EX111201-05a1

ITEM EX5 - ANNEX 1

EXECUTIVE - 11 DECEMBER 2001

REVIEW OF SCHOOL BUDGET DELEGATION FORMULA

ANNEX 1

CONSULTATION ON REVIEW OF THE FORMULA FOR 2002/2003

Split Site Allocations for Primary Schools

1. Do you agree that the extra costs of operating split site Primary schools should be recognised in the formula?

Disagree Strongly

Disagree

Agree

Agree Strongly

% in Agreement

Primary

0

4

47

2

92

Secondary

2

0

5

1

75

Special

0

0

2

1

100

Total

2

4

54

4

91

Do you agree that the funding allocated should be a lump sum plus an amount per pupil? (The value of these two components will be the subject of the formal consultation in December/ January.)

Disagree Strongly

Disagree

Agree

Agree Strongly

% in Agreement

Primary

1

3

44

3

92

Secondary

1

0

6

1

86

Special

0

0

2

0

100

Total

2

3

52

4

92

Pupil Count

2. Do you agree that the current pupil count methodology should be retained for estimating the pupil roll?

Disagree Strongly

Disagree

Agree

Agree Strongly

% in Agreement

Primary

1

8

46

2

84

Secondary

0

3

9

1

77

Special

0

0

1

1

100

Total

1

11

56

4

83

Do you agree that the pupil count methodology for Under 5s should be standardised for all types of provision and the methodology made more clear and transparent?

Disagree Strongly

Disagree

Agree

Agree Strongly

% in Agreement

Primary

0

0

36

25

100

Secondary

0

0

7

0

100

Special

0

0

1

1

100

Total

0

0

44

26

100

Interface Between the Standards Fund and the ISB

3. Do you agree with the principle that rather than being a first call on any growth funding that schools benefiting from the Standards Fund Grants should meet the LEA contribution for such grants by a reduction in their ISB formula allocations where this is possible under formula regulations?

Disagree Strongly

Disagree

Agree

Agree Strongly

% in Agreement

Primary

1

10

21

4

69

Secondary

0

3

8

2

77

Special

0

0

1

0

100

Total

1

13

30

6

72

City First Schools: Temporary Variation

4. Do you agree with the proposal to provide a temporary variation to the formula for 2002/03 and 2003/04 (covering the academic year 2002/03) whereby First schools would be provided with a class size allocation in respect of Year 5 in order to avoid classes greater than 35 pupils in this transition year?

Disagree Strongly

Disagree

Agree

Agree Strongly

% in Agreement

Primary

2

5

35

5

85

Secondary

0

0

9

0

100

Special

0

0

2

1

100

Total

2

5

46

6

88

Special Needs Index: Social Deprivation

5. Do you agree that consideration should be given in setting the 2002/03 Budget to allocating funding (up to £250,000) to be distributed to schools in relation to socio-economic deprivation scores used in the SNI but identified specifically to assist schools to pay for places for pupils from deprived backgrounds to go on field trips, residential visits, etc.

Disagree Strongly

Disagree

Agree

Agree Strongly

% in Agreement

Primary

2

6

37

10

85

Secondary

1

2

8

2

77

Special

0

0

1

2

100

Total

3

8

46

14

85

Protection for Budget Losses

6. Do you agree that there should be no protection given for budget losses greater than 3% for the reasons provided?

Disagree Strongly

Disagree

Agree

Agree Strongly

% in Agreement

Primary

4

9

28

1

69

Secondary

0

2

9

2

85

Special

0

1

1

0

50

Total

4

12

38

3

72

Specialist Schools

7. Do you consider that the Council should attempt to provide additional funding for those schools that are unsuccessful in bidding for government funding for specialist school status?

Disagree Strongly

Disagree

Agree

Agree Strongly

% in Agreement

Primary

3

25

16

1

37

Secondary

2

4

6

1

54

Special

0

1

1

0

50

Total

5

30

23

2

42