MILTON KEYNES’ SCHOOLS FORUM

Acorn House, 381 Midsummer Boulevard MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 1 DECEMBER 2016 AT 3.00 PM

PRESENT: Primary School Representatives Lizzie Bancroft – Loughton Manor First School Christine Ryan – Cold Harbour C of E School

Primary School Governors Francis Grant – Great Linford School Janet Haines – Oldbrook School (alternate for Kirk Hopkins) Paul Hussey – Bradwell Village Primary School (Chair) Jake Yeo – Bushfield School

Secondary School Representative Tracey Jones – Lord Grey School

Secondary School Governor Paul Herbert – St Pauls Catholic School

Academy Representatives Neil Barrett – Stephenson Michelle Currie – Walton High Jane Edwards – Heronsgate School Glen Martin – Shenley Brook End Andy Squires – Ian Tett – Oakgrove School

Academy Governors Dave Moulson –

Special School Representative Finlay Douglas – White Spire School

Nursery School Representative Natalie Fowler – Knowles Nursery School

Church of England Diocese Kieran Salter – Diocesan Authority – St Mary and St Giles C of E Junior School

Northampton Catholic Diocese Michael Manley – Diocesan Authority

Trade Union Representative Anita Richards – NUT Divisional Secretary

SCHOOLS FORUM 1 DECEMBER 2016 PAGE 1

LA OFFICERS: Michael Bracey – Corporate Director - People Natasha Hutchin – Deputy Finance Manager Caroline Marriott – Head of Delivery SEN and Disability Penni Powers – Finance Manager - Children and Families Nicky Rayner – Service Director – Children and Families

OBSERVERS: Bob Seaman – Northamptonshire County Council Helen Wray – Governor Support – Children and Families

CLERK: Sue Puddifoot – Governor Support - Children and Families

SF 607 WELCOME AND APOLOGIES Item 1

The Chair welcomed all to the meeting, including the two new academy members Andy Squires and Jane Edwards.

Apologies in advance had been received by the clerk from: John Howe – Denbigh School Antony Moore – Giles Brook School Ian Northover – Heronshaw School Lindsey Styles –

Lynne Johnson - Pre School Learning Alliance was absent.

Jonathan Budd – Primary PRU had resigned.

SF 608 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Item 2

Michelle Currie declared that although she represented a secondary academy, she was also Chief Executive Officer of MKET (Milton Keynes Education Trust) and therefore had an interest in all areas due to the variety of schools in the trust.

SF 609 MINUTES AND MATTERS ARISING Item 3

The minutes of the meeting held on 13 October 2016 were agreed as an accurate record.

There were no matters arising from the minutes.

SF 610 BUDGET MONITORING 2016/17 (Natasha Hutchin) Item 4

The purpose of this item was to advise Schools Forum of the latest Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) allocation for 2016/17 and the period 8 budget monitoring position for 2016/17.

Natasha Hutchin confirmed that the Early Years Block allocation was £104k greater than the initial allocation and this had been reflected in income and expenditure. However, the Block 2 census information for Early Years providers had not been included and this would feature in the next report.

SCHOOLS FORUM 1 DECEMBER 2016 PAGE 2

This was the second year of Early Years Pupil Premium which had been initially estimated and had been reviewed on actual take up. This resulted in a reduction of £77k compared to 2015/16 allocation.

The current DSG forecast was for an overall £1.051m deficit, which was a £41k improvement on that reported at the last meeting.

Table 2 detailed the significant forecast variations to the DSG budget and included the Early Years allocation and mid year academy conversions. There was a small change in rates and there would be a revision carried out on Newton Leys but a contingency had been set aside for this. There was an underspend on the Growth Fund as Kents Hill schemes would not be paid this financial year. There were also small movements around High Needs with an £155k underspend on top-up funding but an Independent Special School fees overspend of £1m. Detailed work had been carried out on an individual placement basis to determine the phasing and timelines on when these payments would cease, so this could be factored into next year’s budget.

Schools Forum questioned why there had been less take up of Early Years pupil premium. This was due to the initial allocation being high but feedback on the acceptability of applications received had indicated that not all were eligible.

Schools Forum noted the level of DSG for 2016/17 and the latest outturn position as reported for period 8.

SF 611 MILTON KEYNES SCHOOLS BUDGET PLANNING 2017/18 (Penni Powers) Item 5

The purpose of this report was to give Schools Forum members an early opportunity to review how the estimated 2017/18 DSG, including the use of balances, was allocated across schools and academies by way of the funding formula and central early years and high needs budgets.

Penni Powers explained that this would be brought back in January 2017 and the information presented was to prompt discussion. There were still many unknown factors that could impact on the budget.

A set of slides which gave an early overview of the budget position was circulated at the meeting. The budget setting process was outlined for new members and the overview included the continuing challenges, uncertainties and reductions.

When the budget was set in January it was agreed that the overspend in the current year would be the first call on the 2017/18 DSG.

Section 5.5 outlined the estimate for the DSG. The blocks were not currently ring-fenced but this may be introduced in future as part of the National Funding Formula. More detail on summary budgets was

SCHOOLS FORUM 1 DECEMBER 2016 PAGE 3

included in Annex 1. Annex 3 detailed the additional places in planned growth.

There was no inflationary rise and the MFG was set at -1.5%. The main pressures continued to be growth, high needs and post 16 provision. At post 16, expenditure exceeded funding provided and ways to manage this would have to be considered.

Schools Forum drew attention to aspects of growth data and Annex 3 included growth that had been funded. FSM and EAL figures would be available to include from mid December 2016. Broad assumptions had been made on the 15-30 hours take up for Early Years.

An in year surplus of £1m was required to balance the budget. The National Funding Formula would be introduced from April 2018 and it was essential to go into this with a balanced budget. The budget would be voted on at the meeting to be held on 12 January 2017 and papers for this would be circulated as soon as practically possible in the new year.

School Forum members discussed the options presented and there was some objection to reducing the formula by 1.5%, but it was understood why this was necessary. Many felt that schools had already reduced their expenditure at a time when costs were rising. It was also suggested to carry the £1m overspend to the next year.

Attention was also drawn to section 3.3 where the government was introducing a 0.5% apprenticeship levy on payrolls over £3m. This needed further definition.

Annex 3 showed details of the additional growth numbers to be funded over and above those already in schools. There may be scope for delaying the opening of Fairfields and place planning would be considered further. It was noted that there were empty places in some reception classes this term.

Michael Bracey outlined the difficulties in the Council’s overall financial position and the changes that public sector bodies would be facing in the next few years.

School Forum members thanked officers for presenting options and noted the uncertainties surrounding the introduction of the National Funding Formula and the difficulties in balancing the budget if the MFG remained at -1.5%. Staggering clearing the deficit over two years was suggested.

In the High Needs Block, per pupil costs and income were discussed and out of area placements could be reduced by providing facilities in Milton Keynes, hence reducing costs. However, complexity of need was increasing.

Further detail would be provided in January after census data had been included. Special School place numbers were being increased by 88 to

SCHOOLS FORUM 1 DECEMBER 2016 PAGE 4

meet demand and to give stability of funding of special schools. All Early Years, High Needs, Growth and Central Budgets had been reviewed.

Proposals in the report on funding formulae for 2017/18 were discussed and included removing the mobility factor and recycling it through IDACI allocations. Movement towards a £130k lump sum for the primary sector would continue and the difference recycled through the AWPU. Changes for Early Years included the removal of the lump sum and to align central budgets, holding up to 5% in central budgets. (See also item 6).

Discussion took place on the limited scope for adjustment and how different schools may be affected and what the impact might be. Many schools had been prudent while others had not taken a more strategic view. Groups of schools could work together to achieve economies of scale.

The removal of the lump sum for nursery schools would be covered by two years of transitional funding but detail on this was limited at present.

The situation of Milton Keynes in comparison to other local authorities was discussed, with particular reference to growth at a time of austerity and what affect the National Funding Formula may have in the future. If the Schools Block were ring-fenced this would have implications for the support it was giving to the High Needs Block.

Schools Forum noted the issues arising from budget planning for the Schools Budget for 2017/18 and future years and endorsed the draft proposals to balance the budget ahead of final discussions in January.

Schools Forum also endorsed the pupil number adjustments required to support growing schools.

SF 612 EARLY YEARS FUNDING FORMULA – PROPOSED CHANGES (Natasha Hutchin) Item 6

The purpose of this report was to seek the views of School Forum on the proposed changes to the Early Years Single Funding Formula (EYSFF) taking into account the feedback from key stakeholders from the consultation which was undertaken during October and November 2016.

The local consultation based on the choices from the DfE consultation gave feedback from key stakeholders and had been discussed by the Early Years Reference Group. No significant changes were proposed and the responses were detailed in Annex 1. There had been 54 responses from the 250 early years providers including schools, nurseries and PVI sector.

Compulsory changes included the removal of the lump sum and quality factors from the formula. There would be a single provider rate and the formula would be implemented as soon as possible. The implementation timeline had been agreed by 91% of respondents.

SCHOOLS FORUM 1 DECEMBER 2016 PAGE 5

The implication for maintained nursery schools was subject to further consultation.

There was significant support for the proposals, including 86% agreeing that the local authority could hold up to 5% for central funding.

Schools Forum pointed out that the two Nursery Schools and any school with a nursery class would see some difficulty. Transitional arrangements were yet to be confirmed.

It was noted that the MFG did not apply to early years as it used a different formula. This budget went to all providers including the maintained sector and the private sector, where children could be looked after all day. There was more parental choice and although the hours were funded, there was not necessarily the take up. The Local Authority had to provide sufficient places but there was no requirement on parents to take up those places. Private nurseries could also set up at any time. It was also pointed out that most parents who did not work did not want 30 hours a week of provision.

SF 613 ALTERNATIVE PROVISION (Caroline Marriott) Item 7

The purpose of this item was to update Schools Forum on the commissioning of alternative provision in both the primary and secondary sectors.

Primary arrangements consisted of 18 places commissioned at the Milton Keynes Primary Pupil Referral Unit whose focus was getting children re- integrated into mainstream schools.

Secondary arrangements were provided via commissioning 195 places at Bridge Academy.

Some Primary PRU pupils had been attending for too long and transition had now improved through the Fair Access Protocol, therefore places were sufficient and there was no recommendation to change place numbers. Annexes A and B detailed the secondary provision at Bridge Academy.

Michelle Currie pointed out that MKET were looking to open a Free School for alternative provision for primary pupils modelled on schools paying to-ups from pupil premium. Costs for different provisions averaged at £20k per place (current costs to the DSG were £21,229pa at the Primary PRU). There was a need to be pro-active about alternative provision and 18 places were not sufficient to meet demand. If School Forum did not support the Free School it would not take place and meant that Milton Keynes would be deprived of an opportunity. Secondary Headteachers’ views were that behaviour needs were not being met and there was capacity for early intervention. Caroline Marriot indicated that if there were other information to be taken into account, further discussion was required. It was a fine balance to provide the right support. Action MC/CM

SCHOOLS FORUM 1 DECEMBER 2016 PAGE 6

Finlay Douglas and Tracey Jones left the meeting at this point.

SF 614 SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS (Caroline Marriott) Item 8

The purpose of this report was to update Schools Forum on the delivery of SEND support in Milton Keynes and provide an understanding of current pressures and actions to address the pressures.

Caroline Marriott hoped that the report provided an understanding of what was taking place in light of the continued demand for specialist provision and implementation of the SEND reforms. Demand continued to grow and there were a number of new high cost independent placements with limited provision available.

Special schools were at or over capacity and more places were proposed. A number had required 52 week residential provision or periods in a secure unit. Milton Keynes was an area of growth and there had been focussed work on the key challenges to ensure robust management of resources. Caroline had also been looking at early years numbers as there was more complexity and some pupils struggled with transition to school. There had been a 35% growth in EHCP in early years with some requiring specialist provision. Pupils also arrived during the summer with the need to find additional places.

Place planning continued to build on the current provision including the expansion of Redway onto two sites and Romans Field developing KS1 provision. A dedicated SEN caseworker was in post to keep pupils in Milton Keynes if possible and to return them at the appropriate transition points. Robust and consistent processes required that local options be explored first. Re-structuring of the SEND services had enabled further savings.

Additional high needs funding was expected but it was not known how much this would be. There was also a current consultation on the expansion of Slated Row onto a second site at Kents Hill.

Schools Forum members raised points on more detail for out of Milton Keynes places and alternative settings, however Caroline pointed out that financial pressures were predominately through 38/52 week placements. Sometimes there was no alternative provision. Costs picked up by Health and Social Care budgets were based on central criteria.

Schools Forum noted the report.

SF 615 UPDATE FROM SUB-GROUPS OF THE SCHOOLS FORUM Item 9

The minutes of the meetings of the sub-groups were noted:

Schools Reference Group – 15 November 2016 Needs Reference Group - 8 November 2016

SCHOOLS FORUM 1 DECEMBER 2016 PAGE 7

The Early Years Reference Group had met on 24 November and minutes would be provided for the next meeting pack.

The Chair requested that members read the minutes of the groups in advance to prepare any questions.

SF 616 MEMBERSHIP AND CONSTITUTION (Michael Bracey) Item 10

The Primary PRU would be approached to replace their representative. Action - SP

SF 617 FORWARD PLANNING Item 11

Issues to be considered by Schools Forum and dates of meetings for the coming year are detailed below:

12 January 2017

- Budget Monitoring - Final DSG Settlement for 2017/18 - Schools Budget 2017/18 - Agree final primary and secondary unit rates 2017/18

23 March 2017

- Budget Monitoring - Detailed arrangements for High Needs pupils - Scheme changes

29 June 2017

- Provisional Outturn DSG - LA Maintained School Balances at 31/3/2017 - Section 251 Budget Statement - Schools Budget Setting - Schools in Financial Difficulty Contingency - Monitor use of Pupil Growth Fund

12 October 2017

7 December 2017

All meetings 3pm – 5pm

SP 618 WAVE FUNDING (Michael Bracey) Item 12

Letters in relation to wave funding had been circulated with the agenda.

The strategy for a local approach had been to run competitions when a new school was needed and make recommendations. However, two months ago a letter had been received from the DfE awarding two future ‘basic need’ primary schools to REAch2. These schools were not

SCHOOLS FORUM 1 DECEMBER 2016 PAGE 8

required until 2020/21. It would not be possible to open competition locally if the DfE were ‘gazumping’. No reply had been received as yet from the DfE in response to the letter sent.

In an effort to prevent the DfE from allocating any further schools through the wave programme, the Local Authority would be publishing their whole list in wave 13 in March 2017 and recommend that local providers apply.

The risk was that secondary schools on the western flank and others would not have the opportunity to put forward a business case.

There would be a small financial benefit in set up costs but eventual place funding would come from the DSG. Another consequence of this approach would be that schools would be ready too soon or not on time.

Schools Forum expressed concern that if the REAch2 schools opened before 2020, this would cause problems for other existing neighbouring schools.

The DfE wave process accepted feedback but there were no guarantees on their decisions.

The meeting closed at 5.00pm

SCHOOLS FORUM 1 DECEMBER 2016 PAGE 9