THE CUMBRIAN SCHOOLS’ FORUM
Draft MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON
4 December 2012
Committee Room 1, County Offices, Kendal
PRESENT
Louise Anderton (Small Schools)
Anne Attwood (14-19)
Duncan Fairbairn (CCC Conservative Group – Observer)
Nick Fish (Copeland Primary)
Bernard Gummett (Special Schools)
Vivienne Halliday (PVI)
Philip Hyman (Secondary Academy, representing Vanessa Ray)
Steven Holmes (Secondary Academy)
Angela Johnston (Primary Academy, representing Sue Woodburn)
Jo Laker (Allerdale Primary)
John McAuley (RC Diocese)
Alan Mottershead (Secondary Academy)
David Nattrass (Eden Primary)
Nigel Pattinson (Eden Secondary)
Mark Redding (Copeland Secondary, representing Lynette Norris)
Ty Power (Secondary Academy)
Alan Rutter (Teachers’ Professional Associations)
Sue Smith (Nursery Schools)
Joan Stocker (Community Secondary)
Geoff Walker (Allerdale Secondary)
Officers in Attendance:
Caroline Sutton
Helen Hamilton
Amanda Shaw
Nicola Shiels
(Assistant Director Schools and Learning – Children’s Services)
(Children’s Services Finance Manager)
(Children’s Services Finance)
(Children’s Services)
Apologies for Absence
Lisa Balderstone
Chris Brooksbank
Linda Dean
Jackie Franklin
Dianne Irving
Michael Mill
Lynette Norris – represented by Mark Redding
Vanessa Ray – represented by Philip Hyman
Elise Robinson
Sue Woodburn – represented by Angela Johnston
D:\116103563.doc
1
Consideration of the following items would be deferred to the next meeting of the Forum in
January: Item 4 – SEN, Social Deprivation, Access and Inclusion Working Group, draft notes of the
meeting held on 14 November 2012
Item 10 – Cumbria County Council – Consultation on Draft Budget Proposals 2013/14
The date of the next meeting of the Forum had previously been agreed as 8 February
2013. It was noted that this date would need to be brought forward and the meeting held in
January to fit in with arrangements for further consultations relating to high needs provision
and the early years block. The revised date would be agreed at the end of the meeting.
1.
Declarations of Interest
Alan Rutter – Item 9 Teachers Pensions Contributions. During consideration of item
9, David Nattrass would Chair the meeting.
There were no other declarations of interest at this stage.
2.
Minutes of Previous Meeting and Matters Arising
Subject to a change of date on page two, the minutes of the meeting of the Schools
Forum held on 24 October 2012 were agreed as an accurate record.
Matters Arising
i)
Academy Representation – The names of anyone who had indicated an interest
in taking up the remaining Academy vacancy had been forwarded to Allan
Mottershead to co-ordinate the appointment. It was reported that Steven Holmes
from Queen Elizabeth School, Kirkby Lonsdale had been appointed to the final
Academy vacancy.
There were no other matters arising from the minutes.
3.
Working Group Minutes
The SEN, Social Deprivation, Access and Inclusion Working Group had met on 4
November 2012. As noted earlier, consideration of this item would be deferred until
the meeting of the Forum in January 2013.
4.
School Funding Reform
At the meeting of the Schools Forum held on 24 October 2012, feedback from the
consultation on Schools Funding Reform: Arrangements for 2013-14 had been
considered and recommendations from the Forum on each of the proposals had been
agreed. The Forum was reminded that it was a statutory consultee and not the
decision maker, in this process, Cumbria County Council Cabinet was the decision
maker.
D:\116103563.doc
2
A letter from the Corporate Director – Children’s Services to all schools had been
circulated to all members of the Schools Forum and had also been circulated with the
agenda and papers for this meeting. This letter had explained that all the
recommendations from the Schools Forum had been accepted by Cabinet, with the
exception of the lump sum and Cabinet had decided to increase that. The Forum had
recommended a lump sum of £50,000 but Cabinet had agreed that the lump sum
should be £70,000.
In reaching this decision, Cabinet had taken into account that 28% of respondents to
the consultation had recommended £50,000 whilst 72% had preferred a lump sum of
£70,000. The figure of £70,000 would mean that there would be significantly fewer
adversely affected schools with 31 school budgets seeing a reduction of more than
6% rather than 59 schools under the £50,000 lump sum option.
A letter from David Laws MP had also been circulated with the agenda. This letter
had thanked delegates from Cumbria for attending the meeting on 22 October to
discuss school funding and the specific effects on schools in Cumbria. The letter had
also set out the government intention to extend the minimum funding guarantee
(MFG) and also to review the 2013-14 arrangement to consider whether, in the light of
the representations received and the likely impact on some schools, improvements
were needed for 2014-15. The Department of Education were keen to work closely
with Cumbria County Council in conducting this review. This was seen as the result of
successful and positive lobbying by MPs and county councillors, as had been reported
at previous meetings.
It was acknowledged that some difficult decisions had been taken but they had been
taken with the intention of making the best choices within the context of what was
available.
There was general concern from the Forum regarding some of the assertions made in
the letter from David Laws MP. There was a particular view that Cumbria had
managed the formula to allow all schools to receive sufficient funding and, than rather
than moving towards a more consistent basis for funding schools, the current
proposals would have a significant effect on a number of schools in the county. It was
suggested that the Forum should make some further representation to the DfE setting
out this view.
Alternatively, it was suggested that the place to challenge could be through the
working group that would be established to review the arrangements. The proposals
were not just impacting in Cumbria, many other areas were affected in similar ways.
The Forum, however agreed that the Chair should respond to David Laws letter
of 29 October 2012. Whilst the letter would set out the concerns detailed above, it
would also welcome the extension of MFG and the invitation to Cumbria County
Council to be involved in the review of the 2013-14 arrangements.
There was much concern from the Forum regarding the Cabinet decision to agree a
lump sum of £70,000 rather that £50,000 as recommended by the Schools Forum.
There were also further concerns about communications to schools and the Forum
about the decisions that had been taken. The call-in process was explained and the
Lead Member for Schools and Learning reiterated that the decision to have a lump
sum of £70,000 would mean that there would be significantly fewer adversely affected
D:\116103563.doc
3
schools. He also confirmed that the report to Cabinet had stated clearly the
recommendation from the Schools Forum. The Forum was also reminded that it was
a statutory consultee and that Cabinet was the decision maker.
The Forum also felt that Cabinet should be made aware of their concerns and it was
agreed that the Chair should also write to Cabinet.
5.
Maintained Secondary School De-Delegation Options 2013-14
At the meeting of the Schools Forum held on 24 October 2012, recommendations
regarding the delegation or de-delegation of several of the currently centrally retained
budgets were agreed. These recommendations were based on voting by phase.
Maintained secondary school representatives voted for the de-delegation of
insurance, licences and subscriptions and library services.
Following this decision, the Cabinet expressed some concern about the additional
financial and risk burden that the necessary procurement of the above services could
mean for maintained secondary schools. Cabinet requested that some further
analysis of the impact of the decision be undertaken and that the maintained
secondary school representatives on the Schools Forum be asked to reconsider their
decision taking account of the analysis.
Details of the analysis that had been undertaken were set out in the report: Insurance
The centrally retained Insurance budget provided schools with insurance cover for the
main classes of insurance - property, business interruption, liability and money.
In addition to this, there were other types of insurance that schools may need to
purchase (motor insurance, school journey insurance, supply teacher insurance)
which remain the school’s responsibility.
A Cumbrian maintained secondary school with no particular risk premium was
selected. An insurance quotation for 2012/13 based on current information, and with
the same level of cover (covering the main classes of property, business interruption,
liability and money) as is currently obtained for the school through Cumbria County
Council, was obtained from Zurich Ltd. This was then compared to the budget the
school would receive should the Council’s centrally retained Insurance budget be
delegated to secondary schools. The result was that this particular school would need
to find the additional £40,322 from within its budget in order to purchase insurance
cover from the open market.
Library Services
Under the current school funding formula, library services were already delegated to
secondary schools. The majority of these secondary schools then bought library
services in from the Council from a menu of options.
Maintained secondary school representatives on the Schools Forum voted for Library
Services to remain delegated for secondary schools.
Licenses and Subscriptions
The centrally retained licenses/ subscriptions budget covered four different types of
licence:
D:\116103563.doc
4




Educational Recording Agency (required in order to use recordings of broadcasts
as teaching resources)
Phonographic Performance Limited (required for the non-curricular use of
copyrighted music in schools)
PRS for Music (also required for the non-curricular use of copyrighted music in
schools)
Copyright Licensing Agency (required to be able to copy, share and use
published information)
These were purchased by the Council annually in one block purchase for all schools.
All four licences were charged based on a tariff multiplied by pupil numbers.
A Cumbrian maintained secondary school was selected and the cost of the school
directly purchasing the four licenses listed above for the 2012/13 financial year was
calculated. This was then compared to the budget the school would receive should
the Council’s centrally retained licenses/subscriptions budget be delegated to
secondary schools.
Should maintained secondary schools opt for the
licenses/subscriptions budget to be delegated, all maintained secondary schools
would be responsible for directly purchasing the four required licenses. This particular
school would need to find the additional £771 from within its budget in order to
purchase the licenses directly.
Schools would need to ensure they have purchased all required licenses and had not
left themselves at risk of infringing regulations.
The Local Authority received discounts from both the Educational Recording Agency
and Copyright Licensing Agency. Such discounts were not available when schools
directly purchase licenses. Therefore, delegating the licensing/subscriptions budget to
individual schools would result in increased costs and reduced value for money for
individual schools.
It was reported that DfE had indicated that charges relating to the Copyright Licensing
Agency may be top-sliced from the Dedicated Schools Grant. This would both reduce
the licenses/subscriptions budget available for delegation and reduce the cost of direct
purchase by the school.
Taking account of the further analysis detailed above, maintained secondary school
representatives on the Schools Forum reconsidered the recommendations agreed at
the previous meeting: Insurances
Confirm recommendation from 24/10/12
De-delegate
Abstention
0
4
1
The Schools Forum recommended that for the secondary sector insurance
should be de-delegated to be managed through the local authority.
D:\116103563.doc
5
Licenses and Subscriptions
Confirm recommendation from 24/10/12
De-delegate
Abstention
0
4
1
The Schools Forum recommended that for the secondary sector licenses and
subscriptions should be de-delegated to be managed through the local
authority.
Library Services
Confirm recommendation from 24/10/12
De-delegate
Abstention
3
0
2
The Schools Forum recommended that for the secondary sector library services
should be delegated as part of school budgets, confirming the recommendation
agreed on 24 October 2012.
It was noted that these decisions had not been taken lightly and maintained secondary
school representatives on the Schools Forum stressed that the presentation of
additional information about the potential effect of the previous decisions had resulted
in the decision to change two of the recommendations previously agreed.
6.
Excess Surplus Balances
A report setting out the action that had been taken to address school surplus balances
as at 31 March 2012 in accordance with the policy agreed in March 2012 was
presented. The Forum was asked to agree how the balance of £68,398 that had been
clawed back from schools as a result of the Control of Surplus Balances Policy should
be used.
Following the closure of the local authority accounts the excess surplus balances for
schools had been determined. In accordance with the policy, 44 schools had been
identified as having excess surplus balances over the allowable 8% for nursery
primary and special schools and 5% for secondary schools as at 31 March 2012.
These schools had been informed that they had an excess surplus balance and had
been asked to justify the balance and provide supporting evidence by the agreed
deadline of 31 May 2012. The returns and supporting evidence were then scrutinised
to determine whether, in line with the agreed policy, the reasons give were justifiable.
A number of checks were also carried out to ensure that the reasons given were
reflected in the budget.
On completion of the exercise a reports was prepared for the AD Schools and
Learning. Following a small number of appeals, the outcome of the review was as
follows: 

4 schools approved
37 schools approved but with an automatic clawback of any excess surplus
balance over the threshold in 2013-14 if they close 2012-13 with an excess

3 schools partial clawback approved totalling £68,398
D:\116103563.doc
6
The Schools Forum was asked to recommend how the balance of £68,398 should be
used. Suggestions were: 


Roll back into DSG for 2013-14 and allocated to schools via S251
Support for schools in financial difficulty
Schools Contingency Fund
In the previous year, the sum clawed back had been rolled forward but it was noted
that the sum of £68,398 was larger than previously. The Forum was also advised that
the decision agreed would be taken forward and acted upon.
Each of the suggestions set out above were discussed before a vote was taken.
Votes were cast as follows: Roll back into DSG for 2013-14
Schools in financial difficulty
Schools Contingency Fund
13
2
1
Based on the above, the Schools Forum recommended that the local authority
roll the excess surplus balance clawback from individual schools totalling
£68,398 back into the DSG for 2013-14.
7.
Additional Funding Requirements
The Schools Forum considered a report that set out two additional funding
requirements for schools for 2012/13. The Forum was asked to approve the
additional funding requirements and that these should be funded from the Dedicated
Schools Grant reserve.
The current school funding formula included a factor for Newly Qualified Teachers
(NQT). In the 2012/13 School Budget, schools received £1574 per term in respect of
each NQT they employed (pro-rated accordingly if the NQT works part time hours).
This funding was calculated retrospectively and related to NQTs employed for the
period September 2011 to August 2012.
The new school funding arrangements, which will come into effect from 1 April 2013,
do not permit the use of a factor for NQTs in the school funding formula. As a result
schools will not receive any specific funding for their NQTs for the period September
2012 to August 2013.
As many schools have employed NQTs from September 2012, without the knowledge
that specific NQT funding would no longer be available, it was proposed to fund
schools in respect of any NQTs they have employed for the period September 2012 to
March 2013 (to the start of the new financial year from 1 April 2013, when the new
school funding arrangements come into place). The total value of this was estimated
at £427,735.
Walney School was currently undergoing a significant capital development
programme. The £7.2m budget for the programme was fully committed.
The programme and associated budget allowed for the levelling and re-seeding of the
playing fields where the site compound has been situated. The wet weather during
the summer (2012) has meant that the ground was too wet to undertake the levelling
D:\116103563.doc
7
and re-seeding work. It was anticipated that the earliest the contractors could get onto
the field to undertake the re-seeding work would be spring 2013. Following this work,
the field will need to be left for one year to allow the new grass to grow meaning that
the school playing field would not be available for sports activities and teaching. If the
field could be turfed in spring 2013, then it was likely that school playing field could be
available for use in summer/autumn 2013 giving the school back almost an academic
year of their sports curriculum. The cost of turfing the field would be £16,473.30.
The Schools Forum approved the additional funding requirements: 
Approximately £427,735 to fund schools in respect of Newly Qualified
Teachers for the period September 2012 to March 2013

£16,473 to fund Walney School for the turfing of the school playing field
These would be funded from the Dedicated Schools Grant reserve.
8.
Teachers Pensions Contributions
David Nattrass took over chairing of the meeting during consideration of this item.
A report setting out the findings of Internal Audit following a review of pension
contributions by schools to the Teachers’ Pensions Agency (TPA) in 2011/12 was
presented. The review had identified potential savings that could arise for schools by
strict application of the TPA criteria for applying pensionable pay for teachers carrying
out extra duties. The Schools Forum was asked to consider the issues raised in the
report and recommend whether schools be informed of the savings that can be made
through adopting the following definition: 
Extra hours worked on an ad-hoc basis is non-pensionable (overtime)

Extra hours worked on a regular basis is pensionable (additional hours)
Schools pay employer pension contributions in respect of teachers within their school
who are members of the Teachers’ Pension Scheme. Within a school, teachers can
work extra hours. These can be classified as either ‘overtime’ (the pay for which is
non-pensionable) or ‘additional hours’ (the pay for which is pensionable).
In accordance with the Council’s Internal Audit Plan (2012/13), an audit of pension
contributions to the Teachers’ Pension Scheme (TPS) was carried out for the 31
schools that used external payroll providers. As part of the review, an analysis of
extra hours worked by teachers in 2011/12 was undertaken to identify whether they
had been classified as additional hours (pensionable) or overtime (non-pensionable).
The analysis only included non-chequebook schools as insufficient data is held by the
Council for schools with their own bank account and accounting system. The analysis
showed that in nearly all cases, extra hours were treated as additional hours
(pensionable) rather than as overtime (non-pensionable).
The Teachers’ Pension Agency was asked to clarify whether there were any
regulations concerning extra hours worked by teachers. The response was as
follows: 
For full time teachers, the only circumstances in which these staff would be
eligible for additional hours to count would be if they were classed as out of
school learning activities. It was the responsibility of each employer to determine
whether a payment made in respect of out of school learning activities fell under
D:\116103563.doc
8

the Teachers’ Pay and Conditions Document. If it did, any payment for out of
school learning activities should be treated as a pensionable allowance.
Part time and supply teachers can receive pensionable payment (additional
hours) but it must not exceed their pensionable pay if they worked full time.
This guidance and further clarification from the Teachers’ Pension Agency indicated
that it was very much at the discretion of the school as to whether extra hours worked
by teachers were classified as ‘additional hours’ (pensionable) or ‘overtime’ (nonpensionable).
Some other local authorities provided guidance that could be summarised as follows: 
Extra hours worked on an ad-hoc basis is non-pensionable (overtime)

Extra hours worked on a regular basis is pensionable (additional Hours)
The review of all payments of additional hours by month indicated that they varied
significantly by amount and frequency, suggesting that ad hoc payments were a
significant proportion of the total. If the definitions of overtime and additional hours
were applied to schools in Cumbria a significant proportion of the costs could be
allocated as overtime (non-pensionable). Schools would not need to pay employer
contributions where extra hours were classed as overtime and this could represent a
significant saving for schools. Based on the 2011/12 total, Internal Audit had
calculated that the total maximum potential savings for schools in Cumbria would be
£891k.
Any savings would be dependent on the individual contracts that schools had agreed
with their teachers. It was anticipated that such contracts would define the hours a
teacher was required to work per week with any ad-hoc hours, additional to this, being
paid as overtime (non-pensionable). There may be a requirement for contracts of
employment to be amended to ensure there was no action taken by affected teachers
and this may require a period of notice to be given to amend these contracts.
Consideration of the impact on staff would also need to be taken into account. The
change in treatment of some additional hours worked may mean savings for schools
in term of employer pension contributions, but this would impact on the pension
benefits of staff. Furthermore, re-classification of hours worked could also impact on
staff costs but this would depend on the individual pay policies held by schools, for
example whether overtime is paid at a different rate to ‘additional hours’.
In discussing the issues raised in the report there was a view that teachers were
generally paid additional hours – planned PPA, covering for illness etc.
The chair (Alan Rutter) confirmed that he had contacted the NUT regional office with
regard to the issues set out. The School Teachers Pay and Conditions document did
not include anything in relation to overtime and only referred to additional hours. As
such, looking to introduce overtime was seen to be a change in national pay and
conditions and would need to be subject to consultation. There could also be issues
with discrimination. This was not a decision for the Schools Forum.
The Forum were reminded the view from Internal Audit was that there was a potential
for savings to schools if they adopted a different approach and Schools Forum were
being asked to advise whether this information should be shared with schools.
The Schools Forum recommended that no further action should be taken.
D:\116103563.doc
9
9.
Cumbria County Council – Consultation on Draft Budget Proposals 2013-14
As noted earlier, consideration of this item would be deferred until the meeting of the
Forum in January 2013.
10. Date of Next Meeting
The next meeting of the Schools Forum was scheduled for Friday, 8 February 2013. It
was however now necessary for the Forum to meet during the week commencing 14
January 2013 ahead of consultations on early years and high needs. It was reported
that advice had been received to suggest that consultation regarding the high needs
block was not now necessary. There would need to be consultation relating to early
years funding because of potential impact on the PVI sector.
It was therefore agreed that the next meeting of the Schools Forum would be
held on Wednesday 16 January 2013. The meeting would begin at 9.30am,
venue to be advised.
11. Any Other Business
i) CCC Consultation on Draft Budget Proposals 2013-14 – It was confirmed that the
timing of this consultation would allow the Schools Forum to discuss this at the
next meeting in January.
ii) Schools Forum – For future decisions the Forum asked that it be made very clear
what the Forum was being asked to decide, who would be affected by decisions
taken etc.
There were no other items of business.
SL/SAA/NJS
January 2012
D:\116103563.doc
10