As a result of information obtained this morning under Freedom of Information, we can reveal that Argyll and Bute Council has no fewer than 11 Quality Improvement Officers (QIOs) recuited to the Education Department.
These were all recruited in 2004 on a salary band then of £49,425 – £55,149. Given that we already know that an unually high leap in salary costs in the education budget at the last count was caused by ‘QIOs going through the salary bands. it means that many or all of these are now in the band above this one.
This picture also does not include the number and salaries of the managers of the QIOs. We know such posts exist and have a Freedom of Information request lodged to discover this information.
We are also enquiring as to the means of progress between salary bands. It is unlikely that this will be automatic – otherwise there would simply be a long continuous band. There will be criteria applying for what is effectively a promotion and we are asking to see such criteria.
WE had asked to see the JOb Specification under which they were originally appointed but have been sent the Person Specification instead. This is not at all the same thing. Person Specifications are routinely included along with Job Specifications in recruitment processes.
We have reiterated our request to see the Job Specifcation and,in particular, the Job Specificaiton under which these QIOs were appointed in 2004. The Council’s Human Resources department would have to maintain such records against the possibility of any later industrial dispute.
But for anyone who wants to see what a QIO looks like, here is the Person Specification under which the current batch were recruited: 5 QIO- Person Spec
I don’t see Estate Management on that list or experience of writing closure proposals.
Maybe thats in the job description.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The recently advertised post was at £57,000+ and so when one adds in the pension contribution and employer national insurance the cost of that post is already at over £70,000. Obviously if there are also any additional costs (car, travel, training etc) they would push the total cost up further.
Assuming that none are on any more than the recently advertised post (if they have been in post for some time they may well be) then the cost being borne each year is £770,000! Over 3/4 million each year.
How is quality improved by closures of schools that will mean children missing more school and having an extra 1.5 hours (plus) journey on twisting roads?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
All this talk of Quality Improvment Officers makes me ask the question: what is quality? and how do the education department measure it? It’s all well and good to say that our children will have a better quality of education when the schools close, (sorry, amalgamate), but unless they have defined baselines and units of measurement, they will be unable to demonstrate that the “quality” has been improved. So I have to ask: how can the Quality Improvment Officers proove that “quality” has been improved by any of their actions, and therefore justify their inflated salaries?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Brackleystewart: That’s very much at the heart of why we want to see the Job Specifications. There do have to be demonstrable positive frontline impacts from so many expensive jobs – and not just showing that their existence helps to comply with the administrative requirements of big government.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
7. 12. 10. Well there you go – what did I say? Too Many Chiefs and not enough Indians. The whole thing STINKS. Good on you For Argyll. Keep it up. We really do need to know what these QI people are supposed to be doing. Then we can discover how effective they really are. Think how many rural primary schools we could afford to keep open if we REMOVED THE QIs and did IN-POST PEER-MONITORING instead. That is the PROPER way to do Quality Assurance: it is more efficient and professional, and it also happens to be cheaper. And it has Staff Development benefits all round too – both for the monitors and the monitored. Of course, if you also centralised Eductional Admin. you could get rid of the £90,000 pa lot as well….Then you really WOULD start to get a better basis for the infrastructure. I am sure ScotGov is watching all this with keen interest -I certainly hope so. so.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
why did we need a consultant to push his personel agenda on our rural schools when we have all these quality improvement officers.
can they and there managers not make any decisions?
what part did they play in this scandal?
where are the reports they surely must have prepared?
good head teachers and staff do not need to be told how to run the school.
happy kids are a great advert for any school and when I visit them in different parts
of argyll through my job the rapor between the kids,teachers,assistants,dinner ladies etc.
is brillant.
sadly our schools have been used as political pawns by people who do not care what
harm they cause just so they can play at being important.
none of the politacal groups come out of this well and as for the independents[haha]
your time is coming.
sorry to come on so late just finished work.
great work by everbody keep the faith anything I can do to help please get in touch.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Nell MacIntyre: Absolutely, On all counts.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
For Barcaldine Tyger: In-post peer monitoring is excellent, embedded rather than extraneous and richly rewarding for everyone.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I can understand short term quality improvement posts with the target to embed quality monitoring throughout the organisation by a certain time and to set-up the peer monitoring.
I could even accept an infrequent but regular monitoring and improvement exercise using outside consultants to check on the robustness of the quality monitoring process.
But full-time permanent posts, for all these years?
I wonder what similar authorities with similar pupil numbers have done?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Great work, so now everybody who knows a QIO knows how much they get paid. But in the spirit of fairness you can’t stop there, you should be requesting the salary details of all Council employees. That way we can all pass judgement on whether our friends/family/neighbours are worth the salary they are paid.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
How widespread is the use of “Consultants” by A&BC, why and what departments use them, what is the justification for their use, is it because senior management are not up to task?
I have heard from an employee, and this was before the “gagging order”, the going rate is a minimum of £500.00 per day with Mr Bloomer, hired by the Education Department, on £1,000.00 per day
Like or Dislike:
0 
0