Agenda item

Ian Pearson introduced the report (Item 10), which set out the current financial position of the High Needs Block Budget (HNBB) for 2017/18 and the position known so far for 2018/19. The report also explored options in order to make savings and balance the budget in 2018/19.

Ian Pearson referred to the table on page 85 of the report, which illustrated the pressure that the HNBB was under. The overspend for 2017/18 had been anticipated to be £490,640, however, the current forecast was approximately £10k (£500,750) in excess of this. Any over overspend at year end would need to be met from the 2018/19 grant.

To tackle the deficit in the HNBB, the Schools’ Forum had chosen to take a longer time view. Sudden large cuts could have had a detrimental impact upon the needs of pupils and therefore the decision to manage the budget over time had been preferred.

Ian Pearson reported that the estimated deficit for the HNBB was anticipated to rise to £670,980 in 2018/19, which was a growth of about £170k on the 2017/18 figure. The Heads’ Funding Group (HFG) had concluded that it was not realistic or desirable to attempt to save the full shortfall in 2018/19, and to do so might be making unnecessary severe cuts, given that a large proportion of the shortfalls was made up of carried forward overspend.

Ian Pearson added that an option discussed at the HFG had been to cover of the growth in deficit of £170k, which was explained in more detail under paragraph 5.2. As the result of discussion the HFG recommended that the savings of £220k should be identified, which represented the portion of the shortfall, which related to the ongoing costs plus 10% of the remainder.  Ian Pearson explained that this was currently only a figure and there were not yet any preferences with regard to which areas should be considered for savings. This would be taken as an item for consideration at the next HFG and Schools’ Forum meetings.

Reverend Mark Bennett pleaded with Officers to be careful with language used when writing reports (particularly in reference to paragraph 3.2). He understood that the reports were financial in context however, more neutral language was required when referring to the needs of young people and their families, particularly when comparing to the national picture and the level of Statements /EHC Plans.

Keith Harvey noted from the report that other local authorities were in a similar position concerning pressures on HNBB. He had viewed the paperwork of other Schools’ Forums and had struggled to find an example where there was not a HNBB deficit. Keith Harvey asked Officers if there had been any comment from Government on the problem being faced nationally. Ian Pearson stated that there was no doubt that the issue was at the top of local authorities’ agendas. The issue had largely occurred as the result of two factors. Firstly the introduction of the SEND reform, which had with little warning, given local authorities responsibility for children aged up to 25. The funding provided for this change did not align to the spending required to meet need. The second factor that had contributed to the deficit was planned places, in that the number of children requiring places exceeded the number of places available. Funding for places did not increase year on year, which placed pressure on the system. Ian Pearson stated that these issues collectively eroded the ability to spend. There was also a growing number of children with needs for example, those who were on the Autistic Spectrum. Mental health needs were also increasing. The Government was aware of these issues but had not yet put anything in place to help address them.

Claire White reported that the annual Section 251 statistical return collected information overall for the DSG and not broken down by funding blocks. Generally information gathering took place by each local authority and Claire White stated that all local authorities in the south east seemed to have a deficit in their HNBB.

Keith Watts queried what would happen if deficit were allowed to keep on increasing. Claire White reported that other local authorities had made transfers from other blocks, in particular the schools block and this was why they could not go straight on to using the National Funding Formula (NFF). All areas were working hard to resolve the issue.

David Ramsden stressed the Heads’ Funding Group and Schools’ Forum had put in a lot of hard work to ensure cuts were made as far as possible without shutting the high needs area down. The next discussion that needed to take place was regarding what could be cut further in the HNBB.

The Chairman invited Members to consider whether they agreed that the amount of £220k should be the amount covered off from the HNBB. David Ramsden proposed that the Schools’ Forum agree with the recommendation from the HFG that £220k should be identified as a saving in the HNBB. This was seconded by Anthony Gallagher.

RESOLVED that:

·         The Schools’ Forum agreed that the saving of £220k should be identified within the HNBB.

·         A report be brought back the next meetings of the HFG and Schools’ Forum, which sets out options for where savings could be made.