To discuss the consultation issues to enable Schools Forum to formulate a response.

The Schools Forum were informed that the special meeting had been called to agreed the Forums submission to the Governments consultation.  It was noted that the Local Education Authority would be making their own separate submission.

 

The Forum approved the following responses:

 

Principles for a reformed funding system

 

1 Do you agree with our proposed principles for the funding system?

Yes

 

Please provide any further comments::

All principles are valid and sensible

 

The structure of the funding system

 

2 Do you agree with our proposal to move to a school-level national funding formula in 2019-20, removing the requirement for local authorities to set a local formula?

 

Yes

 

Please provide any further comments:

 

The timetable for hard formula implementation and subsequent application of a MFG must be sufficient to allow planning for staff changes and/or restructuring.

If additional funding was deemed to be necessary to meet a local need, each school would need to contribute on a voluntary basis unless a local formal agreement was established which is unlikely to be straightforward.

 

Building block A: per-pupil costs

 

3 Do you agree that the basic amount of funding for each pupil should be different at primary, key stage 3 and key stage 4?

Yes

 

Please provide any further comments:

 

The stage 2 detail will be important - particularly the differential between primary and KS3 being kept to modest levels and the very significant increase in secondary costs being recognised at KS4.

 

Building block B: additional needs factors

 

4a Do you agree that we should include a deprivation factor?

Yes

 

4b Which measures for the deprivation factor do you support?

Pupil- and area-level

 

Please provide any further comments:

 

The review of IDACI every 5 years causes step changes in funding for some schools. This does not adhere to the fundamental principle of predictability.

 

5 Do you agree we should include a low prior attainment factor?

Yes

 

Please provide any further comments:

In principle, we agree that this is necessary to support schools with significant numbers of low prior attainers. The stage 2 detail will be will be important.

 

6a Do you agree that we should include a factor for English as an additional language?

 

Yes

 

6b Do you agree that we should use the EAL3 indicator (pupils registered at any point during the previous 3 years as having English as an additional language?

Yes

 

Please provide any further comments:

If there had been an option to choose EAL4 or 5 we would have given it serious consideration as the need still presents itself in that time period.

 

Building block C: school costs

 

7 Do you agree that we should include a lump sum factor?

Yes

 

8 Do you agree that we should include a sparsity factor?

Not Answered

 

Please provide any further comments:

No relevant experience in order to form an opinion

 

Building block C: other school costs

 

9 Do you agree that we should include a business rates factor?

No

 

10 Do you agree that we should include a split sites factor?

Not Answered

 

11 Do you agree that we should include a private finance initiative factor?

Not Answered

 

Please provide any further comments::

No opinion

 

12 Do you agree that we should include an exceptional premises circumstances factor?

Not Answered

 

Please provide any further comments::

No opinion

 

13 Do you agree that we should allocate funding to local authorities in 2017-18 and 2018-19 based on historic spend for these factors?

 

Yes/No - Business rates:

Yes

 

Yes/No - Split sites:

Yes

 

Yes/No - Private finance initiative:

Yes

 

Yes/No - Other exceptional circumstances:

Yes

 

Building block C: growth

 

14 Do you agree that we should include a growth factor?

Yes

 

Please provide any further comments:

 

The funding system must be predictable. Given the proposals in the White Paper to academies all schools and the duty of LAs to provide places, we are

interested to find out how. in practice. place planning will work.

 

15 Do you agree that we should allocate funding for growth to local authorities in 2017-18 and 2018-19 based on historic spend?

Yes

 

Please provide any further comments:

A system based on known future costs would be preferable.

 

Building block D: geographic costs

 

16a Do you agree that we should include an area cost adjustment?

Yes

 

16b Which methodology for the area cost adjustment do you support?

general labour market methodology

 

Factors not included in the formula

 

17 Do you agree that we should target support for looked-after children and those who have left care via adoption, special guardianship or a care arrangements order through the pupil premium plus, rather than include a looked-after children factor in the national funding formula?

Yes

 

18 Do you agree that we should not include a factor for mobility?

No

 

Please provide any further comments:

 

This is a serious issue for some schools particularly in the light of current migration patterns. We queried whether there was more recent research data available

to gauge the impact of mobility on school budgets.

 

19 Do you agree that we should remove the post-16 factor from 2017-18?

Yes

 

Transition to the reformed funding system

 

20 Do you agree with our proposal to require local authorities to distribute all of their schools block allocation to schools from 2017-18?

 

Yes

 

Please provide any further comments::

On the basis of predictability this is the right answer. However, we could not reach agreement on how a shortfall in high needs funding could be met once the

ability to transfer funds between blocks is removed.

 

21 Do you believe that it would be helpful for local areas to have flexibility to set a local minimum funding guarantee?

 

Yes

 

Please provide any further comments:

 

Due to the current variance in funding across LAs, the new model may initially provide insufficient funds to meet needs.

 

Funding remaining with local authorities

 

22 Do you agree that we should fund local authorities' ongoing responsibilities as set out in the consultation according to a per-pupil formula?

Yes

 

23 Do you agree that we should fund local authorities' ongoing historic commitments based on case-specific information to be collected from local authorities?

 

Yes

 

The education services grant

 

24 Are there other duties funded from the education services grant that could be removed from the system?

 

Please provide your comments::

No opinion

 

25 Do you agree with our proposal to allow local authorities to retain some of their maintained schools’ DSG centrally – in agreement with the maintained schools in the schools forum – to fund the duties they carry out for maintained schools?

 

Yes

Please provide any further comments::

 

Once the detail is clear it will be easier to form a view on this question