Westminster Schools Forum

Date and time of meeting: Wednesday 19th September 2012, 4.45pm

Location: St Marylebone School, 64 Marylebone High Street, London W1U 5BA

Page | 1

Head TeachersLocal Authority Representatives

Elizabeth Phillips (EP), Sylvie Gambol (SG),Dave McNamara (DMc), Tim Gibson (TG)

Sandra Tyrell (ST)Yoke O’Brien (YO)

School GovernorsAcademy Members

Nick Kent (NK), Joe Hegarty (JH),Leslie Boodram (LB)

Aslam Merchant (AM),

Sheikh Dr Abu-Abdullah Adelabu (SA)

Welcome and Introductions

Apologies for absence

Olivia Meyrick, Eugene Moriarty, Barbara Mayne, June O’Sullivan

Minutes and Matters arising from meeting on 2thJuly 2012.

The minutes were agreed.
Alyson Russen hasstepped down as a Maintained Primary Headteacher representative as Millbank has converted to Academy.
TG said Rob Owen will come to the next meeting as an observer, and may replace JH if he stands down.
DMc said the Annual General Meeting has been deferred to the 22nd October 2012 to allow the Schools Forum to discuss the Schools Funding Reform.

DfE 2013-14 Schools Funding Reform

DMc explained that the underlyingfoundation stone in the creation of Schools Funding Reform Consultation Models is to protect school. We have kept both Primary and Secondary phases separate to prevent movement of funding between phases.
DMc said he is of the opinion not to go out to consultation with schools too early as it would only confuse schools as the DfE did not finalise the datasets till early August and in doing so would create conflicting and differing opinions and schools will find it hard to understand.
DMc asked the Schools Forum to reflect on how we should go out to consultation and DMc is open to the number of meetings we should hold to facilitate this consultation.
DMc raised the fact that the use of Minimum Funding Guarantee (MFG) is still allowed under the Schools Funding Reform arrangements is a useful tool as the MFG protects big losses to schools. However Schools Forum are asked to note that at present MFG is only allowed for 2 years although it has been suggested it should be there for 10 years.
DMc explained that the 2012-13 will be the baseline. There are adjustments to the baseline to ensure the funding per pupil is protected. Therefore a change in pupil number will change the funding level.
DMc explained that we need to remove the High Needs element to the High Needs Block and the DfE have also ensured that revisions are made to the calculation of the MFG in 2012-13 to enable the levelling of the comparator against 2013-14. Where there are differences there are protection.
DMc explained that schools with funding reductions of more than 1.5% will be protected by the MFG which is there to ensure that schools do not lose out. There is a cap on schools that gained by more than 1.3% to fund schools that lost out by the required amount of funding.
DMc said that schools that were over and under represented in the old formula will now be given their allocations equally under the School Funding Reform arrangements.
EP said that schools that benefitted from direct grants in the past will lose out.
ST asked how will extended schools funding be allocated as she can’t see how the schools will get it.
TG explained that all the old factors will now have to go into one of the 9 factors.
NK and JH asked if low level SEN is in the Schools Block.
TG explained that it is as schools will be given a notional SEN amount but the individual assigned resources will move to the High Needs Block.
TG explained the DfE’s Schools Funding Reform Consultation and how Mobility is now an allowed factor in the new formula.
TG also explained how the Schools Forum on the 2nd July 2012 favoured an increase in the Lump sum to £200,000 per school from £150,000 in the initial models. Graham Reed produced 4 models for the last Schools Forum meeting. The two models – Model 3 and 4 favoured by the Schools Forum on the 2nd July 2012 meeting were then modelled with the latest dataset provided by the DfE in August.
ST raised the issue on the use of low attainment data as it was not a true reflection of pupil need.
TG said we can choose to give a lower weighting or not use the factor at all.
JH and ST suggested alternative measures but TG explained we have to use the dataset that we have been provided by the DfE.
TG explained what the main changes are, the effect of the MFG and how it will work.
DMc said this is explained by the “storybook” which is the calculation of the MFG and how it relates to the School Funding Reform Model.
EP asked if the Models include 6th Form funding.
TG confirmed that the Models are without 6th Form funding.
TG then explained the Model and that a scaled cap of 1.3% was applied to all schools that gained.
Schools Forum can choose to take a lower cap if they wish.
In the present models schools that gained by more than 1.3% will fund the MFG.
TG explained the MFG calculations and that the use of different caps on each phase is not allowed by the DfE.
DMc explained we can adjust other factors to ensure that there is no movement of funding between the Primary and Secondary phases.
NK raise the fact of St Barnabas high need for the MFG allocation.
JH said it is a signal that the school need to address issues.
ST is concerned for schools which rely on the Ethnic Minority Grant, SEN, EMA and Pupil Premium
DMc said Pupil Premium is not part of the DSG and we can use other factors like Deprivation , SEN, English as an additional language (EAL).
EP expressed that she is not keen on the use of EAL as historically North West Community School used to get extra funding due to EAL whilst St Marylebone did not get anything.
ST said her school is losing in budget.
EP said she will be asking for a higher percentage in age weighted funding.
ST said schools will be worried to spend if they are going to lose budget.
SG is worried about the change to the 4th October census date for funding purposes as it is not the full headcount and she will be losing 14-16 places.
DMc said the DfE have put measures in place to address this.
JH said we need to spell the definitions out more accurately.
DMc explained that is why the story was told as it is in the calculation of the Minimum Funding Guarantee.
JH said we need to state how we moved from the original position.
NK said schools that lost out need to know what the loss is.
TG explained Models A to E and how these have been modelled using different percentages.
TG said what we need is a steer of how much we put in each factor and which factor will be used.

5DfE 2013-14 Schools Funding Reform Consultation Paper

NK said the Introduction is fine
DMc said on the consultative documents, it is the Government intention to introduce the new funding formula with more money being delegated.
The National Funding formula is too challenging to implement in one go so this is the first step towards it.
NK said it is important to get the terminology clear and easy to understand by the receipients.
NK said Q1 could apply to the inter twine relationship for children centre and schools.
SA asked what the number of Looked After Children (LAC) Westminster has on roll.
DMc replied 48.
NK thinks setting £1,000 for LAC seems reasonable.
JH said one of the reasons for the model we see is that the formula has been devised to minimise turbulence in schools existing budget.
FMS6 has been used as a deprivation factor. There has been numerous discussions in previous Schools forum meetings in deciding which is the best indicator to use as a measure of deprivation. NK said we need to define what FSM6 so that consultees will understand what is being asked. FMS6 will capture any child that has been on free school meals at any time in the past 6 years.
Should we use low prior attainment as a measure for SEN? Should we lower the weighting or should we exclude it as a factor altogether?
Should we rewrite Q2 on the consultation on deprivation?
JH said at present the factors used gives the consultation document direction.
NK said he doesn’t want schools to think it is a stitch up.
EP said some schools will lose significantly
TG said he doesn’t know how temporary the loss will be but there are definitely schools that would lose if MFG wasn’t there to protect them.
Schools Forum asked for the Low Attainment 73 models to be removed and just use the 3 models for the consultation. Model E would be used as a balanced model as is recommended by Schools Forum as most fair for all schools in giving protection per pupil.
Schools Forum asked for the funding of the phases to be kept separate to maintain existing stability.
The MFG cap is now set at 1.3% on the gainers to pay for MFG.
TG explained that the DfE will give the local authority the Reception uplift and recommends that we use it to apply funding to Primary schools with reception classes.
SG asked about Nursery funding and TG explained it is funded from the Early Years Block.
TG explained we need to develop the work on notional SEN further. Schools will need to pay the first £6,000 for every High Need pupil and the remainder will be funded by top up funding from the commissioning local authority.
TG explained that the DfE have given LA’s permission to fund Pupil Growth centrally. We now have the ability to create this pupil growth fund by topslicing the DSG in the first instance.
NK asked if we have this at present and TG explained that in 2012-13 a sum of £263,000 has been allocated for pupil growth in the schools formula.
DMc explained we need to have this as across London there are bulge classes everywhere.
Schools Forum asked when will the consultation go out.
TG said we will aim to get it out by next week so schools have about 3 weeks before the closing date.
TG said meetings have been scheduled with the Chairs of the Primary Heads Executive, Secondary Heads Exec, Primary Heads Conference, Governors Forum and an evening of consultation and will feedback to the Schools Forum on the outcome on the 22nd October 2012.

6High Needs Block

TG circulated the High Needs Paper.

Key Implementation tasks that local authorities (LA’s) must undertake before April 2013

Mainstream pre-16 Formula Funding (by October 2012): In constructing the new funding formula for pre-16 provision in schools and academies, LA’s must decide on the level up to which mainstream schools and academies will contribute to the needs of high needs pupils. The DfE recommends £6,000 of additional educational support per high needs pupil or student. This needs to be reflected in the setting of the notional SEN budget for mainstream schools; and in discussions around the development of a local offer.
Places in specialist SEN and AP settings (by September 2012): LA’s must confirm with the EFA the number of places in Specialist SEN, AP and hospital education settings that will be funded in 2013/14.
Reworking providers’ budgets as place-plus so as to set top-up rates for 2013/14 (by April 2013): LA’s must work with providers that they maintain or used to maintain to agree and confirm the rates of per-pupil top-up funding that will be used in 2013/14.

EP said at present schools would get all the funding if the child’s statement is greater than £9,300. For e.g. if the cost of the statement is £14,000 the school would get all the funding. Under the new arrangements schools will have to pay the first £6,000 and get the remaining £8,000 as top up funding from the commissioning local authority.
NK said recoupment takes up a lot of staff’s time.
DMc said there has been discussions local authorities about this across London.

7Early Years Block

TG informed Schools Forum that more work needs to be done on the Early Years Block and willinform Schools Forum of its progress.

8Additional Delegation

TG explained that under the new arrangements there will be no more LACSEG (Local Authority Central Spend Equivalent Grant)
TG circulated the list of additional delegation on the return we submitted to the DFE.
DMc informed the Schools Forum that we can either delegate it to school or we topslice some of the items centrally
TG explained that the New Delegation is outside the calculation of MFG.

9.Formal notification of final 2012-13 DSG Budget Allocation

TG asked the Schools Forum to note the formal notification of the 2012-13 Final DSG Budget allocation by the DFE as it is a requirement of the DfE to confirm this with the Schools Forum every year prior to the Chief Operating Officer signing off the return for submission to the DfE.
Schools Forum noted the contents of the paper.

Schools Forum asked for the tabled papers to be sent electronically.
TG asked if the Schools forum members mind receiving the papers electronically.
NK said he would still like to receive the hard copy through the post as School forum members do not have A3 printers and would find it difficult to read the spreadsheets otherwise.

NK raised the issue of the Schools Forum membership now that Millbank School is a Primary Academy and there is no representation from the Primary Academies.
TG said he checked on the representation of the current Schools forum representation against the new regulations to ensure that Westminster Schools forum is compliant with the DfE’s requirement as at 1st October and existing list of Schools Forum members is consistent with the Regulations. TG said there is no requirement to have a Primary and Secondary Academy representative as long as it reflects the Academy representation. DMc said we will double check and confirm at the next meeting.
DMc raised the issue of Financial Controls and the importance of Scheme of Delegation, Scheme for Financing Schools, the DfE’s Schools Financial Value Standard (SFVS) and contract and procurement rules. DMc informed the Schools Forum of the suspension of the Headteacher at Quintin Kynaston. DMc said he will be writing to all schools to emphasize the importance of financial controls in all schools.

Date of next meeting:

Monday 22ndOctober 2012, Venue is to be confirmed.

The meeting concluded at 18:40.

Page | 1