Agenda item

To provide an update to the Schools Forum from the information currently available in respect of the 2024-25 Schools Budget for mainstream schools together with other relevant finance related matters.

Paul Clark presented the 2024-25 initial Budget preparations for the Schools’ Budget and highlighted the following areas.

There was an overall 2.7% increase in per pupil funding to fund new year cost increases, however it was not yet clear to judge whether this was a good settlement.

Paul commented on the unusual composition of school funding for 2024-25, where in addition to the general 2.7% increase for new year cost pressures, schools would also see the £3m additional grant funding had been allocated in 2023-24 through the Mainstream Schools Additional Grant added to general school budgets, plus continuation of the new separate grant for the teachers’ pay award.

While these three changes aggregated to a 7.8% total increase in school budgets compared to the original budget, it is important to remember that only 2.7% of this was intended to meet increased costs rather than funding catch up from the previous year.

In accordance with the normal publication timeline, the provisional 2024-25 budget was expected to be ready in January 2024 and finalised in March 2024. No significant changes were anticipated.

A key change to the DfE funding framework was the way in which additional funding for low prior attainment pupils was calculated, due to the 2020/21 cancelled exam result cohort. Going forwards, the exam results of 2019 would be used in lieu of 2020, and 2022 results would be used in lieu of 2021 when calculating low prior attainment pupils.

There was a new funding scheme from the Department for Education to schools which had seen significant fall in pupil numbers, which was a national issue also affecting Bracknell Forest schools. The Department for Education measured changes in pupil numbers between October censuses, and if there was more than a 10% reduction £140k would be awarded in grant funding for the affected area. While Bracknell Forest experienced a number of budget issues affecting smaller schools, the general reduction in pupil numbers is indicated at a maximum 6.6%, so the grant funding was unlikely to be received in Bracknell Forest.

There was a 3% increase in per pupil funding into the High Needs Block, which was lower than the increase of 9% in previous years. The Department for Education had previously signposted a decrease to 3%, and this was already reflected in the council’s medium term financial plan for the HNB.

In response to questions, the following points were noted:

·       A 3% increase to the High Needs budget was below inflation, and Forum members raised concerns that this demonstrated further financial hardship to come when supporting children with SEN, with or without EHCPs. In response, it was noted that the Bank of England forecast inflation to be low next year, and that 3% would cover costs. It would not be clear until the next financial year whether a 3% increase was sufficient, but the concern had been factored into the medium-term forecast. Grainne Siggins and Councillor Bailey agreed to feed back Forum members’ concerns and to lobby the Government on the issue. (Action: Cllr Bailey / Grainne Siggins)

·       There was no further detail available at this time on the likely impact on individual school budgets arising from the change methodology to fund schools for low prior attainment.

There being no further questions, it was RESOLVED that subject to consideration of school responses to the annual financial consultation and general affordability, the approach to setting the 2024-25 budget should remain broadly the same as for 2023-24, and in particular:

1.     That there should be no change to the current budget strategy of:

a. as far as possible, replicating the NFF;

b. setting minimum per pupil funding increases between financial years at the highest amount permitted by the DfE;

c. meeting the diseconomy costs at new and expanding schools in a measured way from a combination of Schools Budget reserves and funding allocated for the relevant year from the DfE.

2.     That a centrally managed Growth Fund should be maintained for in-year allocation to qualifying schools (Table 2).

3.     That work should be undertaken to consider potential options available to support schools facing the greatest financial impact from falling rolls;

4.     On-going central retention by the Council of the existing Central School Services Block items (Annex 1).

5.     To prevent over funding, that the DfE be requested to approve that the council continues to disapply the requirement for minimum per pupil funding increases where schools are funded on the Start-up and Diseconomy funding policy for new and expanding schools.