MINUTES OF THE SCHOOLS FORUM
Wednesday 3rd November 2010 at the PDC
Attended by: Martin Tune (MT), Vanessa Ogden (VO), Graham Price (GP), Michael Farley (MF), Frank Jacobs (FJ), Marian Williams (MW), Marcus Jemmotte (JM), Joan Griffiths (JG), Kim Arrowsmith (KA), Frank Jacobs (FJ), Terry Bennett (TB), Alex Kenny (AK), Shahanur Khan (SK), Ann O’Reilly (AO), Stewart Harris (SH), Sue Ward (SW), Jacqueline Priestley (JP), Kevin d’Arcy (Kd’A), Isobel Cattermole (IC), Anne Canning (AC), Kate Bingham (KB), Anthony Walters (AW), David Cross (DX), David Tully (DT), Sailesh Patel (SP), Hania Franek (HF) (Clerk)
1. Apologies for AbsenceAndrew Morris, Jackie Johnson, Amjad Rahi. / Action
2. Minutes of the meeting of 15 September and matters arising
The minutes of 15 September 2010 were agreed.
There was a request about circulating the information items that the Finance Team sends to bursars more widely. It was agreed that as these papers usually provided technical details, which would be of no use to governors, that they would not be circulated.
3. Dedicated Schools Grant - Funding Formula Update
MT/DT introduced the above item.
Report:
· Comprehensive Spending Review
· National figures, work out local implications
· Nov/Dec, DfE translate into LA DSG allocation and all other grants re: schools/education and pupil premium
Current position 10/11:
· DSG all committed
· no underspend to carry forward
· budgets tight
· assumption re October Pupil Census and additional funding
· very little funding available for other pressures
CSF 2010:
· headline 0.1% real terms – the same in cash terms
· post-16, potential decrease in guarantee funding unit
· additionally consequence of pupil premium - £2.5bn over 4 years – could be tapered
3. cont…
FJ – PP is it ‘new’ money? DT – PP is substitute for inflation/ possibly funded by other education grants and re-designating existing funding introducing efficiency saving (1.1 < inflation)
2011-14:
£3.6bn of growth by 2014/15 from a baseline of £26bn in 2010/11 (ie 10% cash increase) is accounted for by:
· Pupil premium (£2.5bn)
· 2-year olds education (£300bn)
· leaving only £800m for some headroom in the DSG (this equates to just over 0.6% of the DSG nationally to pay for the combination of extra pupils/inflation)
Therefore frozen budgets in cash terms
6th form – caution (FE down 257 for adults) – 3.1 down in unit funding for adults
16-18 frozen - potential benchmarking for post-16
Capital – down 60% – essential maintenance/pupil places
IC – BSF: informed by DfE to review entire programme/ substantial savings update – construction costs/partner costs by 26.11.10. DfE may then look at individual contracts. Bouygues already lost 2 substantial contracts through contraction of national BSF programme – no guarantees re pupil places basis need.
MF - clarification re LBTH or national. IC confirmed national/all LAs
MW – clarification on what schemes it applies to. IC confirmed all LBTH schemes.
FJ – clarification by 26.11.10 report and impact on schools with works on site. IC – may have to spec/spread potential savings across all schemes/design costs to be factored in.
AK – wants discussion with elected Members re involving public re decrease in expenditure. IC responded LA intends to do analysis and compute report first by 20/12 – if request for additional savings elected Member response.
SH – potential to go for ‘low hanging’ fruit. IC responded one of the LA’s biggest concerns re east batch of schools.
AC – relationship with PfS has potential to deteriorate
TB – primary capital, no confirmation. DT responded LA down 26.5 funding – profile (frontloaded) – impact on Council and will affect context in which schools operate.
Section 5
· Pupil numbers – appears to be little scope for funding beyond a standstill position on national figures announced in the Spending Review.
· Value of per pupil DSG – a number of grants will be subsumed within the DSG (ie School Development Grant, School Standards Grant (SSG), SSG (Personalisation) and London Pay Grant - do not know about other grants. / Action
3. cont…
· Minimum Funding Guarantee (MFG) – if freeze in cash terms/MFG mechanism will become more/significant – rates/ SEN/YPLA excluded from mechanism.
· Central Expenditure Limit (CEL) – requires that the devolve budgets for schools increase by at least the change in the overall Schools Budget.
· Young People’s Learning Agency Post-16 Funding – might be expected that funding levels for 2010/11 may be honoured – review of how Post-16 Funding should be allocated and Secretary of State indicated unit cost funding will go down.
· Pupil Premium - expect to benefit – deprivation in LBTH – uncertainty re allocation over next 4 years.
FJ – is it real? DT responded principle and amount of money has been announced. IC – possibility that indices of deprivation may be rationalised to level. VO – discuss with secondary heads, primary meeting next week.
DT – possible scenarios in table on page 7; must pay mfg and elements outside mfg (SEN, rates), possible CEL down £6m in 2011/12 (approx 251). TB wanted to know worst case scenario – GFV – will not go down?
DT mentioned other issues – dual registration/participation rates of 3 year old (population v actual pupil).
KD’A – clarification re dual registration. DT responded PRV/secondary school/special schools.
FJ asked about school closures (special schools). IC responded review of SEN – special v mainstream settings. Graham Allen review – LA participating/emphasise needs of SEN/CWD personalisation.
Section 6
Retained Budgets – 2011/12 – the LA when it comes to Schools Forum next term will need to identify:
· which services and functions must remain largely unaffected by reductions, other than any marginal efficiency savings that may be possible (eg independent special schools, recoupment and obligations regarding pupils out of school
· which services and functions are to be scaled down
· which services and functions are to stop
· which services and functions will need to be managed by individual schools from their delegated budgets
Table 2 (page 9) explains SSC £7M – option to scale back/ delegate.
FJ – maternity does not include paternity leave, KB stated compensation scheme does not include paternity leave
TB – need to consider where there are economies of scale and efficiencies. / Action
3. cont…
SP responded most other Las have insurance scheme where schools buy back proposal (£150/£175/teacher) – will discuss at next Schools Forum.
AK mentioned maternity and NQT provision – teachers being persuaded not to increase pay progression – the success of LBTH partly because of school support, training, etc and risk if delegated as no central induction, will be issues as very good scheme. SP explained the proposals. DT confirmed not all possibilities at this stage. FJ asked for clarification of proposals, moduling, exemplification; impact analysis coming back to
Schools Forum in January 2011.
IC clarified that central expenditure supports, subsidises many initiatives for schools. SW asked about PFI impact. DT explained quite problematic within no additional money. VO felt helpful paper in terms of absorbing implications if budgetary issues schools & LA, impact analysis – putting it into context for traded services, what does it mean for LA services? LA will bring back to Schools Forum in January – context of all things.
VO – need to think about implications for all schools/outline of what we think it may be. IC responded difficulty because of timing of announcement for actual settlement.
DT – MTF – decrease in 6th form – no pupil premium, SLA then impact on individual schools. VO – implication of school decision – anticipate. IC stated there would be no increase.
General discussion re caution and not all information know – also timetable. Action: School views at consultative re SSC
Section 7
· formula v mfg
· grants rolling into formula
· elements of grant would be maintained
SH – asked if SSAT is included in DSG – confirmed yes. / Action
4. Early Years provision and funding update (paper circulated)
The Early Years Single Funding Formula EYSFF) is in place in Tower Hamlets and needs to be adapted as registered eligible childminders can now qualify for the grant. At present there is only one childminder in this category. The proposed unique rate childminders would receive through the formula is approximately the same as the majority currently charge (£5 per hour) plus a supplement for social deprivation of 39p per hour where payable.
AGREED – to approve the adjustment to the EYSFF to accommodate the new category of registered childminders who meet the legal criteria for recognised settings.
5. Traded Services (paper circulated)
The paper on the DSG budget had presented the Forum with information about future budget reductions. The LA now wants to consult with schools via a charged services review to see which support services schools are willing to pay for in future. The process for the review is set out in the paper. An on-line brochure will be available this week, which introduces some new services. Link Advisers will talk to Heads to assess demand. In the spring term the final version of the brochure will be released and schools will be asked to place their orders. If there is no or insufficient demand, the LA will consider whether those services should be closed.
A list of the services was tabled. Descriptions will be included in the brochure. The cost of services will have to be covered if they are to continue. The LA has undertaken benchmarking. JP asked about the HR service to Nursery Schools, which was not listed. KB to follow up.
A consultation in April 2010 asked governors and Heads to inform the LA of the services that were valued. A broad picture was obtained from the responses, but information about the cost to maintain the services was not available at the time. The results of the current consultation will be evaluated just before Christmas.
AK said that the services had been crucial to the success of Tower Hamlets schools, that the consultation should explain the possible consequences, and Heads should talk to their staff, who may be getting the real benefits of the services.
IC said that discussions had been taking place for several months and Heads would inform their governing bodies, which include staff governor reps. CS&F staff have been kept informed. It is recognised that Tower Hamlets services have contributed to the best ever results this year. However, given the impending budget reductions the Directorate has to act. Schools have been deservedly well-resourced and many have surplus balances. The Council has added funding to schools but must find £70m savings in the next 3 years. From the feedback so far it is clear that services must be value for money (VFM) and that some are not wanted.
In response to a question about whether staff may consider providing services on a private basis and could they be encouraged, IC said that the big society is about groups taking over and running public services. They need to be mindful that this also involves taking responsibility, such as employer liability. / Action
KB
5. cont…
Tower Hamlets would be happy to talk to any staff group that might decide to offer services privately. SK asked whether there should be wider consultation than schools and AC said that this review is about the services for schools, not those provided direct to the public. The LA would need to think about the impact of schools' decisions and possible other income streams. Governing bodies can contract services out to providers other than the LA providing they are VFM.
There are some services that have been grant funded where the grants will no longer be available. This is in addition to the 28% reduction in funding. The impending consultation needs to provide very good evidence for the next stage of decision making by the LA
RECEIVED / Action
6. Any other business
On 21 October Cllr Lutfur Rahman was elected Mayor as an Independent, with no majority on the Council. The Deputy Mayor is Cllr Ohid Ahmed, who has been the councillor for the Lansbury Ward for 10 years. The rest of the Cabinet has not been announced and the lead member roles are not in place yet. The position of Mayor is powerful as it replaces the authority of the leader of any other group on the Council. The Mayor will not take decisions on planning applications. The Council will meet to set the budget and the Overview and Scrutiny Panel, with members from all parties, will scrutinise policy, decision making and the budget. The leading Labour group has decided not to accept Cabinet positions. The Mayor's term of office is four and a half years.
7. Next meeting
Wednesday 12 January 2011 at 8:30am at the PDC.
1