Forum to consider the report.

The Forum considered a written report regarding the Dedicated Schools Grant Management Plan for 2022-27.

James Norris introduced the report to the forum by stating that it was forecast that if no corrective action was taken at the present time, then within 5 years there could be a deficit of £13 million. A plan had to be sent to the DfE that outlined what action the authority would take to avoid this. James Norris said that they were open to any suggestions that could be included within this plan.

In the year 2021/22, there was an overspend of around £1.5 million. Additional grant funding had also been commissioned for 22/23. He noted that some blocks had underspends, which aided in the overall deficit position.

James Norris then outlined some assumptions that had been made within the modelling. In accordance with DfE advice, the annual grant particularly within the High Needs block had been increased by 5% for the 23/24 year and 3% the year after. Table 2 of the report also showed the trend in Educational Healthcare Plans over the last 4 years. This showed an increase of around 5% per annum. An inflation rise of 2.4% was also shown, however it was noted that this may be outdated due to the large rise in inflation within recent times. It was acknowledged that this would put further pressure upon the authority. If no action was taken, then the authority would see a deficit of around £13.7 million. This would be 10% of the overall DSG allocation.

James Norris said that part of the authority’s plan was to work with the DfE in the delivering better value in SEND support programme. The first meeting was held in March 2022 with representatives from the borough present, where it was agreed that the authority would sign up to the programme with the DfE.

James Norris said that table 6 showed where the authority could end up by the year 2026/27 in terms of cumulative savings, which could show a saving of £8.3 million. The target was £13.7 million, suggesting that the authority would still be in deficit by £5.4 million.

Joolz Scarlett asked if another meeting was to occur to discuss what the DfE’s suggestions would be. James Norris said that the report could be brought back to the Forum, however their suggestions so far had already been discussed by the authority. Joolz Scarlett asked if any future plans would be brought forward. James Norris acknowledged this and said that these would all have to be looked at and potentially be re-prioritised.

Sarah Cottle said that a gap would be left between something being agreed by the Forum and then seeing it actually be implemented. James Norris acknowledged this and explained that things did occur behind the scenes and at ground level, however these obviously need to be recorded.

The Chairman asked what the criteria was for the other local authorities that had been grouped with the borough by the DfE. James Norris said that there were 5 authorities that had the greatest level of deficit and were receiving DSG Safety Value support. 55 authorities were present within the next banding that included RBWM. This was based on relative scale of deficit.

Sarah Cottle asked if there was any sharing between these local authorities in terms of ideas. James Norris agreed and said these discussions did occur; however, most ideas were commonly endorsed.

Joolz Scarlett informed James Norris that the date mentioned within 4.11 of the report was now incorrect as the deadline for the green paper consultation had now been extended to 22 July 2022.

Councillor Baldwin asked for clarity on paragraph 7.13 in agenda item 4 and also for clarity for the word deferred within paragraph 4.9 of the report being discussed.

James Norris said that it should probably have read as delayed rather than deferred and that the authority may have to go back to the DfE to ask for an extension of the 5-year deadline for delivering the plan. If this was not accepted by the DfE then ultimately some services would potentially have to have funding reduced. He noted that this was speculative and would have to be looked at again if and when this occurred. With reference to the question on paragraph 7.13, James Norris said that schools were all asked to confirm what they were going to use their balances for.

Councillor Stimson asked if there was anything that the Councillors could do in aiding the teachers and the schools in anything that had been discussed. The Chairman said that political pressure was important and that maybe the funding could be put in line with the level of inflation. Joolz Scarlett said that overspends within the High Needs block was a national issue and that the green paper consultations would hopefully produce some changes. She added that in the last academic years her school had seen 314 applications for 12 school places.

The forum noted the report.