Following an announcement from the Education Secretary on 16^th December 2018, additional funding for the Higher Needs block has been allocated to local authorities, which for Torbay works out at £268,221 for the years 2018/19 and £268,221 for 2019/20.

Because of this announcement, this paper has been bought to Forum at the request of the EFSA/DfE, to reconsider the virement application and respond before the deadline of 15^th January.

The Forum debated the options presented to them by Rachael, with some expressing disappointment that the three options presented do not contain any monies going to Special Schools, despite the funding being released for that purpose. Despite acknowledging that overspending on Higher Needs pupils is largely responsible for the current financial deficit, it was felt by some that that this additional funding should not be used to offset historical debt.

Other members made the point that other sectors such as Post 16 and Early Years have had no funding uplift at all, and that the size of the collective deficit should perhaps override any individual sectors interests.

Members queried how long we have to achieve a balanced budget, although there is no definite answer to this any Schools Forum in deficit will have to have a detailed recovery plan in place in the next two years.

With that in mind, a fourth option was proposed in addition to the three already given, whereby the additional funding should be split with 50% used to offset the forecast deficit and 50% allocated to Special Schools. This option was proposed as follows:

Option 4 – That additional funds for 2019/20 are allocated to the higher needs block to 50% (or up to 3% growth) to special schools and 50% to offset the forecast deficit.

Separate votes on the allocation of funds were held for each of the two years allocations.

Option 1 – the additional funds for 18/19 are allocated to the Higher Needs Block with a view to reduce the spending on Higher Needs:

Yes: 10

No: 1

Abstain: 1

It was felt that this was the best decision for the current year given the deficit position.

Before deciding on how the funds for 19/20 should be allocated, Rachael drew members attention to an update on Planned Pupil Growth for 2019/20, following conversations on secondary expansions with the Regional Schools Commissioner.

*Please note that this was originally to be discussed under item 10 of the agenda, but given the ramifications that any decision made would have on the unallocated funding, it was decided to incorporate this item as part of the wider discussion.* 

After receiving the 2019/20 allocation for Pupil Growth, It was proposed to allocate an additional 30 places to both Paignton Community & Sports Academy and The Spires College, allowing the LA to work towards the recommended 5-7% surplus capacity. A single vote was held on both of the proposals as follows:

That Schools Forum agree to use Pupil Growth allocation to allocate an additional 30 places to both PCSA and Spires College:

Yes: 12

No: 0

Abstain: 0

This is expected to cost £349k out of an allocation of £567k, leaving £218k of Pupil Growth funding unallocated.  Given this information, the decision on how to distribute this money then formed part of the wider debate on Higher Needs funding, with members querying whether 2019/20 allocation could now be used elsewhere. Two options were presented to members, either increasing the minimum per pupil levels in the funding formula (Option A), or allocating the funds through the various drivers (Option B).

To use Option A to allocate the additional £218k from the Planned Pupil Growth funding:

Yes: 8

No: 1

Abstain: 3

As Option A was approved by members, Option B was not voted on.

Discussion then moved on to the 2019/20 additional allocation, with the three original options as well as option 4 debated at length. Option 1 was put to vote first:

The additional funds for 19/20 are allocated used to offset the overspend:

Yes: 3

No: 8

Abstain: 1

As this was not approved, the next decision was where to place the money, with the three remaining options voted on concurrently:

Option 2 – additional funds are taken off the virement application and allocated through the Schools Block: 4

Option 3 – Additional funds are both allocated to the Higher Needs Block and the Schools Block to offset the virement application on a 50/50 basis: 0

Option 4 - That additional funds for 2019/20 are allocated to the higher needs block to 50% (or up to 3% growth) to special schools and 50% to offset the forecast deficit.  : 7

Abstain: 1

Members felt that, despite the size of the current deficit, the LA is at least acknowledging the problems being faced, and when compared with other LAs, are creating a sustainable plan to address recovery.