Forum to consider the report.

Clive Haines, Deputy Director for Education (AfC), explained that the RBWM Schools Strategy to Support Maintained Schools in Financial Difficulty had materialised because the central government had allocated some additional funding to some local authorities (LAs) which were experiencing financial difficulties (notably deficits). He further stated that this funding strategy applied to maintained schools, nurseries, and special schools; but did not apply to academies (which would receive separate funding) and private voluntary nurseries.

For 2024-25, RBWM had been allocated around £220,000 in order to support schools with deficit budgets. Based on this, an eligibility strategy was formulated to implement this. Clive Haines informed that the report was for Schools Forum to adopt the strategy.

The eligible criteria (based on current trends) would encompass:

·       Falling numbers on roll,

·       Engagement with the Schools Management Resource (SMR) Advisors through their reports,

·       A garrison intake – military schools that provides the primary education for the children of the armed forces,

·       Larger than usual disadvantaged intake.

The strategy included strategic aims and sustainabilitiesunder each of the eligibility criterions (detailed in Table 1, page 22 of the report).

Discussing the transparency and governance of the strategy, Clive Haines informed that:

·       Schools would be selected against the strategy criteria and invited to submit an application based on the criteria.

·       A suggestion that a panel be formed consisting of Schools Forum representatives with applicants being invited to present their cases to this panel.

·       The panel would have a set terms of reference with delegated powers where it would agree/disagree each application and decide on the amount to be awarded based on the strategic aims and sustainabilities, ensuring the funding would help schools become more sustainable with their budgets in the future.

·       Schools Forum would have the responsibility to monitor the grant budget, whereby the reports and grant budgets would be presented to Schools Forum in order to have governance around this strategy.

Clive Haines requested for Schools Forum to adopt the strategy and to take in the panel membership and the reporting governance into the Forum.

Joolz Scarlett (Manor Green) asked whether the number of schools which could be eligible had been identified. Clive Haines replied that he identified the potentially eligible schools but added that he could not reveal this publicly at the moment. Nevertheless, Louise Dutton informed that around 4 or 5 schools were potentially eligible.

The Chair asked whether schools needed to meet every single part of the criteria. Clive Haines replied that they did not, only a selection of the criteria. He reiterated that the criteria was set against the current trends which schools were experiencing that had put them into a deficit.

Neil Dimbleby (Altwood) asked about the timeframe for schools to apply, and then asked whether this would be all-in-one or would schools have to apply at different stages of the year. While needing confirmation with AfC finance officers, Clive Haines believed that it was all-in-one and applications had to be submitted in the first quarter of 2024. Neil Dimbleby stated that he would be happy if it was the case.

Neil Dimbleby then asked about the phrase “greater than usual” in regard to the number of challenging students, opining that the wording sounded a bit “woolly”. Clive Haines explained that it was difficult to place a definite criterion trigger and added that an example of a school meeting this criterion could be the number of students with EHCPs (Education Health and Care Plans) or on the SEN – K register (Special Educational Needs) in which the school had.

The Chair asked for confirmation on whether this would be allocated before the end of the current financial year. Louise Dutton answered that the funding needed be allocated and distributed to schools by the end of March 2024.

Ben Bausor (Early Year PVI) asked whether the process would involve the school requesting for a specific amount of funding or the panel deciding the amount to specific schools. Clive Haines replied that £220,000 was not a huge amount of money; therefore, it would be based on the application and then be distributed on the information AfC possessed on the budget deficits of each school. He added that this was the reason that a panel was required: to give this allocation strong governance.

The Chair asked for clarification on whether the aforementioned panel would be composed of members of Schools Forum who would then be invited to a meeting in the next school term. Clive Haines answered that the panel meeting would be separate to the Schools Forum meeting, but its activities would be reported back into Schools Forum.

Referring to the lack of engagement from headteachers on the financial aspects of schools, Catherine Page (Oldfield Primary) asked whether the eligible schools would be directly contacted so that they were aware of this. Clive Haines confirmed this, and that it would be based on the information which AfC had on each school.

Louise Dutton added that AfC would be contacting all schools and then set out the strategy and the guidance. If the school believed that they were eligible for the funding, they could submit an application. The likely next step would be for the local authority to do a triage on which schools met the criteria before their application was presented to the panel.

Joolz Scarlett commented that there would need to be a more definitive definition with the “greater than usual” or some metrics put in place if the aforementioned process was to be followed, so that schools knew that they had a higher-than-average number of students with EHCPs or were on SEN – K register. Clive Haines suggested that this criterion could be amended to ‘high number of EHCP plans’.

The Chair asked the Forum whether they were happy with the aforementioned amendment, whereby the change of wording would be linked to the number of EHCPs.

AGREED UNANIMOUSLY: RBWM Schools Strategy to Support Maintained Schools in Financial Difficulty with the added amendment of rewording the criterion to ‘high number of EHCP plans’.