Agenda item

Jenny Lawrence introduced the report which presents the 2016/17 Dedicated Schools Grant Settlement for Leicestershire and the 2016/17 Schools Budget.

 

Jenny Lawrence outlined to the meeting that the report brings together the number of reports presented through the 2015/16 financial year and the conversations held.

 

Jenny highlighted paragraph 20 of the report which outlines the purpose and scope of the School Budget.  Jenny added that should approval for the items set out in paragraph 20 not be granted by the Schools’ Forum, the local authority would seek adjudication from the Secretary of State as the local authority had no alternative funding source for these historic budgets.

 

Jenny said that funding for early years was still an estimate as DSG allocations would not be confirmed until January 2017.  The Schools’ Block Funding had slightly improved but was still quite low.  The consultation to establish the government’s proposal on 2017/18 school funding and whether the schools funding formula remains with the local authority has not yet been issued.  Jenny outlined the significant financial and other pressures within Schools Budget and the services that the DSG funds.

 

Jenny referred to paragraphs 28 to 41 and in particular paragraph 29.  The local authority reconsidered the 1% AWPU reduction which was completed alongside the saving target of £3M in high needs.  However the funding gap in SEN budgets was too significant and can only be closed by this action.  The formula was required to be submitted to the EFA in January and the EFA has confirmed that the formula EFA appears to comply to the financial regulations.

 

Jenny outlined the high needs funding issues and the concerns being raised sub-regionally after talking to colleagues. 

 

The DfE have yet to issue a pupil premium settlement for 2016/17 but this was expected in June but has published the per pupil rates.

 

Jenny highlighted that the DfE have very clearly stated that they expect the ESG general funding rate for both local authorities and academies to be removed over the next 3/4 years.

 

Jenny referred to the estimated dedicated schools grant reserve of £5.7M.

 

Jenny reported that high needs for 2016/17 FE places were not fully funded by the EFA and there had been an increased need for places and in particular demand has risen from other local authorities. Local authorities are required to fund places in FE institutions in their area irrespective of there the student resides.

 

The Chair invited any questions/comments from the Schools’ Forum.

 

Suzanne Uprichard asked if Leicestershire was obliged to fund these students who reside out of Leicestershire.  Jenny commented that this was a change in national funding policy and these costs have to be met within the high needs block. 

 

Tony Gelsthorpe asked whether age range change had increased the number of surplus secondary places and that he felt they had had a negative financial impact for the schools concerned.

 

Jean Lewis asked if there would be a reduction in the £248,000 for the commissioning budget for maintained schools causing concern, whilst the number of maintained schools has reduced overall the number of schools requiring LA support.  Lesley Hagger commented there could possibly be a reduction in time as primary schools go in multi academy trusts.

 

Jean Lewis referred to the new SEND regulations and if there had been any thoughts or outline investigation into SEN budgeting on a needs base rather than a formula base.  Jenny Lawrence commented that there was nothing in mainstream formula that reflects SEN money - element of the basic money – notional calculation that really sets out the boundary school funding and local authority funding.  Leicestershire were opposed to this approach - £6K encouragement needs higher.

 

David Thomas referred to Appendix 2 and noted the deprivation section and the reduction in IDACI band 6 and commented that this was amazingly reduced. 

 

Steve McDonald asked if information was available in respect of out-turn expenditure for 2015/16 in relation to age range costs.  Jenny said this could be provided following year end and that the report to the Children and Family Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee on January 18 set out the 2016/17 capital programmes.

 

Callum Orr shared with the Forum members that LSH had written to the local authority and EFA regarding the 1% AWPU reduction and asking for a collaborative approach to a long term strategy for managing school budgets over the next few years. 

 

Graham Bett asked what alternatives to the 1% were looked at.  Jenny Lawrence commented that there was no other alternative to look at and explained the funding issues faced, AWPU is the only universal funding in schools.  Graham commented that money set aside for schools growth could have been reduced as another alternative.

 

Sonia Singleton referred to alternatives and asked if it would have been possible for 2016/17 to have a differing figure by decreasing in other area areas.

 

Jenny Lawrence said that the formula had to be submitted to the DfE by mid-January.  Jenny added that it was not possible to change anything now for 2016/17 and commented that the focus needs to be on working with schools to prepare for 2017/18.

 

Nick Goforth asked why the high needs costs have risen.  Jenny said that volume and costs had risen.  Chris Bristow stated that details of high needs place numbers are on pages 61 and 62 of the Forum papers. 

 

Schools’ Forum approved the retention of budgets to meet the prescribed statutory duties of the local authority. (paragraph 20, item 3).  There was one abstention.

 

Schools’ Forum approved the centrally retained early years funding of £1.649M (paragraph 20, item 4)

 

Schools’ Forum noted the 2016/17 school funding rates (paragraph 30)

 

Schools’ Forum noted the number and average cost of commissioned places for children and young people with High Needs (paragraph 49).

 

Schools’ Forum approved the action to be taken in respect of schools where the Special Educational Needs (SEN) notional budget is insufficient to meet the aggregated value of High Needs Funding Element 2 (paragraph 50).  There were two abstentions.

 

Schools’ Forum noted the average per pupil funding to be taken into account for recoupment for excluded pupils (paragraph 51).

 

Schools’ Forum noted the payment rates for the Early Years Single Funding formula (paragraph 62).

 

Schools’ Forum noted the retention of the Dedicated Schools Grant Reserve and the purposes for which it will be used (paragraph 64).