And transparency.

The budget for 2011 is adopted by directors without a positive recommendation from the GMR. The GMR does not believe to be advised by the lack of long-term policy. The board has announced that a long time in gestation.

We started with an inventory of what needs to happen for a merger between Widar (substructure in Groningen) and NON-US Foundation to achieve. The administration promised intent late in coming. The GMR has suggestions for its content.

know more? Please check out our new website www.vrijeschoolgroningenzutphen.nl '

The site was recently listed online (from February 13, if I understand correctly) and lays bare all the complaints. Here is the letter of the common councils to find the article by Mieke Little Lie called Morse today. In fact, the entire contents also in separate segments on this website. As 'Budget not a positive opinion ", posted on February 13:

" On December 1 this year received the GMR budget for the years 2011 to ask about advice. On December 7 we talked about in the meeting. The GMR has decided not to issue a positive opinion as a whole lacked the underlying framework. There is no policy more years with the associated financial projections. We have since the middle of last year repeatedly insisted that this policy should be established quickly.

The budget this year would be an elaboration of a multi-year budget. We have no frame, hardly policy statements, no more years understanding and yet firmly be cut. Those cuts are not really to be judged: not whether they are needed, not whether they are sufficient, not whether they are justified.

Opinion

The GMR has a statement about the budget itself, and remember a number of additional questions in an urgent letter written . The board received the letter on December 18. The board's budget has already been established on December 22 last, without first consulting us about our questions.

We received these questions in late January answer. Moreover, an answer that is not on our question took effect, but only that we reported on April 1 a plan can expect. We regret this turn of events highly, the Board shall take the discussion with the GMR seriously. The GMR notes that the hair in this way prevented from its statutory duty to properly execute. "

Everything is put on the website, so is the response of the board, but was found unsatisfactory. Here the first letter of the common councils of December 18, 2010 to "The Board of the Free School North and East Netherlands Attn. M. van den Born, managing director "on the" financial policy advice / budget 2011 ":

'Considered governance,

On December 1, 2010 we were the budget of the Foundation for the year 2011 are proposed, with the underlying budgets of the schools. Our opinion, the budget that we received from you should be part of a multi-year budget which again should be part of a multiyear plan. Both long-term budget meerjarenpbeleidsplan as missing, although there by ourselves at an early stage is called for.

In your oral presentation by Chief Executive on 7 December last, this issue was also discussed. In it we found that the multiyear plan with all underlying sub-plans (eg housing, recruiting students, staff, cross-subsidization between PO and with secondary education) is not available for the two joint participation does not exist (eg the multi-year plans of the schools) or invisible to us (it would not be suitable for housing in the GMR to share).

There was a mention of that same agreement, together with external consultants, to develop such a benchmark model spreadsheet (financial windows) showing the multi-year in the first quarter of 2011 should follow. We think this is a reverse course of events, numbers follow policy and not vice versa. This policy can now express and it should be clear to the GMR. Agree with this policy or provide further advice The mission of the GMR. Taking that responsibility is impossible for us despite previous commitments before the summer and most recently in September and despite repeated requests from us.

your director's statement that "you can not see the policy does not mean that it is not there" we think inappropriate. We hear our legal right to speak about the policy and that we are de facto impossible. It is not our job to "see it" it is your task to make known to us. We refer to Article 18.1 of the Participation Rules (VO) that our right to the information we need to do our work. In that light requires The lack of accurate insight into the financial relationships between board and school authority for attention. Without improvements in it seems a repeat of 2010 in the non-realization of savings plans is virtually certain. Changes in school organization in that respect his opinion liable (Article 22.1.d).

That is why we are not currently able to positively advise you provided the foundation budget 2011. We would like to agree on the details of the multiyear. With this budget, take an advance on the formation plans of the schools, we note that this opinion requirement. The lack of understanding of the formation of the proposed budget will impact considers a more impossible.

The indication that the conversation with your manager given that in the first quarter EEE his case should be happy we get to see the end of the year into a number of specific written commitments on the way to planning come to this policy and our involvement in it. We see the priority area of public relations activities and the resulting measures against the recruitment of new students as well as the formation defining policy (offering profiles, minimum / maximum class size, ratio AT / OOP, etc.).

Awaiting your response, with a friendly greeting

Hans Sietsma, Chairman GMR-VO

Mart Breedeveld, Chairman GMR-PO

signed on their behalf,

Erica vd Buijs, Secretary GMR-VO '

Well, here you see it all go wrong. This of course not a satisfactory answer. And whose fault is that? That's difficult to tell from here. But let's answer the Board on January 27 when it first take:

"Members of the MR and GMR PO VO [common councils Primary Education and Secondary Education Participation Council, MG],

In your letter of 18 December 2010 gives you the impression that you have repeatedly made commitments long-term policy but that it is structurally not met. We share this perception is not with you In a meeting on November 12 to your representatives clearly stated that policy is not there you can not be offered. This was accepted by the Chief Executive in consultation at the December 7 repeated. The existing long-term policy you are not remembered, it is not available.

What you have promised. On December 7, the general manager to the prospect that in the first quarter of 2011 a plan will be completed that will ultimately lead to long-term policy on all our relevant policy foundation. This is in agreement on January 11 this year reaffirmed.

in 2010 with the management team, consisting of the directors, rectors and chief executive, added to the upper school staff, have begun to develop long-term policy. From the schools, from primary and secondary clusters and from the board, so that a good mix of bottom-up and top-down the multiannual be achieved.

Since October 2010, the management team supported by consultants KPMG to develop models for calculating the impact of future scenarios, policy options and - ultimately - multi-year budgets. This process is unfortunately leaked but will be completed shortly.

The management team has a number of working groups set up on the educational development areas, staff housing and maintenance, public relations and investment policies and long-term vision will develop. This will result in a multi-year operating budget.

The vision and policy reforms in a number of these areas will have a turnaround, going beyond the calendar year 2011. Per distribution by April 1, 2011 will be a roadmap that you are ready to hand will be.

In your letter identifies the "lack of an accurate understanding of the relationships between financial competence and school administration. This power relationships since October 1 2004 governed the status board that you find attached to this letter.

can be due to the lack of long-term policy and the formation of plans for 2011 no (positive) advice on the 2011 budget. The board is as explained above is unable to meet your requirements and therefore despite the absence of your opinion on the 2011 budget adopted last December 22.

Sincerely,

LJ Stumpf, president

behalf M. van den Born, CEO '

you see it, this will never work. So you'll never be together. The complaints run deeper. Otherwise you are very good arrangements to can, even if the situation is still not ideal, as now. Maybe the next item on the website (also February 13), "Governance Working Group in cooperation breaks down - more delay," may make this clearer:

"GMR and administration had set up a working group. This would try a new proposal to develop a method of control that meets the latest legislation. Together we were all on one statement out.

To our surprise, the administration unilaterally breaks in the working group on cooperation. It wrote a letter about . Oral presentation or a final meeting were omitted. We are very disappointed by this new delay. It was our opinion, unnecessary. It is also entirely inconsistent with the commonly expressed ambition of a joint working group to develop a widely supported proposal. "

This "Joint Statement of directors and community councils Primary Education (PO) and Secondary education (VO)" is dated October 10, 2010:

'Board and representatives of the joint councils primary and secondary education were at 21 September meeting. We talked about the government initiative to establish a different governance with a Board of Trustees and a professional driver. The decision is subject to different substantive reactions. In our conversation it was decided to establish a joint working group. It has the task - based on the documents and administrative (common) councils to date in connection with the introduction of the new governance have produced - to collaborate on a new, jointly supported, transparent and comprehensible to all interested end. Keywords for the new governance model and also the way that government and councils to reach its "openness, togetherness, verifiability".

The result of the joint working group will form the foundation for a new administrative decision that the joint councils advice will be presented.

It is the wish of the parties to accelerate the process, with respect for their respective positions and up support among directors, management and education of the Free School NON Foundation. "

The unilateral termination of the cooperation in the working group by the Board on January 25 (ie two days before the previous letter from the board and is currently the subject of progress introducing new governance structure ") as follows:

" Members of the MR and GMR PO VO,

On January 25, 2010 [So that was exactly one year ago for writing this response, MG] has been proposed to the Board decision to adapt the management structure under code governance approval. In this proposed decision on March 19, 2010 negative conclusion.

With representatives from among 2010 in several talks and seminars were organized to create a document that appears to match the demands of governance and participation. Even the now - in anticipation of the new structure - designed by the Foundation management team has recently reviewed the new structure and a number of suggestions for adjustments made.

The board has concluded that there is now sufficient for exchange to the formulation of a modified decision on the proposed new governance structure of the foundation to come. The management, the proposed decision at the board meeting of February 23 and take it before you submit advice to.

The seminar agreed on January 31 representatives of government participation and will therefore expire.

Sincerely,

LJ Stumpf, president

behalf M. van den Born, CEO '

The two remaining points on the website, "administration fees" and "Fusion Widar', both on Feb. 15, promise really not good. I do not really try decide who is right here. But for me as a sore thumb is: you just do not desire each other, and wants the legal and administrative powers to fight. Well, have fun then, because at the Waldorf school in Zutphen and Groningen.

.