The Bexley Schools Forum met on 15 January 2024 to discuss the proposed funding formulae for mainstream schools and early years settings, as well as the overall schools budget for 2024-25. The Forum approved the proposed funding formulae for both mainstream schools and early years settings, and also agreed to de-delegate funds for maintained schools.

Schools Block Funding Formula

Officers presented an update on the proposed funding formula for mainstream schools and academies, covering annual funding, pupil data, proposed unit values, and the impact on individual schools. A discussion took place regarding the London Mayor's extension of free school meals (FSM) and the local authority's engagement with schools on this matter. Councillor Newton suggested a review of Bexley's data to encourage parents to contact schools if their circumstances change, and officers agreed to gather this data and report back.

Concerns were raised about pupil variance patterns and the impact of building work across Bexley leading to families moving from central London. Officers reported a year-on-year rise in reception intake, bucking the national trend, and noted ongoing in-year transfers. They are working with the Admissions Team to cap admission numbers where necessary. The Forum also discussed expected pupil numbers at key stage four, with officers anticipating they would be maintained.

Regarding the growth fund, officers explained that funds had been allocated for expansions at Birkbeck and Mayplace, with no new funds available. A significant increase in FSM Ever6 was noted, which officers explained included an element of the previously separate mainstream additional grant. The Forum members expressed satisfaction with the proposed unit values.

The Forum was asked to decide on the growth fund budget, and it was resolved that the Schools' Forum agreed the growth fund budget.

Discussions also covered de-delegation options for maintained schools. Officers confirmed that costs associated with FSM eligibility would include checks for the school year. Mr Wheatley noted his school employed a company for these checks at a lower unit cost, and other members shared their approaches. Officers agreed to produce a paper for the next meeting detailing the cost breakdown for de-delegated items and to discuss Mr Wheatley's supplier.

The Forum was asked to decide on de-delegation for maintained school members, and it was resolved that the Schools' Forum maintained members agreed to de-delegate.

Early Years Funding Formula

Officers presented the report on the early years block and changes to free entitlement, including estimated allocations for the dedicated schools grant (DSG), funding formula, central holdback, and draft budget summary. The speech and language supplement was discussed, with officers explaining it was informed by census data and that providers would determine its use.

The Forum discussed service provision and the capacity of settings to meet increasing demand. Officers noted a small capital allocation for which plans needed to be submitted to the Department for Education (DfE) by June. Mrs Herbert sought clarification on the consultation with the Early Years Funding Group, and officers agreed to resend the information. Miss Peters raised concerns about guidance for roll-out and covering day rates and the increase in the national living wage, with officers promising to share information from the DfE as soon as it was received.

The Forum was asked to decide on the proposed funding formulae and draft budget for early years, and it was resolved that the Schools' Forum agreed the proposed funding formulae and draft budget.

Overall Schools Budget 2024-25 Including High Needs

Officers presented the report on the overall schools budget, highlighting the Safety Valve agreement's impact on medium-term deficit planning for the DSG. The baseline for budget proposals was an in-year deficit of £1.341m for 2024-25.

The high needs budget for the current financial year was reported to have an adverse variance of £1.261m, though a favourable outturn for 2022-23 had absorbed much of this. Officers acknowledged the volatility in the system and budget.

A lengthy discussion ensued regarding the Safety Valve profile, with members expressing concerns about ambitious targets and potential DfE intervention if accumulated deficits exceeded agreed levels. Officers explained the process and mitigation measures. Mrs Herbert voiced concerns that the targets remained ambitious.

In response to a question about Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs), officers stated that successful applications were in line with forecasts, and a report on EHCP data would be presented at the next meeting. Mr Wheatley requested a breakdown of the DSG management template, which officers agreed to provide in June, along with more transparent information on the Safety Valve profile.

Mr Hannon shared concerns about forecasting accuracy and the implications of the Safety Valve process failing. Officers highlighted the request for information on outturn costs for the maintained sector in 2022-23, noting that figures were incomplete and further work was underway. They committed to reporting back in June and revisiting 2018-19 funding assumptions.

Safety Valve Update

Officers confirmed that all three Safety Valve reports for 2023-24 had been submitted to the DfE, with funding received for two and the third payment anticipated. Dates for 2024-25 monitoring reports were set for June, September, and December.

The procurement process for Shenstone School had concluded, with a contractor announcement imminent. Updates were provided on Parkway School, Incredible Years, outreach, and supported internships.

Regarding Talk Boost for students with English as an additional language (EAL), officers explained that while not specifically designed for EAL, evidence suggested potential benefits. Early analysis of Talk Boost showed positive impact, but concerns were raised about targeting the correct cohort. The Forum requested further analysis of the 'red' subgroup of children.

Members questioned the selection of schools for the intervention programme, noting the low engagement of maintained schools. Officers stated they would circulate details of cohort three schools.

Forum members requested clearer links between intervention delivery, EHCP reductions, the Safety Valve deficit, and high needs transfer monies to improve strategic oversight and quality assurance. Officers agreed to incorporate this into future reports.

Concerns were raised about the inflexibility of school selection for interventions, with Mr Wheatley highlighting a lack of buy-in from schools.

Officers presented potential intervention options for secondary schools, including a vocabulary module for Year 11 students and training for Special Educational Needs Co-ordinators (SENCOs), teachers, and teaching assistants (TAs) through Elklan Training. Mr Wheatley agreed to meet with officers to assess the suitability of these suggestions. A draft leaflet summarising Safety Valve interventions was shared, with members requesting the inclusion of the rationale behind the chosen interventions, cohort details, and roll-out timescales.

Mrs Herbert queried the green status of agreement condition 3.2, with officers explaining that for DfE reporting purposes, the condition was on track, with anticipated savings through repatriation.

Any Other Business

Mr Hannon expressed surprise at the 10% vacancy rate in commissioned places and pupils. A discussion followed regarding stretched resources, oversubscription at special schools, and whether the local authority was ghost funding spaces. Officers agreed to follow up on this with the Special Education Needs and/or Disability (SEND) Management Team and report back at the next meeting with clarification on numbers of spaces versus vacancies. Mr Wheatley enquired about the outcome of the SEND local area inspection, and officers advised that the partnership was awaiting the inspection outcome letter.