They are tax payer funded schools part of the public sector school provision, but instead of their funding coming via the Local County Council or London Borough, they get their funding direct from Central Government.
They have more freedom over pay, conditions, what is taught and have been a direct replacement for a perceived failing school.
As they have less local authority input, the situation here is more likely to arise, as there is less oversight of their day to day activities.
I'd like to see the reason why it didn't amount to "dishonesty or fraud". I mean this isn't one stray receipt sneaking in is it? Can't see it matters either if it was approved by someone else or not. She must have submitted them to start with. Only thing I can think of would be if someone else altogether collated and submitted them for her.
If someone else collated and submitted them for her, who authorised them for payment? Maybe she keeps a cheque book in her desk where she is the sole signatory required to make payments.
They are tax payer funded schools part of the public sector school provision, but instead of their funding coming via the Local County Council or London Borough, they get their funding direct from Central Government.
They have more freedom over pay, conditions, what is taught and have been a direct replacement for a perceived failing school.
As they have less local authority input, the situation here is more likely to arise, as there is less oversight of their day to day activities.
Even though the free schools are free to employ someone without teaching qualifications to teach, surely they can't employ someone who has been expressly banned from teaching as seems to be suggested by someone with an agenda.
Comments
Yes, that's right, they are annoyed that she's been sacked!
Parents campaign to bring back headteacher banned from teaching after expenses abuse
They have more freedom over pay, conditions, what is taught and have been a direct replacement for a perceived failing school.
As they have less local authority input, the situation here is more likely to arise, as there is less oversight of their day to day activities.
If someone else collated and submitted them for her, who authorised them for payment? Maybe she keeps a cheque book in her desk where she is the sole signatory required to make payments.
Even though the free schools are free to employ someone without teaching qualifications to teach, surely they can't employ someone who has been expressly banned from teaching as seems to be suggested by someone with an agenda.
The mind boggles
Indeed. She's not exactly a good role model for the kids.
I'd love to see her maths lessons.