Agenda item
De-Delegation Approval 2020/21
Minutes:
7.1 Sarah explained the first part of the paper which related to the delegation of amounts for contingency, Administration of Free School Meals and Jury service. Sarah explained that these would be familiar to members and the details of these services remained the same as last year. The Local Authority requires School Forum approval for a number of services to be de-delegated for 2020/21.
7.3 It was explained that voting was for maintained schools only. It was asked if there was further clarification needed on any of these elements and no one needed further clarification.
Voting Summary:
(School Members only - Specifically maintained school representatives)
|
|
Primary Phase |
Secondary Phase |
||
|
Number of Yes |
Number of No |
Number of Yes |
Number of No |
|
|
Contingency |
7 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
|
Admin of FSM |
7 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
|
Jury Service |
7 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
7.4 Nathan then gave an update regarding EALs and the Behaviour Support Service (ESBAS).
7.5 Nathan advised that the LA took a clear steer on the development of new models for the EALs service from extensive consultations with schools, including Schools’ Forum, over the course of 14 months and thanked the forum for engaging in the various consultations over that period. Engagement across the board had been significant and the service has been at the forefront of creating/developing revised models based on staff views on what was needed to improve outcomes for children with EALs across the county.
7.6 The attention of Schools’ Forum members was drawn to the financial appraisal for Model 3, which set out the agreed model for delivery from April 2020 and the key components of the support that would be offered to schools. In order for this model to be viable, the Local Authority would need a commitment of £440K per year, for a 2-year period, in order to continue to run EALs. It was further explained that, if schools did not agree to de-delegate sufficient funding to meet the minimum required commitment at Schools’ Forum, then the service will then go out to individual schools with a view of securing the minimum level of funding on an individual basis. If insufficient funding is committed from maintained schools by 28 September, the service will start consultation for closing the service from 01 April 2020.
7.7 Hugh questioned the different options on the vote and Nathan went on to explain that the options presented in the letter were in line with previous discussions at Schools’ Forum. It was then commented that the members did not have enough information to vote today for both themselves and their colleagues. Discussion ensued around the voting, the information provided in advance and the opportunity for voting on different options rather than just one option.
7.8 Fiona commented that the paper clearly sets out how much funding is needed in order to keep the service open. She then went on to explain the de-delegation figures. Further explanation was given to the figures in table 3.4 and the different requirements from each primary, secondary and academies. Nathan confirmed that academies had committed £33k by the deadline which meant that a vote from primary maintained schools to de-delegate 100% of the funding would, therefore, mean that the service is viable from April 2020. Hugh went on to make sure that all members were clear on what they are voting on. Jane wanted to have the votes from individual schools sent to the forum members before this voting today for clarity and so that all schools fully understood the percentages that they were voting on. Phil asked that an email is sent to members clarifying what the vote means for all schools, explaining the various percentages from each primary, secondary and the academies. It was noted that the voting timescales were clear in the letter that had been sent to all schools and that it was not possible to require responses from all maintained schools in advance as any follow up actions would be dependent on the vote.
7.9 It was agreed that the constitution of Schools’ Forum only allowed for a vote to be taken to de-delegate or not on a 10% basis, so this is what would be voted on. It was agreed that Nathan and Hugh would send an email to all Headteachers to confirm the outcome of the vote. Hugh went on to explain that he would write to secondary schools re a series of options and clarify that commitments from individual schools needed to be in by the 28 September. Fiona made it clear that the service would only be accessible between April 2020 and March 2022 to those schools that buy in by the 28.09.19.
7.10 Nathan advised the members that out of 20 academies who made returns, (out of 53 academies in total) 5 have committed and 15 have said no commitment.
7.11 Nathan then moved on to explain that ESBAS has reduced over the years. There is continued and growing significant concern across all schools regarding how we support young people who present with, in particular, social, emotional and mental health difficulties. ESBAS is the only service that supports children in this area and, ever since the central resource has reduced, there has been no improvement in exclusions or outcomes for this group of children. There have been other reductions in the funding for ESBAS and the LA has looked at how these could be mitigated; there is no scope for further reductions and so if funding is not de-delegated there would have to be a review on what the service would be able to deliver in the future across behaviour and attendance. Voting then took place on de-delegating EALs for two years and ESBAS for 2020/21.
|
|
Primary Phase |
Secondary Phase |
||
|
Number of Yes |
Number of No |
Number of Yes |
Number of No |
|
|
EALs |
7 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
Behaviour Support Service |
7 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
Supporting documents:
-
Covering report, item 7.
PDF 365 KB -
Appendix 1 - BSS and EALS De-Delegation Approval, item 7.
PDF 693 KB