Agenda item

Joint report of the Director of Education and the Corporate Director for Children and Adults

Kathryn Stevenson, Senior Commercial Business Partner (Schools) introduced the report requesting approval for a schools block transfer in 2019/20 and to agree an application to the Secretary of State to enable the block transfer to be implemented in the proposed way. Kathryn highlighted the following:

(a)  a schools block transfer is the transfer of funds between the schools block and the high needs block. The high needs block requires additional funds due to the high rate of permanent exclusions, predominantly in the secondary phase. Schools Block transfers of up to 0.5% require Schools Forum approval;

(b)  the number of permanent exclusions rose significantly between 2012/13 and 2016/17, though did reduce slightly in 2017/18. This has resulted in a doubling of PRU pupil numbers to 137 pupils to be funded from the high needs budget;

(c)  up to now that gap in the high needs budget has been covered using Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) reserves, which will be unsustainable to continue in the longer term;

(d)  nationally, 10% of high needs funding is used for alternative provision (AP) but in Nottingham City this is nearly 20%, risking the amount of money left to use for SEND pupils;

(e)  ‘hard’ implementation of the national funding formula has been delayed by a year to 2021/22, allowing an extra year that a schools block transfer could be implemented;

(f)  schools were consulted on a proposal that limited the impact to the secondary phase and recognised schools that have signed up to the devolved AP model with a 35% reimbursement through devolved allocation. This would have required Secretary of State approval as it represented a higher than 5% block transfer, and also because it would sent the minimum funding guarantee at a different level for secondary compared to primary;

(g)  23 responses were received, with only 3 secondary schools responding in support of a proposal that would result in a reduction of funding for their school. 61% of schools supported the proposal;

(h)  the proposal has now been revised so that the estimated impact on secondary schools is a -0.75% cut in funding per pupil rather than -1.5%, and which also now falls within the 0.5% which can be agreed locally. If this were implemented a further block transfer may need to be considered for 2020/21;

(i)  after reimbursement to AP devolved schools, it is estimated that this proposal will raise around £0.8m to cover the cost of excess exclusions beyond the level in the AP model. Latest projections suggest this may cost £1.247m to the end of 2019/20 based on future exclusions at the same level as the last 12 months;

(j)  initiatives are in place to help reduce exclusions, including the launch of the Routes to Inclusion programme and dialogue is ongoing with secondary schools who have not yet signed up to the devolved AP model. In the 2017/18 academic year there has been a 20% reduction in the number of permanent exclusions compared to the previous year.

The following points were raised during the discussion which followed:

(k)  the DSG reserve is already lower than is desirable, but Nottingham City is the only core city having reserves and not setting a deficit budget;

(l)  it is hoped that the downward trend in exclusions will continue and that pupils in the PRU will continue to be reintegrated back into mainstream schools. The projected costs are based on exclusion levels remaining the same;

(m)the main driver in the reduction of exclusions has been the devolved AP pilot, although other schools outside the pilot have also reduced their exclusions. All schools have a responsibility to reduce the number of permanent exclusions as these children are much more likely to go to prison or commit suicide;

(n)  there is an intention to invest funding into early intervention models which will identify needs at an earlier stage in order to prevent exclusions, and the costs incurred, at a later stage;

(o)  all Schools Forum members should vote on the proposal rather than just secondary schools as the high needs budget affects all schools;

Forum members expressed that they were uncomfortable voting on the schools block transfer as secondary members were clearly unhappy with the proposals. They asked to defer their decision until they have received more information and clarity on impact, or a revised proposal.

Forum members agreed to the principle of separate minimum funding guarantees for primary and secondary schools and supported the local authority’s application to the Secretary of State to do this.

RESOLVED to

(1)  agree the local authority’s application to the Secretary of State to set a lower minimum funding guarantee percentage for secondary schools compared to primary schools in 2019/20;

(2)  defer the decision on the schools block transfer itself until a future meeting;

(3)  note that the local authority wishes to work in partnership with Schools Forum on this issue and to come to an agreement regarding the proposal to implement a schools block transfer in 2019/20. However, if Schools Forum approval is not gained, the Local Authority will consider the available option to pursue approval from the Secretary of State to proceed with the schools block transfer in 2019/20.