Agenda item

Mrs Anne Mackay, Finance Manager submitted a report advising the Forum  regarding the indicative position relating to the level of projected 31st March 2016 school revenue balances as compared to the levels expected when 2015/16 schools budgets were set in June 2015.

Mr Ian Burbidge presented the report and confirmed that by end of financial year, there were 29 schools that had been effective in their financial planning and that only 3 schools indicated a difference in their budgets as opposed to their estimates. The Forum noted that the forecast level for 31^st March 2016 was expected to be £3.97m, which was 15% higher than initial estimates of £3.45m.  

Mr Steve Colledge, Chair of Schools Forum and Mr Burbidge responded to members’ queries regarding:

·         Budget variances from the previous year.

·         The confirmation that the EOTAS (Education Other Than At School) financial data was not included in the figures presented to members.

·         Balances and claw back arrangements for 2016/17.

·         The High Needs Funding and Future Funding Model consultations being undertaken by the Department for Education and the need to ensure that all members of Swindon’s schools associations responded.

·         The confirmation that the 2017/19 Local Formula would be used to fund Swindon Schools but the amount the LA receives will be determined by the new Government’s new National Funding Formula.

Resolved - That it be noted that:

            (1)  The majority [31 of 41 (76%)] of Swindon maintained schools current estimates of their year end balances were close to the estimates provided when budgets were set as measured by the thresholds agreed by Schools Forum and are commended.

            (2) Only 3 of 41 (7%) schools had reported significant variances between their current and initial estimates of their projected year end balances and the narrative explanations for the variances were provided to Schools Forum.

            (3) Latest estimated school balances (adjusted to exclude in-year Academy conversions) were forecast to be £3.97m, which was 15% higher than initial estimates of £3.45m.

            (4) One maintained school and the Special Resource Provision (SRP) for one mainstream school began the year in a deficit position and both were anticipating being in deficit at 31st March 2015. 

            (5) Further to (4) above, the maintained school was being supported by the Local Authority as it worked to balance its budget over the current and next two years. 

            (6) Further to (4) above, Special Resource Provision (SRP) funding was part of an ongoing review by SRP providers, Schools Forum members and the Local Authority.

            (7) The Local Authority would present further information on school balances at the July 2016 Schools Forum showing how each school’s estimate compared to their final year end positions.

            (8) Projected year end balances had also been collected from mainstream schools with a Special Resource Provision (SRP) and from schools providing a commissioned service, Children Centre or community facilities. 

            (9) Further to (8) above, the rating for the maintained school included the total variances in the projected balances for the additional facilities, as the thresholds agreed by Schools Forum did not include the separation of these facilities.