Early Years Working Group
Early Years Working Group
PLA Park Lane, Bingley
Minutes of Meeting 11th June 2009
Present: Jenny Medley, Andrew Redding, Sarah North, Vivienne Robinson, Janet Toner, Marie Lister, Kay Holden, Janet Didur, Kevin Holland, David Wilkinson, Jo Dix, Adele Baines, Teresa Littlewood, Anne Marie Merrifield, Karen Waller, Jayne Brown (Minutes)
Apologies: Susan Moreau, Gill Edge
Agenda / Actions1. The minutes of the last meeting were circulated and agreed
Andrew thanked everyone for completing the homework that was set at the previous meeting and commented on how useful the information was.
2. Funding flexibility September 2009 – Teresa Littlewood’s paper
TL presented a draft document “The extension to the free early years entitlement offer for 3 and 4 year olds - flexible early education revenue request form”. Which when authorised will be used by schools and PVI settings to claim revenue support for the flexible funding.
TL stated that time was short as things needed to be in place for September. Possibly 4 or 5 schools were looking at an element of flexibility and all the Private and Voluntary settings could provide a flexible approach.
Discussion took place as to who’s role it was to ensure schools were working within the correct ratio of staff and pupils when they offer flexible places. TL stated that it is not her role to check staffing ratio’s only to encourage schools to find a way to make the changes needed. TL stated that she is meeting with the unions to look at ways to address these problems but the responsibility rests with the Head teachers and Governors. OFSTED set the regulations and schools will be inspected against the Foundation Stage regulations.
TL stated that each grant will be issued by a service level agreement and would be removed if settings do not comply with the agreement.
There was further discussion with regards to duty of care. KH suggested a letter should be sent to head’s to explain what the regulations are and what they need to do so that it is made crystal clear .
J M stated that a letter will have to be done regarding the statuary guidance and should go to all the heads. Funding at the moment is still part of the whole school funding, when the funding formula is changed, schools will be able to know the amount they have to fund their nursery children.
TL commented that Early Years Foundation Stage documents only state what is recommended. There was uncertainty about who to turn to for guidance.
Teresa stated there was a need to get the funding out ASAP but was unsure of who holds the purse strings, who will make the decision.
After much discussion it was suggested a smaller working group should be formed to work out the details for the funding to ensure it is done for the end of June deadline.
Agreement was made that a smaller working group should be formed . The following people showed interest in being on the group, Karen Waller, Vivienne Robinson, Andrew Redding, Teresa Littlewood, Kevin Holland.
3. Follow up from 14th May – Non classroom based staffing
AR presented his revised paper for non classroom based staff
It was noted that childminders didn’t employ admin staff but that the time was built into their management allowance.
JD commented that her private day nursery had admin employed for 28 hrs per week.
It was noted that the model was becoming quite expensive and that the costs for childminders significantly higher. It was decided more detail was needed, especially to ensure activities were not duplicated so that the model does not fund items twice. However it was again noted that the model is a very basic starting point.
4. Follow up from 14th May – Other staffing costs, curriculum resources & Professional Support Services
AR presented his document on the issues raised for funding on other staffing costs and curriculum resources during the 14th May meeting
AR described what was included in the benchmarking table and asked for any comments.
It was noted that the figures for nursery where slightly different but that it was a fairly valid way of setting up the model. It was discussed that there are a certain minimums and certain costs whatever the number of children attending.
5. Premises & Maintenance
AR presented the paper that had been made up from the homework.
There was no particular pattern emerging and it was proving to be difficult to get it right in the formula. He was not as far on with this as he had hoped so that there was no model to discuss. He asked how the group would want the formula to take into account the different premises costs.
Much discussion took place around the differences between building costs in the different sectors.
Funding was primarily based on amount per pupil per hour. But the size of building is not necessarily proportionate to the head count and it was decided that it wouldn’t really work this way.
AB suggested that premises should be taken out of the formula all together and added as a supplement. Every setting is so different, it was proving to be difficult to form a pattern. Perhaps building costs should be a percentage depending upon type of setting.
AR stated this was a good cost concept as in maintained schools, benchmarking information shows about 8% of budget is for premises. Adjustments can then be made dependent on setting.
AB asked where we would get figures for the percentages?
AR stated we had the info from the maintained and PVI cost analysis.
6. Setting Management
Adjourned to next meeting
Next Meetings:
2nd July 1.30pm – 4.30pm Killinghall Primary School