Agenda and draft minutes

The minutes of the previous meeting of the Rotherham Schools’ Forum meeting held on 30th November, 2012, were discussed. 

It was requested that an alteration be made to Minute number 49 (Structure of the Rotherham Schools’ Forum and Working Groups), to reflect the comment that all of the Working Groups should contain a representative with 16 – 19 expertise, to reflect the changing responsibilities in relation to Raising Participation.

Resolved: -  That, subject to the above amendment being made, the minutes of the previous meeting be agreed as an accurate record. 

The Swinton Learning Community representative gave an update on the work of the Leaning Support Services and Autism Communication Team Working Group. 

• The Working Group had been made aware of the Autism Spectrum Disorder Scrutiny Review.  The Working Group would receive a copy of the final report for consideration;
• The Working Group agreed that there was a need for specialist advice to be provided to schools in this area;
• The Working Group supported the Autism Communication Team providing lower level work in schools, and not just focussing on higher level interventions.

The LSS and ACT Working Group recommended to the Rotherham Schools’ Forum that the ACT Team would be funded on a 50/50 model of DSG funding and a traded service, under the line management of the Learning Support Service. 

Discussion ensued on the information provided and the proposal made: -

• Transition period would be required for: - 
  1. Raising Participation responsibilities;
  2. DfE’s Green Paper ‘Support and Aspirations’, and subsequent legislation.

The Rotherham Schools’ Forum voted on the options put forward by the Learning Support Service and Autism Communication Team Working Group.

Resolved: -  (1)  That the Autism Communication Team be line managed within the Learning Support Team from the 2013/14 financial year.

(2)  That the Learning Support Service continue to be funded during 2013/14 as a 50% buy-back and 50% DSG contribution service.

(3)  That the Autism Communication Team be fully funded from the DSG during 2013/14, with a budget to match the staffing arrangements. 

(4)  That both the Learning Support Service and the Autism Communication Team be funded on a 50/50 basis from DSG contribution and a traded service from the 2014/15 financial year. 

The Dinnington Learning Community Representative provided an overview of the work of the Safeguarding Working Group. 

• Analysis had taken place concerning the proportion of DSG contributions to the services, along with other funding streams;
• Other funding streams, revenue and partner contributions;
• Structure of the Safeguarding Unit and functions;
• Statutory obligations to fund the services.

Based on their research, the Safeguarding Working Group suggested three options for consideration by the Rotherham Schools’ Forum: -

1. Maintain DSG allocation to the Safeguarding Service for 2013/14 based on previous years’ contribution and undertake further work to ensure value for money is achieved from the DSG contribution;
2. Cut DSG contribution to £66k, to maintain the Safeguarding Development Officer post/service (removal of £65k to Education Welfare Service);
3. Cut DSG contribution to £0 and ask the Local Authority to draw up a buy-back scheme. 

The Rotherham Schools’ Forum voted on the three options put forward for consideration by the Safeguarding Working Group. 

Resolved: -  That the DSG contribution to the Safeguarding Unit be £66k for the 2013/14 financial year, in respect of the Safeguarding Development Service (option 2).   

The Junior Schools’ Representative informed the Rotherham Schools’ Forum on the work of the Get Real Team Working Group. 

• There was a Strategic Management Group in place – governance issues, progress and attainment of looked after children, virtual school;
• The Working Group suggested that the Service provide case studies demonstrating impact;
• Some schools do not have any looked after children;
• Those who had worked with the Service spoke highly of it;
• Vacancy management;
• Corporate Parenting responsibility;
• Ofsted’s inspection framework now included scrutiny of the training that had been undertaken by Designated Teachers;
• Increasing responsibilities in relation to extra-district children and Raising Participation responsibilities. 

The Working Group suggested that a value for money review be undertaken into the DSG element of the service. 

The Rotherham Schools’ Forum voted on the options put forward by the Get Real Team Working Group.

Resolved: -  (1)  That the DSG contribution for 2013/14 be maintained based on previous years’ contributions. 

(2)  That further work be undertaken by the Get Real Team Working Group in preparation for the 2014/15 budget. 

The St. Bernard’s Learning Community Representative reported on the efforts of the School Effectiveness Service Working Group: -

• Bench marking visits had taken place in Wakefield and St. Helens; a further visit to Wigan would follow;
• There was a complex funding model – including other funding streams;
• The Service’s main foci were Key Stage 2 and Schools of Concern/vulnerable to Ofsted categories.  

The Working Group suggested that further work continue in preparation for the 2014/15 financial year, including the development of a buy-back option. 

Discussion ensued on the proposals made: -

• Funding contributions in other local authorities and how they structured their service. 

The Rotherham Schools’ Forum voted on the proposals put forward by the School Effectiveness Working Group.

Resolved: -  (1)  That the 2013/14 DSG contribution to the School Effectiveness Service be maintained based on previous year’s contribution. 

(2)  That the School Effectiveness Service Working Group continue in respect to the 2014/15 budget setting process, including options for developing a buy-back service. 

(3)  That the Director of Schools and Lifelong Learning, Children and Young People’s Services provide benchmarking data to the School Effectiveness Service Working Group relating to the funding contribution models of other local authorities. 

The Brinsworth Learning Community Representative reported on the work of the Behaviour Support Working Group.

• Service effectiveness review had been undertaken by the Working Group;
• The Strategic Leader was already reviewing the Service. 

A presentation was given by the Strategic Leader, Behaviour Support Service and Educated Other Than at School, which outlined ongoing work taking place in the Behaviour Support Service, including the development of an offer that addressed areas of need and an organisational structure review. 

• Proposed service model – outreach service: -
  • Staff would have a high proportion of casework time;
  • Pre-planned early intervention work would be a focus;
  • Multi-agency approach;
  • Working across learning communities.  
• A proposed staffing model was shared with the Rotherham Schools’ Forum;
• It was suggested that a DSG contribution of £572k be made to the Service for 2013/14 (in addition, there would be a virement of £33,270k from the EOTAS budget). 

Discussion ensued on the information provided and the proposed structure: -

·         There was support for positive experiences of the Service in the past;

·         Thresholds for using the service and ensuring that referrals were appropriate; 

·         Relationship to Alternative Provision Service;

·         Ensuring there was an equitable service provided to all schools;

·         Staff based in schools but ensuring they were working across all schools equally.

The Rotherham Schools’ Forum voted on the proposals put forward in relation to the Service’s DSG funding.

Resolved: - (1)  That the Service Leader’s proposal for the development of the Service over the next twelve months be supported. 

(2)  That the 2013/14 DSG contribution of £572k towards the Behaviour Support Service be maintained based on previous years’ allocations (including a virement from the EOTAS budget of £33,270k for the role of Anti-Bullying Officer).

(3)  That the newly created post of Reintegration Officer be funded from within the Pupil Referral Service’s projected under-spend for the 2012/13 financial year. 

(4)  That the Behaviour Support Working Group continue to assess the options for the Service’s 2014/15 budget setting process, including traded service options. 

The Rotherham Teaching School Alliance Representative provided an update on the Finance Working Group. 

• School expansions – a formula for providing clear and consistent treatment of all requests for contingency funding from the DSG for the period September – March in respect of staffing costs had been developed;

• Education Action Zones – carry forward of balances from the 2011/12 financial year into 2012/13 and made available to the Education Action Zones; 

• Budget monitoring – Services had been identified where additional information was required in relation to their predicted outturn;

• PFI costs – a paper had been submitted that outlined the options for funding the projected increases in the contractual payments for PFI;

• Home to School Transport budget – The DfE had adjusted their formula, moving from the High Needs’ Block to the Schools’ Block.  It was reported that the DfE had recently notified the Local Authority that its control totals and pro-formas to be completed in respect of the 2013/14 Schools’ Budget had included the allocation for Home to School Transport within the High Needs’ Block.  This was incorrect and contrary to the revised School Funding Regulations, 2012.  In order to comply with the regulations, the DfE had requested that Schools’ Forums agree to move the funding from the High Needs’ Block into the Schools’ Block. 

• Extended Services – residual funding was required in respect of the service, post 31st August, 2012, until 31st March, 2013;

• Carbon reduction commitment – would not be required after the 2013/14 financial year, and funding from 2013/14 would relate to the charges for 2012/13 financial year.  However, it was noted that the DfE had indicated that there may be an alternative proposal that would require to be funded. 

The Rotherham Schools’ Forum voted on the proposals made. 

Resolved: - (1)  That the Rotherham Schools’ Forum delegate powers to the Service Lead, School Organisation, Admissions and Special Educational Needs Service to test and confirm the formula for school expansions, given the need to report to the DfE by 22nd January, 2013.

(2)  That the carry forward of the Education Action Zones’ budgets in to the 2012/13 financial year be approved. 

(3)  That the Director for Schools and Lifelong Learning, Children and Young People’s Services, request further information from the Budget Holders of Services where further information was required in relation to their 2013/14 outturn position. 

(4)  The option 2 be supported in relation to PFI costs, with PFI costs being transferred into the PFI schools’ individual budgets during the 2013/14 only.  This would be further analysed by the Finance Working Group and the Rotherham Schools’ Forum for decision concerning 2014/15 and beyond. 

(5)  That Rotherham’s formula be amended to show Home to School Transport costs within the Schools’ Block.  

(6)  That the Director of Schools and Lifelong Learning, Children and Young People’s Services, be asked to provide a formal report in relation to the request for  residual funding in respect of Extended Learning.

The Not in Education, Employment and Training Co-ordinator, provided an update on the review into the DSG funding to High Needs annex to the DSG.  A Special Educational Needs Working Group was in the initial stages of being constituted, and would include school representatives, along with early years and further and higher education providers and private sector colleagues.  Consultation would be broad and cover the 0 – 25 age-range.

It was anticipated that an action plan would be available for the March meeting of the Rotherham Schools’ Forum. 

Resolved: -  (1)  That the update be noted. 

(2) That the action plan for the Special Educational Needs Working Group be presented to the March, 2013, meeting of the Rotherham Schools’ Forum. 

Representatives of the Early Needs Working Group updated the Rotherham Schools’ Forum on the issues the Working Group had been considering. 

• Thornhill Primary School – funding for seven Foundation Stage One places following the School’s building expansion being delayed;
• Use of Quality measure in the formula;
• Commitment in principle to the use of £2.5millions of funding, which was currently received through the Early Intervention Grant but due to transfer into the DSG, to fund additional places for two-year-old children from April, 2013;
• The Early Needs Working Group were continuing to look at the funding of the base rate for two-year olds as a way of addressing the needs of the most vulnerable, including children with severe disabilities.  The Working Group would present a report to the next meeting of the Rotherham Schools’ Forum requesting that the base rate be increased to reflect needs in the maintained and the private, voluntary and independent sectors. 

The Rotherham Schools’ Forum voted on the proposals made by the Early Needs Working Group.

Resolved: -  (1)  That funding be agreed to Thornhill Primary School in respect of  seven Foundation Stage One places at the School. 

(2)  That the principle of using the £2.5millions transferred from the Early Intervention Grant into the DSG be used to support the provision of additional two-year old places from April, 2013 onwards.

(3)  That the Early Needs Working Group present a report to the next meeting of the Rotherham School’s Forum on the basic rate funding for two-year old places.     

The Chairman of the Rotherham Schools’ Forum reported that the agenda of the next meeting would include consideration of the Trade Unions’ allocation for the 2013/14 budget.  A detailed report would be presented to the meeting.  Trade Union Representatives had been asked to provide Headteachers with information about the full range of tasks they undertook for their union duties. 

Resolved: -  (1) That the next meeting of the Rotherham Schools’ Forum take place on Thursday 7^th March, 2013, to start at 11.00 am at the Rockingham Professional Development Centre. 

(2) That future meetings take place on: -

·         Friday 19^th April, 2013;

·         Friday 28^th June, 2013;

To start at 8.30 am at the Rockingham Professional Development Centre.