Agenda item

NB This was originally set as Agenda Item 4 but following discussions during the meeting, it was agreed to move item 6 to item 4, and therefore this was subsequently discussed as agenda item 5

Salik Khan presented the report to the Forum, the purpose of which is to note the intention to transfer 0.5% of Schools Block funds to the High Needs Block for the SEND Investment Fund and approve launching a formal consultation with all schools. The rationale for the transfer is not about covering the High Needs Block deficit, it is a proactive investment aiming to build capacity within mainstream schools and to support pupils with SEMH needs.

The high needs block deficit remains a major financial challenge for the Council. While the proposed transfer doesn’t directly reduce the deficit, it supports early intervention and demand management. The Local Authority’s involvement in the DfE’s Delivering Better Value programme reflects our commitment to sustainable solutions. The SEND Investment Fund is key to this work, helping mainstream schools build capacity for SEMH support. This enables timely intervention in familiar settings, reducing the need for costly specialist placements.

Due to the delayed autumn budget, we’re working to a tight timeline, aiming to submit any requests for the Secretary of State by mid-November. A full consultation will be launched across all schools via multiple channels to encourage engagement and shape the final allocation.

Rebecca Jones expressed scepticism about the consultation process, suggesting that even if schools oppose the funding transfer, the Secretary of State may approve it regardless, so it feels like schools won’t have a real say. Schools are being asked to create recovery plans to manage deficits, yet the transfer reduces their budgets further, making recovery harder. It feels like the local authority are underfunded, so in order to fulfil roles in their services, they are taking more money from individual schools, making it more difficult for them to recover budgets. Essentially, schools are losing their ability to choose how they’re spending their money.

Salik Khan noted the Local Authority are not taking money away from schools, but redirecting it through the High Needs Block to create greater support there. Salik acknowledged Rebecca’s concerns and reiterated that the structure is mandated by national policy therefore needs further conversation at a national level.

Dr Jude Mellor noted that Leicestershire is severely underfunded nationally, an issue which needs addressing further. She questioned what schools could do collectively to advocate for better funding for our Local Authority. Dr Mellor also ask what are the steps and processes between the transfer proposal decision and the Secretary of State’s final decision?

Tim Browne advised that the process is we go out to consultation, the information returned will then be shared widely and is followed by a cabinet review at local level.  Ultimately, the decision on a request for transfer of funds is a political decision made by the Leicestershire County Council Lead Member and Cabinet. Tim advised that he has met with a number of Headteachers over the summer and relayed all of the concerns to our politicians. There is a political process in place and physical representation can be made if someone wanted to choose to do so.

Rebecca Jones questioned how schools can make an informed decision in the upcoming consultation when the impact from last year’s transfer hasn’t yet been experienced or measured? Schools are being asked to give feedback on a funding transfer without having seen any delivery of the initiative or its impact.

Salik Khan confirmed the consultation will follow a similar process to last year, feedback will be gathered from the sector and presented at the next Schools Forum in early November and the deadline for this application is 17th November. The consultation is about the transfer itself, not the outcomes. The fund has a strategic approach, and whilst there have been some teething issues, schools need to trust in the process and know that support will be delivered.

Dan Cleary questioned the ethics of proceeding without clear evidence to the equality impact assessment. Whilst the cabinet could take the view that the assessment can be undertaken on the information we have got, this could be problematic, especially given the potential impact on children with disabilities. Dan commented on the proposed SEND Inclusion Fund package that Renata has presented, pointing out that whilst it looks really good, it’s not credible to say whether this is the case until it has been tested, which puts the Cabinet in a difficult position. Dan suggested as a member of the forum, that we should seek advice on the matter.

Tim Browne acknowledged that there is a timing issue with the consultation period but believes that the package being offered is a really strong offer which has been driven by the needs and wishes of schools. Whilst the impact of this won’t be known in time for the application, as far as possible, there will an equality impact assessment of any proposal that goes to cabinet.

Dr Jude Mellor asked if the consultation can also consider the tangible losses schools have faced due to the fund transfer. She highlighted the need to balance potential benefits of the fund with the measurable losses schools have already experienced, such as reduced staffing and resources.

Tim Browne advised that the consultation is an open opportunity for schools to express their concerns and opinions. The cabinet welcomes and values all views and opinions put forward, and these will be considered in the decision-making.

The LA made the following recommendation:

1.1  That the Schools’ Forum notes the Local Authority’s intention to propose a transfer of funding 0.5% of funding from the Schools Block to the High Needs Block in 2026/27, specifically for the continued investment in the SEN Investment Fund.

1.2  That the Schools Forum approves the Local Authority to proceed with a formal consultation with all schools regarding the proposed 0.5% transfer, recognising its vital role in sustaining and enhancing the capacity of mainstream schools to support pupils with SEMH needs.

Yes: 10                  No: 2            Abstained: 0

1.3  That the schools Forum provides comments on the proposed approach and the mechanisms for ensuring an equitable distribution of the transfer across schools and acknowledges the Local Authority’s intention to seek Secretary of State approval should local consensus not be achieved following the consultation.

There were no further questions or comments from members on this report.