Agenda item

The report prepared by Grant Davis (Schools Strategic Financial Support Manager) seeks to brief Schools Forum and agree a set of questions to be sent out to all schools in October 2020.

Grant Davis (Schools Strategic Financial Support Manager) referred to the report which sought to brief Schools Forum about the proposed consultation to schools and to agree the questions to be sent out to schools.  Grant highlighted the following:

·       De-delegation of a limited number of budgets/services was available to maintained schools only and they would be consulted on their views/wishes for the following to be retained centrally;

i)        Free School Meal Eligibility Service

ii)      Licences (Access Budget Planning (formerly called HCSS))

iii)     Trade Union Facilities costs

iv)     Maternity costs

v)      Ethnic Minority Achievement Service

vi)     Travellers Education Service

vii)   Behaviour Support Service.

·       The results of the consultation would then be brought back to Schools Forum for a decision to be made by the maintained schools’ representatives. 

·       There were a number of options available to the voting representatives.  If the consensus is for the LA to de-delegate the above services then they would retain a level of funding and provide the service centrally for the schools and this would also guarantee a level of service;

·       Appendix 1 lists the questions that will form part of the consultation – this is a simple form that asks if each service should be delegated or retain centrally for the LA to provide;

·       Appendix 2 letter sets out a letter received from Trade Unions who have written to the LA to pass on to their Schools Forums their request that you continue to support de-delegation;

A maintained primary school representative asked if it would be possible to include on the consultation form the value of budgets available so that schools could assess if they were not looking to delegate the service what effect that would have on their individual budgets and a figure to show what percentage of a schools budget share was given to the de-delegate services.  Grant confirmed that this information could be included.

·       Last year the Forum had agreed to transfer £2 million (0.7%) from the Schools block to the high needs block but this disapplication request was denied by the Secretary of State who agreed to a 0.5% or £1.465 million transfer;

·       As highlighted earlier there was an increase in funding coming through from schools funding and the high needs block which sees £700 million of funding for high needs of which Wiltshire’s share will be £5.5 million.  Our DSG reserve is in a deficit position as we move forward, currently showing as £11.3 million and likely to move upwards;

·       There will need to be a discussion on Schools views on transferring the funding across from the school’s block to help with high needs and there were a range of options set out in the questionnaire in Appendix 3.  The per pupil values of any proposed transfer had been included.  If the DfE were consistent that they would only allow a transfer of up to 0.5% then that would equate to a value of £21.90 per pupil;

·       The consultation would give schools the opportunity to express their views and suggest any other ideas to fill the funding gap for high needs;

A secondary academy representative suggested that there could be an indication of what a transfer would mean for the high needs deficit over time e.g. if all things remained the same then a transfer of for example 0.5% would mean that the deficit would be addressed in x number of years. For schools a transfer would be affecting their budgets but if they could see what a difference it may make it may be better understood. what a difference it would make – it means that at this rate in 5 years at this rate in 10 years.

Marie Taylor reported that in the high needs recovery plan they had assumed a 0.5% transfer based on the decision taken by the Secretary of State last year to not go above this percentage and it was assumed that this approach would continue.  Also, to remember is that when the NFF hard formula is implemented Officers believe that the LA would lose the ability to transfer between blocks – at present there is a lot unknown.  However, Marie felt it would be possible to include information about the impact on the high needs block in future years within the questionnaire.

The Chair asked for clarification – if 100% of schools agreed to a £2 million transfer between blocks – then he assumed that would not be agreed by the Secretary of State.  Grant responded that the authority would need to have a very compelling argument for it to transfer above the 0.5% as in the last financial year only two LA’s did transfer above 0.5%.  Unless they LA could show that all schools in Wiltshire were supporting a higher transfer it would be quite tricky to argue.  It was probably more about sending the message that we would want the 0.5% being added to the high needs budget as there were funding issues there so that they had that clear message from us.

The Chair felt that having an option to support more than a 0.5% transfer was not really within the schools’ gift but that it would show if there was significant support in Wiltshire for a bigger transfer. 

Marie Taylor clarified that if schools voted against a higher transfer then then the Secretary of State would definitely not support a disapplication request and even with schools support last year the application was still not approved.  The questionnaire would be sent out to schools after half term.

Resolved:

That Schools Forum:

i)               Agree the consultation questions for maintained schools around delegation/de-delegation of budgets for central services within the schools’ block as set out in Appendix 1, subject to the inclusion of values of delegation as requested.

ii)             Agree the consultation questions for all schools around setting the 2021/22 Schools Budget as set out in Appendix 3, subject to the inclusion of detail of the impacts of the high needs deficit in future years.