To consider the Herefordshire Schools Task Group Interim report which is currently out for consultation.

The Chairman has invited Lynn Wright, Independent Consultant, who was present at the Schools Forum meeting on 7 July 2009 to support any debate regarding the financial implications of:

(a)          The status quo.

(b)          Any possible models for the future provision of Herefordshire schools.

The purpose of the meeting will be to agree a response to the consultation to be submitted by the Chair on behalf of the Forum

The Director of Children’s Services presented the Herefordshire Schools Task Group Interim Report on the way forward for the planning of Herefordshire provision of Schools. She reminded the Forum that the Schools Task Group was established following agreement of Cabinet Members, Headteachers and Chairs of Governors. The Task group comprising School Headteachers, Governor representatives, local officers with an independent Chair had produced the consultation document. She referred to discussions at the last Forum meeting regarding the effect on schools finance that the reduced Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) settlement would have and that after discussion with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Forum it was decided that the Forum should consider the consultation document. The views of the Forum would then be fed beck to the Task Group.

The Director introduced Lyn Wright, Independent Consultant, who had presented a finance report to the July Forum meeting and had been invited to the meeting to discuss with Members the implications of falling school rolls and the consequential reduction in schools funding.

The Consultant circulated the following documents to Members at the meeting and are attached to these Minutes:

(i)                  Herefordshire School Funding – Appendix 1

(ii)                Annual Decrease in Pupil Numbers Illustrating the Cumulative Effect - Appendix 2

(iii)               Pupil Numbers in Primary and Secondary Schools - Appendix 3

(iv)              Primary Schools Falling Numbers on Rolls - Appendix 4

(v)                Analysis of School Budget Per Pupil - Appendix 5

(vi)              Example of the Merging of Schools - Appendix 6

The Consultant referred to paragraph 1 of Appendix 1 regarding the DSG which was the main source of income to the schools budget which could be used for no other purpose. She drew Members attention to paragraph 3 which set out the decreasing pupil numbers over the last three years and the reduction in DSG funding over those years as a consequence. In referring to Appendix 2, Annual Decrease in Pupil Numbers Illustrating the Cumulative Effect, she highlighted the actual decreasing pupil numbers from 2006/07 to 2008/09 together with the projected reduction numbers from 2009/10 to 2010/2011 and the corresponding reduction in DSG.

The Forum noted that the figure set out in the penultimate line of Appendix 3 should read 1911.

The Consultant informed Members that Appendix 3 set out the primary and secondary reduction in pupil numbers at their peak to the current point in time amounting to 2,675 in total. Both peaks were underlined in Appendix 3. It was, in percentage terms, a reduction of 12 percent. She also informed the Forum that three small schools had closed during that period. She informed Members that as at January 2009, there was a surplus of 17.6 per cent primary school capacity with secondary school capacity being at 9.5 per cent. The increase in surplus primary school capacity was slowing down but the increase in surplus secondary capacity was still on the rise which emphasised that the current issues and difficulties with schools funding will continue.

In answer to a Member’s question, the Consultant informed Members that in some areas of the county some schools were losing pupils whereas some were gaining. She was concerned, however, that those pupils who had been lost would not come back to those schools in Herefordshire which meant that funding would be lost.

The Consultant referred to Appendix 4, Primary Schools Falling Numbers on Rolls, which illustrated in more detail the changes in school rolls. The figures were factual and had been taken from existing schools but the schools were not named. Three different size schools chosen at random were set out in the first part of the Appendix and all were losing pupils. The Appendix showed that if admissions continued at the same level as the September 2009 intake, then the schools would be significantly smaller in 2015 than they were in 2008.

In referring to Appendix 5, Analysis of School Budget Per Pupil, the Consultant informed the Forum that the Appendix illustrated the variation in budget per pupil for a range of primary and secondary schools from 2005/06 to 2009/10. Although the average total budget increase per pupil over those years was slightly over 30 per cent for all primary and secondary schools, changes in pupil numbers determined that the smaller schools received more than average per pupil funding whilst the larger schools received less. She further emphasised that this meant in general terms that all schools were paying for losses in Herefordshire.

The Consultant was of the view that all pupils in Herefordshire should have an equal entitlement to education but that this was not happening due to the way funds were allocated. She added that due to the fact that there was not enough funding for schools, any formula funding review would not solve the lack of money but merely redistribute the same inadequate amount.

She advised that to achieve a suitable response to the Task Group Interim Report, the Forum needed to look at the issues head on. She drew Members’ attention to paragraph 6 in Appendix 1 which she considered was a way forward and which suggested that a strategic evaluation of existing provision was required in order to achieve the most effective use of resources available. This could be achieved by reducing levels of funding currently maintaining individual premises (which were receiving various forms of protection) thereby increasing funding to directly support teaching and learning in schools. 

The Chairman made the point that as well as the Schools Forum, everyone in Herefordshire education has to address the issues facing Schools.

The Consultant agreed that Heads of Governors, Headteachers and the Council had to collectively find a solution. She reminded Members that 69 schools were receiving protection and that some were struggling financially. She emphasised that more funding would not be coming from central government. The Director of Children’s Services advised that it was an issue for every school whether the school was small or large.

The Vice-Chairman was of the view that the Forum should frame its approach by stating that it would endeavour to find a solution to achieve a student’s entitlement to funding and that would put in the discipline that the Forum would need.

A Member referred to the 2675 children that had already been lost from schools which amounted to £4.5 million in lost funding and that this needed to be spelt out to all concerned as that fact alone was more hard hitting than the Interim Report.

In answer to a Member’s question, the Director of Children’s Services advised that when the formal consultation period ended on 2 November 2009, Cabinet would consider the responses and key messages. If the messages agree with the consultation papers then the officers would act on the papers.

A Member suggested that the Forum should support the fact that the funding issue was a problem and, in accepting that fact, that there was a need to set about achieving a strategic evaluation.

It was suggested by a Member that a consultant could be engaged to develop a plan to sustain schools in view of the funding situation. The Director of Children’s Services acknowledged that some authorities had brought in a consultancy to decide how and which schools would be affected. She emphasised that whether an outside body or Herefordshire Council carries out this work would not alter the issues facing schools and that one way or another the issues would have to be dealt with.

The Consultant advised that cluster groups needed to realise the current funding issues facing all schools and that one way to engage them would be to present to them the facts that had been set out before the Forum and that would get the underlying messages across.

A Member referred to the lack of any mention of Early Years in the Interim Report. The Member took the view that Early Years was affected by the issues and should be included in clusters.

In response to a request by Members, Lyn Wright agreed to circulate to Members electronic copies of the Appendices circulated at the meeting.

RESOLVED:   That the Forum

(i)                 agrees with the emphasis in paragraph 6 of Appendix 1 that the current status quo in terms of numbers of settings cannot continue in schools and that a strategic evaluation of existing provision is required in order to achieve the most effective use of resources available, by reducing levels of funding currently maintaining individual premises in various forms of protection and by increasing funding to directly support teaching and learning in schools;

(ii)               endorses the need for a clear strategy for the way forward and the need for change;

(iii)             agrees that the Primary Schools Association and the Herefordshire Association of Secondary Headteachers should be made fully aware of the current financial implications affecting schools;

(iv)             acknowledges that some school closures will take place as a consequence of a sustainable future schools strategy and that an outside consultancy may well be employed to develop such a strategy;

(v)               will look to outside agencies to support school clusters to develop and put forward viable solutions for schools;

(vi)             will request the Task Group to amend the Interim Report to include  Early Years and that Early Years be included in the clusters; and

(vii)           agrees that the Chairman responds by letter to the Task Group setting out the views of the Forum as expressed in (i) to (vi) above.