Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Aileen Bates, Amanda Burnside, George Croxford, Michelle Chilcott, John Proctor, Debbie Rock, Cathy Shahrokni and David Whewell.

Linda Westmore attended the meeting on behalf of Amanda Burnside and Cathy Shahrokni.

Debbie Rock resigned from the Schools Forum.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 14 January 2016 (copy attached).

The minutes of the meeting held on 14 January 2016 were presented; it was agreed that a reason should be stated, for why the ‘National Copyright Licenses’ were heard as an urgent item at 14 January meeting.

Resolved:

To agree and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 14 January 2016, subject to the following amendment of item 12:

‘the reason that this item was taken as urgent was because, it constituted a change to the local funding formula and this had to be agreed, before the submission date to the EFA’.

To receive any declarations of disclosable interests or dispensations granted by the Standards Committee.

There were no declarations of interest.

To receive any announcements through the Chairman.

The Chairman also thanked Grant Davis for his unfaltering support of the Schools Forum in Liz Williams’ absence and those present warmly welcomed Liz back to the Schools Forum.

To receive a verbal update from the Service Director for Commissioning and Performance, Department for Children and Education.

A verbal update from Susan Tanner, Service Director for Commissioning and Performance, Department for Children and Education was given. Ms Tanner confirmed that the last meeting’s paper on troubled families had reached phase 2 and that during this phase closer work would be undertaken with schools. She also confirmed that the education attainment achievements had been published, along with the neglect strategy implementation plan. Ms Tanner advised that should any member of the Forum request to see any of the papers, she would provide them with a copy.

To receive budget monitoring information against the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) for the financial year 2015/16 as at 31 January 2016.

Liz Williams, Head of Finance, was in attendance to present the budget monitoring information against the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) for the financial year 2015/16 as at 31 January 2016 and to introduce the report.

Mrs Williams highlighted that there was a projected overspend of £1.693 million against the overall schools budget and that the biggest variance in this respect originated from the High Needs budget. It was noted that there were projected to be some underspends too and that the Early Years budgets were, broadly, breaking even.

It was highlighted that the overspend against the overall schools budget was expected to be greater than the level of reserves, which totalled £1.49 million. Mrs Williams confirmed that the Council were unable to top-up the DSG and that approximately £200,000 needed to be the first call on the DSG for 2016-17. It was stressed that if the DSG reserves were to be used, then there would be no reserve for future years and those present were asked to be mindful of such a possibility.

It was discussed that the ‘planned underspend’ in paragraph 5 of the report should be reformed to note ‘reduction in planned allocation’, as no underspend had been planned by the Schools Forum. Mrs Williams noted that she would change the wording of paragraph 5 accordingly.

Grant Davis, Schools Strategic Financial Support Manager, explained that insufficient provision had been made for copyright licenses in 2015-16, however for 2016/17, this issue has been rectified. Concern was raised that schools had potentially paid for the copyright licenses, as well as Wiltshire Council. Liz Williams signalled that this issue would be investigated, in order to determine if Wiltshire had double-paid for its copyright licenses. The Chairman advised that the result of the investigation be reported back to the Schools Forum Working Group (SFWG) at the next meeting.

Having been put to the meeting, it was

Resolved:

1. That the Schools Forum note the budget monitoring position at the end of January 2016
2. That Liz Williams amend ‘planned underspend’ in paragraph 5 of the report to read ‘reduction in allocation’ only

   iii.        That an investigation be undertaken to determine whether Wiltshire had double-paid for its copyright licenses and that the result of this investigation be reported back to the next SFWG meeting

To receive minutes, reports and/or verbal updates from the following working groups:

·         Joint meeting of: School Funding Working Group and Special Educational Needs Working Group

·         Early Years Reference Group

Minutes and an update on the joint meeting of the SFWG and the Special Education Needs Development Working Group (SENDWG) and the Early Years Reference Group (EYRG) were provided.

The missing minutes from EYRG November 2015 meeting were also provided, as part of ‘Agenda Supplement 1’.

Having been put to the meeting it was

Resolved:

That the Schools Forum note the content of the minutes

A report to follow as a supplementary publication to the agenda.

A late report on the item was introduced by Grant Davis, as listed in ‘Agenda Supplement 3’. Mr Davis apologised for the lateness of the report and relayed that he desired to ensure that the report was as up to date and accurate as possible, hence the late circulation.

Mr Davis explained that there was a scheme in place, known as the Supply Pool Insurance (SPI), which effectively ensured that staff absences within schools could be covered. He noted that this scheme was run throughout the Local Authority and that there was a cash-back arrangement for schools who had claimed less than 50% of their premium. It was confirmed that the forecast balance on the SPI at the end of 2015/16 was £1.103 million.

Mr Davis informed those present that 133 schools were a part of the scheme, including 11 academies. He noted that the opening balance on the 2014/15 SPI was around -£1.2 million and that cash-back for 2014/15 had been £131,209.66. The opening balance for 2015/16 was confirmed as being £1.07 million, however if one incorporated the outstanding claims, then the closing balance was closer to £1.1 million.

It was expressed with cash-back at the 50% rate; the balance of the SPI could remain at just above £1 million. Mr Davis advised that SPI could continue to be offered with no premiums increased for the next year and that cash-back payments could continue into the future, as affordable.

In response to a question on the future operation of the SPI Liz Williams, Head of Finance, confirmed that proposed national changes around the formula would not impact on the operation of the scheme, which could continue as a trade of service.  It was further agreed that Schools Forum would not need to receive further reports on the operation of the scheme. 

Having been put to the meeting, it was

Resolved:

      i.        That the Schools Forum note the content of the report on the Supply Pool Insurance Scheme

    ii.        The Schools Forum agree the proposals, as set out in paragraphs a – d of the report

   iii.        That the Schools Forum do not need to receive further reports on the Supply Pool Insurance scheme

A report to follow as a supplementary publication to the agenda.

A late report as listed in ‘Agenda Supplement 1’ was presented to the meeting by Grant Davis. Mr Davis highlighted that the report summarised the budget proposals for 2016/17 and that the report was for information only, as no key decision was needed to be reached.

It was explained that the funding allocated through the DSG was then modelled through the Wiltshire funding formula, to ensure that the schools budget was affordable. This also incorporated all the decisions that the Schools Forum had made regarding funding. It was noted that for 2016/17 the schools block had been set at £260.156 million, which was an increase of £3.621 million on the 2015/16 funding level. Mr Davis divulged that this increase was as a result of an increase in pupil growth in the County. The meeting was informed that the High Needs Block had seen an increase of £823,000 and that Wiltshire had received funding of £88,000 per year for Newly Qualified Teachers (NQTs).

Mr Davis drew the meeting’s attention to the table listed under paragraph 7 in the report. He emphasised that primary pupil numbers had increased by 832 pupils and that there had been an increase in 958 pupils for 2015/16 in this realm. It was noted that secondary school pupil numbers had decreased by approximately 500 pupils for 2014/15 and 2015/16.

It was highlighted that Wiltshire had received a fairer funding allocation of £5.7 million for 15-16 and that, going forward, this would be built into baseline funding for Wiltshire. It was also noted that the funding that had been received for Wiltshire was based upon the Schools Block Unit of Funding (SBUF) and that the SBUF had increased by 4 pence, which could have enabled a minor increase in pupil funding, however, this was not deemed to be sustainable and would not be taking place; therefore, per pupil funding had been retained at the current rate adjusted for the cost of copyright licences.

In terms of the per pupil funding, the funding rates for deprivation, prior attainment and English as an additional language were discussed.   Mr Davis explained that the overall quantum for the total amount of funding awarded had been retained in each case and that the movement in figures was based on the shift in pupil numbers. It was noted that this principle was the same as what had been agreed in the previous year. Concern was raised by some members that a procedure should be devised, which would allow more detail on the per pupil funding to be brought to the Schools Forum; especially detail on the amount of money available and what the impact on such a sum could be.

It was highlighted that the amount of schools who had been in receipt of MFG had increased to 48 and that the number of schools that had been capped was 27.

A discussion was had where several points were made, including the following: 

·       That an explanation of how the 2016-17 quantum and per pupil  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.

To receive a report on High Needs Budget 2015-16, which will summarise the key pressures on the high needs budget for 2016-17.

Liz Williams, Head of Finance, was in attendance to introduce a report on the High Needs Budget for 2016-17. The report summarised the key pressures on the high needs budget for 2016-17 and attention was drawn to ‘Agenda Supplement 2’, which included a late supplementary report complete with 2 appendices on the item.

Mrs Williams detailed that 1 year previously pressures on the High Needs Block had been explained to the Schools Forum and that it had been agreed that a number of savings be implemented; indeed, these savings would amount to just short of £1.5 million. It was also relayed that a discussion with the EFA had been undertaken regarding savings agreed on pupil places and that this saving was to be achieved in a different manner to what was agreed at the June 2015 Schools Forum meeting. Mrs Williams confirmed that £1 million of savings had been achieved in certain areas and that, when considering the planned overspend for 2015/16, the High Needs Budget would be £1 million worse off, if previous savings had not been achieved.

Attention was drawn to the table under paragraph 9 of the report in the agenda pack. It was explained that there had been a significant growth in pupils having been supported with plans across all schools and an increase in pupils placed in the independent sector, and that this was playing through into the spend data.

Mrs Williams detailed that the Independent Special Schools budget was projected to overspend and that the number of residential packages was remaining consistent, however, there had been an increase in the number and cost of day cases; which were the 2 areas where there was growth. Reference was made to the graph below paragraph 15, outlining the numbers of independent special school placements by year group and the year on year movement from January 2015 to January 2016.

Those present were advised that there were worrying trends noted within the reports and that, inevitably, this would impact on costs. The meeting was informed that £91,000 had been allocated for those schools with exceptional numbers of pupils with Statements. Mrs Williams confirmed that some of the savings that had been made previously were not able to be repeated for 2016/17 and therefore, it was necessary for one to look across the budget as a whole to be able to determine where savings could be made.

The point was raised that money would have to be allocated to children with SEN, despite the fact that the High Needs Budget would be operating with a deficit. A discussion was had that noted several concerns, such as the following; that young people who could not be educated in the mainstream sector were often moved around and therefore, it was even more vital that these children were to be provided for

Mrs Williams informed the meeting that £823,000 had been put into the High Needs Budget by the Department of Education (DfE) and that this had led to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.

To confirm the dates of future meetings, as follows:

16 June 2016

6 October 2016

8 December 2016

The dates of the future Schools Forum meetings were confirmed as:

·         16 June 2016

·         6 October 2016

·         8 December 2016

Liz Williams, Head of Finance, advised that an extraordinary meeting may be needed to be held, once the details from the Schools National Funding Formula consultations had been provided.

Liz Williams, Head of Finance, was in attendance to introduce the report on ‘Schools National Funding Formula and High Needs Reform’. The Chairman agreed for the report on Schools National Funding Formula and High Needs Reform and the appendix on Schools National Funding Formula and High Needs Funding Formula Government Consultation – stage 1 to be heard as urgent items. The reason the items were agreed to be heard as urgent was because the schools funding consultation had been issued in the week beginning 7 March 2016 and the response date was set for 17 April 2016 and therefore, the Forum would have had no opportunity to provide a response if the items were to be heard at a subsequent meeting date. Mrs Williams explained that 2 consultations on funding formula had been issued; she informed those present that an Early Years consultation would follow and that the purpose of her report was to note the headlines on funding formula and what this would demand in terms of action points. It was stressed however, that a more detailed document on the topic would follow in the summer.

Mrs Williams highlighted that the government had signalled a new process for the national funding formula.  It was explained that, from April 2017 it was proposed that the School Level National Funding Formula, funding would be allocated directly to Local Authorities using that national formula for the subsequent 2 years and Local Authorities would then use a local formula to allocate the funds to schools within their County.

Attention was drawn to the fact that in the future all schools would be receiving money from a national funding formula only. It was noted that, only once the difference had been shown nationally, would the Schools Forum be able to make an informed decision about whether to change the local funding formula in the transitional period.

It was confirmed that the remaining funding guarantee would remain at -1.5% and that there would be a change to the baseline of the DSG block; which would ensure that money could not be moved between blocks. Indeed, this reform would effectively set the levels of the blocks for the future and they would be fixed. It was highlighted that, despite the proposed reform, in 3 years’ time there would be no flexibility over the block anyway and no de-delegations would be able to occur, as the budgets would have to be listed to schools themselves.

Concern was raised by some members that the current mechanism for distributing funding for the High Needs Funding Formula was unfair and it was confirmed that the proposal would move to a more formulaic approach; where factors such as low attainment and deprivation would be considered, however, the meeting was advised that the move to a formula could bring about radical changes to funding for Local Authorities although there is expected to be a minimum funding guarantee applied to protect against disruptive chance

It was discussed that a large number of responses  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.