 The school meets requirements on the publication of specified information on its website.  The school complies with Department for Education guidance on what academies should publish.  The school is an average-sized school and part of a multi-academy trust with two other neighbouring schools, Orchard Meadow and Pegasus.  The school has received substantial external support from two of its sponsors, Family Links and The Hamilton Trust. The proportion of pupils who are known to be eligible for the pupil premium is well above average, with almost half the pupils eligible. The proportion of pupils who receive support because they have special educational needs and/or disabilities is well above average. The proportion who have education, Inspection report: Windale Community Primary School, 24–25 January 2017 Page 10 of 13 health and care plans is slightly above national average. Since the last inspection, there has been one acting headteacher and one interim headteacher. The current permanent headteacher took up her post at the start of November 2016. At the start of the academic year 2016, a number of new staff were appointed, including a new part-time special educational needs coordinator. Further staffing changes were made in January 2017. The early years consists of a Nursery class which children attend on a part-time basis, and a full-time Reception class. The school shares its site with a separately managed pre-school called ‘Two by Two’. The school meets the government floor standards for 2016, which set minimum expectations for attainment and progress.  Inspection report: Windale Community Primary School, 24–25 January 2017 Page 11 of 13 Information about this inspection The inspection started as a short section 8 inspection and then converted to a section 5 full inspection. Inspectors made visits to observe learning in all classes, including in early years. They were accompanied by leaders on most visits. Inspectors also observed breaktime behaviour and made three short dips into classes, one to observe behaviour, one to look at the work of teaching assistants and one to look at spiritual, moral, social and cultural provision. In addition, inspectors scrutinised pupils’ work. Two meetings were held with pupils. One focused on behaviour and well-being and the other on learning and included listening to pupils read. Pupils also accompanied an inspector on a guided tour of the school. Inspectors held meetings with the headteacher, senior leaders, subject leaders, and a group of staff, which included support staff and external support providers. Inspectors also met parents informally. Inspectors also held meetings with the chair of the IEB and two other IEB members, some of whom were trustees. A meeting was also held with the headteacher of one of the schools in the MAT who chairs the board, which consists of the three headteachers of the schools in the MAT. Insufficient responses were made on Parent View to generate a summary. Inspectors reviewed parents’ responses to the same questions as Ofsted uses, gathered by the school. Documentation and policies, which included the school’s own evaluation and development plans, were reviewed. Inspectors scrutinised the school’s safeguarding records, including safety checks made when teachers are appointed.