Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

There were no apologies received.

Councillors are requested to declare any interests on items included in this agenda. Please refer to the workflow on the preceding page for guidance.

Declarations received will be reported at the meeting.

There were none received on this occasion.

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting, held on 13 December 2023, as a correct record.

The minutes were approved as a correct record subject to the inclusion of Cllr R Burton in the list of attendees.

The Chair placed on record thanks to officers involved in bringing the requested options forward to this meeting.

1.     The DSG Settlement for 2024-25 was received on 19 December 2023. It included:

a.    Indicative allocations for the early years block reflecting the new free entitlements in 2024-25.

b.    Final allocations for the school’s block based on the October 2023 schools census with the increase in funding through the schools NFF at £5.1m (2%). Higher funding values account for £4.3m (1.7%) with additional pupils at census providing a further £0.8m (0.3%). Funding for in-year pupil growth at September 2024, has increased by £83,000 (4.6%) compared with last year.

c.    Allocations for the central school services block provide an increase of £55,000 (3.2%) compared with last year for on-going LA functions with previous levels of funding not yet restored for historic commitments.

d.    Allocations for the high needs block are an increase of £1.7m (3%).

e.    A draft DSG budget for 2024-25 is provided in the Appendix to provide context for decisions on the meeting agenda. The funding gap for high needs pupils is projected to be £29m in the absence of additional funding sources.

The report also includes budget monitoring information for quarter three 2023-24. This indicates that the accumulated DSG deficit is projected at £63m for March 2024, rising to £92m by March 2025.

The Assistant Chief Finance Officer presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'A' to these Minutes in the Minute Book. The early years block is to be considered at the February 2024 meeting. The Forum was advised that the DSG Settlement for 2024-25 was received on 19 December 2023. It included indicative allocations for the early years block reflecting the new free entitlements in 2024-25. The final allocations for the school’s block based on the October 2023 schools census with the increase in funding through the schools NFF at £5.1m was included. Higher funding values account for £4.3m with additional pupils at census providing a further £0.8m. There was a slight increase in pupil numbers at the secondary level and a decrease in primary which affected the overall funding level. Funding for in-year pupil growth at September 2024, had increased by £83,000 compared with last year. Allocations for the central school services block provided an increase of £55,000 compared with last year for on-going LA functions with the previous levels of funding not yet restored for historic commitments.

Allocations for the high needs block were increased slightly. A draft DSG budget for 2024-25 was provided in the Appendix to provide context for decisions. It was agreed by the Forum in December that only the surplus school block funding could be transferred. The funding gap for high needs pupils was projected to be £29m in the absence of additional funding sources.

There had been a delay in the new value for licenses paid for by the DfE on behalf of schools, which would require an adjustment to the budget when the figures were known.

The report also includes budget monitoring information for quarter three 2023-24. This indicates that the accumulated DSG deficit is projected at £63m for March 2024, rising to £92m by March 2025.

The Chair sought clarification that the surplus funding which could be transferred as outlined in the report was £0.4 million. This was confirmed.

RESOLVED that

1. The contents of the report be noted.
2. The budgets within the central schools services block (CSSB) be agreed (as outlined in Table 3, paragraph 21 of the report).

Voting: Nem. con.

This report provides the detail of the updated DSG management plan submitted to the DfE for consideration as part of the DfE Safety Valve (SV) programme.

The DSG accumulated deficit has grown rapidly from £3.6m brought forward from the preceding  councils in April 2019 to £36m by March 2023, with £63m estimated for March 2024.

The high needs funding annual gap is estimated at £27m in 2023-24. The updated DSG management plan is projecting a further rise to £29m in 2024-25 before it starts to reduce gradually over the remaining years of the 15-year plan.

The estimated accumulated deficit at March 2025 is £92m without other funding sources being secured.

The Assistant Chief Finance Officer presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'B' to these minutes in the Minute Book. This report provides the detail of the updated DSG management plan submitted to the DfE for consideration as part of the DfE Safety Valve (SV) programme. The DSG accumulated deficit had grown rapidly from £3.6m brought forward from the preceding councils in April 2019 to £36m by March 2023, with £63m estimated for March 2024.

The high needs funding annual gap is estimated at £27m in 2023-24. The updated DSG management plan is projecting a further rise to £29m in 2024-25 before it starts to reduce gradually over the remaining years of the 15-year plan. The estimated accumulated deficit at March 2025 is £92m without other funding sources being secured. The 15-year plan as included within the confidential appendix to the report included a 0.5 percent transfer for 2024/25 and 1 percent each year after this, which balances the high needs block within 15 years with contributions from the schools block. It was expected that the plan with the parameters as outlined was quite unlikely to be agreed by the DfE as part of the Safety-Valve Programme

It was confirmed that a 5-year plan was requested by the DfE but the modelling for this was not achievable and the 15 year plan as modelled was more realistic. It was noted that the statutory override against the deficit was due to run out in March 2026.

It was confirmed that the transfers outlined in the plan would need to be agreed by the Forum on an annual basis.

In response to a question, it was confirmed that a range of officers and members were involved in the production of the plan through a Safety Valve Board and that no headteachers were involved in the production of the plan.

It was confirmed that the impact of the 0.5 percent transfer and the 1 percent transfer for schools was modelled within the next paper. It was confirmed that this was 1 percent in total not additional to the 0.5 percent.

The Chair noted that this was a complex and high-level discussion and that in future it would be helpful to give consideration to discussions of this with headteachers in advance via Schools Forum members.

RESOLVED that the information in the report be noted.

Voting: Nem. Con.

This report sets out the outcome of applying the 2024-25 National Funding Formula (NFF) to the October 2023 schools census data and options for the local mainstream schools funding formula linked to a transfer of funding to high needs.

It also sets out the 2024-25 growth fund budget for approval.

The Assistant Chief Finance Officer presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'C' to these minutes in the Minute Book. The Forum was advised that the report set out the outcome of applying the 2024-25 National Funding Formula (NFF) to the October 2023 schools census data and options for the local mainstream schools funding formula linked to a transfer of funding to high needs. The Forum was also advised of the 2024-25 growth fund budget which was included for approval. According to the Policy agreed in December there was just under £400k available for transfer. It had been requested at the December meeting that the total amount to close the gap was modelled. It was noted that this was not achievable and not something the local authority was planning to do. The 1 percent option was also modelled but it was really only option 2 (0.5 percent) which was relevant. The Forum was asked for its thoughts on options outlined at 2a, 2b and 2c in the paper for the transfer of funding to the high needs block if the DfE was minded to agree this despite the decision of the schools Forum.The Forum was reminded that there was also a need to agree level of growth fund. It was noted that 0.5 percent would not require DfE approval if agreed by the Forum. Anything above this amount would require approval from the DfE or if the 0.5 percent was not agreed by the Forum.

The Forum was reminded that it was agreed in the previous year to transfer the small surplus to the early years budget but a 0.5 percent transfer was not agreed.

The Chair outlined the options within table 7 of the report and the issues which needed to be considered by the Forum.

The Chair went on to outline the central growth fund for 2024/25 and sought agreement for this from the Forum. This was agreed before proceeding to consideration of the other options outlined within the report. The Chair advised that he had been communicating with Head Teachers and there had been a number of questions raised which the Chair would draw together outside of the meeting and provide with the minutes.

Feedback from the Primary Heads was that historically SEND and Social Care systems had been struggling and schools had been compensating for this. The view of primary heads was that cutting funding further it would be very difficult for schools to manage and create more problems for Head Teachers. It would have bee easier for schools to accept this action if the systems performance was better. There was also impacts on school budgets for falling pupil numbers and the partially funded pay increases. However, the biggest pressure in mainstream schools was on SEND. Schools had to resource this from their own budgets and once funding was secured it wasn’t backdated. Even a 0.5 percent transfer would be a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.

This report provides proposals for:

·      The central retention ofservices wherethe LAretains astatutory dutyto undertakeactivity tosupport maintainedschools only (both mainstream and specialist);

·      De-delegation ofservices applicableonly tomainstream schools. Theseare serviceswhere schoolsretain thestatutory duties,but betterefficiency could be achieved through central delivery bythe LA.

The Project Manager presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'D' to these minutes in the Minute Book. The Forum was advised that of proposals for the central retention of services wherethe LAretains astatutory dutyto undertakeactivity tosupport maintainedschools only (both mainstream and specialist) and the de-delegation ofservices applicableonly tomainstream schools. Theseare serviceswhere schoolsretain thestatutory duties,but betterefficiency could be achieved through central delivery bythe LA. One response was received from a maintained school and one from special schools. Both responses were in favour.

RESOLVED

1.           That the retention rates per pupil and budgets for LA duties supporting maintained schools as set out in paragraphs 8-10 of the report be agreed

2.           That separately for primary and secondary, the de-delegation of funding for school improvement duties as set out in paragraphs 11-12 of the report be agreed.

Voting: Unanimous

To consider and note the Forward Plan

The Chair reminded the Forum that there may be a need for an additional meeting in February as mentioned previously. The remainder of the Forward Plan was noted.

February 2024 - Date TBC

24 June 2024

23 September 2024

18 November 2024

13 January 2025

23 June 2025

The dates for future meetings were noted as outlined in the papers.

To consider any other business, which, in the opinion of the Chairman, is of sufficient urgency to warrant consideration.

There was no other business advised of on this occasion.

To consider passing the following Resolution (if required):

"RESOLVED that, in accordance with Section 100A (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press be excluded from the Meeting for the following item(s) of business on the grounds that it/they may involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph(s) [INSERT PARAGRAPH NUMBER HERE] of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Said Act as the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it”.

The meeting moved into a non-public session to consider the confidential appendix to agenda item 5 – DSG Management Plan 2024-25.

There were no further comments on the appendix.