Schools Forum 03 October 2013

Election of Chair and Vice Chair

Review of Constitution and Membership Update 3

Refer to Report – main points Main changes - shading Updated to reflect School Funding Reform changes Membership changes Would like Schools Forum view on substitutes and how this should work Would like Schools Forum view on monitoring of attendance 4

Approval Required… The Schools Forum should approve the revised constitution (including Membership changes) Voting: ALL The Schools Forum should seek to appoint to all vacancies The Schools Forum should note what the constitution says in relation to member attendance and substitutes and give a view 5

Education Funding Agency - Presentation 6

People Directorate 7

8

Notification of DSG 2013/14 9

£ 000 DSG Approved by Schools forum for Budget Shares (Based on EFA DSG settlement figure Dec 2012)258,444 DSG Settlement as published on DfE Website July ,471 Variance increase/(Decrease) 27 Variance made up of adjustments to:- Early Year block 21 Share of NMSS pot 5 Roundings Academies recoupment = £54.0M – (DSG available = £204.4M) 1 Chief Finance Officer 13/14 Budget Statement

Funding and Budget Setting 2014/15 11

Level of DSG is influenced by October census Detailed PPR to the next Schools Forum to inform budget setting Items we already know about… –Inflation – all providers –Rates adjustments –Adjustments from previous years –Living Wage –Reserves proposal – Living wage, schools general, SEND –Underspend/Overspend – top up funding, dedelegated, growth fund Any changes from Schools Forum Funding Sub- Group Initial Budget Setting

Report back from Fair Funding Consultation 13

Refer to Report Main points Consultation 2 nd September (2 weeks) Minimum directed changes for 2014/15 –Pupil Mobility Factor (& resource) –Prior Attainment Factor –De-delegated services –Growth Fund –Living Wage –Others (Primary Prior Attainment / LAC / Lump sum / Sparsity) –Primary / Secondary Funding Ratio 7 responses

Pupil Mobility Factor (& resource) –10% Threshold –103 schools down to 31 schools (Primary 84 to 29) –Unit value the same (Primary £377 & Secondary £428) –Resource redistributed through IDACI deprivation factor Prior Attainment Factor (secondary only) –English or Maths –Increase from 2,203 pupils 2013/14 to 4, /15 –Unit factor falls from £3,019 to £1,332 to ensure overall level of resource remains the same 15 Refer to Report Main points

De-delegated services –Further agenda item and report Growth Fund –Further agenda item and report Living Wage –School Forum approved funding from DSG reserve for 13/14 costs –Direct through budget setting process (one-off) –Ongoing costs funded through budget setting process 16 Refer to Report Main points

De-delegation, Growth Fund and Central Spend 17

reform directed that a number of centrally held budgets should be delegated to schools Mainstream schools can opt to de-delegate these services/budgets (agree a local pooling arrangement to allow the function/ service to continue). 2013/14 –primary phase agreed to de-delegate all of the services (except a small part of MGSS), –secondary phase agreed to de-delegate with the exception of Learning & Behaviour Support Service and Trade union Supply cover. A decision can be taken to de-delegate services that were not de-delegated previously Refer to Report Main points – De-delegation

De-delegation: 2013/14 Amounts as per S251

The Schools Forum should agree the de- delegation for mainstream schools Voting: Primary and Secondary School member representatives will decide for their phase Approval – De-delegation

2013/14 reform - funding for infant class size and pre- 16 basic need growth could no longer be delegated in school budget shares LAs were required to hold a central growth fund, and then agree the criteria for the fund with the schools Forum In 2013/14 an amount of £1,038,556 was held and operated using criteria agreed with the Schools Forum (section 1.6 of report) For any academies qualifying for the funding, needs to apply until August following financial year Refer to Report Main points – Growth Fund

The Schools Forum should agree to the continued holding of some resource centrally to support additional classes needed to meet the infant class size regulation, and to support growth in pre-16 pupil numbers to meet basic need The Schools Forum should agree to the proposed criteria (set out in section 1) for the growth fund Voting: All Members Please note the final amount within the growth fund is determined by October 13 census. Therefore the amount will be ratified as part of the budget setting process at a future meeting. Approval – Growth Fund

2013/14 reform - there are a number of areas of central expenditure budget which the Schools Forum must approve These cannot exceed the value of the budget in 2012/13 The items are admissions, carbon reduction commitment, servicing of School Forums, contribution to combined budgets, termination of employment costs, and SEN transport costs Schools Forum Funding Sub Group could look at the detail of this alongside their review of previous year funding decisions Table Schools Forum Funding Group proposed terms of reference Refer to Report Main points – Central spend

Central spend: item ultimately needs approval, but for today we are seeking the Forum’s view, and approval on a way forward –Establish the Schools Forum Funding Sub Group to review the level of central expenditure in relevant areas –Recommendations made to the Schools Forum at the January meeting in relation to central expenditure. Interim feedback will be brought to the November meeting. –January Meeting: approve the central spend and give a view on what action, if any, should be taken in relation to previous years funding decisions. –Voting: All Members NB. This group will also look at previous headroom decisions Gives a View – Central spend

School Balances 25

Schools Forum were concerned at high level of school balances at end of 12/13 financial year Officers undertook to do some analysis and report back to the Forum on this, along with further action Link found between ongoing high level of balances and weaker school performance LA want to ensure schools can spend this money rather than clawback Closer working between SFO and EIA Advice to Headteachers and governors on how this one–off resource can be used Refer to Report Main points

28

Headroom Priorities Funding Group 29

Already discussed the reconvening of this group in relation to agreeing central spend for specific items This group will also review previous headroom funding decisions Point to note is that the School Funding Reform has superseded some of those previous decisions, i.e. –Some items were delegated –Some items in high needs block Are Schools Forum happy to proceed as proposed in earlier item Way forward

School Forum Training 31

AOB – Minimum Funding Guarantee Disapplication 32

Minimum Funding Guarantee protects schools against their previous years level of funding at a per pupil level Where we make changes to the funding, we can ask to disapply certain items of funding This is to ensure that the change can flow through, rather than triggering (or not) a protection mechanism We need approval from DfE for MFG disapplications, and DfE would expect to see Schools Forum approval Disapplication not approved does not have any bearing on whether we go ahead with the change Background

In 2014/15 we will direct some funding from reserves for 2013/14 part year living wage cost If we do not disapply for purposes of the MFG calculation, this funding will be treated as an increase This may mean that some schools that should be on the MFG would not be, and will affect gains and level of topslice We will want to apply again for 2015/16 to exclude this one-off funding from the baseline Do Schools Forum support the MFG disapplication in relation to the one-off funding for the living wage – estimated level of funding £281K? Voting:ALL Proposal – Living wage

If the secondary sector opt to longer operate a system of charging and reimbursement for excluded pupils, we will not have the resource for their alternative provision We will therefore look to reduce the resource that was delegated to the secondary sector for that purpose If we do not disapply for purposes of the MFG calculation this will be treated as a funding decrease This may mean that some schools are on MFG and protected, where they shouldn’t be and will affect gains and levels of topslice Proposal – Former Pupil Retention Grant

As the funding of the MFG is not phase specific this could impact on the primary sector too Do Schools Forum support the MFG disapplication in relation to the Former Pupil Retention Grant – proposed level of funding £468K? Voting:ALL Proposal – Former Pupil Retention Grant