The Forum welcomed Sarah Tomkinson in her new role as Chair of the meeting. Sarah introduced Sam Walton from the Devon Audit Partnership, attending the meeting to talk about Safety Valve reporting.

Apologies were received from Steven Hulme and Steve Margetts.

Sarah explained that the Forum still has a vacancy for a Primary Academy representative to join, with the agreement of members Rachael will write to schools one final time asking for representation.  

Minutes of the last meeting held on 23^rd November were then discussed. Rachael provided an update on the Overview and Scrutiny Board that took place on the 7^th December. It was pleasing to note that  elected Members wanted more detailed actions being taken forward on the provision and support that is available across our local area for mental health services and will be a focus for children's overview and scrutiny.

Tim asked whether the cumulative underspend in Early Years would be reviewed at the end of the financial year, as this was not recorded in the minutes. Rachael agreed to discuss this as an agenda item in March.

Minutes of the meeting were agreed as a true and accurate record.

At the last meeting, members were asked to consider becoming Vice-Chair, we received one nomination, for Stewart Biddles, so Sarah put it to the vote. Members were unanimous in agreeing to Stewart becoming Vice-Chair.

Members were shown the Terms of Reference for Schools Forum. Rachael felt it important for everyone to be clear on their roles and responsibilities and the delegated powers of the Forum. It was agreed that more detailed guidance from the DfE handbook should be included within the Terms of Reference. Members also asked that the ToR be included as an agenda item on a yearly basis, noting that they had not been updated since March 2021. Rachael and Sarah agreed to this, explaining that it would be best to schedule this at the first meeting of each financial year.

After looking at the membership of the Forum, Rachael decided to try one final time to recruit a member from the Grammar schools, and will write and be really clear to colleagues that they wouldn't have a representation on the school's forum moving forward unless that seat is filled. As for the vacant Primary Academy head teacher, both Stewart Biddles and Stuart Bellworthy agreed to speak to their colleagues to find a representative.

Stewart made the point that some of the language used in the ToR regarding a Chairman and Vice-Chairman is now a bit outdated and should be changed. It was also requested that the notice period of meetings be extended as members felt that 2 weeks notice was not sufficient. Rachael and Sarah agreed to both of these changes.

Rob Parr presented the latest financial report. The main areas of concern in terms of the safety valve moving forward are on the independent special school fees and other packages of support for EHCP. Rob explained that this year they are offset by some sizeable underspends, for example joint funded placements which is the education element of our residential placements. But because our residential placements are much reduced that's impacts on the education side.

There is also a large underspend on MTS as it's not running in its intended capacity. So that's £200k relating to last year and £150k for this year. So in effect they're being offset to a degree, but if those underspends don't arise next year, then potentially we are under pressure unless our numbers start to fall.

One of the main changes between this position and November is our recoupment with other authorities (mainly with Devon). We have a few pupils in other authorities, but mainly with Devon and that's been an ongoing negotiation relating to charges and pupils relating to last financial in and this financial year and they've almost just been agreed, putting the overspend up between November and January. Despite this, Rob clarified that we are still within our target in terms of what we set the safety valve at.

Lawrence asked for clarification on what business support and business intelligence meant, Rob explained that this was staff teams that support the DSG and all the functions within DSG, for example data analysts. Lawrence then asked about the education element of residential placements. Rachael explained that we only want children to be taught in residential provisions away from Torbay if that is exactly what is required for their care or education needs. The LA historically has had a high number of children that had gone into residential provision. So it is a deliberate decision to actually review the children that were in residential provision and make sure that actually they could be brought back further to towards their community but also receive support through that, that fostering network or through connected carriers and things where that's appropriate as well. So it is something that the local authority doesn't see rising in the future. It's a position that we want to maintain low residential numbers. Residential provisions are only used where there are really extreme examples of children needing different types of provision that that could not be applied in a different way. It's our published mission within our social care sufficiency strategy.

Mike Lock then asked a question on recoupment, and how accurate the process is now for charging authorities. Rob explained that whilst it is still in the process of being established, he is confident that the mechanisms in place are ensuring that Torbay is getting the correct monies paid.

Rob then went on to discuss the comparison of initial DSG funding between 2023/24 and 2024/25. that just shows across the schools block, central schools block, early years, high needs etc.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Forum then heard from Rachel Setter, Divisional Director of Learning and Partnership Hubs, who presented a paper on the changes to Early Years funding moving forward. paper is looking at the uplift of the current EY entitlements and the expansion to the two year olds from April 24 and children under nine months from September 24 for working parents. The main points  around the expansion means that the current retained 5% for staffing and systems costs would be considerably increased. Therefore, we've reduced that down to 3.5% with the aim to work towards reducing that further to 3% as the expansions increase in the following financial year. We have kept the ALFI payments and disadvantaged payments at the same rates and as detailed in the proposal around the ALFI payments. The reason behind that is to include early years provisions that are within schools to be able to access that they haven't been able to access historically and also to relieve the burden from the high needs block. So although we're proposing that we retain that £100k for this financial year while we monitor the demand and the potential increase on the ALFI budget, the aim is to then not need the £100k in the future, which will obviously reduce the pressures on the high needs block.

Tim asked whether are we actually going to pay out deprivation payments on the basis of those who are those eligible 2 year olds who live in the appropriate post codes – Rachel clarified that this was the case. Tim also asked whether we could simply take the £45K out of this year's underspend and go down to 3% now, meaning there will be no further change in future years. Rachael Williams explained that if we are planning to add to our debt, then forum members would need to identify where they don't want to have £45k worth of spend taking place between now and the end of March because we cannot go over our safety valve agreement. We've got an investment that will come back as a result of not going over our financial window that we have promised to the ESFA, so Forum have got the decision there that actually we'll have that inward investment to write off the deficit position. So if if that decision was taken, then £45k worth of spend in the higher needs block would need to be identified as a saving and we'd need to be able to enact that straight away to not put us in that position by the 31st of March.

Lawrence raised concerns around the additional funding for 2 year olds and where that extra money would come from, and whether it means we can still support the same numbers in proportion. Rachel Setter said that the reasons for not moving directly to the 3% and keeping the £100k is so that we have this year to really monitor and consider what that will that demand will be and if it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

An update report on the Safety Valve was then showed to members. Rachael said that this report was shared with the ESFA on the 15^th December, so reflects the current budget position as reported at Novembers Forum.

The first condition of the grant is around our special school numbers and really that parental confidence within mainstream we detail for the Education, Skills and Funding Agency. In terms of our numbers overall, we have managed and controlled those numbers throughout the year and that's reflected in the financial information and the report that Rob has provided to us today as well.

Our special school trajectory was in line with our agreed budget position with the ESFA. Rachael explained that there is a significant pressure, we have just been through the January SEP panels and I know colleagues that have taken part in that process have found those decisions really, really challenging regarding the numbers of applications that are certainly coming through and the demand for special school placements as well compared to those that are available. But we have managed within the numbers that we have stated to the ESFA, we are going to be potentially bringing back a proposal for Schools Forum around how do we support some of those children that may not have been given a special school placement because that's equally as important as, as also managing the numbers at those schools as well.

Rachael also mentioned in this section that we are seeing an increased number of tribunals and obviously undergoing also mediations with families around some of those decisions as well. We are being really robust in our tribunal process, responses are around mitigating the decisions that we feel are right in terms of our refusal rates, but also the decisions we're making around efficient use of resources in our local area as well. But members of forum should note that if looking at overall tribunal statistics, about 94% to 96% of them go in parental phase. We also are heavily involved in tribunal process with our special schools for Devon tribunals as well and that's placing pressure on our on our system as well. We have met with our DfE colleagues over the tensions that exist between our neighbouring authorities and us and our ability to respond in the same way for children around those actions as well. There is, however, a commitment from the DfE to provide us with a consultant to facilitate further that work across our neighbouring authorities. We are meeting that consultant at the start of February to think about the scope of that. So in this area, we have rated ourselves still amber for this because we are delivering activity in line with our original DSG management plan and in line with our safety valve condition.

Lawrence asked for a little more clarity on the legal fees of tribunals, Rachael agreed that this needs reporting and agreed to build this into the next financial report.

The next grant  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Verbal update

Rachael gave a verbal update on Alternative Provisions. Members were informed that meetings are continuing and we are looking at the alternative provisions and what is being used and we've got all of the data and finances attached to that. But we've also taken that wider in terms of sense efficiency overall as well. So that we're putting all of the intelligence in in one place.
We have done that now for education other than at school as well. So those children that are not on a school role and actually what's our spend in relation to that as well and we are doing work on the primary areas of needs behind those as well. So bringing all of that into kind of a sufficiency statement and understanding so that we can look at our spend over that that area. There is a further meeting of that group this afternoon an internal one looking at the how that work has progressed to bring it all back together. Rachael explained that following Novembers Forum, Laura Greenland is in the process of putting this information into a written report, which will be shared with Forum members in a later meeting.

Verbal update

we have been handing the budget to the medical tuition service and then  recalling the budget for the spend that doesn't incur, which has been factored into our financial reports as well. So we are not allowing the Medical Tuition Service to fill gaps and voids that come into the service because we recognise they are not delivering what they are saying because of their lack of registration at this time. So wanted for members to be aware of that. So we're managing the costs associated with the MTS at this moment. There has been an in depth analysis of the children that have attended the medical tuition service from 2016 all the way to the present, looking at what their primary area of needs were when they entered the provision, where did they come from, how long did they stay at the medical tuition service and what was the length of their stay. The future direction of travel would indicate that we don't need a 50 place school to meet the needs of our medical pupils, but we do need some group based provision. We do need some a school of some nature, but we also then need a community offer that sits alongside mainstream schools to be able to deliver provision for children that are not able to attend school due to their medical needs at this time. So we have met with the Department for Education and we have met with our barrister to understand what processes we can use to get a registered provision of a different nature. These talks are progressing and we will be able to confirm a decision once the DfE and ourselves have looked at that as what are the options for delivery moving forward as well. Rachael acknowledged that it feels slow but stressed that we're taking every single step to get to the place where it can be a registered provision understood and recognised by all key players as well. Rachael explained that what we're not going to do is return to have a Medical Tuition Service that actually was subsuming education, health and care plans because it should never have done that in the 1st place. It shouldn't have been a special school, but it's understanding that need at this time.

·         SEND statistics on transitions budgets

·         Safety Valve update

·         Allocations

·         Thursday 21st March 2024, 09:00

·         Thursday 2nd May 2024, 09:00

·         Thursday 20th June 2024, 09:00