Agenda item

To consider the information report.

Jack Cutler, Quality and Commissioning, BCP Council, presented the report.

A policy for 19/20 was put in place for the first year of BCP and existing growth would be funded under the legacy LA policy that was applicable to when the growth was put in place. The only exception was an adjustment to the legacy Poole LA policy.

There are 2 options;

1.    To continue to fund existing growth under the arrangements put in place for 19/20 and for new growth introduce an aligned policy. The policies are similar across BCP apart from a slight difference in legacy Dorset. Legacy Dorset considers a form of entry as 25 rather than the 30 that Bournemouth and Poole consider.

2.    To fund existing growth and any new growth under a new 2020-21 policy.

Option 1 is the preferred LA option with a guaranteed class size of 30 regardless of whether those pupils start at a school.

Funding for bulge classes is an incentive for schools because they get the extra funding in the first year due to the increased costs. Growth funding is paid for basic need requirements and is paid even if the pupils do not materialise.

It was noted that although Appendix 2 gave a clear picture of actual and projected growth it did not show the outcome of the admissions into school for September 2019.

A table was shown and will be distributed to the members. In previous years primary growth generally happened as it was forecast with funding matching where pupil growth occurred.

The LA role in ensuring that there are sufficient places in schools was explained. The table showed schools where secondary phase growth places have been added and funded. Across the BCP area the overall Year 7 pupil numbers are broadly as expected but some schools have admitted over their PAN. This means that growth funding has gone to some schools without extra pupils as it is guaranteed under the policy. 

There was some discussion regarding the fairness of certain decision making along with the impact it has had on schools that are below their PAN. There was also concern about funding schools where the growth has not materialised, but other schools within the same Multi-Academy Trust (MAT) have admitted considerably above PAN. It was clarified that revenue funding for a particular school is not ringfenced for that school so the MAT is able to align the growth and funding if they choose.

It was suggested that if a school was admitting above PAN not intended to meet basic need then that is a different situation to growth requested to meet basic need. It was explained that the LA was not suggesting funding schools that go over PAN. The LA has growth funded 199 places for September 2019 which are not being filled, while 196 pupils have been admitted above PAN.

RESOLVED that new information had been introduced to the meeting that Schools Forum will need to consider. No decision was taken on whether to agree the proposed 2020-21 Growth Fund policy.