Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting, reminding everyone that this was a virtual meeting, as permitted under Section 78 of the Coronavirus Act 2020, to enable meetings to take place whilst observing social distancing measures.

At the invitation of the Chair, it was noted that Councillor March, Councillor Dr Moore and Sue Strange, a parent of a child who was attending Millgate School were all invited to participate in discussion of item 5 “Re-alignment of Special School Funding”.

The Chair requested that all Members, officers, Members of the Executive and invitees present at the meeting kindly introduce themselves.

Apologies for absence were received from Gerard Hurst (Roman Catholic Diocesan), Carolyn Lewis (Church of England Diocese) and Joseph Wyglendacz (Teaching Unions).

.

Members are asked to declare any interests they may have in the business to be discussed.

Councillor Cole declared an Other Disclosable Interest in the general business of the meeting that he had family members who worked within schools and a family member that worked within the Council. In addition, Councillor Cole declared that he represented the ward in which West Gate School was located.

Councillor Whittle declared that he represented the ward in which Millgate School was located.

In accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct, these interests were not considered so significant that they were likely to prejudice the Councillor’s judgement of the public interests. Councillor Cole and Councillor Whittle were not therefore required to withdraw from the meeting during consideration and discussion of the agenda items.

Although not a member of the Commission, Councillor Dr Moore declared an Other Disclosable Interest in agenda item 5, “Re-alignment of Special School Funding”, for transparency, that she was a governor at Keyham Lodge and Millgate School. This interest was not considered to be significant enough to preclude Councillor Dr Moore from addressing the Commission at the invitation of the Chair.

The Monitoring Officer to report on any petitions received.

The Monitoring Officer reported that no petitions had been received.

The Monitoring Officer to report on any questions, representations or statements of case.

The Monitoring Officer reported that no questions, representations or statements of case had been received.

The Strategic Director for Social Care & Education submits this report to provide the Children, Young People and Schools Scrutiny Commission with the opportunity to provide feedback and comment on the outcome of a consultation exercise to implement a new funding formula for the six maintained special schools in the city.  It is proposed the changes will take effect from 1 April 2021.

The Children, Young People and Schools Scrutiny Commission are recommended to:

a)    Provide feedback/comment on the proposed funding changes to the individual special school as summarised at paragraph 4.8.

b)    To note the responses to the consultation as detailed at Appendix 5 & 6 and to provide feedback/comment.

c)    To note the proposed funding rates as outlined in paragraphs 4.9 and to provide feedback/comment.

d)    To note the process of further discussions with the schools where their funding is to be reduced and to provide feedback/comments.

The Strategic Director for Social Care & Education submitted this report to provide the Children, Young People and Schools Scrutiny Commission with the opportunity to provide feedback and comment on the outcome of a consultation exercise to implement a new funding formula for the six maintained special schools in the city.  It was proposed the changes would take effect from 1 April 2021.

The Assistant City Mayor for Education introduced the item and officers presented the report. The following was noted:

·         The review of the special schools’ funding related directly to the imbalance of the existing funding arrangements between the six schools. It was noted that four of the schools would see an increase of funding, whilst two schools namely Keyham Lodge and Millgate School would see their funding reduced.

All Members and invitees present, engaged in discussion of the report and noted some of the below concerns including:

·         The legal and equality impact of the review, that a longer programme for consideration was required especially for the Commission’s comments to be taken on board. There was a lot of concern from Members and invitees that the budget cap would have a detrimental effect on Keyham Lodge and Millgate Schools, who were currently achieving outstanding results. In addition, clarity was requested on the following points: the DfE agreement process and general timelines for implementing, standardised costs and the banding system. On the point of the consultation; it was queried as to why feedback from parents and children was not included within the report and it was reiterated that lots of work was required to help all children not just those achieving high grades.

Officers present and the Assistant City Mayor for Education responded to the comments, as set out below:

·         There were four specific SEND schools in the City which were significantly underfunded, and the proposed budget was seeking to address this. Some schools had surplus in their budgets and others were struggling.

·         There would be difficulties if the process was put on hold as it would mean that the schools who were set to gain from the budget increase wouldn’t receive the level of support they required for another year.

·         It was clarified that this funding was a ringfenced grant (the high needs block) from the Department of Education (DfE) which could only be spent on Special Needs Education. The review aimed to ensure redistribution of the funding in a fair and transparent manner.

·         The banding system was developed with reference to systems in other Local Authorities. The schools identified the band for each pupil and LCC worked closely with the schools to ensure the banding model worked. The bulk of funding would follow each pupil based on their need and regardless of which school they attended. It was noted that this banding system would be kept under review. In addition, a review into the high needs block would also take place. To ensure ‘band creep’ was avoided, communication would be made with the special schools this week to request  ...  view the full minutes text for item 129.

The meeting closed at 7.34pm.