Agenda item

Melanie Ellis introduced the report (Agenda Item 6) whichset out the requirements and changes for setting the primary and secondary school funding formula for 2025/26 and to approve West Berkshire Council’s funding proposals to go out to consultation with all schools. The consultation with schools was planned to commence on 16^th October and finish on 6^th November. The major issue was that financial information had not yet been reviewed from the Department for Education (DfE). Normally provisional information was received in July, which enabled the LA to give schools an indication on funding. It was not expected that the information would be received before 30^th October, which would not allow enough time to run the consultation and therefore it was proposed that the consultation was based on the general principles from the past few years. The questions normally used were set out in section ten of the report.

Melanie Ellis explained that if anything different came out of the Government announcement then a follow up consultation via email would be required.

Trevor Keable asked for clarification on point 5.1 (5) of the report regarding the possibility of transferring up to 0.5 percent of the total Schools Block to other blocks of the DSG. He queried if this was stating that if the Forum did not approve a transfer then the LA would appeal the decision. Melanie Ellis clarified that this was setting out that the LA could apply for disapplication, and this was something available to the LA however, there were no forgone conclusions on this.  

Trevor Keable queried section three of the report relating to the Equalities Impact Assessment (EIA), where it was stated that there was no impact. Melanie Ellis understood no impact had been assessed because the impact was the same across all schools. The point of an EIA was to assess if a decision impacted a certain group of characteristics, and it was not believed that this would be the case. Trevor Keable stated that he disagreed with this and felt that removing money from schools would have an impact. Melanie Ellis stated she would consult Officers at the LA regarding the EIA in time for the next Forum meeting in December.

Trevor Keable asked what transferred money would be used for if the transfer was agreed. Melanie Ellis confirmed that if a block transfer was approved it would move up to 0.5 percent of funding from the Schools Block into a block of the Forum’s choice, which had historically been the High Needs Block (HNB). Neil Goddard added reassurance that by moving funding from the Schools’ Block to the HNB, funding was distributed to schools in a different and more targeted way. This also applied to any funding clawed back, in that this would fund pupils with identified needs through the HNB.

Trevor Keable asked how it could be assured that it would not be used to offset the deficit. Neil Goddard reported that the HNB was in deficit and West Berkshire was not in an unusual position compared to other LAs in relation to this. By transferring from the Schoolss Block to the HNB the deficit would be reduced by the amount transferred but money would still go through various routes to schools to support the pupils that needed it. The Vice-Chair reminded the Forum that the consultation provided schools with the opportunity to give a view on any transfer of funding.

Lesley Roberts reminded the Forum of the process in previous years and believed that the difficulty the previous year was that the proposal had changed late in the process and was different to what schools had voiced through the consultation. A halfway mark had therefore been agreed. The Vice-Chairman was of the understanding that the consultation was to obtain views however, Schools’ Forum had the final decision on the matter, which might not necessarily be in line with the consultation views. Neil Goddard commented that consultation was carried out with the purpose of understanding the views of schools. The recommendation from the LA would be informed by but not limited by these views. The Schools’ Forum’s decision would be based on the views of schools and that of the LA. If the LA disagreed with the Forum’s decision the only course of action it could take would be to apply to the Secretary of State as set out in the report.

Chris Prosser clarified that the previous year the consultation had suggested a zero precent transfer and subsequently the LA had expressed that it was going to make a disapplication request. As a result, a compromise of a 0.25 percent transfer had been reached, which had prevented the disapplication request going ahead. It was observed that it was the first time that details of a possible disapplication request were included within the consultation.

David Fitter referred to the transfer of funding, and this being used to offset the deficit in the HNB. He was unclear how the funding could also be used to support students who needed the money in schools. Neil Goddard explained that he understood the perception and explained that the view of the LA was that that in doing a transfer, this money would be used first and if expenditure went beyond this in-year then there would be a deficit position. Any in-year deficit would then be combined with deficit carried forward from previous years.

The Vice-Chair proposed that the Forum consider item seven on the Draft De-delegation proposals with the view to voting on all the items for consultation together (see item 7). 

(The Schools’ Forum considered item seven – Draft De-delegation Proposals 2025-26).

The Vice-Chair proposed that the Schools’ Forum agree that consultation be undertaken with all schools on:

(1) West Berkshire Council’s proposed school funding formula for 2025/26

(2) An up to 0.5% transfer from the Schools Block to other funding blocks

(3) The criteria to be used to allocate additional funds

(4) The proposed services to be de-delegated (included in the report for agenda item 7).

The motion was seconded and at the vote was carried.

RESOLVED that:

·       Melanie Ellis would consult Officers at the LA regarding the EIA and assessed impact in time for the next Forum meeting in December.

·       The recommendation as set out in section 2.1 of the report was approved by the Schools’ Forum,