Agenda item

Melanie Ellis introduced the report (Agenda Item 16), which provided the details of four schools which had submitted deficit budgets for 2019/20, the two schools which ended the 2018/19 financial year with an unlicensed deficit balance and a summary of the schools that submitted deficit forecasts for 2020/21.

An action from the last Schools’ Forum in October 2019 had involved adding a section to the report on the number of schools predicting a deficit in year two. This was included under section five of the report. Melanie Ellis reported that although the summary indicated that the number of schools with a deficit would be high, this was not expected to be the case. Section 5.2 explained that historically schools did not tend to spend a significant amount of time on the two years of forecast (2020/21 and 2021/22) as the funding information available was not robust, the time available to schools to work on forecasts was limited and it had been noted that some schools were no longer preparing three year School Development Plans to support three year budget forecasting.

Year two budgets detailed under section five showed an increase in the number of schools with deficits. Melanie Ellis highlighted that this was only indicative and this number had historically reduced as time progressed.

Antony Gallagher queried if the funding allocations sent to schools as part of the consultation would include the possible 0.5% transfer of funds. He was mindful that the position of some of the schools predicting deficits could worsen if this was agreed. Melanie Ellis responded that the schools included within the report might already be at the minimum funding amount per pupil and therefore would not be impacted upon if the transfer was agreed. The detail on this would be included within the consultation with schools.

RESOLVED that the Schools’ Forum noted the report.