The Forum to consider the report from Tracey Anne-Nevitt, Business Finance Partner for Schools and Early Years (AfC).

Tracey Anne-Nevitt introduced the report by informing that AfC received an updated toolkit from central government at the end of December 2023, containing data from the recent October 2023 census on school funding, as well as receiving the updated dedicated schools run block funding. Reviewing the data and information, AfC decided to provide a snapshot of the movement of data between 2023-24 to 2024-25 APT.

Table 5 (page 7 of the supplement) showcased the proportion of pupils in the different formula factors and the movement between the years, in which there had been significant increases:

·       There were pressures on free school meals (FSM) which had increased by 14% in the secondary sector (compared to 70% in the previous year).

·       English as an additional language (EAL) had increased by 19% in the secondary sector.

·       Mobility had increased by 90.6% in the primary sector and 79% in the secondary sector.

Going through the way the unit funding had been allocated in the primary and secondary sectors, Tracey Anne-Nevitt informed that this was based on previous year's funding allocations plus inflation and had not been updated for the recent changes in characteristics. Therefore, any changes in data had placed pressure on the allocations. As referred to in the previous report in November 2023 and the outcome of the consultation in December 2023, AfC were also seeking to get closer to NFF (national funding formula) values, though the changes in data had made this more difficult.

Tracey Anne-Nevitt then explained that there was a proposal to use some of the pupil growth fund allocation for 2024-25, which stood at £828,000 overall. After reviewing the estimate of what was required based on demand, discussing with an officer on bulge classes and the funding of places, the proposal was for £414,000 of this unrequired fund to go into the schools formula by which AfC could allocate additional funding to the formula factors. As a result, AfC would be much closer in reaching NFF. In addition, they would retain pupil growth funding to cover the estimated costs for the pupil growth and bulge classes but make a movement to the schools formula.

The Chair asked for clarification that reducing the growth fund was based on an informed choice on the situation within the Borough. Tracey Anne-Nevitt confirmed this, elaborating that AfC had looked at the planned numbers of surplus places and where the pressures were. She also informed that Ben Wright, School Places Leader (AfC), had planned how many extra places or bulge classes he would require. In addition, AfC estimated how much was needed of the growth fund based on this and how much we could release into the schools formula funding. She pointed towards Appendix C of the report, which had a draft showing the increases each school would receive if funding from the pupil growth fund was released into the school's formula, adding up to the £414,000.

Neil Dimbleby highlighted some errors in the supplementary report which needed to be corrected before being publishing:

·       At 1.3 (page 4), the report said ‘On the 19^th December 2024’ rather than 2023. This was also the case with 4.1 (page 5).

·       At 1.5, the report says ‘2024-24’ rather than 2024-25. This also occurred at 4.5 (page 6).

ACTION: Tracey Anne-Nevitt to correct the errors of the report.

The Forum decided to approve Column E.

AGREED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve Column E to reduce the growth fund and increase the schools funding.