Schools Forum agenda

Date: Tuesday 30 June 2020

Time: 1.30 pm

Venue: MS Teams Virtual Meeting

Membership: Ms J Antrobus (Newtown School - Primary (Infant) Maintained) Ms J Cochrane (Sir Henry Floyd - Secondary ) Ms P Coppins (Manor Farm Community Infant School - Primary (Infant) Maintained) Ms S Cromie ( - Secondary Academy) Ms J Divers (Turnfurlong School - Primary (Junior) Maintained) Ms J Freeman (King's Wood School - Primary (Combined) Maintained) Mr A Gillespie ( - Secondary Academy) Mr D Hood ( - Secondary Maintained) Mrs J Male ( - Special Academy) Mr K Patrick (Chiltern Hills - Secondary Academy) (Chairman) Mrs D Rutley (Aspire PRU) Ms S Skinner (Bowerdean & Henry Allen Nursery Schools - Nursery Maintained) Mr S Sneesby (Kite Ridge School - Special Maintained) Ms E Stewart (Stoke Mandeville Combined School - Primary (Combined) Maintained) Ms K Tamlyn (Cheddington Combined School - Primary (Combined) Maintained) (Vice- Chairman) Mr B Taylor (Chiltern Wood School - Special Maintained) Mr A Wanford (Green Ridge Academy - Primary Academy) Ms J Watson (Lent Rise School - Primary Academy) Councillor A Cranmer ( Council)

Officers: Mr S James- Director of Education Ms E Williams- Head of Finance, Children’s Services Mr G Drawmer- Head of Achievement and Learning Mr J Carter- Schools Accountant Ms S Bayliss- Early Years Manager Ms H Slinn- Head of Integrated SEND Ms C Beevers- Democratic Services Officer

Webcasting notice

Please note: This meeting may be filmed for live or subsequent broadcast via the council's website. At the start of the meeting the chairman will confirm if all or part of the meeting is being filmed.

You should be aware that the council is a data controller under the Data Protection Act. Data collected during this webcast will be retained in accordance with the council’s published policy.

Therefore by entering the meeting room, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings for webcasting and/or training purposes.

If you have any queries regarding this, please contact the monitoring officer at [email protected].

Agenda Item Time Page No

1 Apologies for Absence/Changes in Membership 13.30

2 Declarations of Interest To disclose any Personal or Disclosable Pecuniary Interests

3 Schools Forum Funding Group Update 13.35 Verbal update to be provided by the Chairman of the Schools Forum Funding Group, Ms K Tamlyn.

4 2019-20 Financial Outturn 13.45 5 - 12 To be presented by Ms E Williams, Head of Finance, Children’s Services, Buckinghamshire Council.

5 High Needs Block Update 14.15 13 - 24 To be presented by Ms E Williams, Head of Finance, Children’s Services, Buckinghamshire Council.

6 Proposals for the Allocation of Top-Up Funding 14.45 25 - 32 To be presented by Ms E Williams, Head of Finance, Children’s Services, Buckinghamshire Council.

7 School Balances 15.15 33 - 48 To be presented by Mr J Carter, School’s Accountant, Buckinghamshire Council.

8 Contingency Update 15.45 49 - 52 Update to be provided by the Chairman of the Contingency Group, Ms J Freeman.

9 Forward Plan 53 - 56

10 Any Other Business 15.55 57 - 58 Additional Paper-

Post-19 Students - Change to School Funding Regulations for Post-19 Students. To be presented by Ms E Williams, Head of Finance, Children’s Services, Buckinghamshire Council.

11 Date of Next Meeting 16.30 13 October 2020, 1.30- 4.00pm. Darke Hall, Green Park.

If you would like to attend a meeting, but need extra help to do so, for example because of a disability, please contact us as early as possible, so that we can try to put the right support in place.

For further information please contact: Christina Beevers on 01296 382938, email [email protected]. This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 4

Report to Schools Forum

Date: 30th June 2020

Title: Dedicated Schools Budget – Outturn 2019-20

Author and/or contact officer: Liz Williams, Head of Finance (Children’s Services)

Recommendations: Schools Forum Funding Group is asked to note the final outturn position against the Dedicated Schools Grant in 2019-20

Reason for decision: For Information

1. Purpose of the Report

1.1. This report updates Schools Forum on the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) allocation, outturn for 2018-19, the DSG Reserves as at 31st March 2020 and the forecasted reserve position for the financial year 2020-21.

2. DSG Allocation 2019-20

2.1. The final DSG allocation for 2019-20 has been confirmed as follows:

Allocation Prior Final Allocation to Academy Less After DSG Block Recoupment Recoupment Recoupment £m £m £m

Schools Block 322.171 156.779 165.391 High Needs Block 82.572 7.989 74.584 Early Years Block 31.559 0.000 31.559 Central Schools Services Block 7.425 0.000 7.425 Total DSG Allocation 2019-20 443.728 164.768 278.960

Income Received in 2019-20 (279.511)

Difference in income received compared to allocation (0.551) Difference due to: Additional Early Years income for 2018-19 (0.510) Adjustment to funding for PRU places (0.041) Total (0.551)

Page 5 3. Outturn 2019-20

3.1. The final outturn position for 2019-20 was an overspend of £2.718 million against the overall Dedicated Schools Budget. A summary of expenditure and income for 2019-20 is shown in the following table:

Funding Block Budget Actual Variance £ £ £ Schools Block 165,407,823 165,488,915 81,092 Of which: Dedelegation from Special School/PRU 16,324 Schools Block Allocation 165,391,499

High Needs Block 77,443,627 81,711,768 4,268,141 Of which Contributions from Reserve 1,048,354 Former Historic Commitment from Central Block 1,708,000 Import/Export Adjustment from reserve 120,000 Dedelegation from Special School/PRU (16,324) High Needs Block Allocation 74,583,598

Early Years Block 31,559,329 30,594,244 (965,085)

Central Schools Services Block 5,717,363 5,482,396 (234,967) Of which Contribution to High Needs (1,708,000) Central Schools Services Block Allocation 7,425,363

Total DSG Expenditure 2019-20 280,128,142 283,277,323 3,149,181

DSG Allocation (279,079,789) 279,079,789 DSG Income (incl EY from 2018-19) (279,510,641) (279,510,641) Planned Contribution from Reserves (1,048,354) (1,048,354) 0

Total DSG Income 2019-20 (280,128,143) (280,558,995) (430,852)

Net (Contribution)/Drawdown (to)/from Reserve 2,718,329 3.2. A more detailed table is provided in Appendix 1 to this report. 3.3. The main pressures through the year continued to be within the High Needs Block which is £4.268 million overspent at the end of the year against the budget of £77.444 million. The main variances were as reported through the year:  Placements in Independent Special Schools – overspend of £1.105 million  Placements in Post-16 colleges – overspend of £829k  Support for pupils with EHCPs in mainstream schools – overspend of £1.212 million

Page 6  Additional places and exceptional support in special schools and PRUs – overspend £938k. 3.4. The overspend in High Needs budgets is partially offset by an underspend of £965k against the Early Years block, most of which is against the budget for the free entitlement for early education and childcare for 3 and 4 year olds. This underspend had not been projected during the year, work is taking place to review forecasting methodology for early years expenditure in the new financial year. Analysis of the provisional January census data indicates that there will not be a clawback of Early Years block DSG for 2019-20. 4. DSG Reserve

4.1. Any variance against the DSG is to be managed through the DSG reserve which is ringfenced. At the end of the 2019-20 financial year the council had a deficit of £1.153m against its DSG reserve.

DSG Reserve - Surplus/(deficit) £ Mandeville School Deficit 500,000 Early Years - changes in grant funding 700,000 De-delegation 717,511 Unallocated reserve 1,021,694 Opening Balance 2019-20 2,939,205

Drawdown 2019-20 Contingency appeals from 2018-19 paid in 2019- 20 (26,000) Refund of Contingency surplus to schools (300,000) Allocation to support High Needs overspend agreed by Schools Forum June 2019 (1,048,353) Drawdown at year end to support overspend (2,718,329) Total Drawdown during 2019-20 (4,092,682)

Closing Balance 2019-20 - Surplus/(Deficit) (1,153,477) 4.2. In January 2020 Schools Forum agreed a number of actions to reduce the projected deficit against the DSG reserve. The impact of these actions has been reviewed as follows:

Page 7 Agreed January Revised After Proposed Action 2020-21 2020 Outturn £ £ Use of funding historic commitment funding for ex BLT services 0 110,000 Use of unallocated revenue contribution to capital (historic commitment) 884,000 884,000 Early Years Additional funding for January Census 2020 420,000 300,000 1,304,000 1,294,000 Opening Deficit 1/4/20 (1,153,477) DSG Reserve as at 1 April 2020 after recovery actions 140,523 4.3. The updated actions will ensure that the deficit is removed at the start of the year however this does not replenish the earmarked reserves that were held in previous years. The reserve previously contained earmarked reserves of £917k against funds de-delegated from schools (£417k) and against the risk of the deficit at Mandeville School (£500k). 4.4. There is also no contingency to support further pressures against the High Needs Block. 5. Impact on 2020-21

5.1. Schools Forum set a balanced budget for 2020-21 against the increased High Needs Block. An additional £7.5 million has been allocated to Buckinghamshire for the 2020-21 financial year. This additional funding is fully committed against pressures in 2020-21 and there is currently no confirmation that it will continue in future years. It is essential that a longer term recovery plan is developed to ensure that high needs spend can be managed in future years. 5.2. Mitigating actions that have been taken to date include: a) Revised SEN panel procedures which will impact on the decision making processes for September 2020. b) Review of processes for EHC Plans to ensure resource allocation is appropriate and is reviewed. c) Speech and Language link – this is expected to reduce the numbers of requests for EHC Plans, focused on children aged 5-7years as an early intervention measure. d) Focus on Ordinarily Available Provision: greater highlighting of the provision that is expected to be put in place for those children at SEND Support utilising already delegated funds to schools before requests for additional funding are considered.

Page 8 e) Side by Side work with schools to focus on inclusion, therefore meeting more needs in county. f) Review of the methodology for allocating top up funding for pupils with EHCPs; following consultation with schools a new model is proposed for the allocation of top-up funding for pupils with EHCPs. 5.3. Further work has taken place to identify the key workstreams for the high needs recovery plan and these are outlined in more detail in the High Needs Update report on this agenda.

Page 9 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix

DSG Blocks OUTTURN 2019-20 Appendix 1

Annual Actual outturn Actual outturn Budget variance Row Labels CB Central Block 5,717,363 5,482,396 -234,967 Licences (DSG) - copyright etc 427,651 427,651 -0 Education Safeguarding Advisory Service 96,548 82,986 -13,562 BASL and TSAN 35,000 10,266 -24,735 BLT Contrib to Combined budgets (E Years) 1,972,794 1,710,353 -262,441 Contribution to former ESG budgets 1,178,000 1,178,000 0 Schools Forum 9,000 9,338 338 Premature Retirement Costs (Schools) 272,000 334,387 62,387 Parental Information 4,547 4,912 365 Transfer Appeals 27,465 17,569 -9,896 Admissions Team 815,620 850,265 34,645 Legal Service Cost 138,286 107,227 -31,059 Raising Participation Age 139,000 139,000 0 DSG Practical Learning Opportunities 224,000 224,000 0 Central overheads DSG 264,000 264,001 1 Safeguarding in Ed. Project Team 113,452 122,442 8,990

EB Early Years Block 31,559,329 30,594,244 -965,085 Childcare Projects Prev Childminder Strt 1,343,457 1,343,462 5 2 Year Old Funding 2,752,065 2,750,030 -2,035 EYC Sufficiency & Sustainability 193,443 83,586 -109,857 Contingency Fund 75,000 66,000 -9,000 2, 3 & 4 YO Inclusion Funding 395,000 252,506 -142,494 Disability Access Fund (DAF) 88,560 82,424 -6,136 Private Providers - Nursery Grant Scheme 20,493,240 19,632,672 -860,568 Nursery schools and classes 6,218,564 6,383,564 165,000

HB High Needs Block 77,443,627 81,711,768 4,268,141 Early Stimulation Project - Portage 200,000 209,546 9,546 EHCP Top Up - School Age 7,169,000 8,381,178 1,212,178 BLT SEN Support Services 2,057,000 2,057,000 0 PRU Delegated Budget 359,496 360,000 504 Additional Resourced Provision (ARP) 2,171,600 2,363,675 192,075 Special Schools Place Funding 10,897,558 10,913,333 15,775 Add Resource Prov (ARP) Place Funding 1,038,000 1,026,000 -12,000 Vulnerable Children Attainment Intervntn 871,000 466,000 -405,000 Integrated Therapies Contract 1,657,000 1,659,229 2,229 Pre School Statemented Children 303,168 456,710 153,542 HNBF School Age 910,000 511,056 -398,944 HNBF EY Non Statemented 167,641 212,038 44,397 Education Personal Budgets 166,000 201,373 35,373 Equipment 250,000 296,520 46,520 Additional Places & Exceptional Support 513,000 1,461,334 948,334 Recoupment from BCC - All OLEA Schools 3,692,000 4,492,959 800,959 Recoupment to BCC - Special Schools -1,035,000 -884,479 150,521

Page 11 DSG Blocks OUTTURN 2019-20 Appendix 1

Annual Actual outturn Actual outturn Budget variance Row Labels Recoupment to BCC - Mainstream Schools -280,000 -266,835 13,165 Independent Schools 14,219,724 15,324,436 1,104,712 Independent Hospital Schools 70,000 148,664 78,664 High Needs Block overheads 1,968,000 1,968,000 0 Post-16 HN FE Colleges 5,132,000 4,843,790 -288,210 Independent Colleges 1,000,000 2,117,313 1,117,313 Educating Children in Public Care (ECPC) 705,820 686,242 -19,578 Early Years Pupil Premium 0 6,605 6,605 Excluded Pupils AWPUs Reallocated 0 -68,795 -68,795 Re-Integration Group 412,500 455,490 42,990 Alternative Provision Tuition Costs 496,000 429,744 -66,256 Alt Prov Commissioning 1,965,000 1,965,000 0 Hospital Teaching Service 237,000 237,000 0 Buckinghamshire Home Tuition Service 217,600 184,000 -33,600 DSG Contribution Education Psychology 680,000 419,000 -261,000 Special Schools Top Up 19,232,520 19,078,641 -153,879

SB Schools Block 165,407,823 165,488,915 81,092 Business Rates 42,355 31,584 -10,771 Growth Fund for Planned Places 2,923,490 3,274,285 350,795 De-delegated budgets 796,534 529,930 -266,604 Schools Delegated Budgets 161,645,444 161,653,115 7,671

Page 12 Agenda Item 5

Report to Schools Forum

Date: 30th June 2020

Title: High Needs Block Update

Author and/or contact officer: Liz Williams, Head of Finance (Children’s Services)

Schools affected: All maintained schools and academies, FE Colleges and Early Years Settings

Recommendations:

Schools Forum is asked to note the impact of the final outturn for 2019-20 on the High Needs budget for 2020-21 and to agree the proposed approach for the development of a High Needs Block Recovery Plan.

Reason for decision: to agree the approach to reducing and monitoring costs against the High Needs Block.

1. Purpose of the Report

1.1. The purpose of this report is to outline the proposed approach to mitigating the continued pressures on the High Needs Block and to clarify the proposed governance of that process.

2. Current Position and Implications for Future Years

2.1. Appendix 1 to this report summarises the outturn for 2019-20 against the High Needs Block and the agreed budget for 2020-21. The outturn position highlights the key risk areas for 2020-21.

2.2. The table demonstrates that 90% of the High Needs Block spend is directly on places and top-up funding for pupils with EHCPs across all phases and placed across a range of provision and pupils placed in Alternative Provision. This means that changes to the level of spend will impact over time as many existing support packages will need to continue.

Page 13 2.3. Initial modelling work carried out in November 2019 indicates that if demand continues at the current rate, across the current mix of provision, spend will increase by £7 million by the end of the 2021-22 financial year with the key areas of pressure being support for pupils with EHCPs in mainstream schools and in special schools. This projection needs to be reworked based on current activity levels and this is likely to indicate that the pressure in future years will have increased further.

2.4. The proportion of children with plans recorded in mainstream placements (including pre-school), and placements have increased from March 19, while those in special school and independent / non-maintained placements have decreased.

 Mainstream  1.8% - from 41.5% (1734) to 43.3% (2046).  Special  2.8% – from 35.6% (1484) to 32.7% (1547)  Independent / Non-maintained  0.7% - from 5.5% (231) in 2019 to 4.8% (228)  Further Education  1.8% - from 11.3% (473) to 13.1% (619) Please note that these increases/decreases relate to the percentage of the total number with plans at the placement type and not the actual number. 2.5. The current numbers of pupils with EHCPs in mainstream schools is spread across the different year groups as follows (as at 31st March 2020):

3. Mitigating Actions

3.1. Actions which have already been implemented include:

a) Revised SEN panel procedures which will impact on the decision making processes for September 2020. This has had a significant impact on

Page 14 ensuring all students transferring phases of education have a school place for September 2020 named on their EHC Plans for September 2020.

Phase Transfer Deadline of 15th February Number / % Next school named 385 / 97.7% Type of school named 9 / 2.2% Deadline not met 1 / 0.1%

A review with schools across the county is planned to improve the process even further, starting earlier and facilitating effective consultation and placement. 5 new independent placements were agreed as part of this process, 2 of equal cost when comparing local options so schools were named in line with parental preference. b) Review of processes for EHC Plans to ensure resource allocation is appropriate and is reviewed. A new system is in place for agreeing EHC needs assessments which is ensuring more robust decision making. 207 new EHC needs assessments have been commenced in the period January – May 2020, a 17% decrease on the previous year.

As part of the work of the Quality EHCP Impact Group, a new request for EHC needs assessment form was developed to enable correct information to be supplied to facilitate accurate decision making. , Training was rolled out to schools in the Aylesbury area, which was very well received:-

Page 15 Attendees felt the materials were 55% reported they were excellent easy to use 35% reported they were good Tasks were clearly explained 58% reported this is as excellent 32% reported this as good Session was useful 54% reported this to be excellent 39% reported to be good When asked if SENCos would attend 100% said yes! similar sessions in the future Wycombe and CSB sessions are planned during June 2020 to ensure the new request form is in full circulation.

The total numbers of new plans issued by BC for 2020 is 262. For the same period in 2019, 302 were issued, a decrease of 13%.

2018 2019 2020 January 31 34 43 Accumulation of number of plans issued over calendar year February 34 36 57 800 March 17 26 53 700 April 83 70 40 600 May 82 136 69 500 2018 400 June 46 53 2019 300 2020 July 53 51 200 August 70 59 100 September 40 40 0

October 76 71

July

May June

November 43 54 April

March

August

January October

December 52 43 February

December November Average 52 56 52 September

All of this work is focused on ensuring the students who really need the support of an EHC Plan get this, and that time / resource is not invested by all, working on requests that will not lead to EHC Plans. In May, 53% of requests for EHC needs assessments were agreed; we aim to raise this %, and reduce the number coming in – the right children at the right time.

c) Speech and Language link – this is expected to reduce the numbers of requests for EHC Plans, focused on children aged 5-7years as an early intervention measure. Review sessions are planned this month to look at the impact of this and we can report further to the next meeting. d) Focus on Ordinarily Available Provision: launched in January 2020 through initial training sessions, greater highlighting of the provision that is expected to be put in place for those children at SEND Support utilising already delegated funds to schools.

Both Ordinarily Available Provision and Speech and Language Link form specific workstreams from the SEND Support Impact Group, now chaired

Page 16 by the Principal Educational Psychologist, Tim Jones. Future focus is planned on SEN identification and identifying those that if left could escalate further, and providing support for these. e) Side by Side work with schools to focus on inclusion:-

Chiltern Wood School Project started September 2020; work supporting schools with their SEND Support offer in the Wycombe area Stony Dean / School Children are placed on the roll of Stony Dean School but are based in with the support of specialist staff from the special school Utilising the MITA (Maximising Impact of Teaching Assistants) as the model for improvement, Furze Down School are supporting schools in the north of the county – Winslow / Buckingham areas

f) Review of the methodology for allocating top up funding for pupils with EHCPs; following consultation with schools a new model is proposed for the allocation of top-up funding for pupils with EHCPs. The model is needs led and is based on a number of bands. The proposal is described more fully in a separate paper on this agenda and the impact, following implementation, will be a more transparent and equitable funding system to support pupils with SEND.

4. Further Recovery Actions

4.1. In order to achieve a sustainable level of spend within the High Needs Block it will be necessary to ensure resources are allocated in the most effective way to meet need and that opportunities to intervene earlier and support pupils in local provision are maximised. There are clear dependencies between the work required to manage spend and the work to develop the key strategies in relation to SEND services. These include:

 Review of the SEND Improvement Plan

Page 17  Development of the SEND Strategy  Development of the SEND Sufficiency Strategy

4.2. A number of key work streams are proposed as part of the High Needs recovery work:

4.2.1. Data

Accurate and up-to-date data is key to the development of the Buckinghamshire Sufficiency Strategy and understanding demand across different need types. The budget monitoring work this year has identified that we need to improve information flow relating to placement decisions and recording of need and support packages.

A key work stream will be to ensure we have accurate and timely data to inform financial planning and monitoring.

4.2.2. Commissioning and Procurement

The Sufficiency Strategy will inform commissioning priorities to enable a move away from spot purchasing of placements towards a coherent commissioning approach to our work with providers to meet needs that cannot be met in-house, underpinned by robust contractual oversight. This work stream will also include a review of how placements are procured and monitored to ensure outcomes and value for money are achieved.

4.2.3. Review of Alternative Provision

This review, to include the areas highlighted below, is to ensure we are maximising support for pupils in local provision and providing support, particularly for mainstream provision, to meet need and an emphasis on a more inclusive approach to provision (aligned to Ordinary Available Provision). Work to review ARP provision has already commenced whilst the other projects need to be scoped.

a) Additional Resourced Provision (ARPs) in mainstream schools b) Pupil Referral Units c) Hospital and Home Tuition d) Specialist Teaching support e) SEN Support

4.2.4. Review of External Placements

Page 18 A review of all external placements is required to better understand the needs that are not being met in county and whether there are opportunities to develop provision to support pupils more locally

4.3. A more detailed plan is attached at Appendix 2 to this report outlining some of the more detailed actions and timelines under of these headings. This plan is an initial draft and further work will be required to finalise the tasks and required resources for the different workstreams.

4.4. The plan will also build on the progress made against the recommendations from the recent Impower report which has been circulated to schools.

4.5. As previously reported the DfE has confirmed the ringfencing of DSG deficits meaning that the Council is not able to utilise its general fund to offset a DSG deficit without permission from the Secretary of State. Pressures within the High Needs Block therefore need to be met from within the overall DSG budget or from DSG reserves, which are now depleted. Proposals and actions coming forwards from these workstreams will need to include actions to reduce spend within the High Needs Block and will also need to consider whether funding needs to be allocated from other DSG blocks in order to support specific actions.

5. Governance

5.1. As identified above, the work to ensure spend against the High Needs Block can be sustainable going forwards is dependent on a number of other strategies and workstreams already underway. 5.2. It is therefore proposed that this work is closely linked to the SEND Improvement Plan work that reports in to the Integrated Services Board as well as to Schools Forum.

5.3. The current governance structure for the SEND Improvement Plan includes a number of Impact Groups focused on specific areas of work. It is proposed to utilise those existing groups so that the work is managed within the SEND Improvement Plan process. These groups are included in the table in Appendix 2.

5.4. Update reports will be presented to Schools Forum at each meeting.

6. Next steps

6.1. Reporting and forecasting against the High Needs Block is being developed to include activity data and unit costs. This will be reported to each Schools Forum meeting.

Page 19 6.2. Development of the work on the recovery plan will be continued in line with the SEND Improvement Programme.

Page 20 High Needs Block Spend 2019-20 and Budget 2020-21 (After Recoupment)

2020-21 Risk 2019-20 Outturn Agreed Rating Expenditure Type Budget 2019-20 Variance % Budget 2020-21 Comments £ £ £ £ Placements/Top-ups 5-16 year olds High risk for 2020-21. Panel processes have been revised and lower Independent Special Schools 14,289,724 15,473,099 1,183,375 14,600,236 number of new placements agreed High Risk - data needs to improve as overspend not projected during 2019- Other LA Special Schools (net) 2,377,000 3,341,645 964,645 2,377,000 20 Budget increased in 2020-21 however impact of new funding model to be BCC Special Schools 30,130,078 29,991,974 (138,104) 31,889,501 quantified, including transition High cost in 2019-20 due to pupils with EHCPs at Aspire. Work Additional Places and Exceptional Support 513,000 1,461,334 948,334 513,000 completed to move some pupils - remains high risk ARPs 3,209,600 3,389,675 180,075 3,211,933 Mainstream Top-Ups with EHCP 7,169,000 8,381,178 1,212,178 8,759,584 SEN Support 1,076,000 712,429 (363,571) 1,076,000 Total Placement/Top-ups in Schools (5-16 year olds) 58,764,402 62,751,335 3,986,933 77% 62,427,254 Post-16 Placements High risk for 2020-21 as cohort is increasing. Mix of placements between Post-16 (Independent and FE College) 6,132,000 6,961,103 829,103 9% 6,742,000 independent settings and Bucks College will impact on costs Early Years Top-Ups Risk needs to be more fully understood as budget was not projected to Early Years pupils with EHCPs 303,168 456,710 153,542 303,168 overspend Early Years SEN Support 167,641 212,038 44,397 167,641 Total Early Years top-ups 470,809 668,748 197,939 470,809 Total Spend on Places and Top-ups for Pupils 65,367,211 70,381,186 5,013,975 86% 69,640,063

Alternative21 Page Provision Pupil Referral Units 2,324,496 2,325,000 504 2,494,276 Budget increased by inflation in line with mainstream provision Alternative Provision 496,000 429,744 (66,256) 496,000 Hospital Tuition Service 237,000 237,000 0 237,000 Home Tuition Service 217,600 184,000 (33,600) 217,600 Total Alternative Provision - spend on Pupils 3,275,096 3,175,744 (99,352) 4% 3,444,876 Total Spend on Places and Top Ups incl. Alternative Provision 68,642,307 73,556,930 4,914,623 90% Commssioned Contracts Integrated Therapies 1,657,000 1,659,229 2,229 1,657,000 Portage 200,000 209,546 9,546 200,000 Total Commissioned Contracts 1,857,000 1,868,775 11,775 2% 1,857,000 Contribution to Staffing and Service costs Specialist Teaching Service 2,057,000 2,057,000 0 2,057,000 Education Psychology Service contribution 680,000 419,000 (261,000) 680,000 Contribution was reduced in 2019-20 due to vacancies within the service Early Help Service 871,000 466,000 (405,000) 871,000 Contribution was reduced in 2019-20 due to vacancies within the service Educational Equipment 250,000 296,520 46,520 250,000 Reintegration 412,500 455,490 42,990 412,500 Educating Children in Public Care 705,820 624,053 (81,767) 705,820 Total Contribution to Staffing Costs within SEND 4,976,320 4,318,062 (658,258) 5% 4,976,320 Savings target agreed by Schools Forum - staffing within central teams to Savings from Central HNB Services - agreed SF January 2020 (75,000) be reviewed Unallocated (January 2020) 113,000 Import/Export increase 2020-21 120,000 Estimate based on previous year, adjustment will be notified in July 2020 Total Adjustments/unallocated 158,000 Overhead Costs 1,968,000 1,968,000 - 2% 1,968,000 Total Spend 77,443,627 81,711,768 4,268,141 82,044,259 - - Funding Funding Allocation (74,583,598) (74,583,598) 0 (82,044,742) High Needs allocation after recoupment of places paid directly by ESFA Transfer from Historic Commitment DSG (1,708,000) (1,708,000) 0 0 Support from Schools Forum 0 0 0 0

Support from Reserves (1,152,030) (5,420,170) (4,268,140) 0 Appendix Total Funding (77,443,628) (81,711,768) (4,268,140) (82,044,742) - This page is intentionally left blank March 2020 High Needs Recovery Plan – Initial Draft Appendix 2

Theme Situation Proposed Solution Timeframe Governance

Data  Data held by the LA is not fully accurate or  Link with existing data workstream Short term SEND complete and is not consistent with data within the SEND Improvement – July 2020 Improvement held by schools Planning work Plan – Data  Reporting cannot be timely or completely  Improve the link between cost and Impact Group accurate activity data to better understand  More accurate data is required in order to the impact of current patterns of drive the sufficiency strategy and to fully placements and to better understand the current activity and costs. understand current and future  More accurate data required for financial demand. modelling

Page 23 Page Commissioning and  Spot purchasing of placements does not  Further work with West London July 2020 Independent Procurement ensure value for money Alliance to develop and access Placement  Commissioning to be driven by the existing framework agreements Group – Sufficiency Strategy and identified gaps in  Continue with regular Independent Monthly local provision Placement meetings to include Ongoing meetings SEND Managers, Finance and Commissioning to review contracts, SEND reasons for external placements etc Improvement  Develop recommendations from Plan – that work for key commissioning Integrated priorities including from in-house Commissioning providers/settings Impact Group

Review of  Over the past few years there has been an  Link with the sufficiency strategy to Short Alternative Provision change in the needs of children and young identify needs and required SEND

ARPs people with SEND and the provision across capacity Short Improvement Appendix the County – locations and levels of  Develop service specification for Plan March 2020 High Needs Recovery Plan – Initial Draft Appendix 2

provision through ARPs needs to be ARPs April 2021 reviewed to reflect current and future  Implement the agreed needs led Sufficiency needs funding mechanism to ensure Strategy pupils are funded appropriately Short  Review of place numbers and funding mechanism to ensure high needs budget is not supporting high 1-2 years numbers of empty places  Develop models based on outreach and inreach using expertise within ARPs to support mainstream schools more widely 1-2 years  Longer term strategy linked to

Page 24 Page sufficiency strategy and partnership working to ensure right numbers of places to meet need and support wider mainstream school community Review of External  Links to commissioning and procurement Monthly external placements contract Independent Placements workstream management group and team May 2020 Placement  Better understanding required of the managers to review full list of Group – reasons for the current external placements Monthly placements and whether need could have meetings been met in house  Better understanding of whether children could be brought back to more local provision at key transition points  Use that information and insight to inform sufficiency strategy

Agenda Item 6

Report to Schools Forum

Date: 30th June 2020

Title: Allocation of Top-Up Funding – Outcome of Consultation and Recommendations for Implementation

Author and contact officer: Liz Williams, Head of Finance (Children’s Services)

Schools affected: All

Recommendations:

Schools Forum is asked to

a) Note the outcomes of the consultation with schools on the mechanism for allocating top-up funding for pupils with Education Health and Care Plans (EHCPs), ie, I. That the recommended approach of a needs led funding approach based on an adapted model for Buckinghamshire is supported. II. That the model should be supported by a moderation process III. That there should be a phased implementation, beginning with special schools with roll out to mainstream and further settings in future years. b) Note the proposed time lines for implementation. c) Agree the basis for calculating top-up values proposed by the Needs and Provision Group, including the application of a fringe uplift where appropriate. d) Agree the principles for transition to the new model including support for schools that would see a reduction in funding under the proposed model. e) Agree to seek an exemption from the Minimum Funding Guarantee for Special Schools in the 2021-22 financial year in order to move toward the new funding mechanism through the implementation of transitional support.

Reason for decision: to implement a needs led funding model in line with the outcomes of the consultation with schools.

Page 25 Executive summary

This report updates Schools Forum on the outcomes of the consultation on the allocation of top-up funding to support pupils with Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) and the implementation of a needs led funding system based on an adapted model for Buckinghamshire. This has been agreed by Cabinet Member decision on 17th June 2020. The report outlines the proposed model including the calculation of band values and proposals for transitional support in moving towards the new funding mechanism. The proposed funding mechanism will

i. Bring funding in line with government guidance to ensure funding is allocated on a needs led basis; ii. Deliver on the Council’s priorities and the Local Area SEND Strategy; iii. Ensure the way that top-up funding is allocated is fair, simple, consistent and transparent, and enables us to plan how we meet the increasing number of pupils with EHCPs. 1. Background

1.1. A report was considered by the Buckinghamshire Schools Forum in March 2019 outlining a proposed process for reviewing the mechanism for funding special schools and developing a needs led funding system for top-up funding. This report identified an initial process and timeline for the review. At the start of that process a Needs and Provision Group was established. This group consisted of senior leaders from special schools, mainstream schools and mainstream schools with ARPs as well as officers from the local authority (SEND and Finance). The timeline was amended as the Needs and Provision Group started to carry out its work and the revised timeline was reported to Schools Forum. Regular updates were also discussed at the Meeting of Special School and PRU Head Teachers and Principals plus Officers. Consultation was then further delayed due to the general election.

1.2. The work of the Needs and Provision Group included a review of funding systems from other local authorities to identify good practice and a methodology that could be applied to Buckinghamshire. As part of the engagement and scoping of a new model of funding, a number of pre-consultation information, engagement and modelling events were held to include consideration of potential descriptors, assessment of pupils against descriptors and the moderation of those assessments. That work led to the development of a proposal to adapt a model from another local authority to suit the needs of Buckinghamshire.

1.3. A consultation with education leaders across Buckinghamshire including head teachers, governors and senior leaders from our special and mainstream schools and pupil referral units was held between 13th February 2020 and 6th March 2020.

Page 26 Three consultation events were held across the county during the consultation period to enable information to be shared and questions to be asked.

1.4. The consultation set out 4 options:

Option A – Do nothing and continue with the current way of allocating of top-up funding.

Option B – Move to a needs led funding approach based on an adapted model for Buckinghamshire. (Local Authority preferred option)

Option C – Move to a needs led funding approach by drawing up a new bespoke model for Buckinghamshire.

Option D – Move to a needs led funding approach by utilising an existing model from a comparator authority.

1.5. The consultation report has been made available to schools and the outcomes of the consultation are summarised below:

a) There were 59 responses to the consultation. b) The majority of respondents (85%) expressed an opinion in favour of moving to a needs led funding model. c) The majority of respondents expressed a preference to move to a banded funding model that could be adapted to meet the needs of the children and young people within Buckinghamshire (Option B). d) Just over half of respondents agreed to a funding model that was focused around 4 bands of need. e) Almost all respondents (93%) agreed with a process of moderation. f) The majority of respondents agreed to a phased transition to the new funding model. g) Overall the majority of comments regarding the consultation were positive about change to a new model and felt that the review of funding was overdue.

1.6. The proposal for an adapted model that was included in the consultation was based on 5 primary SEND needs (aligned with the four broader areas in the SEND Code of Practice, 2015):

a) Speech Language & Communication / ASC b) Cognition and Learning c) Social, Emotional & Mental Health d) Sensory e) Physical and/or Medical

1.7. In the model initially proposed, pupils would be assessed as having a primary need from one of the five areas of SEND outlined above that fall into one of four bands.

Page 27 The Needs and Provision Group considered the outcome of the consultation, including the written comments, on 11th March. Taking into account the feedback from the consultation responses, it was recommended by the group that the model be based on 5 bands of need with an additional “exceptional” band to recognise the most complex needs that may be met within Buckinghamshire schools.

1.8. Further work has now been undertaken to develop the process for banding and moderation. Based on the work with special schools to date it is proposed that the implementation should be from the 2021-22 financial year. This means April 2021 for maintained special schools and September 2021 for academies.

2. The Proposed Funding Model

2.1. A key part of the work of the Needs and Provision Group has been to consider the potential financial values that should be ascribed to the individual bands. In modelling financial values the basis of the initial work has been the support costs, based on additional learning support staff, required for each band. In all cases it is proposed that teaching staff would be part of the base funding for a setting (special or mainstream) and the top-up is to reflect additional support on top of teaching costs. Average group sizes have been proposed by the Needs and Provision Group and triangulated with indicative group sizes referenced in the DfE’s BB104 guidance: Area Guidance for SEND and Alternative Provision.

2.2. The principles for developing top-up values are recommended as follows:

1) There will be 5 Bands for use across mainstream to special schools

2) A further “exceptional” band is proposed to recognise the most complex needs that may be met within Buckinghamshire schools reflecting provision in which pupils may need 3 to 1 support at all times

3) Average group sizes and numbers of adults (excluding teachers) working with pupils will be used as a basis for the calculation of top-up values.

4) That a single band value should be calculated for each of the bands set at a level determined to meet the needs of the children in that band rather than variable values according to the differing primary SEND needs (para 1.6 above).

Page 28 2.3. It is further proposed that a fringe uplift be applied to special school top-ups for schools in the relevant part of the county. This uplift is proposed as 1.75% in line with the uplift applied to mainstream schools within the National Funding Formula (NFF).

2.4. Final financial values for the bands will also need to take into account the affordability of the model following the banding and moderation process.

3. Affordability and Transition

3.1. The implementation of the new model is expected to result in some schools gaining funding and some schools receiving a reduction in funding in order to reflect the needs of the pupils in each school. As a result, there will need to be a transition to the new model.

3.2. This means it will be necessary to seek permission from the Secretary of State to be exempted from the Special Schools Minimum Funding Guarantee (MFG), so that we can manage the appropriate changes in funding. This is provided for within the High Needs Operational Guidance 2020-21 and can be applied in cases where local authorities are proposing to change their banding systems. In considering any application for exemption from the MFG, the DfE will need to see that there is agreement from Schools Forum. A transition process and level of support therefore needs to be agreed. The following principles are key to an equitable model:

1) That gaining schools need to move as quickly as possible to the new model to ensure they are appropriately funded for the needs of pupils in the school;

2) That schools facing a reduction in funding will have a longer transition period in order to manage reductions, with less disruption to staffing and provision.

3.3. This will need to be modelled and determined in consultation with schools based on the final banding. The final band values and transitional arrangements will be proposed to Schools Forum as part of the budget setting process for 2021-22.

4. Legal and financial implications

4.1. The proposals in this report relate to the implementation of a revised methodology for the allocation of top-up funding to support pupils with Education Health and Care Plans. Funding to support pupils with EHCPs is allocated from the High Needs Block within the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG). Band values will be developed based on the principles agreed by Schools Forum and the final recommended values will take into account the overall funding available.

Page 29 4.2. As outlined in the body to the report it will be necessary to implement a transitional arrangement to support schools in managing changes to their funding. 4.3. Legal Implications The Local Authorities legal responsibilities are set out in Part 3 of the Children and Families Act 2014. In particular:

Section 37 of the Children and Families Act 2014 provides:

(1)Where, in the light of an EHC needs assessment, it is necessary for special educational provision to be made for a child or young person in accordance with an EHC plan—

(a)the local authority must secure that an EHC plan is prepared for the child or young person, and

(b)once an EHC plan has been prepared, it must maintain the plan.

Section 42 of the Children and Families Act 2014 provides, as relevant:-

(2) The local authority must secure the specified special educational provision for the child or young person.

(6) 'Specified', in relation to an EHC plan, means specified in the plan.

The Council fully expects that the level of funding at each band will continue to meet the needs specified in EHCPs.

S 175 of the Education Act 2002 provides that a local authority shall make arrangements for ensuring that their education functions are exercised with a view to safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children. In doing so, authorities have to have regard to the Secretary of State’s guidance. The proposed model for allocation of top up funding is consistent with the duty under s 175 of the Education Act 2002 as it is in line with the High Needs Operational Guidance 2020-21 and the aim of the model is to ensure fairer distribution of resources for the education of children with high needs, within the context of all children’s EHCPs being met.

S149 of the Equality Act requires public authorities in the exercise of their functions to have due regard to the need to

(a) eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by or under this Act;

(b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it;

(c) foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it.

Page 30 An Equalities Impact Assessment (EIA) has been undertaken in relation to the proposed model for allocation of top up funding. The EIA concludes that as the project is focused on developing a new funding model for schools/settings, any impact on service users is minimal, and the transition arrangements proposed will minimise disruption to any impacted school. These arrangements would ensure children and young people are not disadvantaged. The policy aims to provide a fairer, more transparent and equitable approach to funding allocation, based on need so that children presenting with similar needs are funded at the same rate. 5. Next steps and review

5.1. Next steps include: a) Development of the moderation process; this will involve further work with our special schools to assess pupils against the bands, and achieve consistency across Buckinghamshire’s specialist provision. This will go alongside work looking at the continuum of specialist provision in Buckinghamshire, to ensure this is clear and transparent, and subsequent funding allocation matches the needs and provision required to meet the needs of children placed here. b) Calculation of band values and modelling of the phased transition to the new funding allocation method. This will be brought back to Schools Forum as part of the budget setting process for 2020-21. c) Consideration of implementation within other provision; the Needs and Provision Group will plan the next phase of implementation of a banded model, working with Additionally Resourced Provisions and SEN Units within mainstream schools, as well as Pupil Referral Units. This will follow a similar process of informing, engaging and modelling events for those affected settings, moving towards an assessment and moderation process, prior to implementation.

Page 31 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 7

Report to Schools Forum

Date: 30th June 2020

Title: School Balances as at 31st March 2020

Author and/or contact officer: Liz Williams, Head of Finance (Children’s Services), Jonathan Carter, Schools Accountant.

Recommendations: To note the surplus and deficit balances for maintained schools as at 31 March 2020.

Reason for decision: for information

1. Purpose of the Report 1.1. This report is for information and looks at the balances at the financial year end for the 167 maintained schools in Buckinghamshire. Academies account for their own balances and report to the . 2. Overall position 2.1. Overall schools revenue balances are £11.84m in surplus, a decrease of £0.24m compared to 2018/19. Capital balances also decreased by £0.79m to £2.28m.

18/19 19/20 Movement No. of No. of Type Total Income Revenue Revenue Revenue Schools Pupils Balance Balance Balance Nursery 2 197 1,275,959 -434,541 -288,690 145,851 Primary 149 35,213 181,107,419 -9,958,306 -9,947,529 10,777 Secondary 6 6,386 37,297,457 -107,277 -160,204 -52,927 Special 8 1,113 27,184,414 -1,355,576 -1,014,855 340,721 PRU 2 18 2,274,716 -225,365 -431,879 -206,514 Total 167 42,927 249,139,965 -12,081,065 -11,843,157 237,908

2.2. Total Income includes all sources of funding including government grants and school generated income.

Page 33 3. Surplus schools 3.1. There are 18 schools with surpluses greater than £10,000 and over 15% of all income as per the Buckinghamshire Council’s scheme. Of these 13 had surpluses which increased in 2019/20. 5 had in year deficits. See table below:

18/19 19/20 Movement Balance as a Schools in Surplus Revenue Revenue Revenue % of Income Balance Balance Balance Westfield School -424,469 -500,085 -75,616 31.4% Swanbourne CE School -277,372 -229,407 47,965 30.5% Whaddon CE School -88,167 -115,857 -27,690 29.6% Thornborough Infant School -33,313 -69,481 -36,168 24.8% Hannah Ball Infant School -304,994 -239,332 65,662 24.1% Bucks Primary PRU -181,117 -337,640 -156,523 23.7% Marsworth CE Infant School -48,461 -61,402 -12,941 22.6% Elmtree School -182,977 -265,223 -82,246 20.7% Dagnall School -25,052 -63,318 -38,266 20.1% Bierton CE Combined School -222,741 -271,389 -48,648 19.4% Speen CE School -49,598 -47,909 1,689 18.6% Drayton Parslow Village School -112,714 -70,398 42,316 18.5% Brushwood Junior School -150,591 -236,156 -85,565 17.6% St Peter's CE Combined School -249,788 -214,773 35,015 17.0% Mursley CE School -37,749 -84,443 -46,694 16.7% Curzon CE Combined School -51,679 -124,233 -72,554 16.7% Cheddington Combined School -131,224 -151,899 -20,675 16.5% Foxes Piece School -102,195 -184,541 -82,346 15.3%

3.2. Appendix 1 – Shows the position for these schools over the last 5 years. 3.3. The Schools Accountancy Support Team have attempted to speak to all the schools to find out what future plans they have to reduce their surplus, a summary is provided below:

Page 34

School Plans to reduce surplus Westfield School Building Expansion Project – Contract Awarded Start June 2020 end March 2021 Swanbourne External Building Works – Possible Hall expansion. Loss of income Whaddon CE School Saving for an classroom (Planning in place) – Expansion to Combined Thornborough No response Hannah Ball Infant School New doors/Covered Walkway/Covered outside Areas/Falling Rolls Buckinghamshire Primary PRU Restructure of SMT/Problems recruiting, unusually have EHCP pupils which is managed within the normal staffing Premises/ICT Upgrades Marsworth CE Infant School Expecting Decrease in High Needs funding (Loss of EHCP’s) – Building improvements – IT improvements Elmtree School Transfer to academy 1st July 2020 Dagnall Currently going through expansion to combined/Roofing Bierton Staffing changes due expansion, furniture, premises refurb costs, increase in SMT Speen CE School Held in reserve to support school while numbers are low Drayton Parslow Improve the playground and ICT Brushwood Junior Bulge Year due to leave in the future, timing of staff changes may not coincide/ongoing building works St Peter’s CE Combined School Looking to carry out premises and IT projects (Summer 2020) Mursley External Play Area – Early Years Curzon CE Combined School Academy from 1st June 2020 Cheddington Combined School Improvement works, staffing changes Foxes Piece School No response

Page 35 4. Schools with deficits 4.1. A summary of all schools with deficits at 31 March 2020 is shown in Appendix 2. The majority of schools listed in Appendix 2 are already receiving support from the Schools Accountancy Support Team. 4.2. Section 4.5 of the Buckinghamshire Council Scheme for Financing Schools requires the governing body to seek authorisation from the Authority if it intends to set a deficit budget. The Authority is able to license a deficit budget where the governing body provides details of the steps being taken to fully recover the deficit, usually within 3 financial years. In exceptional circumstances this may be increased to a 5 year recovery period. In the event that a school is unable to set a balance budget over three years may trigger a “Notice of Concern”. Such a notice will set out the reasons and evidence for it being made and may place on the governing body restrictions which may include:

• A requirement that relevant staff undertake appropriate training to address any identified weaknesses in the financial management of the school

• insisting that an appropriately trained/qualified person chairs the finance committee of the governing body

• requirements for the provision of monthly accounts to the authority • regular financial monitoring meetings at the school attended by authority officers

• etc

4.3. In October 2019 the Schools Accountancy Support Team agreed a Service Offer for Schools in Financial Difficulties with the Maintained Schools Sub-Committee of Schools Forum. This service offer outlines the roles and responsibilities of the Schools Accountancy and Support Team and of school governing bodies in relation to addressing school deficit budgets. The Service Offer is attached as Appendix 3 to this report. 4.4. In December 2019 the Finance Business Partner (Schools) wrote to the Chair of Governors for all maintained schools which had submitted a deficit budget for 2019- 20 requesting 1) an explanation of why the deficit has arisen 2) detailed steps the school intends to take to reduce expenditure or increase income to recover the deficit 3) an assessment of risks associated with these planned actions 4) submission of a revised and balanced medium term plan 4.5. 36 letters were sent out requesting explanation for deficit schools. A further 4 schools that had submitted deficit plans in May 2019 and were still believed to be in

Page 36 deficit were sent letters regarding non-compliance with submission for Q2 reforecasts.  35 responses were received in total  8 schools submitted revisions that indicated a return to surplus which was achieved. All ended the year in surplus.  An additional 4 schools had improved their position and returned a surplus at the year end. 7 of these schools indicated that a surplus position would not be achieved within the required 3-5 year timeline.  The remaining 7 schools that responded did not show a balanced medium term plan or recovery. 4.6. Budget submissions for 2020-21 are currently being reviewed and those schools submitting a deficit budget will be contacted to establish the plans for recovery. In addition to ensuring that schools and governing bodies are considering the actions that need to be taken to recover any deficit, this also ensures that the Schools Accountancy Support Team can prioritise support where required.

5. Background information: ‘Scheme for financing schools’ - agreed by Schools Forum. Scheme for financing Schools | SchoolsWeb 4.2 Controls on surplus balances Schools that have excessive surplus balances will be required to report to Schools forum on an annual basis. Excessive surpluses are defined as 15% or more (on all the school’s income) for the last 5 years and at least £10,000 each year. The authority reserves the right to clawback excessive surpluses following consultation with Schools Forum.

Page 37 This page is intentionally left blank 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 Revenue Balance as a Revenue Balance as a Revenue Balance as a Revenue Balance as a Revenue Balance as a Name Balance % of Income Balance % of Income Balance % of Income Balance % of Income Balance % of Income Westfield School - * -392,651 28% -381,211 30% -251,601 19% -424,469 27% -500,085 31%

Swanbourne CE School - * -278,904 42% -254,202 40% -248,513 38% -277,372 38% -229,407 31%

Whaddon CE School - * -87,186 28% -50,757 17% -69,059 20% -88,167 26% -115,857 30%

Thornborough Infant School 2,364 0% -8,129 3% -31,677 11% -33,313 13% -69,481 25%

Hannah Ball Infant School - * -316,015 34% -194,186 21% -183,752 19% -304,994 31% -239,332 24%

Buckinghamshire Primary PRU -31,219 2% 15,721 -1% -33,465 3% -181,117 13% -337,640 24%

Marsworth CE Infant School -8,015 3% -31,188 12% -41,310 17% -48,461 19% -61,402 23%

Elmtree School -41,207 3% -41,089 4% -38,843 4% -182,977 15% -265,223 21%

Dagnall School -26,857 11% -24,738 10% -19,336 8% -25,052 10% -63,318 20%

Bierton CE Combined School - * -199,880 17% -205,637 17% -207,476 17% -220,560 17% -271,389 19% Page 39 Page

Speen CE School - * -77,976 27% -72,639 24% -66,937 22% -49,598 20% -47,909 19%

Drayton Parslow Village School - * -73,196 21% -95,140 25% -141,579 38% -112,714 32% -70,398 19%

Brushwood Junior -56,596 5% -49,701 4% -89,644 7% -150,591 12% -236,156 18%

St Peter's CE Combined School -213,603 16% -177,243 14% -197,483 16% -249,788 19% -214,773 17%

Mursley CE School -216,657 43% -243,374 63% -37,211 9% -37,749 11% -84,443 17%

Curzon CE Combined School -49,337 7% -43,269 6% -33,841 5% -51,679 8% -124,233 17%

Cheddington Combined School -95,578 11% -111,190 12% -125,408 14% -131,224 15% -151,899 17%

Foxes Piece School -109,627 9% -72,500 5% -25,965 2% -102,195 8% -184,541 15%

* - Schools that have exceeded the limit for all 5 years Appendix This page is intentionally left blank Schools with deficits

Support 18/19 19/20 Movement 20/21 Oct. 19 Balance as a from Name Revenue Revenue Revenue Estimated Numbers % of Income Schools Balance Balance Balance Balance on Roll Finance Coleshill CE Infant School -3,426 235 3,661 0% 0 48 William Harding Combined 21,482 13,930 -7,552 0% -75215 730 * Marsh Gibbon CE School 2,701 3,133 432 0% 26661 163 * Booker Park -111,363 44,954 156,317 -1% 221 West Wycombe Combined School -15,503 6,026 21,530 -1% 6026 130 * Stone CE Combined School -5,146 12,699 17,845 -1% 2398 207 Little Chalfont Combined School -28,104 16,498 44,603 -1% 51523 246 * Robertswood Combined and Nursery 77,088 31,451 -45,637 -2% 7547 388 *

Our41 Page Lady's Catholic Primary School -25,360 19,896 45,256 -2% -41845 218 * Winslow CE Combined School -63,550 28,377 91,927 -2% 119142 338 * Brookmead School -34,103 29,527 63,630 -2% 342 * Cedar Park School 15,383 21,821 6,438 -2% 49508 226 North Marston CE School -23,648 11,750 35,398 -2% 9639 98 * Radnage CE Infant School 17,504 11,619 -5,884 -2% 36701 81 * Buckingham Primary 78,306 69,262 -9,043 -3% 71983 447 * Overstone Combined School -8,694 32,583 41,277 -3% 54216 213 * Mary Towerton School - The -22,311 14,072 36,383 -3% 17332 59 * Broughton Infant School -37,008 28,584 65,592 -3% 28751 179 * Fulmer Infant School -4,218 12,948 17,166 -3% 10056 74 * Cadmore End CE School 33,894 15,446 -18,448 -3% -3768 71 * Jordans School 2,041 14,674 12,634 -3% 28211 64 * Grendon Underwood Combined Sch. 81,648 33,486 -48,162 -4% -5822 207 * Chilternwood Special School 128,833 215,461 86,628 -4% 514185 212

Bledlow Ridge School 16,593 33,115 16,522 -4% 50623 170 * Appendix East Claydon School 58,236 25,772 -32,464 -4% 25104 79 * High Ash CE Combined School 32,758 87,315 54,557 -7% 34464 295 * Schools with deficits

Support 18/19 19/20 Movement 20/21 Oct. 19 Balance as a from Name Revenue Revenue Revenue Estimated Numbers % of Income Schools Balance Balance Balance Balance on Roll Finance Mandeville School 554,963 417,538 -137,425 -7% 587007 979 * Millbrook Combined School 220,347 243,657 23,311 -8% 26415 601 * 258,110 577,904 319,795 -10% 679366 1060 * John Hampden School Wendover 129,998 150,988 20,990 -10% 86782 291 * Maids Moreton CE School -15,676 36,249 51,925 -11% 102566 43 * Iver Village Infant School 179,843 125,869 -53,974 -12% 109452 194 * Steeple Claydon School 45,455 120,878 75,423 -14% 53330 204 * Ibstone CE Infant School 24,906 52,769 27,863 -14% 41325 58 *

Hazlemere42 Page CE Combined School 60,348 148,290 87,942 -14% 218 * Lee Common CE School 1,561 70,003 68,442 -17% 65722 46 * Quainton CE Combined School 60,727 224,719 163,991 -28% 140879 167 * Appendix

Schools Accountancy Support Team – Service Offer

Schools in Financial Difficulties

Version 1.0 – October 2019

Page 43

Contents Purpose of the Service Offer ...... 2 Support Summary...... 2 Service Offer - Period Covered ...... 4 Schools Accountancy Support Team Responsibilities ...... 4 Governing Body/ School’s Responsibilities ...... 4 Monitoring and Quality Assurance ...... 4 Contacting the Schools Accountancy Support Team...... 4 Issues and complaints procedures ...... 4

Page 44 Purpose of the Service Offer

The purpose of this agreement is to:  Set out the support provided by the Schools Accountancy Support team to maintained schools in deficit  Set out the responsibilities of both parties in the agreement  Set expectations for the support to be given to recipient schools  Set out the arrangements for monitoring and quality assurance  Lay out the process to be followed in the event of any issues related with the Service

Support Summary The Schools Accountancy Support Team will be providing the following support to the schools identified as predicting a deficit outturn from their Q2 forecast in November and/or their provisional three year forecast submission in March.

Timescale Action Outcome Responsibility Q2 – November (in- Desktop review of all High level risk Schools year forecast) schools’ submitted analysis report for Accountancy forecasts/plans and all maintained Support team schools’ explanation schools for deficits

3 year budget plan – Desktop review of all High level risk Schools March schools’ submitted analysis report - Accountancy forecasts/plans and those predicting Support team schools’ explanation deficit positons for deficits are deemed to be at risk within the three year period

Q2 – December Confirmation to the Letter sent to Finance Business 3 year budget plan – governing body that governing bodies Partner ( Schools) April deficit budget has been submitted and Schools Accountancy Support Team will take action Q2 – December Deficit recovery Schools Schools 3 year budget plan – process initiated Accountancy Accountancy April Support Team Support Team contact schools

Page 45 Timescale Action Outcome Responsibility Q2 – Spring Term Initial visit to high risk Support provided School in 3 year budget plan – schools by Schools to enable the partnership with Summer term Accountancy Support governing body to Schools Team develop their Accountancy school’s recovery Support Team plan Q2 – Spring Term Robust recovery plan Full recovery of Governing Body 3 Year budget plan - within three years deficit within three September submitted to Schools years Accountancy Support Team Q2 – Spring Term Schools Accountancy Formal Finance Business 3 Year budget plan - Support Team agree notification to the Partner (Schools) September school’s recovery plan governing body is robust and viable that a licensed deficit has been agreed Q2 – Spring Term No recovery plan or a First stage notice Finance Business 3 Year budget plan - non -viable recovery of concern to Partner (Schools) September plan submitted by the governing body school that the plan is non- viable and one year monitoring process initiated Ongoing Monitoring schedule Submission of Schools agreed with school monthly monitoring reports and narrative to Schools Accountancy Support Team Ongoing Termly monitoring visit Evidence Governing Body with Schools provided that the Accountancy Support recovery plan is Team and governing on track body scheduled Summer term Outturn review : Schools Governing Body outturn in line with Accountancy forecast Support Advisor schedule visit with governing body Summer term Outturn review : Visit from Finance Governing Body outturn significantly Business Partner different from forecast - (Schools) to meet Formal notice of with relevant concern issued parties.

Page 46 Service Offer - Period Covered

The period covered by this service offer is ongoing and support to individual schools remains in place until the school has fully recovered its deficit positon.

Schools Accountancy Support Team Responsibilities

Contact notes of each meeting will be forwarded to the school within two weeks. Regular contact with the school will be maintained and a visit schedule established after the initial meeting.

Governing Body/ School’s Responsibilities The school is responsible for the formulation and implementation of the agreed recovery plan. Any variances from the plan should be notified to the Schools Accountancy Support Team in writing as soon as possible.

Monitoring and Quality Assurance

As part of this agreement in order that the Schools Accountancy Support Team is able to support schools in deficit, it is important that schools provide the team with accurate and timely information. The Schools Accountancy support Team will co-ordinate with other services within the authority to ensure that a consistent and cohesive approach is applied to supporting schools. The Schools audit team will also have access to briefings and school notes if requested.

Contacting the Schools Accountancy Support Team

The Schools Accountancy Support Team can be contacted by telephone on 01296 382222 Option 3 or email [email protected] Issues and complaints procedures In the first instance all comments should be directed to: Janaki Try, Finance Business Partner ((Schools) – [email protected]

Page 47 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 8

Report to Schools Forum

Date: 30th June 2020

Title: Contingency Group 2019-20 Update, Mainstream Maintained Schools (Dedelegation)

Author and/or contact officer: Liz Williams, Head of Finance – Children’s Services

Recommendations: Schools Forum is asked to: a) Note the report detailing the decisions of the Contingency Group b) Agree changes to the to the Contingency Group’s Terms of Reference as set out in 3.4 and 3.5.

Reason for decision: to update Schools Forum on the allocation of contingency funding for 2019-20 and to ensure the terms of reference can be updated.

1. Purpose of Report

1.1. This report updates members of Schools Form on the decisions of the Contingency Group at its meeting on 25th February 2020 for the financial year 2019-20. The report also outlines the recommendations by the Contingency Group to further clarify their Terms of Reference.

2. Update from Contingency Group

2.1. The group considered applications from 26 primary schools and 2 secondary schools, totalling £966,646. At the meeting the group agreed payments of £349,924. The budget for 2019-20 is £ 428,171 based on the agreed dedelegation pupil rate of Primary: £10 per pupil and Secondary: £12.50 per pupil. This leaves a balance in this year’s funding of £78,247 to meet the costs of any appeals. Appeal requests are yet to be received and Schools Forum will be updated of the outcome in due course. Appendix 1 shows details of anonymised applications and payments agreed by the group.

Page 49 2.2. Last year in 2018-19, the Group received applications from 24 primary schools requesting £816,746. The panel agreed to allocate £228,926 at the meeting and subsequently allocated a further £17,336 on appeal.

2.3. Similar to last year, successful bids included unforeseen staffing costs, pupil premium for traveller children and costs associated with additional pupils up to a maximum of 7/12 AWPU. Unsuccessful applications included bids where the case was not made according to the Terms of Reference and bids for SEN related provision.

2.4. As part of the review of applications, the Group agreed to strengthen their Terms of Reference with reference to ‘appropriate insurance’ – i.e. Headteacher cover should be at the higher teacher rate rather than at the lower administration staff rate. Schools Forum are recommend to agree the following wording :

“Long term absence of teachers through sickness/maternity leave etc. where it has proved necessary to engage agency staff (N.B. the School Specific Contingency Group (SSCG) will require valid reasons if no appropriate insurance has been arranged)” 2.5. As part of the review of applications, the Group agreed to strengthen the Terms of Reference with reference to ‘a school’s decision to increase pupil numbers/classes’ Schools Forum are recommend to add the following wording:

“Costs incurred where a school expands and increases its pupil numbers without Local Authority support – are not eligible for contingency funding.”

Page 50

Appendix 1 Update - Contingency Group 2019-20 - Maintained Schools in Financial Difficulties

Contingency bids for Financial Year 2019-20 Anonymised list of 28 schools Requested Agreed 25.02.20 £1,913 £0 £9,943 £0 £15,917 £7,959 £4,394 £0 £40,935 £11,053 £31,716 £15,858 £16,439 £4,493 £9,279 £4,640 £31,148 £5,205 £13,873 £1,936 £40,017 £6,853 £25,776 £8,940 £4,510 £2,255 £55,000 £0 £1,565 £782 £4,099 £2,050 £74,425 £32,251 £77,730 £28,603 £80,578 £36,794 £33,867 £11,819 £41,656 £440 £15,077 £6,854 £30,111 £0 £27,199 £0 £156,334 £124,188 £6,272 £3,514 £50,000 £0 £66,875 £33,437 £966,646 £349,924

Budget 2019-20 £428,171 Balance for Appeals £78,247

Page 51 This page is intentionally left blank Schools Forum – Forward Plan 2020-21 Key meetings and decisions – updated June 2020 (new items highlighted yellow) Meeting Date Agenda Item Purpose of Report 30 June 2020 1. Schools Forum Funding Group Update (standing item) 2. High Needs Block Update (Standing Item) 3. 2019-20 Financial Outturn 4. School Balances 2019-20 5. Proposals for the Allocation of Top-Up Funding 13 October 2020 1. Election of Chairman and Vice Chairman 2. Agree membership and Chairman of all sub-committees 3. Schools Forum Funding Group update (standing item) 4. Schools Forum Induction 5. Budget Monitoring 2020-21 Page 53 Page 6. High Needs Update 7. Update on National Funding Formula and DSG Guidance 2021-22 – including agreement of any consultation with schools 8. De-delegation 2021-22 – Consultation with schools 9. Covid-19 Financial Update 8 December 2020 1. Schools Forum Funding Group Update (standing item) 2. High Needs Block Update (Standing Item) 3. Schools Budgets 2020-21 a. Schools Block Agenda Item 9 b. Central Schools Services Block c. High Needs Block d. Early Years 4. De-delegation 2020-21 5. Growth Fund

Completed Meetings 15 October 2019 1. Election of Chairman and Vice Chairman 2. Agree membership and Chairman of all sub-committees To review projected spend in 2019-20 and 3. Schools Forum Funding Group update (standing item) future years and identify savings proposals to 4. Schools Forum Induction reduce spend where appropriate 5. Budget Monitoring 6. SEN Quarterly Update (standing item) 7. Update on National Funding Formula and DSG Guidance To update on any changes to DSG 2020-21 Operational Guidance on the NFF, and agree 8. De-delegation 2020-21 – Consultation with schools any consultation that may be required with 9. Verbal Unitary Update- G Drawmer schools To agree consultation process on De- delegation of budgets (in line with operational guidance) Page 54 Page

To consult Schools Forum on proposals for the pay review for support staff in schools prior to consideration by SABPAC 03 December 2019 6. Schools Forum Funding Group Update (standing item) 7. Schools Budgets 2020-21 Set of papers to outline schools budget a. Schools Block proposals, including outcome from any b. Central Schools Services Block consultation with schools and impact of c. High Needs Block changes d. Early Years Outcome of consultation and recommendation 8. De-delegation 2020-21 for 2020-21 9. Review of demand and costs within the High Needs Block (including agreement of any consultation on transfer between funding blocks 10. SEN Quarterly Update 11. Growth Fund 12. Schools Pay Review (Part 2 item) Gary Lamb – confidential item 21 January 2020 1. Schools Budget Proposals 2020-21 To agree the final DSG budgets for 2020-21 2. SFFG Update (Standing Item) 3. Appeals Funding 4. SEN Update- Budgetary proposals only. 5. Budget Monitoring 6. Growth Fund 7. Unitary Update (Standing Item- Until end of March 2020) 24 March 2020 1. Schools Forum Funding Group Update (standing item) 2. Budget Monitoring 3. High Needs Block Update 4. Consultation on Top Up Funding for Schools. 5. Admissions Appeals Charging. 6. School’s Budget Proposals 2020-21, including Early

Page 55 Page Years Update. 7. Contingency Group Update. 8. Unitary Update (Standing Item- Until end of March 2020)

This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 10

Report to Schools Forum

Date: 30th June 2020

Title: Post-19 Students - Change to School Funding Regulations for Post-19 Students

Author and/or contact officer: Liz Williams, Head of Finance – Children’s Services

Recommendations: Schools Forum is asked to support the application to the DfE to vary the Schools Funding rules to enable continued support of post-19 students in special schools as a result of Covid-19

Reason for decision: to enable application to the Secretary of State to disapply the Schools and Early Years Finance () Regulations

1. Content of report

1.1 Due to the impact of COVID-19, there are a number of students, specifically within our special school community for whom requests are coming in to continue to spend additional time Post-19 in their school. This is because the usual transition work either into employment or their next placement has not occurred, and this has been assessed by the school as having a potential significant impact on this young person’s individual outcomes.

1.2 Applications from local authorities for a relaxation of the normal rules for continuing financial support to schools of all kinds for students aged 19 and over will be considered under the established ESFA process, if students need to remain on the roll of the school to complete their supported internship in the new academic year. This will involve the LA making a general application to disapply the Schools and Early Years Finance (England) Regulations, by continuing to educate young people for specifically defined periods of time post-19. To make this application, the LA needs to consult with Schools Forum and a vote taken to agree this decision in principle. We expect this to affect less than 10 students from the information provided to us so far.

Page 57 1.3 The financial impact of these changes will be determined when the final number of students is confirmed with schools and will be an additional cost to the high need block. Schools Forum agreement is required in order to make the application to Secretary of State to enable continued funding of these pupils within their special school settings.

1.4 Further guidance has also now been issued by the government in relation to the potential extension of supported internships. Where the core aim of a student’s supported internship has not been met due to the impact of coronavirus (COVID-19), students will be able to complete their internship in the next academic year. Each student should be assessed to determine the necessary duration of this extension, and an appropriate planned number of hours agreed. Supported internship providers will need to enrol the young person onto a new study programme, but it is not envisaged that all students will require a further full year programme. The new study programme will be funded through the usual funding routes. The normal ESFA processes will be followed and payments will be issued through the usual lagged funding system – therefore affecting the allocations under the 16 to 19 funding formula to be issued for the academic year 2021 to 2022. In addition, all providers should continue to record their school census and ILR data and ESFA will take into consideration in-year growth calculations and any adjustments in the normal way. This will need further exploration by the LA as to the number of placements that this could affect and where this would need employment, however we are seeking an agreement in principle to proceed with these from Schools Forum as well.

Page 58