Agenda item

Claire White introduced the report (agenda item nine) to the Schools’ Forum, which set out a proposal to provide additional funding for resource units who need to stagger the entry for new pupils due to start at the unit at the same time.

West Berkshire currently had nine resource units at primary and secondary schools and a tenth was due to open in September 2017. Each provided specialist support and in West Berkshire there were units for pupils with physically disabilities, speech and language difficulties, autistic spectrum disorder (ASD), hearing impairments and specific literacy difficulties.

Each unit received funding of £10k for the number of places it supported. Sixth form places were funded at £6k in addition to the sixth form funding.

In most units the place funding did not cover the costs, so in addition top up funding was paid for each pupil in a unit. This funding “follows the pupil” and was paid by the local authority where the pupils lived. In West Berkshire there were three top up funding bands specific to each unit. The current funding rates were introduced in 2013 based on staff ratios for the number of pupils in the unit and at the relevant salary costs at that time, plus an allowance for non staffing costs.

The place funding and top up rates had not increased with inflation since they were originally introduced and in 2017/18 they were reduced by 0.5% as part of the high needs block savings requirement.

Although funding was fixed for a year, top up funding could vary if there was movement of pupils. Generally however the number of pupils would stay much the same for the year and as and when pupils left, their places would be refilled as soon as possible. Schools could therefore plan their unit budgets and staffing structures around the number of places and expected pupil numbers.

An exceptional circumstance had arisen at Theale Primary ASD Unit. Three pupils were due to leave the unit at the end of the summer term and although there were three pupils waiting to enter the unit, due to the complexity of their needs it was not possible to admit them all into the unit at once and they would therefore need to be integrated at different times. Not placing the pupils at the same time would have an impact on the unit’s funding (approximately £10k shortfall).

It was proposed that if any unit met the specific criteria for this exceptional circumstance, then additional funding would be payable as set out in section 5.2, 5.3 and 5.4 of the report.

Claire White explained that to ensure funding was fair and that the school was not disadvantaged by an exceptional circumstance beyond its control, additional funding as proposed would ensure other pupils in the unit were not disadvantaged in any way.

Claire White confirmed that it would be additional funding from the high needs block and Paul Dick expressed his view that with a sensible time limit, the proposal should be supported.

Jonathon Chishick queried what would happen if three children needed to transition from a primary unit to secondary unit however, there was not space available. Ian Pearson reported that children would have to be held at a primary unit if they could not be taken into a secondary unit. Jonathon Chishick further questioned if the unit where they remained would be funded accordingly and Ian Pearson confirmed that funding would be provided whilst they remained in the unit. It was thought that in this particular circumstance the pupils had been placed in different secondary provision.

The Chairman invited members of the Forum to vote on the proposal. Catie Colston proposed that the recommendation by the Heads Funding Group for approval of the proposal as set out in paragraph 5 of the report, be approved. This was seconded by Paul Dick.

RESOLVED that the proposal as set out in paragraph 5 of the report be approved.