Part 1
ITEM NO.
___________________________________________________________________
JOINT REPORT OF THE STRATEGIC DIRECTOR FOR CHILDREN’S SERVICES
AND THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
___________________________________________________________________
TO SCHOOLS FORUM ON 16 SEPTEMBER 2015
___________________________________________________________________
TITLE: Schools funding: de-delegation for services provided by the authority
___________________________________________________________________
CONCLUSION
Each year, Schools forum makes decisions on behalf of all primary and secondary
schools separately in relation to the de-delegation of specified central services and
budgets. This decision does not impact on special schools and academies. Dedelegation allows the council to manage services collectively on behalf of schools.
Following an initial consultation with schools in 2013/14, and taking into account any
subsequent schools views, Schools Forum has, to date, determined to de-delegate
all the specified service areas.
RECOMMENDATION:
Schools forum is asked to consider the details in the report and make a decision on
the de-delegation of funding for the detailed central services for 2016/17.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This paper identifies the impact of schools funding reforms on specific services
where the funding was de-delegated in 2013/14 following the consultation responses
from schools. Schools Forum is empowered to determine which services should be
de-delegated in 2016/17.
___________________________________________________________________
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS:
DfE schools funding reform guidance documents
s251 Budget Statement 2015/16
___________________________________________________________________
SOURCE OF FUNDING: DSG dedicated schools grant
___________________________________________________________________
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Supplied by Chris Hesketh, strategic finance manager
1
___________________________________________________________________
OTHER DIRECTORATES CONSULTED: None
___________________________________________________________________
CONTACT OFFICERS: Chris Hesketh Tel No: 0161 793 2668
Debbie Fulton Tel No: 0161 778 0486
WARD(S) TO WHICH REPORT RELATE(S): All
___________________________________________________________________
REPORT DETAIL
1.
Introduction
1.1
In April 2013, the government introduced the simplification of the funding
formula allowed for schools. The funding reform had significant implications
for schools budgets, but robust protection arrangements have ensured that
schools do not lose or gain significantly in cash terms. Continuance of those
arrangements is subject to any decisions the government might make in the
2015 comprehensive spending review. There is no protection in place for
central budgets.
1.2
Within the overall fairer funding arrangements, local authorities are required to
delegate, to maintained schools and academies, budgets for some services
that were previously managed and provided centrally. That is, the funding will
be in both the maintained schools’ and academies’ budgets up front.
1.3
Maintained primary and secondary schools can then choose to “de-delegate”
certain, specified budgets, ie to return the budget to the council. Schools
Forum is empowered to make the decision on behalf of schools.
1.4
De-delegation does not apply to special schools. Any elements of funding for
the service areas involved will be included as part of any top up funding and
special schools will be able to buy into any SLA agreements in place.
1.5
Academies are not permitted to de-delegate funding but they can buy into
SLAs where offered by the council.
2.
Delegation/de-delegation of centralised services
2.1
The table at Appendix A shows the categories of expenditure within the DSG
that were de-delegated in 2015/16. The amounts indicated are those figures
currently included within the s251 budget statement for 2015/16 and they
include both the direct service costs and the related overheads. Should
Schools Forum agree to the de-delegation proposals, these will be the figures
included in the S251 budget statement 2016/17.
2.2
The government directs that the items in Appendix A have to be delegated to
schools on a rate per [type of] pupil. This rate has been calculated for each
2
item on a base appropriate for the type of expenditure. So, for instance, the
behaviour support rate per pupil is based on prior attainment pupil data.
2.3
De-delegation allows the council to manage services collectively on behalf of
schools. The potential impact of not de-delegating each item is outlined in the
appendix. The decision on each of the de-delegated items needs to be made
separately for both sectors. If the primary sector decides to de-delegate a
service but the secondary sector does not, then the council may not be able to
continue providing a service on that basis.
2.4
The results of the schools funding consultation in 2013/14 indicated that, for
those schools who responded, the preferred option was for the funding for all
the specified service areas to be de-delegated. Since that time, Schools
Forum has, each year, determined to continue to de-delegate all the items.
Approval is sought to continue on the same basis in 2016/17.
3
Conclusions
3.1
Each year, Schools forum makes decisions on behalf of all primary and
secondary schools separately in relation to the de-delegation of specified
central services and budgets. This decision does not impact on special
schools and academies. De-delegation allows the council to manage services
collectively on behalf of schools.
3.3
Following an initial consultation with schools in 2013/14, and taking into
account any subsequent schools views, Schools Forum has, to date,
determined to de-delegate all the specified service areas.
4
Recommendations
4.1
Schools forum is asked to consider the details in the report and make a
decision on the de-delegation of the detailed central services for 2016/17.
3
Appendix A
Amount as
per
Amount
Amount
S251budget allocated on allocated on
statement
a per pupil
a per pupil
2015/16
basis
basis
£
Item
Allocation
Contingencies (including
previous amounts for
schools in financial
difficulties)
Rate per pupil
Free school meals
eligibility
Rate per FSM pupils
Staff costs, supply cover
Rate per pupil
Support for minority ethnic
pupils and underachieving
groups (EMTAS)
Rate per pupil using
english as an additional
language (EAL)
Behaviour support
services
Rate per pupil using prior
attainment
£
£
Primary
Sector
Secondary
Sector
135,940
6.63
60,491
5.46
678,293
408,277
60,384
Impact if not de-delegated
Schools contingency allows for some approved in year adjustments to budgets. If the funding was not de1.80 delegated then there would be no provision for opening/closing schools, amalgamating schools, closing schools
deficits and unforeseen expenditure which it would be unreasonable to expect governing bodies to meet from
their budget share.
This covers the assessment of pupils' entitlement to free school meals. This is currently undertaken by staff in
7.26 the Gateway centres. Schools would have to arrange for the assessments to be undertaken either by the
school or externally commissioned if possible.
21.97
This funds maternity cover for teaching staff and higher level teaching assistants. It covers the cost of staff
undertaking magisterial duties and territorial army assignments. If this was not de-delegatd schools would need
to make contingency arrangements to fund this type of expenditure or source external insurance cover. It also
funds facilities time for unions representing school staff. If this was not managed collectively, there would be two
36.10
options. (a) Current arrangements could continue but the schools who employed union representatives would
have to fund the backfill to cover union activities. The council would not be able to continue to employ union
representatives not attached to schools. (b) All schools would need to put in place local representation
arrangements.
157.61
EMTAS helps young people from ethnic minorities, including gypsy roma travellers, to maximise their potential
in the education system. If this funding was not de-delegated, schools would have to meet the needs of these
466.09 pupils using existing staff expertise or buy in advice and support if available. If schools did not de-delegate there
would not be any expertise retained in the council to advise on issues affecting these children. The changing
demographics of Salford mean that the work of this team continues to increase.
3.78
This budget funds specialist support to help children and young people with behavioural, emotional and social
difficulties to maximise their potential in the education system. The service links to a significantly developed
provision made through resource provided to Alderbrook, The LEAF, The KS3 &4 PRU's and New Park High
School, providing a continuum of response to behavioural issues in schools as part of a wider response to the
increasing prevalance of challenge in this area from across all ages and phases of education. If this funding is
now a very small element, one post in what is an ongoing commitment from the High Needs Block, the funding
25.74
covers the post required at a senior level to manage the provision, if it was not de-delegated there would not be
any expertise retained centrally to manage the service which advises on issues affecting these children and
liaise with other elements of the learning support service. Over the past year the LA in conjunction with schools
has developed a 10 strand strategy regarding Behaviour Support for Schools which will meet the needs of these
pupils using a range of staff resources tailored to individual schools needs. The de-delegated funding support
for this service of £60k is complemented by a significant contribution from the high needs block of c.£350k.
4