SALFORD SCHOOLS FORUM
21 NOVEMBER 2012
SALFORD SCHOOLS FORUM
21 November 2012
Meeting commenced: 4.15 p.m.
“ ended: 6.40 p.m.
PRESENT: School Members
Steve Aveyard - Academy Schools
Patrick Ottley-O’Connor
Drew Povey - Secondary School Headteachers
Phillip Harte
Brian Pearson - Secondary School Governors
Sheila Hamnett
Joe Bourke - Primary School Daniel Gauld Headteachers/Representative
Lee Pridden
Steve Hopkins - Primary School
Kenneth Hickman Governors
Paula Howe
Martin Hanbury - Special Schools
Non-School Members
Judith Elderkin - Teacher Trade Unions
Debbie Ramsay - Pupil Referral Units
Kelly Morgan - Early Years
Officers
Cathy Starbuck - Assistant Director Universal Services
Sue Woodgate - Assistant Director Targeted
Sue Wilkinson - BSF Project Director
Paula Summersfield - Principal Group Accountant
Debbie Fulton - Management Accountant – Schools
Janet McCall - Accountant
Carole Chapman - Senior Democratic Services Advisor
1. Apologies for Absence
Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Ann McQuirk, Jackie Moores, Jon Stonehouse and Cllr Merry.
2. membership of forum
Members were informed that the closing date for applications for the Primary governor representative vacancy is Friday 23 November. A ballot will then be held to determine the successful applicant.
RESOLVED: THAT (1) the information provided is noted
3. FORUM RESOLUTIONS - UPDATE
An update report was submitted providing details of the resolutions made by the Salford Schools Forum.
RESOLVED: THAT (1) the report be noted
4. MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
RESOLVED: THAT the minutes of the meeting held on 17 October 2012, be approved as a correct record.
5. MATTERS ARISING
Apologies received from Paula Howe for the meeting held on 17 October, were omitted from the minutes.
6. ‘school provider arm’ (SPA) service for primary schools
Cathy Starbuck presented this report which asked Schools Forum to approve the request for the contribution of £107,739 towards supporting School Improvement.
The total amount was made up of two elements as follows:-
· To fund 1 post holder paid on Soulbury terms and conditions to work in vulnerable primary schools in order to narrow the gap and raise attainment in literacy and numeracy. The contribution requested was £79,515.00
· To make a contribution of £28,224 towards the Salford Safeguarding Children Board (SSCB)
Discussion took place during which the following issues were raised and answered:-
· Additional resources available through the SPA are supported via core funding from the Children’s Services budget
· During the academic year 2011/12 the SPA worked with 8 Primary schools where results had been below the government floor target
· A number of procedures are in place to help ensure the right person is in post, including appraisals and feedback from the schools in receipt of the service
With regard to the contribution towards the SSCB members were less comfortable with this request as they were not sure whether the increase in the budget was to enable an increase in the service or reduce the contribution from other parties.
In conclusion, following a vote, members agreed to the two requests. However, the contribution to the SSCB was agreed for 1 year with the proviso that justification for the request is provided.
RESOLVED: THAT (1) forum members agree to fund 1 post holder paid on Soulbury terms and conditions to work in vulnerable schools in order to narrow the gap and raise attainment in literacy and numeracy. The contribution agreed was £79,515.00
(2) forum members agree to make a contribution of £28,224 towards the Salford Safeguarding Children Board (SSCB) for 1 year with the proviso that the purpose of the contribution is clarified.
7. update: Non-maintained schools & ‘supply cover’ budget
Cathy Starbuck presented this report which informed members that Salford Academy Trust, the academy sponsor for three academies in Salford, has expressed an interest in buying into the ‘staff costs-supply cover’ facility if there was an opportunity to do so via an SLA. As the number of academies in Salford has increased it seemed appropriate to raise the issue at Forum.
Supply costs act as an insurance fund for maternity, trade union and magisterial duties cover. Membership of this fund has not been offered to academies as they receive their proportion of the fund as part of the academy fund transfer.
Whilst maintained schools have opted to de-delegate the budget to the LA in the formula for 2013-14, academies can only express their wish to join the mutual local scheme through an SLA agreement provided by the LA.
The LA proposed that consideration should be given to allowing academies to buy back into the budget under an SLA agreement based on their level of funding they had received for this element. To prevent unfair manipulation of the fund, the SLA would have to be for 3 years with penalties for leaving before the end of the 3 year agreement.
Members then proceeded to discuss the proposals within the report at length and concluded their deliberations by taking a vote.
The members voted no at this time due to the fact that they felt they could not consider supporting the proposal without more information about the implications for both maintained schools and academies.
It was agreed that further information would be provided at the January meeting.
RESOLVED: THAT (1) members voted against the motion that Academies should be allowed to join the mutual scheme through an SLA agreement at this time, until more information about the implications for both maintained schools and academies is provided
(2) further information to be provided at the January meeting.
8. pupil numbers growth budget
Following a report presented in November 2011on this issue, Sue Wilkinson presented an update on the outturn position of the contingency support for the additional Primary School places Autumn Term 2012 and the contingency provision anticipated to be required for 2013 and in the forthcoming years.
In order to support enlarging schools it was recommended that a contingency total of £1.011m is set aside and made available for additional teachers, ancillary support and classroom equipment for September 2013.
Members were also asked to acknowledge that this contingency amount will be an annual requirement from the DSG until at least 2020 as the population of pupils is currently predicted to continue to increase year on year until this time and then level off.
Within the report it was suggested that delegated authority should be established, to enable the allocation of contingency funding, between Forum meetings, if an interim school solution is required as a matter of urgency.
However, the proposal was that it should be for the Chair of the Forum to approve, and the guidance issued from the DfE states that it is not legal for the chair to take a decision on behalf of the schools forum, no matter how urgent the matter in question.
An alternative proposal put forward during the meeting was for a professional panel consisting of a LA officer, the Chair and two Headteachers to judge any requests that may be urgent, up to a maximum value of £30k.
With regard to this matter members also wanted to define the exact circumstances for such requests with an explanation as to why they could not be referred to the previous or delayed until the next meeting and to ensure that the decisions are referred to the next forum meeting for ratification.
RESOLVED: THAT (1) the proposed level of contingency is approved
(2) with regard to matters of urgency, arrangements should be put forward at the next Forum meeting, for procedures which define:-
· The exact circumstances
· The scope, maximum costs and type and length of provision
· The need for a referral to the following Forum meeting for ratification.
9. approvals for 2013-14 budget
The changes introduced by the Department for Education (DfE) require schools forum to make a decision on the amount of funding to be held for specific central service provision.
Paula Summersfield presented this report which identified the impact of schools funding reform on services currently funded through centrally retained DSG (Dedicated Schools Grant) and members were asked to confirm the level of funding to be retained in 2013-14 as proposed by the Local Authority.
Members then proceeded to discuss the proposals within the report and concluded their deliberations by taking a vote where required, the results of which were as follows:-
2.2 Forum members agreed to the total for growth as £1,240,944, which is split into the following:-
· Primary growth – existing commitments £236,000
· Primary growth – new commitments £775,000
· Primary growth (trigger funding) £164,375
· Secondary growth (trigger funding) £65,569
2.3 Members approved the following:-
· Admissions £183,558
· Servicing of Schools Forum £49,811
· Carbon Reduction Commitment £181,923
· Contribution to combined budgets £2,531,453
2.4 Members agreed the following amounts:-
Contingency £307,280
This is made up of the following:-
· Nursery Growth £138,886
· Amalgamated schools provision £46,394
· General Contingency £100,000
· Additional for Academy topslice £22,000
With regard to the write off of the academy deficit budget, members agreed subject to the value of the under spend in 2012/13 that the full debt is written off.
2.5 Due to the limited time between receiving the data from the Education Funding Agency (EFA) and the submission date of formulas to the EFA members were asked to make a decision on the allocation of any surplus funding if applicable.
Members agreed the proposals put forward by the LA which were:-
- The first call on any surplus funding should be used to ensure that schools are put on formula
- Any funding in excess of the above is used to increase the overall funding per pupil taking account of DfE recommendations in the primary secondary funding ratios
RESOLVED: THAT (1) the proposals put forward by the LA within the report are all agreed
(2) subject to the value of the under spend the full debt in relation to the academy deficit budget is written off
(3) the proposals put forward by the LA for the allocation of any surplus funding are agreed.
10. nursery place funding for 3 and 4 year olds
This report follows on from a report submitted to Schools Forum on 26 September 2012 that set out the current funding arrangements for the universal entitlement for 3 and 4 year olds. During that meeting members requested alternative models to be provided for consideration that either sustain the current funding or incur additional spend.
Sarah Callaghan presented this report which provided the information requested along with a number of options being offered. Forum members were asked to confirm their preferred option for future funding arrangements in nursery school settings.
Following lengthy and detailed discussion forum members agreed to option 1a, if the DfE allows the exemption to the Minimum Funding Guarantee and 1b, should the exemption not be allowed.
RESOLVED: THAT forum members agreed to option:-
1a
Full time (25 hours) across all maintained nursery classes with an hourly cost that covers the cost of delivery for 3&4 year old
Base rate - £3.27
Quality Supplement - £0.15
IDACI - £0.22 max
(dependent on children’s postcodes)
Should the DfE allow the exemption to the MFG
Or
1b
Full time (25 hours) across all maintained nursery classes with a reduce hourly cost should the DfE not give an exemption to the Minimum Funding Guarantee
Base rate - £3.38
Quality Supplement - £0.15
IDACI - £0.22 max
(dependent on children’s postcodes)
11. any other business
None submitted.
10. DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting will be held on Wednesday 16 January 2013 at 4.15pm and will be held in Committee Room 4.
6