To consider the report of the Budget Working Group on the following matters: changes to the national funding formula, Dedicated Schools Grant Underspend 2012/13, Special Educational Needs Support Services, provision for sponsored academies deficits and  the use of school balances.

RESOLVED:

That (a) consultation should take place on the basis that the following are the preferred options but with a range of options to be presented in the consultation paper:

1              LUMP SUM

a)            Herefordshire should adopt the lump sum values (proposed by the f40) of £75,000 for primary and £150,000 for secondary schools

b)            The transition to these new values should be phased in over the same period that sparsity funding is implemented – options for 3 or 5 years were suggested, the Budget Working Group favouring five years.

2          SPARSITY

            A sparsity factor should be applied as follows:

Primary Sparsity Model

a)             That the sparsity subsidy should be set at £51,000 for a 28 pupil primary school and that funding should decrease on a tapered basis.

b)            Primary Model A, a sparsity lump sum of £70,000 and the 105 pupil model, should be the preferred sparsity model as this does not reduce expenditure from 2012/13, however, views on the alternative Model C should also be sought.

Secondary Sparsity Model

That the sparsity lump sum should be set at £70,000 to maintain consistency with the primary sparsity model and the pupil threshold of 450 pupils be adopted.

Sparsity Generally

That the cost of sparsity payments in high schools should be funded by high schools and those in primary schools should be funded by primary schools.

3          PRIMARY/SECONDARY RATIO

That consultation be conducted on the basis of a £200,000 per year transfer from primary to secondary schools over a five year period moving the ratio from 1:18 to 1:23 at 1% per year, making provision for reviewing the position annually to permit adjustments to be made if appropriate, and ensuring that the actions of other authorities were monitored and in each annual review the family average was considered to see whether that had changed.

4          MOBILITY FACTOR

That no change be made in relation to a mobility factor for the present and the position reviewed for 2015/16.

5          LUMP SUM/SPARSITY/PRIMARY:SECONDARY RATIO PACKAGE

That the proposals for the lump sum, the application of a sparsity factor and a phased move towards the average funding ratios were interlinked and were best viewed as a single package.

6          PRIOR ATTAINMENT – SEN PROXY PUPILS NOT ACHIEVING          KS2 LEVEL 4 IN MATHS/ENGLISH 

That the funding allocation for secondary prior attainment be amended to £147 per pupil not attaining Maths or English to maintain the current expenditure at the same level as 2013/14 i.e. £347,184.

7     MISCELLANEOUS

·                     That the DfE should be asked to confirm whether or not it had taken account of schools across the Welsh border in calculating the sparsity factor and requested to recalculate the sparsity factor if it had not done so.

·                     That the consultation paper should explain the redistribution of resources to more fairly reflect the deprivation factor following the cessation of the excellence cluster funding.

·                     That the consultation document should explicitly state that schools with fewer than 70 pupils could not afford their own head teacher and  ...  view the full decision text for item 129

The Forum considered the report of the Budget Working Group (BWG) on the following matters: changes to the National Funding Formula, Dedicated Schools Grant Underspend 2012/13, Special Educational Needs Support Services, provision for sponsored academies deficits and the use of school balances.

Since the publication of the agenda a further meeting of the BWG had been held on 8 July, principally to give further consideration to changes to the National Funding Formula.  The notes of that meeting and updated recommendations had been circulated to Forum Members.

National Funding Formula

The report noted that In March the Forum had submitted a response to the Department for Education (DfE) review of 2013/14 School Funding Arrangements.  The DfE had now published their findings from the review and announced the details of the changes that would be made in 2014/15. 

The main issues that the Forum was invited to consider were the introduction of a sparsity factor to support rural schools, changes to the lump sum to permit differing amounts for primary and secondary schools and proposals locally to move incrementally towards the national average ratio of funding for primary to secondary school funding per pupil.

Initial views of the Forum were sought on the recommendations of the BWG to inform the preparation of a consultation paper.  The consultation paper was to be issued to all schools in September and the findings reported to the Forum on 25 October prior to the submission of draft school budget proposals to the Education Funding Agency (EFA) at the end of October.

The Senior Finance Manager (SFM) gave a presentation.  A copy of the presentation has been placed with the agenda papers on the Minute Book.

The first part of the presentation set out edited highlights of a presentation given by the EFA on changes to the National Funding Formula for 2014/15.  In summary the 2013/14 reforms mainly stayed in place.  Changes for 2014-15 were a development of 2013-14 and continued the journey towards a national funding formula for pre-16 pupils.

The presentation then highlighted principal changes for 2014-2015 and then focused on consequences for Herefordshire.  The SFM outlined choices for the lump sum, the sparsity factor and the primary/secondary ratio. He noted that the consultation paper would also include proposals for high needs tariffs to replace banded funding.

The SFM commented that given the representations the Authority had made seeking recognition of the rural nature of Herefordshire it seemed correct for the Authority to make use of the sparsity factor.  The implication of a national funding formula was that the current wide variation in primary/secondary ratios would not be permitted to continue.  It had therefore been proposed to the BWG that there should be a managed move towards the average ratio for the Authority’s comparator family group of similar authorities, reviewing the position annually. A variation in the lump sum would be one of the means of achieving this shift in resources from the primary to the secondary sector.

The Chairman of the BWG  ...  view the full minutes text for item 129