Agenda item

Report ED18025

The Schools’ Forum considered a report which provided an update on DSG expenditure in 2017/18 with particular focus on the High Needs and Early Years Block.

In January 2017, the Schools’ Forum agreed a balanced budget for the Dedicated Schools Grant for 2017/18, on the basis that a balancing figure of £1.057m from the Schools block was used to offset an overspend within the High Needs Block – the Early Years Block was at that time deemed to be self-funding. In August 2017, the Council was notified of an adjustment to the Early Years Block due to reduced pupil numbers on the January 2017 census. As a result of this the overall income for 2017/18 reduced from £20.029m to £19.096m with the reduction relating specifically to 3 and 4 year old and 2 year old funding. The Council reviewed the expenditure based on these numbers and was anticipating a potential underspend in the Early Years Block as a result of the reduction in numbers. However it was recommended that this be held in contingency as the underspend was likely to be recouped retrospectively by the DfE in 2018/19.

The Council was also notified of a retrospective adjustment to the Early Years funding for 2016/17 with £475,000 being deducted from this year’s DSG to reflect a decrease in pupil numbers in 2016/17. There had also been a significant increase in High Needs expenditure during the year. This was due mainly to increased pressure resulting in increased place numbers for several of the special schools as this was deemed to be the most economical way for accommodating this pressure as opposed to sending pupils to out of borough placements which were often far more costly. However, as there was no adjustment to the DSG grant to reflect the needs of these pupils additional pressure was placed on the High Needs Block. The High Needs Block had already been charged with finding around £750,000 of savings in year – some of this had already been achieved by applying a 1.5% MFG reduction to top up funding for special schools and units and also to matrix funding for SEND pupils within mainstream schools. Other savings were identified within the central SEND expenditure. The Council had commissioned a company called SEND4Change to carry out a full review of the overall High Needs Block and whilst it is envisaged that this would highlight areas of best practice where savings could be made it was expected that this would be a long term strategy and would not identify any additional savings within the current financial year.

A net overspend of £0.377m across the whole of the Dedicated Schools Grant had been identified, with the focus specifically on the increased overspend in the High Needs Block. However, the Council had identified an underspend of £1.623m to be carried forward from 2016/17. This could be used to offset the overspend and meant that the Council would move into 2018/19 with an expected underspend of £771,000.

The DfE carried out another exercise in April and May 2017 to collect information from Councils on spend in order to baseline DSG grant funding and mirror expenditure in each block as far as possible. The intention was that this was then used to inform the starting positions of the 2018/19 DSG allocations. The movement between the High Needs and the Schools Block of £1.05m had been consolidated into the re-baselined figures for 2018/19. There was also a further adjustment from the High Needs Block to the Schools Block of £1.54m which related to the proposed changes to funding for unit places in mainstream schools. The Head of ECHS Finance noted that guidance would be published in the summer, and that there could be the option for 0.5% to move across into the High Needs Block.

A member enquired as to where the core funding for the Harris Aspire Academy originated from. The Head of ECHS Finance said that historically the DfE had directed LBB to make payments to High Needs Academies and Free Schools following a 10% top slice. Members queried if Harris Aspire were held to account with regard to the number of students and quality of the provision, and questioned whether predominantly Bromley students were placed in the provision or whether Bromley funding was being used to support non-Bromley students. It was requested that information be provided to the Schools’ Forum regarding how many students that attended the Harris Aspire Academy were Bromley residents; if the school was subject to the same scrutiny as others schools within the borough; and if the provision was subject to the same funding cuts as other Bromley schools. The Head of ECHS Finance agreed that it would be a concern for LBB if the provision was not being used by Bromley students and would provide details at the next meeting.

RESOLVED: that the report be noted.