Somerset Schools Forum
Agenda Item: 2
Schools Forum
13 January 2016
Notes of the Schools Forum meeting 8 December 2015
Attendees:
Members
Secondary headteachers:
Denise Hurr
Observers (representation)/Others
Observers:
Rob Benzie - SASH
Helen Roper – SGSG
Julie Walker – SEN.SE
Phil Burner - SAPHTO
Robin Head - NUT
Rachel Parker – NASUWT
Ian Rowswell - SSE
Primary headteachers and
Governors:
Chris Blazey
Alan Smith
Stephen Farndale
Sue Brewer
Marcus Capel
Officers:
Frances Nicholson
Sharon Campbell
Ken Rushton
Dave Farrow
Charlotte Wilson
Phil Curd (agenda item 5)
Sue Ford (notes)
Special School headteachers and
Governors:
Richard Berry – Chair
Diana Denman
PRUs:
Academies:
Amanda Eastwood
Alison Crudgington
Helen Rogerson – Vice Chair
Sandra Bartlett
David Norton
Peter Elliott
Andrew Davis
Special Academies:
Emily Massey
Non-school members:
Rachel Parish – Early Years
Ian Robson – Early Years
Natalie Paull – Diocese
18 voting members in attendance, the
chair voted on proposals.
1. Apologies from members and observers
 Members: James Staniforth, Peter Elmy, Naomi Philp, Chris Partridge, Linda
Oliver and Nigel Shipton.
1
Somerset Schools Forum
 Observers/officers: Belinda Burton, Clare Kellett, Marion Gatrell and Sue
Rogers.
The Chair welcomed the following new members/officers:
Peter Elliott, Principal of Bridgwater Academy, representing academies.
Charlotte Wilson, Service Manager, EY Commissioning
Phil Curd, Service Manager – Specialist Provision & Transport/Schools & Early
Years Commissioning, presenting agenda item 5.
The Chair also informed the Forum of the following departure:
James Staniforth is standing down as the Forum representative of Further
Education (James has given his apologies for this meeting). John Abbott, Principal
of Richard Huish College, will be the new representative, effective from January
2016.
2. Notes of the last meeting – 8 October 2015
Accuracy:
The notes reflect a true and accurate record of the previous meeting.
2.1 Matters arising:
Item 4, Update from Early Years (EY) Sub Group – SWAP EY audit; reference
was made to the Forum recommending improved processes for areas of concern.
Work will be undertaken with EY colleagues and providers. At the last EY meeting,
retrospective claims were discussed along with improvements to the process.
Item 5, TWG update; Schools Consultation – an update is provided in agenda item
9.
Item 7, Schools Budget 2015/16 – SEN/CSC pooled budget overspend and
contribution from Health. A meeting was due this week regarding discussions with
partners. However, this has been deferred until January 2016 and the intention is
to have a solution by the end of the meeting. The issue is also being discussed at
Westminster.
Item 9.1, Any Other Business; petition for fair funding – this amassed tens of
thousands of signatures and was presented to Parliament by Graham Stuart (MP
Member for Beverley & Holderness & f40 vice chairman) on 1st December.
The Chair thanked Alison Crudgington for raising this at the last Forum meeting;
recent feedback indicates that the Government has taken on board the funding
issues in terms of planning for 2017/18.
Item 9.2, Any Other Business; MTFP saving – the proposed saving in respect of
school crossing patrol funding is currently on hold.
3. Reports and Updates
3.1 Deputy Director of Education
Dave Farrow provided the Forum with an update on Somerset County Council’s
(SCC) strategic vision on behalf of Sue Rogers.
2
Somerset Schools Forum
Various meetings have taken place this term to develop and establish a strategic
vision for education in Somerset and the intention is to hold a consultation during
the Spring 2016. The plan includes the recruitment of Somerset Education
Partners on a consultancy basis with effect from the Spring term as well as
professional dialogue meetings.
Following the outcome of the Government’s spending review and statutory duties,
the Local Authority (LA) will carry on as before, until the picture becomes clearer
as part of the wider DfE consultation on the role of the LA. One of the headlines
was guidance on schools causing concern.
The test for Somerset’s vision is that it should stand alone, irrespective of Central
Government plans and legislation.
In 2013, Ofsted began to inspect local authority provision for school improvement
under the Education and Inspections Act 2006. This included the introduction of
the LASI (Local Authority School Improvement) Framework and Handbook.
Somerset’s LASI self-evaluation resulted in the majority of the areas being
considered classified initially as ‘red’ inadequate category. There is now some
movement towards ‘amber’ with the hope of moving to ‘green’ by the early part of
the Spring term. The Forum will be kept informed on the LA’s progress. It is
important to spend money in the right areas which should be demonstrated in
outcomes.
3.2 Head of Support Services for Education (SSE)
Ian Rowswell gave a presentation which provided an update on Support Services
for Education (SSE). The presentation coincides with one given to the Compact on
24 November 2015 and made reference to the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG).
The presentation included a summary of SSE’s purpose, objectives and priorities.
Ian stressed that SSE is still very much an internal trading unit within SCC and is
fully aligned with the emerging vision and strategies for Education within
Somerset.
In early 2016, a paper will be presented to The Cabinet in terms of SSE’s progress
and direction of travel, with a further review planned for 2017.
The cost of traded services for schools will increase by 3-5%. A plan is also being
considered which enable price increases to schools to be restricted to 3% rather
than the 5% agreed within the initial 5 year financial plan for SSE - if schools
submit an early order during the SSTEP window. SSE are aware there are a
number of other external providers available to school and therefore are very
conscious of price and quality of service. Improved processes have been put in
place to try and get good feedback from schools and understand their needs and
any concerns.
A lot of work has been undertaken on integration, process, culture and
standardisation to ensure SSE feels like a single organisation. All teams now have
3
Somerset Schools Forum
a much clearer understanding of links to each other and to school improvement
and Ofsted inspection frameworks.
SSE’s funding streams are currently as follows, although there is an
understanding that more funds will be delegated to schools in future years:
Somerset County Council (SCC)
10%
Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG)
40%
Schools (buying services and subscriptions)
50%
The Forum was informed of a funding issue in relation to corporate overheads. For
2015/16, these increased by 10% and were funded from the DSG. An additional
increase of 6% in costs will be applied in 2016/17 as part of the move towards a
full cost recovery plan. The 6% increase cannot be met from DSG as this funding
is currently at its maximum limit, resulting in a spending pressure of £362k. SSE
has worked with its Service managers and with Dave Farrow to identify areas
where the risk of less service delivery and impact on outcomes is lowest. Ian
highlighted how £236k could be found by working differently. Further discussions
are required to identify how the remaining £126k gap can be closed and will
include looking at services that could be reduced or discontinued.
Concerns were raised about the impact of any changes to Somerset Total
Communication (STC) particularly on special schools SSE is working with Rick
Beaver, Strategic Manager and Principal Educational Psychologist is leading on
the review of STC to ensure it is embedded within SEN services.
School Funding Reforms
4. Dedicated Schools Grant – Month 7 2015/16
Sharon Campbell presented a summary of the current forecast Outturn position for
the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG), which funds the Central Schools Budget,
Delegated Schools, Early Years and High Needs Budgets.
The Forum was asked to note the latest position and level of DSG reserves.
The following points were noted:
 The forecast 2015/16 outturn of £15.96m underspend comprises mainly of
maintained school balances (and excludes academy balances).
 The £0.563m overspend relating to Out of County Independent and nonmaintained special school placements is not sustainable and work will be
undertaken to bring down costs.
The £0.100m call on Reserves for Leisure Centres specifically relates to an
historical arrangement with Frome Leisure Centre whereby the LA makes a
contribution towards swimming. This has been paid from Reserves each
year and 2015/16 is the final year of the subsidy payment.
Rob Benzie requested on behalf of the Technical Working Group for academies
to submit details of 2014/15 balances in order to establish if surplus balances are
declining in line with maintained schools. This information has been requested
several times but a number of academy balances remain outstanding If the LA
wishes to argue a case for poor funding it is important that details of all Somerset
4
Somerset Schools Forum
schools are provided. It is also important when deciding on whether funds should
be aligned with national and regional ratios between school phases.
Alison Crudgington informed the Forum that she will contact all secondary
colleagues regarding this matter. Phil Burner also reported that he recently
emailed the primary academies concerned. If there is a problem for academies
releasing this information, the Forum should be notified accordingly.
Summary/outcome:
The Forum noted the latest position and level of DSG reserves.
5. Provision of School Meals – Central Production Kitchen
Phil Curd presented a report on the provision of universal infant free school meals
(UIFSM) in Somerset and the potential risk of no supplier of meals in more rural
areas.
The paper recommended that the Schools Forum looks to provide an increase in
demand for school meals in the short term to ensure that the market is strong
enough to provide meals going forward to all schools that require a service.
The Forum was asked to approve the proposal to use DSG reserves to buy all of
the catering equipment within the Central Production Kitchen, securing it as a fully
equipped resource for Somerset’s schools.
The paper included a summary of school meal provision and focussed specifically
on two main contractors:
1. Edwards and Ward; this contract is due to end in September 2016 and affects
55 schools.
2. BAM use a Central Production Kitchen (CPK) furnished with its own equipment.
This contract affects 27 schools and is due to end in 2019 although it is highly
likely that BAM will choose to give notice to terminate. The contract was
originally based on a business case to produce 3,000 meals per day; however,
the actual number is only 2,000 per day and therefore not viable for BAM.
Termination of the existing contract would see BAM, as the owner, vacate the
CPK and remove all catering hardware. This would result in a purpose built
facility being unable to fulfil its function. It is unlikely that a new tenant could be
found to occupy an unequipped, vacant kitchen facility.
The following points were noted:
 In hindsight, the LA would have paid for the equipment installed in the CPK but
the timescales around the UIFSM implementation influenced the process and
decisions.
 If BAM terminate their contract and remove the kitchen equipment the cost of
replacing it would be more than buying it back. It would therefore be better for
the LA to choose the latter option.
 If a deal is proposed with BAM, timing is crucial in terms of agreeing a price and
the contract should be checked carefully.
 The Forum’s decision is about the principal of the proposal and not necessarily
about the funding source. The LA currently has some surplus Devolved
Formula Capital Grant (DFCG) due to the methodology used for school
5
Somerset Schools Forum




allocations; a small pool could be used to mitigate the cost. The 27 schools
involved in the contract could also utilise their own DFCG allocation if they
expressed an interest in purchasing the equipment.
The LA doesn’t have full knowledge of all meal providers within the market;
however, the two biggest contractors are at risk of leaving/giving notice.
If a new contract is agreed, the new supplier might be interested in purchasing
equipment.
When UIFSM was introduced, the Forum’s priority was installing sufficient
provision for all schools.
The following options were proposed;
o Schools could undertake their own procurement exercise either
externally or in house – there is no direct cost for this process although a
sum would be included in the contract fee if taken up.
o Approach BAM in respect of purchasing kitchen equipment.
o The LA would provide meals in house.
Summary/outcome:
The Schools Forum felt unable to make an informed decision on the proposal
and it was agreed to defer the paper until the meeting on 13 January 2016. In
the meantime, the following information was requested:
 BAM’s position in terms of losses incurred from the original contract.
 Details of alternative funding sources.
6. Spending Review Update
Ken Rushton gave a presentation which supported agenda item 6 following the
Chancellor’s Autumn Statement and Spending Review announcements on 25
November 2015.
The information included details of a four year spending plan for schools and early
years along with the financial implications for Somerset.
The main points to note were as follows:
Early Years (EY):
 Doubling free childcare from 15 to 30 hours a week for working families of 3
and 4 year olds from Sept 2017. This increase will impact on EY providers in
terms of the rates charged for the element of provision that exceeds free
childcare. If providers currently charge more than the rate allocated for free
childcare, they will lose revenue as the number of additional hours available at
a potentially higher rate will decrease. Conversely, if providers charge less for
additional hours, they will gain from the increased free childcare provision.
 Although the increase from 15 to 30 hours is effective from September 2017,
LAs can apply to the Government to be part of a pilot scheme in September
2016 and Somerset has submitted an application.
 Investing over a billion more a year by 2019/20 on free childcare places for 2, 3
and 4 year olds
 Early Years review of Early Years block and the potential increase in the hourly
rate.
Schools
6
Somerset Schools Forum






Protecting the schools budget in real terms rather than cash terms. This means
any increase will include inflation but will depend on the calculation the
Government uses.
One of the biggest impacts will be the reduction of the Education Services
Grant (ESG) in order to save the Government £600m; this will be cut by 73%
over 4 years, stating with a £10 per pupil reduction in 2016/17 and equates to
£670k for Somerset (maintained and academies) schools.
Supporting schools to realise efficiencies.
Introduce a national funding formula, with a transitional phase to help smooth
the implementation of the new schools formula. Implement the new formulae
from 2017/18.
The potential increase to the National Funding Formula could benefit Somerset;
however, this could be offset by other cuts such as the ESG, as detailed above.
The increased per pupil values only affect the Schools Funding Block and the
High Needs (HN) and Early Years Funding Blocks could be reduced to dampen
the effect. The outcome of the HN ISOS report is due to be published by the
Department for Education (DfE).
Other announcements include:
 The national 16 – 19 rate per student will be protected in cash terms. This
only applies to the basic rate and not additional factors.
 Sixth form colleges will be given the opportunity to become academies,
allowing them to recover their non-business VAT costs
A consultation is expected to be published by the DfE in Spring 2016 and this
should give any transitional periods. The DfE is also working with the f40 Group on
a proposed methodology; however, the data being used is a year out of date.
2016/17 datasets are expected to be published next week. As Somerset is a
member of the f40 Group, it could obtain the calculator beforehand.
Summary/outcome
The forum noted the Autumn Statement and Spending Review
announcements in respect of Schools and Early Years funding.
7. Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) Budget Planning Parameters
Sharon Campbell presented a paper which set out the overall budget position and
context to enable Schools Forum to make informed recommendations and
decisions on the budget for 2016/17.
The Forum was recommended to note the following prior to a decision being
required at the next Forum meeting:
 The current budget parameters and pressures
 Centrally held and combined budgets are to be set as per Appendix A (subject
to the announcement of DSG funding in mid-December 2015) with a full review
being undertaken of each line in the spring and summer of 2016 prior to the
consultation being issued for the 2017/18 budget setting.
The Forum was asked to note paragraph 1.4 of the paper which provided details of
the main budget issues for 2016/17.
7
Somerset Schools Forum
At its meeting on 24 November 2015, The Compact discussed the current position
concerning the centrally held elements of the DSG, which includes Combined
Budgets. The recommendation is that no changes are made to these budgets until
the outcome of the forthcoming DfE consultation, as this may affect the treatment
of Combined Budgets.
Under the School and Early Years Finance (England) Regulations LAs may retain
some budget for the provision of some central services that would normally be
funded from wider local authority funds. Expenditure of this kind is only permitted
for existing commitments and to the level budgeted for in 2012/13. No new
commitments or additional expenditure are allowed.
It would be appropriate to establish if some centrally retained budgets are better off
being delegated to schools or continue to be held centrally. The Compact will
discuss this next year in preparation for any proposed changes in 2017/18. The
Compact’s business should be making recommendations as a steer for the Forum.
It was noted that the same decision to review Combined Budgets was made last
year for 2016/17; however Somerset is now in a different position. The
appointment of Sue Rogers, Deputy Director of Education and the Educational
Vision has provided a different approach and the LA should see it through. One
view is that the default position should be all money is delegated to schools and
funds should only be centrally retained where necessary and/or due to economies
of scale. The termination of existing contracts should also be borne in mind.
Furthermore, the 2016/17 schools budget must also be set at the next Forum
meeting on 13 January 2016 and time is therefore an issue.
Summary/outcome: the Forum noted
 the current budget parameters and pressures, and
 the centrally held and combined budgets are to be set as per Appendix A
(subject to the announcement of DSG funding in mid-December 2015)
with a full review being undertaken of each line in the spring and summer
of 2016 prior to the consultation being issued for the 2017/18 budget
setting.
8. Update from Early Years Sub Group
Charlotte Wilson, provided an update from the Early Years (EY) Sub Group on
 Somerset’s application to be an early implementer of 30 hours of funded
childcare for working parents of three and four year olds
 The removal of late adjustment claims regarding the early years entitlement.
The Schools Forum was recommended to:
 Note the timeline for notification and implementation of the pilot for 30 hours of
funded childcare
 Approve the recommendations made by Early Years Sub Group on the removal
of late adjustment claims for the early years entitlement.
Section 1 of the paper provided details of the early implementation to double free
childcare. The Scheme is based on providing 5,000 spaces across 2-3 Local
Authorities. Somerset submitted an application last month to take part in the
Government’s pilot scheme and will be notified in April 2016 on the outcome. It will
8
Somerset Schools Forum
not embark on the pilot if there is insufficient backing from the Department for
Education (DfE).
The particulars of Somerset’s proposal were described in section 2. The plan is to
implement additional places for families in Somerset rather than provide cross
border arrangements. The LA will contact employees regarding offering additional
childcare hours using a ‘golden ticket’. Somerset has opted for a county wide
approach rather than focussing on one particular area, to avoid families being
disadvantaged. The Scheme is an economic one to encourage people back to
work and alleviate family costs.
The trial will help providers to gain advance knowledge of the process and provide
feedback to the DfE in terms of the model. If Somerset Early Years providers wish
to be involved they should contact Charlotte Wilson in the first instance.
All parents working over 16 hours may access any number of hours between 16
and 30 hours free childcare and the offer currently applies to term time only. The
Government is also thinking about shift work, 24/7 and unsociable working hours
childcare.
The LA is specifically looking at the Somerset Larder, who has been awarded the
interim catering contract for EDF Energy’s Hinkley Point C project. The LA will look
at brokerage, long term sufficiency and capacity of EY providers. If more capacity
is required in September 2017 when the Scheme is rolled out nationally, it will
consider capital funding.
Concern was raised over the increased hours in terms of capacity and
sustainability for some EY providers as it was felt that parents might move children
if their current provider is unable to accommodate additional hours. It was
recommended that any issues or concerns in respect of the pilot scheme are
discussed outside of the Forum, with EY colleagues and managers.
Full details on the statutory requirements are not yet known.
Section 4 summarised the issues around late adjustments of Early Years
entitlement claims and the reasons for the proposal to remove it. 90% of place
funding is paid to the EY provider based on estimated take up. Actual place
numbers are subsequently submitted by the provider at the end of the period and
an adjustment is made accordingly. If figures are provided late, the LA can make a
late adjustment for a £50 charge; however continuation of this has impacted on
budget setting, monitoring and forecasting.
EY settings are given a reasonable amount of time to submit actual numbers
without the need for late adjustments. Delays are also time consuming in terms of
administration resources.
Summary/outcome
The Schools Forum noted the timeline for notification and implementation of
the pilot for 30 hours of funded childcare.
9
Somerset Schools Forum
The Forum approved the recommendation made by Early Years Sub Group
on the removal of late adjustment claims for the early years entitlement,
effective from the Spring term 2016.
Yes: 11
No: 0
Abstentions: 7
9. High Needs sub Group – SEND review progress report
Dave Farrow gave a report on the discussions of the meeting of the High Needs
Sub Group held on the 18 November 2015.
The Forum was asked to note:
 the High Needs Budget Monitoring report
 the agreement for an additional High Needs Top up payment to Somerset
College
 the consideration in relation to Pupil Premium Payments for Alternative
Provision providers
 the Implementation Plan in relation to funding for Special Schools and
Resource Bases
 the work of the LA Lead Officer for Out of LA Provision
The Forum was also asked to decide if the High Needs Safety Net funding is
extended to cover Early Years settings with a disproportionate number of High
Needs children. The estimated cost backdated to September 2015 is £15,000.
The sub group’s objective is to control the current pressures and to endeavour not
to add to them or create more.
Paragraph 1.5 provided details of discussions on the LA’s approach to Pupil
Premium Payments to Alternative Provision Providers. There needs to be clarity on
the expectation that Pupil Premium is included in the cost of a pupil’s support
package and should not be regarded as an additional payment. This would be
effective from April 2016. In the meantime, Emily Walters, LA Lead Officer for Out
of LA Provision is reviewing cases.
The agenda item included an update on the SEND work programme from Karina
Kulawik (Appendix 1 refers). This included a report on the third element of the SEN
Thematic Review on specialist provision. A banding review of provision has been
worked upon collectively by Special Schools and Specialist Resource Units as
shown in Appendix 3. Planned places have already been agreed. Paragraph 1.7
included a proposed timescale for implementation and Appendix 2 provided details
of cross moderation arrangements. There may be some transitional arrangements
which would require a request for additional funding although figures have yet to be
compiled.
Emily Walters has now taken up her post as LA Lead Officer for Out of LA
Provision and is already looking at contractual arrangements, costings and the
impact of placements. The continuation of this appointment is subject to attaining
good outcomes and savings. Emily will be invited to attend a future Forum meeting.
The recommendation to extend the High Needs (HN) Safety net funding to Early
Years settings would be similar to the arrangements for schools. Under current
10
Somerset Schools Forum
arrangements, funding is based upon the school’s notional SEN allocation, divided
by the number of identified High Needs Pupils (HNP). If this is less than £6k per
high needs pupil then an additional allocation will be made. In addition some
schools may also be eligible for additional HN safety net funding if after
contributing £6k per high needs pupil, the remaining notional SEN funding is less
than £50 per pupil. The £15,000 funding would cover approximately 10 EY
settings.
Summary/outcome
The Forum unanimously agreed to extend the High Needs Safety Net funding
to cover Early Years settings with a disproportionate number of High Needs
children. The estimated cost backdated to September 2015 is £15,000.
Yes: 18
No: 0
Abstentions: 0
10. Technical Working Group Update
Ken Rushton presented a paper which provided feedback from the Technical
Working Group (TWG) meetings held on 15 October and 25 November 2015. It
included discussions on the following:
 TWG terms of reference
 Growth funding
 The Wide Area Network (WAN)
 Academy Balances
 Community Learning Partnerships (CLPs)
 Month 6 Financial Reports
 The outcome of the consultation with schools and academies on proposed
changes for 2016/17
 2016/17 Indicative School Budgets.
The Forum was asked to agree the following:
 The terms of reference for the Schools Forum sub group ‘Technical Working
Group’ (Appendix A refers)
 The growth funding criteria for 2016/17 (Appendix B refers)
 The change in funding for children with English as an Additional Language
(EAL)
 The de-delegation of budgets for primary, middle and secondary maintained
schools, including Trade Union facilities time
The Forum was asked to note:
 Somerset County Council’s plans for ICT and Broadband in Somerset.
 The Indicative school budget shares for 2016/17
The following points were noted in respect of each discussion item:
Terms of Reference
 One small amendment has been made to the first bullet point under paragraph
1.2.
Growth Funding
11
Somerset Schools Forum

Full details of the review of growth funding were provided in Appendix B. The
proposal is to move to the national criteria for growth funding from 2016/17.
Two of the criteria make reference to allocating funding where pupil numbers
exceed a specific number which is denoted as ‘x’. A value would need to be
agreed for x. One of these criterion states funding may be allocated for KS1
classes where overall pupil numbers exceed a multiple of 30 by X or fewer
pupils; this has been queried with the DfE as it would make more sense if it is
more pupils. The revised 2016/17 Operational Guidance published by the
Education Funding Agency may provide further clarity.
Wide Area Network (WAN)
 The fixed annual cost for the WAN infrastructure is met from Combined
Budgets. This should reduce after the contract has ended as a lot of the
preparatory work has already been undertaken (eg digging channels).
 A paper will be brought back to Forum in January 2016, which will include the
implications of planned projects. The Forum was asked to scrutinise this before
the meeting.
Schools Consultation
 Full details of the consultation responses were provided under section 7 of the
paper. Overall, there was a poor response and the LA would have preferred to
have more replies to assist with decision making for the Forum.
 Several schools submitted comments in respect of question 2, on the proposal
to delegate funding for Children with English as an Additional Language (EAL)
via the schools formula, rather than continue with the current arrangements of
devolving funds.
 If the proposal is approved, the change would be effective from April 2016 and
there would be no termly retrospective allocations. As funding will be based on
October 2015 pupil datasets, allocations may not necessarily match the pupils
on roll. Advantages to changing the methodology would be for schools to
receive funding in their budgets at the outset and administration costs would be
reduced.
 The majority vote from the consultation was for EAL funding to be delegated
and the TWG’s recommendation is for 2 years funding. Since the TWG
meeting, a few more responses were submitted and the latest results changed
from a favoured 2 year duration to 3 years. In the circumstances, a view was
sought from Peter Newman (Virtual Headteacher) and Kate Daunton (Service
Manager, Narrowing the Gap). The consensus was in support of 2 years
funding as the total amount of funding available for this element will remain the
same and the per pupil value will be reduced if funding was extended to three
years when compared to two years.
 The majority response to the question on Trade Union facilities time was to
make it available as a traded package, which would be the most cost effective
method for schools to cover legal duties. This proposal stems from DfE
guidance which states that this element should be included in new delegation
under the heading for staff costs. The cost for trade union facilities time is
currently met from Combined Budgets.
2016/17 Indicative School Budgets
12
Somerset Schools Forum

Details of individual school budgets were not circulated to the Forum as the
figures are based on 2015/16 pupil datasets and the DfE is expected to publish
2016/17 data in the next week. This will super cede any previous calculations.
Summary/outcome: the Forum agreed the following:
 The terms of reference for the Schools Forum sub group ‘Technical
Working Group’ (Appendix A refers)
Yes: 15

No: 0
Abstentions: 0
The change in funding for children with English as an Additional
Language (EAL)
Yes: 12

Abstentions: 0
The growth funding criteria for 2016/17 (Appendix B refers)
Yes: 15

No: 0
No: 1
Abstentions: 1
The de-delegation of budgets for primary, middle and secondary
maintained schools, including Trade Union facilities time (maintained
schools only)
Primary vote:
Yes: 4
No: 0
Abstentions: 0
The decision for middle and secondary maintained schools was deferred
until the next Forum meeting on 13 January as there was only one eligible
voting member at the meeting and only two maintained schools submitted
responses to the consultation.
11. Any Other Business
None
12. Future Meetings
2015/16 meeting dates
All meetings are to start at 1.30pm unless otherwise stated at Long Sutton Golf
Club
Wednesday 13 January 2016 – pm only
Tuesday 8 March 2016 – pm only
Tuesday 10 May 2016 – pm only
Tuesday 12 July 2016 – pm only
13. Month 6 Financial Reporting
A report on the Month 6 financial reports submitted by 194 Maintained schools
advising of their half year revised financial position.
13
Somerset Schools Forum
14. Financial Management Scheme
An information paper providing a summary of the consultation process for
proposed changes to Somerset’s Financial Management Scheme for the 2016/17
financial year.
14