Agenda item

To summarise the cost pressures and potential options for savings within the high needs block for 2015-16.

The report will follow as a supplement.

Elizabeth Williams presented the report which provided a summary of key pressures on the High Needs Budget (HNB) for 2015-16 and short term proposals to minimise the impact on the budget. It also gave a brief update on the progress of the SEN Strategy which aimed to identify medium and longer term proposals to address the overspend in the HNB.

The need for short-term actions during 2015-16 was brought about by the significant overspend during 2014-15. The reserves were unable to be relied upon to support the HNB during 2015-16. The strategy was explained to bring about longer term actions which would manage the HNB more effectively.

The allocation for 2015-16 was noted as being £37.12million. Wiltshire’s share of the national £47million top-up was £0.420million; this figure was based on the proportion of 2-19 year olds within the population.

A large majority of the HNB was spent on places and top-ups for pupils in schools. Places and top-up values for pre-16 pupils in schools amounted to £24million, along with a further £5million budgeted for top-up payments in post school providers.

For the 2015-16 year an extra 200 places were requested. A total of 117 of these had been allocated. This information had been received at the last Schools Forum meeting; however feedback on how this decision was reached was now available. The feedback broadly stated that the money was not available and that the spaces had not been filled in 2014-15. It was felt that there was quite a lot of risk in funding money upfront as the places might not have been filled. It had since been stated by the EFA that if places were filled first then the EFA would fund them the next year.

Paragraph 19 of the report was said to contain the information not available at the last Schools Forum meeting:

“An analysis of the national position indicates that only 22% of additional places requested across the country were agreed. In the South West, applications were submitted for 721 additional places but only 159 were agreed. Wiltshire received 117 of those, 59% of places requested.”

A question was asked on whether it was possible to go back and appeal places now that the process was clear. It was explained that it had been instructed that growth money should be used to fund places.

It was noted that Springfields Academy was currently consulting on a change in age range and place numbers. Any change in place numbers over and above that proposed in the report was explained to result in additional pressure on the high needs block.

It was requested to record that the EFA had been invited to the Schools Forum meetings but had not sent apologies and were not present.

Pressures for the 2015-16 year had been worked out by taking into account all the know pupils paid for, any known leavers, and known September 2015 starters. The amount of migration into the county was noted as being of an unknown level at the moment.

The budgeted place funding for pre-16 during 2015-16 was set at £11.958million assuming that an extra 3 places at Larkrise, Saint Nicholas’, and Exeter House still needed to be funded. All known and planned places were built into the budget along with planning assumptions. The pre-16 places and top-up funding were discussed and the revised cost pressure in the pre-16 budget 2015-16 was noted as £1.16million.

The post-16 budget was left with a balance of £1,137,541 for the next academic year and part of the current year after known commitments had been taken off. This demonstrated a better position than the 2014-15 period. There was a £289,393 estimated shortfall for 2015-16.

A question was asked on where post-16’s go if they do not attend Wiltshire College. There were a range of independent sector providers in the county, and where they went depended on their needs. Lots of work had been done to make Wiltshire College as accessible as possible. It was confirmed that the majority of students from Rowdeford progressed to Wiltshire College.

It was also noted that £420,000 had been received in growth as part of the funding settlement. Savings options totalling £1.991million were proposed in the report.

Split Site Allowance

It was noted that this situation should not happen again and that the wording of split site allowance needed to be chosen carefully.

The revenue consequences of split sites needed to be picked up before capital projects of their nature had begun. This was because they could cause significant revenue pressures within a school. A case by case basis was noted as the best form of approach.

There was agreement that a process needed to be put in place.

The Schools Forum would only grant split site allowance if it had been agreed upon in advance. It was recognised in mainstream schools that where provision was open on more than one site a split site allowance may be payable. It was noted that therefore the principle should be the same for special schools to create equity between mainstream and special schools.

It was noted that St Nicholas Special School fitted in with the SEN and Wiltshire Plan, and was therefore eligible for up to £100,000.

Savings Proposals

The Schools Forum considered the list of savings proposals put forward in the report.

The opening of Greentrees Primary School was already delayed until September 2015. A formal letter from Greentrees Chair of Governors was being waited on.

It was asked if savings principle 9 (renegotiate prices with Independent Providers) was in line with Wiltshire Council’s policy of saving 10% on the voluntary sector. It was explained that these would be private providers who worked with a range of local authorities which could have different policies. It would be hard to know the actual figure which would be achieved.

For saving proposal 11 (5% Reduction to top-up funding) it was noted that Minimum Funding Guarantee (MFG) only related to 11d and that it was in place to limit reductions in Special School funding.

Enhanced Learning Provision cuts ranged per school from £500 to £8800. Resource base cuts per school ranged from £200 to £8000.

Savings would take place from April 2015.

It was noted that the figure estimated on the report may not be the figure saved as were unable to definitively predict what they would be. The Schools Forum would be agreeing in principle to the saving action. It was agreed that regular monitoring reports would be brought to Schools Forum to review progress against the agreed savings

Each savings principle was individually voted on.

Resolved

1.     To note the current and projected position in relation to High Needs budgets.

2.     To agree that going forward a Split Site Allowance must be agreed between the school and the local authority prior to the opening of a separate site. Any split site allowance will be payable through top up rates therefore there is not an official split site allowance.

3.     To agree that Saint Nicholas Special School does meet the split site criteria and that it should be awarded £100,000 split site allowance per annum to be paid as an addition to the top up rate.

4.     To agree the following savings:

a.     To recycle unfilled Enhanced Learning Provision places and unused resource base places.

b.    To delay the opening of Greentrees Primary School until September 2016.

c.     To save on place funding following the closure of the resource base at The Manor School.

d.    To delete or hold all current DSG funded vacancies within the SEND service.

e.     To allow secondary schools to roll forward unspent funding for Hard to Place Pupils from 2014-15, but to top up available funding to £250,000.

f.      To renegotiate prices with Independent Providers based on 10% reductions from ISP/ISS package contracts and/or reduced numbers of placements with renegotiation to focus on key transition points.

g.    To cease Transition into Primary School funding.

h.    To reduce top up rates for named pupil allowances; enhanced learning provision; and resource bases for maintained schools and academies by 5%.

i.       To meet the £100,000 shortfall through the Special Schools Budget, and for the budget model to be reworked to create new special school top up rates in accordance with minimum funding guarantee requirements.