Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed members to the meeting of the Forum and introductions were made.

Apologies for absence were received from Stephanie Longson, Danny Pearson, Mark Quinn, Ian Roberts, Jon Roper and Colin Short.

It was reported that Alan Beswick was in attendance as an observer.

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 9 July 2015.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 9 July 2015 (copies of which had been circulated) were approved as a correct record.

To discuss any matters arising.

A member who was unable to attend submitted a number of matters for which they were seeking clarification in relation to 2014/15 Schools Balances – Excessive Surplus Balance Control Mechanism (Minute 7 of 12 of 9 July 2015 meeting), and the Chair agreed that these could be put to the meeting. The Director for Education responded to the points as summarised below:-

·         The accuracy of the minutes relating to the claw-back mechanism was questioned and it was suggested that points 5 and 7 of the comments did not align.

Clarification was sought on the accuracy of the detail of the claw-back mechanism and point 5 of the comments outlined the original issue, whereas point 7 outlined how SMT had reacted to the issue and it was believed that these points were not at odds with each other and it was accepted by Schools Forum members attending that point 7 clearly outlined the position of the LA in this matter.

·         The typographical/clerical errors had not been taken into account by the Local Authority when assessing the submitted returns and there seemed to be a mood of punishing schools.

It was reported that the issue was inaccuracies in the calculations as opposed to typographical errors and 50% of the returns were incorrect. The Local Authority had to demonstrate that it was applying the claw back system as agreed by School Forum and stated in the Scheme for Financing Schools document and as had been stated in note 7 of previous meeting minutes, schools that had not correctly submitted their original template were now being given the opportunity to resubmit. SMT had requested that the schools were given another opportunity to present an accurate form as requested originally.

·         The full excessive surplus had been retained by the Local Authority as opposed to the portion of the surplus that was unaccounted for, which was believed to not have been made clear at the meeting and was not authorised by Schools Forum.

It was agreed that it was made clear that the full excessive surplus balance would be clawed back as per the Scheme for Financing Schools document (Section 4.2) and that this was a Local Authority decision that did not require Schools Forum authorisation. It was confirmed that all excessive funds over 12% would be clawed back, but could be drawn down to allow access to the funding.

·         There had been no response to the suggestion that the calculation could be set against the final income of a school as opposed to the initial allocation to account for in-year funding streams.

All local authorities were permitted to operate an excessive school surplus balance control mechanism if they chose to do so, following agreement with Schools Forum. This was agreed following due consultation in autumn 2013 and the Scheme duly updated from April 2014.The Scheme for Financing Schools document section 4.2.3 clearly stated the method of calculation to determine if a school is deemed to be reporting an excessive surplus balance at year-end.

Schools Formula Funding – National Data (Minute 12 of 16 of 21 May 2015 meeting)

With regard to Minute number 12 from the meeting held on 21 May 2015 regarding the investigations into other Local Authority’s use and funding level applied to the Looked after Children (LAC) formula factor, it was reported that the national range was from £211 to £3,000 per pupil, with Stockport providing £334.

Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council and Lancashire County Council both provided £1,000 per pupil, and Salford City Council provided up to £2,339. Reasons for the variation included some Local Authorities had continue to apply the same amount as valued from an old formula, as well as others providing the same level of funding as Free School Meals pupils.

Bury Metropolitan Borough Council, Manchester City Council and Cheshire West and Chester Council all provided £0 as they believed the Pupil Premium Grant provided a sufficient level of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services.

The report provides Schools Forum members with an executive summary report of the business matters included on the main agenda.

Schools Forum is recommended to note the executive summary and offer any views, comments and feedback to be considered for future Executive summary reports.

Officer Contact: Peter Hughes on 0161 474 3947 or email peter.hughes@stockport.gov.uk

A representative of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) providing the Forum with an executive summary of the business matters included on the main agenda.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services.

The report details the effect the growth in uptake of two year olds receiving early education funding had on the numbers of three & four year old children attending maintain nursery schools and classes.

Schools Forum is asked to note the report.

Officer Contact: Peter Hughes on 0161 474 3947 or email: peter.hughes@stockport.gov.uk.  

A representative of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) detailing the effect the growth in uptake of two year olds receiving early education funding had on the numbers of three & four year old children attending maintain nursery schools and classes.

It was reported that Stockport had been successful in securing over 80% take up of eligible free early year’s education places when the national average was 63%, meaning that over 1000 two year old children were receiving up to 570 hours a year of funded early education. Nearly 90% of the funded two year olds are accessing places in the private, voluntary and independent (PVI) sector.

The total numbers of children eligible for funded early education increased by 236 over between Spring 2013 and Spring 2015. The majority of the increase had been absorbed into the PVI sector. The PVI sector had increased by 370 children but the maintained sector had decreased by a smaller number of children, 134. This showed that there had been a small decrease in numbers attending the maintained sector. The number of school applications between September 2014 and September 2015 was similar however the distribution of the children across the schools had varied.

It was further reported that possible reasons for the reduction in numbers of children in the maintained sector included:-

·         Working parents’ need for flexibility, longer days and wrap around care, which schools do not offer routinely;

·         Some areas and schools would be affected more than others dependent on availability and flexibility of other local provision, childcare and parental choices;

·         Child-minders were now able to offer funded places and there had been a significant increase in child-minders in recent years from 8 to 144.

The following comments were made/issues raised:-

·         Members requested an update following the next census is this would account for the summer period;

·         Some schools were considering the affordability of their nursery as the uptake was as little as 50%;

·         Schools were being asked to take extra Special Educational Needs children;

·         Some schools could offer wrap around care and longer hours however the issue was believed to be deeper than just working parents.

RESOLVED – (1) That the report be noted.

(2) That a further update be provided to Schools Forum.

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services.

The report provides details of proposed amendments to the Schools Forum Terms of Reference and membership updates.

Schools Forum is asked to approve the proposed amendments to the ToR document and discuss/clarify the specific item of membership/election process.

Officer Contact: Peter Hughes on 0161 474 3947 or email peter.hughes@stockport.gov.uk

A representative of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) providing details of proposed amendments to the Schools Forum Terms of Reference and membership updates.

It was reported that the Stockport Schools Forum Terms of Reference document to take effect from the 2015/16 academic year included proposed amendments for approval and/or to seek clarity on the membership and election process, voting procedures and Substitutes.

A vacancy had arisen for the fifth primary head teacher representative following the end of Helen Hilton’s term of office, and it was reported that Mark Quinn (St George’s CE Primary School) had replaced her with immediate effect. There were still four primary governor vacancies and an election process was due to conclude in October. Renee Dickens’ term of office was due to end in September and David Mellor (Abacus Childrens Services/Bright Beginnings Community Nursery) had been elected to replace Renee. Dawn Taylor had also been elected to Schools Forum following the retirement of Dawn Strachan. Norrie Williams had retired as deputy head teacher of Castle Hill School therefore John Law (Head teach at Castle Hill) would represent the special school sector at this meeting and would then discuss with the wider special heads consortia who would be the longer term representative on the Schools Forum and inform the LA accordingly.

The following comments were made/issues raised:-

·         The election process for primary head teachers was currently defined in a way that the representatives would change each year, which provided no continuity;

·         Having the same representative on Schools Forum could deny someone else the chance to fulfil the role, however it was felt that there was often nobody else willing to volunteer;

·         There should be a white voting card to indicate an abstention during voting;

·         It was suggested that any member not attending (or providing appropriate substitute representation) at two or more meetings within a twelve month period will be formally written to by the Chair of Schools Forum to seek explanation and their continued membership shall be subject to review with the Corporate Director for Services to People;

RESOLVED (1) – That the report be noted.

(2) That the proposed amendments to the Terms of Reference document be approved as outlined in the report.

(3) That the Primary and Secondary Head Consortium consider the wording at section 4.5 Defined Election Process and feeds back ahead of the next Schools Forum meeting.

(4) That an update be provided to members on this matter at the next meeting.

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services.

The report outlines the update on the high needs review undertaken by Isos partnership and details of the Department for Education (DfE) “call for evidence” responses received to the consultation launched autumn 2014.

Schools Forum is asked to note the report.

Officer Contact: Peter Hughes on 0161 474 3947 or email peter.hughes@stockport.gov.uk

A representative of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) providing an update on the high needs review undertaken by Isos partnership and details of the Department for Education (DfE) “call for evidence” responses received to the consultation launched autumn 2014.

It was not known what the next steps in the process for change would be for high needs funding; however given the information that had been released by DfE over the summer relating to 2016/17 funding arrangements for the DSG, it was highly likely that further detailed consultation would be undertaken from either autumn 2015 or spring 2016 before any implementation plan was outlined commencing April 2017 at the earliest.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services.

The report provides members with an update on the 2016/17 revenue funding provided via the dedicated schools grant (DSG) any other associated funding stream and the details of the 2016/17 budget requirements, plans and timeline.

Schools Forum is invited to consider the detailed recommendations in the report.

Officer Contact: Peter Hughes on 0161 474 3947 or email peter.hughes@stockport.gov.uk

A representative of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) providing an update on the 2016/17 revenue funding provided via the dedicated schools grant (DSG) or any other associated funding stream and the details of the 2016/17 budget requirements, plans and timeline.

It was estimated there would be an additional £2.9m of funding for the pupil population increase of 689 pupils, however until such time all the school census data had been received, collated and populated into the updated local funding formula model calculation it was not possible to identify any clear impact on the overall budget position. A further update would be provided at the next meeting.

The LA was responsible for allocating funding to all early years providers for the education free entitlement (15 hours per week) for three and four year olds via the agreed local early years single funding formula (EYSFF). The per pupil unit of funding to be allocated to LAs for early years would be announced as part of the 2016/17 spending review announcement due later this term. The LA reserved the right to implement any change permissible to EYSFF rates and 2 year old offer funding based on the outcomes of the spend review announcements in order to ensure the LA could set a final balanced budget for 2016/17. Any such changes would be presented to Schools Forum members as part of further 2016/17 budget reports to be tabled in due course.

Schools Forum members for LA maintained schools were requested to discuss the service areas in scope for de-delegation with their wider sector colleagues this term and identify any school issues and feedback to the relevant LA officers. Schools Forum members must have made a final decision at the next Schools Forum meeting for each service area.

The 2016/17 DSG settlement was expected to continue on an overall 0% cash settlement basis and included requirement to provide MFG protection to all delegated budget share allocations at -1.5%. Upon receipt of the final 2016/17 DSG settlement, the LA would continue to assess priorities, review resource baseline levels and construct the 2016/17 total Schools Budget based on latest information and requirements. The LA was minded to allocate any available headroom to reducing the requirement to deploy DSG reserves to set a balanced budget.

The following comments were made/issues raised:-

·         The Ethnic Diversity Service was forecasting to utilise £40,000 of ear-marked reserves to balance the 2015/16 budget, therefore the de-delegation per pupil rates were likely to increase by approximately £1 per pupil to cover this ongoing cost in 2016/17. Any profit made from the Interpreting Service was maintained to underpin the service;

·         No date had yet been set for the Early Years Funding project group;

·         The urgency to find out further information on the implementation and funding of the extended 30 hours per week offer to some three and four year olds.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services.

The report outlines the Local Authority’s proposal that the new contract for the budget planning software (BPS) package for schools be offered from April 2016 to the preferred supplier on a “Two plus Two” year basis.

Schools Forum is invited to consider the detailed recommendations in the report.

Officer Contact: Peter Hughes on 0161 474 3947 or email peter.hughes@stockport.gov.uk

A representative of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) outlining the Local Authority’s proposal that the new contract for the budget planning software (BPS) package for schools be offered from April 2016 to the preferred supplier on a “Two plus Two” year basis.

The Local Authority commissioned on behalf of all schools a BPS package from HCSS Education Ltd that supported and enabled schools to fulfil their day to day financial management requirements and all associated costs of utilising the BPS were paid by schools as part of the corporate council service level agreement (SLA) framework. In order for the Local Authority to ensure they were complying with updated procurement regulations and specifically direct and/or third party contracts, a formal tendering process would have to be undertaken to identify potential providers and then select a preferred provider from April 2016 onwards during the autumn term.

Due to the size of contract (approx. £50k pa) and to ensure the LA is compliant with statutory regulations it was not possible to continue to renew the contract on behalf of schools without undertaking a tendering exercise to identify the Councils preferred supplier. The Schools Finance Team had been in discussions with STAR (Stockport, Trafford and Rochdale) procurement advisers since spring 2015 and contract specification documents and other sources of information are at an advanced stage in preparation for formal launch in October 2015.

The LA was not resourced to undertake an annual review and therefore following discussions and advice from the STAR procurement team it was proposed that the LA offer the contract on a “Two plus Two” year basis initially for the period April 2016 to March 2020.

The following comments were made/issues raised:-

·         The LA officer time saved from the proposed to the contract offer process proposed was welcomed;

·         The current supplier was developing the system to ensure it was more comprehensive and fulfilled all requirements;

·         Members commented that any update made to the system should not have a negative impact on the capability of users;

·         No members indicated that they wished to be part of the selection process.

RESOLVED (1) – That the report be noted.

(2) That the Local Authority’s proposal to offer the new contract to the preferred budget planning software supplier from April 2016 on a “Two plus Two” year basis be approved.

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services.

The report provides members with details of the scheduled meetings for the 2015/16 academic year the proposed forward planner of Schools Forum business.

Schools Forum is invited to consider the detailed recommendations in the report.

Officer Contact: Peter Hughes on 0161 474 3947 or email peter.hughes@stockport.gov.uk

A representative of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) updating members with details of the scheduled meetings for the 2015/16 academic year and the proposed forward planner of Schools Forum business.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

To discuss any other business.

There was no other business.

The next scheduled meeting of Schools Forum is Thursday 10 December 2015.

RESOLVED – That the next meeting of the Schools Forum be held on Thursday 10 December 2015 at Castle Hill High School, The Fairway, Offerton, with an optional question and answer session on reports to be considered to be held prior to the commencement of the meeting at 3.45pm.