238 ACTION REDCAR AND CLEVELAND SCHOOLS FORUM
MINUTES OF MEETING HELD AT 3.00 P.M. ON TUESDAY 26TH JUNE 2012 AT THE INSPIRE TO LEARN CENTRE, ESTON:
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Headteachers:
Mr N Appleby, Rye Hills School (Vice-Chair) Mrs A Johnson, Dormanstown Primary School (Chair) Mrs H Hall, South Bank Primary School Mrs A Hull, Chaloner Primary School Mrs R Mayes, Huntcliff School Mr S O’Gara, Education Other Than at School Service & Pathways School Mr K Thompson, Kilton Thorpe School Mr P Tyreman, Hummersea Primary School
School Governors:
Mrs L Davies, St Peter’s Catholic College Mrs D McLay, Caedmon Primary School Mr V Peel, Lakes Primary School Mr S Richardson, Sacred Heart School Mr J Tombs, Lockwood Primary School
ALSO PRESENT
Mr G Douglas, NASUWT, TU and Associations Representative Ms M Tansley, Diocesan Representative Cllr W Wall, LA Representative
IN ATTENDANCE:
Mr J Anthony, Head of Education and Skills Mrs K Redfern, Principal Manager, Inclusion Mrs K Slingsby, Business Manager Mr K Smith, Directorate Accountant Mr M Gershman, Clerk to the Schools Forum
1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies for absence were received from the following:
Ms L Halbert, Freebrough Academy • • Mrs A Hill, Wilton Primary School • Mr A Hobbs, Bydales School • Ms W Nixon, Early Years Development Officer
The Chair would write to Mr Hobbs to thank him for his service to the Forum. Chair
239 ACTION 2. MEMBERSHIP UPDATE
An updated membership list had been circulated and the Clerk pointed out that:
• The list should be amended to indicate that Mrs Johnson was Chair and Mr Clerk Appleby Vice-Chair • Mrs Alison Hill had been re-appointed as a representative of the Eston Primary School Headteachers’ cluster • The terms of office of a number of members of the Forum would be coming to an end on 31st August 2012:
- Mr G Douglas as TU representative - Mrs A Johnson as a representative of the Redcar Primary School Headteacher’s cluster - Mr T Hobbs and Mrs R Mayes as representatives of the Secondary Schools and Colleges Improvement Partnership - Mr K Thompson as special schools’ representative - Mrs D McLay as a primary schools’ governor representative - Mr S Richardson as a secondary schools’ governor representative
Some of these vacancies would be affected by the consultation on changes to the 2010 Schools’ Forum regulations. The Clerk tabled a letter from the Education Funding Agency of 13th June. The draft 2012 regulations to come in force by “early October” 2012 were attached and comments were to be returned by 11th July. All LAs would be required to reconstitute their Schools’ Forums in accordance with the Forum regulations. Members
The Clerk explained to the Forum that LAs were required to ensure proportionality either by school roll or numbers of type of school between maintained school and academy representation. A briefing paper would be produced for the Secondary Clerk/ Schools and Colleges Improvement Partnership meeting on 13th July and a revised Agenda constitution considered at the next meeting.
3. MINUTES
Members had received minutes of the last meeting held on 9th February 2012.
RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 9th February 2012 be approved and signed by the Chair. Chair
4. MATTERS ARISING
(Mr Appleby joined the meeting)
Arising from Item 8.3.2 – Carbon Reduction
Mr Smith had not yet provided the tonnage figure for all schools and would do so. Mr Smith Mrs Slingsby asked if schools received this information from Wendi Wheeler, LA Energy Manager. The Chair responded that she believed that schools were only provided with their own figures. 240 ACTION 5. SCHOOL TRANSPORT
Three elected members had called in the Cabinet’s decision on 13th March 2012 to withdraw free discretionary transport to faith schools from September. The Scrutiny Board had upheld the Cabinet’s decision at its meeting on 19th March 2012. The new School Transport Policy was available on the intranet.
6. DEDICATED SCHOOLS’ GRANT OUTTURN 2011/12
6.1 Mr Smith tabled a report on the 2011/12 DSG outturn. He highlighted that the underspend of £282,000 during 2011/12 should not mislead Forum members into thinking the financial situation was positive, as it did not reflect the real underlying position.
6.2 The main variances over £10,000 were explained. The £32,000 of potential ER/VR costs at Gillbrook would fall in 2012/13. There had been savings from lower than anticipated take up of support services and specialist provision outside the Borough. This was partly offset by the cost of central support services being £155,000 higher than budgeted for, which should not be repeated in future years. The post 16 SEN Young People’s Learning Agency grant had to be estimated, but had been £34,000 less than the year before.
6.3 Gillbrook’s deficit of c. £280,000 had been allowed for in 2011/12, but would now fall in 2012/13 due to the delay in conversion to academy status. The DSG in 2012/13 would alter according to which schools converted to academies and when.
6.4 The Chair congratulated the LA SEND staff on getting expenditure under control in 2011/12. Mr Anthony agreed that the capping of SEND funding had achieved the desired effect.
7. SCHOOL BALANCES
Mr Smith tabled a list of school balances at the end of 2011/12. LAs were no longer obliged to operate a balance control mechanism for school budgets, but the Forum had decided to do so for Redcar and Cleveland, of 5% of SBS for secondary schools and 8% for primary schools. Balances against the Pupil Premium would be carried forward into 2012/13 as well. Schools were required to submit returns explaining how any excessive balances would be utilised. LA officers had been satisfied with the single exception of Nunthorpe School that the intended uses of the balances were legitimate. Nunthorpe School had failed to submit a return for its excessive balance of £168,832 and Mr Anthony was asked if he intended to recover this. He responded that the LA was entitled to do so, but had never actually done so previously. The decision would be made by himself, Mr Smith and Mrs Slingsby. The School was entitled to retain this balance upon conversion to academy, currently scheduled for 1st September.
The Chair commented that the balances seemed high. Mr Smith pointed out that these were lower than previous years.
241 ACTION 8. UPDATE ON PROGRESS TOWARDS IMPLEMENTING SCHOOL FUNDING REFORM
8.1 An update on progress towards implementation of the School Funding Reform had been circulated. Mrs Slingsby explained that the three groups established to consider each block of funding had met a number of times.
Early Years Block
8.2 A consultation on a single early years funding formula had been carried out not long ago. The two main changes considered by the EY Working Group were the targeting of disadvantage and funding of high incidence/low need SEN.
8.3 It was proposed to replace Free School Meal entitlement in the current funding formula with band rates based upon the Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index from 2013/14.
8.4 The SEN Index was currently used to allow pupils with SEN attending nurseries in schools to access funding, which was not available to any children in private and voluntary provision. Prior attainment was not available as a proxy measure, so the correlation between children scoring less than 78 against the Foundation Stage Profile and IDACI was currently being examined. Concern was expressed that SEN was not governed by deprivation and that schools should not be double funded according to IDACI. Around 40-50 children were affected and the LA would be consulting on the criteria in September. Plotting 78 and under against IDACI produced a correlation of 0.67 and Mr Anthony observed that this was not that close, so Mrs Slingsby wished to retain a proportion of the funding to be based on need. She added that the SEN of children were often not known when they joined the Foundation Stage.
8.5 The EYWG were still considering this issue. They had held their third meeting that day and had reached agreement in principle, but would consult in September. The Chair commented that this would be the important part of the process and that Mrs Slingsby had done good work with the three working groups. Mrs Slingsby would Mrs Slingsby seek wider views over the next few weeks, prior to the consultation stage and the Chair added that the primary school clusters were working on this.
High Needs Block
8.6 Mrs Redfern reported that the High Needs WG had done a great deal of work on a possible funding formula. Four levels of need would be used for Kirkleatham Hall and Kilton Thorpe School and two for Pathways School. The units in mainstream schools had also been considered and two levels proposed, one for higher level autism and the other for pre-school, infant assessment and early intervention support bases.
(Mr Tyreman left the meeting)
Inevitably there would be winners and losers, financially. Alternative Provision had not yet been considered and this would be affected by new legislation. 242 ACTION
8.7 The DfE wished to direct more funding into schools’ own budgets to allow them to commission the services they required and the LA was working towards this, while at the same time avoiding radical change and trying to protect existing specialist provision. The consultation in September should identify further questions.
Mrs Redfern thanked Mrs Slingsby for her support.
Schools Block
8.8 Mrs Slingsby wished to alert Forum members to potential issues and provide an opportunity for feedback.
(Mr Tyreman rejoined the meeting)
There would be a significant level of new delegation of funding to maintained schools as a result of the reforms. Schools’ Forums could decide to ‘de-delegate’ certain funds for each sector if they wanted the LA to continue to provide the service, but school budgets would include these allocations in their Average Weighted Pupil Units, so they would be able to calculate the figures. These funds were already delegated to academies, who made their own arrangements for provision of these services. The details of these services and the per pupil cost for Clerk/ maintained schools would be presented to the next meeting and a proforma sent to Agenda/ the DfE in October. Final decisions would probably be made at the December Mrs Slingsby meeting.
8.9 There were potential issues over the cost of insurance and EU Procurement requirements for advertising in the EU Journal and tendering periods. The LA could require maintained schools to insure up to specified amounts. The Education Funding Agency set a corresponding figure for academies they were expected to insure their premises for and this would form part of their school budgets in future. Head 8.10 The decisions on central retention would be made for each phase in December. Teachers/ Primary and secondary school representatives needed to discuss this with the Governors schools they represented, through SCIP and the primary clusters. Mr Anthony Mrs Slingsby requested that a briefing paper be prepared for the following meeting on where there were risks arising from the fragmentation of central services.
8.11 In response to a question from a headteacher, Mr Smith explained that academies could not purchase insurance through a service level agreement with the LA as the LA would be acting ultra vires. A governor asked how the LA procured insurance and Mr Smith responded that there was a tendering process every three years. A headteacher asked if all the maintained schools currently obtained all their insurance through the LA and how much this saved them. Coverage was an issue as well as price. Another governor pointed out that the LA had decided of its own volition to save on insurance by forgoing cover for flooding. His school had been flooded and they had been forced to fund the remedial work from the school budget. As this was a community school and the building belonged to the LA, he found this unacceptable. Mr Smith pointed out that the LA employed a risk 243 ACTION
manager to carry out assessments of risks such as these. Mrs Slingsby added that the LA did not insure for all risks as this was not cost-effective and the mechanism was partly a self-insuring one. A governor asked if insurance was included in the unitary charge for PFI schools. Mrs Slingsby responded that it was not and PFI school contributions had to be renegotiated
8.12 Mr Anthony highlighted that the Schools’ Forum and not the individual schools would make the decision regarding ‘de-delegation’ of the first group of services. It was important that Forum members read the information sent out to them for the Forum next meeting very carefully. Mrs Slingsby pointed out that changes to voting Members arrangements under the new Forum regulations would preclude academies from voting on de-delegation.
8.13 Mr Douglas informed the Forum that he was assuming that Mr Anthony would Mr Anthony contact him regarding any employment issues.
8.14 The LA had some concerns about the future viability of some of the services in the second group and would strongly encourage schools to cooperate. Funding for Advanced Skills Teachers currently followed the teacher. Mr Anthony commented that he found it difficult to believe that schools would want to risk losing AST provision. The Chair pointed out that there were more ASTs in the secondary schools and this issue needed to be considered by phase. The ASTs were supposed to work across all schools, but this had not happened in practice and the schools that had not benefited as planned would take this into account. A headteacher confirmed that her school paid for ASTs without receiving any service and another headteacher agreed, but pointed out that feeder primary schools had benefited.
8.15 Mr Anthony observed that the Inspire to Learn Centre was at risk if schools did not agree to support it and it would be a disastrous if it was lost.
8.16 In response to a question from a headteacher about LA funding of early retirements, Mr Anthony explained that the LA could support a planned deficit budget if there was a recovery plan in place and a case was made by the school, but this had to be planned.
8.17 The £161,000 for Primary Strategy was to be spread across all schools for tasks such as EY moderation.
8.18 The East Cleveland EIC funding was the former Excellence in Cities/Education Action Zone funding. The other two clusters had distributed this funding, whereas this was held centrally for the East Cleveland cluster in Kilton Thorpe School’s bank account.
8.19 The Local Safeguarding Children’s Board funding of £23,000 had previously been approved by the Schools’ Forum to support training and child protection. In future the LSCB would have to provide schools with a SLA. Pete Davies, the LA Child Protection Officer for Education, was funded separately by schools from the DSG.
244 ACTION
8.20 Mr Anthony expressed the hope that schools would continue to value services such as Gifted and Talented and establish a joint commissioning body to purchase services, to avoid fragmentation and the risk of threatening services, limiting choice and value for money to schools. The Vice-Chair responded that secondary schools were unlikely to continue to support such services unless it was clear to them what they were getting in return. The Chair asked about the strategy for discussing this with schools. Mrs Slingsby would be speaking to the three primary Mrs Slingsby clusters and SCIP.
8.21 Mr Smith explained that the abolition of the Local Authority Central School Equivalent Grant would bring academy funding into line with maintained schools. The EFA replicated academy budgets calculated by the LA.
Individual Schools Budgets
8.22 Mrs Slingsby had not tabled examples of the output of the DfE’s modelling tool because there had not been enough time available to do this properly. The DfE had not yet provided all the information on the final parameters. Consultation on the lump sum figure to protect the budgets of small schools was still ongoing and was supposed to conclude at the end of the week. The number of AWPU values for secondary schools were not yet confirmed.
Mr Anthony thanked Mrs Slingsby for her work. Many LAs were only just beginning to think about this matter and he felt that Redcar and Cleveland had made a good start.
9. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
None.
10. DATES OF MEETINGS DURING 2012/13
It was agreed that meetings during 2012/13 would be held at 3:00 pm in the Inspire to Learn Centre on Tuesday 9th October 2012, Tuesday 11th December 2012, Tuesday 12th February 2013 and Tuesday 18th June 2013.
(The meeting closed at 4:35 pm)