Agenda item

Avril Allenby introduced the report (Agenda Item 8), which set out the proposal for the Early Years Budget 2024/25, which was based upon the recommendations of the Early Years Funding Group (EYFG). Avril Allenby explained that early years was a complex budget to manage and pointed out that the permeameters had changed over the last five years.

A number of new entitlements were being introduced in 2024-25, which would complicate the area further and were set out in section 4.2 of the report in detail. A lot of work had gone on in the background in anticipation of these changes and detailed discussions had taken place by the EYFG.

Avril Allenby reported that the good news was that the additional funding had been provided for the new entitlements. Recommendations within the report were as follows:

2.1 That the Early Years DSG budget for 2024/25 be set at the level detailed in the budget model and agreed. Thus increasing the 3 and 4 year old rate, the 2 year old rate, the quality rate and deprivation along with an increase in the SEN Inclusion Funding.

  2.2 That there remained a focus on deficit recovery and lowering of the pass-through    rate.

Avril Allenby reported that the recommendations had been discussed and supported by the EYFG.

Avril Allenby passed over to Lisa Potts to provide information on the deficit. It was about a balance of ensuring the budget and rates for 2024-25 worked well for providers whilst managing the deficit down.

Lisa Potts drew attention to the table under section 4.3 of the report, which showed West Berkshire had received an increase in rates in 2023/24. The table under 5.6 showed the forecast based on the current hours. A slight over spend of £30k was expected, which was positive compared to the much larger overspend seen in previous years.

Lisa Potts explained that the overall deficit was expected to increase in the current year however, the pass through rate for the new year was being brought in line with what was necessary to support the 95 percent pass through rate. When it had been investigated why the deficit recovery plan had not recovered as much as originally hoped, it was noticed that the centrally managed funds were more than five percent of the allocated budget. This was something that would need to be addressed in future years.

Lisa Potts reported that when the budget had been set there had been a pass through rate of 98 percent for three and four year olds. This had reduced with the actual figures received. For 2024/25, rates had been discussed with early years providers and a figure had been proposed that would reduce the pass through rate, whilst ensuring providers were catered for.

Lisa Potts drew attention to the extra funding streams for 2024/25 which would increase the overall budget from about £11m to £17m. By applying the new rates it was hoped there would be an in year surplus of about £200k. This would help to bring the overall deficit down.

Keith Harvey commented on the complexity of the budget and noted the good news about the deficit being brought down. He raised concern as to whether the deficit was being reduced fast enough and if this would have consequences for future years. Avril Allenby reported that one of the issues was that the LA had to pass through a set amount to providers, which was 95 percent and this was based on estimated figures. Avril Allenby reported that going forward, it was expected that the Government would be asking LAs to pass through 97 percent. Lisa Potts clarified that this would be 97 percent of the £17m. Lisa Potts reported that historically the LA had been passing through too much however, this had been reduced.

Avril Allenby reported that going forward the local model could be relooked at. There was some flexibility around areas such as deprivation and the quality rate. Locally in West Berkshire, the aim historically had been to reward settings and schools that had qualified teachers or equivalent. As a result, there were a large number of settings and schools that were entitled to the quality rate. It was an expense locally but it meant there was better quality early years provision. This was something that had to be balanced but in the future was an area that might need reviewing.

Reverend Mark Bennet noted that the discussion was focused on money however, the other question was the impact and whether the disadvantaged within the community were being reached. He queried if metrics were being benchmarked to see if life was being made better for children and families locally. Avril Allenby reported that there was some tension in this area because vulnerable two year olds had previously been a standalone group and there had been success in increasing the uptake amongst this group. Going forward some competition would be created in this area because there would also be working parents with two year olds seeking these places. Avril Allenby provided reassurance based on local sufficiency data, that there were enough places in the area. Avril Allenby reported that currently West Berkshire was quite rich in terms of places.

The Chair drew attention to the recommendations set out in section two of the report as set out above. It was proposed and seconded that the recommendations be approved. The Chair invited the Forum to vote on the proposal and at the vote the motion was approved.

RESOLVED that the Schools’ Forum approved the recommendations set out in section two of the report.