Agenda item

The Forum considered a report (Agenda Item 6) which proposed changes to the Scheme for Financing Schools, a statutory document which set out the financial relationship between the local authority and the schools it maintained. In order to make changes to the Scheme, all schoolshad to first be consulted, and having reviewed the consultation responses the members of the Schools’ Forum representing maintained schools would be required to approve each change proposed.  

The consultation went out to schools prior to 2^nd November, and closed on 13^th November. The consultation document was attached as Appendix A to the report and the full Scheme tracking the proposed changes was attached at Appendix B.

Apart from two statutory changes and minor corrections, there were six discretionary changes being proposed and which were consulted on.

The proposed changes were:

1.    to formalise the current arrangement for imprest schools to submit a month nine forecast and bank report (as at 31^st December) by mid January each year

2.    to move the budget plan submission date to 1^st May

3.    to specify within the Scheme a requirement for schools to set a de-minimus level for capital spend

4.    that the current scheme for the claw back of excess surplus balances should be removed and replaced by a light touch review by the Schools’ Forum

5.    that schools closing the year with an unplanned deficit carried forward to the following financial year, should for that year be required to submit the same additional information as schools setting a planned deficit budget

6.    amendments to the current loan scheme

There were 40 responses to the consultation, from 27 (38%) schools; though not all respondents replied to all questions (some answered none at all). The report set out the questions asked in the consultation and the responses received. Schools’ Forum was required to agree or otherwise on each of the main changes proposed.

On the subject of proposal 3, to set a de-minimus level for capital spend, Patricia Brims sought clarification that £2000 was to be the smallest amount to qualify for a spend of capital. Claire White answered that £2000 was a guideline and if a school’s governing body felt a smaller amount was necessary they could argue their case if challenged as some very small schools would have a small amount of capital. Reverend Mark Bennet expressed the view that small schools required flexibility for capital spending and officers could consider in future that the de-minimus level should be 10% of the school’s total capital. Claire White advised that the figures were a guideline and it was for the school’s governing body to set the de-minimus level for capital spend.

John Tyzack (Chair) invited the Maintained School Representatives to make a decision on the report. Patricia Brims proposed that the changes to the scheme for financing schools be approved as laid out in the report. The proposal was seconded by Clive Rothwell and agreed by the Maintained Schools Representatives.

RESOLVED that the Proposed Changes to the Scheme for Financing Schools be approved.