Meeting of the Lancashire Schools Forum to Be Held on Tuesday 4 July 2017

MEETING OF THE LANCASHIRE SCHOOLS FORUM TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY 4 JULY 2017

Venue: Oak Room, Woodlands Conference Centre, Chorley Time: 9.30 a.m.

A G E N D A

1. Attendance and Apologies for Absence To be recorded in accordance with the agreed membership of the Forum.

2. Substitute Members To welcome any substitute Members.

3. Forum Membership (Enclosure) (Page 12) To note the Forum membership report.

4. Minutes of the Last Meeting (Enclosure) (Page 15) To agree the minutes of the last meeting held on 21 March 2017.

5. Matters Arising To consider any matters arising from the minutes of the meeting held on 21 March 2017 that are not covered elsewhere on the agenda.

6. Recommendations from the Schools Block Working Group (Enclosure) (Page 28) To consider the recommendations from the Schools Block Working Group held 20 June 2017.

7. Recommendations from the Early Years Block Working Group (Enclosure) (Page 62) To consider the recommendations from the Early Years Block Working Group held on 13 June 2017.

8. Recommendations from the High Needs Block Working Group (Enclosure) (Page 84) To consider the recommendations from the High Needs Block Working Group held on 8 June 2017.

9. Apprenticeship Levy Vanessa Carthy, Programme Relationship Manager, Skills Learning and Development will present this item.

1 To receive a report about the implementation of the Apprenticeship Levy in Lancashire.

10. Forum Correspondence There has been no Forum related correspondence since the last meeting.

11. Any Other Business

12. Date of Future Meetings) To note that the next scheduled Forum meeting will be held at 9.30 am Tuesday 24 October 2017 at County Hall, Preston. The venue is subject to confirmation.

2 Lancashire Schools Forum meeting of 4 July 2017 at Chorley Woodlands

Executive Summary

1. Attendance and Apologies for Absence and 2. Substitute Members To note attendance and apologies for absence and welcome any substitute members.

3. Forum Membership To note the Forum membership changes since the last meeting.

4. Minutes of the Last Meeting and 5. Matters Arising To agree the minutes of the last meeting held on 21 March 2017 and any matters arising.

6. Recommendations from the Schools Block Working Group To consider the recommendations from the Schools Block Working Group held on 20 June 2017.

i. 2016/17 Schools Budget Outturn Report – Schools Block A report was presented providing information on the Schools Budget outturn position for 2016/17, for the Schools Block. The overall Schools Block budget at 31 March 2017 shows an overspend of £0.591m. Further details were provided on the individual budget lines. Information was also provided about the Reserves and Provisions at 31 March 2017.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report and the 2016/17 Schools Budget final financial outturn position in relation to the Schools Block; b) Noted that further reports would be presented about the staff supply scheme in due course.

ii. School Balances and Clawback 2016/17 This report set out the year end position of schools' delegated budgets at 31 March 2017 and it was noted that the final outturn position against schools delegated budgets at 31 March 2017 was an overspend of £8.716m. Further analysis of the balances position was provided and the report also contained details of individual school balances and information on clawback.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Noted the overall position of school balances at 31 March 2017 and the individual school level information provided in the report; c) Noted that the analysis provided demonstrated the significant costs pressures facing the school sector; d) Noted the application of clawback to 6 schools as at 31 March 2017, in accordance with the arrangements previously agreed by the Forum and the application of exceptions in accordance with the policy; e) Supported the inclusion of the DFC clarification in the school balances and clawback arrangements to be applied at 31 March 2018; f) Requested that individual balances information relating to Lancashire academies be collated from statutory returns. (The information that has been collated about academy balances is provided at Annex 2, although it should be noted that where academies are part of a wider MAT, it is not possible to identify a balance at an individual establishment level).

3 iii. Schools Block Budget This report provided details about two DfE publications that provide further 2017/18 schools block information that may provide useful background to help inform future Forum deliberations.  Producing DSG Baselines for 2018/19 Financial Year Allocations - 2017/18 Baselines  Schools block funding formulae 2017 to 2018: Analysis of local authorities’ schools block funding formulae

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Noted the information contained in Lancashire's 2017/18 baselines submission; c) Noted that Lancashire's position against key national school block budget formulae averages for 2017/18 could provide background information to inform 2018/19 funding decisions. iv. Schools Heading Towards Financial Difficulty A number of key indicators in the school balances report reflect the challenging financial climate within the school sector. Further budget monitoring has identified that, in addition to schools that are in a deficit budget position, there are other schools that are heading swiftly towards a deficit position, quickly burning through reserves. This report set out proposals to offer some support to these high risk schools to assist in responding to the financial challenges being faced.

In addition, an update was provided around schools with large structural deficits.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Endorsed the proposals to support schools heading towards a financial deficit; c) Requested that the seminars dates be arranged quickly; d) Encouraged schools to respond immediately with any outstanding Income and Expenditure returns, even if the budget was in deficit, so that support could begin to be provided; e) Noted the update on schools with structural deficits.

v. School Expansion Policy (Growth Fund) Schools Forum has in place a School Expansion Policy (Growth Fund) to assist schools/academies commission by the LA for basic need growth. A report was presented highlighting future risks that exist around the application of this policy caused by the proposals contained in the DfE's Schools National Funding Formula (SNFF) arrangements.

In addition, clarification was requested about the use of the growth fund to support schools/academies that are receiving additional pupils from outside Lancashire, or from independent schools (i.e. implications that are not as a result of County Council decisions).

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Acknowledged that the future school funding uncertainties meant that the current Forum Growth Fund policy may be unsustainable depending on national decisions; c) Felt unable to provide a guarantee that existing growth fund allocations would be honoured from reserves, as there was too much uncertainty around the level of possible allocations to Lancashire, or local flexibilities that may be available; d) Requested a future report around the updated supply of school places policy to help inform any future Growth Fund policy;

4 e) Asked the Forum to consider writing to the Government to highlight the disconnect at national level between the pressure put on local councils to approve additional house building and other government departments responsible for funding related costs; f) Supported a clarification that the growth fund could only be used to support implications that are as a result of County Council decisions and cannot support those schools/academies that are receiving additional pupils from outside Lancashire, or from independent schools, as Lancashire would not have received any DSG funding to support the increased pupil numbers.

vi. Devolved Formula Capital (DFC) Devolved Formula Capital (DFC) is direct funding for individual institutions to maintain their buildings and fund small-scale capital projects. The LA has recently been reviewing its capital expenditure arrangements and it is therefore proposed to delegate DFC to all non-VA schools in the County from September 2017.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Supported the proposals to delegate DFC to non-VA schools in Lancashire, from September 2017. vii. Charging for Admissions Appeals Various DfE regulations have been updated in recent years that impact on the rules for admissions appeals charges. Diocesan/Church Authorities have contacted the LA to challenge the fact that VA schools are being treated differently that community schools an dthis report sets out a possible solution.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Expressed a view that professional support to assist the appeals process was a vital service and therefore recommended that a pragmatic solution to this issue being found; c) Requested further information at the autumn term cycle of meetings .about possible charging options before making any final recommendations; d) Supported the use of savings in the Schools Budget in 2017/18 being used to fund a transition period in 2017/18 to enable development of the revised traded offer to be introduced from April 2018. viii. Payment and Recoupment of DSG Funding for Non Maintained Establishments The LA is proposing to adopt a similar process for adjustments to High Needs and Early Years Block top-up payments at non-maintained establishments as is used at maintained bank account schools.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Supported the proposal to amend the High Needs and Early Years Block top-up payments to non-maintained establishments, so that the final monthly payment each term is adjusted to reflect the re-determinations.

ix. Urgent Business Procedure: DfE Consultation: Changes to the criteria for agreeing loan schemes The DfE launched a consultation on a proposed directed revision to section 4.10 (Loan Schemes) of the Scheme for financing schools guidance. As the consultation ran over the school Easter

5 holidays and the closing date was prior to any scheduled Forum meeting dates, a draft response was prepared and circulated for comment/approval using the Urgent Business Procedure. This report set out the responses received to the UBP and the final Forum response

The Working Group: a) Noted the report, b) Noted the decision taken under the Urgent Business Procedure and the final Forum consultation response submitted to the DfE.

x. Schools Financial Value Standard (SFVS) This report set out the Forum sanctions for SFVS and provided information on the 2016/17 SFVS returns.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report. b) Recommended that the returns timescale and sanctions policy introduced in 2014 is maintained

xi. Surface Water and Highways Drainage Charges The County Council, the Forum, and individual members, have been involved in lobbying United Utilities (UU) for a reduction in water charges in a long running campaign co-ordinated by Sefton Borough Council. This report set out information about concessions that have recently been notified by UU.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Welcomed the potential savings for Lancashire schools and academies as a result of this proposal from UU: c) Recommended that the Forum write to UU requesting that inclusion of nursery schools in any concessions scheme.

xii. Schools Forum Annual Report 2016/17 Each year the Schools Forum publishes an annual report setting out items of business in which the Forum has been involved. A draft Forum Annual Report for 2016/17 was provided for consideration by the Working Group.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Recommend to the Schools Forum that the 2016/17 Annual Report be approved for publication; c) Recommended that concessions to water rates charges from 2018/19 be included in the annual report. xiii. Any Other Business Members raised a number of matters under AOB, including:

 Home to Schools Transport  Fire Safety in Schools  School Attendance Officer

6 xiv. Venue of Future Meetings The Working Group noted that the October 2017 meeting was scheduled for County Hall. Members expressed concern about travelling to central Preston for 9.30 and trying to park.

The Working Group asked that the Forum consider using an alternative venue for future meetings.

The Forum are asked to ratify the Working groups recommendations.

7. Recommendations from the Early Years Block Working Group To consider the recommendations from the Early Years Block Working Group held on 13 June 2017

i. Early Years National Funding Formula (EYNFF) – Consultation on Lancashire Implementation 2018/19 Following discussions with eth Working Group, Lancashire Early Years National Funding Formula proposals for 2018/19 were issued for consultation. This report set out the consultation responses and the recommendations from the Working Group

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Noted the consultation responses and comments received to date; c) Expressed the following recommendations to the Schools Forum on the 2018/19 EYNFF proposals:  Q1. Do you agree with the proposal to move towards Universal Base Rate in 2018/19 incorporating one year of transitional funding? The Working Group supported this proposal;  Q2. Do you agree that the existing funding level and methodology should be used in 2018/19 for the mandatory deprivation supplement? The Working Group supported this proposal;  Q3. Do you agree that the existing Rurality Supplement should be discontinued in 2018/19? The Working Group supported this proposal, but suggested that a year of transitional funding should be included in the proposals for 2018/19, allocating half the existing rates;  Q4. Do you agree that none of the other allowable supplements should be included in the Lancashire EYNFF 2018/19? The Working Group supported this proposal, although some members favoured the use of a quality supplement based on QTS;  Q5. Do you agree that the SEN Inclusion Fund (known as Additional Inclusion Support in Lancashire) should remain at £150,000 in 2018/19? The Working Group supported this proposal;  Q6. Do you agree with the proposal to combine both elements of two year old funding into a single rate? The Working Group supported this proposal.

ii. 2016/17 Schools Budget Outturn Report – Early Years Block A report provided information on the Schools Budget outturn position for 2016/17, for the Early Years Block. The overall Early Years Block budget at 31 March 2017 shows an underspend of £0.502m. Further details of individual budget lines were highlighted.

The Working Group:

7 a) Noted the report and the Schools Budget Outturn position for 2016/17 in relation to the Early Years Block; b) Noted that the funding block ring-fencing arrangements agreed by the Forum mean that the 2016/17 Early Years underspend of circa £0.5m will be available for distribution in the Early Years Block, subject to the 2018/19 budget finalisation process. iii. Schools Forum Annual Report 2016/17 Each year the Schools Forum publishes an annual report setting out items of business in which the Forum has been involved. The Working Group considered the Early Years Block issues contained in the report.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Recommended to the Schools Forum that the 2016/17 Annual Report be approved for publication. iv. FEE Administration Charges The existing policy relating to administration charges for inaccurate and late headcount/supplementary claims has been reviewed, including feedback from the Early Education Consultative Group (EECG). This report provided an update.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report, the recommendations made by the EECG and the decisions taken by the County Council; b) Supported the decision to suspend administrative charges in the autumn term 2017; c) Recommended that the situation be reviewed following the introduction of the revised system; d) Welcomed the face to face training offer for the autumn term on the new system; e) Recommended that pressure be brought to bear on the software supplier to improve the usability of the system, as a number of errors and difficulties could be attributed to this issue (although it was acknowledged that the suppliers current focus would be around developing the updates necessary for 30 hours implementation).

v. Interim Payment Options for 30 Hours Implementation This report set out developments in connection with the reintroduction of Interim Payments in the light of the 30 hours implementation.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report and the proposed Interim Payment Options following recommendations from the EECG; b) Requested that the situation be kept under review. vi. 2017 - 2018 Free Early Education Funding Agreement In preparation for 30 hours free childcare implementation the DfE have published the new Early Education and Childcare Statutory Guidance, along with the Early Years Entitlements Operational Guidance. This guidance has been used to update the 2017/18 Funding Agreement

The Working Group: a) Noted the report and the draft 2017/18 Funding Agreement;

8 b) Expressed views on the Funding Agreement for consideration by the LA. vii. Nursery Schools with Neighbourhood Centres Nursery school colleagues informed the group about a matter relating to the revised arrangements relating to schools that now have Wellbeing Prevention and Early Help (WPEH) services within their buildings.

The Working Group: a) Noted the information provided and asked to be kept updated on progress.

The Forum are asked to ratify the Working groups recommendations.

8. Recommendations from the High Needs Block Working Group To consider the recommendations from the High Needs Block Working Group held on 8 June 2017

i. 2016/17 Schools Budget Outturn Report A report was provided setting out information on the Schools Budget outturn position for 2016/17 for the High Needs Block. The overall High Needs Block budget at 31 March 2017 shows an underspend of £0.585m. Further details of individual budget lines were provided, together with information about reserves at 31 March 2017.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report and the Schools Budget Outturn position for 2016/17 in relation to the High Needs Block; b) Agreed that the underspends on the Early Intervention Services could be carried forward into 2017/18, but requested that further information be provided by the services to set out how this funding would be utilised; c) Requested a more detailed breakdown of the £1.062m overspend on the Schools Delegated Budget; d) Requested a report to a future meeting about the SEND policies and provision in Lancashire and the financial implications to the High Needs Block.

ii. School Balances and Clawback 2016/17 This report set out the year end position of schools' delegated budgets at 31 March 2017 and the provision of clawback.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Noted the overall position of school balances at 31 March 2017 and the individual school level information provided in the report; c) Noted the application of clawback to 6 schools (including one special school) as at 31 March 2017, in accordance with the arrangements previously agreed by the Forum; d) Supported the clarification that DFC balances were not subject to clawback being included in the School Balances and Clawback policy for 2017/18.

iii. Alternative Provision (AP) Places Update This report provided an update around AP provision in the primary and secondary sector and about Lancashire Hospital Education Service.

9 The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Supported an increase in the number of primary AP commissioned placements from 132 to 152 (an increase of 20), to be utilised to ensure the LA meets its statutory duties and to increase access to programmes to prevent exclusions; c) Requested further reports providing details of the additional places as they are commissioned, including impact evaluation information; d) Supported an increase in the Hospital Education Budget of £107,500 for 2017/18, in response to the identified cost pressures.

iv. Payment and Recoupment of DSG Funding for Non Maintained Establishments The LA has recently been reviewing some payment processes and a report was presented setting out some proposals in connection with non-maintained establishments.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Supported the introduction of the revised payment and recoupment arrangements for DSG Funding for Non Maintained Establishments, involving the final monthly payment each term being adjusted to reflect the High Needs Block top-up re-determinations.

v. Schools Forum Annual Report 2016/17 Each year the Schools Forum publishes an annual report setting out items of business in which the Forum has been involved. A draft Forum Annual Report for 2016/17 was provided for consideration by the Working Group.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Recommend to the Schools Forum that the 2016/17 Annual Report be approved for publication.

vi. PRU Top-Up Funding Previous reports to the Working Group had set out information on PRU top up funding, following concerns raised by the sector about the Lancashire rates. A report was presented providing the latest information supplied by the PRU headteachers.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Supported the principle of reviewing the PRU formula, including the delegation of the Additional Top-Up budget; c) Requested that PRU headteachers and officers meet to further review the PRU formula and develop proposals, including: a. Key principles for any proposals; b. Modelling of any proposed mechanisms, providing evidence and impact data; d) Requested that primary PRUs, the West Lancashire special school and the PRU academy are included in the process; e) Requested that an update be provided to the next meeting of the Working Group.

The Forum are asked to ratify the Working groups recommendations.

10 9. Apprenticeship Levy Vanessa Carthy, Programme Relationship Manager, Skills Learning and Development will present this item.

The new Apprenticeship Levy came into force on 6th April 2017. The purpose of the Levy is to fund apprenticeships to significantly increase the quality and quantity of apprenticeships in England. This report provides an update about the implementation of the Apprenticeship Levy in Lancashire.

10. Forum Correspondence To note the Forum related correspondence since the last meeting.

11. Any Other Business To consider any items of AOB.

12. Date of Future Meetings To note that the next scheduled Forum meeting will be held at 9.30 am Tuesday 24 October 2017 at County Hall, Preston. The venue is subject to confirmation.

11 LANCASHIRE SCHOOLS FORUM Date of meeting 4 July 2017

Item No 3

Title: Forum Membership Appendices (if applicable) N/A

Executive Summary

This report summarises the changes to the membership of the Forum since the last meeting.

Forum Decision Required

The Forum is asked to:

a) Note the report; b) Thank Max Lunt, Paula Evans , Neil Ringrose, Barry Payton, Steve Parsons and Sally Cryer for their contribution to the Forum; c) Welcome Stephen Benson his first Forum meeting; d) Note the outcomes of Forum elections and appointments for September 2017.

12 Background This report provides information on Forum membership issues that have arisen since the last Forum meeting. Details are provided below.

Annual Membership Review As part of the Forum's annual membership review, the following members will be leaving the Forum at the end of the school year. This will be the last Forum meeting for:

 Paula Evans Primary School Headteacher;  Neil Ringrose Primary School Headteacher;  Barry Payton Primary School Governor;  Steve Parsons Primary School Governor.

Members will wish to thank these colleagues for their contributions to the Forum.

Arrangements have been made to find replacement members for these vacancies in time for the start of the new school year in September 2017 (see below).

Special School Governor In April 2017, correspondence was received from Max Lunt, special school governor, tendering his resignation from the Forum with immediate effect.

Stephen Benson from Mayfield School has been appointed to replace Max.

Members will wish to thank Max for his contribution to the Forum and welcome Stephen to his first Forum meeting.

Secondary School Headteacher Secondary School Headteacher Sally Cryer has resigned from the Forum with immediate effect.

LASSH have been asked if they wish to nominate a replacement secondary headteacher.

Members will wish to thank Sally for her contribution to the Forum.

Primary School Headteachers Nominations for the two primary school headteacher vacancies arising from the annual membership review were sought earlier in the summer term.

Two nominations were received for the two places available and appointments have therefore been offered to:

 Chris Shields, headteacher at Walton-le-Dale Primary School;  Lucy Sutton, deputy headteacher at Brockholes Wood Primary School.

These colleagues will be invited to the Forum and relevant Working Groups from September 2017.

Primary School Governors Four nominations were received for the two primary school governor vacancies available on the Forum from September 2017. It was therefore necessary to conduct an election process to determine which candidates should be appointed to the Forum.

All primary school governing bodies were entitled to vote in the election and voting closed on 12 June 2017. The voting results for the successful candidates are shown below:

Nominee No of Votes (%) successful Kathleen Cooper 26 (34%) Louise Martin 21 (28%)

74 votes were cast in the election, representing a turnout of 16%.

Kathleen Cooper from SS Peter and Paul Catholic Primary School, Mawdesley and Louise Martin from St Anne's Catholic Primary School, Leyland will join the Forum in September.

Members will know that Kathleen has previously been a member of the Forum.

14 Item 4 LANCASHIRE SCHOOLS FORUM

MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD AT 9:30 A.M. ON TUESDAY 21 MARCH 2017 AT WOODLANDS CONFERENCE CENTRE, CHORLEY

Present: Schools Members: Primary School Governors Academy Governor Stephen Booth Chris McConnachie Gerard Collins Louise Shaw Eleanor Hick Steve Parsons Academy Principal/Headteacher Ruth Pollock John Tarbox Laurence Upton Alternative Provision Academy Primary School Headteachers Daniel Ballard Special School Academy Tim Cross (Chair) Andy Squire Michael Holden Susanne Kime Special School Governor Steve Robinson Max Lunt

Secondary School Governors Special School Headteacher Janice Astley Shaun Jukes Lesley Burrows Short Stay Governor Secondary School Headteachers Sandra Thornberry Steve Campbell Ivan Catlow Short Stay Headteacher Sally Cryer Mark Jackson Nursery School Headteacher Kay Burke

Nursery School Governor Thelma Cullen

Members: Early Years - PVI Peter Hindle Anne Peet

Other Voting Members CC Nikki Hennessy County Council Lead Member for Schools Robin Newton-Sims Lancashire Colleges Representative

Observers Observers - Members of the Public Elaine Brooks Kathleen Cooper John Davey Liz Laverty Rod Marsden Sam Ud-din

In attendance: Paul Bonser For item 6: Vanessa Carthy, Programme Andrew Good Relationship manager, Skills Learning and Christine Hurford Development. Kevin Smith David Graham (observing) Heather Stevens Neil Smith (observing)

1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Apologies for absence were received from: Felicity Ackroyd, Sharon Alexander, Jane Beckford, Cheryl Brindle, Grant Carruthers, Paula Evans, Janet Hamid, Angela Johnstone, Barry Payton, Alan Porteous, Neil Ringrose, Brian Rollo, David Swaffield, Alan Whittaker, and Mike Wright.

2. SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS There were no substitute members at this meeting of the Forum.

3. FORUM MEMBERSHIP Forum noted membership changes since the last meeting and welcomed:

 Ivan Catlow, headteacher of St Cecilia's R.C. High School as a secondary headteacher representative;  Andy Squire, Principal, Tor View School representing special academies;  Francesca Sullivan has joined the Forum as a trade union observer representing Unite.

Annual Membership Review  As part of the Annual Membership review correspondence has been sent to schools members of the Forum asking whether they wish to continue on the Forum from September 2017.  The closing date for responses is Friday 24 March 2017.  Any schools members that had not yet replied, were asked to do so by the deadline.

4. MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING HELD ON 24 JANUARY 2017 The Forum agreed the minutes of their last meeting held on 24 January 2017 as a correct record.

5. MATTERS ARISING There were no matters arising from the minutes not covered elsewhere on the agenda.

6. APPRENTICESHIP LEVY Andrew Good, Head of Service Financial Management (Development and Schools) and Vanessa Carthy, Programme Relationship Manager, Skills Learning and Development presented this item.

16 The new apprenticeship levy requires all employers operating in the UK, with a pay bill over £3 million each year, to invest in apprenticeships.

Confirmation was provided about the implications for various types of school:  For community and voluntary controlled, the local authority is the employer. The local authority remains legally responsible for payment of the Apprenticeship Levy for schools under their control, even if they’ve delegated responsibility for payroll. Each local authority has an annual allowance of £15,000;  For voluntary-aided schools, foundation schools, free schools and academies, the governing body is the employer. Each governing body will be entitled to an allowance of £15,000;  Multi-academy trusts will get a single annual allowance of £15,000.

Correspondence from a Lancashire payroll provider was also highlighted and it was noted that advice received from HMRC indicated that the County Council would need to pay the levy liability for all community schools, regardless of who was the payroll provider.

Information was also shared about how the apprenticeship levy allowance could be spent: and the tasks that the County Council would undertake for community schools.

School representatives indicate that as the apprenticeship levy allowance cannot be spent to cover the wages of apprentices schools were likely to use the levy allowance to ‘skill up’ existing staff in ‘relevant’ qualifications.

The Forum: a) Noted the report; b) Requested that the Forum and schools be kept informed of developments as the Apprenticeship Levy is fully implemented.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE SCHOOLS BLOCK WORKING GROUP On 7 March 2017.the Schools Block Working Group considered a number of reports. A summary of the key issues and recommendations arising from the Working Groups considerations were provided for the Forum.

i.Schools Block Funding Principles 2018/19 The Schools Forum 2017/18 Schools Block Budget setting principles were used to steer the 2017/18 Schools Block budget setting process and, following approval by the EFA, individual school budgets for 2017/18 were then issued on 21 February 2017.

This report asked members to give initial consideration to the budget setting principles for 2018/19 and to consider whether to largely continue the existing funding principles for April 2018, which should minimise turbulence between 2017/18 and 2018/19 budgets, or attempt to move the Lancashire formula towards the SNFF rates in order to reduce the level of turbulence in 2019/20.

An analysis of the funding rates proposed by the SNFF compared to Lancashire's 2016/17 rates was provided for the Working Group.

It was emphasised that the DfE proposals were still subject to consultation, so final rates for 2018/19 could change.

17 The Working Group a) Noted the report; b) Expressed an initial view that the 2018/19 funding principles should attempt to move the Lancashire formula towards the national rates in order to minimise the turbulence that will be created by the SNFF hard formula in 2019/20.

The Forum agreed that any final decisions should await confirmation of 2018/19 national funding rates and local modelling of possible options.

ii.Schools National Funding Formula (SNFF) - stage 2 consultation Following discussions at the special meeting of the Schools Forum on 24 January 2017, a draft Forum response to the DfE's Schools National Funding Formula (SNFF) - stage 2 consultation had been produced. Members considered two suggested amendments that had been made to the initial response. The two suggested amendments that had been made to the initial response, both to the Q14 text:

o If no additional funding can be secured to accompany SNFF implementation, some primary school colleagues felt that funding for the Universal Infant Free School Meals Project should be diverted into general school funding, as this was seen as a higher priority o A key rationale for the SNFF proposals is to provide a national formula that allocates funding to maintained and academy schools on an equal basis and based on a schools characteristics and those of their pupils. Yet the proposals do not require Multi Academy Trusts (MATs) to passport the full national allocations to their academies, whereas LAs must passport full national allocations to maintained schools. Therefore this does not resolve the issues around schools/academies with the same characteristic being funded at different levels in different LAs or MATs as the funding received by a school will be dependent upon the level of top slice that individual MATS enforce. This would also seem to be at odds with the SNFF principles.

There was considerable discussion about the second proposed edit at the working group.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Recommended to the Forum that the draft response be amended to include both suggested edits, the first edit was unanimously supported, the second following a vote in which:  21 members voted in favour of the inclusion;  1 member voted against the inclusion;  1 member abstained. c) Colleagues were encouraged to respond to the consultation on an individual basis

The Forum ratified the Working Group's recommendations. iii.Schools in Financial Difficulty Schools in deficit that fail to submit a recovery plan or are in breach of an existing recovery plan at the end of August then move into the Schools in Financial Difficulty (SIFD) policy. A number of factors have arisen that have caused the LA to reconsider the SIFD policy and timeframes. A revised SIFD policy and timetables were therefore submitted for consideration by Forum that look to bring forward trigger points and introduce a voluntary partial suspension of delegation for certain schools in an attempt to moderate deficit budget situations.

Factors that have caused the LA to reconsider the policy and timeframes, include:

o There are considerable cost pressures on the school sector, with inflation, increased staffing and pension costs and, in some cases, the apprenticeship levy combining to create a difficult financial environment for all schools and academies, especially as income is flat. This increases the risk that more Lancashire schools will face financial difficulties in the coming years; o The introduction of the Schools National Funding Formula (SNFF), commencing in 2018/19, causes considerable turbulence at individual school level. Approximately 2/3 Lancashire schools and academies lose under the DfE's proposals and even those that are SNFF winners may be real terms losers when other costs pressures are taken into account; o SNFF proposals also introduce additional constraints into the school funding system which may well limit the support that the LA is able to offer schools in financial difficulty. In 2017/18, the Forum again approved a SIFD de-delegation, which is used to finance the support provided to schools facing deficit budgets. A one-off de-delegation of the structural deficits reserve was also approved in 2017/18, to mitigate the risks associated with schools with large deficits either closing or becoming sponsored academies under formal brokered sponsorship arrangements. It appears that from 2019/20, de-delegations will no longer be allowable.

Members considered the proposed revisions and also the wider context of school finances, which all agreed were under considerable pressure.

Possible school to school support arrangements and the sharing of good practice amongst schools and governing bodies was also discussed.

It was noted that a key to recovery from a deficit position was a close working relationship between the school and the LA.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Supported the proposed amendments to the Schools in Financial Difficulty arrangements, including: o The deadline for submission of Budget Anticipation/Recovery Plan being brought forward to 30 June rather than 31 August each year. o The introduction of a voluntary partial suspension of delegation for schools due to the concern around risks of the level of deficit increasing without additional controls. By seeking the agreement of the Governing Body to this arrangement on a voluntary basis it is hoped to engage with the full governors at an early stage and prevent the need to more formal warning notices and suspensions of delegation that have a statutory process involving the Regional Schools Commissioner (RSC).

The Forum ratified the Working Group's recommendations. iv.Water Retail Market From the 3 April 2017, businesses in England will be able to choose their supplier of water and wastewater retail services. LCC is currently monitoring the water retail market and is awaiting further details and developments in the framework offerings before deciding upon

19 how LCC will procure a subsequent water contract. It is envisaged that any contract procured will include the option for schools to join as part of a wider corporate contract.

Schools may receive, or have already received, communication from Waterplus and/or other water retailers regarding competition. Such communication may seek to encourage schools into signing or switching contracts at the earliest opportunity. Whilst schools are free to make their own arrangements regarding water contracts if they so wish, please be aware that if you do sign up to a contract, you may be tied into terms that may restrict your ability to join any future LCC corporate contract.

It is advisable therefore that Schools carefully consider what they are signing up to if they wish to make their own arrangements.

Information has recently been shared with schools via the Portal and separate contact has also been made with a handful of schools who are supplied by Yorkshire Water to explain the situation for them too (in essence Yorkshire Water will continue to supply them as opposed to UU/Water Plus

The Working Group: a) Noted the report.

The Forum noted the report.

v.Apprenticeship Levy A verbal update was provided for members about the introduction of the Apprenticeship Levy and how it will impact on various categories of school. The possible charges and benefits of the Levy were discussed and the possible options around whether schools bought into the LCC payroll service.

More information on this issue was provided at item 6

The Working Group a) Noted the report.

The Forum noted the report.

8. RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE EARLY YEARS BLOCK WORKING GROUP On 28 February 201.the Early Years Block Working Group considered a number of reports. A summary of the key issues and recommendations arising from the Working Groups considerations were provided for the Forum.

i. Early Years National Funding Formula (EYNFF) – Lancashire Implementation 2018/19 Following discussions with the Working Group, a principle of stability in the Early Years National Funding Formula (EYNFF) was adopted for 2017/18 in Lancashire. This report sought the initial views of the Working Group around the shape of the 2018/19 proposals, which will then be subject to a consultation with all Lancashire providers.

2018/19 EYNFF Proposals

Universal Base Rate

20 In 2018/19, the LA proposes that a Universal Base Rate is implemented across all settings. However, it is proposed to offer a further year of transition for providers where the base rate is reducing. The LA is therefore proposing to move half way from current transitional rate levels to the estimated universal base rate level in 2018/19.

The Lancashire Universal Base Rate in 2018/19 is estimated to be circa £4.08 per hour. The base rates for childminders and nursery classes, including the remaining transitional protection would be as follows:

o Child minders - £4.49 per hour o Nursery classes - £4.26 per hour

For maintained nursery schools, the supplementary grant would continue to be available to provide funding stability in 2018/19.

Funding Supplements The EYNFF guidance sets out various requirements and options in relation to funding supplements.

A supplement cap restricts the total value of supplements used in the formula that must not be more than 10% of the total value of planned funding to be passed through to providers. It was noted that there is considerable scope for increasing the level of supplements paid in the Lancashire EYNFF, as we are currently distributing well below the maximum allowable level. (Circa 2.5% compared to the 10% cap).

However, any increase in funding distributed via supplements would reduce funding available for base rates. The estimated 2018/19 Universal Base Rate of £4.08 referred to in the previous section assumed that the existing level of supplements continue. Also, the greater the variation from the existing supplement profile that is introduced, the more turbulence will be created at individual setting level and if more supplements are introduced, the larger variation there will be between settings based on eligibility to them.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Noted that clarification was awaited on the local Early Years MFG and the rate to be applied to the additional 15 hours; c) Recommended that the transitional options for 2018/19 towards a universal base rate be put to consultation with all providers, but commented that the responses may be influenced by the clarification information received from the DfE; d) Recommended that the mandatory derivation supplement continue in 2018/19 at the same funding level (circa 2.5%) and using the existing Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) methodology; e) Recommended that the continued use of a rurality supplement be put to consultation with all providers, but noted the LAs concerns about the data used in this factor; f) Recommended that the flexibility and quality supplements are not reintroduced into the Lancashire formula, having been previously discontinued; g) Recommended that the English as an additional language (EAL) factor is not introduced into the Lancashire formula, as the additional need associated with pupils with EAL is closely linked to deprivation. h) Noted that, subject to any further changes in Early Years Operational Guidance for 2018/19 from the EFA, the are no proposals to alter the Early Years Pupil Premium

21 (EYPP), Disability Access Fund (DAF) and SEN Inclusion Fund arrangements from April 2018.

Subsequent to the meeting further guidance has been received from DfE in response to the queries.

The Forum ratified the Working Group's recommendations.

ii. Supplementary Payments The Early Years Single Funding Formula makes payments to providers each term based on a termly headcount submission. Lancashire has also introduced arrangements where providers are able to submit a supplementary headcount return, which is designed to make a payment to settings for children who had not started at the date of the Headcount. However, the complexities of the DSG calculation methodology mean that Lancashire does not receive full payments for some of these supplementary children.

The Working Group: a) Noted the information; b) Requested further details of the impact any change to the Supplementary payments process may have on settings and overall funding levels.

The Forum ratified the Working Group's recommendations.

9. RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE HIGH NEEDS BLOCK WORKING GROUP To consider the recommendations from the High Needs Block Working Group held on 2 March 2017.

i. Membership The Schools Forum Regulations require that the Forum must include a member from a special school academy, if one exists in the LA area. In January 2017, Tor View Special School became the first special school academy in the County and, as such, is entitled to a place on the Forum.

As the funding for the academy will come from the High Needs Block, Tor View have been invited to nominate a representative to attend the Forum and the High Needs Block.

The Working Group a) Noted the report.

The Forum noted the report

ii. PRU Top-Up Funding At the last meeting of the High Needs Working Group, PRU representatives raised concerns about the level of funding received by the sector and the pressures this was causing. This report updated the Group on developments since the last meeting and requested a steer as to the next steps to be taken.

Subsequent to the High Needs Block meeting, finance officers attended the Secondary PRU headteachers meeting on 19 January 2017. At this meeting, further discussions took place around the PRU funding issue, which predominantly related to the level of top- up funding available.

The LA is a member of a regional network of school finance officers and has sought information on the top up rates paid to PRUs in other NW authorities. Replies from responding LAs were summarised for secondary PRU top up rates:

There was a significant variation in top up rates paid, ranging from £3,040 to £11,000. Many, but not all, of the rates were higher than paid in Lancashire, but were not always accompanied by the additional payments available in Lancashire.

In order to progress and provide modelling and analysis, PRU secondary headteachers were asked to meet and provide clarity on key funding requirements that are being sought to ensure that any final outcomes meet necessary timescales to facilitate changes for 2018/19 budget setting. This could then form the basis for a further paper to the next meeting of the Working Group.

In addition, the Headteacher of the Virtual School for Children Looked After and Vulnerable Children is due to attend the next secondary PRU headteachers meeting to take forward other discussions.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Requested that the various developments be taken forward and a further report presented to the next meeting of the group.

The Forum ratified the Working Group's recommendations. iii. High needs funding reform - stage 2 consultation This report provided a copy of the draft Forum response to the DfE's High Needs Funding reform consultation and allowed an opportunity for members to comment or propose any final amendments. One suggested edit was proposed to the draft response.

 Addition to Q3: o We are particularly concerned that the KS2 tests are flawed and will not provide a reliable data source for funding purposes.

The Working Group a) Noted the report; b) Recommended that the draft High Needs response, including the proposed amendment, as set out at Appendix A, is signed off by the Forum at the meeting on 21 March 2017; c) Individual schools were again encouraged to respond to the consultation.

The Forum ratified the Working Group's recommendations. iv. Updates on Alternative Provision: This report provided an updated on the Primary Intervention funding, including the West Lancashire pilot and primary exclusions and on the pressure on secondary alternative provision placements.

Primary Inclusion Support:

23 Since June 2016 the Primary Intervention funding (£1,000,016) allocated by School Forum has been used to fund a revised system of early support to primary schools to support inclusion, including the outreach element of the West Lancs Inclusion Pilot. It was predicted and reported to Forum in July 2016 that this funding would not be sufficient during this first year of the new practice.

Currently, £206,000 of the budget is remaining, with the spring term funding to be claimed.

Data was provided to demonstrate that Primary permanent exclusions in each area- North, South and East have reduced in Autumn Team 2016 as compared to Autumn Term 2015.

There have been no primary permanent exclusions to date in the area of the West Lancs Pilot. This has helped support capacity at Golden Hill to provide respite placements. To date West Lancs Outreach ETHOS has worked on 86 cases of which 32 are now closed and 54 remain active. 33 schools are currently being supported.

In addition to the staged support a number other interventions have been supported and information was provided to the Working Group.

AP High Needs Funding: High Needs funding, originally allocated to provide additional top up funding for high needs pupils in PRU/AP has also funded a growing number of AP placements for pupils who are not appropriately placed in a PRU, or when there are no/few PRU place available.

Forum approved additional primary AP places in July 2016, 8 have been commissioned as part of the West Lancs pilot and to date 2 additional places commissioned at Hendon Brook PRU. The results of significant growing demand on the AP High Needs budget has resulted in the predicted overspend on the original allocated budget. Current overspend is £406,560

A breakdown of AP placements was provided for the Working Group.

Alternative Providers commissioned by the LA. 7 Pupil Referral Units provide the majority of commissioned AP placements for the LA Other providers include:  FE Colleges.  Training providers- is Strawberry Fields, PVC.  Independent AP or Free School AP i.e. The Alternative School, Burnley Heights, Tower Learning.

All providers are registered schools, colleges or training providers and assurances were given that the providers were being monitored for quality of provision.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report and the increased demand on secondary alternative provision placements; b) Expressed continued support for the Primary Inclusion strategy.

Officers reported that the DfE were undertaking a piece of work around AP outcomes, costs and quality assurance, which would impact on the Lancashire arrangements.

24 The Forum ratified the Working Group's recommendations and asked to be kept informed of local and national developments.

10. FORUM CORRESPONDENCE The Forum considered correspondence received since the last meeting.

a) Correspondence from a Secondary Academy The Schools Forum has been copied into email correspondence between a secondary academy and BTLS in connection with the operation of the Lightspeed filtering system. Following discussions with the Forum Chair and BTLS colleagues, this matter has been referred to the BTLS Focus Group, which has a remit to consider ICT services. The Forum Chair and the head of the academy involved are members of this group.

The Forum: a) Noted the correspondence; b) Noted the comments and assurances received from BTLS; c) Recommended that this issue be considered further at the BTLS ICT Focus Group.

b) Correspondence from a Secondary School about Education Welfare Service (EWS) Funding Correspondence has been received from a Lancashire secondary school about EWS funding.

The email notes that schools feel that any influence on or timely information flow about the funding has been lost and schools now only receive spasmodic communication about the funding as it is allocated and there is no prior notifications or rationale shared with schools in advance to assist with budgetary planning. The correspondence seeks the Forum's assistance to influence a closer involvement of school finance staff in the EWS funding process to assist with the communication flow around this important funding.

The Forum: a) Noted the correspondence; b) Requested that the LA look at the process involved with the allocation of EWS funding to see if any improvements can be made.

c) Correspondence from a Lancashire Payroll Provider Email correspondence has been received from a Lancashire payroll provider about the approach for dealing with the Apprenticeship Levy for community schools receiving payroll from this provider.

The Forum: a) Noted the correspondence; b) Noted that advice received from HMRC indicated that the County Council would need to pay the levy liability for all community schools, regardless of who was the payroll provider.

d) Correspondence from DfE about Schools Forums DfE are undertaking a review of Schools Forums and have asked for a conversation with Lancashire about the way Forums operate and whether and specifically:

 Are there things you do in Lancashire that you think might be different from other areas?  Are there things the Department / EFA could do to support any of this?

The Forum: a) Noted the correspondence; b) Noted that the Chair would contact the DfE.

11. ANY OTHER BUSINESS

a) Devolved Formula Capital (DFC) The LA as a responsible body receives DFC from the EFA for community schools each year and holds this capital funding centrally until schools draw down against their capital expenditure. This has always caused additional administration and communication for both the LA and for community schools. For the 2017/18 financial year, the LA is looking to simplify DFC processes and procedures for schools and the LA. Currently each community school allocation is held centrally by the LA, but it is proposed that for 2017/18, the allocations will be delegated to each school.

The Forum: a) Noted the report and that further information would be provided in due course.

b) Classification of Capital Threshold Officers reported that consideration was being given to adjusting the capital expenditure threshold and that this may enable additional VAT to be reclaimed.

The Forum: a) Noted the report and that further information would be provided in due course.

c) Forum Letter to Lancashire Members of Parliament The Forum Chair commented that there were considerable pressures on school funding throughout the agenda, including cash flat funding settlements, cost pressures from inflation, extra staffing costs and the apprenticeship levy and the impact of the SNFF. These factors combined to create a funding crisis for Lancashire schools and academies.

The Forum: a) Support the Forum chair writing a letter to Lancashire Members of Parliament to highlight the funding issues and to seek support in obtaining a better deal for Lancashire

d) CC Nikki Hennessy CC Hennessy indicated that this may be her last Schools Forum meeting.

The Forum a) Thanked CC Hennessy for all her help and support as Lead Member for Schools

26 12. DATE OF FUTURE MEETING The next scheduled Forum meeting will be held at 9.30 am Tuesday 4 July 2017 at County Hall, Preston.

Members agreed the schedule of Forum meetings for 2017/18.

27 LANCASHIRE SCHOOLS FORUM Date of meeting 4 July 2017

Item No 6

Title: Recommendations of the Schools Block Working Group

Annexes 1, 2, 3 and 4 refer

Executive Summary

On 20 June 2017, the Schools Block Working Group considered a number of reports, including:

o 2016/17 Schools Budget Outturn Report – Schools Block; o School Balances and Clawback 2016/17; o Schools Block Budget; o Schools Heading Towards Financial; o School Expansion Policy (Growth Fund); o Devolved Formula Capital (DFC); o Charging for Admissions Appeals; o Payment and Recoupment of DSG Funding for Non Maintained Establishments; o Urgent Business Procedure: DfE Consultation: Changes to the criteria for agreeing loan schemes; o Schools Financial Value Standard (SFVS); o Surface Water and Highways Drainage Charges; o Schools Forum Annual Report 2016/17; o Any Other Business; o Venue for Future Meetings.

A summary of the key issues and recommendations arising from the Working Group's considerations of the items are provided in this report.

Recommendations

The Forum is asked to: a) Note the report from the Schools Block Working Group held on 20 June 2017; b) Ratify the Working Group's recommendations.

28 Background On 20 June 2017, the Schools Block Working Group considered a number of reports. A summary of the key issues and recommendations arising from the Working Group's considerations of the items are provided in this report.

1. 2016/17 Schools Budget Outturn Report – Schools Block In advance of expected national regulations to ring-fence the Schools Block ahead of the proposed Schools National Funding Formula (SNFF), the Forum has agreed that in principle the Lancashire allocations will be ring-fenced in the first instance.

A report was presented providing information on the Schools Budget outturn position for 2016/17, for the Schools Block. The table below shows the Schools Block outturn position for 2016/17.

Budget Actuals Variance £m £m £m Central Services 1.278 1.288 0.010 Commissioned Services 2.399 1.982 -0.417 Schools Delegated 612.757 611.383 -1.374 De-delegated 2.330 2.330 0.000 DSG Grant -618.764 -616.392 2.372 Total 0.000 0.591 0.591

Commentary The overall Schools Block budget at 31 March 2017 shows an overspend of £0.591m. Further details were provided on the individual budget lines. Key variances were largely attributable to reduced income and expenditure relating to schools that closed/academised in year and to an underspend on the School Re-organisation budget, as fewer pupil were admitted at expanding schools than were forecast.

Opening Transfers Transfers Closing Schools Reserves and Provisions Balance In Out Balance £m £m £m £m DSG Reserve Opening Balance 20.152 20.152 Underspend 16/17 0.593 0.593 Other Adjustments -0.468 -0.468

1 DSG Reserve 20.152 0.593 -0.468 20.278

Schools in Financial Difficulty Opening Balance 4.546 4.546 Schools Clawback for 15/16 0.054 0.054

29 Underspend 16/17 0.613 0.613 2 Schools in Financial Difficulty 4.546 0.667 0.000 5.213

De-delegated Reserve Opening Balance 0.712 0.712 Overspend 16/17 -0.049 -0.049

3 De-delegated Reserve 0.712 0.000 -0.049 0.662

Supply Teacher Reimbursement Opening Balance 0.689 0.689 Underspend Teaching Supply 16/17 0.294 0.294 Overspend Non Teaching 16/17 -0.026 -0.026 4 Supply Teacher Reimbursement 0.689 0.294 -0.026 0.956

School Reserves Opening Balance 53.713 53.713 Schools operating in year surplus 5.157 5.157 Schools operating in year deficit -13.874 -13.874 Closed school deficit moved to DSG 0.499 0.499 Academy School closed in year -0.215 -0.215 5 School Reserves 53.713 5.656 -14.089 45.280

Total Schools Reserves and Provisions 79.812 7.210 -14.632 72.390

Commentary The Total Schools Reserves and Provisions at 31 March 2017 of £72.390m is a reduction from the position in previous years, which equated to £79.812m at 31 March 2016 and £89.890m at 31 March 2015. This equals a reduction in overall reserves of £17.5m over the last two years, although it was noted that in overall terms the reserves remained in a fairly stable position.

Further information was provided in connection to the 2016/17 movement in Schools Reserves and Provisions.

Assurances were provided that the premiums would be adjusted in future years to ensure the non-teaching element of the Staff Supply Scheme became self financing and it was noted that reports would be provided to a future meeting about proposals for 2018/19 scheme arrangements

2. School Balances and Clawback 2016/17 This report set out the year end position of schools' delegated budgets at 31 March 2017 and it was noted that the final outturn position against schools delegated budgets at 31 March 2017 was an overspend of £8.716m. This meant that school balances have decreased by £8.716m in 2016/17, to a total of £44.997m. Further analysis if the balances position was provided

2016/17 School Balances - In-Year Movement of Balances by Phase

Opening Balance In Year Movement Closing Balance Phase 1/04/16 16/17 31/03/17 £ £ £ Nursery 846,543 -46,335 800,209 Primary 36,874,434 -2,871,201 34,003,233 Secondary 10,579,858 -6,157,401 4,422,457 Special 4,489,959 723,455 5,213,413 Short Stay 922,325 -365,000 557,325 Total 53,713,118 -8,716,481 44,996,637

The outturn position reveals that school balances have decreased by over 16% at 31 March 2017, which is largest single year reduction on record, and reflects the increasing financial pressure on school budgets.

2016/17 School Balances –In-Year Movement Count of Schools by Phase

Count of deficit in Count of surplus in Phase year year Nursery 13 11 Primary 293 181 Secondary 47 15 Special 9 19 Short Stay 6 3 Total 368 229

Overall, 368 schools (62%) operated an in year deficit in 2016/17, spending funding from reserves. This compares to 276 schools in 2015/16 and 256 in 2014/15.

2016/17 School Balances – No of Schools in Surplus/Deficit by Phase

Count of Deficit Count of Surplus Phase close balance close balance Nursery 5 19 Primary 17 457 Secondary 14 48 Special 2 26 Short Stay 2 7 Total 40 557

40 schools ending the year in deficit. This compares to 25 schools with deficit balances at 31 March 2016 and 18 schools with deficit balances at 31 March 2015. There are schools from every sector facing financial difficulty and ending the year in deficit.

Forecasting The reduction in schools balances to £44.996m (including closures/academy conversions), compares to a forecast reduction in balances to £23.689m, which was indicated by schools’ spending plans for 2016/17. As the Forum are aware, it is not uncommon for the actual outturn to deviate from school forecasts and the table below has been updated for the 31 March 2017 figures:

2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m Total Forecast outturn 18.466 24.722 30.018 38.687 35.526 39.103 31.648 23.689 Total Actual outturn 39.823 47.317 52.225 51.480 55.854 56.373 53.946 44.996 Total Variance 21.357 22.595 22.207 12.793 20.328 17.270 22.298 21.307 Percentage Variance 116% 91% 74% 33% 57% 44% 70% 90%

Governors Financial Training The county wide finance governor training programme is now delivered by Schools Financial Services and a handful of schools have also taken the opportunity to request school specific training. This latter part of the programme is looking to be expanded subject to resources.

School Closures/Academy Conversions During 2016/17, one secondary school closed, with a deficit balance which was a charge on the DSG reserve. The table below shows the impact of these closures/conversions on the school balances position at 31 March 2017.

Balance Carried Balance Carried Balances paid Closed school Forward as at 31 Forward as at 31 to or accrued in 2016/17 March 2017 after March 2017 Phase for Academies balance deducting including schools Conversions transferred to Academy converted to 2016/17 DSG reserve conversions & Academy Closed Schools

£ £ £ £ Nursery 800,209 800,209 Primary 34,003,233 34,003,233 Secondary 4,422,457 -197,067 -498,988 5,118,511 Special 5,213,413 411,872 4,801,541 Short Stay 557,325 557,325 Total 44,996,637 214,805 -498,988 45,280,820

These adjustments mean that the final level of aggregate school balances at 31 March 2017 equates to £45.281m.

Individual School Balances

32 Attached at Annex 1 to the report are details about the movement in balances at an individual school level in 2017/18. As previously requested by the Forum, in addition to the year-end balance by school, information is included in this annex setting out:  Year-end balance adjusted for approved exemptions;  Adjusted balance as a % of CFR income;  Adjusted balance per pupil.

Following some discussions is was requested that individual balances information relating to Lancashire academies be collated from statutory returns.

Clawback Arrangements 2016/17 In accordance with the School Balances and Clawback policy agreed by the Forum for 2016/17, exemptions have been applied by the LA to balance figures at four schools. Requests for an exemption at a further school was rejected as this did not comply with the policy.

In addition, one appeal to an initial clawback calculation was received. This referred to a reimbursement for a suspension that was allocated at year end and pushed the school into a clawback position. Had this information been received as a timely clawback exemption request, it would have been excluded from the clawback calculation as a 'late allocation'. The LA is therefore minded to allow the appeal and to rescind the clawback.

In accordance with the 2016/17 School Balances and Clawback policy, clawback is therefore to be applied to 6 schools in relation to their balances at 31 March 2017, totalling £33k.

No specific projects for the use of this clawback funding were proposed during 2016/17 and, as previously agreed by the Forum, the unallocated clawback funding of £53k was transferred to the Schools in Financial Difficulty Reserve at year-end.

School Balances and Clawback 2017/18 Members considered what School Balances and Clawback arrangements should be put in place for 31 March 2018. The only suggested change to the policy for 2017/18 from the LA relates to clarification around Devolved Formula Capital (DFC) balances. This clarification would confirm that DFC balances at year end do not contribute to the school revenue balances, and so are not included in the clawback calculations or levels.

33 noted that where academies are part of a wider MAT, it is not possible to identify a balance at an individual establishment level).

3. Schools Block Budget At the last Forum meeting members gave some initial consideration to the possible 2018/19 Schools Block Funding Principles. The Forum agreed that any final decisions on these principles should await confirmation of the 2018/19 national funding rates and local modelling of possible options.

Initial timetables for the DfE response to the stage 2 SNFF funding consultations suggested that announcements could be made before the end of the summer term 2017. However, the result of the snap general election for 8 June 2017 make any pre summer decisions seem increasingly unlikely.

In the meantime, there have been two DfE publications that provide further 2017/18 schools block information that may provide useful background to help inform future Forum deliberations. Details are provided below.

Producing DSG Baselines for 2018/19 Financial Year Allocations - 2017/18 Baselines In March 2017, the EFA issued a 2017/18 Baselining exercise. This required a return to be made to the EFA setting out the local DSG budget decisions taken in relation to the 2017/18 Schools Budgets. The information will be used by the EFA to produce baselines for 2018/19 Financial Year Allocations. A copy of the Lancashire response was provided for the group.

Some of the key Schools Block issues were noted:  The Schools Block increase in funding is due to the effect of circa 2,200 additional pupils when compared to 2016/17;  2016/17 budgets included one-off funding of £4.195m, which related to the delegation and de-delegation of the LA's strategic reserve;  There is no movement of funding between DSG blocks in Lancashire, so all Schools Block funding received is allocated for Schools Block purposes.

Schools block funding formulae 2017 to 2018 Analysis of local authorities’ schools block funding formulae In April 2017, the EFA published analysis of local authorities’ schools block funding formulae for the 2017/18 financial year. The 2017/18 analysis of local authorities’ schools block funding formulae offers an insight into where Lancashire's formula sits in the national context. Some of the key issues 2017/18 were highlighted for the Group and could be used as background information to inform possible decisions in 2018/19.

34 4. Schools Heading Towards Financial Difficulty A number of key indicators in the school balances report reflect the challenging financial climate within the school sector. Further budget monitoring has identified that, in addition to schools that are in a deficit budget position, there are other schools that are heading swiftly towards a deficit position, quickly burning through reserves. Schools in deficit are supported by the Forum's Schools in Financial Difficulty (SIFD) policy and arrangements. However, there are a significant number of high risk schools using up reserves, particularly in the secondary sector, as indicated by the reduction in aggregate balances within the phase.

Proposals have therefore been developed by the School Improvement Service and School Finance to offer some support to these high risk schools to assist in responding to the financial challenges being faced.

In order to ensure that the proposals were appropriate and helpful, and could be taken forward collaboratively, discussions have taken place with the secondary heads association (LASSH) at the June Executive meeting. The discussions with LASSH provided contextual information about the financial situation and the legal framework.

The LASSH executive were very supportive of the proposals and the following actions were agreed:  Secondary schools will be asked to complete benchmarking information around key indicators like class sizes and pupil teacher ratios, contact ratios, structure and teaching loads of Senior Leadership Teams and curriculum structures. Consideration will be given to the format this will take, either by developing a Lancashire information sheet, or using packages already available;  Seminar(s) to be arranged for the autumn term, targeting high risk schools, but offering a general invite to all secondary schools  Invitations to the seminars, hosted by School Improvement Service and School Finance, will be extended to headteachers, Chairs of Governors and School Business Managers;  Examples of good practice and input from schools that have been in financial difficulty could also feature;  As a starting point, high risk schools may be identify as those that used 30% of their balances in year and where the overall balance remaining is below 3% of Consistent Financial Reporting (CFR) income;  Follow-up visits to schools to provide more targeted support from finance and school improvement could be made available on request.

Budget Income and Expenditure Returns It was noted that a number of I&E returns were still outstanding for 2017/18 even though the submission deadline had passed. There was a concern that some schools may not have submitted their returns as they were struggling to set a balanced budget. Schools were encouraged to respond immediately, even if the budget was in deficit, so that support could begin to be provided.

Schools with Structural Deficits Andrew Good updated members on considerations that were taking place around some schools that had structural deficits and low pupil numbers. It was emphasised that no final decisions had been taken, and in some instances, the PFI contract implications of any

35 solutions would need to be considered. Any proposals developed by the Council would then be discussed with schools in the area as a collegiate approach would be necessary to find appropriate solutions.

5. School Expansion Policy (Growth Fund) Schools Forum has in place a School Expansion Policy (Growth Fund) to assist schools/academies commission by the LA for basic need growth. Since first introduced in 2014, the policy has been kept under review and has been amended on a number of occasions. The latest version of the policy, agreed by the Forum in January 2017, was provided for the Group.

Schools/academies can choose how to draw down the funding over the period of the support, receiving an equal payment over the 5 or 7 years of the planned growth cycle, or in 2 or 3 instalments, to better cover different class organisation structures.

A report was presented highlighting future risks that exist around the application of this policy caused by the proposals contained in the DfE's Schools National Funding Formula (SNFF) arrangements. The latest DfE's SNFF proposals envisaged a 'soft' introduction from April 2018, with the 'hard' formula in place from April 2019. It is unclear what, if any, impact the outcome from the June 2017 snap general election with have on the proposals. However, risks remain around the implications for the Lancashire Growth Fund policy.

The DfE proposals indicated that Growth Funding for 2018/19 will be funded on a historic spend basis including both 'explicit' and 'implicit’ growth funding. Explicit funding is that identified in the Growth Fund, and 'implicit' growth will be calculated from any adjustments made in each LA's Authority Proforma Tool (APT) submissions to individual schools data to reflect the number of pupils they expect to arrive.

Lancashire may therefore expect approximately £2m of Growth Funding in 2018/19, which DfE will set aside before calculating schools’ budgets under the SNFF. The Growth Funding will then be allocated back to LAs for distribution locally.

SNFF consultation documents acknowledged that historic spend on growth will not necessarily predict the amount of funding that will be needed for future growth accurately. DfE indicated that they have also rejected school capacity survey (SCAP) forecasts and Office for National Statistics (ONS) population forecasts as alternatives.

However, DfE recognise that a different approach is needed in the longer term and the DfE's current proposals for 2019/20 favour a factor based on lagged pupil growth. This method would count all pupil number increases in every school at a year-group level between the 2

36 previous years and use this to calculate the total amount of pupil growth in each local authority area. The total amount of funding available nationally for growth would be allocated to local authorities on a per-pupil basis, based on the distribution of the lagged pupil growth across the country.

Whilst final consultation outcomes are still awaited the LA has been reflecting on the options presented by the DfE and has concluded that there is genuine concern about the longer term growth fund position.

Other aspects of the SNFF will severely restrict any local flexibility that may be available to the LA/Forum, which may impact on the ability to sustain the current Lancashire growth fund methodology in a lagged system. Also, the lack of a predictable funding stream creates uncertainty and risk for any schools or academies considering proposals from the LA to expand numbers, making them less likely to participate. There is also uncertainty for existing school expansions that are part way through the growth cycle and the LA intends to write to these schools after the Schools Forum.

Supply of School Places in Lancashire Members entered into a wider debate about the place planning policies in the county, especially the requirements linked to housing developments with associated infrastructure and school requirements.

Members noted that updated supply of school places policy was due to be reported to the Cabinet in August 2017 and it was agreed that this could be made available to the Forum to help inform the Growth Fund policy.

Some members also felt that there was a disconnect at national level between the pressure put on local councils to approve additional house building and other government departments responsible for funding related costs. It was noted that school capital funding is made available and infrastructure contributions, via Section 106 planning obligations and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) were intended to contribute to the improvements required in a locality due to additional houses.

Restriction of Support to LCC Decisions In addition, clarification was requested about the use of the growth fund to support schools/academies that are receiving additional pupils from outside Lancashire, or from independent schools (i.e. implications that are not as a result of County Council decisions). This issue had been previously discussed at Forum with a view emerging that these types of costs would not be supported as Lancashire would not have received any DSG funding to support the increased pupil numbers, so would need to await the following census and consequent DSG allocation in order to fund the school increase. However, this had not been explicit in the policy, so confirmation was requested.

37 c) Felt unable to provide a guarantee that existing growth fund allocations would be honoured from reserves, as there was too much uncertainty around the level of possible allocations to Lancashire, or local flexibilities that may be available; d) Requested a future report around the updated supply of school places policy to help inform any future Growth Fund policy; e) Asked the Forum to consider writing to the Government to highlight the disconnect at national level between the pressure put on local councils to approve additional house building and other government departments responsible for funding related costs; f) Supported a clarification that the growth fund could only be used to support implications that are as a result of County Council decisions and cannot support those schools/academies that are receiving additional pupils from outside Lancashire, or from independent schools, as Lancashire would not have received any DSG funding to support the increased pupil numbers.

6. Devolved Formula Capital (DFC) Devolved Formula Capital (DFC) is direct funding for individual institutions to maintain their buildings and fund small-scale capital projects.

Local Authorities (LAs) receive the DFC payments for their maintained schools and are required to pass on these allocations to the schools. In Lancashire, the LA has held the DFC payments centrally for non-voluntary aided schools for accounting purposes, but decisions about DFC expenditure have been taken at school level. Separate arrangements exist for VA schools, involving the relevant diocesan/church authorities and academies receive allocations directly from the EFA.

The LA has recently been reviewing its capital expenditure arrangements, systems and processes, including DFC. It has been concluded that to be fully compliant with the EFA guidance, the DFC funding should be delegated to non-VA schools in Lancashire. It is therefore proposed to delegate DFC to all non-VA schools in the County from September 2017. This would also have the advantages of providing more direct control for schools.

Analysis of the proposals has been undertaken and this was shared with the group. It was noted that only 14 schools had a negative DFC balance at 31 March 2017 and 12 of these negative balances could be met in full from 2017/18 DFC allocations. This left only 2 schools with negative balances at the proposed 1 September 2017 delegation point, totalling less then £3k.

The LA intents to produce a comprehensive list of FAQs to accompany the DFC delegation, which should include answers to many of the queries schools may have around eligible DFC expenditure and accounting practices and codes. This would include confirmation that DFC balances will not count towards clawback calculations or levels.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Supported the proposals to delegate DFC to non-VA schools in Lancashire, from September 2017.

38 7. Charging for Admissions Appeals The DfE introduced revised school funding arrangements from 2013/14, which prescribed a reduced number of school funding formula factors that could be used to allocated school resources. These funding reforms removed the ability of local authorities to specifically allocate funding for own admissions authority schools and ended the separate grant paid to academies for admissions. The reforms also restricted local authorities’ ability to increase the amount of budget retained centrally for admissions, to ensure that as much money as possible was allocated to schools.

More recently, following a consultation, the DfE issued revised statutory guidance for local authorities on schemes for financing schools in December 2015. This revision added an additional paragraph to Section 6.2 'Circumstances in which charges may be made'. The supplementary paragraph is shown below:

6.2.20 Costs incurred by the authority in administering admissions appeals, where the local authority is the admissions authority and the funding for admission appeals has been delegated to all schools as part of their formula allocation.

The Government's consultation response document indicated that whilst respondents' views were split, the DfE had decided to proceed with the proposed amendment to the scheme statutory guidance. They indicated that the change offered greater flexibility for LAs in complying with the School Admission Appeals Code. Paragraph 1.14 of the Code states that:

“Local authorities must allocate reasonable funds to governing bodies of maintained schools which are admission authorities to meet admission appeals costs.”

DfE indicated that with the change to the scheme guidance, it is intended that, from 2016/17, LAs would be able to charge all schools, including those for which they are the admissions authority, for admission appeals. DfE said that where funding is held centrally for this purpose local authorities may wish to increase delegation to schools for 2016/17 in order to transfer both the funding and responsibility for admission appeals. Should local authorities, in agreement with their Schools Forum, wish to continue to retain funding centrally to cover admission appeals for all types of schools, they will be able to do so. If local authorities need to increase their centrally retained admissions funding to do this, they need the consent of the School Forum and Secretary of State to do so.

A report on the revised scheme guidance was reported to the working group/Forum in the spring term 2016 and at the time it was decided not to introduce this optional amendment into the Lancashire scheme or change the local appeal arrangements.

Delegation of Admissions Funding By way of background, the LA, in consultation with the Forum, undertook a major review of the Lancashire funding formula in 2010, with changes commencing from April 2011. This was a local review, ahead of the national funding reforms introduced from April 2013, and was responding to concerns that the Lancashire formula had become increasingly complex to administer and its educational rationale has been eroded over time. In part, the proposals looked to simplify the Lancashire formula arrangements.

The Lancashire formula in the years leading up to and including financial year 2010/11 incorporated a small number of factors relating to various legal responsibilities of schools.

39 These factors allocated resources on a per pupil basis for relatively small amounts of money. Funding for admissions/appeals in aided schools was similar to that delegated to community schools for Climate Levy responsibilities, s and it was therefore agreed that this funding could simply be delegated to all schools within the general AWPU allocation from April 2011. These formula arrangements were then superseded by the Government's revised funding framework from April 2013.

LCC Appeals Traded Service The County Council currently operates a traded service to all VA / foundation schools and academies to provide an admissions appeals service for establishments that are their own admissions authority. The County Council administers appeals at community schools without charging the school, as the LA is the admissions authority. In total, the LA undertakes about 2,500 appeals each year. The traded service generates an income of circa. £180k per year.

Diocesan/Church Authorities have contacted the LA to challenge the fact that VA schools are being treated differently that community schools. The Diocese are interpreting the Appeals Code and scheme guidance that all schools should be treated equally and dispute the traded services that only charges the Aided and Foundation schools.

Future Arrangements Lancashire does not actually keep any Schools Budget central items for Appeals. The funding for Appeals staff either comes from the County Council budget, or the traded service offered to VA/Foundation schools.

Funding is held central for Admissions, which amounted to £0.937m in the 2017/18 budget.

When considering possible options for the future, it is not considered practical to increase central expenditure to incorporate funding to cover the costs for appeals at VA/Foundation schools. Schools National Funding Formula (SNFF) proposals are likely to introduce a Central Schools Block for central items expenditure and this will face severe financial pressure and so is unlikely to be able to incorporate any additional expenditure.

The only route providing equity across all types of schools is to introduce the option for charging all schools for the appeals service that is provided in the DfE's December 2015 revised statutory guidance for local authorities on schemes for financing schools. Introduction of this change in the Lancashire scheme would need formal approval by the Schools Forum, following a consultation with all schools.

As any change would take some time to introduce, a transitional solution for 2017/18 may need to be considered, which might involve the waiving of traded appeals charges for aided/foundation schools for 2017/18, perhaps funded from savings elsewhere in the Schools Budget Central Expedite Limit.

Members considered the options available in light of this information and noted that the service were working on more details proposals for charging policy that would incorporate all schools and academies. Various charging methodologies were being considered and further information would be provided to the Forum in the autumn term.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report;

40 b) Expressed a view that professional support to assist the appeals process was a vital service and therefore recommended that a pragmatic solution to this issue being found; c) Requested further information at the autumn term cycle of meetings .about possible charging options before making any final recommendations; d) Supported the use of savings in the Schools Budget in 2017/18 being used to fund a transition period in 2017/18 to enable development of the revised traded offer to be introduced from April 2018.

8. Payment and Recoupment of DSG Funding for Non Maintained Establishments Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) funding is received by the LA to make payments to maintained and non-maintained establishments. The non-maintained establishments include academies, FE colleges and other non-maintained and independent schools.

Payments to these non-maintained establishments are in the main High Needs Block top-up funding allocations for Lancashire pupils attending these schools, but also include a small number of early years payments to primary academies with nursery classes.

Lancashire High Needs Block pupil related top up funding is calculated using data supplied by each school to Lancashire County Council Teams. The High Needs top-up allocations in the budget are calculated using the previous term's data and the level of top-up funding is re- determined up or down termly in line with the counts in January, May and October. Currently, for non-maintained establishments, if the re-determination reveals an underpayment, then an additional BACS payment is made to the establishment for the in-term correction. In addition the following term's monthly payment is then adjusted accordingly to be in line with the data received in the prior term.

If the re-determination reveals an overpayment has occurred, then an invoice is issued to the establishment to recoup the overpayment amount and as above the following term's monthly payment is then adjusted accordingly to be in line with the data received in the prior term.

The LA has recently been reviewing some payment processes and a number of issues have been identified with this top-up arrangement for non-maintained establishments. These include: o The arrangements differ from the process used to pay circa 600 maintained schools, including circa 70 bank account schools. In line with EFA guidance, the LA is keen to ensure that there is a consistent approach across all providers; o Making additional BACS payments and raising invoices causes the LA to incur additional resource and costs. o Adjusting the final monthly payment each term has the added advantage of being a more automated process. On occasion, invoices go unpaid, particularly when issued around school holidays. Debt management and legal processes can be initiated due to non-payment, which can again incur additional costs on both the LA and establishments. . o The process to adjust scheduled monthly payments to reflect changes and recalculations in allocations is the same method as employed by the EFA when dealing with adjustments for over/underpayments relating to the LA.

41 Following the review, the LA is proposing to adopt a similar process for adjustments to High Needs Block top-up payments at non-maintained establishments as is used at maintained bank account schools. This involves the final monthly payment each term being adjusted to reflect the High Needs Block top-up re-determinations. This process would also be used for a small number of Early Years Block payments to academies with nursery classes.

The proposal would involve the introduction of this revised process from the autumn term 2017, rather than summer term as specified in the original report, in order to provide adequate notice to establishments.

It was noted that the High Needs Block supported this approach.

9. Urgent Business Procedure: DfE Consultation: Changes to the criteria for agreeing loan schemes On 24 March 2017, the DfE launched a consultation on a proposed directed revision to section 4.10 (Loan Schemes) of the Scheme for financing schools guidance and proposals to make a related revision to section 8.1 of the Treatment of surplus and deficit balances when maintained schools become academies guidance note for schools and local authorities. The closing date for the consultation was 21 April 2017.

As the consultation ran over the school Easter holidays and the closing date was prior to any scheduled Forum meeting dates, a draft response was prepared and circulated for comment/approval using the Urgent Business Procedure.

By the urgent business request closing date of 20 April 2017, 16 responses had been received. Of these: o 14 replies (88%) supported the draft response, without amendment; o 2 replies (12%) supported the draft response, with amendment.

In connection with the replies advocating amendments, one of the replies suggested a minor tweak to the wording of the Forum response, whilst the other proposed a fundamental change to the response, suggesting that it should support the DfE proposals. The response received suggesting that the Forum should agree with the DfE proposals took a pragmatic view that loans were never intended to be used in connection with deficit school budgets and therefore supported the DfE clarification to ensure this position was made clear going forward.

Comments received from some members favouring the Forum consultation being sent without amendment acknowledged that the response was setting out a wider point about the pressures on school funding generally and were content to support this approach.

Urgent Business replies were discussed with the Forum Chair and as the majority of members responded in favour of the reply, this was agreed and a Forum response was submitted on 21 April 2017. A copy of the final Forum response is attached at Appendix A. Brief additional information about the DfE proposals is attached at Appendix B.

Final DfE decisions in response to the consultation are awaited.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report, b) Noted the decision taken under the Urgent Business Procedure and the final Forum consultation response submitted to the DfE.

10. Schools Financial Value Standard (SFVS) SFVS is a statutory requirement for all maintained schools and consists of 25 questions which governing bodies must formally discuss annually with the head teacher and senior staff. As Governing bodies have formal responsibility for the financial management of their schools, the standard is primarily aimed at governors.

Each year the Chief Finance Officer is required to report to the DfE the number of eligible schools which have failed to submit their return.

Due to the number of outstanding claims at 31 March 2014 the Forum introduced revised sanctions for none compliance. This included: o Reminder letter to schools yet to submit (copy to COG) mid April each year o Schools which have still to submit their return by 30 April will receive a pre-warning notice giving them three weeks to 21 May in which to comply. o Schools which fail to meet this deadline will receive a formal warning notice.

2016/17 Returns The above policy was again applied to the 2016/17 returns with the following results: o There were 29 schools which had not submitted their SFVS return by 31 March (this compares to 44 at the same stage last year). o By mid April there were 20 schools still to submit their return who were written to informing them of the approved policy. o By 28 April all but four returns had been received. All four schools gave assurance that this was awaiting full governing body approval and were subsequently received in early May.

All returns have therefore been received without the need for a pre warning notice. The SFVS assurance certificate showing 100% returns compliance has been signed by Neil Kissock, Chief Finance Officer and returned to the DfE.

Analysis of Returns As per DfE guidance the local authority uses schools’ SFVS returns to inform their programme of financial assessment and audit. Lancashire internal audit service use an internal audit risk assessment to prioritise those schools that should be audited and will take into account those schools who are consistently late in submitting their SFVS return or showing little improvement year on year.

Over the next month the audit service is also undertaking a review of SFVS responses to better support the assurance process. This will require a select number of schools to provide the evidence governors used to respond to several key SFVS questions. It will also look at who in school undertakes the detailed SFVS process. Whilst the DfE guidance says the

43 process can be delegated to a committee or working group there is increased evidence to suggest that in many schools the task is delegated to just one governor, usually the COG or Chair of Finance Committee, which reduces the opportunity for proper discussion to build resilience in governor understanding of financial management.

Some members did comment that the SFVS process was not a helpful one, but it was also acknowledged that it was a useful process in some schools to generate greater governor awareness and challenge.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report. b) Recommended that the returns timescale and sanctions policy introduced in 2014 is maintained

11. Surface Water and Highways Drainage Charges Previous reports to the Forum have set out the perceived inequalities in the charges levied for Surface Water and Highways Drainage (SWHD) for schools in the North West compared to other regions.

The County Council, the Forum, and individual members, have been involved in lobbying United Utilities (UU) for a reduction in charges in a long running campaign co-ordinated by Sefton Borough Council.

A letter has recently been sent to the Chief Executive of the County Council from United Utilities indicating that they have agreed to make some concessions to the SWHD charging for schools. A copy of this letter was provided for the Group.

Concessions described in the letter will provide a 50% discount to the wholesale site area charges for SWHD, to be introduced in 2018/19. It is suggested that for the majority of schools this would represent a 40% reduction in the overall waste water bill. The letter goes on to say that UU have also decided to provide a credit to schools in 2017/18; worth about 15% of their wholesale site area charges.

UU have indicated that they will write directly to affected bill payers explaining the changes. Whilst no specific costings are provided in the letter to the County Council, it is estimated that the full impact of this change could be over £1m annually for Lancashire schools from 2018/19.

Members welcomed this development but also noted that the eligibility criteria set out in the letter appeared to exclude nursery schools.

44 12. Schools Forum Annual Report 2016/17 Each year the Schools Forum publishes an annual report setting out items of business in which the Forum has been involved. In recent years this report has been streamlined to ensure it is a more manageable size for readers and incorporates the main headlines of the Forum's work throughout the year.

A draft Forum Annual Report for 2016/17 was provided for consideration by the Working Group.

13. Any Other Business Members raised a number of matters under AOB, including:

Home to Schools Transport A query was raised about the current home-to-school transport policy operated by the County Council in connection with a particular example in the Chorley area.

Subsequent to the meeting, information was obtained from the Pupil Access Team about the current home-to-school transport policy. Home-to-school transport is funded from the County Council budget and has been subject to changes over recent years due to the financial pressures on the County Council. A briefing note is attached at Annex 4.

Fire Safety in Schools Correspondence has been sent from two teacher unions and the fire brigade union to the Secretary of State seeking urgent reassurances about fire safety in schools in light of the fire at Grenfell Tower. The letter refers to Government changes in the connection with fire safety requirements in schools, including sprinkler systems and fire compartmentalisation requirements.

Members asked about the implications for Lancashire.

It was noted that this issue would also be raised at the LA's Schools Health and Safety Committee in July.

Work is ongoing at the County Council to collate information on the issues raised, but this has not yet been cleared by the LCC Management Team for release at this time. Once the information has been cleared then it will be forwarded to Forum members.

School Attendance Officer Members referred to a recent letter that had been published on the Schools Portal relating to the non-availability of school attendance support for schools in area North, due to staffing difficulties.

The Working Group expressed some concern about this situation relating to a statutory service and highlighted OfSTED implications for schools effected.

This concern has been raised by the service on behalf of the Working Group and a response is awaited.

14. Venue of Future Meetings The Working Group noted that the October 2017 meeting was scheduled for County Hall. Members expressed concern about travelling to central Preston for 9.30 and trying to park.

The Working Group asked that the Forum consider using an alternative venue for future meetings.

46 Closed *Adjusted Balance Balance schools or Balance Balance Brought In year Carried academy Carried as % of Balance Sch No School Name Forward as Surplus/ Forward as conversions Forward as CFR per pupil at 1 April (Deficit) at 31 March closing at 31 March Income 2016 2017 balance 2017 * Adjusted Balance Carried Forward as at 31 March 2017-excludes clawback exemptions £ £ £ £ £ % £ PRIMARY SCHOOLS 01001 Bowerham Community Primary and Nursery School 93,040 (8,792) 84,248 84,248 4.60% 196 01002 Dallas Road Community Primary School 89,403 5,119 94,523 94,523 5.44% 227 01003 Willow Lane Community Primary School 82,201 27,285 109,486 109,486 9.59% 561 01005 Lancaster Christ Church Church of England Primary School (28,401) 11,207 (17,194) (17,194) -1.79% (83) 01006 Scotforth St Paul's Church of England Primary and Nursery School 95,301 2,090 97,391 97,391 10.18% 441 01008 St Joseph's Catholic Primary School. Lancaster 55,483 (9,842) 45,641 45,641 3.90% 219 01009 Skerton St Luke's CofE Voluntary Aided Primary School 19,720 34,998 54,718 54,718 5.28% 270 01010 The Cathedral Catholic Primary School. Lancaster 58,153 (36,586) 21,567 21,567 2.16% 107 01011 Ridge Community Primary School 151,546 (50,791) 100,755 100,755 7.92% 548 01012 Ryelands Primary and Nursery School 169,329 (15,043) 154,286 154,286 7.28% 409 01013 Arkholme Church of England Primary School 36,631 (17,529) 19,102 19,102 4.61% 303 01014 Caton St Paul's Church of England Primary School 29,196 5,633 34,829 34,829 4.82% 200 01015 Moorside Primary School 115,934 (30,767) 85,167 85,167 3.98% 175 01016 St Wilfrid's Church of England Primary School. Halton 112,377 (874) 111,503 111,503 11.43% 470 01017 Hornby St Margaret's Church of England Primary School 39,047 7,314 46,362 46,362 12.68% 813 01018 Nether Kellet Community Primary School 54,279 4,150 58,429 58,429 10.38% 551 01019 Over Kellet Wilson's Endowed Church of England Primary School (16,728) 2,717 (14,012) (14,012) -2.39% (120) 01020 Leck St Peter's Church of England Primary School 59,307 (5,203) 54,104 54,104 17.59% 1,462 01021 Melling St Wilfrid Church of England Primary School 24,807 (28,738) (3,931) (3,931) -1.32% (106) 01022 Quernmore Church of England Voluntary Controlled Primary School 12,053 12,656 24,709 24,709 4.43% 242 01023 Tatham Fells CofE Voluntary Controlled Primary School 51,660 4,167 55,826 55,826 15.89% 1,241 01024 St Bernadette's Catholic Primary School. Lancaster 80,764 15,171 95,935 95,935 11.35% 463 01025 Caton Community Primary School 16,172 (19,639) (3,467) (3,467) -0.98% (83) 01027 Wray with Botton (Endowed) Primary School 47,431 3,433 50,864 50,864 15.45% 1,211 01028 Carnforth Christ Church. CofE. Voluntary Aided Primary School 25,283 11,428 36,711 36,711 7.14% 395 01029 Slyne-with-Hest. St Luke's. Church of England Primary School 103,615 (15,317) 88,298 88,298 8.43% 376 01030 Bolton-le-Sands Church of England Primary School 83,660 23,300 106,959 106,959 8.65% 354 01031 Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic Primary School. Carnforth 58,638 (16,095) 42,543 42,543 7.84% 506 01032 Warton Archbishop Hutton's Primary School 46,585 (13,886) 32,699 32,699 4.83% 282 01034 Yealand Church of England Primary School 19,969 (12,018) 7,951 7,951 2.69% 306 01035 Silverdale St John's Church of England Primary School 49,066 (6,365) 42,701 42,701 8.37% 502 01036 Thurnham Glasson Christ Church. Church of England Primary School 45,355 6,795 52,149 52,149 15.98% 1,862 01038 Cockerham Parochial Church of England Primary School 11,236 (5,505) 5,732 5,732 1.20% 70 01039 Dolphinholme Church of England Primary School 39,727 3,771 43,498 43,498 8.35% 544 01041 Ellel St John The Evangelist Church of England Primary School 74,454 (4,741) 69,713 69,713 7.72% 350 01042 Cawthorne's Endowed School. Abbystead (1,691) 7,960 6,270 6,270 2.04% 142 01044 Carnforth North Road Community Primary School (112,438) 54,945 (57,493) (57,493) -6.33% (301) 01046 Overton St Helen's Church of England Primary School 77,177 (9,023) 68,154 68,154 8.86% 401 01049 Great Wood Primary School 88,081 (14,034) 74,047 74,047 4.95% 189 01050 Torrisholme Community Primary School 74,936 14,569 89,505 89,505 5.58% 214 01051 Morecambe Bay Community Primary School 122,744 (40,735) 82,009 82,009 4.43% 253 01052 West End Primary School 2,924 20,642 23,566 23,566 2.00% 119 01053 Sandylands Community Primary School Morecambe 150,048 (9,224) 140,823 140,823 6.82% 326 01054 Lancaster Road Primary School 160,258 18,264 178,522 178,522 8.47% 385 01055 Poulton-le-Sands Church of England Primary School 103,494 (11,899) 91,595 91,595 9.74% 506 01056 St Peter's Church of England Primary School. Heysham 29,471 7,528 36,998 36,998 3.66% 152 01057 St Mary's Catholic Primary School. Morecambe 60,522 25,552 86,074 86,074 8.83% 478 01058 Trumacar Nursery and Community Primary School (4,844) (53,328) (58,172) (58,172) -3.56% (164) 01059 St Patrick's Catholic Primary School. Morecambe 60,670 30,327 90,997 90,997 9.89% 471 01060 Westgate Primary School and Children's Centre 236,258 12,055 248,313 248,313 9.71% 447 01061 Morecambe and Heysham Grosvenor Park Primary School 66,898 (27,891) 39,007 39,007 2.96% 137 01062 Mossgate Primary School 92,629 12,847 105,476 105,476 10.34% 510 02001 Carr Head Primary School. Poulton-le-Fylde 93,398 17,253 110,651 110,651 10.71% 494 02002 The Breck Primary School. Poulton-le-Fylde 145,190 (10,854) 134,336 134,336 9.22% 449 02003 Carleton Green Community Primary School 140,287 843 141,129 141,129 9.81% 434 02005 Poulton-le-Fylde St Chad's Church of England Primary School 91,895 2,042 93,937 93,937 9.22% 388 02006 St John's Catholic Primary School. Poulton-le-Fylde 81,151 (4,739) 76,412 76,412 8.85% 369 02007 Carleton St Hilda's Church of England Primary School 91,574 2,774 94,347 94,347 10.01% 467 02008 Fleetwood Chaucer Community Primary School 170,874 (23,935) 146,939 146,939 10.06% 532 02009 St Mary's Catholic Primary School. Fleetwood 61,154 2,839 63,994 63,994 8.07% 421 02013 Larkholme Primary School 96,971 (17,028) 79,943 79,943 5.83% 266 02014 Fleetwood Charles Saer Community Primary School 144,658 (9,960) 134,698 134,698 7.76% 430 02016 Shakespeare Primary School 82,721 (40,270) 42,452 42,452 2.31% 103 02017 St Wulstan's & St Edmund's Catholic Primary School & Nursery 20,693 1,617 22,310 22,310 1.57% 70 02018 Fleetwood Flakefleet Primary School 218,922 (59,543) 159,378 159,378 7.81% 379 02019 Preesall Carter's Charity (Voluntary Controlled) Primary School 35,919 (3,559) 32,360 32,360 3.89% 193 02020 Preesall Fleetwood's Charity Church of England Primary School 71,473 15,923 87,396 87,396 11.73% 683 02022 Pilling St John's Church of England Primary School 35,207 4,161 39,368 39,368 7.62% 386 02023 St William's Catholic Primary School. Pilling 4,907 (11,399) (6,492) (6,492) -2.23% (282) 02024 Great Eccleston Copp Church of England Primary School 56,162 7,036 63,198 63,198 9.76% 486 02025 St Mary's Catholic Primary School. Great Eccleston 14,801 (2,666) 12,135 12,135 4.27% 357 02027 Stalmine Primary School 59,313 (20,200) 39,113 39,113 7.23% 471 02030 Stanah Primary School 176,957 (17,053) 159,903 159,903 9.44% 414 02031 Thornton Cleveleys Northfold Community Primary School 112,525 (17,915) 94,609 94,609 9.78% 471 02032 Sacred Heart Catholic Primary School. Thornton Cleveleys 117,599 (49,836) 67,763 67,763 6.91% 331 02033 Thornton Cleveleys Baines Endowed VC Primary School 65,940 (3,712) 62,228 62,228 6.12% 295 02035 Thornton Primary School 77,724 (23,746) 53,978 53,978 7.93% 486 02036 Thornton Cleveleys Royles Brook Primary School 4770,639 22,399 93,038 93,038 7.65% 359 02037 Kirkland & Catterall St Helen's Church of England Primary School 71,593 6,497 78,090 78,090 11.06% 521 02038 Nateby Primary School 22,406 (18,727) 3,679 3,679 0.90% 50 Closed *Adjusted Balance Balance schools or Balance Balance Brought In year Carried academy Carried as % of Balance Sch No School Name Forward as Surplus/ Forward as conversions Forward as CFR per pupil at 1 April (Deficit) at 31 March closing at 31 March Income 2016 2017 balance 2017 * Adjusted Balance Carried Forward as at 31 March 2017-excludes clawback exemptions £ £ £ £ £ % £ 02039 Forton Primary School 58,310 (2,707) 55,603 55,603 11.92% 678 02040 St Michael's-on-Wyre Church of England Primary School 61,185 (1,798) 59,386 59,386 8.72% 499 02041 Bleasdale Church of England Primary School 9,661 (1,661) 8,000 8,000 3.64% 667 02042 St Mary's Catholic Primary School. Claughton-on-Brock 44,233 (9,442) 34,791 34,791 11.29% 870 02043 Bilsborrow John Cross Church of England Primary School 33,153 (18,276) 14,877 14,877 4.78% 354 02044 Calder Vale St John's Church of England Primary School 39,172 10,554 49,727 49,727 17.31% 2,368 02045 Inskip St Peter's Church of England School 41,602 (18,693) 22,909 22,909 7.21% 432 02046 Garstang St Thomas' Church of England Primary School 36,012 (2,826) 33,186 33,186 3.71% 178 02047 Winmarleigh Church of England Primary School 39,157 12,548 51,704 51,704 16.92% 2,068 02048 Scorton Church of England Primary School 46,006 3,379 49,385 49,385 14.62% 915 02049 Garstang Community Primary School 83,119 (12,350) 70,770 70,770 8.17% 345 02050 SS Mary and Michael Catholic Primary School. Garstang 36,608 17,539 54,148 54,148 7.71% 336 02051 Staining Church of England Primary School 80,148 (44,672) 35,476 35,476 3.66% 155 02052 Thornton Cleveleys Manor Beach Primary School 109,723 1,254 110,977 110,977 8.75% 470 04029 Weeton St Michael's Church of England Primary School 31,945 1,432 33,377 33,377 10.57% 759 04030 Ribby with Wrea Endowed Church of England Primary School 71,045 (1,639) 69,406 69,406 8.90% 451 04031 Bryning with Warton St Paul's Church of England Primary School 57,489 (16,036) 41,452 41,452 6.35% 373 04032 Freckleton Church of England Primary School 63,491 (40,285) 23,206 23,206 2.67% 132 04033 Singleton Church of England Voluntary Aided Primary School 60,656 (11,293) 49,363 49,363 9.07% 489 04034 Newton Bluecoat Church of England Primary School 45,844 1,469 47,313 47,313 4.87% 239 04035 Holy Family Catholic Primary School. Warton 59,303 (9,691) 49,612 49,612 8.82% 486 04036 Freckleton Strike Lane Primary School 94,951 (20,422) 74,530 74,530 7.69% 392 04037 Kirkham St Michael's Church of England Primary School 103,520 (26,282) 77,238 77,238 9.87% 525 04038 The Willows Catholic Primary School. Kirkham 58,064 (12,975) 45,088 45,088 5.58% 252 04039 Kirkham and Wesham Primary School 35,231 (22,082) 13,148 13,148 1.33% 66 04040 St Joseph's Catholic Primary School. Medlar-with-Wesham 46,216 (17,866) 28,350 28,350 5.03% 298 04041 Medlar-with-Wesham Church of England Primary School 77,876 559 78,435 78,435 9.60% 484 04042 Treales Church of England Primary School 58,613 (14,115) 44,498 44,498 11.71% 795 04043 Weeton Primary School 325,657 15,662 341,320 133,069 11.99% 859 04044 Lytham St Annes Mayfield Primary School 62,225 62,619 124,844 124,844 7.65% 342 04045 Clifton Primary School 3,874 20,995 24,868 24,868 2.24% 101 04046 Lytham St Anne's Ansdell Primary School 116,123 (2,452) 113,670 113,670 10.67% 468 04047 Heyhouses Endowed Church of England Primary School 4,058 18,798 22,856 22,856 0.98% 39 04048 Our Lady Star of the Sea Catholic Primary School.Lytham St Annes 86,157 16,404 102,561 102,561 10.66% 493 04049 Lytham Church of England Primary School 41,078 (30,676) 10,401 10,401 0.98% 44 04050 St Peter's Catholic Primary School. Lytham 89,342 (8,086) 81,256 81,256 7.86% 383 04051 St Annes on Sea St Thomas' Church of England Primary School 76,800 (35,631) 41,168 41,168 4.45% 203 04052 Lytham Hall Park Primary School 123,929 (3,668) 120,262 120,262 7.87% 308 06001 The Blessed Sacrament Catholic Primary School. Preston 145,106 (70,497) 74,609 74,609 3.71% 178 06002 Brookfield Community Primary School 98,797 (58,700) 40,097 40,097 4.41% 232 06005 Eldon Primary School 161,152 (30,024) 131,128 131,128 10.96% 604 06007 English Martyrs Catholic Primary School. Preston 81,774 (30,232) 51,542 51,542 5.00% 242 06008 Brockholes Wood Community Primary School 96,725 12,612 109,337 109,337 8.69% 434 06009 Frenchwood Community Primary School 169,058 2,669 171,727 171,727 11.29% 499 06010 Preston Grange Primary School 53,686 (27,850) 25,836 25,836 3.01% 168 06011 Preston Greenlands Community Primary School 88,700 10,388 99,088 99,088 8.64% 511 06012 Holme Slack Community Primary School 45,889 (27,316) 18,573 18,573 1.67% 102 06013 Holy Family Catholic Primary School. Ingol. Preston 53,461 21,391 74,851 74,851 7.93% 456 06014 Ingol Community Primary School 48,959 2,568 51,527 51,527 6.95% 393 06016 Moor Nook Community Primary School 141,923 22,047 163,970 163,970 11.69% 812 06019 Ribbleton Avenue Infant School 151,952 (11,026) 140,926 140,926 10.85% 607 06020 Ribbleton Avenue Methodist Junior School 117,744 5,199 122,943 122,943 10.79% 506 06021 The Roebuck School 88,055 (55,697) 32,358 32,358 1.78% 94 06022 Sacred Heart Catholic Primary School. Preston 70,250 18,235 88,484 88,484 9.49% 527 06023 Ashton-on-Ribble St Andrew's Church of England Primary School 160,173 15,071 175,244 175,244 10.13% 415 06024 St Augustine's Catholic Primary School. Preston 105,904 18,912 124,816 124,816 9.54% 459 06025 St Bernard's Catholic Primary School. Preston 123,204 (16,874) 106,330 106,330 10.65% 516 06026 St Gregory's Catholic Primary School. Preston 59,206 (18,032) 41,174 41,174 4.26% 198 06027 St Ignatius Catholic Primary School. Preston 124,180 (4,098) 120,082 120,082 11.88% 646 06028 St Joseph's Catholic Primary School. Preston 137,050 (53,794) 83,257 83,257 5.51% 275 06029 St Maria Goretti Catholic Primary School. Preston 96,939 (42,452) 54,487 54,487 5.33% 256 06030 Preston St Matthew's Church of England Primary School 116,785 (75,667) 41,118 41,118 1.95% 90 06031 Preston St Stephen's Church of England Primary School 101,681 (44,869) 56,812 56,812 4.15% 204 06033 Ashton Primary School 116,626 233 116,859 116,859 10.24% 596 06035 Preston Fishwick Primary School 42,918 25,289 68,207 68,207 7.44% 614 06036 St Teresa's Catholic Primary School. Preston 108,256 (44,417) 63,839 63,839 6.15% 387 06037 Lea Community Primary School 82,333 3,598 85,931 85,931 7.54% 430 06038 Lea Endowed Church of England School 74,745 (14,187) 60,558 60,558 8.85% 429 06039 St Mary's Catholic Primary School. Lea Town 64,931 (14,536) 50,395 50,395 9.47% 504 06040 Catforth Primary School 44,191 (2,451) 41,740 41,740 9.46% 614 06041 Sherwood Primary School 119,210 (63,797) 55,413 55,413 3.15% 134 06042 Cottam Primary School 45,299 (12,010) 33,289 33,289 3.68% 160 06043 Woodplumpton St Anne's Church of England Primary School 33,013 (9,793) 23,220 23,220 4.52% 239 06044 Broughton-in-Amounderness Church of England Primary School 59,565 (13,657) 45,908 45,908 4.13% 188 06046 Barton St Lawrence Church of England Primary School 58,084 12,445 70,530 70,530 9.72% 461 06047 St Mary and St Andrew's Catholic Primary School. Barton Newsham 58,557 4,224 62,781 62,781 10.02% 519 06048 Goosnargh Oliverson's Church of England Primary School 19,334 14,054 33,388 33,388 4.42% 195 06049 St Francis' Catholic Primary School. Goosnargh 54,852 (17,727) 37,125 37,125 7.24% 516 06050 Goosnargh Whitechapel Primary School 26,295 10,630 36,924 36,924 7.49% 406 06051 Grimsargh St Michael's Church of England Primary School 110,56648 (5,139) 105,427 105,427 10.77% 522 06052 Our Lady and St Edward's Catholic Primary School. Preston 103,107 3,738 106,845 106,845 11.71% 504 Closed *Adjusted Balance Balance schools or Balance Balance Brought In year Carried academy Carried as % of Balance Sch No School Name Forward as Surplus/ Forward as conversions Forward as CFR per pupil at 1 April (Deficit) at 31 March closing at 31 March Income 2016 2017 balance 2017 * Adjusted Balance Carried Forward as at 31 March 2017-excludes clawback exemptions £ £ £ £ £ % £ 06053 St Anthony's Catholic Primary School. Fulwood. Preston 60,254 39,740 99,994 99,994 7.74% 316 06054 St Clare's Catholic Primary School. Preston 50,242 29,197 79,440 79,440 7.67% 316 06055 Kennington Primary School 111,471 (22,271) 89,201 89,201 8.22% 376 06056 Fulwood St Peter's Church of England Primary School and Nursery 103,203 10,879 114,082 114,082 10.83% 494 06057 Fulwood and Cadley Primary School 130,255 12,710 142,965 142,965 10.53% 455 06058 Harris Primary School 66,935 (19,124) 47,811 47,811 5.17% 224 06060 Queen's Drive Primary School 77,827 94,776 172,603 172,603 8.89% 396 06062 Pool House Community Primary School 91,744 (40,464) 51,280 51,280 5.65% 394 06064 Brabin's Endowed School 57,270 (8,919) 48,351 48,351 11.39% 628 06065 St Mary's Roman Catholic Primary School. Chipping 41,581 9,766 51,347 51,347 18.73% 1,556 06066 Alston Lane Catholic Primary School. Longridge 40,815 13,658 54,472 54,472 5.99% 270 06067 Longridge Church of England Primary School 116,469 (50,516) 65,953 65,953 7.57% 344 06068 Barnacre Road Primary School. Longridge 6,610 (23,968) (17,357) (17,357) -1.93% (84) 06069 St Wilfrid's Roman Catholic Primary School. Longridge 69,179 14,326 83,504 83,504 9.67% 439 06070 Ribchester St Wilfrid's Church of England Primary School 61,075 (22,637) 38,438 38,438 7.97% 442 06071 Longsands Community Primary School 50,409 623 51,033 51,033 5.34% 247 06604 Deepdale Community Primary School 177,898 (22,004) 155,895 155,895 5.38% 244 07001 Cuerden Church School 100,325 (6,102) 94,223 94,223 10.46% 518 07004 Our Lady and St Gerard's RC Primary School. Lostock Hall 137,588 (17,356) 120,231 120,231 9.68% 380 07005 Higher Walton Church of England Primary School 77,277 (46,701) 30,576 30,576 5.44% 283 07006 St Patrick's Roman Catholic Primary School. Walton-le-Dale 58,964 (168) 58,796 58,796 6.42% 290 07007 Bamber Bridge St Aidan's Church of England Primary School 82,620 (26,555) 56,065 56,065 7.72% 428 07008 Walton-le-Dale. St Leonard's Church of England Primary School 56,587 30,918 87,506 87,506 7.24% 318 07009 Lostock Hall Community Primary School 212,852 (24,321) 188,530 188,530 10.04% 449 07012 Walton-le-Dale Primary School 58,174 16,172 74,345 74,345 4.20% 169 07013 Coupe Green Primary School 42,799 24,606 67,406 67,406 10.22% 503 07014 St Mary and St Benedict's RC Primary School. Bamber Bridge 98,475 6,770 105,245 105,245 8.42% 352 07015 Leyland St Andrew's Church of England Infant School 89,556 13,912 103,469 103,469 9.51% 565 07016 Leyland Methodist Junior School 101,075 11,038 112,112 112,112 10.45% 417 07017 Leyland St James Church of England Primary School 102,904 42,240 145,144 145,144 11.60% 615 07018 St Mary's Roman Catholic Primary School. Leyland 152,769 (38,587) 114,181 114,181 7.63% 360 07019 Woodlea Junior School 59,323 (709) 58,613 58,613 5.63% 257 07020 Lever House Primary School 81,986 (21,185) 60,802 60,802 5.23% 215 07021 St Catherine's Catholic Primary School. Leyland 70,705 (14,107) 56,598 56,598 5.94% 257 07022 St Anne's Catholic Primary School. Leyland 127,331 (20,056) 107,275 107,275 9.74% 475 07024 Northbrook Primary School 56,854 5,212 62,067 62,067 7.42% 383 07025 Seven Stars Primary School 67,187 (40,220) 26,967 26,967 2.47% 147 07026 Moss Side Primary School 116,481 (5,187) 111,294 111,294 9.60% 443 07028 Farington Moss St Paul's Church of England Primary School 84,369 (14,329) 70,040 70,040 8.40% 367 07029 Farington Primary School (3,066) (995) (4,061) (4,061) -0.47% (22) 07030 Longton Primary School 104,147 (35,380) 68,767 68,767 7.13% 323 07032 St Oswald's Catholic Primary School. Longton 80,545 27,844 108,389 108,389 10.58% 459 07033 New Longton All Saints' Church of England Primary School 86,151 (7,534) 78,618 78,618 9.20% 378 07036 Hoole St Michael Church of England Primary School 56,872 260 57,132 57,132 9.56% 529 07037 Little Hoole Primary School 65,439 (19,178) 46,260 46,260 4.99% 245 07039 Cop Lane Church of England Primary School. Penwortham 82,598 (21,621) 60,978 60,978 6.81% 293 07040 Penwortham Middleforth Church of England Primary School 66,482 (30,439) 36,044 36,044 3.64% 171 07041 Howick Church of England Primary School 32,993 297 33,290 33,290 6.24% 317 07042 St Mary Magdalen's Catholic Primary School 45,091 (4,089) 41,002 41,002 4.18% 202 07043 Penwortham Primary School 84,220 7,621 91,840 91,840 10.31% 452 07044 Whitefield Primary School 129,648 23,746 153,394 153,394 9.34% 426 07045 St Teresa's Catholic Primary School. Penwortham 118,055 (8,685) 109,369 109,369 9.47% 392 07046 Kingsfold Primary School 80,475 6,983 87,458 87,458 10.01% 554 07047 Penwortham Broad Oak Primary School 76,075 15,750 91,825 91,825 9.59% 464 07051 Samlesbury Church of England School 44,705 (23,294) 21,411 21,411 5.20% 315 07616 Leyland Methodist Infant School 106,943 (27,490) 79,453 79,453 8.50% 373 08001 Burscough Bridge St John's Church of England Primary School 54,114 (14,068) 40,046 40,046 5.20% 229 08002 Burscough Bridge Methodist Voluntary Controlled Primary School 29,078 (7,966) 21,113 21,113 5.20% 384 08003 St John's Catholic Primary School. Burscough 54,920 1,837 56,756 56,756 10.32% 684 08004 Ormskirk Lathom Park Church of England Primary School 16,363 19,832 36,194 36,194 12.21% 1,448 08005 Newburgh Church of England Primary School 51,275 (11,177) 40,098 40,098 6.62% 355 08006 Westhead Lathom St James' Church of England Primary School 55,927 (15,230) 40,696 40,696 8.44% 438 08007 Burscough Lordsgate Township Church of England Primary School 83,376 (19,227) 64,149 64,149 7.24% 314 08009 Ormskirk Asmall Primary School 20,310 27,570 47,880 47,880 5.55% 330 08011 Ormskirk Church of England Primary School 139,900 (17,089) 122,812 122,812 7.60% 357 08012 Ormskirk St Anne's Catholic Primary School 154,812 (58,851) 95,960 95,960 5.58% 226 08014 Ormskirk West End Primary School 62,836 (33,276) 29,560 29,560 4.61% 264 08016 Burscough Village Primary School 72,003 24,638 96,642 96,642 9.39% 431 08018 Bickerstaffe Voluntary Controlled Church of England School 56,756 (21,298) 35,458 35,458 7.19% 473 08019 Aughton Town Green Primary School 101,504 (21,719) 79,785 79,785 6.16% 245 08020 Aughton Christ Church CofE Voluntary Controlled Primary School 92,657 (4,552) 88,105 88,105 9.43% 414 08021 Aughton St Michael's Church of England Primary School 70,142 (27,052) 43,090 43,090 4.90% 224 08022 Rufford Church of England Primary School 52,866 9,599 62,465 62,465 9.64% 473 08023 Holmeswood Methodist School 26,737 2,884 29,622 29,622 7.84% 926 08024 Richard Durnings Endowed Primary School Bispham 35,608 (3,210) 32,398 32,398 7.09% 410 08025 Downholland - Haskayne Voluntary Aided CofE Primary School 45,454 6,096 51,550 51,550 13.26% 1,289 08026 Halsall St Cuthbert's Church of England Primary School 71,871 (17,321) 54,550 54,550 8.11% 357 08027 Scarisbrick St Mark's Church of England Primary School 37,316 (6,014) 31,302 31,302 7.55% 489 08028 St Mary's Catholic Primary School. Scarisbrick 21,168 9,205 30,373 30,373 5.52% 298 08029 Pinfold Primary School. Scarisbrick 4939,334 7,803 47,137 47,137 11.67% 1,428 08031 St Richard's Catholic Primary School. Skelmersdale 58,226 19,309 77,536 77,536 6.90% 320 Closed *Adjusted Balance Balance schools or Balance Balance Brought In year Carried academy Carried as % of Balance Sch No School Name Forward as Surplus/ Forward as conversions Forward as CFR per pupil at 1 April (Deficit) at 31 March closing at 31 March Income 2016 2017 balance 2017 * Adjusted Balance Carried Forward as at 31 March 2017-excludes clawback exemptions £ £ £ £ £ % £ 08033 Holland Moor Primary School 130,680 109,692 240,372 240,372 8.94% 465 08034 Cobbs Brow School 171,226 (12,285) 158,940 158,940 10.28% 513 08036 St James' Catholic Primary School. Skelmersdale 75,331 14,379 89,710 89,710 11.53% 564 08038 Skelmersdale Trinity Church of England/Methodist Primary School 58,603 18,209 76,812 76,812 6.99% 359 08040 Skelmersdale Crow Orchard Primary School 103,825 (27,810) 76,015 76,015 9.13% 475 08043 Little Digmoor Primary School 44,995 (43,488) 1,507 1,507 0.26% 17 08045 Bishop Martin Church of England Primary School 136,687 14,837 151,524 151,524 11.34% 736 08046 Hillside Community Primary School 94,542 (20,734) 73,808 73,808 6.23% 362 08050 St Edmund's Catholic Primary School. Skelmersdale 60,672 (46,165) 14,507 14,507 2.30% 136 08051 St John's Catholic Primary School. Skelmersdale 71,202 33,625 104,827 104,827 7.72% 499 08054 Delph Side Community Primary School 33,298 (19,089) 14,209 14,209 1.33% 84 08060 St Teresa's Catholic Primary School. Up Holland 61,812 (5,006) 56,806 56,806 6.25% 283 08061 Up Holland Roby Mill CofE Voluntary Aided Primary School 19,654 8,125 27,780 27,780 12.20% 2,525 08062 St Thomas the Martyr Church of England Primary School 73,476 26,102 99,577 99,577 10.30% 556 08063 Crawford Village Primary School 29,778 5,296 35,074 35,074 10.28% 746 08064 Wrightington Mossy Lea Primary School 19,649 (16,461) 3,187 3,187 0.85% 74 08066 Appley Bridge All Saints Church of England Primary School 62,146 (6,444) 55,702 55,702 6.67% 306 08067 St Joseph's Catholic Primary School. Wrightington 38,926 (15,357) 23,569 23,569 3.77% 200 08069 Our Lady and All Saints Catholic Primary School 50,686 (21,453) 29,234 29,234 5.50% 278 08070 Dalton St Michael's Church of England Primary School 24,704 (44,710) (20,006) (20,006) -4.91% (323) 08071 Tarleton Community Primary School 99,832 (30,324) 69,508 69,508 5.66% 251 08072 Tarleton Mere Brow Church of England Primary School 37,856 (20,126) 17,730 17,730 4.41% 257 08073 Tarleton Holy Trinity Church of England Primary School 33,129 (19,459) 13,670 13,670 1.78% 80 08074 Hesketh with Becconsall All Saints CofE Primary School 46,068 (3,957) 42,111 42,111 4.31% 201 08076 Banks Methodist Primary School 58,629 (7,388) 51,240 51,240 13.26% 1,114 08077 Banks St Stephen's Church of England Primary School 77,290 (5,510) 71,780 71,780 9.37% 440 08078 Brookfield Park Primary School 76,058 5,188 81,246 81,246 8.06% 439 08079 Woodland Community Primary School 114,612 (15,677) 98,935 98,935 4.80% 283 08080 St Francis of Assisi School 169,347 (13,341) 156,006 156,006 10.13% 661 09001 Chorley All Saints' CofE Primary School and Nursery Unit 86,203 (537) 85,666 85,666 6.69% 389 09002 Duke Street Primary School 96,272 (17,785) 78,487 78,487 5.53% 245 09003 Highfield Primary School 60,320 4,617 64,937 64,937 5.05% 256 09005 Chorley. The Parish of St Laurence CofE Primary School 91,102 (1,942) 89,160 89,160 10.29% 429 09006 Sacred Heart Catholic Primary School. Chorley 94,356 (18,597) 75,759 75,759 8.05% 366 09007 St George's Church of England Primary School. Chorley 63,867 (6,498) 57,368 57,368 4.94% 224 09008 Chorley St James' Church of England Primary School 31,329 56,026 87,355 87,355 7.99% 399 09009 St Joseph's Catholic Primary School. Chorley 71,621 (34,418) 37,202 37,202 3.91% 177 09010 Gillibrand Primary School 41,075 (3,181) 37,894 37,894 4.12% 183 09011 St Mary's Catholic Primary School. Chorley 77,093 (8,670) 68,423 68,423 6.49% 292 09012 Chorley St Peter's Church of England Primary School 104,704 8,599 113,303 113,303 7.82% 342 09014 St Gregory's Catholic Primary School. Chorley 65,376 28,246 93,621 93,621 9.24% 429 09015 Buckshaw Primary School 79,575 17,425 97,000 97,000 6.50% 439 09019 Rivington Foundation Primary School 18,136 (9,875) 8,262 8,262 1.31% 81 09021 Adlington St Paul's Church of England Primary School 50,656 (23,817) 26,839 26,839 3.28% 145 09022 Adlington Primary School 67,021 (29,449) 37,572 37,572 6.03% 294 09023 St Joseph's Catholic Primary School. Withnell 18,838 16,549 35,387 35,387 7.45% 478 09024 Lancaster Lane Community Primary School 67,453 (27,497) 39,956 39,956 3.87% 192 09025 Clayton-le-Woods Manor Road Primary School 97,599 7,754 105,353 105,353 10.16% 430 09026 Clayton-le-Woods Westwood Primary School 122,934 (18,475) 104,459 104,459 11.70% 550 09027 St Joseph's Catholic Primary School. Anderton 51,719 (7,258) 44,461 44,461 5.33% 230 09028 Anderton Primary School 102,375 (21,912) 80,463 80,463 8.54% 398 09029 Bretherton Endowed CofE Voluntary Aided Primary School 40,138 (1,992) 38,146 38,146 6.78% 347 09030 Brindle St James' Church of England Primary School 35,733 (9,416) 26,317 26,317 6.35% 393 09031 Brindle Gregson Lane Primary School 49,482 (41,600) 7,882 7,882 0.93% 39 09032 St Joseph's Catholic Primary School. Brindle 17,287 (5,198) 12,089 12,089 2.30% 136 09033 Christ Church Charnock Richard Church of England Primary School 87,684 (3,152) 84,532 84,532 10.34% 457 09034 St Bede's Roman Catholic Primary School. Clayton Green 70,266 (33,041) 37,225 37,225 4.20% 182 09035 Clayton-le-Woods Church of England Primary School 41,054 (10,218) 30,836 30,836 3.53% 161 09036 Coppull St John's Church of England Primary School 52,652 11,094 63,746 63,746 10.13% 601 09037 Coppull Parish Church of England Primary School 94,511 (17,709) 76,802 76,802 8.86% 394 09038 St Oswald's Catholic Primary School. Coppull 65,023 (4,980) 60,042 60,042 9.27% 480 09039 Coppull Primary School and Children's Centre 72,032 38,015 110,048 110,048 7.63% 390 09040 Croston Trinity and St Michael's CofE / Methodist Primary School 64,101 23,398 87,499 87,499 9.25% 407 09042 Eccleston St Mary's Church of England Primary School 20,784 583 21,368 21,368 2.43% 104 09043 Euxton Church of England Voluntary Aided Primary School 47,380 (37,539) 9,841 9,841 0.95% 46 09044 Euxton St Mary's Catholic Primary School 51,721 (10,399) 41,322 41,322 4.70% 191 09045 Euxton Primrose Hill Primary School 81,422 32,452 113,875 113,875 9.62% 414 09046 Heskin Pemberton's Church of England Primary School 10,017 (19,500) (9,483) (9,483) -1.98% (96) 09048 Mawdesley St Peter's Church of England Primary School 15,560 4,263 19,823 19,823 3.55% 191 09049 SS Peter and Paul Catholic Primary School. Mawdesley 44,183 (917) 43,266 43,266 12.14% 983 09050 Balshaw Lane Community Primary School 125,108 (52,130) 72,978 72,978 6.49% 263 09052 Eccleston Primary School 60,636 16,134 76,770 76,770 8.36% 384 09053 Clayton Brook Primary School 94,732 22,033 116,765 116,765 10.53% 628 09054 St Chad's Catholic Primary School 52,350 (4,857) 47,493 47,493 7.32% 344 09055 Whittle-le-Woods Church of England Primary School 93,278 24,238 117,516 117,516 10.83% 488 09060 Brinscall St John's Church of England/Methodist Primary School 75,150 21,456 96,606 96,606 10.43% 469 09062 Abbey Village Primary School 67,008 (5,599) 61,409 61,409 13.43% 787 09063 Withnell Fold Primary School 58,078 460 58,538 58,538 11.63% 616 09064 Trinity Church of England/Methodist Primary School 75,029 61,442 136,471 136,471 7.83% 309 11001 Baxenden St John's Church of England Primary School 5026,278 29,129 55,407 55,407 6.45% 283 11002 Accrington Benjamin Hargreaves CofE Primary School 43,135 13,927 57,062 57,062 7.23% 354 Closed *Adjusted Balance Balance schools or Balance Balance Brought In year Carried academy Carried as % of Balance Sch No School Name Forward as Surplus/ Forward as conversions Forward as CFR per pupil at 1 April (Deficit) at 31 March closing at 31 March Income 2016 2017 balance 2017 * Adjusted Balance Carried Forward as at 31 March 2017-excludes clawback exemptions £ £ £ £ £ % £ 11003 Accrington Green Haworth Church of England Primary School 36,161 493 36,653 36,653 7.03% 458 11004 Accrington Huncoat Primary School 113,706 (9,357) 104,350 104,350 10.90% 522 11005 Accrington Hyndburn Park Primary School 268,327 (25,809) 242,518 242,518 10.21% 522 11006 Accrington Peel Park Primary School 191,188 (3,481) 187,706 187,706 7.13% 304 11008 Accrington St Anne's and St Joseph's RC Primary School 105,505 (22,704) 82,801 82,801 6.17% 283 11010 Accrington St John with St Augustine CofE Primary School 60,997 24,420 85,417 85,417 8.48% 434 11011 Accrington St Mary Magdalen's Church of England Primary School 76,008 37,700 113,708 113,708 10.04% 571 11012 St Oswald's Roman Catholic Primary School. Accrington 74,670 4,863 79,533 79,533 9.68% 530 11013 Accrington St Peter's Church of England Primary School 76,187 (34,280) 41,907 41,907 4.57% 222 11014 Accrington Spring Hill Primary School 237,345 (15,787) 221,558 221,558 11.19% 565 11015 Accrington Woodnook Primary School 145,604 (18,340) 127,264 127,264 11.24% 633 11018 Oswaldtwistle Hippings Methodist Primary School 97,899 3,895 101,794 101,794 10.67% 492 11020 Oswaldtwistle St Andrew's Church of England Primary School (17,362) 11,915 (5,447) (5,447) -0.42% (20) 11021 Knuzden St Oswald's Church of England Primary School 71,818 (47,629) 24,188 24,188 2.53% 117 11023 St Mary's Roman Catholic Primary School. Oswaldtwistle 129,203 (7,416) 121,787 121,787 11.00% 479 11024 Oswaldtwistle West End Primary School 9,457 (10,294) (837) (837) -0.09% (4) 11025 Oswaldtwistle Moor End Community Primary School 100,385 1,811 102,196 102,196 9.70% 503 11026 Oswaldtwistle St Paul's Church of England Primary School 103,093 (57,912) 45,182 45,182 5.68% 350 11029 Clayton-le-Moors Mount Pleasant Primary School 152,864 (29,001) 123,863 123,863 7.06% 307 11030 St Mary's Roman Catholic Primary School. Clayton-le-Moors 51,380 (5,066) 46,314 46,314 6.81% 380 11031 Church. St Nicholas Church of England Primary School 109,578 (23,350) 86,228 86,228 8.15% 464 11033 Sacred Heart Roman Catholic Primary School. Church 125,223 (38,851) 86,372 86,372 8.19% 417 11036 Altham St James Church of England Primary School 42,847 (25,700) 17,147 17,147 4.99% 301 11038 Great Harwood St Bartholomew's Parish CofE VA Primary School 46,144 (12,227) 33,918 33,918 3.64% 162 11039 Great Harwood St John's Church of England Primary School 89,051 (33,537) 55,515 55,515 7.09% 391 11040 St Hubert's Roman Catholic Primary School. Great Harwood 83,789 (14,983) 68,805 68,805 8.43% 395 11041 St Wulstan's Roman Catholic Primary School. Great Harwood 53,092 (10,788) 42,304 42,304 5.14% 255 11042 Great Harwood Primary School (17,788) 66,128 48,341 48,341 4.67% 259 11045 Rishton Methodist School 92,766 (861) 91,904 91,904 10.62% 534 11046 Rishton St Peter's and St Paul's CofE Primary School 88,134 (61,385) 26,749 26,749 2.93% 142 11047 St Charles' Roman Catholic Primary School. Rishton 109,255 6,636 115,891 115,891 12.13% 613 11048 St Joseph's Roman Catholic Primary School. Hurst Green 34,880 (15,179) 19,701 19,701 4.74% 274 11050 Langho and Billington St Leonard's CofE Primary School 73,526 (3,216) 70,310 70,310 6.32% 249 11051 St Mary's Roman Catholic Primary School. Langho 86,515 (6,736) 79,779 79,779 7.86% 314 11052 Bolton by Bowland CofE Voluntary Aided Primary School 53,351 (9,345) 44,007 44,007 13.71% 1,073 11053 Thorneyholme Roman Catholic Primary School. Dunsop Bridge 55,067 (8,253) 46,814 46,814 15.26% 1,614 11054 Chatburn Church of England School 60,226 (3,953) 56,273 56,273 9.98% 521 11055 Clitheroe Brookside Primary School 113,331 (125,001) (11,670) (11,670) -1.40% (64) 11056 Clitheroe Edisford Primary School 69,869 (19,045) 50,824 50,824 4.90% 212 11057 Clitheroe Pendle Primary School 118,989 (4,908) 114,082 114,082 8.47% 332 11058 St James' Church of England Primary School. Clitheroe 141,524 (42,481) 99,043 99,043 8.15% 352 11059 St Michael and St John's RC Primary School. Clitheroe 55,309 (20,490) 34,819 34,819 4.26% 196 11060 Simonstone St Peter's Church of England Primary School 59,383 (7,533) 51,850 51,850 8.98% 412 11061 Gisburn Primary School 3,053 12,223 15,276 15,276 2.53% 115 11063 Grindleton Church of England Voluntary Aided Primary School 42,150 (6,474) 35,675 35,675 10.65% 991 11064 Read St John's Church of England Primary School 94,471 3,389 97,860 97,860 11.66% 515 11065 Sabden Primary School 38,361 (1,255) 37,106 37,106 7.41% 464 11066 St Mary's Roman Catholic Primary School. Sabden 37,643 (14,126) 23,517 23,517 5.03% 290 11067 Brennand's Endowed Primary School. Slaidburn 34,883 (1,216) 33,666 33,666 9.58% 765 11068 Waddington and West Bradford CofE Voluntary Aided Primary School 29,687 (18,852) 10,835 10,835 1.52% 74 11069 Whalley Church of England Primary School 87,558 (20,994) 66,564 66,564 5.84% 255 11070 Barrow Primary School 59,656 (11,094) 48,561 48,561 7.09% 335 11071 Balderstone St Leonard's Church of England Primary School 33,993 (902) 33,091 33,091 6.29% 331 11072 Mellor St Mary Church of England Primary School 60,000 (20,453) 39,548 39,548 6.17% 279 11073 St Mary's Roman Catholic Primary School. Osbaldeston 50,359 (10,170) 40,188 40,188 8.72% 529 11074 Salesbury Church of England Primary School 54,111 (17,126) 36,985 36,985 3.13% 135 12001 Briercliffe Primary School 20,531 11,005 31,536 31,536 2.31% 99 12002 Worsthorne Primary School 97,187 (32,263) 64,924 64,924 7.46% 306 12003 St John's Church of England Primary School. Cliviger 100,490 (13,200) 87,289 87,289 10.01% 432 12005 Padiham Green Church of England Primary School 105,072 (2,420) 102,652 102,652 9.41% 489 12006 Padiham Primary School 165,877 9,420 175,297 175,297 12.03% 609 12007 St John the Baptist Roman Catholic Primary School. Padiham 62,128 (10,101) 52,027 52,027 5.08% 233 12008 Padiham St Leonard's Voluntary Aided CofE Primary School 132,022 (1,432) 130,590 130,590 9.82% 465 12011 Hapton Church of England/Methodist Primary School 55,983 9,187 65,170 65,170 9.07% 509 12012 Barden Primary School 272,171 (22,368) 249,803 249,803 10.59% 584 12013 Burnley Brunshaw Primary School 186,582 9,343 195,925 195,925 9.20% 432 12015 Christ The King Roman Catholic Primary School. Burnley 57,181 (14,938) 42,243 42,243 4.42% 196 12020 Burnley Heasandford Primary School 216,985 124,238 341,223 341,223 11.41% 533 12021 Burnley Holy Trinity Church of England Primary School 100,563 (1,063) 99,500 99,500 9.87% 483 12022 Burnley Ightenhill Primary School 149,913 (9,339) 140,574 140,574 9.40% 456 12023 Burnley Lowerhouse Junior School 112,845 (71,661) 41,184 41,184 4.26% 217 12025 Rosegrove Infant School 97,340 (1,933) 95,408 95,408 11.65% 600 12028 St Augustine of Canterbury RC Primary School. Burnley 67,335 16,745 84,080 84,080 7.83% 391 12029 Burnley St James' Lanehead Church of England Primary School 114,528 32,381 146,909 146,909 12.15% 544 12031 St Mary's Roman Catholic Primary School. Burnley 101,872 (26,449) 75,423 75,423 6.51% 329 12032 St Mary Magdalene's Roman Catholic Primary School. Burnley 21,091 (22,633) (1,542) (1,542) -0.16% (7) 12033 Burnley St Peter's Church of England Primary School 42,780 (27,263) 15,517 15,517 1.46% 78 12034 Burnley St Stephen's Church of England Primary School 55,476 40,321 95,797 95,797 9.14% 465 12035 Burnley Stoneyholme Community Primary School 286,295 (113) 286,182 286,182 11.71% 693 12037 Burnley Whittlefield Primary School 5147,335 11,208 58,542 58,542 5.36% 279 12039 Burnley Casterton Primary School 145,002 3,986 148,988 148,988 10.89% 517 Closed *Adjusted Balance Balance schools or Balance Balance Brought In year Carried academy Carried as % of Balance Sch No School Name Forward as Surplus/ Forward as conversions Forward as CFR per pupil at 1 April (Deficit) at 31 March closing at 31 March Income 2016 2017 balance 2017 * Adjusted Balance Carried Forward as at 31 March 2017-excludes clawback exemptions £ £ £ £ £ % £ 12040 Wellfield Methodist and Anglican Church School 91,720 (21,240) 70,480 70,480 8.04% 337 12041 Rosewood Primary School 213,137 2,149 215,286 215,286 11.33% 516 12042 Cherry Fold Community Primary School 231,955 16,049 248,004 248,004 11.28% 656 12043 Burnley Springfield Community Primary School 128,240 7,203 135,443 135,443 11.44% 774 12044 St John the Baptist Roman Catholic Primary School. Burnley 117,629 (2,449) 115,180 115,180 8.94% 425 13001 Bradley Primary School 232,519 (83,148) 149,371 149,371 7.81% 363 13004 Holy Saviour Roman Catholic Primary School. Nelson 96,910 (6,228) 90,682 90,682 9.10% 436 13005 Nelson St Philip's Church of England Primary School 69,690 (22,702) 46,988 46,988 6.28% 338 13006 Nelson St Paul's Church of England Primary School 167,105 (27,047) 140,059 140,059 8.80% 392 13007 Lomeshaye Junior School 197,266 (16,488) 180,778 180,778 10.66% 511 13009 St John Southworth Roman Catholic Primary School. Nelson 62,162 27,298 89,461 89,461 8.38% 428 13010 Nelson Walverden Primary School 231,884 (34,033) 197,851 197,851 9.63% 452 13011 Nelson Whitefield Infant School and Nursery Unit 196,925 9,091 206,016 206,016 11.09% 658 13012 Marsden Community Primary School 126,924 (35,956) 90,968 90,968 4.17% 216 13014 Barrowford St Thomas Church of England Primary School 63,324 3,378 66,702 66,702 10.65% 542 13016 Barrowford School (37,353) 35,658 (1,695) (1,695) -0.10% (4) 13017 Holy Trinity Roman Catholic Primary School. Brierfield 62,178 (5,989) 56,189 56,189 10.28% 546 13019 Blacko Primary School 63,947 6,237 70,185 70,185 11.86% 675 13020 Newchurch-in-Pendle St Mary's Church of England Primary School 48,437 (13,528) 34,910 34,910 9.61% 671 13022 Wheatley Lane Methodist Voluntary Aided Primary School 84,076 (12,809) 71,268 71,268 8.08% 343 13023 Roughlee Church of England Primary School 58,339 (491) 57,848 57,848 17.60% 1,483 13024 Higham St John's Church of England Primary School 65,978 (3,346) 62,632 62,632 9.00% 435 13027 Colne Christ Church Church of England Primary School 105,774 (23,894) 81,880 81,880 9.18% 443 13028 Laneshaw Bridge Primary School 38,053 1,467 39,521 39,521 3.95% 183 13029 Lord Street Primary School. Colne 108,045 (19,389) 88,656 88,656 5.19% 248 13030 Colne Park Primary School 174,752 27,531 202,283 202,283 11.16% 568 13031 Colne Primet Primary School 90,162 (20,063) 70,100 70,100 6.42% 356 13032 Sacred Heart Roman Catholic Primary School. Colne 54,137 (32,517) 21,621 21,621 2.05% 101 13033 West Street Community Primary School 84,434 20,764 105,198 105,198 9.23% 518 13034 Trawden Forest Primary School 67,506 (19,348) 48,158 48,158 5.39% 246 13035 Foulridge Saint Michael and All Angels CofE VA Primary School 112,332 (83,757) 28,575 28,575 3.28% 142 13036 Reedley Primary School 149,023 (14,815) 134,208 134,208 8.23% 353 13040 Barnoldswick CofE Voluntary Controlled Primary School 90,910 17,931 108,840 108,840 7.89% 330 13041 Barnoldswick Coates Lane Primary School 53,462 (3,213) 50,250 50,250 5.36% 239 13042 Barnoldswick Gisburn Road Community Primary School 8,562 (40,684) (32,123) (32,123) -3.01% (154) 13044 St Joseph's Catholic Primary School. Barnoldswick 50,324 (5,290) 45,033 45,033 6.89% 339 13046 Kelbrook Primary School 46,682 3,319 50,001 50,001 8.63% 505 13048 Salterforth Primary School 40,638 (3,087) 37,551 37,551 6.32% 383 13049 Earby Springfield Primary School 74,366 (22,359) 52,006 52,006 7.22% 356 14001 Bacup Britannia Community Primary School 100,834 5,192 106,026 106,026 10.43% 478 14002 Bacup Thorn Primary School 61,019 21,035 82,054 82,054 5.89% 299 14003 Northern Primary School 91,618 10,275 101,892 101,892 11.91% 539 14005 Sharneyford Primary School 48,593 (592) 48,000 48,000 10.68% 686 14006 St Joseph's Roman Catholic Primary School. Stacksteads. Bacup 33,573 35,657 69,230 69,230 8.46% 528 14007 Bacup St Mary's Roman Catholic Primary School 89,440 (45,849) 43,591 43,591 4.49% 307 14008 Bacup St Saviour's Community Primary School 56,336 6,141 62,478 62,478 10.09% 687 14011 Bacup Holy Trinity Stacksteads Church of England Primary School 126,121 (22,805) 103,316 103,316 7.65% 365 14015 St Paul's Church of England Primary School. Rawtenstall 105,149 21,939 127,088 127,088 10.44% 457 14016 St James-the-Less Roman Catholic Primary School. Rawtenstall 72,598 3,973 76,570 76,570 8.79% 363 14018 St Mary's Rawtenstall Church of England Primary School 83,552 (39,333) 44,219 44,219 4.65% 229 14019 Crawshawbooth Primary School 128,829 (4,317) 124,511 124,511 9.98% 395 14022 Waterfoot Primary School 76,144 (13,276) 62,868 62,868 4.37% 201 14023 St Peter's Roman Catholic Primary School. Newchurch 68,420 914 69,334 69,334 9.49% 478 14024 Newchurch St Nicholas Church of England Primary School 69,368 15,440 84,808 84,808 12.70% 707 14025 St Anne's Edgeside Church of England Primary School 66,595 (24,148) 42,448 42,448 5.13% 277 14026 Balladen Community Primary School 80,989 5,051 86,041 86,041 7.76% 420 14027 Water Primary School 39,574 (5,175) 34,399 34,399 5.85% 294 14028 Haslingden St James Church of England Primary School 84,976 (65,849) 19,128 19,128 2.07% 116 14029 Haslingden Primary School 17,513 (6,412) 11,102 11,102 0.56% 27 14030 Broadway Primary School 87,843 (10,999) 76,844 76,844 8.26% 361 14031 Helmshore Primary School 93,186 (39,419) 53,766 53,766 3.33% 132 14032 St Mary's Roman Catholic Primary School. Haslingden 83,917 (24,576) 59,341 59,341 8.42% 430 14033 St John's Stonefold Church of England Primary School 45,886 29 45,915 45,915 7.90% 362 14034 St Veronica's Roman Catholic Primary School. Helmshore 109,691 (3,610) 106,081 79,526 9.50% 454 14038 Edenfield Church of England Primary School (20,619) 21,648 1,029 1,029 0.13% 6 14039 Stubbins Primary School 67,725 (14,712) 53,013 53,013 5.93% 255 14040 St Bartholomew's Church of England Primary School 18,552 38,707 57,258 57,258 6.43% 356 14042 Whitworth Tonacliffe Primary School 95,111 61,769 156,880 156,880 11.08% 467 14044 Our Lady & St Anselm's Roman Catholic Primary School. Whitworth 58,452 (4,607) 53,845 53,845 6.74% 296 14045 St John with St Michael CofE Primary School. Shawforth 46,881 (26,339) 20,543 20,543 3.19% 163

52 Closed *Adjusted Balance Balance schools or Balance Balance Brought In year Carried academy Carried as % of Balance Sch No School Name Forward as Surplus/ Forward as conversions Forward as CFR per pupil at 1 April (Deficit) at 31 March closing at 31 March Income 2016 2017 balance 2017 * Adjusted Balance Carried Forward as at 31 March 2017-excludes clawback exemptions £ £ £ £ £ % £ SECONDARY SCHOOLS 01108 Heysham High School Sports College 181,525 (49,823) 131,702 131,702 2.23% 179 01109 Morecambe Community High School 190,388 (66,768) 123,619 123,619 1.47% 100 01110 Carnforth High School 177,362 (7,610) 169,752 169,752 4.27% 294 01112 Our Lady's Catholic College. Lancaster 404,711 (259,115) 145,596 145,596 3.31% 260 01113 Lancaster Central Lancaster High School 508,242 (282,960) 225,282 225,282 5.18% 367 02101 Millfield Science and Performing Arts College 210,641 (1,505) 209,135 209,135 4.55% 255 02103 Baines School Poulton-le-Fylde 374,949 (189,598) 185,350 185,350 3.90% 225 02104 Saint Aidan's Church of England High School 345,010 74,642 419,652 419,652 10.33% 532 02105 Fleetwood High School (296,260) 186,223 (110,036) (110,036) -2.38% (153) 02106 Cardinal Allen Catholic High School. Fleetwood 480,012 (41,163) 438,848 438,848 9.26% 542 04114 Lytham St Anne's Technology and Performing Arts College 210,589 (335,522) (124,934) (124,934) -1.62% (93) 04115 Carr Hill High School & 6th Form Centre 660,822 (203,704) 457,117 457,117 7.10% 433 04116 St Bede's Catholic High School. Lytham 56,081 (144,567) (88,486) (88,486) -2.25% (110) 06103 Broughton High School 365,868 13,112 378,980 378,980 7.71% 418 06104 Ashton Community Science College 15,475 126,680 142,155 142,155 3.12% 206 06105 Moor Park High School and Sixth Form 450,291 (68) 450,223 450,223 11.10% 871 06112 Archbishop Temple School. A Church of England Specialist College 217,061 39,885 256,946 256,946 6.56% 338 06115 Longridge High School - A Maths and Computing College 406,630 (164,346) 242,283 242,283 6.05% 318 06116 St Cecilia's RC High School. Longridge 23,142 (360,330) (337,188) (337,188) -17.55% (1,077) 06117 Christ The King Catholic High School 281,423 (48,215) 233,208 233,208 11.35% 861 06118 Our Lady's Catholic High School. Preston 594,854 75,104 669,958 578,651 11.48% 654 06121 Corpus Christi Catholic High School 66,033 (17,921) 48,112 48,112 1.04% 74 06122 Preston Muslim Girls' High School 252,403 15,858 268,262 268,262 11.23% 621 07101 Balshaw's Church of England High School 470,076 16,765 486,841 486,841 10.65% 527 07102 St Mary's Catholic High School. Leyland (110,172) (230,292) (340,464) (340,464) -11.03% (626) 07104 Wellfield High School (637,221) (208,274) (845,495) (845,495) -36.96% (2,249) 07105 Brownedge St Mary's Catholic High School 429,107 (168,553) 260,554 260,554 6.70% 373 07106 All Hallows Catholic High School. Penwortham 96,396 27,422 123,819 123,819 2.77% 139 07107 Walton-le-Dale Arts College and High School 211,697 20,401 232,098 232,098 5.72% 327 07109 Hutton Church of England Grammar School 372,315 (138,897) 233,418 233,418 5.23% 322 07111 Penwortham Girls' High School 224,891 (23,800) 201,092 201,092 5.34% 279 08103 St Bede's Catholic High School. Ormskirk - A Specialist Arts College 260,553 (105,480) 155,073 155,073 4.31% 224 08104 Burscough Priory Science College 167,379 (81,385) 85,994 85,994 2.43% 124 08105 Up Holland High School 22,682 (244,276) (221,594) (221,594) -6.30% (314) 08106 Glenburn Sports College (117,942) 0 (498,988) 0 0 0.00% 0 08113 Lathom High School - A Technology College (275,438) (12,595) (288,033) (288,033) -6.52% (455) 08114 Our Lady Queen of Peace Catholic Engineering College 476,468 (274,666) 201,802 201,802 3.95% 229 08115 Ormskirk School 376,516 (94,749) 281,767 281,767 3.58% 229 09101 Southlands High School 238,013 (28,729) 209,284 209,284 4.56% 266 09103 Holy Cross Catholic High School 288,173 (198,664) 89,509 89,509 2.27% 114 11101 Norden High School and Sports College (88,745) (130,206) (218,951) (218,951) -7.05% (473) 11102 The Hollins Technology College 443,371 (93,964) 349,406 349,406 7.58% 440 11103 Mount Carmel RC High School 145,279 (12,806) 132,474 132,474 2.90% 176 11105 Rhyddings Business and Enterprise School 240,941 (174,945) 65,996 65,996 1.82% 116 11109 St Augustine's Roman Catholic High School. Billington 168,516 21,802 190,317 190,317 3.54% 185 11113 Ribblesdale High School 207,058 (206,271) 788 788 0.01% 1 12110 Shuttleworth College 464,294 (437,222) 27,072 27,072 0.53% 40 12111 Hameldon Community College (1,935,139) (277,896) (2,213,035) (2,213,035) -58.62% (7,876) 12112 Unity College 255,619 (93,934) 161,685 161,685 2.40% 153 12113 Sir John Thursby Community College 464,336 (130,794) 333,543 333,543 4.48% 314 12114 Blessed Trinity RC College 458,823 (34,061) 424,763 424,763 5.63% 334 12115 Thomas Whitham Sixth Form (1,441,152) (258,806) (1,699,959) (1,699,959) -82.47% (10,828) 13103 West Craven High School (75,764) 0 (197,067) 0 0 0.00% 0 13107 Colne Park High School 335,166 26,619 361,785 361,785 6.60% 361 13108 SS John Fisher and Thomas More Roman Catholic High School. Colne 154,654 (73,172) 81,482 81,482 1.99% 109 13110 Marsden Heights Community College 181,586 (358,412) (176,826) (176,826) -2.75% (182) 13111 Pendle Vale College 783,105 33,950 817,055 817,055 11.17% 795 14101 Alder Grange School 229,853 (18,156) 211,697 211,697 4.38% 293 14105 All Saints' Catholic High School 152,637 (35,786) 116,851 116,851 4.34% 259 14107 Whitworth Community High School 37,872 127,723 165,595 165,595 4.95% 272 14108 Fearns Community Sports College (9,626) 10,987 1,361 1,361 0.05% 4 14109 Haslingden High School and Sixth Form 736,429 (152,219) 584,210 584,210 6.77% 438

53 Closed *Adjusted Balance Balance schools or Balance Balance Brought In year Carried academy Carried as % of Balance Sch No School Name Forward as Surplus/ Forward as conversions Forward as CFR per pupil at 1 April (Deficit) at 31 March closing at 31 March Income 2016 2017 balance 2017 * Adjusted Balance Carried Forward as at 31 March 2017-excludes clawback exemptions £ £ £ £ £ % £ SPECIAL SCHOOLS 00139 Hillside Specialist School and College 186,049 3,362 189,411 189,411 7.84% 1,973 00131 Wennington Hall School 262,425 (81,781) 180,644 180,644 6.34% 2,258 02131 Brookfield School. Poulton-Le-Fylde 42,835 18,592 61,427 61,427 4.99% 1,575 06131 Moorbrook School (160,827) 77,550 (83,276) (83,276) -8.54% (2,082) 08135 Hope High School (32,393) 151,029 118,636 118,636 9.99% 2,119 08138 Elm Tree Community Primary School 157,761 193,778 351,539 221,521 10.66% 2,576 12134 The Rose School (40,988) 93,476 52,487 52,487 2.65% 875 14132 Rawtenstall Cribden House Community Special School 95,887 3,379 99,266 99,266 7.77% 1,985 06134 Acorns Primary School 156,832 (8,787) 148,045 148,045 10.32% 2,115 06135 Sir Tom Finney Community High School 254,953 13,119 268,072 268,072 9.53% 1,787 08136 Kingsbury Primary School 68,646 30,403 99,050 99,050 7.45% 1,339 08137 West Lancashire Community High School 154,431 1,559 155,991 155,991 8.43% 1,182 11130 Oswaldtwistle White Ash School 214,691 24,888 239,579 239,579 11.15% 2,549 11131 Broadfield Specialist School For Sen (Cognition And Learning) 120,650 53,076 173,727 173,727 6.70% 1,277 12135 Holly Grove School 210,191 96,051 306,243 306,243 14.62% 3,329 12136 Ridgewood Community High School 132,029 (49,543) 82,487 82,487 2.86% 611 13133 Pendle View Primary School 131,961 80,672 212,633 212,633 9.87% 2,025 13134 Pendle Community High School And College 253,566 44,838 298,404 298,404 10.99% 2,016 14130 Tor View Community Special School 300,697 0 411,872 0 0 0.00% 0 00134 Royal Cross Primary School 87,271 (27,076) 60,195 60,195 8.80% 2,315 01130 Morecambe And Heysham Morecambe Road School 257,162 (227) 256,935 256,935 9.53% 1,713 02130 Great Arley School 131,825 (30,995) 100,830 100,830 6.60% 1,018 07130 Moor Hey School - A Specialist Mathematics And Computing College 111,721 46,714 158,435 158,435 10.82% 1,569 09130 Chorley Astley Park School 193,943 (25,715) 168,228 168,228 7.03% 1,020 00133 Bleasdale School 169,832 41,248 211,080 211,080 11.75% 6,208 01131 The Loyne Specialist School 226,499 14,576 241,075 241,075 9.39% 2,115 02132 Thornton Cleveleys Red Marsh School 201,190 1,286 202,475 202,475 11.28% 2,439 04133 Kirkham Pear Tree School 285,141 (42,569) 242,572 242,572 8.90% 2,527 07131 The Coppice School 43,959 (47,574) (3,616) (3,616) -0.24% (50) 09131 Mayfield Specialist School 272,020 (63,051) 208,968 208,968 9.74% 2,111 Nursery Schools 01162 Appletree Nursery School 5,069 (14,534) (9,465) (9,465) -2.38% (201) 06160 Stoneygate Nursery School and Centre 8,148 57,162 65,310 32,587 7.38% 905 08160 Ormskirk Moorgate Nursery School 4,277 (9,025) (4,748) (4,748) -1.31% (153) 09160 Chorley Highfield Nursery School 66,365 (17,182) 49,182 49,182 6.76% 1,004 09161 Duke Street Nursery School 48,481 (4,150) 44,331 44,331 7.15% 1,008 11160 Accrington Lee Royd Nursery School 64,263 (4,507) 59,756 59,756 11.35% 964 11161 Fairfield Nursery School 73,521 8,272 81,793 81,793 11.98% 997 11162 Ribblesdale Nursery School 31,780 19,044 50,824 50,824 13.30% 1,240 12175 Reedley Hallows Nursery School 34,249 39,861 74,110 74,110 9.24% 862 12166 Ightenhill Nursery School 49,752 3,193 52,945 52,945 16.78% 1,393 12168 Burnley Rockwood Nursery School 72,693 (34,657) 38,036 38,036 7.71% 692 12169 Burnley Rosegrove Nursery School 43,156 (29,553) 13,603 13,603 3.12% 316 12171 Burnley Stoneyholme Nursery School 29,019 3,745 32,764 32,764 8.69% 712 12172 Padiham Whitegate Nursery School 45,060 (18,129) 26,931 26,931 5.06% 449 12173 Burnley Basnett Street Nursery School 50,426 (2,269) 48,158 48,158 8.84% 944 12174 Burnley Taywood Nursery School 2,097 (55,422) (53,324) (53,324) -7.30% (1,088) 13160 Bradley Nursery School 68,502 (12,309) 56,194 56,194 6.86% 702 13161 Walton Lane Nursery School And Early Excellence Centre (7,831) 42,245 34,415 34,415 2.91% 649 13162 Brierfield Woodfield Nursery School 49,907 (25,517) 24,390 24,390 5.07% 387 13163 Nelson McMillan Nursery School (16,981) 731 (16,249) (16,249) -3.83% (319) 13164 Colne Newtown Nursery School 354 (23,135) (22,782) (22,782) -3.60% (485) 14161 Haslingden Hillside Nursery School 14,260 9,681 23,941 23,941 5.62% 520 14162 Bacup Nursery School 42,479 10,741 53,220 53,220 9.45% 968 14163 Staghills Nursery School 67,495 9,379 76,874 76,874 9.80% 961 PUPIL REFERRAL UNITS 01141 Stepping Stones School 85,644 (48,302) 37,342 37,342 4.78% 1,167 07141 Golden Hill Leyland Centre 122,919 3,692 126,611 126,611 11.54% 2,878 13143 Hendon Brook School 92,965 (21,138) 71,826 71,826 9.27% 1,995 01149 Chadwick High School 90,244 (136,490) (46,246) (46,246) -3.56% (609) 02143 Mckee College House 150,268 40,745 191,013 191,013 10.44% 1,949 06141 Larches House School 18,727 (150,873) (132,146) (132,146) -6.45% (1,017) 08147 The Acorns School 135,026 (44,095) 90,931 90,931 7.69% 1,246 09145 Shaftesbury High School 76,315 6,581 82,897 82,897 4.27% 691 11142 Oswaldtwistle School 150,217 (15,119) 135,098 135,098 10.59% 1,648

54 Annex 2

Lancashire Academy Balances at 31 August 2016

Balances Academy Name Phase (£000) Notes

HAMBLETON PRIMARY ACADEMY Primary N/A Fylde Coast Academy Trust PARBOLD DOUGLAS CHURCH OF ENGLAND ACADEMY Primary 233 MOORSIDE COMMUNITY PRIMARY SCHOOL Primary 99 BELTHORN PRIMARY SCHOOL Primary 98 CLAYTON LE MOORS ALL SAINTS PRIMARY SCHOOL Primary 42 PENDLE PRIMARY ACADEMY Primary N/A Pendle Education Trust GREAT MARSDEN ST JOHN'S PRIMARY ACADEMY Primary N/A CIDARI Education Limited CASTERCLIFF PRIMARY SCHOOL Primary N/A Pendle Education Trust LANCASTER GIRLS' GRAMMAR SCHOOL Secondary 316 LANCASTER ROYAL GRAMMAR SCHOOL Secondary 0 RIPLEY ST THOMAS CE ACADEMY Secondary 460 HODGSON ACADEMY Secondary 565 GARSTANG COMMUNITY ACADEMY Secondary 203 FULWOOD ACADEMY Secondary 252 LOSTOCK HALL ACADEMY Secondary 168 PENWORTHAM PRIORY ACADEMY Secondary 195 ACADEMY@WORDEN Secondary 36 TARLETON ACADEMY Secondary 833 ST MICHAEL'S CHURCH OF ENGLAND HIGH SCHOOL Secondary 538 BISHOP RAWSTORNE CHURCH OF ENGLAND ACADEMY Secondary 463 ALBANY ACADEMY Secondary 22 PARKLANDS ACADEMY Secondary 526 ACCRINGTON ACADEMY Secondary N/A United Learning Trust CLITHEROE ROYAL GRAMMAR SCHOOL Secondary 383 BOWLAND HIGH SCHOOL Secondary 367 ACCRINGTON ST CHRISTOPHER'S CHURCH OF ENGLAND HIGH SCHOOL Secondary 0 COLNE PRIMET ACADEMY Secondary N/A Pendle Education Trust WEST CRAVEN HIGH SCHOOL Secondary N/A Pendle Education Trust BACUP AND RAWTENSTALL GRAMMAR SCHOOL Secondary 2,292 COAL CLOUGH ACADEMY Short Stay N/A Education Partnership Trust

55 Lancashire Schools Forum

Annual Report 2016/17

Headlines April 2016 - March 2017 The Lancashire Schools Forum met on four occasions in the financial year 2016/17 and has considered a variety of reports and presentations on school funding and finance related matters. This annual report sets out some of the significant issues dealt with by the Forum.

Schools Budget 2017/18 Advising on the Schools Budget is a crucial responsibility of the Forum. The key headlines from the 2017/18 budget setting process included:

Funding Shortfall - There was a shortfall in core funding in 2017/18 of £3.49m. Reserves were used to bridge this funding gap.

Funding Blocks - Ahead of regulatory requirements to ring-fence the funding blocks within the Schools Budget, the Schools Block, High Needs Block and Early Years Block funding was ring fenced to the individual blocks for 2017/18 budget setting purposes.

Schools Block  The Children Looked After (CLA) funding envelope for 2017/18 was held at the 2016/17 level ahead of national changes to remove CLA funding from the school funding formula and transfer it into Pupil Premium Grant (PPG) allocations.  Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) allocations were calculated to achieve minimum turbulence and minimum cost pressures on the schools budget;  A small amount of headroom within the Schools Block was targeted at the Age Weighted Pupil Unit (AWPU).

High Needs Block - Despite a budget shortfall within the High Needs Block, top-up rates across all sectors are being protected at the 2016/17 levels.

Early Years Block - The DfE introduced the Early Years National Funding Formula (EYNFF) from April 2017 and Lancashire consulted early years providers on the implementation proposals for 2017/18. The majority of respondents supported the 2017/18 proposals, which set out to protect funding levels across all provider types in 2017/18.

Central Expenditure Limit - The Forum approved a central expenditure limit for 2017/18 of £37.162m, which included funding transferred from the previous Education Support Grant (ESG), for LA statutory duties.

The funding within this block is used to support services for all pupils of Lancashire, accessed by all schools whether they be Community, Voluntary Controlled, Voluntary Aided, Foundation, Academies or Free schools.

56 Service De-delegations 2017/18 Regulations require that the Forum is responsible for deciding which services should be de- delegated each year. In October 2016, the Forum considered a number of de-delegation proposals. Primary and secondary members agreed by phase that a number of services would be de-delegated for the 2017/18 financial year. This means that for primary and secondary schools (but not academies) services will be provided centrally. These services are:

 Staff costs – Public Duties/Suspensions. The 2017/18 de-delegation incorporates reimbursement to schools for staff costs associated with public duties and suspensions.  Museum Service - Primary Schools Only. Provides funding for the work the museum service undertakes for primary schools to help meet the national curriculum and to support wider cultural learning.  Support for Schools in Financial Difficulty. This funding allows support to be offered to schools in financial difficulty, which is managed by the School Improvement Challenge Board (SICB) against published eligibility criteria.  Strategic Reserve (2017/18 only). This de-delegation relates to 2017/18 only and was in response to the changes in DfE guidance. The funding mitigates against the risk of schools in deficit closing or becoming sponsored academies.

Consultation Responses 68 schools responded to the de-delegation consultation. The Forum were very grateful for these responses to help steer their decisions on which services should be de-delegated.

Early Years National Funding Formula Implementation The government have introduced an Early Years National Funding Formula (EYNFF) from April 2017/18.

Lancashire agreed proposals for 2017/18 looked to offer stability to all providers, whilst commencing the transition to the required Universal Base Rate. This included  utilising the supplementary maintained nursery school grant;  temporarily increasing base rates for nursery classes and childminders to offer some transitional protection;  targeting available headroom was targeted at the PVI base rate as a first step towards the Universal Base Rate.

Schools National Funding Formula & High Needs Funding Reform Consultations The Schools Forum submitted responses to the DfE's Schools National Funding Formula (SNFF) and High Needs Funding Reform consultations and also encouraged individual schools and academies to respond to the consultation.

The Forum has also lobbied local MPs to help influence the Lancashire perspective in the national school funding debate.

Final announcements on the consultation outcomes are still awaited any announcements and the implications for Lancashire.

School Balances and Clawback The Forum reviews the Lancashire school balances and clawback arrangements each year.

In connection with School Balances and Clawback at 31 March 2016, clawback totalling £53,797 was applied to 13 schools.

The Forum confirmed the School Balances and Clawback arrangements for 31 March 2017:

Guideline Balances For all phases guideline balance is the maximum of £60,000 or 12% of the schools Consistent Financial Reporting (CFR) income.

Clawback Rates For all phases the following clawback rates will be applied at 31 March 2017 and in subsequent years:  A clawback rate of 50% is to be applied to any balance above guideline (after adjusting for exemptions) as at 31 March 2017, or in the first year a school exceeds the new guideline (after adjusting for exemptions);  A clawback rate 100% is to be applied to any balance in excess of guideline where the guideline has been breached for two or more consecutive years.

Exemptions The Forum agreed that 'late allocations' be reintroduced into the list of clawback exemptions.

Property Strategy and the Reconfiguration of the Wellbeing, Prevention and Early Help Service The reconfiguration of the Wellbeing, Prevention and Early Help Service has impacted on schools with Children's Centres, with the removal of provision from 23 schools and changes within the 21 schools where provision is being retained.

Following representations by the Forum and individual schools, the County Council agreed to provide transitional funding in 2017/18 to all schools currently with Children's Centres, irrespective of whether the authority is remaining in them or removing provision. These payments relate to the "running costs" identified by the authority for 2016/17 and were additional to any new shared use payments for the schools where services are remaining within. This funding totalled over £650,000.

Schools in Financial Difficulty (SIFD) Process The Forum have supported changes to the SIFD process and timescales as follows:  The deadline for submission of Budget Anticipations/Recovery Plans to the LA has been brought forward to 30 June rather than 31 August each year;  Schools may be asked to agree to a voluntary partial suspension of delegation for schools due the concern around risks of the level of deficit increasing without additional controls.

58 A number of factors have arisen that have necessitated a review of the SIFD policy and timeframes:  There are considerable cost pressures on the school sector, with inflation, increased staffing and pension costs and, in some cases, the apprenticeship levy combining to create a difficult financial environment and increasing the risk that more schools will face financial difficulties in future;  The introduction of the Schools National Funding Formula (SNFF), commencing in 2018/19, causes considerable turbulence at individual school level. Approximately 2/3 Lancashire schools and academies lose under the DfE's proposals and even those that are SNFF winners may be real terms losers when other costs pressures are taken into account;  SNFF proposals also introduce additional constraints into the school funding system which may well limit the support that the LA is able to offer schools in financial difficulty.

High Needs Block Commissioned Places 2017/18 Regulations require the Forum to be consulted annually on the arrangements for commissioning High Needs Block places. Detailed information was provided to Forum about the number of places to be commissioned at Special Schools, FE colleges, Independent Specialist Providers, Pupil Referral Units and the Hospital Education Service, for both pre 16 and post 16 pupils/students.

Prevention and Early Help Services Each year, the Forum consider various combined services budgets, which incorporated Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) funding, including:  Early Help Commissions;  Careers Education, Information, Advice and Guidance (CEIAG) for Children Looked After (CLA);  Teacher posts in the Lancashire Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH).

The Forum scrutinised outcomes achieved in the previous 12 months and supported a continuation of this expenditure for 2017/18.

Surface Water and Highways Drainage (SWHD) Charges The Forum and individual schools, have been involved in lobbying United Utilities (UU) for a reduction in charges in a long running campaign co-ordinated by Sefton Borough Council.

Notification has recently been received from UU indicating that they have agreed to make some concessions to the SWHD charging for schools from 2018/19 and also provide a credit to schools in 2017/18. It is estimated that the full impact of this change could be over £1m annually for Lancashire schools from 2018/19.

The Forum welcomed this concession but intend to lobby UU to request that nursery schools are able to benefit from the changes, as current criteria appears to exclude them.

Full details of all Schools Forum business are available from the Schools Forum website. For any queries please email [email protected]

59 Annex 4

Lancashire County Council: Home to School Transport 2016 -2017. Department of Education: Home to school travel and transport guidance. July 2014 The Department of Education issued statutory guidance in July 2014 that reaffirmed that Local Authorities had a duty to provide free transport for all pupils of compulsory school age (5-16) if their nearest suitable school* is:

 beyond 2 miles (if below the age of 8); or  beyond 3 miles (if aged between 8 and 16) *Taken to mean nearest school with places available that provides education appropriate to the age, ability and aptitude of the child. The guidance also states: "parents do not enjoy a specific right to have their child educated at a school with a religious character or a secular school, or to have transport arrangements made by their local authority to and from any such school" In relation to policy changes the guidance states: "Good practice suggest that the introduction of any such changes should be phased-in so that children who start under one set of transport arrangements continue to benefit from them until they either conclude their education at that school or choose to move to another school." Changes in the Lancashire County Council's Home to School Transport Policy. Background. Between 2010 and 2018 the County Council will have had to have made unprecedented savings of around £547 million. This has already, and continues, to require careful examination and review of all areas of expenditure, including home to school transport. It is parental preferences for schools and academies and the application of admission arrangements linked to these which informs and drives the subsequent application of the Local Authority's home to school transport policy. The Council has no statutory duty to provide transport assistance in circumstances where pupils do not attend their nearest school or academy. In the past, Lancashire was able to exercise discretion to provide transport assistance over and above that which the authority was legally obliged to offer. In the present economic situation this is no longer affordable. There was consultation from 21st October 2013 to 29th November 2013 about proposals to change various elements of Lancashire's home to school transport policy. This was via the Council's web site and many local media outlets. All of Lancashire's primary and secondary schools and academies (around 560 establishments) were informed about the consultation and asked to notify parents that this was underway.

September 2011: The County Council introduced a parental contribution towards the costs of providing transport assistance for any new pupils attending denominational schools, where this school* was not the nearest geographically to the home address. To qualify for denominational assistance the pupil has to meet the denominational criteria for admission and live over the statutory walking distances. The parental contribution is not required from low

60 income families. The contribution in 2011 was set at £380.00 and each year this has been increased by 5% + RPI. From September 16, the contribution is £540.00. September 2015: The County Council removed further discretionary elements of the previous policy. All new pupils starting at school will only be paid transport assistance if they attend their nearest school and live more than three miles away. When undertaking assessments there is no longer any consideration of which Geographical Priority Area a pupil lives within and schools in neighbouring districts and local authorities are also considered. Denominational transport assistance is still available but only where a pupil is attending their nearest faith school and the parental contribution is paid. In determining the nearest faith school for denominational transport assistance the County Council no longer considers whether a particular school serves a parish in which the pupil lives. Information about the Transport Assistance. The admission information which is available for all parents from each September (online and paper where requested) provides a summary transport policy. Parents are advised to check the policy carefully if getting their child from home to school and back is a consideration. Parents are directed to a full copy of the Home to School Transport Policy on the Lancashire County Council website and to seek advice from the area education office if they have any queries. The County Council also has officers in attendance at most secondary school open evenings to give advice on transport eligibility and admission queries. Low income. Pupils attending secondary schools whose parents are on the qualifying benefits for free school meals or in the receipt of maximum amount of Working Tax Credit will receive assistance with travel costs if they attend one of their three nearest schools provided the distance to school is between 2 and 6 miles. There is also denominational transport assistance if a pupil is attending a particular school on the grounds of faith and the school is between two and 15 miles from home. Assessments to receive assistance with transport are based solely on the distance between home and school. There is no consideration of:

 Bus routes / bus availability.  Older siblings with entitlement.  Parental preference for a particular school.  Grammar school status  Single sex / mixed cohorts.  OFSTED findings  Home to school distances just under three miles. Please note: Transport eligibility assessments are undertaken by the Pupil Access Team. All assessments are undertaken within the framework of the published Home to School Transport Policy. Members of the team do not have any discretion to award assistance outside the policy. The policy is determined by the Cabinet Member for Children and Young People on an annual basis.

61 LANCASHIRE SCHOOLS FORUM Date of meeting 4 July 2017

Item No 7

Title: Recommendations of the Early Years Block Working Group

Annexes A and B refer

Executive Summary

On 13 June 2017, the Early Years Block Working Group considered a number of reports, including:

 Early Years National Funding Formula (EYNFF) – Consultation on Lancashire Implementation 2018/19;  2016/17 Schools Budget Outturn Report – Early Years Block Any Other Business;  Schools Forum Annual Report 2016/17;  FEE Administration Charges;  Interim Payment Options for 30 Hours Implementation;  2017 - 2018 Free Early Education Funding Agreement;  Nursery Schools with Neighbourhood Centres.

A summary of the key issues and recommendations arising from the Working Group's considerations of the items are provided in this report.

Recommendations

The Forum is asked to: a) Note the report from the Early Years Block Working Group held on 13 June 2017; b) Ratify the Working Group's recommendations.

62 Background On 13 June 2017, the Early Years Block Working Group considered a number of reports. A summary of the key issues and recommendations arising from the Working Group's considerations of the items are provided in this report.

1. Early Years National Funding Formula (EYNFF) – Consultation on Lancashire Implementation 2018/19 At the last Working Group meeting views were sought to help shape the Lancashire Early Years National Funding Formula proposals for 2018/19. This consideration was undertaken well ahead of the 2018/19 financial year in order that proposals could be developed for consultation with all settings and timely decisions could be taken which offer a significant notice period for providers receiving reduced funding rates from April 2018.

Working Group recommendations were used to produce a draft consultation document, subject to clarification from on two queries.

Subsequent to the meeting, responses were received from the DfE to clarify that:  LAs are expected to fund the additional 15 hours at the same rate as the universal hours at the total hourly rate including any supplements;  A local MFG is not allowable in the EYNFF, although some freedom is available in 2018/19 around discretionary supplements, especially flexibility.

The Working Group had recommended against introducing/reintroducing additional supplements into the Lancashire EYNFF arrangements for 2018/19 and recommended that the 2018/19 base rates should include transitional funding, subject to the consultation with providers. A consultation document was therefore produced and agreed through the Chair of the Working Group. A copy of the consultation document is attached at Annex A.

The consultation was issued to providers in the week commencing 1 May 2017, and a reminder was published on 22 May.

Interim consultation responses were reported to the Early Education Consultative Group (EECG) meeting held on 18 May 2017.

A further updated of responses was shared with the Working Group on 13 June 2017. Members considered the responses and comments to date and made recommendations to the Forum on each consultation question.

The consultation closing date was 23 June 2017 and a final analysis of responses together with all comments received, is attached at Annex B.

It should be noted that 84 responses were included in the report to the Working Group. A further 6 responses were received after this date, meaning that a total of 90 responses were received. The further replies did not significantly change the percentages of responses for any of the questions. The additional comments received since the Working Group are included in Annex B, but are highlighted in yellow at the end of each section. Many of the comments are similar to those received earlier in the consultation. Recent comments to Q4 about possible supplements mention a quality supplement. A number of additional comments to Q5 about SEN inclusion funding mention difficulty in accessing AIS funding or remark that it does not meet costs.

 Q1. Do you agree with the proposal to move towards Universal Base Rate in 2018/19 incorporating one year of transitional funding? The Working Group supported this proposal;

 Q2. Do you agree that the existing funding level and methodology should be used in 2018/19 for the mandatory deprivation supplement? The Working Group supported this proposal;

 Q3. Do you agree that the existing Rurality Supplement should be discontinued in 2018/19? The Working Group supported this proposal, but suggested that a year of transitional funding should be included in the proposals for 2018/19, allocating half the existing rates;

 Q4. Do you agree that none of the other allowable supplements should be included in the Lancashire EYNFF 2018/19? The Working Group supported this proposal, although some members favoured the use of a quality supplement based on QTS;

 Q5. Do you agree that the SEN Inclusion Fund (known as Additional Inclusion Support in Lancashire) should remain at £150,000 in 2018/19? The Working Group supported this proposal;

 Q6. Do you agree with the proposal to combine both elements of two year old funding into a single rate? The Working Group supported this proposal.

2. 2016/17 Schools Budget Outturn Report – Early Years Block In advance of expected national regulations to ring-fence the Schools Block ahead of the proposed Schools National Funding Formula (SNFF), the Forum has agreed that in principle the Lancashire allocations will be ring-fenced in the first instance.

Also, following comments received from some Forum members about the Outturn report for 2015/16, individual reports for each funding block have been produced for the 2016/17 outturn.

A report provided information on the Schools Budget outturn position for 2016/17, for the Early Years Block. The table below shows the Early Years Block outturn position for 2016/17.

64 Budget Actuals Variance £m £m £m Commissioned Services 0.011 0.000 -0.011 Early Years PVI 42.700 39.625 -3.076 Schools Delegated 18.062 18.153 0.091 DSG Grant -60.773 -58.280 2.493 Total 0.000 -0.502 -0.502

Commentary The overall Early Years Block budget at 31 March 2017 shows an underspend of £0.502m. Further details of individual budget lines were highlighted, as set out below:

Commissioned Services The £0.011m underspend on commissioned services relates to the historic EU Energy Performance Directive budget line, which is no longer applicable, and has been removed from the 2017/18 budget.

Early Years PVI The Early Years PVI budget shows an underspend of £3.076m. The complexities of the DSG calculation methodology mean that the Early Years element of the DSG is allocated on the basis of January pupil counts across two years. The 2016/17 Early Years budget is calculated on the basis of Early Years counts in January 2016 and January 2017. The final Early Years DSG allocation, updated with the January 2017 count, will not be received until July 2017. As the actual Early Years PVI expenditure has come in below the amount forecast in the 2016/17 budget, then it is expected that the July 2017 DSG allocation will also be at this lower level.

Schools Delegated This provision relates to the delegated budgets of maintained nursery schools and nursery classes at primary schools. This shows an overspend of £0.091m in 2016/17 indicating delivery above expectations at maintained settings.

DSG Grant The Actual Early Years DSG income in 2016/17 was £58.280m, which was below the budgeted income of £60.773m, reflecting more limited early years growth than was originally forecast.

School Balances and Claw back Individual school level information for 2016/17 reveals that of the 24 maintained nursery schools, five ended the year in a deficit position and the overall level of nursery school balances fell by £0.046m to £0.800m at 31 March 2017. No nursery schools are subject to clawback at 31 March 2017.

School balances information about early years block funding at nursery classes in primary schools is not available separately, as balances at the school level also incorporate schools and high needs block income. Individual school balances information for all maintained schools will be made public when reports are published for the Schools Forum meeting on 4 July 2017.

65 The Working Group: a) Noted the report and the Schools Budget Outturn position for 2016/17 in relation to the Early Years Block; b) Noted that the funding block ring-fencing arrangements agreed by the Forum mean that the 2016/17 Early Years underspend of circa £0.5m will be available for distribution in the Early Years Block, subject to the 2018/19 budget finalisation process.

3. Schools Forum Annual Report 2016/17 Each year the Schools Forum publishes an annual report setting out items of business in which the Forum has been involved. In recent years this report has been streamlined to ensure it is a more manageable size for readers and incorporates the main headlines of the Forum's work throughout the year.

The Working Group considered the Early Years Block issues contained in the report.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Recommended to the Schools Forum that the 2016/17 Annual Report be approved for publication.

4. FEE Administration Charges The existing policy relating to administration charges for inaccurate and late headcount/supplementary claims has been in place since January 2015. The policy was introduced because of the increased time/workload involved in in correcting all the errors. It was also intended to act as a deterrent and reduce the number of errors being made.

A paper was presented to the Early Education Consultative Group (EECG) on 18 May 2017 about possible amendments to the policy and comments were expressed for consideration by the Authority. A copy of the EECG paper was provided for the Working Group.

Members gave careful consideration to the report and the issues highlighted and to the County Council's feedback from the initial comments made at the EECG.

It was noted that ultimately the FEE administrative charges were an operational matter that was a decision for the County Council, and although feedback from EECG had been considered, a decision had been taken to amend the policy as follows:

 Reduce the existing administration charge to £10 for childminders and £20 for other providers, and remove the cumulative late penalty charges for settings submitting late headcount claims.

EECG feedback had also been received on proposals around the suspension of the Administrative Charges for the autumn term 2017 due to additional uncertainties connected with a software updated required by the implementation of the 30 hours. EECG had supported this suspension and the County Council decision would therefore be implemented as follows:

 The Council has agreed that the administration charge will be suspended for the Autumn term 2017 due to the fact the new system for 30 hours will not be released to the Council until mid-August. As such it will only be possible to publish written guidance for settings early September which gives very little lead in time before they will be required to start using the system. Training workshops will be delivered to support the sector but it is unlikely that this will be before November 2017 at the earliest. Administration charges will be reinstated from the Spring term.

5. Interim Payment Options for 30 Hours Implementation Historically early years providers were paid FEE funding in two payments, an interim followed by a balance payment. In 2014, following consideration of a number of factors, the Early Years Working Group agreed that interim payments would cease.

The extended entitlement to 30 hours free childcare comes into effect from September 2017, and the statutory guidance that has been published expects Council's to pay settings on a monthly basis, by September 2018. The Software provider are developing the system to enable local authorities to pay on a monthly basis, however this functionality will not be implemented by September 2017 when settings will start to claim the 30 hours free childcare.

Concerns have been raised by the sector, about having to wait until the 6th week of term to receive their payments from the Council when the extended entitlement comes in from September 2017. Many parents who have previously paid for the additional hours will move over to the free extended hours. This means that cash flow will be a problem for some settings particularly in the first month of term as they will no longer have the same amount of income from parents, but will still have the same financial commitments.

In order to support settings until the introduction of monthly payments it has been requested that the Council consider the reinstatement of interim payments.

A paper was presented to the Early Education Consultative Group (EECG) on 18 May 2017 and comments were expressed for consideration by the Authority. A copy of the EECG paper was provided for the Working Group.

67 Members gave careful consideration to the report and the issues highlighted and to the County Council's feedback from the initial comments made at the EECG.

It was noted that ultimately the Interim Payments are an operational matter that was a decision for the County Council, and following the feedback from the initial EECG the County Council had decided to adopt the following policy: : Term Interim (% based on previous term actual) Balance Payment Autumn 40% End of November Spring 30% End of February Summer 40% End of June

The Rationale for this option was:  The interim payment would be made of the 15th working day of term.  The payment would be the equivalent of approximately two months payment in Summer and Autumn with the balance payment being made at the end of the third month, and one month payment in Spring with the balance payment being made at the end of the second month.  It should be noted that although two months payment in the Autumn term equates to 50% interim, the actual hours from the Summer term used to calculate the interim would be over-inflated, as the actual hours settings claim in Autumn drops considerably due to the number of children that transition to school. Paying a 40% interim rather than 50% would compensate for this, and help reduce the risk of overpayments being made. At the meeting some members felt that, on reflection, a different option may have been preferable, especially for smaller settings, however, it was noted that arrangements were already in motion to proceed with option originally recommended by the EECG.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report and the proposed Interim Payment Options following recommendations from the EECG; b) Requested that the situation be kept under review.

6. 2017 - 2018 Free Early Education Funding Agreement In preparation for 30 hours free childcare implementation the DfE have published the new Early Education and Childcare Statutory Guidance, along with the Early Years Entitlements Operational Guidance.

The new guidance includes a model agreement that sets out the DfE expectations on what should be included in local authority funding agreements. It does not however prevent local authorities from exercising their statutory powers to include other requirements.

The model agreement applies to the 15 hour free entitlement for the most disadvantaged 2 year olds, the 15 hour universal free entitlement for three and four year olds, and the 15 hour extended entitlement for three and four year olds.

68 In light of the above, the Council's current funding agreement needs to be revised to meet the requirements of the new statutory guidance from September 2017. Officers have been comparing the existing funding agreement with the model agreement to determine what local requirements need to be included in the Council's new funding agreement from September 2017.

A paper setting out the key issues identified was presented to the Early Education Consultative Group (EECG) on 18 May 2017. Comments from this meeting were considered by the County Council as part of the process for producing a revised draft funding agreement. This draft agreement was also being shared with Legal Services for comment.

A copy of the draft 2017/18 Funding Agreement was provided for the working group. Some key areas for discussion included:  Inadequate Policy  requires Improvement Policy  Funding for parents becoming eligible after the start of term  Refund of deposits  Administration Charges  Backdated Claims

In addition, members suggested edits from a line-by-line consideration of the document.

The Working Group noted that some of the proposed edits to the Agreement were taken directly from the updated DfE Model document, so could not be changed.

Members also made a further suggestion around the Inadequate Policy, which had been an area of debate with the Authority for some time. The current proposal extended the period before funding would be withdrawn following an inadequate judgement by Ofsted to 8 weeks, from four. It was suggested that a clause could be inserted that funding that was removed could be repaid to a setting, in the event that it received a good or outstanding judgment at the re-inspection.

Advice received from the County Council's Legal Department had also suggested that the Agreement could be for a three year period, although it was confirmed that 'variations' could be issued within that time if amendments were needed.

Officers agreed to consider the comments raised by the Working Group.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report and the draft 2017/18 Funding Agreement; b) Expressed views on the Funding Agreement for consideration by the LA.

7. Nursery Schools with Neighbourhood Centres Nursery school colleagues informed the group about a matter relating to the revised arrangements relating to schools that now have Wellbeing Prevention and Early Help (WPEH) services within their buildings.

69 Nursery colleagues met with Andrew Good on 5th June to discuss issues we are having with this transition to new arrangements including trying to establish apportionment and the lack of clarity, communication and consistency around this process.

None of Nursery schools have had a final agreement / statement or confirmation of how much WPEHS Funding will be finalised and when it will be received into school budgets. This is making budget planning for 2017/18 very difficult.

LCC officers at the meeting agreed to find out further information and provide at update for the Forum.

The Working Group: a) Noted the information provided and asked to be kept updated on progress.

70 Consultation on the Lancashire 2018/19 Early Years National Funding Formula (EYNFF) Proposals

Background and 2017/18 Arrangements in Lancashire From 1 April 2017, the government introduced an Early Years National Funding Formula (EYNFF), which prescribed how 3 and 4 year old funding should be distributed to providers. The EYNFF requirements include the introduction of a Universal Base Rate and set out the type and level of supplements that are available. Full implementation of the new EYNFF arrangements must be achieved by 2019/20.

Government announcements about the introduction of the EYNFF were only received in December 2016, and budget decisions for 2017/18 had to be finalised in January 2017. Following discussions with the Schools Forum's Early Years Working Group, Lancashire proposals for 2017/18 adopted a principle of stability. This was due to the limited time available to fundamentally revise the Lancashire Early Years Single Funding Formula (EYSFF) and to provide a period of stable funding to allow those providers that were likely to lose under EYNFF arrangements a more reasonable lead in time.

A brief consultation on the 2017/18 arrangements was undertaken with all early years Free Early Entitlement (FEE) providers at the end of 2016/early 2017, with the majority of respondents supporting the proposals. The Schools Forum and the County Council therefore agreed an EYNFF for 2017/18 that retained funding levels across all providers, but that targeted available headroom towards the PVI base rate, as a first step towards the required Universal Base Rate.

Lancashire 2018/19 EYNFF Proposals The County Council has now held initial discussions with the Schools Forum's Early Years Working Group to help shape the 2018/19 EYNFF and this document sets out the proposals and seeks your views.

In order to provide some overall financial context for the consultation, Appendix A to this document sets out information on the 2017/18 Early Years Funding received and distributed by the County Council.

Universal Base Rate The Universal Base Rate must be fully implemented by 2019/20. In 2018/19, it is proposed to move towards a Universal Base Rate but incorporate one year of transitional protection to allow settings currently receiving a higher base rate 12 months adjustment time, to minimise the turbulence caused by the Universal Base Rate introduction.

The County Council is therefore proposing to move half way from current funding rate levels to the estimated levels in 2018/19 for Child minders and Nursery classes. We are currently estimating that the Lancashire funding rate in 2018/19 will be circa £4.08 per hour. (The 2017/18 rate is £4.03 per hour).

71 The base rates for 2018/19 would therefore be as follows:

Provider Type Funding Rate Transitional Base Rate Protection PVI Providers £4.08 per hour - £4.08 per hour Nursery classes £4.08 per hour £0.18 £4.26 per hour Child minders £4.08 per hour £0.41 £4.49 per hour Maintained Nursery £4.08 per hour supplementary ring- £4.08 per hour Schools fenced maintained nursery schools grant*

*The supplementary ring-fenced maintained nursery schools grant may continue to be available to provide funding stability in 2018/19, subject to further Government announcements after the general election.

Q1. Do you agree with the proposal to move towards Universal Base Rate in 2018/19 incorporating one year of transitional funding?

Funding Supplements The EYNFF guidance sets out various requirements and options in relation to funding supplements. Supplements are amounts of funding which are given in addition to the base rate to reflect local needs or policy objectives. A cap restricts the total value of supplements used in the formula that must not be more than 10% of the total value of planned funding to be passed through to providers. Guidance also sets out the mandatory and discretionary supplements that can be used in the EYNFF.

Deprivation Supplement Deprivation remains the only mandatory supplement in the EYNFF. The formula must use this supplement to recognise deprivation but there is local discretion about the amount of funding to channel through this supplement as long as the total value of all supplements used does not exceed the 10% cap.

For 2018/19, it is proposed to retain the Deprivation Supplement in its current form, using the national Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI) dataset to calculate a supplement for qualifying pupils, which is paid on an hourly basis. Allocations range from £0.01 to £0.40 per hour. This would continue to allocate about 2.5% of EYNFF expenditure though the Deprivation supplement.

Part of the rationale for proposing a continuation of the current arrangements is to minimise the disruption that could be caused by changing the total amount of funding distributed through this supplement, or amending the qualifying criteria. Additionally, maintaining the existing level funding distributed by the supplement will ensure that all headroom released in the move to the Universal Base Rate is available to increase the Base Rate level. Any increase in funding distributed via supplements would reduce funding available for base rates. The estimated 2018/19 Base Rate of £4.08 referred to in the previous section assumes that the existing level of supplements continue.

72 Q2. Do you agree that the existing funding level and methodology should be used in 2018/19 for the mandatory deprivation supplement?

Rurality Supplement A rurality supplement is used in the 2017/18 EYNFF and generates a lump sum payment for qualifying settings. In overall terms, this factor only distributes a small amount of the total EYNFF funding (circa 0.2% or £83k), however, the level of funding will be more significant to individual settings that qualify.

The County Council is concerned about data used to calculate eligibility for the factor. Data is currently sourced from Government published rurality classifications, but this data is no longer updated and this causes concerns about the validity and robustness of the factor. This means that new settings cannot be adequately assessed for qualification and existing qualifying settings where circumstances change, perhaps due to close proximity to significant housing development, are not reassessed in the light of their changed circumstances.

It is therefore proposed to discontinue this supplement in 2018/19. However, we are keen to hear the views of providers on this issue, particularly those settings that may be in receipt of the supplement.

Q3. Do you agree that the existing Rurality Supplement should be discontinued in 2018/19? (If not, do you have any alternative methodologies that could be used to fund a Rurality Supplement, if it continued in the 2018/19 EYNFF?)

Other Allowable Supplements The Government's EYNFF framework allows for three other funding supplements to be used. These are:

 Flexibility - A flexibility supplement is permitted to support providers in offering flexible provision for parents.

 Quality - A quality supplement is permitted to either: o support workforce qualifications, or; o support system leadership (supporting high quality providers leading other providers in the local area)

 English as an additional language (EAL) is permitted, as is used in the school funding formula, to target additional funding at children who speak English as an additional language

Following discussions with the Schools Forum's Early Years Working Group, it is not proposed to use any of these supplements in the Lancashire 2018/19 EYNFF.

This rationale for this is:

73  The greater the variation from the existing supplement profile that is introduced, the more turbulence would be created at individual setting level;  The more supplements that are introduced, the larger variation there will be between settings based on eligibility to them;  As mentioned above, any increase in funding distributed via supplements would reduce funding available for base rates;  Lancashire's early years formula historically contained flexibility and quality supplements. However, following consultation with providers, these factors were discontinued from 2014/15. This was because almost all settings met the eligibility criteria. Funding from these supplements was reallocated through base rates.

Q4. Do you agree that none of the other allowable supplements should be included in the Lancashire EYNFF 2018/19? (If you do wish additional supplements to be introduced into the Lancashire EYNFF 2018/19, please specify which supplements and why)

SEN Inclusion Fund (Additional Inclusion Support) The EYNFF guidance sets out limits on the amount of early years funding that can be held centrally by the LA by stipulating a high pass through requirement. For 2018/19, this pass through figure is 95%.This means that centrally retained funding (for central services or services in-kind) combined with any funding movement out of the early years block will be constrained to a maximum of 5% from April 2018.

Lancashire has always distributed a higher percentage of early years funding directly to providers, with the 2017/18 pass through figure being over 99%.

One element of early years funding that is retained centrally in Lancashire relates to an SEN Inclusion Fund (known as Additional Inclusion Support in Lancashire). This is funding that is initially held centrally, but that is then allocated to specific providers based on the identified needs of an individual child with additional and complex SEND needs.

This funding was originally identified in the High Needs Block budget, but following EYNFF guidance was moved to the Early Years Block from April 2017. In 2017/18, £150,000 was retained for this purpose, and initial proposals for 2018/19 allocate the same level of funding.

Again, the reasoning for this decision is based around keeping the EYNFF arrangements stable and ensuring that funding is not diverted away from the base rates.

Q5. Do you agree that the SEN Inclusion Fund (known as Additional Inclusion Support in Lancashire) should remain at £150,000 in 2018/19? (If you do wish to see a different figure allocated for this purpose in 2018/19 please tell us how much and why)

74 Other Early Years National Funding Formula (EYNFF) Funding Streams Subject to any further changes in Early Years Operational Guidance for 2018/19 from the Government, the County Council has no proposals to alter any of the other EYNFF funding streams for 2018/19:

Early Years Pupil Premium Early Years Pupil Premium (EYPP) funding will continue unchanged under the EYNFF proposals for 2018/19.

Disability Access Fund (DAF) The 2017/18 arrangements introduced for the DAF that targets additional funding for eligible three- and four-year olds will continue in 2018/19.

Two Year Old Funding When Two Year Old funding was introduced, allocations were split into two elements:  Base Rate Funding (£4.64 in 2017/18);  Targeted Support Funding (£0.36 in 2017/18).

This split of funding is no longer necessary or appropriate and for 2018/19 it is proposed to remove the separate identification for the Targeted Support Funding. This change will not impact on the amount of funding distributed for Two Year Olds as the £0.36 per hour identified as Targeted Support Funding will simply be added to the base rate, giving a revised base rate of £5.00.

Q6. Do you agree with the proposal to combine both elements of two year old funding into a single rate?

Let us know your view Let us know your views on the proposals by completing the eform available from the link below, by 23 June 2017: https://lccsecure.lancashire.gov.uk/corporate/questionnaires/runQuestionnaire.asp?q id=709607

75 2017/18 Lancashire County Council - Early Years Funding

Funds Available (Dedicated Schools Grant - Early Years) £

Two Year Old Allocation 10,822,817 Universal 3-4 year old entitlement funding 44,489,589 Additional 3-4 year old funding for working parents (additional 15 hours) 7,886,501 Illustrative Maintained nursery school supplementary funding (ring-fenced) 4,093,584 Early Years Pupil Premium 785,903 Illustrative Disability Access Fund 252,150

Total 2017/18 Early Years Funds given to Lancashire County Council 68,330,544

2017/18 Allocated Fund (Early Years Budget Allocations)

2 Year Olds Provider Type No of Providers £ Nursery Schools 21 1,033,198 Primary Nursery Class 27 348,559 Private, Voluntary & Independent and Childminders 441 9,660,057 11,041,814

3 & 4 Year Olds

Provider Type No of Providers £ Nursery Schools (including ring-fenced MNS funding) 24 9,607,565 Primary Nursery Class 126 9,468,783 Private, Voluntary & Independent and Childminders 855 36,967,143 56,043,491

Early Years Pupil Premium (EYPP)* 785,903

Total 2017/18 Allocated Early Years Funds 67,871,208

2017/18 Centrally Retained Funds £ Disability Access Fund (DAF) (Provider to complete application form*) 252,150 SEN Inclusion Fund (Providers access by completing a request form to the SEN team*) 150,000 Private Finance Initiative in relation to nursery school 57,186

Total 2017/18 Retained Early Years Funds 459,336

Total 2017/18 Early Years Funds distributed by Lancashire County Council 68,330,544

Government pass-through requirement

From 2017/18 the government have set a new pass-through funding level requirement. This pass-through requirement is to ensure the maximum amount of funding allocated to local authorities reaches providers. 2017/18 Government required pass-through rate 93% 2017/18 Lancashire County Council pass-through rate 99%

* DAF, EYPP and SEN Inclusion Fund allocations will be distributed according to actual claims made during 2017/18

76 Annex B

Consultation on the Lancashire 2018/19 Early Years National Funding Formula (EYNFF) Proposals

Final Consultation Analysis and Comments after 23 June 2017 closing date

1. Universal Base Rate The Universal Base Rate must be fully implemented by 2019/20.

Proposed to incorporate one year of transitional protection in 2018/19:  PVI - £4.08  Nursery class - £4.08 plus £0.18 = £4.26  Childminder - £4.08 plus £0.41 = £4.49  Nursery School - £4.08 plus Ring-fenced Maintained Nursery School Grant (subject to confirmation by new government)

Q1. Do you agree with the proposal to move towards Universal Base Rate in 2018/19 incorporating one year of transitional funding?

Responses Yes No Not sure Nursery School 15 12 2 1 Primary School with Nursery Class 8 5 3 0 Private, Voluntary and Independent 41 19 13 9 Eligible Child Minder 26 8 13 5 Total 90 44 31 15 % 48.9% 34.4% 16.7%

Q1 Comments This is a big reduction from £4.48 for 17/18. That's a loss of £468 per 3/4 yr old child for academic year 17/18....not enough to staff my Nursery Class. everyone should receive the same rate including maintained nursery schools A transitional funding rate was applied in 2017/18 to 'soften' the blow for certain providers - but at the detriment to PVI who ARE NOT been treated equally. The funding rate therefore should now be the same moving forward for ALL providers; as it is for the vast majority of other local authorities. By continuing a 'two tier' system children within PVI & its providers are being disadvantaged and sustainability is being put at risk This is not a sufficient increase compared to business costs increases in 2018/2019 That's is less than we are paid privately Remove the transition payments and increase base rate for all providers I think it should be more gradual. Base Rate isn't sufficient for sustainability I feel that a universal base rate is the correct way to go with EYNFF however I think that settings shouldn't be receiving anything less than they already receive (and in

77 future it should rise in line with inflation) whilst the parents whose children are being looked after by the settings will be considerably better off. More hassle for less money not fair. £4.05 under18 min pay, you are not paying the children you are paying for our services and I'm much older than 18 Do not believe the base rate level is sufficient to meet staffing and pay requirements at current levels. Unfair to childminders as we do not have as many children and after providing the provision we won't even be earning the minimum wage This is not sustainable long term. Nursery Schools need additional transitional funding to provide protection in light of the additional costs they incur due to statutory requirements. Without transition Funding we will not survive as a Nursery School. 30 hours 'free' childcare for parents potentially earning up to £200.000. Last year after expenses & before tax I earned £16.000. I cannot charge parents for consumables etc as they provide their own. I pay for activities so that no child is excluded because a parent won't pay. As some children only come for one day and attend nursery too I cannot charge more for extra hours so would OPT OUT when the base rate is too close to my fee reducing options for parents & reducing 'free' places available. Transitional Funding will be essential for the financial health of our school. We are already a school in difficulty and at risk. Why is the transitional amount different for Lancashire schools? I do not fully understand any of the funding as I have never had a child on it yet. I think if you cannot make it to a meeting then straight forward leaflets/booklets should be provided The move to a universal base rate should be undertaken as soon as possible without any transitional funding arrangements. I believe in a level playing field for all sectors (x4) I believe in a level playing field for all sectors - especially with having the majority of rising threes poached from this setting by the maintained sector. How is the maintained sector covering the cost of the education of rising threes? Reduction in pay for childminders I disagree with the principle of a universal base rate especially for school based early education. However Transitional funding will be important and this will need to be thought about in detail if and when the ring fenced NS additional funding ceases Once my expenses are taken out I'm left with less than minimum wage. Base rate unfair for private sector v childminder as greater overheads As a primary school we need to provide a teacher, but this is not covered by any funding - I do not feel this is fair. We think it is important to put in transition rates for providers moving from a higher hourly rate to the universal rate. We think it is essential that the LA continues to put pressure on the DFE to properly fund all early years provision, including the supplementary ring fenced maintained nursery school grant and an increase in the base rate for ALL providers so that funding meets the cost of delivering FEYE 3 and 4. Transitional funding is important for those settings moving from a higher hourly rate to the universal rate. It is important for the DFE to fund all early years provision

78 appropriately and increase the base rate for all providers so that funding meets the cost of delivery and ensures that settings are sustainable.

2. Deprivation Supplement Deprivation remains the only mandatory supplement in the EYNFF but discretion is available over level to be allocated, subject to a 10% cap. The current Deprivation supplement in Lancashire allocates about 2.5% of EYNFF expenditure.

Proposal for a continuation of the current arrangements is to minimise the disruption and maintain base rate increases

Q2. Do you agree that the existing funding level and methodology should be used in 2018/19 for the mandatory deprivation supplement?

Responses Yes No Not sure

90 64.4% 6.7% 28.9%

Q2 Comments we don't qualify NEEDS TO REFLECT NURSERY FEES Keep the childminders rate at £4.96 or increase not decrease. Good service deserves good pay We need to funded at a level where we can continue to provide high quality education for young children with a specialist qualified workforce including trained SENCO, Headteacher and Graduate Teachers Again not sure what any of this really is Need to know figures to assess better - possibly unfair We believe that the same methodology should be used for distributing deprivation funding to early years providers as is used for all Lancashire primary and secondary schools.

3. Rurality Supplement Proposed to discontinue the Rurality Supplement, due to concerns over data used for calculation. Only small aggregate sum is allocated through this supplement (0.2%). However, there is concern about the impact on individual settings that currently qualify

Q3. Do you agree that the existing Rurality Supplement should be discontinued in 2018/19?

Responses Yes No Not sure Nursery School 15 14 1 0 Primary School with Nursery Class 8 5 2 1 Private, Voluntary and Independent 41 22 13 6 Eligible Child Minder 26 8 6 12

79 Total 90 49 22 19 % 54.5% 24.4% 21.1%

Q3 Comments We qualify for this supplement so wouldn't want to see it discontinued. No alternative methodologies should be used to fund Rurality Supplement Being a small setting it will be difficult to recoup lost funding from the low numbers of families using our service. A smaller rural supplement would be better than nothing. If this is going to affect the base rate. Settings that already receive this shouldn't lose out due to lack of government data. Keep it the same or increase The rurality supplement helps to ensure our sustainability during quiet years. Lifestyle choice for some families rather than deprivation where money would be better spent - again relevant figures would provide better basis for judgement It is difficult to sustain numbers when you are in a rural location.

4. Other Allowable Supplements DfE Guidance allows other supplements, as follows:  Flexibility  Quality  English as an additional language (EAL)

Proposal is not to use any further supplements, as some were used previously and discontinued as most settings qualified, plus there is a desire to maintain base rate increases.

Q4. Do you agree that none of the other allowable supplements should be included in the Lancashire EYNFF 2018/19?

Responses Yes No Not sure Nursery School 15 6 7 2 Primary School with Nursery Class 8 5 1 2 Private, Voluntary and Independent 40 23 12 5 Eligible Child Minder 25 6 6 13 Total 88 40 26 22 % 45.5% 29.5% 25.0%

Q4 Comments I agree most settings probably do meet the criteria therefore providing these supplements would only end up lowering the base rate SHOULD BE GENERIC Quality & EAL - we cannot continue to offer highly qualified staff EYTS, EYP etc if the funding provided does not cover the cost of the childcare. EAL is also another

80 aspect that creates more drains on resources that needs more appropriate funding to support settings. Additional supplement for flexibility and for hiring highly qualified staff Quality should be recognised using Ofsted judgement If affects base rate but if base rate stays the same then the additional supplements should be added. Not sure what you mean EAL - need additional speech and language support, wide variations between setting and level of need. An additional supplement for EAL as this impacts on educational outcomes and requires settings to provide additional support. The loss of the quality supplement is very concerning. This should be linked to having fully qualified QTS teachers in the setting. Quality is a key factor in improving outcomes for children and the cost of providing this should be taken into account with the provision of funding. Unless we provide outstanding/good quality of early education, we will not close the gap to ensure young children have the best start to their education and have better long term outcomes. Rurality should be maintained. Quality and EAL supplement should be retained. We need quality to remain and then needs of all EAL learners to be met at a higher level and the supplement will allow that. The quality supplement should be maintained as it encourages settings to recruit the best trained staff available, and removing this may lead to an increase in less qualified staff being employed with a subsequent drop in teaching quality for children. I believe there should be funding related to quality. If all settings are meeting this requirement it will therefore be shared equally however it will also ensure that settings still strive to provide high quality early education. Deprivation should be included Nursery Schools offer high quality education with teachers and additional costs - a quality supplement should be available I think. Flexibility A quality supplement should be developed in order to ensure that children. This should reflect the importance and value of QTS in Early Education. This should only be received where the QTS works directly with the children and whose qualification is Early Years Specialism. EAL, SEN, Quality these are areas which dramatically influence the financial stability of a private childcare setting and if being delivered to a high quality should be reimbursed In order to plan and retain staff we would like the funding to stay as stable as possible. Fluctuation from year to year and term to term is difficult to manage and can impact on quality of staffing. I do feel there should possibly be some supplement which rewards quality, but defining quality is difficult. Research as evidenced quality often comes with QTS teachers and fully trained SENCos. If one of the supplements includes support to provide a teacher, that should be included.

5. SEN Inclusion Fund (Additional Inclusion Support) SEN Inclusion Funds are a requirement of the EYNFF. It is proposed to continue current £150k level of funding in 2017/18.

Q5. Do you agree that the SEN Inclusion Fund (known as Additional Inclusion Support in Lancashire) should remain at £150,000 in 2018/19?

Responses Yes No Not sure 88 57.9% 11.4% 30.7%

Q5 Comments Currently have no children that qualify I know LCC give us what they can, but it is not enough if a child needs 1:1 for their safety (e.g. They can't communicate) More transparency regarding how much of the funding is spent on the children and the outcomes this achieves. Nursery Schools must also be considered as centres of excellence in supporting children with SEN and as such be rewarded for it. Under the present arrangements, we are finding an increasing number of children coming into the school at 2 via funded sessions through low income or Portage/SEND needs. These children often require additional support and identification and there is no funding or support for this. This puts an already extremely stretched system at breaking point. Or increase. It certainly should not decrease. The SEN team needs to review it's structure. Nursery Schools in particular are struggling to meet all the costs. We always have children moving to us mid term because other settings have not been able to meet the children's requirements. The amount of time SENCOs spend to complete paperwork which is more often than not repetitive is causing a strain on the staffing budget. Additional staff needed to support children with complex educational and health needs is also a drain on the budget. Actual funding should come in to settings alongside specialist support. Maintained Nursery Schools often do not receive finance to support SEND children as we work very hard to provide a high quality service even with low budgets - this puts a great deal of pressure on staff. No idea if this is sufficient or not. We have a significant number of children on roll for whom this additional funding is very important. I don't think this should be reduced and I would like to stress that the DAFF funding remains totally separate as there has been some speculation that AIS may be reduced due to the existence of DAFF Again to enable a judgement supportive statistics are needed to assess better - SEN funding remains extremely difficult to access in my own personal experience There is a large gap in the complex needs of the SENd children who access our provision and the amount of funding we receive for them. Some nurseries (both of mine) have a very high number of children with complex needs the AIS funding does not come close to meeting these needs. I think the impact of this AIS money needs evaluating, is it being used effectively for the right children and making a difference? As always, more money for SEN is needed in school - the earlier the support is given, the more chance they can catch up.

82 AIS funding does not work in meeting the needs of children with SEN. Insufficient funding is being passed through to providers for us to support children effectively. Additional funding should be requested from the High Needs block as our work with children with SEN is early intervention and prevention. A mapping exercise would need to be undertaken to assess how much funding is needed for early years providers to support children with SEN. AIS funding does not meet the needs of supporting children with SEN. A mapping exercise would be beneficial to assess the funding needed for early years settings to support children with SEN.

6. Two Year Old Funding When Two Year Old funding was introduced, allocations were split into two elements:  Base Rate Funding (£4.64 in 2017/18)  Targeted Support Funding (£0.36 in 2017/18) This split of funding is no longer necessary and it is proposed to remove the separate identification giving a revised base rate of £5.00, at 2017/18 levels

Q6. Do you agree with the proposal to combine both elements of two year old funding into a single rate?

Responses Yes No Not sure 89 76.4% 6.7% 16.9%

Q6 Comments

Don't take 2 year old funded children As long as this does not reduce the actual amount being paid Would make it easier Again 2year funded children should be able to access Quality funding as an additional supplement where an Early Years QTS is employed in Nursery School / Class provision

83 LANCASHIRE SCHOOLS FORUM Date of meeting 4 July 2017

Item No 8

Title: Recommendations of the High Needs Block Working Group

Appendix A

Executive Summary

On 8 June 2017, the High Needs Block Working Group considered a number of reports, including:

 2016/17 Schools Budget Outturn Report  School Balances and Clawback 2016/17  Alternative Provision (AP) Places Update  Payment and Recoupment of DSG Funding for Non Maintained Establishments  Schools Forum Annual Report 2016/17  PRU Top-Up Funding

A summary of the key issues and recommendations arising from the Working Group's considerations of the items are provided in this report.

Recommendations

The Forum is asked to: a) Note the report from the High Needs Block Working Group held on 8 June 2017; b) Ratify the Working Group's recommendations.

84 Background On 8 June 2017, the High Needs Block Working Group considered a number of reports. A summary of the key issues and recommendations arising from the Working Group's considerations of the items are provided in this report.

1. 2016/17 Schools Budget Outturn Report A report was provided setting out information on the Schools Budget outturn position for 2016/17 for the High Needs Block.

It was noted that, in advance of expected national regulations to ring-fence the Schools Block ahead of the proposed Schools National Funding Formula (SNFF), the Forum has agreed that in principle the Lancashire allocations for all funding blocks will be ring-fenced in the first instance.

The table below shows the High Needs Block outturn position for 2016/17.

Budget Actuals Variance £m £m £m Central Services 0.047 0.047 0.000 Commissioned Services 32.198 27.659 -4.539 Schools Delegated 67.108 68.170 1.062 DSG Grant -99.353 -96.461 2.892 Total 0.000 -0.585 -0.585

Commentary The overall High Needs Block budget at 31 March 2017 shows an underspend of £0.585m. Further details of individual budget lines were provided for the Group. Key issues included:

Commissioned Services Overall, this budget revealed a High Needs outturn position showing an underspend of £4.539m. This underspend was an accumulation of a number of variances on individual budget lines, including: o Primary Behaviour Support ended the year with an overspend totalling £0.6m. Members noted that various reports had been presented throughout the year alerting the Forum to the pressures on this budget and the anticipated overspend. The Forum have agreed adjustments to the 2017/18 budget to reflect this situation; o Virtual School High Needs Funding was overspent by £0.421m at 31 March 2017. This overspend is attributable to a year end recharge, of circa £0.5m, to the social care budget for the costs of education provided for young people in children's social care, which are attributable to the DSG. These Lancashire children often have to be placed outside Lancashire settings in residential care homes due to child sexual exploitation (CSE) or other safeguarding issues (as opposed to SEN/EHCP reasons, which is covered below) and the costs of the educational element of a placements are initially charged to children's social care. In future, the Headteacher for Children Looked After will be informed as placements including education provision are made, to enable queries and checks about the suitability of provision to be undertaken and the expenditure authorised in advance. It is also proposed that the educational element is invoiced separately, to facilitate

85 approval of each payment and allow expenditure to be coded directly to the High Needs Budget as it occurs; o The Out of County budget underspend of £3.878m is in the main due to having long term agreements at favourable rates and maximising the number of children and young people placed in Lancashire schools. This is the second successive year that this budget heading has been underspent following concern expressed by the Forum about previous increases in the costs associated with out county provision; o SEND Learner Support ended 2016/17 some £0.942m below the original budget, mainly due to underspends on staffing costs; o The Forum supports various early intervention initiatives from the Schools Budget and, in 2016/17, these budget headings underspent by £0.346m. Members will be aware that the ability of the Forum to support these initiatives, deemed 'historic commitments', will reduce as new more stringent Regulatory requirements are introduced ahead of the Schools National Funding Formula.

Schools Delegated The outturn position for schools delegated budgets from the High Needs Block budget shows an overspend of some £1.062m. This overspend is caused by higher top up expenditure at maintained schools (special schools and PRUs, as well as high needs pupils in primary and secondary schools). This figure is partly offset by underspends in top up expenditure at non maintained provision.

DSG Grant DSG Grant income was some £2.892m below the original budget forecast. This is part due to reductions for High Needs pre & post 16 expenditure which is funded outside the DSG and schools transferring to academy status. The remainder is due to not having to release reserves due to the underspend on commissioned services.

Reserves and Provisions A number of earmarked reserves and provisions are maintained by the Authority for specific purposes. As at 31 March 2017 these amounted to a total of £72.390m for Schools, which is a significant reduction from the position in previous years, which equated to £79.812m at 31 March 2016 and £89.890m at 31 March 2015.

Members gave careful consideration to the report and to associated issues, including:  Overall pressures on High Needs funding going forward, including increased demand and implications from Lancashire SEND policies and provision;  Early Years SEN developments, including a DfE pilot involving SENCOs at a nursey school offering professional development to local PVI providers and the review of the local Early Years offer;  The breakdown of some budget lines, including the reported overspend on the Schools Delegated Budget;  The underspend on the Early Intervention Budget and the possible uses for carry forward in 2017/18, given some of the pressures being created by some County Council reorganisations.

86 The Working Group: a) Noted the report and the Schools Budget Outturn position for 2016/17 in relation to the High Needs Block; b) Agreed that the underspends on the Early Intervention Services could be carried forward into 2017/18, but requested that further information be provided by the services to set out how this funding would be utilised; c) Requested a more detailed breakdown of the £1.062m overspend on the Schools Delegated Budget; d) Requested a report to a future meeting about the SEND policies and provision in Lancashire and the financial implications to the High Needs Block.

As requested at c) above, a more detailed breakdown of the £1.062m overspend on the High Needs Block Schools Delegated Budget is provided at Appendix A.

2. School Balances and Clawback 2016/17 This report set out the year end position of schools' delegated budgets at 31 March 2017.

The final outturn position against schools delegated budgets at 31 March 2017 is an overspend of £8.716m. This means that school balances have decreased by £8.716m in 2016/17, to a total of £44.997m. The tables below show analysis of school balances by phase at the end of the financial year 2016/17.

2016/17 School Balances - In-Year Movement of Balances by Phase

Information was also provided on other school balances outturn data, including the number of schools in overall surplus or deficit at year end.

2016/17 School Balances – No of Schools in Surplus/Deficit by Phase

Count of Deficit Count of Surplus Phase close balance close balance Nursery 5 19 Primary 17 457 Secondary 14 48 Special 2 26 Short Stay 2 7 Total 40 557

The data again showed a worsening real terms position around school funding, with 40 schools ending the year in deficit, including 2 special schools and 2 PRUs, compared to 25 schools with deficit balances at 31 March 2016 and 18 schools with deficit balances at 31 March 2015.

Individual School Balances The report included details about the movement in balances at an individual school level in 2017/18. As previously requested by the Forum, in addition to the year-end balance by school, information is included in this annex setting out:

 Year-end balance adjusted for approved exemptions;  Adjusted balance as a % of CFR income;  Adjusted balance per pupil.

In addition, one appeal to an initial clawback calculation was received. This referred to a reimbursement for a suspension that was allocated at year end and pushed the school into a clawback position. Had this information been received as a timely clawback exemption request, it would have been excluded from the clawback calculation as a 'late allocation'. The LA was therefore minded to allow the appeal and to rescind the clawback.

In accordance with the 2016/17 School Balances and Clawback policy, clawback is therefore to be applied to 6 schools in relation to their balances at 31 March 2017, totalling £33k. Further information is provided below.

School No Balance Claw Claw Balance Claw Claw above Back @ Back @ above Back @ Back @ Guideline 100% 50% Guideline 100% 50%

Primary £9,603 £1,409 £4,097 5 1 4 Secondary £0 £0 £0 0 0 0 Special £54,916 0 £27,458 1 0 1 Nursery £0 £0 £0 0 0 0 PRU £0 £0 £0 0 0 0 Total £64,518 £1,409 £31,555 6 1 5

The clawback application included one special school but no PRUs.

School Balances and Clawback 2017/18 For 2017/18, the LA suggested a possible amendment to the clawback policy, which related to a possible change to the DFC arrangements, which, from September 2017, will be delegated to schools. (Report being prepared for schools block and Forum). It was therefore suggested that the clawback policy be amended to clarify that DFC year end balances should

88 be coded separately as 'capital' and would not therefore be subject to the clawback calculation.

The working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Noted the overall position of school balances at 31 March 2017 and the individual school level information provided in the report; c) Noted the application of clawback to 6 schools (including one special school) as at 31 March 2017, in accordance with the arrangements previously agreed by the Forum; d) Supported the 'late allocation' appeal being exempt from clawback; e) Supported the clarification that DFC balances were not subject to clawback being included in the School Balances and Clawback policy for 2017/18.

3. Alternative Provision (AP) Places Update

Primary Alternative Provision 112 places are commissioned for 3 area PRUs (the capacity number for the schools) and 8 from a provider in West Lancs and 12 others, giving a total of 132.

In 2016/17, these have not been sufficient to meet demands due to the number of primary permanent exclusions, especially in the east of the county and the barriers to moving children on from the PRUs.

The Strategy to address this has included a review and relaunch of the use of alternative provision to prevent exclusion. A vital part of this offer is the provision of an in house programmes to compliment the outreach support to schools.

The pilot in West Lancashire based on a local model has been successful, with no permanent exclusions in the area in 2016/17 to date. Exclusions in the rest of the Preston/South area have reduced and in the North have remained very low. However since the end of the spring term, the PRU serving the south has been at capacity, unable to offer in house programmes, resulting in an increase in exclusions.

The east area PRU was at capacity by the end of October 2016 and subsequently there have been a significant number of further permanent exclusions. Additional AP places have been sourced from another provider, however a number of children are still only able to access 121 tuition. Work is ongoing to identify appropriate additional providers and to replicate the success of the West Lancs pilot based on a local, collaborative model.

Data is provided below:

Area PE 2016-17 PE 2015-16 (2 terms) (3 terms) NORTH 3 8 EAST 21 31 SOUTH 17 36 TOTAL 41 85

Secondary Alternative Provision The trend of recent years of increased permanent exclusions has continued. The majority of placements continue to be commissioned from the 7 secondary PRUs, with these places including provision for pupils with significant medical needs and LA commissioned single roll places. A total of 687 alternative places have been commissioned from 7 Lancashire PRUs for 2016/17. Each PRU also offer in house intervention places to area schools.

In addition the number of pupils requiring alternative provision other than in a PRU, i.e. college, has increased, in part due to numbers of refugees, some unaccompanied children, requiring bespoke package of education and the number of non-Lancashire CLA being placed in the county, many with significant needs.

PRUs in the east of the county are currently at capacity, due to number of PE and also the high number of new to county pupils with significant needs, many CLA, who move into this area of Lancashire.

Data is provided below:

AREA 2016-17 2015-16 (2 terms) (3 terms) NORTH 55 51 EAST 76 77 SOUTH 85 105 TOTAL 216 233 Non PRU AP 111 (currently 80 in provision)

Lancashire Hospital Education Service This is a centrally managed service and provides education for children who are inpatients in Royal Preston and Lancaster General Hospitals, day patients accessing support from ELCAS (child mental health) based at Burnley Hospital, children and young people (13-18) accessing Level 4 inpatient support (Mental Health) and Home Teaching for pupils too ill to leave the home.

The funding for this service has been at the same level for 3 years. It is anticipated that there will be increased costs in 2017-18 which will put great pressure on the budget and result in insufficient funds to deliver this statutory service.

Causes of this pressure are:  The through pupil numbers for all of these provisions has increased in 2015-16 and 2016- 17 and it is anticipated that this trend will continue in 2017-18.  Recent relocation of the Junction (Level 4 mental health inpatients) due to an NHS service development. The provision has increased number from 10 to 18 inpatients. The relocation will involve additional costs to the service- for the provision of resources, essential ICT connections to classrooms to enable access to LCC systems and some new ICT equipment, and setting up the new classrooms.

90 The Group discussed the additional costs associated with Hospital Education Provision and the pressures on alternative provision. The process and monitoring of commissioned places was also deliberated.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Supported an increase in the number of primary AP commissioned placements from 132 to 152 (an increase of 20), to be utilised to ensure the LA meets its statutory duties and to increase access to programmes to prevent exclusions; c) Requested further reports providing details of the additional places as they are commissioned, including impact evaluation information; d) Supported an increase in the Hospital Education Budget of £107,500 for 2017/18, in response to the identified cost pressures.

4. Payment and Recoupment of DSG Funding for Non Maintained Establishments The LA has recently been reviewing some payment processes and a report was presented setting out some proposals in connection with non-maintained establishments.

Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) funding is received by the LA to make payments to maintained and non-maintained establishments. The non-maintained establishments include academies, FE colleges and other non-maintained and independent schools.

DSG funding is received by the LA on a monthly basis from the EFA and, to assist with cash flow, is also paid out to non-maintained establishments on a monthly basis.

Currently, for non-maintained establishments, if the re-determination reveals an underpayment, then an additional BACS payment is made to the establishment for the in- term correction. In addition the following term's monthly payment is then adjusted accordingly to be in line with the data received in the prior term.

91 For maintained bank account schools there are cash flow implications, however additional payments are not actioned nor invoices raised, instead the final monthly payment each term is adjusted to reflect the High Needs Block top-up re- determination. In line with EFA guidance, the LA is keen to ensure that there is a consistent approach across all providers; o Making additional BACS payments and raising invoices causes the LA to incur additional resource and costs. The current practice applied to maintained bank account schools to adjust the existing final monthly payment each term is a more efficient and cost effective process; o Adjusting the final monthly payment each term has the added advantage of being a more automated process. On occasion, invoices go unpaid, particularly when issued around school holidays. Debt management and legal processes can be initiated due to non-payment, which can again incur additional costs on both the LA and establishments. Adjustments to existing payment profiles would negate these additional actions being triggered. In the event of a dispute regarding a redetermination payment, a future monthly payment could make a further adjustment to correct a payment level either up or down. o The process to adjust scheduled monthly payments to reflect changes and recalculations in allocations is the same method as employed by the EFA when dealing with adjustments for over/underpayments relating to the LA.

Following the review, the LA is proposing to adopt a similar process for adjustments to High Needs Block top-up payments at non-maintained establishments as is used at maintained bank account schools. This involves the final monthly payment each term being adjusted to reflect the High Needs Block top-up re-determinations. The proposal would involve the introduction of this revised process from the summer term 2017. Therefore, adjustments would be made to the August 2017 payments to non-maintained establishments, either up or down, based on the May 2017 termly counts.

This process would also be used for a small number of Early Years Block payments to academies with nursery classes. The Early Years budget allocation issued each year to academies with nursery classes includes a termly estimate of the 2, 3 and 4 year old hours that will be provided. These hours are adjusted each term in line with the actual hours delivered as recorded on the termly early years census. It is proposed that any adjustments necessary to reflect actual provision, either up or down, will also be made to the existing final monthly payment each term.

The Group considered the proposals and noted that the process of agreeing the termly places was much improved and a smooth transition to the proposed payment system would depend on timely notifications to establishments.

The original report indicated that, if agreed, this proposal could be introduced from the summer term 2017, with the adjustments being made to the July 2017 payments.

92 However, subsequent to the meeting, the County Council has reflected that implementation timescales will be very tight assuming Forum ratify the recommendation on 4 July, providing limited notice to establishments effected. If the proposals is agreed by the Forum, it is now proposed to introduce the new arrangements from the Autumn term 2017.

5. Schools Forum Annual Report 2016/17

Each year the Schools Forum publishes an annual report setting out items of business in which the Forum has been involved. A draft Forum Annual Report for 2016/17 was provided for consideration by the Working Group.

High Needs Block highlights include issues around The Schools Budget 2017/18, the High Needs Funding Reform Consultations and High Needs Block Commissioned Places for 2017/18.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Recommend to the Schools Forum that the 2016/17 Annual Report be approved for publication.

6. PRU Top-Up Funding Previous reports to the Working Group had set out information on PRU top up funding, following concerns raised by the sector about the Lancashire rates.

A report was presented providing the latest information supplied by the PRU headteachers.

At the last meeting, the Working Group asked PRU secondary headteachers to provide clarity on key funding requirements that are being sought to ensure that any final outcomes meet necessary timescales to facilitate possible changes for 2018/19 budget setting.

Secondary PRU headteachers submitted a paper setting out the key issues, which included analysis of individual PRU funding and also referred to the previous comparator data on LA top up rates in the NW, which showed that Lancashire was one of the lowest.

The headteachers data indicated that for secondary PRUs, four of the six have a situation where the expenditure per pupil exceeds the income per pupil. The shortfall ranged from £158 to £1820 per pupil. Further information in the report provided additional background information about the challenges faced by the schools.

It was noted that each PRU must continually respond to an ever- changing intake of pupils which adds to the very challenging situation of budget management. When pupils are needing high support PRUs arrange the provision and then apply for additional funding retrospectively to the LA, via the Headteacher for Children Looked After. Whilst the PRU must commit the expenditure, there is no guarantee that ACERS will authorise the high support funding.

93 The sharp rise in permanent exclusions, especially at KS3 has also impacted on the PRUs. Many of these pupils have unidentified special needs and need supporting through the graduated response. Whilst each PRU is working collaboratively with their district and the LA to ensure the pupils receive EHCP where needed, this is a slow process and often requires smaller groups with higher staffing ratios.

The secondary PRU Headteachers requested:  The Additional Top-Up funding received from the LA (ACERS) be delegated to the PRUs. This would allow each PRU to forward plan for each academic year in a cost- effective way.

 A full review of top-up funding to be undertaken

Members discussed the report and supported the principle of reviewing the PRU formula, including the delegation of the Additional Top-Up budget.

The working group asked that PRU headteachers meet with officers to conduct the review and develop options for consideration. It was noted that primary PRUs, the West Lancashire special school and the PRU academy would also need to be included in the process.

The Working Group: a) Noted the report; b) Supported the principle of reviewing the PRU formula, including the delegation of the Additional Top-Up budget; c) Requested that PRU headteachers and officers meet to further review the PRU formula and develop proposals, including:  Key principles for any proposals;  Modelling of any proposed mechanisms, providing evidence and impact data; d) Requested that primary PRUs, the West Lancashire special school and the PRU academy are included in the process; e) Requested that an update be provided to the next meeting of the Working Group.

Appendix A

Breakdown of the £1.062m overspend on the High Needs Block Schools Delegated Budget.

Variance Final Phase Original Budget Under (-) Allocations Over (+) Maintained Secondary £1,574,864 £1,665,072 £90,208 Maintained Primary £3,612,035 £4,183,877 £571,842 Maintained Shortstay £9,460,272 £9,743,418 £283,146 Maintained Special £46,346,388 £48,111,420 £1,765,032 Academy Primary £17,288 £239,137 £221,849 Academy Secondary £690,613 £739,436 £48,823 Further Education Provider £1,968,473 £3,142,761 £1,174,288 Specialist Provider £3,437,623 £2,593,871 -£843,752 Budgeted Growth £2,249,000 £0 -£2,249,000 Total £69,356,556 £70,418,992 £1,062,436