Location / The Professional Centre, Winchester
Held on / Wednesday 7th December 2016, 6.00pm – 8.00pm
Present: / Sylvia Vine / Martina Humber
Michael Anderton / Julie Amies
Andrew Turk
Robin Gray / Simon Walker
Andrew March / Charlotte Bailey
Andrew Minall (Head of Education Finance Services) / Mandy Parsons (Head of Governor Services)
Kathryn Stevens (EFS) / Helen Hardy (clerk)
Apologies: / Peter Higgs / Amy Mossop
Shirley Nellthorpe / Keith Norman
Dave Wright / Andrew Turk
Paul Evelyn
No / Note / Action
1 / Welcome and apologies
The Chair welcomed all members to the meeting. Apologies were received and noted as above.
2 / Schools Forum Issues
Non-Schools Forum Papers
Property Services report on new building projects looking the higher quality and cost of Hampshire builds. They are working with the DfE on new build programmes to see if can become a delivery agent for building new free schools.
IBC Update – changes to customer contact model has been requested following conversations with external consultants. Proposals for a new model are under way following consultation with Schools Forum and Primary / Secondary Heads Resources. The Customer Interaction Centre wasn’t working well so are looking to improve the model. EFS has taken on a role in delivering: system training for school staff as the online model is not really working; new user training on all aspects of the system; and “Building Confidence” training. They have employed systems trainers to deliver this training. EFS is also taking on a role in customer relations and therefore best placed to provide the conduit between schools and IBC.
Schools Forum Papers (NB all papers subject to change before Schools Forum on 15 December)
Early Years Advisory Service (EYAS) –The EYAS is funded from DSG reserve with approval for a further two years of funding. This paper provides a few options on potential funding for the future. There would need to be some changes to the funding formula if the service is to remain as is – part DSG / part sold service.
DfE has now published its response to EYNFF consultation. It will now allow the quality aspect of the funding formula. There is also a further year protection for maintained nurseries (to the end of this parliament) which is a positive response. Officers are putting together an early years’ consultation with the aim of steadying the ship and bringing in what the DfE wants for early years.
Is this the service that Schools Forum / HGA wanted more evidence on the impact Yes, there was some evidence at Schools Forum last year. Headteachers were quite positive about the service in general. There is joined up work with HIAS colleagues on EY inspection. There is no guarantee that PVI settings will buy into the service.
Early Years Consultation – what will that be on? It will be on changes to the EY single funding formula from April 2017 to bring it into line with the DfE publication – quality to be measured by staff qualifications and leadership (Hampshire will have to remove Ofsted). It will be for EY providers to complete. What are the consequences if service providers don’t want to do what we want? Doing nothing is not an option but there will be some choices around where the funding goes. It is now too late to implement some of the DfE options because of the late release of their response. There will be a very tight turnaround for the Hampshire consultation so that it is ready for January 2017 Schools Forum.
Split Sites
This is reflective of the changes in Hampshire since the split site funding was introduced. There is a mixed picture of split site schools across Hampshire. Schools Forum is being asked to agree with the principles, there are no budget recommendations at this point. They have undertaken a benchmarking with other authorities; Hampshire’s policy is quite simple and the overall picture is mixed. Officers have also spoken with those current schools with split sites about their costs which they report as higher than currently funding.
The proposal is to keep the split site policy but refine it to support those schools facing additional costs, and vary the amount payable by phase of school, distance and number of sites. What is driving the change in fixed sites? It is not federations, but amalgamations of schools; there have been some already and more are planned next year. Are there some efficiencies from amalgamation which can partially offset the costs of split-site? Yes absolutely. Is this going to be an increasing and growing trend? Yes potentially. There are savings in relation to lump sum funding where this is saved when one school closes. How long can we continue with this pattern? If two schools amalgamate, they lose £175k straight off but gain only £50k split site funding. Does offering split site funding provide any incentive for rationalisation? Not really, but seeking to strike a balance, where appropriate Children’s Services will be seeking to rationalise estate as well as other costs. Why do schools choose to amalgamate rather than federate? Federation is a school decision, amalgamation can be driven more by a school improvement need and would require a statutory consultation. In addition, you can dissolve a federation but not an amalgamation. Why do West Berkshire not have a policy? We don’t know. Option C is the preferred one.
New SLA for LADOs
Part of this is a statutory role but the LA has before gone far beyond the statutory provision up to now. This paper considers introducing an SLA for those additional services provided. Is there an opportunity to top slice? No, the regulations don’t seem to provide for this. What about the cost of administering the SLA? The amount put in by the LA will remain the same. Team has done what it can to manage the demand at this stage and this seems the only option. It would be a rolling SLA which would reduce the administration costs.
Budget
No change from previous predictions. Confirmation has been received that Pupil Premium and universal FSM will remain the same this coming year. Are the government aware and inclined to do anything to help with rising high needs costs? Yes, they have offered some high needs uplift but it doesn’t reflect the increasing needs and therefore costs.
Schools Funding Consultation
This paper looks to agree a set of principles for the budget allocation and dataset updates which will come in towards the end of next week.
· Lump sum – higher than average in Hampshire but basic pupil value much lower so consider how much to adjust this at this point.
· Datasets – no choice but to apply them. We can manage the data change within the existing pots of deprivation and low attainment to reduce turbulence as much as is possible. Until the DfE’s exact direction of travel is known, governors felt it is best to maintain a stable position where possible.
· Business rates – build in the £1m to cover the immediate pressure.
· DSG Reserves – growing schools is felt to be very important. Look at how to provide permanent funding for a robust core function that does not require 100% buy-in from an SLA.
· Education Service Grant – The Spending review introduced a 75% saving from this grant. The retained part will get a degree of funding and the residual part of the grant will go to DSG to fund statutory duties. School Improvement will be removed from ESG; there will be a separate grant for hard intervention; for additional school improvement, can seek to de-delegate. In Hampshire looking at for the retained element, retaining grant back at level of the grant rather than the costs. General grant – (for maintained schools), LAs should seek to top-slice maintained school budgets for these statutory functions (para 4.38). Hampshire will seek to deal with shortfall in the grant. Does it currently occur for maintained schools? No, these are statutory functions, SLAs will be for services on top of the statutory functions. It equates to a £4m hit on schools and a £7m hit on the Local Authority.
Options for budget reductions
A consultation was sent to schools with every possibility for saving money made clear.
Immediate pressure on schools’ budget - £8m on high needs (£4m overspend last year and likely again this year).
· Unallocated spending – high needs uplift allowed deferral of lump sum reduction. Not yet clear whether we will do well this year.
· CERA – historic commitment running down each year so this can go back into the overall schools’ budget. Logical starting point for putting into the schools’ budget immediately.
· Early Years – believe NFF will lead to increase in budget. Children with additional needs are provided with additional funding, growth in funding to meet these pressures.
· High needs – extremely complex. Great risk in taking money out of HN providers which would result in higher cost INMSS. Would plan to use HN uplift to cover this pressure. Can Hampshire reduce these placements? This is very difficult as some are due to lost tribunals so there is no other option. They are looking at the development of new schools; overarching high needs strategy will be longer term.
· Individual School Budgets – range of factors to consider. Most scope for savings are lump sum and AWPU. Make most of savings from lump sum - £15000 for primary and £10000 for secondary. What is the impact of reducing AWPU in secondary by greater level but keep lump sum the same? Trying to keep in line with national picture and sizes of school - this proposal tries to find the middle ground. There is an issue for schools with falling rolls.
· Central Services – miscellaneous services equates to around £400, 000. If agreed through Schools Forum, some could be released immediately.
· What are the fees to independent schools for pupils without SEN? Social care placements – this is the educational element, they might be waiting for an EHCP. It’s a short-term budget cost.
· Admissions – struggling to keep within the budget due to large number of pupils to be placed. Contribution to FSS and NEET tracking service.
· De-delegation – time constraints mean limited savings to be made at this stage.
Is this just the logical conclusion of ongoing government direction of travel – yes, some of these discussions took place last year at Schools Forum but the delay to the National Funding Formula means that permanent decisions must now be made to put Hampshire on a firmer footing to see this through.
What about school surpluses – are they genuinely going down in Hampshire? No, they are still going up. However, the picture is mixed across such a range of schools. Forecasts show a significant reduction over next few years, and the increase may have been less. It’s shifting a bit by phase and is also a net figure so takes into account schools in deficit. Some of it is due to a fear of spending money because of the impending budgetary issues - apprenticeship levy, national living wage. Is it time to consider clawing back some of the surpluses? The time involved in it last time resulted in very little being clawed back; the DfE has made it clear that schools should manage their own budgets
Are schools aware of the likely hit with the top-slice of the ESG and reduction of the lump sum that is coming their way? They are aware that it is coming but the figures just are not available at this stage… it is too “unknown”. The timetable for schools around budgeting and receiving pupil numbers is very difficult. Can you build a surplus factor into the budget? No.
Robin thanked Andrew and Kathryn for their time and commitment.
3 / Notes of 13 October2016 meeting
These were approved.
4 / Matters Arising
There were none
5 / IBC
There were no new issues.
6 / NGA
Andy March fed back on very good national conference in Manchester in November with good speakers. One was around the National Lead for Governance for Ofsted report due to be published in December: evidence of impact, school websites, skills and expertise, roles and responsibilities, new governor’s handbook to be published soon, collaboration, importance of clerks, CPD of FGB. The second Tony Bresling from the Royal Society of Arts who is publishing a paper in January on Governance in Changing Times. This focussed on the changing landscape: MATs, federations, RSC, LA, relevance of governors and their importance, preparing governors for change in roles, long-term plan for own development.
There were workshops on secondary curriculum, primary assessment, 5 years of pupil premium, safeguarding, recruitment. The Secondary Curriculum workshop looked at pressures on the curriculum (finance, arts being sidelined as a result on Ebacc), collaboration to provide a subject to ensure. Sir David Carter, national schools commissioner, also spoke about the role of governance in developing a world class education both in academies and more generally.
The AGM also took place. NGA put forward deficit budget but because of recruitment process to provide additional services to be funded through increase in membership. Schemes of delegation for MATs, young governors network, GEL e-learning taken over. Subscriptions – increases to individual but not for LA. Struggling to get LA to fund them. Change name to National Governance Association.
Admissions – met on the 4th November mostly discussing the admissions policy, in particular issues around the complication of siblings, different families, children of staff and their position on the list of preference. There are arguments both for and against – ease for staff, tricky for families who might then end up with children in different schools. The issue is around over-subscribed schools. This has gone out to consultation.
Hampshire Children’s Trust Board – the date was changed and Robin was unable to attend.
7 / Budget
All on track.
8 / Correspondence
There was none.
9 / Chairman’s Items
There were none.
10 / Treasurer’s Items
There were none.
11 / Any other business
NCOGS conference took place just before the NGA conference. Mandy is now the chair of the national NCOGs group – this is very positive for the regional group and for Hampshire.
Competence Framework for governors – will be coming out soon along with new governor’s handbook.
Future Meeting Dates
HGA Minutes 2016-12-07 Page 5 of 6