Agenda item

The budget outturn is provided for information & discussion.

This item was provided to inform members of the LA’s financial position in relation to the Schools’ Budget.

Paragraph 4 provides an analysis on areas that the LA has an underspend or overspend, including £6.7m overspent on High Needs, £1m overspend on EYs Block, and a £1.8m underspend on the schools’ block. The High Needs overspend will be tackled by TSIL to ensure sustainability whilst also ensuring that the needs of schools are met.

Paragraph 5 outlines this as the third year in succession in which Leicestershire has opened additional schools. There is uncertainty around when that growth will hit due to the current housing market. The DfE are looking to standardise how school growth is funded and will move towards a standardised approach in 2024-25.

Paragraph 6 details that maintained school balances have decreased by £2.2m. This reduction is consistent with messages from schools regarding financial pressures which may also impact on High Needs position. The LA is trying to understand the significant factors of these pressures but the unique position and circumstances to schools makes this difficult. The LA will continue to scrutinise financial plans.

A financial risk assessment is undertaken for schools including their financial performance from the previous years to assess adherence to budget plans. Schools with the highest concern will receive visits from someone within the finance team as a method of support.

Simon Grindrod has expressed concern that the pressure to reduce expenditure on High Needs has led to either a reduction or a delay of provisions. Current provisions are not allowing schools to fund the requirements of EHCPs. Simon noted that a reduced overspend is not beneficial if it impacts the provisions available. Furthermore, Simon felt that there needs to be an investigation into the provision of plans and their timeliness; the whole process must be considered for discussion, how provisions are funded and how the LCC plans to break on its expenses.

Jenny Lawrence has clarified that there is no planned break on the LA’s High Needs spend. The reported reduction in overspend is due to a slower roll out than expected in opening new resource bases in schools with some places delayed due to planning issues and age profiles for the school.

The LA seeks to balance its funding for SEND budgets with the needs of the children. It has been acknowledged that there are problems revolving around timely and accurate payments to schools, which has been raised frequently by schools for LA attention. The TSIL workstream is looking at finance workstream improvements and more robust processing. It would be beneficial to bring members of the Leicestershire Schools’ Forum into discussions regarding workstream improvements.

Robert Martin commented that it would be interesting to acquire the views of schools and their experiences. The LA saving on overspends does not help children with SEND. In addition, each decline in provisions results in EHCPs which cost more to support and transitions to special provisions schools, which will ultimately cost the LA more money. Robert expressed that a review of schools’ views should be presented to the forum at future meetings.

Robert Martin reported instances around the county in which schools aren’t receiving SEND funding; parents have been told by SENCOs that provisions are unavailable due to delays in funding. Whilst these reports were anecdotal and second hand, Robert noted that these reports had come in from various sources.

Jenny Lawrence provided clarification to the discussion, noting that the LA was not reporting an underspend but was reporting a reduction in deficit. Furthermore, where some schools have expressed concern that they are not receiving funding to cover EHCPs, Jenny noted that the first £6,000 to support EHCPs is the responsibility of the school and not the LA as per legislation.

Carolyn Lewis has questioned the collective understanding of the notional £6,000 to be paid by schools to cover EHCPs. Not every child on the SEND register requires funded support but Carolyn noted schools’ understanding that where a child has an EHCP it should fall to the LA to fund this entirely. Carolyn was concerned that there wasn’t a shared understanding of what the £6,000 is or how it should be applied; she has questioned whether the DfE should provide clarification on this. Simon Grindrod noted pushback from schools that the £6,000 expectation is questionable.

Jenny Lawrence clarified that the £6,000 expectation for schools to cover EHCPs was written in legislation and was not subject to LA interpretation. Jenny has previously issued guidance, information, and structure charts on how funding for SEND works; this can be provided again for forum members: High Needs Funding: 2022 to 2023 Operational Guide, School’s Operational Guide: 2022 to 2023, The Notional SEND Budget for Mainstream Schools: Operational Guidance.

Simon Grindrod has requested the opportunity to present case studies to the Leicestershire Schools’ Forum to explore different provisions for SEND.

Alison Bradley noted that concerns for SEND funding are considered as part of the TSIL workstream. Comments from maintained schools are fed back to DfE and representatives are encouraged to sit as part of the workstream. Recommended changes are done within the system of TSIL and must not be done in isolation.

Paragraph 10 refers to the 3 Tier intervention programme from the DfE. The highest tier covers safety valve agreements for highest deficits, agreed actions, and additional funding from DfE. The second tier delivers better value within SEND, which is where the Leicestershire LA sits; its deficits are concerning but not as high and does not require immediate intervention. The lowest tier of intervention consists of discussions between the respective LA and the DfE. Leicestershire LA is in phase two of this programme and is confident that it is moving in the right direction, which is reflected in DfE improvement plans.

The LA attempted research into what causes surplus or deficit within schools – there is no significant correlation between the size of a school and its deficit, the National Funding Formula appears to be less beneficial to schools with less than 220 pupils. There are many factors which affect the financial position of schools, and the environments are complex, making identifying causes difficult.

A financial planning tool is available to maintained schools and some academies, which can also be accessed by governors to assess their schools’ finances against efficiency models issued by the DfE, giving them a means to challenge their schools. Broader work around this has been attempted through Leicestershire Education Excellence Partnership (LEEP) but it has been delayed due to staff turnover.