Agenda item

Jenny Lawrence presented the Schools Budget report, which fulfils the LA’s roles as per the schools’ budget, sets out the decisions required from Schools Forum, and builds upon several reports presented during 2024-25. The LA sought permission from Secretary of State to transfer 0.5% from the Schools Block to a SEND Investment Fund, which the Secretary of State approved. Jenny sought information on how other LAs have undertaken Schools Block transfers and other requests for approval from the Secretary of State, but the Department for Education (DfE) could not provide this information.

The report outlined an affordability gap caused by an increase in Free School Meals (FSM) eligibility, in which schools are funded from the October 2023 census, but LAs are funded from the October 2024 census. This left the LA with a financial gap of approximately £700k between the funding received and that required to deliver the National Funding Formula (NFF).

The report noted eleven primary schools experiencing falling rolls which will experience reductions in 2025-26 budgets. Jenny Lawrence noted it would be useful for a non-headteacher from Forum to be involved in discussions in developing the SEND Investment Fund.

David Warwick questioned whether the £2.75bn increase in schools spending announced by the Secretary of State in October was reflected in budgets. Jenny Lawrence confirmed all funding provided by the DFE had been factored into 2025-26 budgets.

Phil Lewin questioned whether there would be communications with schools to outline deductions to funding. Jenny Lawrence confirmed that schools will observe their deductions in Section 251 or GAG funding statements, so would see the impact of the capping to enact the Schools Block transfer and the affordability gap. The LA will include reference to this in the school 2025-26 budget briefing aimed at maintained schools but partially applicable to academies.

Dr Jude Mellor questioned whether the LA could financially support schools impacted by declining birth rates and decreasing rolls in primary schools. The Growth fund is used to fund school growth from September to March, as well as fund opening schools. Jenny Lawrence confirmed that the growth fund can be used to fund falling rolls. However, the criteria set for schools to be eligible for this funding is specific; it is triggered by sudden drops in pupil numbers and requires numbers to return to that level within three to five years. Statistics show a steady decline in pupils, but no Leicestershire schools qualify for declining numbers funding.

Rebecca Jones questioned how the LA sets criteria for falling rolls funding, this is a policy agreed by Schools Forum. In relation to housing growth Jenny Lawrence clarified that the DfE compares school capacity with future pupil forecasts. The data provided by the DfE shows that there are no schools within the authority that meet these criteria. Rebecca questioned whether schools could address this funding with the LA to discuss their eligibility. Jenny confirmed that a school could raise this with the LA.

Suzanne Uprichard noted that housing rates may takes years to reflect actual need; houses built may not create expected pupil numbers, which makes this an unreliable factor. Simon Grindrod also questioned the requirement for building developers to consider school placements as part of planning. Jenny Lawrence confirmed that significant housing developments must consider additional infrastructure as part of planning and the Section 106 agreement between the County Council, District and Borough planning departments, and the developer, which includes roads, medical provisions, and schools. Jenny referred to the Planning Obligation policy on the LA website which requires developers to consider the number of houses to be built, the type of houses, and the expected ratio of children compared to local capacity; if this capacity is exceeded, the Section 106 agreement requires developers to fund school expansion or the build of new schools. David Warwick referred to reports online which discussed how developers can evade Section 106 responsibilities, however Jenny assured the forum that Leicestershire has a good history of holding developers to account for delivery the Section 106 agreement.

Jason Brooks questioned whether the LA had specific plans on how the 0.5% transfer to the SEND Investment Fund would be used. Alison Bradley shared that school leaders have volunteered to be part of this discussion with the LA to ensure strong governance and reporting on SEND Investment Fund spending. Agreements to SEND Investment Fund spending is expected to be in place by September 2025 with full visibility and transparency on implementation, impact, and how impacts will be measured. Jason has agreed to join this discussion – invites to meetings will be shared within the next three to four weeks.

NB. Following the meeting, it was agreed that Martin Towers and Suzanne Uprichard will also be invited to discussions with the LA regarding SEND Investment Fund spending.

The LA made the following recommendations:

1.    That Schools Forum approved the retention of the budget to fund future school growth (Paragraph 17, Item 2).

2.    That Schools Forum approved the retention of budgets to meet the prescribed statutory duties of the Local Authority and to meet historic costs (Paragraph 17, Items 3 & 4).

3.    That Schools Forum approved the centrally retained early years funding (Paragraph 17, Item 5).

4.    That Schools Forum note approved the use of the exceptional premises factor in respect of schools that incur rental costs for premises and / or sports facilities and the adjustments made in respect of age range changes. (Paragraph 38).

Dr Jude Mellow questioned whether premature retirement costs are getting larger. Jenny Lawrence confirmed that premature retirement costs cannot increase. And will reduce with time. Central school services contribute £673k to the £1.3m cost.

5. That Schools Forum noted the actions taken by the Local Authority in applying Capping to the National Funding Formula for the purposes of effecting a 0.5% transfer of funding from the Schools Block to the High Needs Block and to address an affordability gap (Paragraphs 36 - 42).
6. That Schools Forum noted the number and average cost of commissioned places for children and young people with High Needs (Paragraph 63).
7. That Schools Forum noted the approach to setting Early Years Provider payment rates for 2025-26 (Paragraph 68).

Beverley Coltman noted that fees are set at beginning of April and settings endeavour to give parents one full month notice for FEEE increases. Beverley questioned when funding rates would be announced. Jenny Lawrence confirmed that communications regarding funding rates are ready and will be released by the LA soon. LAs are required to issue rates by the end of February. Rates will continue to be set to enable the recovery of the early years deficit.

8.    That Schools Forum approved the actions taken to align the Notional SEN Budget to the SEND population in schools and the action to be taken in respect of schools where it is insufficient to meet the aggregated value of High Needs Funding Element 2 (Paragraphs 76-78).

9.    That Schools Forum noted the average per pupil funding to be considered for recoupment for excluded pupils and other purposes (Paragraph 79).