[To receive an update on action taken for maintained schools with surplus or deficit balances.]

Debra Boniface, Finance Manager presented the Surplus and Deficit Budget Monitoring Report and highlighted salient points. The report provided an update to members of Schools’ Forum on the current Local Authority processes of monitoring schools that either had or had forecast a deficit balance; and schools that carried excess surplus balances.

The report made the proposal that the processes of monitoring of excess surplus balances, capital balances and deficit recoveries be streamlined to enable more robust challenge and to mitigate the risk to the Local Authority.  The timetable in the attached appendix provided a detailed outline of the proposed changes to the reporting and monitoring processes for approval.

It was proposed that the level of scrutiny be increased on those schools forecasting a deficit position, and holding expired capital balances, and greater transparency offered on the process that followed.

The remit had been widened from schools reporting their intended use of surplus balances and new reporting format will be combined to show both existing and new balances, as well as capital balances in a single template.

It was noted that the information within the report provided the current status of Wolverhampton schools and a revised forecast would be available by the end of the month.

In response to a query on the purpose of the arbitration panel process, it was clarified that the process was only for schools who held a surplus balance and was designed to determine if a school had robust proposals to spend the excess money or if clawback was deemed necessary.

It was queried why one particular area had gone from a surplus balance to a deficit balance however assurances were given from officers that this matter was being investigated. It was noted that forecasts often erred on the side of caution and it was possible that the figures may have been overly pessimistic. It was agreed that an update would be provided after October for further clarification.

The report was welcomed as it was beneficial to gain a deeper understanding of the balances held by schools and to challenge why schools held either a surplus or deficit. It was reported that Emma Bennett, Director of Children’s Services had been particularly interested in this matter and keen to monitor its progress.

A concern was raised in respect of the One system as some discrepancies in pupil records had been reported. It was agreed that this would be explored further by officers.

In response to a query regarding special educational needs SEN funding, it was noted that the Authority appreciated that there was a delay in some funding as the payment schedule of certain grants is determined by when the Authority receive the grant notification from the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA).

Concerns had been raised in respect of a lag in schools receiving funding for children who were already in attendance at the school. It was noted that this was a complex situation. It was clarified that, in some situations, once a school was named following a tribunal, the child would have to attend that school later and the funding may be delayed until after they had started.

Resolved:

1.    That the undertakings of the Schools at Financial Risk (SFR) group (formerly Schools Under Notice of Concern or SUNC) be noted.

2.    That the proposed revisions to the monitoring and reporting methodology be agreed.

3.    That an investigation be conducted by officers into the discrepancies within the One system.