Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Mrs. A. Jones, Mrs. J. Fearnley, Mr. D. Shevill, Councillors Austen and Littleboy.

(a) The minutes of the meeting held on the 26th January, 2007 were agreed as a correct record.

(b) That Graham Sinclair arrange with the Learning and Skills Council for a report to be submitted on Post 16 Out of Authority Placements for Pupils with Complex Difficulties.

Graham Sinclair reported on the content of a paper which set out information relating to controls on schools surplus balances.

With effect from 1st April, 2007, surplus balances held by schools as permitted under the Fair Funding Scheme for Financing Schools are subject to restrictions, as set out in the paper.

The paper set out a list of the only purposes and/or projects which will be permitted by the Authority for deduction from the schools surplus balance i.e. criteria for determining allowable carry-forward.

All such expenditure must be clearly costed and identified within the school’s three-year financial plan submitted to the Authority by 1st May each year. Information submitted in a plan after this date will not be accepted by the Authority. The plan must include :-

(a) Funding projections that reflect all likely sources of funding and are based upon realistic pupil projections (as agreed with the Authority).

(b) An accurate assessment of carry forward balances from the previous year.

(c) Budget projections that are consistent with expenditure patterns in the previous financial year. Any additional/irregular expenditure included within the financial plan would be evaluated in the same manner as for ‘specific items of expenditure’ above.

The Sub-Group of the Schools Forum will consider the explanations provided by schools and make recommendations to the Authority, it is the Authority that will ultimately determine whether deduction of ‘excess balances’ is to be made.

It was clarified that the 8% (primary and special schools) and 5% (secondary schools) figures – any excess above these figures to be deductible by the Authority from the current year’s school budget share – were figures set by the DfES.

It was noted that the DfES had published a consultation document on the issue of interest earned by schools on surplus school balances.

Agreed:- (a) That the report be received.

(b) That Mr. M. Hall, a school governor, be appointed to the Sub-Group referred to above.

Further to Minute No. 66 of the meeting held on the 26th January, 2007, it was reported that a new portfolio on the enhanced services to be provided as part of the Service Level Agreement for a Library Service in primary and special schools had been sent to schools.

The information sent out outlined the cost involved to schools, along with the reasons for increased charges, but it was made clear that Rotherham’s prices were generally lower than those of neighbouring authorities.

It was noted that schools were signing up for the provisions offered by Rotherham Schools Library Service.

Subsequent discussion made reference to :-

(a) the implications for the service if a group of schools decided not to sign up.

The DfES regulations make it clear that schools have to buy into a Library Service, the future of Library Service being dependent on this, investment being needed to be successful with targets to achieve. The situation is continuously being monitored.

Clarification was given on delegated budgets as against devolved budgets.

(b) the policy on book buying

Regard was taken of the school curriculum, leisure interests and ‘topic watch’. Pupil interests were continuously monitored.

(c) what is the service trying to achieve; how are children encouraged to continue to use Library Services in later years.

It was made clear that the Service is not just book based, it has music and creative elements, aids for children with special needs, available resources to encourage youngsters and develop their interests.

Agreed:- That the report be received and to include the delegation of the service to primary and special schools in a consultation in the Autumn.

Joanne Robertson informed the meeting that school budgets would be sent out today (16th March), full details will be available at the next meeting.

Budgets per pupil had increased overall. The basis for the AWPU calculation was outlined which was being reviewed by the Financial Strategy Team.

A letter was being sent to primary schools describing the application process if a Head Teacher felt that their school would be in financial difficulty.

The process for secondary schools was slightly different and how their situation would be managed was reported.

Comments on the report made reference to :-

(a) possible ways in which schools may experience a deficit. There was no specific trend identified.

(b) the correlation between schools in financial difficulty and whether they were in areas of social deprivation.

As schools in these areas attracted additional funding they should not experience undue financial difficulty.

(c) the availability of resource support through the year when a school has additional pupil numbers due to people moving into the area. It was noted that a group was looking at this issue, and would report back in due course.

(d) consideration of a team approach on a locality basis and the possibility of realignment of alternative provision for young people’s needs.

Agreed:- That the information be received.

Graham Sinclair informed the meeting of the consultation being undertaken in respect of proposals to :-

-           Rawmarsh St. Marys R.C. Primary School : closure

-           Whiston Grange School : closure and adapt as a PRU

-           Review of the work of special schools : SEN vision

Concerns were expressed that the driving force behind the proposals was financial and may be detrimental to the welfare of the children.

It was stressed that the Authority will do everything in a child’s best interest, but regard had to be taken of budget constraints; the vision needs to be workable.

The Inclusion Strategy Steering Group would be monitoring the situation.

In response to a query it was reported that there were a small number of pupils from Doncaster/Sheffield area that attended Rotherham Special Schools.

Agreed:- That the report be received.

(a) Dates for Schools Holiday

The consultation process for agreeing dates for schools holidays was outlined following a query as to whether there was any input to the process from schools/governors.

Agreed:- That the matter be referred to David Hill with a view to discussing the matter at future meetings of Chairs and Vice-Chairs of School Governors.

(b) Education Action Zones

It was reported that a budget for EAZs had been allocated for 2007/08 but not beyond.

It was anticipated that consultation on future funding would take place.

(c) School Uniforms – Contracts

The content of a letter was referred too which had been sent to schools by Trading Standards.

The letter was to be sent to Graham Sinclair for comment.

(d) Consultation on Early Years and 14-16 Funding 2009-2011

Graham Sinclair reported that a consultation letter had been published on the DfES web site and that it would be sent to members of this Forum prior to the next meeting.

A report on the content of the consultation letter would be submitted at the next meeting.

This was scheduled for Friday 20th April, 2007 at 8.30 a.m.