Agenda item

1.   

2.   

3.   

4.   

5.   

6.   

7.   

7.1.  2014/15 Budget Monitoring

a.    Provisional Outturn position

The outturn position will be presented to the Performance and Contract Management Committee on 12^th May 2015 and will be provided to School Forum members once the Committee Papers have been published.

Recommendation:

To note the final outturn position for 2014/15.

Previous reports to the Forum:

• 7 May 2014 noted budget changes
• 9 October 2014 noted revisions to the budget and quarter 1 monitoring position
• 4 December 2014 noted revisions to the budget and quarter 2 monitoring position

·         5 February 2015 noted quarter 3 monitoring position

b.    2 year old trajectory funding

Free Early Education for Two Year Olds

Summary

This paper requests that the underspend from  the 2014/15 allocation for the Free Early Education for Two Year Olds (FEE2) scheme be carried forward to continue to support the delivery of the offer into 2015-16. The total amount to roll over is £735,208 in order to facilitate capacity building.

Background Information

The FEE2 scheme became a statutory duty for targeted groups of children to access a free early education place in quality childcare provision from 1 September 2013. This entitlement expanded to an additional group of children from 1 September 2014; the result being that an estimated 2014 children became entitled within the borough.

The eligibility criteria to access FEE2 places are:

·           Children from families in receipt of qualifying benefits for the Free School Meals (FSM) criteria or

·           Children whose families receive Working Tax credits (income less than  £16,190 per year)

·            Children who are looked after by the local authority

·           Children with a current statement of special educational needs (SEN) or an education, health and care plan

·           Children who receive Disability Living Allowance;

·           Children who have left care through special guardianship or through an adoption or residence order.

There have been 1550 two year olds accessing their entitlement across 2014/15. 75% were places in the PVI sector, 15% children’s centres, 5% with child-minders and 5% in nursery schools.

Not all children take up their entitlement or access their full 570 hours (15 hours per week for 38 weeks). Additionally there are still some families that are not aware of the scheme or unable to access a place in their preferred setting.

There have been lower than anticipated take up rates and therefore the full quota of place funding has not been utilised. This has resulted in an underspend of £1,385,116[1] (from 2014/15 place funding and trajectory allocation). A programme to rapidly increase 2 year old numbers has been put in place, a key plank of which will require engagement and participation in the programme by Barnet Schools.

The LA has a statutory duty to deliver places to all eligible children that require one. Additionally, there is an expectation from the DfE that up to 2014 places are delivered for all eligible two year olds in the borough. Barnet is currently delivering places to 43% of eligible children and there is therefore a reputational risk to the borough.

The DfE has advised that any underspend on the two year old funding should be rolled forward, if possible, to support the continued development of places. Currently, Barnet is not providing the number of required places as set by the DfE and as such is under close scrutiny. If there is no significant improvement in places, this will lead to reputational damage (e.g. national and regional league tables). Vitally there remain a number of disadvantaged two-year olds not accessing the appropriate support and action in this area must be viewed as a priority.

From April 2015, place funding is allocated to LAs based on participation rates rather than the estimated number of places. Based on the January Early Years Census returns, the current take-up levels will result in a significant reduction to DfE funding in this area and will negatively impact on the ability for Barnet to deliver the programme. Barnet has a statutory duty to fund places for all children that require one and, as the take up rates continue to increase, additional burdens will be placed on the DSG budgets to fund the additional cohort of children throughout the year.

Implementation plan

In order to increase capacity for two year old places the following activities will be progressed:

-          Capacity building with childcare providers, in particular schools and council managed childcare settings.

-          Having sufficient (time limited) staff for a clear focus and support to providers to establish places

-          A bespoke package of assistance will be developed for schools in order to help them deliver the required places in the targeted areas of the borough.

-          Continued development of the IT infrastructure programme to ensure the journey for parents and providers is as simple as possible

-          Targeted marketing for ‘hard to reach’ families using intelligence from take up data

-          Identification of eligible families who are then engaged using a focused outreach programme.

The DfE have identified Barnet as a borough with significantly low take up rates compared to our statistical neighbours and London as whole. This scrutiny has resulted in a visit from the DfE with the Family Services Senior Leadership Team and communication to the Chief Executive regarding performance.

Recommendation

Family Services are requesting that Schools Forum approves the use of £735,208 from the anticipated 2014/15 underspend to enable place development to continue, specifically focussing on place development in schools.

   7.1. 2014/15 Budget Monitoring

a)         Provisional Outturn Position

CP presented the papers for budget monitoring and added that the outturn position was presented to the Performance and Contract Management Committee on Tuesday 12th May 2015.

She stated there was an underspend of £3.5 million, which was mainly due to the underspend on two year olds and  by a reduced requirement for contingency funding as there was better quality information available for top-ups and a reduction in expensive placements.

She said that the projected underspend in February was £3.2m and that the increase was largely due to high needs adjustments. JG commented that although £3.5 million sounds like a lot of money, when shown as a percentage of the total budget, 1.67% does not seem like a lot.

SL asked what the in-year bursaries were for and CP replied that they were Post-16 bursaries to be passported to schools from the EFA.  Cllr S recommended a charitable trust that exists in Chipping Barnet that schools may be able to request funds from and KN suggested it could be put in the Schools Circular.

GK noted that the underspend was creeping up but said he recognises it is the result of good management of budgets and IH reiterated that the underspend was mainly due to an underspend on High Needs and 2 year olds.

b)         Two Year Olds

IH presented the papers in DT’s absence, asking for a carry forward of £735,208 for 2 year olds in order to facilitate capacity building.

He stated that Barnet has not provided as high a percentage of places to eligible children as the DfE wanted and that there were many reasons for this, including having places in the right location and informing families properly.

The DfE has recommended that LAs use their underspend to get place numbers up. The proposal is for £735k of the underspend to be used and an implementation plan has been provided. This sum of money will be used to encourage schools to take 2 year olds and inform them that there is support available. Targeted marketing will be used, aimed at hard to reach families (to make them aware of the scheme) and better identification of eligible families. LL asked what the targeted marketing would involve. IH stated  that this was still being developed..

IH highlighted that funding to the LA would no longer be allocated based on target places but on actual take-up. SV said that private nurseries don’t feel the money is enough. She stated that she has turned away two year olds but could expand and that nobody had consulted her about taking on two year olds. IH stated that there would be staffing and capital funding to make it possible.

VW stated that in terms of schools providing places for two year olds, Barnet was the second worst in the country, with a very low take-up which wasn’t unusual for LAs in London. There are also pressures from reception classes as there is a high demand for funding for reception places.

She said that the LA has not yet managed to engage schools and that so far it had mainly been PVIs that have risen to the challenge. A large campaign will be required to encourage schools in Barnet as many eligible families identified don’t want to send their children to childminders, they prefer schools or nurseries and so better targeting will be required.

LL said that the new software for identifying families looks difficult to use.

VW said that there needs to be a step change in capacity. IH added that Barnet has reached 43% of the target 40% of eligible children in the borough and that although we don’t expect 100%, Barnet is still below the national average of 50%.

SV added that with two year old provision, families need to be involved too and VW added that in some boroughs, parents can stay with their children at the settings.

SL said that from the schools point of view, there were practicalities such as staffing and accommodation issues that may cause difficulties and that they would need a lot more support. She added that they were already having recruitment problems for older children as it was and that there were also many other extra issues. IH stated that direct assistance would be available.

VW stated that she was working with the 3 nursery hub to provide support to other schools as there had been government discussions about doubling FEEE.

KN highlighted that there would be recruitment issues to which IH replied that the council would help with recruitment but that it was a secondary issue because getting provision in the right place and finding the families were the first issues.

SL asked whether the issue was empty two year old places and IH replied that the council can offer places. SV said that their setting was turning children away.

GK suggested physical space might be a problem. IH agreed and said he wouldn’t pursue schools where there was no scope to find extra space but that space for 2 year olds on other premises was also an option.

SL asked what would happen with regards to all the other extra regulations and VW said that a headteachers pack is being produced.

SV asked where the greatest demand was in the borough and IH confirmed that it was the west of the borough.

Proposal: £735,208 from underspend requested to spend on 2 year old place development.

Cllr S asked whether SF could make decisions and IH replied that they could.

KN asked what else the money could be spent on and IH said it would still leave £2.8 million.

Vote:

For: 15

Against: 0