Notes of Worcestershire Schools Forum (WSF)
Fair Funding Scheme Sub Group
Meeting 2
23rd November 2010
IN ATTENDANCEAndy McHale (AMcH) – Children's Services
Trish Mallinson (TM) – Children's Services Finance
Caroline Brand (CB) – Children's Services Finance
David McIntosh (DMcI) – Governor, Wyre Forest
Malcolm Richards (MR) – Governor, Bromsgrove
Prue Winton (PW) – Governor, Malvern Hills
June Longmuir (JL) – Governor, Bromsgrove.
Bernard Roberts (BR) – Prince Henry's High School
Carol Newton (CN) – Holyoakes Field First School
Steve Baker (SB) – Teachers Associations
Detail / Notes
1 / Apologies / None
2 / Notes of the Last Meeting 30th September 2010 / Agreed.
3 / Matters Arising / FMSiS
AMcH confirmed the DfE had announced the scrapping of the
FMSiS with immediate effect. This had been communicated to all schools and would be reported at the next WSF meeting. The group noted this would be welcomed particularly by small schools.
The DfE had produced a FAQ which would also be circulated.
The DFE have indicated it will be replaced by a new arrangement yet to be determined. AMcH advised that any future requirements for academies will have to include the need for full annual external audit arrangements for the statutory accounts.
4 / Review of LA Documentation / Private Healthcare Issues
The group reviewed the reasonableness of this and felt the guidance in Colin's letter dealt with all issues for a valid business case. It needed to be considered by schools in the context of investment in staff and would need to be a decision for individual schools. BR shared some further advice from SSAT but felt this was not appropriate.
The group commented that if private healthcare was viewed as appropriate use of expenditure following the business case then there should be consideration of other means for 'investment in staff'.
School Fund Guidance
DMcI again raised concerns on the approval and legality of the documents. He felt the audit approach and that the guidance was a change in the previous rules resulting in retrospective redress.
AMcH advised that it was guidance only and that it was not appropriate or practical for every piece of financial guidance to be consulted upon. The LA had to have relevant standards in which it and schools had to operate for all funds otherwise it would be negligent in discharging its duties.
The group agreed to consider the magnitude of the issue. BR proposed that schools could be set an upper limit of the use of school/private funds in which to have flexibility. Based upon some research with a range of schools BR suggested this to be 0.05% of total budget income levels to benefit all staff e.g. for a £6m budget this was £3,000. It was recognised this could cause some difficulties for small schools due to income levels not generated in unofficial funds.
The following issues were discussed: -
· There are a lot of perceptions here based upon audit findings.
· There needs to be flexibility but there are potential risks.
· Will there be an impact on the ability for Governors to claim expenses?
· What would be the view from schools for such a limit in the LA?
· Difficult to issue guidance on this but schools could include relevant details in their school fund usage guidance to parents where contributions are voluntary. If parents did not agree they would not contribute.
· The LA being the custodian of public money.
Letter to Schools June 2010 on the Use of Funds
The group felt that a number of the items in the letter were correct to highlight in terms of inappropriate use of funds. However, if some were part of the learning experience in supporting pupils in school time there needed to be consideration of reasonableness e.g. supporting the costs of staff meals for performing lunch duties with pupils.
The group agreed for the LA to draft an update to: -
· The school fund guidance to pick up the proposed limit and to provide greater clarity on the use of such funds.
· The Fair Funding Scheme to pick up exceptional events e.g. lunchtime supervision issues.
It was agreed for the LA to circulate a draft to the group for comment.
5 / Date of Next Meeting / Deemed not to be required at this stage.
1