Agenda item

To update the Forum with regards to the 2016-17 DSG for the Schools Block

It was noted that the Reports were arranged in the incorrect order, in correlation to the agenda items. Page 21 of the Agenda Supplement, ‘Budget Update 2016-17 – Schools Block’ listed under agenda item 8, corresponded to agenda item 7 – ‘Budget Update – DSG Schools Block’. The listed agenda item 7 – ‘Review of High Needs Places for 2016-17’ was noted as being correctly placed.

Members were given time to note the contents of the Report (listed agenda item 7 and 8).

Grant Davis was in attendance to provide an update on 2016-17 Schools Block. Mr Davis noted that in 2015-16 Wiltshire had received a portion of the national share of funding, which was £5.7 million, he explained that this had moved Wiltshire from being the 6^th worst funded County to 7^th worst funded County. Mr Davis commented that the EFA funding for 2016-17 represented a roll-forward from 2015-16.

Mr Davis stated that SBUF (Schools Block Unit of Funding) had seen an increase of 4p for 2016-17, which totalled £4,302.45. The EFA were basing funding on 60,467 pupils and this figure had been compiled from the October census. He noted that the October 2015 census was the driving force of funding allocation.

Mr Davis commented that there had been a small movement in the number of maintained schools across to the academy sector and that there had been an additional 841 pupils into the primary sector and thus, that there had been a growth in primary school numbers, but not in secondary school numbers.

It was proposed that an amendment be made to paragraph 9, on page 22 of the Agenda Supplement to: ‘That the Schools Forum note the final proposed value of the SBUF for 2016-17’.

Having been put to the meeting, it was

Resolved:

      i.        That the Schools Forum note the final value of the SBUF.

    ii.        That the Schools Forum note the final settlement and the revised pupil numbers for 2016-17.

The Chairman then drew attention to listed agenda item 7 - ‘Review of High Needs Places for 2016-17’ and Grant Davis presented a report on the item.

Mr Davis explained to the Schools Forum that the EFA had asked for the revision of High Needs Places (HNP), in order to ensure that the correct number of HNP were available in both the primary and secondary school areas. The Schools Forum had agreed to implement this change and to carefully review HNP in all primary and secondary schools at its previous meeting in November 2015.

Mr Davis reminded the Schools Forum that appropriate pupils need to be married up with the appropriate places and that the Local Authority had to agree the number of places with the academy. Mr Davis asked the Schools Forum to note the table in paragraph 7 on page 8 of the Agenda Supplement, he explained that this table noted the numbers that the Schools Forum was looking to move to for 2016-17 represented an overall reduction in the number of places.

It was explained that this revised number of places would be introduced in the academic year from September 2016, despite the fact that the Local Authority works off the financial year.

It was discussed that recoupment would continue from April to September 2016 and that the revised number of places would be made known in April, which would ensure that there is time to make up recoupment.

Mr Davis stated that the EFA were required to work off an academic year and that recoupment would take place.

The point was raised that the words ‘financial saving’ could be misinterpreted and that being in a position to save is not the sole reason for revising the number of high needs places. Discussion was had about the fact that a ‘financial saving’ is an inaccurate phrase, as this process is trying to ensure that the money given will follow the child throughout their educational career and that emphasis needed to be put on the fact that money would be intended to follow the child.

Mr Davis commented that the tables listed in paragraph 12 of page 9 of the Agenda Supplement showed the projection of expenditure and not actual expenditure and that these figures would be met by the recoupment process.

It was discussed that a different sentence about recoupment to paragraph 12, on page 9 of the Agenda Supplement be noted and that the words ‘a significant saving’ in paragraph 12 of page 9 be corrected to ‘whilst there will be a place correction in the 2016-17 financial year, the full financial correction would not be achieved until 2017-2018 when all schools should be funded according to their revised number of planned places’; in order to reflect a more accurate reality of money following the child throughout their educational career.

Having been put to the meeting, with the amendments of:

·         ‘financial saving’ being re-worded and emphasis to be placed on the fact that money would follow that child;

·         A sentence on recoupment being added into paragraph 10 on page 8 of the agenda supplement;

·         That the words ‘a significant saving’ in paragraph 12 of page 9 of the agenda supplement be corrected to ‘whilst there will be a place correction in the 2016-17 financial year, the full financial correction would not be achieved until 2017-2018 when all schools should be funded according to their revised number of planned places’.

 It was resolved:

To note the content of the Report.

To continue to recoup for High Needs Places for the 2106-17 year