The Business Advisor (Schools) will present Document KD (and Appendices 1-5), which summarises the decisions and recommendations that the Schools Forum is asked to make in setting the allocation of the DSG and final formula funding arrangements for the 2019/10 financial year. The Forum will be asked to take decisions / make recommendations on the items listed under the following main headings:
· Schools Block Centrally Managed Funds
· Early Years Block Centrally Managed Funds
· The Central Schools Services Block
· The High Needs Block
· The Allocation & Retention of forecasted Balances Brought Forward
· Early Years Single Funding Formula and Pro-Forma
· Primary & Secondary Formula Funding and Pro-Forma
Recommended –
The Forum is asked to make final recommendations and decisions on the allocation of the 2019/20 DSG and the one off monies available.
(Andrew Redding – 01274 432678)
Minutes:
The Business Advisor (Schools) presented Document KD (and Appendices 1-5), which summarised the decisions and recommendations that the Schools Forum was asked to make in setting the allocation of the DSG and final formula funding arrangements for the 2019/10 financial year. The Forum was requested to take decisions / make recommendations on the items listed under the following main headings:
· Schools Block Centrally Managed Funds
· Early Years Block Centrally Managed Funds
· The Central Schools Services Block
· The High Needs Block
· The Allocation & Retention of forecasted Balances Brought Forward
· Early Years Single Funding Formula and Pro-Forma
· Primary & Secondary Formula Funding and Pro-Forma
Resolved –
1. Schools Block Centrally Managed Funds 2019/20
Schools Block De-Delegated Funds
Document KB Appendices 1 – 3.
1.1 Schools Members representing maintained primary & secondary schools agreed the values of de-delegated funds on a phase-specific basis with contributions to be taken from 2019/20 formula funding allocations as per Document KB and its appendices.
a) School Re-Organisation Costs (Safeguarded Salaries) (Primary & Secondary): agreed to continue de-delegation from both the primary and secondary phases for the actual cost of continuing safeguarded salaries in maintained primary and secondary schools.
b) School Re-Organisation Costs (Sponsored conversions budget deficits) (Primary only): agreed to de-delegate from the primary phase at the 2018/19 per pupil value. The Schools Forum will be provided with monitoring reports where this provision is used. A report will be provided to the March 2019 meeting on the allocation of the current fund / brought forward balance in support of the primary schools that have converted in autumn 2018 with deficit balances.
c) Exceptional Costs & Schools in Financial Difficulty (Primary only): agreed to continue de-delegation from the primary phase at the 2018/19 per pupil value. Members also agreed and noted that there is no ‘positive’ separate additional provision made for the conclusion of the Forum’s discussions on financial support for Falling Rolls / Under-Subscription. Where the Forum agrees that additional financial support should be provided to eligible maintained primary schools from de-delegated funds in 2019/20, this will need to be financed either from brought forward balances within primary phase de-delegated funds or via a retrospective contribution taken through de-delegation from primary maintained school allocations in 2020/21.
d) Costs of FSM Eligibility Assessments (Primary & Secondary): agreed to continue de-delegation from both the primary and secondary phases at the 2018/19 per FSM values, with contributions taken using FSM Ever 6 data.
e) Fisher Family Trust (Primary only): agreed to continue de-delegation from the primary phase, recovering the cash value to match the actual cost. The secondary phase and all primary academies will be invited to subscribe through the Local Authority (paying for this from their delegated budgets via invoice). Please note that the Schools Members representing maintained primary schools decided on 17 October 2018 to continue de-delegation in 2019/20 for the purposes of subscribing to FFT. As such, this decision is repeated here only for reference and completeness.
f) Trade Union Facilities Time – Negotiator Time (Primary & Secondary): agreed to continue de-delegation from primary and secondary phases at the 2018/19 per pupil values.
g) Trade Union Facilities Time – Health and Safety Time (Primary & Secondary): agreed to continue de-delegation from primary and secondary phases at the 2018/19 per pupil values.
h) School Maternity / Paternity ‘insurance’ fund (Primary only): agreed to continue de-delegation from the primary phase at a value forecasted to afford the scheme for a full year. The £app cost is shown in Document KB Appendix 2 (£27.41 per pupil). The reduction from £43.28 in 2018/19 to £27.41 per pupil includes the release, on a one off basis, of £0.25m of balance within this fund brought forward.
i) School Staff Public Duties and Suspensions Fund (Primary only): agreed to continue de-delegation from the primary phase on the same £app basis as 2018/19.
1.2 Schools Members representing maintained primary & secondary schools agreed the principles behind the management of the Schools Block de-delegated funds listed in paragraph 1.1:
1.3 The Schools Forum noted that a net surplus balance of de-delegated funds of £0.677m is forecasted to be brought forward from 2018/19. As such, the Schools Forum is not asked to write off from the 2019/20 Schools Budget any deficit associated with de-delegated funds.
Schools Block Growth Fund
Document KB Appendix 1 (full list of DSG centrally managed funds) and Document KD Appendix 1 (list of allocations from the Growth Fund to existing expanding schools and academies).
All Schools and Academies Forum Members by consensus agreed:
1.4 The allocations from the Schools Block Growth Fund to existing expansions and bulge classes as listed in Document KD Appendix 1. Members noted:
· There are 26 allocations with a total value of £0.725m. 18 Primary schools / academies; 3 all through academies; 5 Secondary academies.
· The allocations to the all through academies (for secondary expansions) and the allocations to the secondary academies simply complete the growth funding already agreed for the full 2018/19 academic year. Appendix 1 does not list any further allocations to the secondary phase for the 2019/20 academic year for the continuation of expansions that begun at either September 2017 or September 2018. Allocations for both continuing and new expansions in the 2019/20 academic year will be funded from the provision in paragraph 1.5 below and will be confirmed and presented to the Schools Forum during autumn 2019.
· The allocation to Beckfoot Upper Heaton in 2019/20, from the £1.829m designated brought forward balance, will be presented to the Schools Forum during 2019 following the request made at the 5 December meeting. The value of budget provision forecasted to be required to meet the final 2 years of the agreed model, in 2020/21 and 2021/22, has reduced by £0.129m to £1.200m. This is because the financial model adjusts as pupil numbers increase and the academy’s intake is strong. The £0.129m has been added to the unallocated element of the ring-fenced Growth Fund balance. These values, and this transfer of £0.129m, can be seen in Document KA.
1.5 A further planned budget of £0.845m for the Schools Block Growth Fund for additional / new allocations during 2019. This planned budget is split £0.20m Primary and £0.645m Secondary. All new in year allocations from the Growth Fund will be agreed by the Schools Forum prior to confirmation with the receiving school or academy. Growth Fund allocations will continue as a standing Forum agenda item to enable this. Members noted:
· £0.200m will enable c. 4 additional forms of entry or bulge classes in the primary phase at September 2019 (for the period September 2019 to March 2020). This budget is reduced on the £0.314m held within the Schools Block in 2018/19.
· £0.645m will fund c. 12 additional forms of entry or bulge classes in the secondary phase at September 2019 (for the period September 2019 to March 2020). This budget is slightly reduced on the £0.70m held within the Schools Block in 2018/19.
1.6 The criteria for the allocation of the Schools Block Growth Fund in 2019/20 as set out in the autumn 2018 consultation document, which are the criteria used in 2018/19.
Schools Block Falling Rolls Fund
Document KB Appendix 1 (full list of DSG centrally managed funds) and Document KD Appendix 2 (Falling Rolls Fund Criteria).
All Schools and Academies Forum Members by consensus agreed:
1.7 The establishment of a Falling Rolls Fund for the primary phase. Members agreed:
· To establish the Falling Rolls Fund on the basis set out in Document KD Appendix 2, which is the same as presented in the autumn 2018 consultation.
· To set a planned budget of £0.25m in 2019/20. This is partially funded from the reduction in value of the Growth Fund. Indicatively, £0.25m will cover approximately 4-5 allocations.
· As explained in Document KD Appendix 2, that actual proposed allocations from the Falling Rolls Fund in 2019/20 will be presented to the Schools Forum in spring 2020.
2. Early Years Block Centrally Managed Funds 2019/20
Document KB Appendix 1 (full list of DSG centrally managed funds) and Document KD Appendix 3 (Early Years SEND Inclusion Fund).
All Forum Members by consensus agreed:
2.1 The retention of funds for central management within the Early Years Block, as listed in Document KB Appendix 1:
a) £0.127m for access for maintained nursery schools to Schools Block de-delegated funds (Trade Union Facilities Time, Maternity / Paternity Insurance Scheme, Staff Public Duties and Suspensions). A breakdown of the £0.127m by fund is given in Document KB Appendix 2. These centrally retained funds count within the 5% that the Authority is permitted to centrally retain within the Early Years Block 3&4 year old funds.
b) £0.036m for the Early Years Block’s contribution to the DfE Copyright Licences charge.
c) £1.500m in total for the estimated cost of allocations to early years providers from the Early Years SEND Inclusion Fund. This budget is split £0.30m for 2 year olds and £1.20m for 3&4 year olds. The criteria to be used for the allocation of this SEND Inclusion Fund are set out in Document KD Appendix 3. The criteria are the same as were consulted on in autumn 2018. Although this budget is shown here as centrally retained, the full value of £1.50m is intended for allocation to providers. As such, this budget counts within the pass-through of funds for the purposes of measuring our position against the DfE’s 95% Early Years Block pass-through restriction. A budget of £1.50m represents an increase of £0.70m on the planned budget set for 2018/19.
d) £0.325m for the Early Years Block’s contribution to the cost of early years high needs support services, including portage and the pre-5 service. £0.30m of this fund is existing cost that has been transferred from the High Needs Block from April 2019, as one of the cross-block actions discussed with the Schools Forum over autumn 2018 in support of managing High Needs Block cost pressures. £0.025m is a new budget from April 2019 for the Authority to use to enable capacity to deliver the new holistic Early Years SEND Inclusion Fund. The £0.325m counts within the 5% that the Authority is permitted to retain within the Early Years Block 3&4 year old funds.
2.2 Forum Members noted that:
· The Early Years Pupil Premium and Disability Access Funds shown in Document KB Appendix 1 are funds that are allocated to providers following the conditions set out by the DfE and do not count within the 5% retention restriction.
· The sum of the centrally retained budgets within the Early Years Block that counts within the 5% restriction is £0.488m. As shown in the Early Years Pro-Forma (Document KC Appendix 5) we calculate that 101% of the 3&4 Year Old hourly-rate allocation (excluding use of brought forward balances) will be passed-through to providers in 2019/20. This is greater than 100% due to the benefit that comes into our Early Years Block spending position as a result of the difference in profile of DSG-level funded hours (on January censuses) and setting-level funded hours (on termly censuses).
· It is not expected that Early Years Block centrally managed funds held in 2018/19 will hold a deficit balance at the end of the financial year. As such, the Schools Forum is not asked to write off from the 2019/20 Schools Budget any deficit associated with an Early Years Block fund.
3. The Central Schools Services Block 2019/20
Document KB Appendix 1 (full list of DSG centrally managed funds).
All Forum Members by consensus agreed:
3.1 The allocation of the Central Schools Services Block (CSSB) as set out in Document KB Appendix 1:
a) Schools Forum Running Costs: agreed to continue at the 2018/19 value of £10,000.
b) School Admissions: agreed to continue at the 2018/19 value of £580,100.
c) DfE Copyright Licences: a value of £0.368m. The cost of copyright licences for primary and secondary schools and academies is met from the Central Schools Services Block. This is not a matter for decision for the Schools Forum as the DfE negotiates the price and top-slices our DSG. The costs for early years and high needs providers are charged within our model to the respective blocks. The DfE confirmed 2019/20 costs on 21 December 2018; increased by 3.3% on 2018/19.
d) Education Services Grant Statutory Duties: agreed to continue to passport to the Local Authority’s budget the 2018/19 value of £1.331m. This is the former ESG Centrally Retained Duties Grant, transferred into the DSG at April 2017, allocated in support of the statutory duties delivered by the Local Authority on behalf of all state funded schools and academies. A list of statutory activities was provided in December 2018 for the Forum’s reference.
e) Transfer of services previously funded from the High Needs Block: agreed that the Travellers Children budget of £0.389m is permanently transferred to the Central Schools Services Block. The transfer of High Needs Block activities to the CSSB was begun in 2018/19 using the headroom that currently exists within the CSSB as a result of gain under National Funding Formula but also because the DfE continues to fully fund historic commitments at £0.44m (although our spending on these has ceased).
3.2 The Schools Forum noted and agreed that:
· The allocation of the CSSB is put forward to maximise the amount of headroom available to transfer from the CSSB to the High Needs Block in 2019/20 in support of High Needs Block cost pressures. This was one of the cross block actions discussed with the Schools Forum during autumn 2018. A total value of £0.249m of CSSB income is transferred from the CSSB to the High Needs Block. The value of headroom is maximised by retaining the budgets in the CSSB cash flat on 2018/19, with the exception of copyright licences where the charge levied by the DfE has increased by 3.3%. The value of headroom going forward will be affected where the DfE begins to reduce its funding of ‘historic commitments’ within its CSSB National Funding Formula, which we now expect from April 2020.
· It is not expected that any CSSB fund held in 2018/19 will hold a deficit balance at the end of the financial year. As such, the Schools Forum is not asked to write off from the 2019/20 Schools Budget any deficit associated with a CSSB fund.
4. The High Needs Block 2019/20
Document JZ (DSG summary, which shows the initial planned High Needs Block budget) and Document KD Appendix 4 (list of specialist places). Also refer to the matters arising outline plan for the development of additional places during 2019. Planned budget-based allocations for high needs providers are presented in Document KC Appendix 3. An updated view of the High Needs Block 3 year trajectory is presented in Document KD Appendix 6.
All Forum Members by consensus agreed:
4.1 To retain for 2019/20 the existing structure of Bradford’s High Needs Block Place-Plus Funding Model, as consulted on in autumn 2018, in summary on the following basis:
a) The values of funding allocated in 2019/20 by our Pupil-Led Need top-up Ranges Model will be the same as allocated in 2018/19 i.e. will be cash flat. The on-going review of special school funding may alter the ranges model used for special schools during 2019/20. We will keep the Schools Forum informed of this work. We have identified the benefit that holistic review of our top-up funding arrangements will have, in particular in insuring that our top-up funding continues to be based on clear descriptors of need, continues to follow our continuum of provision as this develops, and is allocated on accurate moderation of pupil-need. We expect to continue to develop and amend our Place-Plus system incrementally over time - we continue to hold the view that, given the extent of discussion that is taking place about the District’s SEND model, and the changes that have already taken place and may come from these discussions, continuity generally in funding in 2019/20 will be welcomed, especially in mainstream settings. Any further change in the funding model should be managed incrementally following holistic re-assessment.
b) For the purposes of the DSG Conditions of Grant, with the values allocated by our Ranges Model in 2019/20 remaining cash flat on 2018/19, the Minimum Funding Guarantee for special schools and special school academies is set at 0%.
c) We will continue to use our existing methodology for the definition of notional SEND budgets for mainstream primary and secondary schools and academies within the Schools Block funding formulae.
d) We will continue to protect SEND Floor allocations for primary and secondary schools and academies at 2017/18 levels. We have identified that we need to find a better way of calculating additional mainstream SEND funding support now that we have moved to National Funding Formula. So review is planned by April 2020 and this will be discussed with the Schools Forum. This review most likely may not result in a change in the total value of support overall that will continue to be funded, but may result in this support becoming more concentrated. However, we wish to ensure continuity in 2019/20.
e) We expect to consolidate and further develop the changes that were made in 2018/19 in the funding of alternative provisions (from September 2018 we ceased the High Needs Block’s funding of the top up element for non-EHCP non-permanent exclusion students placed in our PRUs). We expect to develop and to clarify the principles of this, and funding responsibilities between the Local Authority and schools, as we continue to re-shape our alternative provisions going forward. We will continue to work with the Secondary BACs. We will also work with the primary phase in the development of a local agreement regarding funding adjustments resulting from permanent exclusions.
4.2 That the initial High Needs Block planned budget for 2019/20 includes financial provision for the specialist places in Bradford-located settings that are presented in Document KD Appendix 4. This repeats the information presented on 5 December 2018 but also now incorporates the outline additional places plan presented under matters arising. The Schools Forum agreed that the initial High Needs Block planned budget includes further financial provision, £4.529m, to enable the development of 354 new places during 2019 as set out in the outline plan.
4.3 The Schools Forum noted that the following 3 main areas of spending growth provided for within the High Needs Block planned budget sit in addition to places-development costs (from new places during 2019 and the full year impact of places developed in 2018). The figure shown for each area is the estimated growth on currently forecasted 2018/19 actual spend, rather than against the 2018/19 planned budget, which is what is shown in Document JZ:
· OLA and Independent placements (+£1.54m).
· Mainstream Primary & Secondary EHCPs (+£1.05m).
· High needs placements post 16 in Further Education (+£0.69m).
4.4 The Schools Forum noted that the High Needs Block planned budget of £73.461m, as currently set out in Document JZ, may be vired between spending headings during 2019 as our specialist places, and our strategies that will re-shape alternative and SEND provisions, develop. For example, the High Needs Block planned budget currently includes additional provision to meet an estimated £1.54m of spending growth on out of authority / independent placements. The Authority may use a proportion of this growth budget in the development of Bradford-located places. The Forum will be kept informed as this work develops and as the initially planned HNB distribution changes during 2019.
4.5 The Schools Forum agreed and noted that the estimated £3.56m budget gap within the 2019/20 High Needs Block, shown in Document JZ, is to be met as set out below. Members were reminded that this £3.56m budget gap is after the transfer of £0.3m of early years SEND support services cost to the Early Years Block and after the permanent transfer of the travellers children’s budget £0.389m to the Central Schools Services Block.
· £0.800m additional funding allocated from the Local Authority’s base budget to support the cost of fully subsidised SEND teaching support services.
· £2.000m of DSG income growth transferred from the Schools Block.
· £0.249m of DSG income growth / headroom transferred from the Central Schools Services Block.
· £0.515m allocation of balance brought forward from 2018/19.
4.6 The Schools Forum also noted and agreed that:
· A ‘safety net’ figure of £0.768m is held within the planned budget to be available to offset any further growth in post 16 high needs placement cost in Further Education Colleges and in alternative provision (as a result of permanent exclusions). This £0.768m is highlighted in the DSG summary Document JZ. Members were reminded that High Needs Block expenditure is more difficult to predict and is subject to changes during the year and that the Local Authority, with the Schools Forum’s support, has always taken a prudent approach in setting the initial budget.
· Within the PRUs & Alternative Providers planned budget of £6.287m there is £0.30m Schools In Financial Difficulty (SIFD) provision, which is related to transitional financial support and / or deficit balance support that is currently anticipated will be required.
· There is no un-earmarked contingency provision within the planned budget.
· Following the approach taken in previous years to the construction of the planned budget, we have assumed that our established specialist provisions will be 100% occupied across the 2019/20 financial year. Occupancy does fluctuate during the year. However, it is difficult at this stage to quantify this and it is prudent to not assume a significant spending impact as a result, especially as typically some of the reduction in spending due to fluctuating occupancy in previous years has been used to meet additional cost from the growth in level of need of pupils. We also anticipate that there will be a lower level of fluctuation in occupancy in 2019/20 in certain settings than there has been previously due to the pressure on places capacity.
· The cost of SEND teaching support services within the planned budget incorporates the changes in structure that were agreed by the Executive in July 2018. The total on-going cost of these services to the High Needs Block is £3.936m of which, in 2019/20, £0.80m is supported by additional Council base budget contribution, £2.836m net is met by the High Needs Block allocation and £0.30m by the Early Years Block.
· The High Needs Block 4 year budget trajectory modelling, shown in Document KD Appendix 6, confirms the necessity for the successful delivery of further significant structural change in SEND and alternative provision, as well as the success of the District’s early help strategy. It also indicates the necessity for continued control of the value of the ‘top up’ allocated by our High Needs Block ranges model. We forecast that the budget gap in future years will accelerate where the DfE’s damping continues to significantly reduce our actual National Funding Formula result. The balance forecasted to be brought forward from 2018/19 is expected to be needed both to secure further structural change and to support the avoidance of growth of deficit.
5. The Allocation & Retention of Balances forecasted to be Brought Forward from 2018/19
Document KA.
All Forum Members by consensus agreed:
5.1 The treatment of the £14.149m of balances forecasted to be brought forward from 2018/19, as set out in the paragraphs below. Members noted that the figure of £14.149m is an estimate. The final confirmed values of brought forward balances by DSG block will be presented to the Schools Forum in July 2019.
5.2 The Schools Forum noted that we do not forecast that there will be a balance brought forward within the Central Schools Services Block.
5.4 It is forecasted that a balance of £3.643m will be brought forward within the Early Years Block. The Schools Forum agreed that:
· £0.648m is allocated to the Early Years Single Funding Formula (EYSFF) in 2019/20 to uplift / protect the value of the 3&4 year old Universal Base Rate at £4.11 per hour, as initially set out in autumn 2016 and confirmed by our autumn 2018 consultation. This is a protection of £0.10 per hour i.e. the Universal Base Rate otherwise would be £4.01 per hour. Members noted that the cost of protecting the rate at £4.11 is currently estimated and will be influenced by the actual number of delivered hours in 2019/20.
· The remaining value of balance, currently estimated to be £2.995m, is retained to be used in support of the Early Years Funding Formula from April 2020. This could be deployed, for example, to continue to protect Universal Base Rate funding over a transitional period. This balance may also be needed to manage further national system change, including to the funding of nursery schools, as well as the impact of our planned EYSFF review. There is significant further discussion required, and development work to take place, on how our EYSFF, and the values of funding rates, adjust and develop from April 2020. As we set out in the autumn 2018 consultation and reports to the Schools Forum, there are a number of factors that will influence this development. We expect to begin to discuss wider EYSFF review with the Early Years Working Group mid spring 2019.
5.5 It is forecasted that a balance of £4.114m will be brought forward within the High Needs Block. In line with previous recommendations, the Schools Forum agreed that this balance is continued to be viewed as a transition fund to enable the successful delivery of structural change at the same time as supporting the avoidance of a significant deficit. Members noted that:
· This comes in the context of the transition to a hard national funding formula, now anticipated from or after April 2021, where, in advance of this, the 2020/21 DSG settlement is uncertain as is whether the flexibility to transfer monies from the Schools Block to the High Needs Block will remain. This also comes in the context of the Authority’s current High Needs Block 4 year budget forecast, which clearly indicates that the scale of financial pressure on the High Needs Block, and the scale of the challenge to balance this Block, will increase. A summary of this indicative trajectory was included in the Schools Block consultation paper in autumn 2018 and an update of this is shown in Document KD Appendix 6. For example, our updated modelling suggests that, without a contribution from the Schools Block, and without further release of damping, or further savings, our High Needs Block allocation may be insufficient to meet costs by c. £5.8m in 2020/21.
· In the Forum’s autumn term 2018 meetings, the Deputy Director, Education and Skills, has explained that the Local Authority is currently actively developing a ‘Plan A’ for the swift establishment of additional specialist places during 2019/20. An outline of this plan was presented to this meeting and the costs of this are included in the 2019/20 planned budget. It is expected that the 2019/20 High Needs Block will spend up to its capacity and, given the scale of additional spend required on places and the ‘front-loading’ of some aspects of spend to enable these places, it is likely that High Needs Block allocation will be exceeded as these places are established.
· £0.515m of the forecasted £4.114m brought forward is currently expected to be allocated in support of the 2019/20 high needs planned budget. This would leave an estimated £3.599m of the balance brought forward to be available to be allocated from April 2020.
5.6 It is forecasted that a balance of £6.393m will be brought forward within the Schools Block.
· £0.677m is a ring-fenced balance from de-delegated funds. The Schools Forum noted that £0.25m of this balance is being deployed in 2019/20 to reduce to cost of the paternity / maternity insurance scheme for maintained primary schools. The remaining value of the forecasted balance is held in support of the cost of continuing de-delegated funds, in line with the principles set out in paragraph 1.2.
· £2.952m is the Growth Fund ring-fenced balance.
o £1.70m of the total balance remains earmarked for the Beckfoot Upper Heaton Academy financial support model agreed in January 2015, of which £0.5m is estimated to be allocated in 2019/20. There are then 2 further financial years of support to be funded, 2020/21 & 2021/22, and £1.20m of balance remains available for this. The Schools Forum has requested that the Authority discusses with Beckfoot Academies Trust whether the financial support model for Beckfoot Upper Heaton Academy could be adjusted where the financial position of the Academy has improved to surplus. This conversation will be taken forward. In advance of this, the financial provision within the Growth Fund balance has been reduced by £0.129m to £1.20m.
o The Schools Forum agreed the allocation of £0.888m of the Growth Fund balance to support the new cost of the delegated budget shares for the period September 2019 to March 2020 for the 2 newly establishing secondary free schools - to support this cost in 2019/20 before our Growth Fund allocation from the DfE is calculated to ‘catch up’ in 2020/21.
o The Schools Forum then agreed the retention of the remaining £0.364m of balance brought forward within the Growth Fund to be used in support of future Growth Fund costs.
· £0.650m is balance already committed by the previous Schools Forum decision in January 2015 to support the deficit of a secondary school converting to academy status. It was agreed that this sum continues to be held and the Forum noted that this may be deployed in 2019/20.
· The Schools Forum agreed the allocation of £0.328m of the brought forward to balance off the Schools Block planned budget in 2019/20.
· The remaining value of £1.786m of the balance brought forward was agreed to be retained as a resilience reserve.
6. Early Years Single Funding Formula and Pro-Forma 2019/20
Document KC Appendix 5 (Early Years Pro-forma), Document KC Appendices 2a, 2b and 2c (indicative provider modelling) and Document KD Appendix 3 (Early Years SEND Fund).
Schools and Academies Members (by consensus on a phase specific basis) agreed:
6.1 The structure of the Early Years Single Funding Formula (EYSFF) for 2019/20, the detailed workings of which were set out in the Technical Statement, which formed part of the autumn 2018 consultation documentation. In summary to:
a) Continue the policy of ring-fencing of the Early Years Block.
b) Continue our current termly headcount methodology (and 2nd headcount for the 2 year old offer).
c) Continue our simplified processes for PVI providers, which include no longer publishing a ‘hard copy’ pre-calculated Confirmed Indicative Budget in March 2019. Instead, we will begin payments in April 2019 based on the latest confirmed position and we will enable providers to use a ready reckoner to estimate funding. The Authority will continue to develop the Bradford Provider Gateway and will continue to talk to PVI providers about how information submitted through the Gateway can feed into the payments system so that initial payments are made on the latest information.
d) Continue to pass through to providers 100% of the DSG funding rate for the Early Years Pupil Premium (currently £0.53 per hour) and the Disability Access Fund (currently £615 per year).
e) Continue to fund providers for the 2 year old entitlement on a single flat rate per hour of £5.20 with no additional supplements.
f) We have now established a ‘Universal Base Rate’ for the 3 & 4 year old entitlement, as required by the DfE, with this overridden in 2019/20 for nursery schools via the allocation of the specific MNS factor. This means that that the total funding rates for each nursery school (both base and deprivation rates) will continue to be retained at their 2016/17 values. We also continue the nursery school lump sum sustainability supplement, using the current methodology, and continuing to bring in the 30 hours extended entitlement into the calculation. On current information, awaiting further announcement from the DfE, 2019/20 is the final year of this protection.
g) 2019/20 is the third and final year of the strategy we set out in autumn 2016 for the protection of the value of base rates for PVI providers and nursery classes. We will complete this strategy. Meaning:
a. We will allocate monies brought forward from 2018/19 within the Early Years Block to uplift the universal base rate for 3 & 4 year olds in 2019/20 to £4.11 per hour. £4.11 is the value we set out in our autumn 2016 consultation. This will be the base rate for the 3 & 4 year old entitlement allocated in 2019/20 for all PVI providers as well as all nursery classes in primary schools and academies.
b. We will continue our current deprivation supplement within the 3&4 year old EYSFF in 2019/20, calculated at 9.5% of EYSFF (excluding the impact of brought forward balance monies). Deprivation rates will reduce slightly in 2019/20 on a general basis because the overall EYSFF funding envelope is reducing due to the impact of national reform (the DSG funded Early Years Block rate is reduced from £4.59 to £4.57).
c. We will not introduce any further supplements into the 3 & 4 year old EYSFF in 2019/20.
h) Regarding SEND Inclusion:
a. SEND Early Years Inclusion monies will continue to be 100% funded from within the Early Years Block.
b. We will implement the holistic SEND Inclusion Fund approach for 2, 3&4 year olds, which will apply to all providers. This is set out in Document KD Appendix 3. The holistic approach represents a change from what PVI providers have previously accessed (known as ‘EYIP’ funds). We will continue to operate the existing ‘EYIP’ inclusion model for PVI providers until the new model is introduced. Any allocations that have been agreed under the current model that extend beyond the introduction of the new model will be funded until these expire.
6.2 The Schools Forum gave its final approval to the Early Years Pro-Forma for the 2019/20 financial year, as presented at Document KC Appendix 5. This pro-forma sets out in summary the setting base rates under the full EYSFF, the mean deprivation and SEN rates and other Early Years Block funds.
6.3 The Schools Forum was reminded and noted that:
· Deprivation and SEND rates for individual PVI and classes providers will be confirmed once January 2019 postcode data is available to calculate updated IMD scores. The figures shown in Document KC Appendices 2b and 2c are indicative.
· A series of estimates have been made in the 2019/20 Early Years Block calculations relating to both income and to the cost of the entitlements (number of hours delivered). By necessity this requires end of year reconciliation and may require carry over of either an under or over spending into 2020/21.
· As described in Document JT, presented to the Schools Forum on 5 December, the planned budget for the Early Years Block includes the re-instatement of the ‘benefit’ from our profile of hours delivery. We anticipate therefore, that we will be funded at DSG level (based on January 2019 and 2020 censuses) for a larger number of 3&4 year old hours than providers will deliver across the 3 terms (that the number of hours delivered in the summer term 2019 will be higher than January 2019 but that the additional cost of this will be more than offset by the number of hours delivered in autumn term 2019 being lower than the following January 2020).
· There is no un-allocated contingency held within the 2019/20 Early Years Block planned budget.
· As shown in the Pro-Forma, our Early Years Block planned budget complies with the DfE’s statutory restrictions for the funding of 3&4 year old hours delivery concerning a) the minimum 95% pass-through and b) the maximum 10% spend on supplements. Our planned budget also complies with the DfE’s expectation that the specific Maintained Nursery School Supplement will be allocated to protect nursery school funding at 2016/17 rates.
7. Primary and Secondary Formula Funding and Pro-Forma 2019/20
Document KC Appendix 4 (Primary & Secondary Pro-forma) and Document KC Appendices 1a, 1b and 1c (indicative modelling). An updated ‘High Needs Block Transfer’ analysis is given in Document KD Appendix 5.
Schools and Academies Members (by consensus on a phase specific basis) agreed:
7.1 The Primary & Secondary Funding Formula for 2019/20, the detailed workings of which are set out in the Pro-Forma Document KC Appendix 4. In summary, to:
a) Continue to closely mirror the DfE’s National Funding Formula at local level, meaning that we amend our local formula in 2019/20, from that used in 2018/19, to adopt the DfE’s revised lower prior attainment variable value in the primary phase and that we amend our calculation of the £3,500 (primary) and £4,800 (secondary) minimum per pupil funding to come more closely in line with the DfE’s calculation, which excludes the additional funding that schools may receive via split sites and pupil mobility factors. We do not alter our primary and secondary funding formula in 2019/20 other than for these two amendments.
b) Transfer a cash sum of £2.000m of Schools Block income to the High Needs Block. This represents 0.48% of our 2019/20 Schools Block allocation. This matches what has been presented to, and discussed with, the Schools Forum across the autumn term 2018 as what was set out in our Schools Block consultation.
c) Set the Minimum Funding Guarantee for 2019/20 at 0%.
d) Not apply the optional factor, which would give a minimum 1% increase on 2017/18 National Funding Formula baselines per pupil.
e) Remove the ceiling, meaning that there is no longer a cap on increases for schools and academies that may gain from the National Funding Formula or from the impact of changes in pupil characteristics recorded in the October 2018 Census. This means that all National Funding Formula ‘gains’ for individual schools are fully allocated within the 2019/20 funding formula. No gains within the Schools Block are still to be released in future years.
f) Continue to use our existing local formula approaches to the factors not yet covered by the National Funding Formula (pupil mobility, split sites and the pass-through of the BSF DSG Affordability Gap funding).
g) Continue to fund business rates at actual cost, with the cost estimated within the planned budget.
h) Continue to use our existing methodology for the definition of notional SEND budgets for mainstream primary and secondary schools and academies within the Schools Block funding formulae.
7.2 The value of the DSG’s total contribution to the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) Affordability Gap for 2019/20, which is £7.112m; split £6.348m Schools Block and £0.764m High Needs Block. This is the 2018/19 value plus an estimated 3.4% RPIX. This represents a net increase (allowing for adjustments relating to the apportionment for academies) of £0.142m on the 2018/19 cost. This contribution will be split between relevant schools and academies on the same % basis as in 2018/19 (based on the school’s unitary charge value). For Secondary schools and academies, this contribution is expressed as a formula factor. For Special schools and academies, this contribution is managed as a central item within the High Needs Block.
7.3 The Schools Forum gave its final approval to the Pro-Forma for the 2019/20 financial year, presented at Document KC Appendix 4.
7.4 The Schools Forum was reminded and noted that:
· Following the School Forum’s agreement, 2 dis-applications were submitted to the ESFA relating to lump sum funding for Silsden Primary School and to the calculation of the MFG for Dixon’s Allerton Academy. Both these dis-applications have been approved by the ESFA and have been incorporated into the Schools Block planned budget as set out.
· The cost of business rates shown in the Pro-forma is estimated and is subject to change during the year. The cost in 2019/20 is estimated to be significantly lower than in 2018/19. This is shown in Document JZ. The cost may reduce further. The main driver of this reduction is the conversion of maintained schools to academy as the cost of rates generally reduces by 80%.
· In moving to using the National Funding Formula at local individual primary and secondary school level in 2018/19, the Schools Forum wished to more closely monitor the actual spending of the Schools Block by phase against the funding received within the Schools Block by phase i.e. phase ring-fencing within the Schools Block. An updated calculation of the position for 2019/20 is shown in Document JZ. Forum Members are reminded that premises-related costs and Growth Fund costs are funded on a cross-phase basis so are not included in this calculation.
· Our Schools Block allocation for 2019/20, published by the DfE on 17 December 2018, is £420.162m. This sum is 100% allocated by the decisions set out in this decisions list. £418.162m is spent within the Schools Block and £2.000m is transferred to the High Needs Block.
· There is no un-allocated contingency held within the 2019/20 Schools Block planned budget.
Supporting documents:
PDF 153 KB PDF 81 KB PDF 74 KB PDF 100 KB PDF 139 KB PDF 89 KB 
