Agenda item

To receive benchmarking data on LA planned expenditure for 2014-15 as recorded in the section 251 budget statement.

A summary of Havering’s position along with detailed comparative data will be tabled at the meeting.

Two packs of information were provided.  The first set showed the changes nationally against section 251 budget headings from 2013-14 to 2014-15, the first two years of the school funding reforms.  The total Schools Budget as funded by the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) had increased by £0.7bn from £38.8bn in 2013-14 to £39.5bn in 2014-15.  The data showed a £1.3bn increase in recoupment from the DSG reflecting the increase in the number of academy conversions.  There had been reductions nationally in per pupil expenditure on centrally funded areas such as School Improvement and Statutory and Regulatory duties reflecting reductions in Local Authorities (LAs’) Education Support Grant. 

Expenditure on Looked After Children (LAC, Fostering, Adoption etc.) had increased from £268 per pupil to £277.  It was also noted that the total services for young people figure (youth services) had dropped from £55 per pupil to £48.  Expenditure on Sure Start Children’s Centres and Early Years had reduced from £88 per pupil to £78.

The planned expenditure by Authority was also shown and Havering was ranked 22^nd highest of the 32 London Boroughs with a gross figure of £194,333,000.  This was slightly better than in previous years, when   Havering was second to last, but with further changes in 2015-16 this may have been a temporary position.  Havering was 27^th of 32 in net core spend for Education, and 29^th for Children and Young People.  It was noted that these were cash amounts, not per pupil.

The second set of tables showed benchmarking of all ‘section 251’ headings against the other 31 London Boroughs.

The DSG schools block funding showed Havering at £4,727 per pupil, 24^th highest of 32.  Havering was 20^th in the percentage of schools who received the minimum funding guarantee, which showed that the formulae worked better than 19 other Local Authorities. For Home to School transport, Havering ranked as 31^st.

Havering was the 6^th highest on money de-delegated but that included insurance which no other LA had de-delegated.

It was noted that Havering was 8^th highest in its budgeting for pupil growth and 3^rd for support for schools with falling rolls.

The expenditure budget held centrally from the DSG for Children under-5 was ranked 29^th highest.

For the total High Needs expenditure budget which included top up funding, Alternative provision (AP) and Special Educational Needs (SEN) Support Services, Havering was 32/32.  Newham appeared to have a lower High Needs budget than the Forum understood to be the case.  David Allen agreed to check the figure. It was acknowledged that some authorities chose to account for their expenditure differently.

The rankings for the different areas of non-DSG budgets were also shown for core Education and Community and core Children and Young Peoples Services.  For School Improvement, Havering was 25^th highest, and for Statutory and Regulatory Services, 16^th.  Within Children and Young People Services Havering was ranked 16^th of 32 for expenditure for Children’s Centres and Early Years, 24^th for Children Looked After (including Fostering, Adoption and Residential Care) 24^th for Safeguarding and 23^rd for Youth Services.

Generally Havering was in the lower quartile in its expenditure per pupil in the majority of the budget headings.

The Forum noted the benchmarking reports.