Agenda item

FB presented the quarter 3 budget monitoring report, which shows no overall change to the schools budget. There has been a £1.4m movement as a result of revised High Needs top-up funding, revised 2, 3 & 4 year olds uptake figures and reduced Early Years Vulnerable Children (EYVC) expenditure. Appendix 1 of the papers shows the current projection of £1.7m underspend.

PH queried the fact that EYVC is now underspending when schools are bearing the cost and have been advised there should be no new referrals.  She asked if the application process for EYVC funding would now be reopened.  FB advised that she should contact the Family Services (Social Care) team for up-to-date guidance.

IH advised that there has been no detail from the DfE regarding the National Funding Formula consultation. It is not known whether any proposals will be a formula at school level or Local Authority level, but it is highly likely to be a move away from historic spend/ funding levels and there is an expectation that it will mean lower funding for London authorities (especially Inner London) but higher funding for northern authorities.

A number of organisations have undertaken some modelling, but as detail is not known these are not reliable. However, the London Councils group modelling suggests a change to LB Barnet of approximately -2%.  London Councils have proposed to the DfE that other LA funding levels should be brought up rather than London being reduced.  The consultation is expected in the next couple of months, although the government is aware that the timing is affected by the GLA election purdah period.  Any protection during the transition period is not known, nor is the timescale for this transitional protection. The proposals are expected to cover the High Needs and Schools Block first, with Early Years possibly following at a later stage. The proposals are also likely to include cuts to the Education Support Grant (ESG) for both maintained and academies/ free schools.

ML commented that the F40 (40 lowest funded authorities) website is accessible, and shows new proposals that indicate LB Barnet would lose ~£167 per pupil.  CM advised that current indications are that the government are not planning to accept the F40 proposals. Indications are that the higher area costs for London have been accepted and not questioned. VW suggested that members of the Schools Forum should respond robustly to the consultation once released, either as individuals or as a group.  The Schools Funding Team will offer assistance on this and will provide a briefing to support the Schools Forum response. SH asked if the DfE per pupil figure is likely to recognise deprivation. CM stated that this is not known.

VW recapped the reasoning for the council decision to establish an Alternative Delivery Model (ADM) in order to maintain support services to schools.  At the end of a complex process (where Headteachers and Governors have worked closely with the LA), Barnet is about to sign a contract with Cambridge Education that will manage these services.  VW then introduced Finbar McGaughey, Barnet’s lead contact at Cambridge Education. 

The organisation works solely in the Education sector, both in the UK and overseas and will deliver catering through its sub-contractor, ISS.  The changeover will take effect from 1^st April 2016, and plans are in place to ensure a smooth transition so as not to distract staff from service delivery.  There is likely to be a review of services in the early months to identify where efficiencies may be needed, or in order to expand the traded services offer.  All stakeholders will be included in these discussions.  Cambridge Education also has access to non-Barnet funding and the Barnet contract confirms that any surplus achieved above an agreed level will be reinvested for the benefit of Barnet and Barnet Schools.

SH asked if the discussions with ISS regarding catering requirements will take place before or after the April changeover.  FMcG said this would happen shortly after the contract commencement.

IH requested that, as this potentially affects posts within the authority that would transfer to Cambridge Education, schools should indicate as soon as possible their traded service buyback requirements.