1. Funding reforms and special provision One LA’s response
Alison Weaver
NATSIP 2012

2. Nottingham Context High levels of identified SEN
Low statementing rates
Range of provision:
Mainstream:
- support service – Deaf/VI/MSI
- SA+ funding – formula delegation and targeted delegation
Resource bases (Deaf)
Special school – with in school/peripatetic specialist support
Out of city

3. Key funding requirements
Schools to cover first £6000 of provision in mainstream schools
Special provision to have base funding up to £10,000 per pupil
Top up funding for all pupils irrespective of placement from high needs block
Pupils with similar needs to be similarly funded whatever the placement
Funding for SEN support to be centrally retained
End to inter-authority recoupment

4. Response to reforms Meetings with:
Finance (feeding into Schools Forum)
Heads and teachers in charge of specialist provision
SEN Strategic leads and finance officers across the region
Transition arrangements in place for
Longer term planning in coming year

5. Issues: mainstream provision
Delegated SA+ provision
Current formula delegation closely matches funding expectations that schools fund first £6,000 (notional SEN Budget)
Targeted delegation (top up)
Unequal distribution of pupils with highest level needs
Inclusive schools penalised as named pupil funding is excluded from MFG
Disincentive to admit “high cost pupils”
Consultation with Schools Forum to ensure sufficient funding available to meet high cost needs
Funding allocation process to be maintained

6. Issues: Specialist provision
Impact on budget stability: schools receive £10,000 per pupil on role + top up
October Census to trigger £10,000
Top up funding will move with child – potential impact on some provisions where high mobility
End of LA recoupment processes
Schools to broker placements and invoice LAs directly
LA no longer gate-keepers of own provision

7. Interim response: funding
Where numbers remain same, standard rate of top up to be calculated for each provision
Agreement across local LAs to share information re top ups and ensure all commissioning at appropriate costs
Development of joint protocols with neighbouring LAs e.g. re notice period of withdrawal of placement
Contingency funding to provide flexibility to protect providers from significant unplanned budget adjustments (unpredictable movements in and out of provision)

8. Interim response: Commissioning and invoicing of placements
From April 2013 LAs will commission places directly from providers
This could have significant administrative and financial implications for schools
Potential for schools to commission brokerage/recoupment support from LA to reduce administrative burden on school
Considering delegating some funding which the special schools can then use to by back a recoupment service

9. Similar funding for similar pupils
Current allocations indicate largely similar costs irrespective of placements
Potential impact for resource bases on high needs budget if all funding to come from high needs block. Previously schools received AWPU for these pupils + additional funding
Resource bases may cost more than provision for similar children elsewhere - justifiable by the management of these pupils in large secondary mainstream schools, curriculum demands etc