Agenda item

This report sets out the outcome of applying the 2026-27 National Funding Formula (NFF) to the October 2025 schools census data and options for the local mainstream school formula due to the £0.15m shortfall in the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) schools block funding.

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.

The Schools Forum was advised that the report set out the outcome of applying the 2026–27 National Funding Formula (NFF) to the October 2025 schools census data, together with the options available for the local mainstream school formula arising from the £0.15m shortfall in the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) Schools Block funding.

Members were informed of the following:

·       Three options had been modelled to address the affordability gap, along with the ability for the Forum to recommend a combination of the available levers.

·       A consultation had been undertaken with all schools, including trust-level responses, and the exercise had achieved a high overall response rate.

·       The affordability gap had arisen due to reductions in the Growth Fund, increases in pupil characteristic data since the pandemic, and the constraints within the DSG Schools Block.

·       The National Per?Pupil Funding Level (NPPFL) could not be reduced, as previous applications to the DfE had not been approved.

·       The relative impact of adjustments to the Basic Entitlement, Minimum Funding Guarantee (MFG) and capping mechanisms was discussed, with Members acknowledging that whilst absolute fairness was not achievable, all schools able to contribute should do so.

The Forum considered the options set out in the report and voted as follows:

• Option 1: 0 votes
• Option 2: 3 votes
• Option 3: 0 votes
• Option D (Combination): 10 votes

There were two abstentions.

Following the vote, Members agreed that officers should model an MFG of –0.25%, with any remaining adjustments applied to the Basic Entitlement to meet affordability requirements. This approach was considered a reasonable and proportionate way to distribute the shortfall across a wider group of schools. ACTION

It was further agreed that one primary and one secondary representative would be selected to work alongside the Chair and the officers to review the modelling outputs prior to wider circulation. ACTION

RESOLVED that:

• The Forum recommended a combined approach commencing with an MFG of –0.25%, with consequential adjustments to the Basic Entitlement as required.
• The outcome of the modelling would be shared with Forum Members prior to submission of the local formula to the DfE.

It was agreed that the Clerk would circulate the Q&A document summarising Member questions and officer responses and Members also noted that the consultation summary paper could be shared with headteachers. ACTION

Post meeting note

Following the Schools Forum on Monday 19th January 2026, Option D, an alternative option, had been requested. This was subsequently modelled, reducing the minimum funding guarantee (MFG) from the NFF 0% to minus 0.25% in per?pupil funding. The impact was on only five schools, so the balance of the shortfall was made up by reducing the basic entitlements equally by 0.06%. The group of Forum members who had volunteered to look at this option agreed that this option showed a more balanced contribution between schools.

This option was now the one that Schools Forum had approved for BCP to submit.