Agenda item

The Chair introduced this item by commending the significant amount of work done by SH and colleagues in the local authority in a very short space of time.  The DfE had published the APT later than expected while keeping the same deadline for return. There have been a number of “technical issues” within the structure of the NFF this year, and some changes which had been more challenging to work through.

The Chair referred to the meeting of the 5-16 Task Group which had been held the previous day, where the LA proposals had been subject to a significant level of scrutiny and discussion.  Forum members were reminded of the powers of Forum in relation to the schools block, which was to comment on the formula proposals and make recommendations to the LA, who retained the decision-making authority.

SH noted the majority of NFF factors were kept at the mid-point of the allowable range. Mobility and split site factors were kept at the lower end of the range. A significant change for 2024-25 was to bring the payments for split sites fully within the formula.  Payments comprise a base factor for each additional site, and a factor is based on the distance from the main school;  the effect is to raise the funding to £84k per additional site, compared to the local level of £34k in previous years. Slough has two schools with split sites, Claycotts and Langley Hall Primary Academy;  in 2023-24 each school received £34k for its additional site. LPHA has had two further sites approved by the DfE and therefore receives a significantly higher level of funding than in previous years. The total allocation through the split site factor has increased from £68k in 2023-24 to £305k in 2024-25, reducing the headroom available for distribution to all schools. After applying the NFF based on revised census numbers, and including the £500k growth fund allocation, the remaining  headroom level was £0.623m - significantly lower than anticipated at the December Forum.

The Chair asked SH to confirm that the split site issue was out of our control because the DfE have changed the criteria and schools can have additional sites directly approved by the DfE. SH confirmed that the information is pre-populated on the APT. SH confirmed she had raised a query with the DfE who had confirmed the approval of the additional sites. The Chair advised that there had been significant discussion about this issue within the 5-16 Task Group and had asked SH to raise a further query with the DfE to ensure that all the criteria for attracting split site funding were being properly met.

The Chair summarised the 5-16 Task Group discussion, noting the recommendation to agree the LA proposals for the local formula and endorse the distribution of the remaining headroom through basic entitlement. The Task Group recognised the need to review the position on mobility, which historically has been a factor that was thought not to target the right pupils in the right schools. 

SH also asked  Forum to confirm the November 2023 provisional decision to transfer 0.5% from the schools block to the high needs block. SH confirmed that her understanding was that the additional transfer of £100k to the CSSB which had been made in previous years had not been requested and the assumption was that it was not required.  If it proved to be necessary because of a mistake having been made, the £100k would be taken from the 0.5% transfer, with the balance transferring to the high needs block.

Forum members therefore confirmed the November 2023 provisional decision to transfer 0.5% to the high needs block, and endorsed the local authority’s proposals for the 2024-25 local formula and the distribution of schools block headroom through basic entitlement.