The Business Advisor (Schools) will present a report, Document GU, which provides a forecast of the anticipated DSG funding position and cost pressures in the 2017/18 financial year. Please note that any further information on the DSG for 2017/18 that may be announced by Government before 7 December will be presented verbally at the meeting.

Recommended –

Members are asked to consider the information presented in the report, in advance of making final recommendations on 11 January 2017.

(Andrew Redding – 01274 432678)

The Business Advisor (Schools) presented a report, Document GU, which provided a forecast of the anticipated DSG budget position and cost pressures in the 2017/18 financial year. It was stressed that this is still an estimated position, but, unless a significant addition sum is allocated to Bradford in the 2017/18 DSG High Needs Block settlement (announced later in December), this is a realistic appraisal of the 2017/18 DSG.

The Business Advisor highlighted the following:

·         One of the key principles proposed to lay behind the management of the DSG going forward is that the Early Years Block will be ring-fenced, apart from its contribution to earl years SEND costs.

·         The actual estimated pressure in the High Needs Block next year is £6.86m. This assumes only £1m of new income from DfE. 50% roughly of this £6.86m pressure comes from the cost of new places (including only a 7/12ths provision for the 2^nd tranche of 120). 50% comes from growth in pressure in existing provisions, including growth of mainstream EHCPs / SEND statements and out of authority placements. This pressure is after the Early Years Block has contributed £300,000 for the SEN Inclusion budget. It is also after a 1.5% reduction has been levied on the High Needs Block top up rates and centrally managed budgets.

·         A 1.5% contribution from the Schools Block pupil-led factors, on current estimates, will provide a sum of £4m to help offset the £6.86m. This contribution is split 50/50 between primary and secondary when a blanket 1.5% reduction in all factors is applied.

·         After these contributions however, it is still currently estimated that the High Needs Block will overspend and the total DSG funding gap is estimated to be £2.3m i.e. more may need to be done to balance the 2017/18 DSG.

The Chair emphasised that, on current modelling, a 1.5% reduction within the Schools Block would not close the DSG gap in 2017/18 fully. This leaves the Schools Forum with a very difficult set of considerations and decisions to make. However, the Schools Forum must make recommendations that set a balanced DSG budget. The Chair asked that Members hold their detailed responses on this until all the agenda items relating to the DSG position, including the updated modelling of school budgets and the High Needs Block, have been presented.

In responding to the presentation, Members made the following comments and asked the following questions:

• Whether modelling can be done on comparative High Needs Block per pupil spending, incorporating a view about the level of spending in higher performing local authorities. The Chair responded that benchmarking has taken place (and has been presented to the Forum) showing that our spending per place in special schools is close to the national median. It is understood that the comparison for alternative provision is more complex because of the diverse nature of provisions can come under the AP designation. However, it will be helpful for more information on the ‘national context’ to be provided for 11 January meeting.
• Whether the calculations suggest that a contribution of 1.9% from the Schools Block resolves the £2.3m final gap. It was explained that the resolution is more complicated that this as there are restrictions on how monies can be ‘moved around’.
• What will be the impact of a 1.5% / sizeable transfer of money out of primary and secondary school budgets in 2017/18? Do we have a clear view about this? The Business Advisor explained that he has collected information on impact through his discussions with schools, but that he welcomed the opportunity to talk with individual members who offered in the meeting to put their schools forward as ‘case studies’.

Resolved –

(1)  That a report be provided to the 11 January meeting, which sets out in more detail the options that are available for the management and balancing of the DSG in 2017/18. That this report also provides further information on Bradford’s position in the national context.

(2)  That further work takes place, on a case-study style basis, to interrogate the impact of a 1.5% reduction in the primary and secondary formula funding values in 2017/18 and the options around this, to inform the Forum’s discussions on the 11 January.