(Mr N Griffiths (Vice-Chairman) in the Chair)

The Vice-Chairman welcomed Mr P Box and Mr G House as new Members of the Forum.

Apologies were received from Mrs L Brazewell, Mr P Burbidge and Mrs R Lloyd.

None.

None.

To elect a Chairman for the ensuing year.

RESOLVED:   That Mrs D Strutt be elected Chairman for the ensuing year.

RESOLVED:   That Mrs D Strutt be elected Chairman for the ensuing year.

(Mrs D Strutt in the chair)

To elect a Vice-Chairman for the ensuing year.

RESOLVED:   That Mr N Griffiths be elected Vice-Chairman for the ensuing year.

RESOLVED:   That Mr N Griffiths be elected Vice-Chairman for the ensuing year.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 12 July 2013.

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting held on 12 July 2013 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To elect a Chairman of the Budget Working Group for the ensuing year.

RESOLVED:      That Mr A Shaw be elected Chairman of the Budget Working Group for the ensuing year.

RESOLVED:      That Mr A Shaw be elected Chairman of the Budget Working Group for the ensuing year.

To consider the report of the Budget Working Group on the following matters: response to consultation paper on introduction of high needs multi-tariffs and proposed national funding formula changes 2014/15, final Dedicated Schools Grant Allocation 2013/14; High Needs spending forecast, SEN Support Services and School Transport.

RESOLVED: That

(a)        the proposals for the local application of the funding Formula for 2014/15 as set out at Appendix 1 to the report, subject to an amendment to printed recommendation l, as reflected below,  be approved for recommendation to the Cabinet Member – Children’s Wellbeing as follows:

a)    The strategy of moving the primary secondary funding ratio from 1:1.18 to 1:1.23 over a five year period and the associated funding transfer of  an annual £200,000 from primary to secondary schools  so that Herefordshire’s funding ratio is consistent with the family average of comparable local authorities be approved;

b)    The strategy be reviewed annually to ensure that further movement towards the 1:1.23 “family average” funding ratio is appropriate depending on DfE guidance;

c)    The lump sum values (proposed by the f40 group) of £75,000 for primary schools and £150,000 for secondary schools be phased in over five years as part of the five year strategy;

d)    The lump sum allocation for primary schools be reduced by £6,000 to £99,000 in 2014/15 as the first year of the five year strategy;

e)    The lump sum allocation for secondary schools be increased by £13,750 to £118,750 in 2014/15 as the first year of the five year strategy  

f)     Herefordshire, as one of the most rural counties in England, will include the DfE’s sparsity factor in the school funding formula for 2014/15;

g)    The principle that sparsity funding should be phased in over the same five year period as the lump sums and the primary secondary funding ratio be approved;

h)     

i    Primary sparsity be determined by a pupil threshold of 105 pupils, a sparsity distance of 2 miles and a tapered lump sum of £14,000 as the first year of a five year strategy to increase to the tapered lump sum to £70,000 in equal instalments (model A);

ii    Secondary sparsity be determined by a pupil threshold of 450 pupils, a sparsity distance of 450 pupils  and a tapered lump sum of £14,000 as the first year  of  a five year strategy to increase to the tapered lump sum to £70,000 in equal instalments  (model A);

i)     The cost of sparsity should be phase specific so that the cost of primary sparsity is funded by the primary schools budget and the cost of secondary sparsity by the secondary schools budget;

j)     The Notional SEN budget remains unchanged for 2014/15 at 6% of the lump sum, 6% of basic pupil entitlement, 100% of low prior attainment (as a proxy for SEN) and 40% of deprivation funding;

k)    Schools gaining funding through the national funding formula have their gains capped in order to fund the statutory Minimum Funding Guarantee (MFG) protection to schools losing funding and the percentage used as the gains cap should as far as possible be the MFG percentage set by the DfE;

l)               (i)         funding for ethnic minority support, and free school meals administration be de-delegated;

(ii)           the decision on the de-delegation of funding for Trade Union facilities should be  ...  view the full decision text for item 141.

The Forum considered the report of the Budget Working Group (BWG) on the following matters: response to consultation paper on introduction of high needs multi-tariffs and proposed national funding formula changes 2014/15; final Dedicated Schools Grant Allocation 2013/14; High Needs spending forecast; SEN Support Services; and Home to School Transport.

The Chairman of the BWG thanked members of the BWG, members of the High Needs Group and the Senior Finance Manager for their work.  He reported that the BWG had carefully considered the options available, being mindful of the implications of their recommendations and the difficult considerations that some schools would face as a consequence.  The BWG had sought to smooth the impact of change to the funding formula to give schools the opportunity to manage the consequences and plan ahead.

A Member of the Forum who had been invited to attend the Group’s meeting in September as an observer, having expressed some reservations about some of the proposals put forward to the Forum in July, commented that she had been reassured by the considered and fair way in which the Group had approached its task.

The Senior Finance Manager (SFM) reported that the consultation process had included a number of meetings with schools where the proposals had been almost entirely well received.  In the written responses to the consultation there had been clear support for the proposals with the exception of the sparsity models where there had still been support for the BWG’s preferred model.  The BWG considered that no evidence had been presented to suggest that the BWG should consider an alternative model.

The SFM commented that at the heart of the proposals was the intention to move incrementally part way towards the average primary/secondary funding ratio for the Authority’s family group over 5 years.  This was to be achieved by an annual reduction in the Primary School lump sum which would be transferred to the Secondary School lump sum.  The introduction of the national funding formula signalled that the DfE would not permit the current variations in funding ratios to continue.  The proposals represented a package of measures  intended to enable schools to move towards an average funding ratio at a pace of Herefordshire’s own choosing. 

In relation to the printed recommendation l, on de-delegation, it was proposed that, as only de-delegation to Trade Unions was potentially affected by a DfE consultation on the funding of Trade Union facilities, the Forum should agree to dedelegate the two other elements encompassed by that recommendation.

RESOLVED: That

(a)        the proposals for the local application of the funding Formula for 2014/15 as set out at Appendix 1 to the report, subject to an amendment to printed recommendation l, as reflected below,  be approved for recommendation to the Cabinet Member – Children’s Wellbeing as follows:

a)    The strategy of moving the primary secondary funding ratio from 1:1.18 to 1:1.23 over a five year period and the associated funding transfer of  an annual £200,000 from primary to secondary schools  so that Herefordshire’s  ...  view the full minutes text for item 141.

To consider possible responses to the proposed changes to Herefordshire Council’s School Transport policy.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY:

That    (a)        the Cabinet be formally advised of the concerns raised at the meeting;

            (b)       the Chairman of the General Overview and Scrutiny Committee be formally advised of the concerns raised at the meeting; and

            (c)        the Chairman of the Budget Working Group meet the Cabinet Member (Children’s Wellbeing) and if the Chairman considers it necessary convenes a meeting of the Budget Working Group to report to the Forum on 29 November.

The Forum considered a report inviting possible responses to proposed changes to the Council’s Home to School Transport Policy.

The interim Head of Sufficiency and Capital Commissioning (HSCC) presented the report which had been circulated to the Forum in advance of the meeting.  He acknowledged that the subject was an emotive one.  However, the Council’s policy position was that it should provide services to the statutory minimum level unless there was a clear reason to provide additional services.  It was also policy to charge full cost recovery unless there was a clear reason to amend this approach.  The Council was currently providing more home to school transport than it was statutorily required to do.

The Council was seeking to save £250k by changing the policy of free home to school transport entitlement to nearest school only, rather than nearest and catchment.  A decision was to be made by Cabinet in December 2013.

Efficiencies made over the past ten years on home to school transport budgets meant that further efficiencies were extremely hard to achieve.  Benchmarking data suggested that the current service provided good value for money.

He reported that there had been a good response to the consultation exercise on changing the policy.  A number of concerns had emerged to date including in particular:  

·      The implications for Schools on the border with Wales where a pupil’s nearest school might  lie across the border;

·      The implications for schools on the border with neighbouring English authorities where a pupil’s nearest school might lie in a neighbouring County.

·      What regard should be had the concept of a Herefordshire identity and whether an offer should be made to support residents to send pupils to a Herefordshire school if that was their preference.

·      The timing of the introduction of the proposed new policy and whether implementation could be phased.

He noted that amendments to the proposed policy to seek to address these concerns would have an impact on the proposed saving.

The Cabinet Member - Children’s Wellbeing commented that the proposal was not being made lightly and outlined the significant pressures on the Council’s budget and the savings that needed to be made (£33million over the next 3 years with £15m of that made in 2014/15).  Councils nationally were facing these sorts of pressures.  The Council had to look particularly carefully at expenditure on non-statutory services, however much that might be regretted.

In discussion the following principal points were made:

·         The HSCC commented that about 800 pupils would be affected.  He observed that 43% of children currently did not attend their catchment school.

·         It was suggested that more pupils would be affected than suggested by the Council.

·         The nearest school for many pupils might be across either a national or county border.

·         What would happen if places were not available at the nearest school? 

·         The proposal would have a long term impact on families and children.

·         The HSCC acknowledged that it was very complex to model the effects of the proposal because it depended  ...  view the full minutes text for item 142.

To review the provisions in the Forum’s Constitution on substitute membership.

RESOLVED: That each electing/appointing body should be invited to designate a pool of substitutes; a forum member who is unable to attend a meeting may then ask one of the designated substitutes from the relevant pool to attend a meeting of the Forum, or formally established Sub-Group, in their place.

The Forum reviewed the provisions in the Forum’s Constitution on substitute membership, a report having been requested at the Forum’s previous meeting.

There was consensus that the current provisions in the Constitution should be amended to reinforce the principle that substitutes should be appointed by the relevant electing/appointing bodies.

RESOLVED: That each electing/appointing body should be invited to designate a pool of substitutes; a forum member who is unable to attend a meeting may then ask one of the designated substitutes from the relevant pool to attend a meeting of the Forum, or formally established Sub-Group, in their place.

To consider the Forum’s work programme.

The following items are currently scheduled:

·      Capital Investment 2013/14 Update

·      DSG Underspend 2011/12

The Forum noted its Work Programme.

The following meeting dates have been scheduled:

Friday 29 November 2013 9.30 am

Friday 17 January 2014 2.00 pm

Monday 17 March 2014 9.30 am

Friday 16 May 2014 9.30 am

The following meeting dates have been scheduled:

Friday 29 November 2013 9.30 am

Friday 17 January 2014 2.00 pm

Monday 17 March 2014 9.30 am

Friday 16 May 2014 9.30 am

Noted.

The Chairman drew Members’ attention to a letter from the Education Funding Agency issued on 25 October giving notice of the publication of the updated:  Schools Forums: Operational and Good Practice Guide and release of a proforma to academies.  She informed Members that a copy of the letter had been circulated by e-mail to all Members.