Meeting documents

ITEM EX6 - ANNEX 2

EXECUTIVE - 11 DECEMBER 2001

FURTHER DELEGATION OF BUDGETS TO SCHOOLS

DELEGATION OF THE BUDGET FOR SEN STATEMENTING

1. Since Local Management of Schools was introduced in 1990, Oxfordshire has delegated to mainstream schools a large proportion of funds to support children with special educational needs (SEN). Currently 6.75% (£8.3m) of the delegated budget is distributed through the Special Needs Index, a formula which is intended to reflect the incidence of such pupils in schools. The formula in the Fair Funding Scheme was amended for the current year to incorporate changes in the SEN Index deriving from schools’ own SEN records, Key Stage information and socio economic data available on a ward by ward basis. The new Index was adopted after extensive consultation and received widespread support.
2. However, although the SEN Index funding is substantial and is expected to provide for the Special Educational Needs of most children, (around 20% of the school population) there remains a small number of pupils (around 2% of the mainstream school population) for whom additional resources are required. These pupils are the ones with long term and complex needs who have Statements of SEN which describe those needs and the provision appropriate to meet them. The money to "top up" the provision made by mainstream schools is held centrally and allocated annually to reflect the needs of the individual child, as determined through the annual review of his/her statement. Currently the budget is £3.2m.

The Need to Consider Delegation

3. Given the increase in the government requirement of 87% delegation, it is necessary to consider how such large budgets as the statementing budget can be delegated. Indeed, in some LEAs delegation of parts of these budgets has already occurred.
4. Because it is not possible to predict precisely the incidence of special educational needs, LEAs have found that the task of developing a formula for delegating statementing funding to schools is fraught with problems. This is particularly the case for low incidence special educational needs, e.g. visual or hearing impairment. The high level of support required for children with such needs would place a significant burden on a school, especially a small school, unless funding could be targeted in such a way to reflect those needs. It is difficult to see how such a formula could be devised. For that reason most LEAs have tried to retain all or some of their statementing budgets centrally. Those which have attempted to delegate have usually only done so for high incidence special educational needs, such as learning and behaviour. However, a common response to such delegation schemes (usually based on factors similar to ones utilised in Oxfordshire for constructing the SEN Index) has been an apparent increase in the number of children whose needs no longer fall into high incidence categories. Thus the proportion of children with learning difficulties (funded through the schools’ delegated budgets) apparently falls and the proportion with language difficulties (still centrally funded) rises. Similarly, some behaviour problems are more likely to be described in terms of autism. There is also a tendency for more pupils to be seen as requiring placement in special schools. The effect is to put pressure on the small centrally retained part of the budget.
5. Because there is almost certain to be a much larger change in funding mechanisms in 2003/04 it would not be wise to embark on a fundamental review of the current scheme in Oxfordshire. As any changes lead to winners and losers (and this year’s changes to the SEN Index are being phased over two years) further shifts in funding would run the risk of creating unnecessary instability and uncertainty. More radical changes, should new regulations or other imperatives require them, would benefit from a longer period of consultation and consideration during 2002/2003. The aim for 2002 should be to make as few changes as possible as far as schools are concerned.

  Proposal for Delegation

6. To ensure that the delegation target is met, while maintaining stability until new government rules are clear, requires a change in accounting and payment practice rather than a wholesale revision of the funding mechanism for supporting children with Statements of SEN. It is therefore proposed that the current practice of determining resources on a case by case basis following assessment or review be maintained. However, once the level of resource for a child is established the two main elements, teaching and non-teaching hours, can be converted into resourcing bands. For an individual school these would be aggregated for the year and the appropriate funding delegated to the school. Thus for a child needing 5 hours per week of non-teaching support and two hours of teaching support the band might be 5N2T. A child requiring no additional teaching but a high level of personal support might be a band 20N0T. The totals for the schools and the financial outcomes would be readily calculated and included in the schools’ delegated budgets.
7. For budget purposes, the totals would be calculated for pupils on roll as at the January census date. However where there are in-year changes resulting, for example, from reviews or children joining or leaving, there would be retrospective claw back or compensation in the following year.
8. For children leaving a school (usually year 6 or year 11) funding would be delegated for only that part of the financial year (April to August) when the child would remain on roll. However, for children admitted in September into the admission year, to avoid the need for schools to use reserves or run a deficit budget, it might be wise to make in-year payments. Such payments would be for September to April (7/12 of the year) and would be taken from a centrally retained element of the budget. Other elements of the current budget to be retained centrally might include payment for equipment/aids, for home tuition or support for children not on a mainstream school roll.
9. Technically this budget will be delegated and therefore governors may spend it as they see fit. However, in practice that will not happen as the Fair Funding scheme already allows the LEA to make provision for children with statements and to deduct that cost from delegated budgets should governors decide not to do so.

Budget

10. Based on the above £2.4m would be delegated leaving £0.8m retained.

Effect on Schools

11. In practice, the above proposals will involve no change to the funding that schools receive for pupils with statements. The change will be simply in the mechanism by which the assessed funds are allocated.