Schools Forum 12th December 2013

1

The Role of Schools Forum

• The Schools Forum is a statutory body and is responsible for School Funding

• A sharper focus on value for money and supporting schools

• Embracing new ways of working

Since the election of the coalition government three years ago we have seen the most fundamental reform of the education system for more than a generation These reforms have amongst many things: • Devolved significant power to schools

and increased levels of accountability• Accelerated the pace and scope of the

Academies programme - setting out an unequivocal ambition (of the Gov’t) that Academies should be the norm (27% of all Sheffield children are now in an Academy, 73% are still in maintained schools)

Pre 2010 2011 2012 20130

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Primary

Secondary

Number of Academies in Sheffield – 2010 to Present

At the same time the level of funding for Local Government has been dramatically reduced

Finance and Performance: • Changed the relationship

between schools and local and national Government in terms of funding and performance e.g.

• Introduced the pupil premium

• Ended specific grants for specific purposes

• Move towards national funding formula in the longer term

The Schools Forum and the CWLB have worked together over the last two years to ensure that:

• Our funding strategy supports our strategic priorities and most pressing policy challenges e.g. New Arrivals, FSM attainment

• School leaders have a clearer (and louder) voice in decision making and priority setting

• Supported an increase in delegation of funding to schools. Delegation is now above 92.5%, placing Sheffield in the top quartile for all Local Authorities

To support this joint working the CWLB and Schools Forum have agreed a set of funding principles

• To secure a world class education for Sheffield’s children.

• To ensure that the services for children and young people that support learning are similarly world class.

• That principles behind any service retention should promote equity, accessibility, strong impact and value for money.

• Fundamentally, services should be retained centrally if there was no reasonable alternative provider; and services for vulnerable children must be given a high level of protection.

What does the future hold?

The National Context and Proposal

• A National Funding Formula after 2015/16 – does not necessarily change our local allocation

• Local Authorities remain responsible for the creation of the formula for all schools – and must work with and through the Forum to do this

• Factors within the formula remain the same – with no major change in the Government guidelines

School Funding

Budgetary Assumptions

Our budgetary assumptions for primary and secondary schools are:

 • an increase in the primary population of 1310 pupils,• a decrease in the secondary population of 349 pupils,• a net increase of 961pupils,• an increase of £3.5m for the additional pupils,• an increase to match the additional top slice of £500k

for the contingency for significant growth (see section 6 of consultation report for more information).

The Funding Formula

We use 9 of 13 national factors – we only apply those that are relevant to us. (A full list of all 13 factors is on the next two slides)

Funding Formula Factors 2014/15Mandatory Factors

1. Pupil Number Funding (Age Weighted Pupil Unit): • A single primary rate of at least £2,000• Separate KS3 (Year 7-9) and KS4 (Year 10-11) rates allowed but must be

at least £3,000 for Secondary

2. Social deprivation funding – based on eligibility for free school meals and/or IDACI (Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index) In Sheffield we are using a combination of both factors.

Optional Factors

3. Looked After Children. Local authorities using this factor must use the criteria of where a child is Looked After for a single day or more for both primary and secondary. In Sheffield we have decided not to use this funding factor

4. Low cost, high incidence SEN funding using prior attainment data (based on low attaining pupils on the Early Years Foundation Stage Profile for primary and Key Stage 2 results for secondary pupils where they have failed to achieve level 4 or higher in English or Maths)

5. English as an Additional Language (EAL) – limited to the first 3 years an EAL child is in any school

6. A lump sum of between £100k and £175k – but the value may differ for primary and secondary schools . In Sheffield the Lump Sum will remain at £150k for both sectors.

7. Split Sites - calculated using Sheffield factors agreed previously, which are pupil numbers and distance between sites

8. Rates – estimated actual costs (no mid-year adjustments)

9. Private Finance Initiative (PFI) calculated using current circumstances

10. London weighting (not applicable to Sheffield)

11. Pupil mobility – payable in Sheffield where more than 10% of pupils are starting outside the normal entry dates

12. Sparsity (not relevant in Sheffield, for small rural schools)

13. Post 16 (not relevant as DSG has not funded this previously)

Funding Formula Factors 2014/15

Funding Formula Factors

Basic Entitlement Age Weighted Pupil Unit (AWPU), £205m,

71%

Deprivation, £20m, 7%

Prior Attainment, £27m, 9%

English as an Addi-tional Language (EAL), £2.6m, 1%

Mobility, £0.261m, 0%

Lump Sum, £23m, 8%Split Sites, £0.471m, 0% Rates, £4.1m, 2% PFI Funding, £5.2m, 2%

Total £288m

This year it is proposed that we transfer £1m from the deprivation factor to pupil numbers

This is being proposed because:

• Increasing Funding for Pupil Premium based on deprivation• Pupil Premium distributed in a targeted way - FSM• Sheffield schools will receive £18m in Pupil Premium rising to

£25m in 2014-15• To recognise the level of funding distributed through the pupil

premium and sharing the benefits through AWPU• No immediate implementation of a national funding formula

(deferred until after 2015 – 16/17) but as DfE moves towards it, where majority of funding is likely to be allocated by pupil numbers, this is a transitional approach by the LA to stabilise school funding.

Pupil Premium• Pupil Premium Funding sits outside of the formula

• We were anticipating an increase in pupil premium from £900 to £1300 for all schools and £1900 for Looked After Children.

• We are hearing “un-officially” that this will now not be the case. Instead there will be different rates.

• £935 Secondary• £1,300 Primary• £1,900 Looked After Children

• We have re-run our modelling based on these figures. Our proposals are still robust.

Minimum Funding Guarantee and the Cap on Gains

• The Minimum Funding Guarantee (MFG) and the Gains Cap protect the per pupil funding for schools from one year to the next against significant changes in funding. This is prescribed by the Government and we believe it to be good practice.

• Gains Cap is set at 1.5% and basically funds the cost of the Minimum Funding Guarantee also set at -1.5%

• 37 schools require an MFG allocation• 60 schools have their gains capped

Effect of Formula Change to Schools FundingEffect of Formula Change £1m £2m £3mPrimary Gain 39 38 37  Lose 36 39 40  No Effect 58 56 56    133 133 133           % Gain 29% 29% 28%  % Lose 27% 29% 30%  % No Effect 44% 42% 42%    100% 100% 100%

Secondary Gain 9 7 7  Lose 7 8 4  No Effect 8 9 13    24 24 24           % Gain 38% 29% 29%  % Lose 29% 33% 17%  % No Effect 33% 38% 54%    100% 100% 100%

Total Gain 48 45 44  Lose 43 47 44  No Effect 66 65 69    157 157 157           % Gain 31% 29% 28%  % Lose 27% 30% 28%  % No Effect 42% 41% 44%    100% 100% 100%

Outcome of Consultation

Consultation - Response

Primary and Special Schools

Academies Maintained Schools All Schools

Funding Transfer 0 21 21

De-delegation 0 19 19

Secondary Schools      

Funding Transfer 1 2 3

De-delegation 0 1 1

Total Funding Transfer

1 23 24

Total De-delegation   20 20

83%

17%

Funding Transfer Responses - All Responding Schools

Yes  No

De-Delegated Items

De-delegated Items – Agreed by the Schools Forum last year

This budget consists of £2m and includes:

1. ESCAL (£231K)

2. Support for Ethnic Minority Pupils or underachieving groups (£255K)

3. Museum and Library services (£44K)

4. Free School Meals (£64K)

5. Licences/subscriptions(Pupil Data and Information Systems) (£414K)

6. Staff costs-supply cover (HR statutory and TU facilities time) (£353K)

7. Insurance – Property, Employers Liability and Copyright licenses (£266K)

8. Contingency for exceptional or unforeseen circumstances for maintained schools and schools in financial difficulty (£421K)

Why de-delegate? - Agreed Principles

• To secure a world class education for Sheffield’s children

• To ensure that the services for children and young people that support learning are similarly world class

• That principles behind any service retention should promote equity, accessibility, strong impact and value for money

• Fundamentally, services should be retained centrally if there was no reasonable alternative provider; and services for vulnerable children must be given a high level of protection

Outcome of Consultation

De-delegated School Type Favourable Neutral / Mixed Unfavourable / Supports Total

Delegation

Primary Schools 8 4 6

Secondary Schools 0 0  

1

Special Schools 1 0 0

All Schools 9 (45%) 4 (20%) 7 (35%)

Favourable45%

Unfavourable35%

Neutral20%

De-delegated Response

Way Forward

• De-delegated services continue as in 13/14 for 14/15

• Following through with academies to make contribution

• Different approach is explored for ESCAL /EMTAS so a new way of working starts from April 2015 or earlier if possible.

Early Intervention and Prevention

27-8-2013

Continuum of Need

Referral Details

• Referrals for children age 5 to 16 represent 48% of the 10520 referrals received by MAST during the period April 2012 to April 2013

• Key issues for referral were Attendance (Education/Skills) and Parenting Support (Family/Home)

• On average there were 3,600 cases open within the service at any one time during the last year (within Screening, or allocated to MAST or a partner).

WorkforceMAST have Statutory Responsibility for:

Childcare sufficiency assessment

Information and advice duty

Children’s Centres

School Attendance

Child Licencing and Work Permits

Single Point of Contact

(Joint Screening and Assessment – PAT)

Social Workers for Prevention and Intervention and PAT Intervention Workers ensure;• Allocation to appropriate

services• Multi Agency information

sharing and agreement• Support with assessment

Direct Work

Direct delivery of interventions to meet whole family need (thoroughly assessed) through Intervention and Prevention Workers and Specialist's in MAST and Early Years

Co-ordinated case management through a

keyworker and access to specialist support

Whole family working, continual assessment of need and escalation to

acute services

Within MAST:

Attendance, Engagement with Learning, Parenting, Senior Learning Mentors, CAMHS, Family Support, Employment, Early Years,

Through MAAM and Team Around the Family work:

School Nurses, Social Care, Midwives, Health visitors, CYT, Police

Case supervision and risk management. Identification of thresholds of needs for the whole family. Escalating cases and securing access to acute service to secure support to meet escalated need

Continual Workforce Development

Service for the Future

Year 1Determining the model consultation with stakeholders

Year 2Early Support and

Intervention model agreed

Early Support and

Intervention Phase 1

implementation

Mainstreaming of BSF and Review

of new model

Year 3Early Support and

Intervention Phase 2

implementation

Review of new model

Early Support and

Intervention Phase 3

implementation

What support do you receive for your pupils?

AND

How can this be improved?

27-8-2013

What do you need to help you to support the vulnerable children in

your school?

and

How would you prioritise this need?

27-8-2013

Next Steps………….

27-8-2013