To report any issues with the information below please email executivecycle@westberks.gov.uk.

Agenda item

DSG Outturn 2017/18 (Ian Pearson/Wendy Howells)

Minutes:

Wendy Howells introduced the report (Agenda Item 10) which set out the actual deployment of the Dedicated Schools’ Grant (DSG) in 2017/18, explaining the main variances and to propose the amounts to be carried forward to 2018/19.

Section 5.2 of the report detailed the options for utilising the unspent budgets and 5.3 included recommendations from the Heads Funding Group (HFG) on how this money could be used.

1)    Primary Schools’ in Financial Difficulty – it was recommended that the unspent budget of £259,099 be added to the funding available in 2018/19 to help meet restructuring costs for schools in deficit, which would provide a total budget of £379,120.

2)    Support to Ethnic and Minority and Bilingual Leaners – it was recommended that the amount of £35,170 be used to offset the cost to schools for this service in 2019/20. This would be an approximate reduction per pupil of £50.

3)    Behaviour Support – it was recommended that the £4,500 be added to the current year budget and for it to be utilised in 2018/19.

4)    Growth Fund – it was recommend that this be rolled into the budget already set for 2018/19, increasing the budget to £277,710.

5)    School Improvement – It was recommended by the HFG that £5,960 of the unspent budget of £73,410 be used to offset the over spend in the Statutory and Regulatory Duties budget. The HFG had not reached a recommendation for the remainder of the money however, this would be discussed again at the HFG meeting in October 2018.

Catie Colston asked for clarification that section 5.3 listed recommendations from the HFG and Ian Pearson confirmed that this was correct. David Ramsden noted that schools had been under represented at the last meeting of the HFG and Ian Pearson confirmed that there had not been a Secondary School representative present.

David Ramsden raised a question about the unspent budget for the Primary Schools’ in Financial Difficulty Fund (£259,099), regarding whether this money could be handed back to schools. Wendy Howells reported that this was not possible however, it could be used in 2019/20 to reduce the amount the pooled schools would be required to pay into the budget.

Ian Pearson stated that there had been concern raised at the HFG that this budget could continue to rise. The approval of bids from The Willows and The Parsons Down Partnership would mean the overall budget would reduce to around £300k. The HFG had discussed a cap being applied to the budget and any money paid into the budget above the capped amount would be returned to schools through reducing costs the following year. David Ramsden was concerned that the sum of money would be left unused and Ian Pearson highlighted that schools were continuing to forecast deficits and therefore it was highly likely that there would be further calls on the fund.

Reverend Mark Bennet felt that the money needed to be viewed strategically. Schools were having to make hard decisions and this pot of funding provided schools with the confidence to make these decisions early on. Ian Pearson added that extra criteria had been added to the fund, as agreed by the Schools’ Forum, that allowed it to be used for obtaining additional advice and support to schools that required it.

In reference to the options set out under 5.3, Graham Spellman asked if one unspent budget could be used to offset another. Wendy Howells confirmed that this could be done, for example £5,960 of the School Improvement unspent budget was being used to offset the over spend in the Statutory and Regulatory Duties budget.

Keith Watts speculated that schools that went into deficit used the Schools in Financial Difficulty Fund as a last resort. He felt that it could be worth reversing this situation to help schools before they reached crisis point. This would however require a change in expectations amongst school leaders.

Wendy Howells stated that the Schools’ Forum had agreed the criteria for accessing the fund for example, a decrease in pupil numbers. There were several criterion that a bid could be submitted against. It was not recommended however, as part of the criteria, that a school should already be in deficit. Keith Watts was concerned that schools were unaware of the process and Wendy Howells stated that the Strategy for Primary Schools in Financial Difficulty was circulated to schools on an annual basis.

 (Patrick Mitchell joined the meeting at 5:21pm)

Reverend Mark Bennet felt that the process needed reiterating to Chairs of Governors. Ian Pearson felt that the issues needed to be approached collectively. It was important that the mismanagement of funds was not rewarded and therefore the area needed addressing carefully. Keith Watts highlighted that currently when a school failed to balance its budget, money was awarded and ideally schools needed supporting before they reached this point.

David Ramsden reiterated his concern about the amount of unspent funding in the Schools’ in Financial Difficulty pot, which was nearly reaching £400k. Jonathon Chishick stated that a deficit of almost £900k was being projected for primary schools and therefore the Schools in Financial Difficulty Fund should be viewed as a contingency fund. He did however, agree with the notion that the fund needed to be capped. All schools were taking steps to address their deficits however, additional support might be required.

David Ramsden stated that he disagreed with the point made by Keith Watts regarding how the Schools in Financial Difficulty Fund should be used. He was aware that a large degree of deficits were a result of management issues. There was a huge amount of unspent money, which in his view could be used elsewhere.

Keith Harvey was in support of discussing the Schools in Financial Difficulty Fund at the next HFG. Chris Davis added that in his view the pot of money was not increasing unacceptably and it could be argued that in the grand scheme of things, the amount of money available was relatively small. Issues could be addressed when setting the next budget and a cap could be applied. It was agreed that the area should come back to the HFG for discussion in October 2018 and in particular focus should be given to applying a cap to the fund.

David Ramsden stated that it was important to ensure that the criteria for accessing the fund was correct as there was a danger that schools would be wanting to call on it more often. Ian Pearson confirmed that there was a rigorous system in place that involved the HFG challenging schools applying for funding.

Wendy Howells moved on to talk about the High Needs Block, where £100k would be allocated for invest to save projects. This area would be discussed in more detail under Agenda Item 12.

RESOLVED that:

1)    The unspent funding in Primary Schools in Financial Difficulty Fund would be discussed in more detail at the next HFG in October 2018, with particular attention given to applying a cap.

2)    (Post meeting comment: Although the Forum raised no objection to the recommendations set out in section 5.3 concerning unspent budgets (for the following areas: Support to Ethnic and Minority and Bilingual Learners (£35,170); Behaviour Support (£4,500); Growth Fund (£75,710); and School Improvement (£5,960)), by omission no motion for approval was carried and therefore, these items would need to return to the Schools’ Forum in October 2018 for decision).

Supporting documents: