Agenda item

(Chris Prosser, Jacquie Davies and Jon Hewitt left the meeting at 5.50pm)

Neil Goddard introduced the report (Agenda Item 9), which updated the Schools’ Forum on the outcomes of the review of the proposed clawback of excessive balances in relation to the 2023/24 financial year end.

Neil Goddard reported that following on from the process that had led to the decision taken by Schools’ Forum in July 2024, the LA had listened very carefully to concerns raised by schools about the process implemented and had conducted a review of all surpluses identified as uncommitted and subject to clawback. The review had concluded on 11^th September. Neil Goddard reported that he had visited many of the schools directly impacted along with Councillor Heather Codling. Constructive discussions had taken place about the circumstances that had led to the situation and the underlying issues for why surpluses had been accrued. Each school had been given the opportunity to provide the LA with further information whilst being better informed about what information was required. The information had been reviewed by a panel, which he had formed part of along with the Audit Manager and Melanie Ellis, and it had become clear that there were elements of surplus balances that should have been counted as committed. This was largely because they related to capital expenditure. This had not been identified originally because either the capital expenditure had been delayed; had been driven by recent events or had not been recorded in a discrete way when provided in the first instance. Through these discussions a much more accurate position had been reached in terms of surplus balances.

Neil Goddard explained that the policy already agreed by the Schools’ Forum had then been applied to remaining surplus balance as set out in the report and as a result only two schools would be impacted. It was acknowledged that this was a significant change from the original proposal however reflected a much more informed position.

It was recommended by the LA that the Schools’ Forum approved the recommended clawback amount as set out in the report. In order to clarify the process going forward, Neil Goddard noted that at the previous round of meetings the Heads Funding Group (HFG) and Schools’ Forum had participated in discussions regarding what balances contained and it was highlighted that this was not the role of the Schools’ Forum or HFG. This was a piece of work to be undertaken by the LA with individual schools and having undertaken this work in detail, the decision before the Schools’ Forum was whether to clawback or not. It was clarified that the LA could then take steps to appeal this through the Secretary of State if felt appropriate. Neil Goddard reminded the Forum that any funding clawed back would go into the HNB and would go back to schools through a more targeted approach. 

The Vice-Chair commented that the process had been difficult however, it felt like the approach that had subsequently taken place was the correct one. Trevor Keable was concerned that process had not been completed correctly the first time around resulting in a report being presented to the Forum that was incorrect. Going forward there needed to be confidence that the reports received from the LA were accurate. It was disappointing that this was not the case. Neil Goddard acknowledged the points made and stated that the LA would not wish to present anything other than accurate reports to the Forum. There had been an ambition to complete the process by the end of the academic year and this had led to an insufficient amount of rigor in the process. The LA acknowledged retrospectively that this was an error and had taken action to address and recognise this.

Richard Hand commented that it was important to be mindful that lots of LAs had been in a similar position and it was a result of serious under funding under the previous Government.

It was proposed and seconded that the LA’s revised clawback proposals set out in section 5.1 of the report be approved. At the vote the motion was carried.

RESOLVED that the LA’s revised clawback proposals set out in section 5.1 of the report were approved by the Schools’ Forum.