Agenda item

Governors

Mike Heiser - Chair (MH)

Martin Beard (MB)

Titilola McDowell (TMcD)

Alan Carter (AC)

Herman Martyn (HM)

Cllr Lesley Jones (Cllr LJ)

Janice Alexander (JA)

Cllr Helga Gladbaum (Cllr HG)

Head Teachers

Sylvie Libson – Vice Chair (SL)

Lesley Benson (LB)

Matthew Lantos (ML)

Rose Ashton (RA)

Andy Prindiville (AP)

Kay Johnson (KJ)

Rabbi Yitzchak Freeman (YF)

Gill Bal (GB)

PRU

Terry Hoad (TH)

PVI Sector

Paul Russell (PR)

Trade Unions

Lesley Gouldbourne (LG)

14-19 Partnership

Maggie Barth (MB)

Others

Officers

Sara Williams (SW)

Ravinder Jassar (RJ)

Norwena Thomas (NT)

Devbai Patel (DP)

Carmen Coffey (CC) - up to item 4

Circulation to all present plus:                        

Cllr Michael Pavey

Elizabeth Jones

Umesh Raichada

Terry Molloy

Sabina Netty

Sue Knowler

Maxine Henderson

ITEM

DISCUSSION

ACTION

MH opened the meeting at 6pm.  He congratulated GB for receiving an OBE and so did everyone else.

MH asked if everyone knew each other.  Cllr HG said she didn’t know who RJ was so he introduced himself.

1.0

Apologies

1.1

Cllr Michael Pavey (Cllr MP)

Umesh Raichada (UR)

Terry Molloy (TM)

Sabina Netty (SN)

2.0.

Minutes of the meeting held on 4^th December 2013 and Matters Arising

2.1

Accuracy

2.1.1

Item 6.21 which was a quote from TM should say ‘no member should be released more than half the time of their work time’ instead of ‘no member should be released no more than half the time of their work time’.

2.1.2

The above amendment was noted and the minutes were approved as accurate record.

2.2

Matters Arising – (From the Action Log)

2.2.1

Item 1 – A clarification was received and MH read out the response from the DfE on voting by non schools representatives:

•No voting on de-delegations

•Only PVI representatives can vote on the consultation on the funding formula

•All non-school members can vote on any other Schools Forum business

It was therefore noted that all non-school members can vote on any other Schools Forum business which excludes consultation, funding formula and de-delegations. 

2.2.2

LG was not convinced that this advice was correct as she felt the guidance clearly indicates that non-school members have the right to vote on all non de-delegation items.  SW said that officers would send out a note attaching the response from DfE so that individual members can seek advice should they wish do so.

DP/NT

2.2.3

Item 2 – Report on adequacy of Growth Funding in 2013/14 to inform provision for 2014/15 – on agenda for this forum.

2.2.4

Item 3 - SEN Funding Report - A report to be brought to the February Schools Forum.

CC

2.2.5

Item 5 – Review of the Early Years Intervention Team is to be brought to the Schools Forum.

Sue Gates

2.2.6

Item 6 – Strategy for FT Nursery Places is on the agenda for this Forum. 

2.2.7

Item 1 – FSM eligibility assessments – A report to be brought to the February Schools Forum.

Paula Buckley

2.2.8

Item 2 – School Admissions – A report to be brought to the February Schools Forum.

Paula Buckley

2.2.9

Budget Review of Alternative Education Service –

•      To present partnership model that oversees devolved funds

•      Develop further proposals to introduce a rewards and incentives funding framework

Sara Kulay

2.2.10

Schools Forum membership – DP said this can be brought to the next Schools Forum as we now have the most up to date census data and as Gladstone Park Primary School will be converting to academy on 1^st April 2014.  Cllr HG asked if she could join the Early Years Sub Group as she is involved with Early Years and Children’s Centres.  SW said this could be resolved as part of the membership report.  However we will be reviewing all the sub groups to find out if they need to continue and to determine if they still serve the purpose of what they were formed for.  Cllr HG asked when will this be reviewed and SW said at the next forum.

DP/NT

3.0

2014/15 Early Years – Full Time Places Assessment

3.1

SW presented this report which is being brought to the Forum with issues that have been outstanding for some time.  Early Years Sub Group took place and the report explains the issues discussed at that meeting.

3.2

The first issue was the increase in the base rate to the early years single funding formula by 3% which is to be funded from the overfunding of 2013/14 full time places.  The second issue is to fund a post in the Early Years Inclusion Team to support children with emerging SEN in schools nursery classes and PVI’s.  This was proposed to be funded from the £500k allocated towards SEN to Early Years from 2013/14.  The third issue is to retain the current FSM eligibility rudiments and process for funding full time places.

3.3

MH invited members to comment.  LB asked what the impact would be when the free school meals are introduced.  This needs to be considered as it is coming into effect in September 2014. 

3.4

SW said that no information has been released by DfE on revenue funding but will check.  MH asked for this to be put on the agenda as a future item.

DP

3.5

The recommendation to note the following items were noted by the Schools Forum:

i.   Increasing the EYSFF Base Rate by 3% in 2014/15

ii.  Additional Early Years Inclusion Team post

iii.Retaining the current FSM eligibility requirement for funding full time places.

4.0

Out of School Provision and Provision in Pupil Growth

4.1

CC presented this report.  This report provides update on meeting the demand of the pupils with out of school places.  It details the projects with all associated funding to set up temporary and permanent provisions that have been created for college places, EAL Projects, additional secondary Year 10 and 11 classes, new primary classes, expansions and annexes.    She explained that there are two units at Claremont and Queens Park Schools for newly arrived pupils with EAL as well as courses at the College of North West London for pupils who arrive mid year and cannot secure places in schools. Additional places in lower year groups, i.e. Year 7 and 8, in secondary schools are available so there may be less demand in EAL units and the college.  She said the need for these units have been longer than originally anticipated. A  Headteacher Consultant was brought in for three months in 2005 and is still working in this area.

4.2

Paragraph 4 details the 2012/13 and 2013/14 schemes which show the growing demand.  It is anticipated that 2014/15 demand would be similar to 2013/14.  It was confirmed that the growth funding for basic needs expansions is estimated to be £2.443m and current Rising Rolls allocation of £1.130m making a total of £3.573m.

4,3

RA asked CC to explain what the Fair Access Policy was and how it is applied in Brent.  CC responded that the DfE through the Admission Code, requires LA’s to place children in schools promptly. Every LA is required to have a Fair Access Protocol (FAP). Children without a school place must be prioritised on waiting lists over those who have a school place and wish to transfer. This prioritisation has been implemented in Brent for some years. The admissions code and the FAP allow for circumstances when schools are required to admit children over their Planned Admission Number (PAN). Due to pressure on primary places, and the number of children without a school place, this has only recently been implemented in Brent, and to date, in the limited circumstances where a sibling has a place in a school, and it is impossible for parents to be at two schools at the same time, or the distance between schools makes it unreasonable for parents to take up a place.

4.4

RA said that children are new to the country and suddenly they get a primary place over those on the waiting list.  The LA does not check ID as when they are in the school they suddenly have siblings and suddenly jump the queue.  CC said it’s difficult to discuss individual cases but LA’s are not allowed to check passports.  The only check carried out is the proof of address to validate the residency in the borough.  CC said if the schools were concerned about the legitimacy of an application, then to get in touch with her.  RA argued that some parents know the loophole and jump the queue whilst others are still on the waiting list.  She said ‘it’s not a Fair Access Policy then; it’s just an Access Policy’

4.5

CC said that schools can request evidence of both the birth certificates and passports whereas Local Authorities cannot.  RA said that some foreign documentation was hard to authenticate.

4.6

SL asked if the Fair Access Policy was just for those just arrived, CC replied that the FAP covers all children without a school place, and the categories are set out in the Protocol.

4.7

LG said if the class sizes increase it has a detrimental effect on children’s education.  She is aware that it’s not Brent’s fault but the LA needs to make a stand on class sizes.  She is aware that both CC and SW are aware of this issue.

4.8

SL said the three schools that are receiving £25k, is it a recent policy as she doesn’t recall receiving it?  CC said it’s not available for bulge but only for permanent classes which has been introduced recently.  If the school expands by 1FE the school will receive £25k as one off payment.  It’s a reflection of additional management time.  Those that have been through it will know how much management time is required and it was felt unreasonable not to pay schools something towards this.  It can take up to 15 months to complete expansion projects.  ML asked if it is backdated to which CC said if Schools Forum wants to approve it.  MH asked at what stage they get devolved budget.  SW said once the class become permanent pupils appear on census.  LB asked if the College of North West London project is permanent.  CC said until sufficient places are available.  It’s the same as Anansi which aren’t planned for, permanent, but may last for 2-3 years. 

4.9

MB asked if the Anansi project for 90 pupils would carry on until all those pupils absorb into Reception classes within other schools.  CC replied that they may be kept there more than one year once building work is completed so Anansi may take on Year 1 and Year 2 pupils. 

4.10

It was confirmed that the anticipated forecast for 2014/15 expansions budget would be similar to 2013/14 anticipated places budget.  These are as listed on the table under paragraph 4.1 from Anansi Nursery to Vicars Green School projects.  Further expenditure will depend on demand.  KJ highlighted that 25 provisions have been involved and have expanded in the borough and said it was phenomenal. 

4.11

MH thanked CC for the report and said that the Members will continue to monitor the situation.

5.0

Consultation on Schools Budget 2014/15

5.1

This report provides update on indicative 2014/15 Individual Schools, Early Years and High Needs funding following the announcement of the DSG on 19^th December 2013. SW introduced the report and said that other officers will contribute to presenting the report.

5.2

The Individual Schools Budget is prepared using the DfE’s model which needs to be submitted to DfE for approval by 21^st January 2014.  Also presented as part of the report are other delegated budgets to special schools, nursery units and schools, schools with Additional Resource Provision and SEN statemented.

5.3

An additional criterion is being applied to safeguard schools to avoid penalising them for having a high number of Statemented pupils.  NT explained the criteria used for Targeted High Needs.  This has been discussed with the SEN sub group and the criteria approved by them was that where a school has 4% or more of the number on roll of the Statemented pupils the school would received £5k per pupil for each in-borough statemented pupil the school has above the average of each phase.  Only the two Malorees Schools qualified for this funding in the total sum of £70k.  Cllr HG asked why Capital City was not on the list of schools and it was confirmed that this is because it is a non-recoupment academy in the same was as Ark and therefore they are not part of the Local Authority’s schools calculation.  They receive Early Yeas and SEN top-up funding from the Local Authorities. MH confirmed that those pupils are removed from the LA’s budget calculations.

5.4

MH asked how is the CRC funding top-sliced.  DP said this does not affect schools’ ISB as CRC was always centrally funded.

5.5

LB asked for clarification on how the High Needs provisions for under 5’s would be funded.  These are the Additionally Resourced Provisions (ARP) units and Children with Disabilities (CwD).  DP said that these would continue to be funded in the same way as in the current financial year.  DP thought the CWD budget was funded from the High Needs Block but could not confirm.  LB said she is not sure that it is.  She was concerned that the Early Years block has been squeezed and felt that these units should be funded from the High Needs Block. She asked when this would be confirmed.  DP said probably in time for next Schools Forum but it is a requirement to show each blocks funding as part of the Section 251 Return which has a deadline of last working day in March every year.

5.6

LB asked why there was no indicative budget for PVI nurseries.  DP said that this was not made available last year and did not have the actual to date data to calculate the 2014-15 budgets.  LB said they do termly returns on actual pupil number and saw no reason for not being able to produce indicative allocation to PVI’s.  DP agreed to produce indicative allocation to PVI’s.

DP

5.7

NT pointed out that that KS3 and KS4 Pupil Referral Units have merged and the indicative budget for that unit is calculated but an indicative calculation for Health Needs Education Service (former BETS) has not been included in Appendix C.  It is under central costs. 

5.8

DP pointed out an error in the report under paragraph 2.2 which should exclude ‘non’ and should read as ’Based on this, the final Schools ISB (including recoupment academies) for 2014-15 will be £190.7m, an increase of £1.9m from 2013/14.  

5.9

DP said that the ratio has slightly dropped from the indicatives but without analysing further could not confirm where within the schools funding it is affected.  This could be that in the provisional budget it was at the bottom level of 1:1.27 and it is now at a higher level of 1:1.26 but is not a significant movement.  MB said if it drops below 1:1.25, this should be addressed at that point in the future.

5.10

AP asked how the SEN funding is recouped for in and out borough pupils.  DP said that there is a Recoupment Officer in post that deals with all SEN recoupments.  The schools do not have to deal with their own recoupments.  It was agreed last year by the schools forum to fund this post from the DSG.

5.11

Recommendations:

11.1 a)   A criteria for Targeted SEN Funding at £5k per pupil above the average as detailed in paragraph 5.3 as above was approved.

11.1b)    A Growth funding at £2.44 m was approved.  (This is in addition to the rising rolls contingency of £1.130m which remains the same as last year.

5.12

The following were noted:

11.2a)    The Individual Schools Budget as to be submitted to the DfE for approval

11.2b)    The Special and PRU’s budget

11.2c)     SEN Statemented Funding and Targeted Funding

11.2d)   The Early Years Indicative Budgets

6.0

Any Other Business

6.1

NONE.  The Forum ended at 7.45pm.

No

Action

Completion Date

Owner

1

Circulate a note with DfE’s clarification on voting rights to non Schools Forum members.

February 2014

NT/DP

2

Update on Universal Free School Meals to Reception, Year 1 and 2 pupils.

February 2014

DP/NT

3

Calculate indicative budgets for Private Voluntary and Independent (PVI) 3 and 4 year old providers

February 2014

DP

4

SEN Funding Update

February 2014

Carmen Coffey

5

Review of Early Intervention Team – to be presented to EY Sub Group prior to being presented to Schools Forum

February 2014

Sue Gates

6

Find out if parents apply on-line for FSM eligibility assessment, how they are identified if they attend maintained school or academy.

February Schools Forum

Paula Buckley

7

Benchmarking of End to End process and cost per pupil in processing  admissions application

February Schools Forum

Paula Buckley/ Margaret Read

8

Budget Review of Alternative Education Service –

•      To present partnership model that oversees devolved funds

•      Develop further proposals to introduce a rewards and incentives funding framework

February 2014

Sara Kulay

9

Schools Forum Membership to be recalculated if any more schools convert to academy. Otherwise refresh for the start of the year using the latest (January) census

February 2014

NT/DP

2014/15 Action Points

10

Consultation of Scheme for Delegation -

Approval of required amendments to the

scheme

June 2014

NT

11

Low Carbon Schools Programme Update Report

September 2014

Emily Ashton

12

Provide details of what service is covered by DSG allocation at GBOEC

September 2014

Angela Chiswell