School Funding Reform Consultation Briefing for Louise Malik Service Leader (Resources) September 2012 Purpose of session To outline the key proposals of the school funding reforms To highlight the local impact of the reforms To enable you to feel able to respond to the consultation The Consultation Consultation opened on Monday 10 th September - it closes on Monday 8 th October The document is comprehensive, its sectioned as follows: 1.Introduction 2.Methodology 3.Executive Summary 4.Overall Structure of the Schools Budget 5.Changes to the Current Formula for Mainstream Schools 6.Additional Delegations 7.De-delegations 8.Funding for High Needs Pupils 9.Early Years 10.Overall Position and Next Steps 4 - Overall structure of the schools budget The Schools budget will in future be split into 3 blocks: 1.Centrally retained schools block; 2.Early years block includes contingency for growth during the year; and 3.High needs pupils ? Do you agree that the allocation of the current schools budget ( ) is allocated to each of the new blocks? 5 - Changes to the current formula for mainstream schools AWPU Currently 3 rates for primary, Reception, KS1 and KS2 but only one rate permitted for primary from In secondary we have 3 rates currently and although separate rates for KS3 and KS4 are permitted the proposal is to have one rate for secondary. ? Do you agree that there should only be one AWPU rate within the secondary phase? A separate rate for post 16 is permitted from However, it is not proposed to continue to have one. ? Do you agree that there us no separate AWPU rate for post 16? Both the primary and secondary values have been calculated by taking the rates per key stage in and multiplying by the number of years in each KS to determine the average. The two rates created are 2, Primary and 3, Secondary. ? Do you agree that the calculations for the single AWPU rates for each phase are correct? There are a number of factors that are ending; Gifted and Talented; Lump sums, some School Specific Items; NQTs; Safety Net, post 16 AWPU and ASTs are proposed to be distributed through AWPU ? Do you agree with the reallocation of these ending factors into AWPU? SEN The current SEN factor is based on a 3 year average of prior attainment as a proxy indicator of the level of SEN in each school In future the SEN factor must be based on data provided by the DfE. For primary schools in the short term its can either be based on proportion of pupils not achieving either 78 or 73 points on the FSP. It is proposed to use 78 points as the measure. ? Do you agree that the data issued by the DfE based on children not achieving 78 points in the FSP is used to distribute resources through the SEN factor in the primary phase? Currently a minimum level of SEN funding of 11,691, but this is no longer permitted. It is proposed to take funding out of the SEN factor to provide all schools with a 10,000 lump sum. This ensures a minimum level of funding for SEN. ? Do you agree that the resources distributed through the SEN factor are reduced, to enable 10,000 to be included in the lump sums to ensure that every school receives a minimum level of funding for SEN? ? Do you agree that the remaining resources currently allocated through the SEN factor, after the transfer of funding to the lump sums, are allocated through the new SEN factor based on the prior attainment data issued by the DfE? Concern has been expressed that the data that has to be used may not be robust. It is proposed to cash limit the value of the SEN formula factor for each phase. ?Do you agree that the amount available for the SEN factor in the formula is cash limited separately for the primary and secondary phases so that increases and decreases in data affect the unit value rather than the amount of funding allocated? One to One Tuition is one of the formula factors which is no longer allowable. It is proposed that this is included in the SEN factor allocated across both phases using the same amount per notional SEN pupil. ? Do you agree that the funding that was allocated through the one to one tuition formula factor is redistributed through the SEN factor at the same value per phase? Social Deprivation Currently there are two elements to the social deprivation formula factor:- the traditional element based on census data and the FSM element. In future LAs can use IDACI (Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index) and/or free school meals. It is proposed to redistribute the traditional element of the social deprivation factor using the IDACI data. ? Do you agree that the funding that was allocated through the traditional element of the social deprivation factor, based on the census data, is redistributed using the IDACI data provided by the DfE? The DfE have defined IDACI bandings. Values that are the same for primary and secondary schools are proposed. ? Do you agree that the IDACI band values proposed for primary and secondary schools are implemented? It is proposed that the funding currently allocated using FSM is redistributed using the DfE ever 6 FSM measure. This is in line with the pupil premium funding. ? Do you agree that the funding that was allocated through the FSM element of the social deprivation factor is redistributed using the ever 6 FSM data provided by the DfE? The SSF made a commitment to move towards the equalisation of the unit value for FSM social deprivation. It is proposed that the rate per FSM will be the same for both primary and secondary schools. ? Do you agree that the unit value for the FSM element of the social deprivation factor is the same for both the primary and secondary phases? It is proposed to allocate 3 ending factors (parts of the current lump sum, schools specifics and turnover) via the FSM element of the social deprivation factor. ? Do you agree that the reallocation of some of the ending factors into the FSM element of the social deprivation factor is implemented as proposed? Lump Sums Due to ending factors it is proposed to include the following in lump sums: small school support, KS2 swimming, SEN factor ? Do you agree that the reallocation of ending factors into the lump sum is implemented as proposed? The proposed value of the lump sum is 125,140 per school - a small increase for primary schools but less than half of current amount for secondary schools. ? Do you agree that the proposed value of the lump sum is implemented for primary and secondary schools? Rates Currently estimated funding is allocated to schools and then adjusted if the actual rates charge is different. In year adjustments are no longer permitted. However, rates allocations can be held centrally for maintained mainstream schools with any over or under spend carried forward as part of the DSG. ? Do you agree that funding rates for maintained mainstream schools are maintained centrally? Exceptional Circumstances The EFA can approve exceptional factors for 3 areas; listed buildings, buildings that are rented or boarding provision. An application has been approved in respect of rent only for those schools that meet the criterion. ? Do you agree that the exceptional factor for rents is introduced? ? Do you agree that the remaining allowable factors are not used as part of the North Somerset funding formula? 6 Additional delegations The DfE have identified what funding can be retained centrally as part of the schools block with everything else being delegated to schools. Areas retained as part of the schools block are; combined services, SSF costs, carbon credits, prudential borrowing, co-ordinated admissions and contingency for pupil growth and infant class size qualifying measures. For most of these the budgets retained can be no more than that set for and are for existing commitments only. Its also possible to retain funding centrally for both the high needs and early years block for spend specific to those areas. ? Do you agree with the proposed amounts to be delegated to the Primary, Secondary and Special phases for each of the additional delegations in section 6? ? Do you agree with the proposed method of delegation to the Primary & Secondary phases for each of the additional delegations detailed in section 6? ? Do you agree that the remaining resources are distributed to secondary schools via AWPU? 7 De-delegation There are some elements that can be de- delegated but only for maintained primary and secondary schools. The elements where de-delegation is permitted are: Support for ethnic minority groups Inclusion advisory team behaviour Behaviour improvement programme Licences and subscriptions Future schools cont Schools central funds (maternity/paternity only) Support for schools in financial difficulty Insurance RPTAs FSM eligibility Contingencies With the exception of the two above in blue it is proposed that these elements are de- delegated. ? Do you agree with the proposed de- delegations from maintained schools? ? Do you agree that any over or under spends on de-delegated services are used to adjust the value of the de-delegations required in the following financial year? ? Do you agree that the over and underspends are calculated for each de- delegated service but with the affecting schools receiving a reimbursement, or making an additional payment of the net value? 8 Funding for high needs pupils Top-up funding will follow the pupil. It is proposed that top up funding will be allocated to schools, resource bases and PRUs on a monthly basis. ? Do you agree that top up funding will be allocated to schools, resource bases and PRUs on a monthly basis? ? Do you agree that top up funding will start or cease in the month in which the pupil is admitted/leaves if this takes place on or before the 15th of the month. Where the pupils is admitted/leaves after the 15th of the month top up funding will start or cease from the following month? It is proposed that top up funding is reduced to reflect the level of attendance for part time placements and calculated on a daily basis. ? Do you agree that top up funding is reduced to reflect the level of attendance for part time placements and calculated on a daily basis? It is proposed that short term placements are funded on a termly basis (based on a 6 term year). ? Do you agree that short term placements are funded on a termly basis (based on a 6 term year)? The DfE considers that there is an important role to be played by a form of banding framework in facilitating discussions between commissioners and providers about pupil placements and appropriate levels of top-up funding. It is proposed to establish a universal banding framework for the vast majority of high needs pupils regardless of the type of provision that will best meet their needs. ? Do you agree that a universal banding framework is implemented for the vast majority of high needs pupils regardless of the type of provision that will best meet their needs? The proposed universal banding and values have been calculated by using the existing special school funding levels or audit funding values. ? Do you agree that the universal bandings, values and descriptors are implemented for all settings from April 2013? It is proposed that the funding for children and young people currently in receipt of audit funding or placed in a special schools/resource bases is migrated from the current categories to the equivalent new category in April ? Do you agree that children and young people currently in receipt of audit funding or placed in a special school/resource bases are migrated from the current categories to the equivalent new category when the new bandings are implemented in April 2013? The DfE have a strong recommendation that the contribution expected to support the special educational needs of each pupil from a mainstream schools delegated budget share should be up to 6,000p.a (element 2). ? Do you agree that a level of 6,000 p.a. is set as the amount which mainstream schools will be expected to contribute up to for the special educational needs of each pupil? It is proposed that the funding released should be redistributed to mainstream schools, within phase, through the SEN element of the formula. ? Do you agree that funding released as a result of increased contributions towards SEN from delegated budget shares and the migration to the new universal bandings be redistributed within phase through the SEN formula factor? The LA continues to be required to publish a notional SEN budget for each mainstream school. This can include any element of the formula which is deemed as being relevant for funding support for pupils with SEN. ? Do you agree the calculation of the notional SEN budget for mainstream schools is agreed? The universal band values are reduced as appropriate to create top up values. ? Do you agree the top up values are agreed for implementation from April 2013? In order to support the proposals for high needs pupils it is necessary to introduce a funding moderation process. ? The proposal for top up funding moderation is agreed for implementation for the academic year? 9 Early years No significant implications in North Somerset. Schools with maintained nursery classes will receive a separate notification of their EYSFF. The deprivation factor remains as it is DfE not providing the IDACI data for early years settings. There will be a minimum funding guarantee based on the hourly rates. A separate consultation will be issued in Oct/Nov to all providers funded by the EYSFF. With effect from April 2013 the funding for free entitlement for 2 year olds will form part of the DSG. ? Do you agree that the EYSFF continues to use the existing census data for social deprivation factor for ? 10 Overall position The MFG provides short term protection but schools are encouraged to incorporate the full implications into their financial planning. More change likely in In future a MFG cap can be applied to schools that gain funding in order to make the protection for others affordable. It is proposed to ensure that the MFG is no greater than in (110,271). ? Do you agree that a cap on gains is introduced to ensure that the total cost of the MFG is no greater than that in ? 10 - Next steps Respond to the Consultation by Monday 8 th October 2012 somerset.gov.uk/consult.ti/fairfund1314/http://consult.n- somerset.gov.uk/consult.ti/fairfund1314/ consultationHome The SSF meet on Wednesday 17 th October 2012 Proforma to EFA 31 st October 2012 Issue a tool to schools in Term to estimate funding allocations. Final Formula Allocations by mid-March earlier if possible place funding only. Contacts If you have any further questions you can contact the team via: Phone and ask for Clare, Jemma, Emma or Louise. There will be a FAQ area within the consultation website which will be updated throughout the consultation period.