Agenda item

To seek views from members of the Schools Forum on preliminary proposals from the Council for the 2010-11 Schools Budget

The Head of Finance, Performance and Resources introduced the report on the Schools Budget proposals, which had been circulated. He told the meeting that the Forum was asked to review and comment on the preliminary budget proposals from the Council, and to identify any further work which needed to be done before final decisions would be taken on the budget at the February meeting..

The Schools budget was funded by government grant, who set the amount of funding to be received by the Council, was ring-fenced, and clearly defined. It was published in three year periods, and for 2010-11, it was proposed that the funding would rise by 4.6% per pupil. Priorities were set by national government but each LA can determine to where resources are allocated.

An estimate of the increase in funds had been undertaken, and this would be adjusted when more up to date data is available in February. To allow for the management of potential budget risks, £0.240m had been set aside and would not be allocated for spending. To help plan spending priorities, the Forum had agreed a budget strategy, and this had been used by the Council in formulating the proposals. This had been aligned to the majority wishes of schools, as set out in responses to the Financial Consultation that were undertaken in November as part of the budget planning process. This allowed schools to receive indicative budgets last year to help with their initial budget setting processes.

At this stage of building the budget, the preliminary proposals allow for all unavoidable pressures, the new developments identified by schools and £0.080m of new funding to be added for administrative pressures as requested at the December Headteachers meeting. After these allocations, there remained £0.175m of funding outstanding that was also allocated to schools.

The Forum agreed that the proposals being made by the Council were supported and that no more work was required before final decisions would be taken in February.

In response to questions from Forum members, it was reported that the estimated number of pupils for 2010-11 would be around 14,500, but precise numbers could not yet be confirmed and therefore the estimated income to the Schools Budget had been reduced by 55 pupils as a contingency for error or unexpected cost increases. On the question regarding whether meals provided under the Caterhouse contract had increased over the last year, this data was now available and over the year indicated a 17% increase in meals provided. On this basis, it is appropriate to retain the £0.020m saving proposed on this item in line 1 of Table 4.

The final question asked if, in view of the recession, provision had been made for the financial impact arising from the probable increase in free school meals provision and it was confirmed that a provisional £0.060m had been set aside for this purpose.

The Chairman asked Forum members to support the Council in the proposed recommendations, and it was unanimously RESOLVED 

(i)                  That the estimated increase in income of £2.895m as set out in Line 13 of Table 2 (paragraph 5.19) be NOTED.

(ii)                That by applying the agreed budget objectives to the estimated level of available resources, that funding for the following budget proposals be SUPPORTED:

a)            the unavoidable budget pressures estimated at £2.053m as set out in Table 3 (paragraph 5.23);

b)            the economies and new budget developments estimated at £0.841m as set out in Table 4 (paragraph 5.29);

c)            the £0.036m budget pressure relating to the Education Health Partnership and families facing domestic abuse at line 9 of Table 4 be classified as a Combined Services Budget (paragraph 5.32);

d)            the inflation allowances set out in Annex F, the cost of which is included in the pressures and developments listed in Tables 3 and 4;

(iii)       That the annual uplift in payment to Early Years providers be set at the average increase in per pupil funding received by schools through the Funding Formula, currently estimated at 3.3% (paragraph 5.33).

(iv)       That to set the proposed budget, it was NOTED that the Council was likely to seek permission to exceed the central expenditure limit (paragraph 5.53).

(v)                That the following changes to school funding arrangements be AGREED:

a)      Funding allocated to secondary schools based on test results moves over time to use 5 years of Key Stage 2 data (paragraph 5.45);

b)      Funding allocated to secondary schools based on pupil eligibility to a free school meal continue to be based on January 2008 data, pending review from the 2010 census which may indicate a further amendment (paragraph 5.47);

(vi)              That funding adjustments be made to the Kennel Lane Special School budget at the point of any changes in Band 5 pupils occur, rather than adjusting only from the termly census returns (paragraph 5.49);

(vii)             That the Minimum Funding Guarantee payment to Brakenhale, currently estimated at £0.171m, be phased out in equal amounts over the next three years, with the savings re-distributed within the Schools Budget (paragraph 5.52).

(viii)      That the arrangements in place for the following are AGREED as appropriate (paragraph 5.59):

a.      provisions for statemented pupils.

b.      pupil referral units and other education out of school.

c.      arrangements for insurance.

d.      administrative arrangements for the allocation of central government grants.

e.      arrangements for free school meals.

(ix)       That the extent to which the Forum be expected to be requested to exercise its statutory powers be NOTED (paragraph 5.61).

(x)                In order that final budgets reflect the most up to date data, it was NOTED that there would be a need to revisit any preliminary budget decisions agreed now in February (paragraph 5.68).

(xi)       Any further work required by the Forum in respect of the 2010-11 budget be AGREED now (paragraph 5.68).

(xii)             The Forum should note the potential budget pressures that could arise in 2011-12 (paragraphs 5.62 to 5.66).