Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Consultation on Primary & Secondary Formulae Review Presented By: Andrew Redding 01274 385702 Sarah North

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Consultation on Primary & Secondary Formulae Review Presented By: Andrew Redding 01274 385702 Sarah North"— Presentation transcript:

1 Consultation on Primary & Secondary Formulae Review Presented By: Andrew Redding 01274 385702 Sarah North 01274 385701

2 Session Outline Presentation Time for questions Time to complete a responses form

3 Session Purposes To present an overview of the reasons why changes are being implemented To share the thinking behind the proposals To present an overview of the impact of changes To answer your questions To enable you to respond more confidently to the consultation To collect immediate feedback

4 Do Not Panic!

5 The MFG & the Ceiling The Minimum Funding Guarantee will protect ‘losers’ –MINUS 1.5% per pupil in 2013/14 & 2014/15 The Ceiling will cap the gains of the ‘winners’ to pay for the MFG –INDICATIVELY set at 1.73% per pupil Whether a school or academy* is protected by the MFG or capped by the Ceiling is shown in Appendix 4 The MFG will not protect against reductions in pupil numbers * recoupment academy (converted from maintained)

6 Appendix 4 Modelling INDICATIVE ONLY – not representative of 2013/14 allocations Designed to show the impact of changes vs. 2012/13 actual Enables schools & academies to “look at the detail” if they wish x3 key columns in summary –Column 8 (pink): variance in formula funding only –Column 28 (brown): variance including MFG & Ceiling –Column 31 (purple): variance also including estimated Pupil Premium increase in 2013/14 (£900)

7 Caution All modelling is based on: –2012/13 DSG funding envelope –Data taken from the October 2011 census, as provided by the EFA –October 2011 pupil numbers –Is your October 2011 census data accurate? Vitally important that the 4 October 2012 census is completed accurately –No “second chances” Impact to be reviewed once October 2012 Census dataset is available in December

8 Additional LA Consultations Early Years Funding –No intended changes to the Early Years Single Funding Formula –Transitional protection for maintained providers ends this year –Integration of the extension of the free entitlement to 2 year olds Funding High Needs Provision –Significant changes for special schools, resourced & alternative provision –Establishment of a clear ‘continuum’ of funding across all settings –P & S consultation covers the funding of mainstream SEN

9 Why Change? Required by Government – all Local Authorities In preparation for a ‘national funding formula’ from April 2015 (at the earliest) Cross cutting themes: –Simplification & transparency –Less local flexibility –Greater consistency in funding levels –More direct funding relationships e.g. between commissioners & providers of SEN –Less centrally managed support > academies & self managing maintained schools –Greater EFA scrutiny

10 Headlines Switch from January to October census as the basis for funding Data on which schools are funded to be provided by EFA rather than calculated by the LA Much simpler formulae – max of 12 allowable factors, set by DfE Same formulae apply to maintained & academies Greater proportion of the DSG delegated to maintained schools Fewer centrally managed funds and contingencies available for maintained schools to access Much continuity in the funding of SEN in mainstream schools & academies Continuation of the Pupil Premium; expected to increase in 2013/14 & 2014/15 Clear decision making “by phase” required within the Schools Forum

11 Anticipated Impact? More responsive but less protection against reducing rolls More responsive but less protection against data ‘blips’ More funding allocated via pupil no.s alone vs. smaller schools Individual variances influenced by previous access to factors no longer allowed e.g. specialist schools, NQTs, buildings area Greater potential for pressure on school budgets from the reduction in centrally managed funds & contingencies, influenced by the extent to which schools accessed these funds Negatively affects schools with later intakes. Encouragement for earlier intake of children Schools with higher levels of mobility potentially have a greater exposure to cost pressure & budget uncertainty

12 What are we seeking to achieve?

13 What We Can Influence The factors we use – only required to have an amount per pupil, a deprivation factor and to employ the MFG How we use certain factors, where the regulations allow choice e.g. FSM / IDACI; EAL 1 / 2 / 3 The values we assign to each of the factors i.e. how we choose to distribute the overall value of funding available How we continue to provide support through centrally managed, de-delegated and contingency funds, within tight regulatory constraints Our approach to mainstream SEN funding, within DfE national expectations

14 What We Cannot Influence The use of the October census That certain current formulae factors are no longer allowed by the regulations The formulae behind each of the factors, in the vast majority of cases That the value of the lump sum must be the same for both Primary & Secondary (max £200,000) That certain existing centrally managed funds are no longer allowed That certain contingencies currently held are no longer allowed The value of the Pupil Premium in 2013/14 The level of the MFG

15 Current Formulae Based on a wholesale review conducted during 2003/04; implemented at April 2004 –“Activity” or “needs” led –Annually reviewed & adjusted by the Schools Forum Additional wholesale deprivation & SEN funding review implemented in April 2005 e.g. introduction of IMD, uncoupling of SEN funding from Statements Reviewed alongside the mainstreaming of standards funds at April 2011 Forum has strengthened funding approaches for changing circumstances as these have arisen e.g. new to English migrants

16 Review Principles To build on principles established in previous reviews Overarching “fair and equitable allocation of DSG resources” Replication of our current distribution, when looking at themes or averages of types of schools –Small vs. large –High deprivation vs. low deprivation –High ethnicity vs. low ethnicity ‘Best fit’ where replication is not fully achievable, governed by: –Ringfencing of phase budgets –Ringfencing of funding by current factor & purpose –Adjustments where these minimise funding variances –Consideration of the anticipated impact of the new model

17 Impact - Themes See handouts – scattergraphs showing overall per pupil profile x3 themes: size, deprivation & ethnicity Prior to MFG & Ceiling Impossible to address all individual school circumstances Remember – protection against formula change via the MFG

18 Simplified Formulae (1) 12 allowable factors, of which 11 apply to Bradford District Key principle: factors need to “add value” Proposing to use 9 of the 11 (including 2 deprivation factors): –Basic amount per pupil –Deprivation: Free School Meals –Deprivation: IDACI –Low Prior Attainment –English as an Additional Language –Pupil Mobility –Lump Sum –Split Sites –Rates –PFI

19 Simplified Formulae (2) Means 2 factors not used: LAC & Post 16 For the vast majority of factors there is no choice on how allocations are calculated; formulae are set by the DfE Formulae are very different from those we use currently –‘AWPU’ replaced by a base amount per pupil –Less allowance for ‘saturation’ within additional needs funding –No allowance in the calculation of FSM% for new to English migrants –No reference to levels of attainment in EAL data –Switch from KS1 to FSP results for Primary low attainment –No use of 3 year rolling averages

20 Simplified Formulae (3) Formulae are shown in the consultation document –Simple –Calculated on %s based on the October census Simplification is the main cause of variances Appendix 4 – look at your allocation for each of the factors –Compare with your current S251 Budget Statement –Compare against the schools you choose to benchmark against Note – safeguarded salaries & expanding schools / academies will be funded outside the formula in the future

21 Simplified Formulae (4) The Lump Sum: Crucial factor in providing some budget stability Main cause of variances in the Secondary formula Regulations –Maximum value of £200,000 (to be reviewed for 2014/15) –Must be the same value for Primary & Secondary Current ranges: –Primary £121,000 to £210,000 –Secondary £359,000 to £589,000 Proposal to set at £175,000 –For Primary: strikes the right balance between providing for stability and not causing redistribution between small / large –Does not help smaller Secondary (but £200,000 doesn’t help either)

22 Simplified Formulae (5) Deprivation Compulsory factor Will continue to allocate deprivation & SEN formula funding Proposal to continue to use 2 measures equally : FSM & IDACI Proposal to use ‘Ever 6’ FSM (as per the Pupil Premium) IDACI is not a significant change from IMD –Crucial in being able to recognise ‘saturation’; weighted model –Crucial in countering the redistributing effect of the FSM formulae –Careful to avoid ‘cliff edges’; incremental funding model –Weightings subject to review for the October 2012 dataset

23 Simplified Formulae (6) Other Key Factors Low Prior Attainment –Primary: switch to FSP; choice on 73 or 78; proposal to use 73; concern over robustness; proposal to reduce the budget by £3.2m –Secondary: continued use of KS2, but now measured on pupils not achieving L3 in English AND Maths EAL –Applies to all pupils regardless of attainment –Choice of EAL 1, EAL 2 or EAL 3; proposal to use EAL 3 –Allocates the former £500 new to English fund Pupil Mobility –Proposal to increase the budget to support schools with higher levels of turbulence; recognition of the loss of central funds & the impact of other formula changes

24 Simplified Formulae (7) The October – January Reception uplift Schools & academies that continue to admit significant numbers of pupils after the October census will see a permanent reduction in funding over time The ‘Uplift’ applies to admissions into Reception classes only i.e. does not help where mobility affects all year groups Retrospective adjustment based on the intake between October and January in the previous year; dataset provided by EFA Must apply to all Primary schools & academies or not at all Proposal to adopt the uplift for 2013/14 but to review for 2014/15

25 Funding Mainstream SEN Much continuity - we moved to a delegated model in 2005/06 Focus on establishing a clear continuum Key proposals: –Continue to allocate the vast majority of SEN resources to schools via the SEN funding formulae (which have now changed) –Shift the ‘threshold’ for funding high value statements from £5,155 to £6,000 to replicate the national formula –Continue to allocate > £6,000 separately, based on actual value & adjusted on a monthly basis –Continue to employ the SEN Funding Floor to ensure a minimum level of SEN formula funding –Continue to calculate a notional SEN figure & to separately identify all SEN resources within a school’s budget (I03 funding)

26 National High Needs Model National financial definition of High Needs > £10,000 pa Funded in 3 elements: –Element 1: £4,000 – base formula funding that all children attract –Element 2: £6,000 – additional resources allocated to the school’s budget via SEN formulae –Element 3: value >£10,000 – top up paid directly by the commissioning local authority for the difference between £10,000 and the assessment of the total actual cost of provision

27 SEN Resources (I03) SEN Formula Funding + Specific funding for the values of Statements > £6,000 + SEN Funding Floor + Notional SEN

28 A defined sum within a school’s base formula funding that is identified to support pupils with SEN Currently 6% of AWPU Proposal essentially to keep this level, but to reduce the % recognising that more funding is now allocated via the base per pupil amount –Primary reduced to 5.5%; Secondary reduced to 4.5% This maintains the overall position, though there will be some differences for individual schools & academies Note that I03 funding values will be greater due to the inclusion now of former mainstreamed grants funding (correct to do so)

29 New Delegation DfE: maximum delegation to schools & academies Greater proportion of DSG funding delegated to schools Fewer centrally managed funds & contingencies Continued allowance of specific named DSG funds Proposals TBC but based on likely majority view & recognising the purposes for which funds are currently held Further development of traded services Elements: –Identifying the value of new delegation into school budgets –Being clear on the funds that will continue to be managed centrally & the contribution from schools to enable these –Being clear on what funds will no longer be available Academies – this approach replaces DSG LACSEG

30 PrimarySecondary 2012/13 Total Schools Block (net of income) £ 221.47m £ 165.01m 2012/13 School Budgets (already delegated to schools) - £ 208.08m- £ 153.04m 2012/13 High Needs Block Expenditure (removed from this) - £ 4.60m- £ 8.19m Allowable Centrally Managed Expenditure prior to New Delegation - £ 2.23m- £ 1.01m Allowable Centrally Managed Growth Fund prior to New Delegation - £ 1.60m- £ 0.10m Funds for Academies previously allocated via LACSEG recoupment + £ 0.05m+ £ 0.62m Adjusted Schools Block for New Delegation to Schools & Academies £ 5.01m £ 3.29m Per Pupil New Delegation (based on Oct 2011 no.s) Schools & Academies £ 102 pp £ 123 pp

31 Summary of New DelegationMaintained Primary Academy Primary Maintained Secondary Academy Secondary Adjusted Amount Per Pupil not delegated in 2012/13 £ 102 £ 123 Additional Contribution to De- Delegated Items for Maintained Schools Per Pupil £ 53 £0£0 £ 49 £0£0 Additional Contribution to Contingencies for Maintained Schools Per Pupil £ 11 £0£0 £ 14 £0£0 Total Additional Per Pupil Contribution £ 64 £0£0 £ 63 £0£0 Final net value of New Delegation added to school budgets (Per Pupil) £ 37 £ 102 £ 60 £ 123

32 De-Delegated Items Maintained schools only Proposed: –Electrical Health & Safety Testing –Support for minority ethnic & underachieving groups –Licences / subscriptions –Maternity & Paternity costs –Trade union duties facilities time –Discretionary exceptions –FSM eligibility (education welfare) –Behaviour support services Funded by reducing base per pupil funding

33 Central Funds No Longer Available The following existing funds will no longer be available; the funding delegated to school & academy budgets: –DSG RCCO –Redundancies in schools –14-19 confederations –Provision of school milk –Minibus driver assessments Cost Pressures Carbon reduction costs charged to school & academy budgets No central fund planned for single status costs at this stage

34 Continued Contingencies Can now only be held in specific circumstances Proposed: –Ringfenced Growth Fund –Exceptional / Unforeseen Costs –Schools in Financial Difficulties –Safeguarded Salaries Values to be agreed by Forum within phases Criteria driven under Forum management Limited access / limited adjustment of budgets in year Funded by reducing base per pupil funding

35 Contingencies No Longer Available Infant Class Sizes – exceptional circumstances only £500 new to English new starters (EAL) General schools contingency for data changes Small school investigations – exceptional circumstances only Looked After Children – replaced by the Pupil Premium

36 Funding Expanding Schools Regulations allow a ringfenced ‘Growth Fund’ Available to both maintained & academies; Primary & Secondary Proposed to continue to fund –Permanently expanding schools –Bulge classes

37 Immediate Next Steps Consultation closes 23 October Pro-forma submitted to EFA by 31 October Additional EYSFF & High Needs consultations October 2012 dataset available December - review

38 Budget Timetable 2013/14 Mid / late February 2013: publication of Primary & Secondary formula allocations for 2013/14 –no “indicative budget checking” for P & S formulae –First draft EYSFF allocation published at the same time Mid / late March 2013 – publication of confirmed indicative EYSFF allocations See BSO for a more detailed timetable

Download ppt "Consultation on Primary & Secondary Formulae Review Presented By: Andrew Redding 01274 385702 Sarah North"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google