Agenda item

6.1Schools Budget 2015-16 – Section 251 budget submission

Carol Beckman

The local authority submitted the Section 251 budget to the DfE as required at the end of March.  The Section 251 return (S251) details the council’s income and expenditure on schools and education services from the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) and council general income under pre-defined headings.  The Schools Forum receives information on the first half of the return (lines 1.0.1 – 1.8.1) which is known as the Schools Budget.

The table overleaf compares the S251 submission to the draft budget presented to the Schools Forum in December 2014.

The reasons for change are as follows:

1.    Adjustments for the final submission of the Authority Proforma Tool (APT) which is the school funding formula for mainstream maintained schools, academies and free schools.

2.    Adjustments to the high needs places within Barnet

3.    Recalculation of the estimated cost of the free entitlement to early education

4.    Removal of the budget for salary safeguarding in schools – this is now fully delegated to schools.

5.    New budget for Direct Payments to parents for SEN transport

6.    Higher growth budget due to increasing demand.

7.    Lower DSG funding than predicted

As discussed with the Schools Forum previously the 2013/14 underspend (£1.33m) has been used for the growth fund and protection of the gap on gains in the funding formula at +0.5%

The Schools Forum agreed that the first priorities for the 2014/15 underspend should be special educational need and growth.  The final underspend will be over £3m but at this stage only £570,000 has been committed to the budget.  This has been used to support items 5 and 6 above and protect SEN budgets from the lower than expected DSG.

The Dedicated Schools Grant is not yet finalised and in fact the EFA issues adjustments throughout the financial year.  Further reports will be brought to the Schools Forum in July 2015.

6.22016/17 DSG Budget planning

Ian Harrison

6.1       2015/16 Budget                                                                                                           Catherine Peters

CP presented the paper, explaining that the main reasons for differences between the S251 and the draft budget presented to Schools Forum in December 2014 were the adjustments to the Authority Proforma Tool (APT) and Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) actual funding. She added that there was a new budget for Direct Payments to parents for SEN transport.

CB explained that the latest estimate of the DSG, based on announcements from the DfE in December shows a lower total than the original estimate. CP advised that there will be adjustments to the DSG throughout the financial year.

GK reminded people that they should not feel shy about asking questions if they have any as it is important that all members fully understand the issues being discussed.

6.2       2016/17 Budget Planning

IH alerted the SF to the Annual Report to the Children, Education, Libraries and Safeguarding (CELS) Committee regarding a review of EYFF, SFF and High Needs etc. He added there had been complaints regarding a lack of reporting structure and that going forward; there would be more transparency with an annual report from the council.

There were no proposed changes to the SFF yet but CB had been doing some modelling to see if some schools can be helped. Options will be discussed with the SF then will be put forward for consultation.

EYFF: There were some issues raised regarding nursery schools and whether they should receive more money because of the additional costs associated with running a nursery school.

IH stated he would consult on whether the funding would be staying the same or whether the LA would be giving nursery schools more and that this would need to be done by January. He would also be reporting on recent changes to SEN bandings and PRUs (mostly for information), then come back to SF.

IH confirmed consultations would take place in July for EYFF and SFF and a decision for SFF would need to be made by the end of October. He stated that he would report back by the end of the autumn term for EYFF and would be consulting all sectors including PVIs.

KN added that it would be useful to know the dates for the CELS meetings.

SV asked whether the EYFF review would include 2 year old funding and IH confirmed that it would not.

SH asked how the decision would be made and whether there would be some sort of working party so that the Schools Forum would agree the SFF. IH replied that the LA would decide but would look at various options and pressures.  VW said that a working party was a good idea and SH volunteered to be part of it.

SH also asked whether the pressures were seen mainly in primary schools or secondary schools and IH replied that there were pressures coming from both.

Cllr S said that an EYFF review would be welcome and that had PH been present, she would have said there were flaws in the current formula and would have wanted it to be reviewed with the support of the Schools Forum. Cllr S went on to say that, using Freedom of Information requests to all other local authorities, he had found that Barnet was the only council to operate on a flat rate and that Croydon council paid a £96k lump sum per nursery school to cover costs such as business rates.  He added that decisions should be taken by elected members.

SV stated she had attended a PVI network meeting recently where a number of PVIs were also questioning their sustainability on the current flat rate.

IH said that if nursery schools funding is increased, then PVI funding will decrease unless the extra funding came from the SEN budget.

KN asked whether councillors are told about the Schools Forum meetings and Cllr S replied that they are not. VW pointed out that the information about the meetings is on the website and KN said that it might be useful if they are told.  Cllr S said that people won’t see the information unless they are looking for it and that they need to be pointed in the right direction.

GK asked why the consultations are going to take place over the school holidays. IH stated they would start earlier but that a full half term would be allowed to respond.