Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Nicholas John, Bob House, and Kateryna Law. Izzy Jones was attending a substitute for Bob House.

There were no declarations.

Broadcast of the meeting

The Chair to announce the following: ‘In addition to the rights by law that the public and press have to record this meeting, I would like to remind everyone that this meeting is being broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and can be viewed on our website for twelve months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts are archived and can be made available upon request.

If you have asked to address the meeting, you are deemed to be consenting to having your contributions recorded and broadcast, including video when switched on, and to the use of those sound recordings and images for webcasting and/or training purposes’. 

Any other announcements

There were no announcements.

To consider and approve the minutes of the meeting held on 4 December 2024.

RESOLVED –

THAT the minutes of the last meeting held on 4 December 2024 be approved as a correct record.

There was no urgent business.

To note the Schools Forum membership list and any updates.

The Chair welcomed Luca Salice, governor at Robson House, as a new Schools Forum member. The Chair also confirmed that four members were re-nominated by their relevant groups to start a new term of office, which could be viewed on the membership list.

RESOLVED -

THAT the membership list be noted.

Report of the Director of Education Commissioning and Inclusion.

This report updates the Schools Forum on the estimated funding available for 2025/26 following the recent Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) finance settlement notification on 18^th December 2024 and details the anticipated use of this money to fund schools early years and high needs. It then outlines future funding pressures the current DSG reserves position, de-delegation and the latest ESFA support.

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Education Commissioning and Inclusion.

Victor Saunders (Team Leader Schools and Designated Schools Grant) introduced the report which updated on the estimated funding available for 2025/26 following the recent Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) finance settlement and detailed the anticipated use of this money to fund schools Early Years and high needs. The report also outlined the future funding pressures, the current DSG reserves position, de-delegation, and the latest ESFA support.

The Chair thanked officers for the report and invited questions and comments from the Forum. The following was discussed:

A member highlighted the financial strain on schools due to falling rolls, noting that fixed costs remained unchanged unless class numbers and staffing were reduced. Many schools were operating below their Published Admission Number (PAN), with most admissions coming from first-choice applicants, making financial planning challenging. Members stressed that schools were increasingly struggling, and despite numerous meetings, in their view there was no clear plan to manage the issue. A proactive approach was needed to address the situation before significant damage occurred. Officers acknowledged the difficult financial position reflected in the data and noted that a range of initiatives, including reducing PANs, had been implemented over the past 12 months to mitigate risks. While the situation could have been worse in the context of previous decisions, such as school closures, there was no sign of an upward trend, making it necessary to explore further options and address ongoing risks. It was confirmed that out-of-borough preference data for 2025 had not yet been received, but it was unlikely to change the overall position. A longer-term view was needed, given the structural difficulties schools faced. Schools had requested an implementation plan based on the principles of school place planning, with a clear short and medium-term strategy. Work was underway to develop this, with the aim of presenting it to the School Place Planning Group on 25 February 2025.

Members expressed frustration at repeatedly receiving similar responses from officers, who stated they were working on the issue. They questioned when it would be concluded and noted the year-on-year decrease in the number of children. One member highlighted that reducing the PAN did not address the current fixed costs and stressed the need for well-developed proposals to present to councillors. Concerns were raised about the situation worsening, with neighbouring boroughs cited as examples of potential outcomes. Officers responded that they were actively working on the strategy, having spoken to numerous colleagues and bringing in additional resources, including Housing colleagues. They described the issue as complex, involving housing and assets, and stressed the need to consider the utilisation of property assets to avoid losing them. They assured that substantial work was taking place and that there would be a detailed update on school place planning. They also mentioned recruiting a officer to drive this work and engaging corporate colleagues to highlight the scale of the challenge.

Officers stated that if members  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Report of the Director of Children’s Prevention, Family Help and Safeguarding.

This report details the proposed allocation of national free entitlement funding using Camden’s local funding formula. It seeks approval from School’s Forum for the proposed hourly rates payable to providers and for the retained element of funding used by the local authority to administer the schemes.

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Children's Prevention, Family Help and Safeguarding.

Debbie Adams (Head of Early Years and Family Hubs) summarised the report which detailed the proposed allocation of national free entitlement funding using Camden’s local funding formula. Recommendations in the report sought approval for the proposed hourly rates payable to providers and for the retained element of funding used by the local authority to administer the schemes.

The Chair thanked officers for the report and invited questions and comments from the Forum. The following was discussed:

·       Members inquired about the retained budget for Early Years Entitlements, asking if Camden had a breakdown of what the funds were spent on, whether the spending was required, the range of wages, and what was covered, particularly regarding essential teams. Officers explained that the funding covered the administration of the Free Entitlement Team, including the checking of eligibility codes, and also funded equality advisors. They noted that Camden followed a mixed provider model, involving Private, Voluntary, and Independent (PVI) providers and schools. All providers in Camden had a named advisor, which not all local authorities offered, ensuring that all settings met the required standards. The funding also supported admin and support functions.

·       A member asked why Camden increased the pass-through rate to 97%, which was above the 96% requirement for local authorities. Officers explained that the aim was to pass through as much funding as possible while still managing available resources. In response to members questioning the impact on the central team, officers stated that they had not expanded the team as other local authorities had, as the new entitlement for 2-year-old working parents and, more recently, 9-month-old children of working parents, was being met by the existing workforce.

·       A member raised concerns regarding Figure 7, noting that Band D referred to 100% of a child’s nursery hours, which implied full funding, but this was not the case. They highlighted that unions were asking for Teaching Assistants (TAs) to move to a higher salary grade, which was not covered by the funding. The member stressed that the paper appeared too positive and did not reflect the true costs, which resulted in a shortfall per TA. They requested more accurate wording in the report. The member also expressed concern that parents might believe children requiring 1:1 support would be fully funded, when this was not the case. They questioned whether children needing 1:1 support could be sent home for 3 hours per week, as the funding would not cover these hours, and asked if the matter could be brought back to the Schools Forum for further discussion. Another member added that both parents and staff were misinterpreting the funding, especially for Band D children, causing confusion about the actual hours of support needed. Officers acknowledged that the wording could be clearer and explained that the intention was not to fund 100% of the additional time but to represent the potential need for full-time support in nursery. Officers to update  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Report of the Director of Education Commissioning and Inclusion.

This report provides an updated financial projection on High Needs Block (HNB) spend for 2024/25 and reports a further increase in the deficit projection since the last report. 

Proposals for the 2025/26 HNB budget are made against this background and that are sustainable whilst also working to improve life outcomes for children/young people with high needs.

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Education Commissioning and Inclusion.

Vikram Hansrani (Director of Education Commissioning and Inclusion) and Di Osborne (Head of SEND and Inclusion) summarised the report which provided an updated financial projection on HNB spend for 2024/25 and reported a further increase in the deficit projection since the last report.    Proposals for the 2025/26 HNB budget were made against this background and that were sustainable while also working to improve life outcomes for children/young people with high needs.

The Chair thanked officers for the report and invited questions and comments from the Forum. The following was discussed:

·       A member stated that the proposed change to proportionality payments should have been reviewed in detail by the HNSG, as that forum was intended for in-depth discussions on specific areas and the potential outcomes of such changes before proposals were presented to Schools Forum. The member acknowledged that officers had attempted to bring this issue to a previous meeting, but it had not been discussed.

·       A member noted that if the change recommended to Schools Forum was implemented on an interim basis, it might be difficult to reverse, as providing the money to schools upfront, rather than as a proportional payment at the end of term, would have made future adjustments more challenging.

·       A member stated that they did not disagree with devolving money to schools, or the principle of providing certainty regarding funding, but noted a contradiction in the report. They highlighted concerns about a proposed formula based on proxy measures, which did not create perverse incentives for identifying children with SEND. However, the formula now included identifying the number of SEND children as part of the calculation. An officer acknowledging that it could be seen as a similar perverse incentive, as there was a factor based on high needs pupils. However, it would be done annually, and the excess money would be calculated based on what the school would have received through the devolved payment. The officer explained that while the formula reflected the number of high-needs pupils, there was no direct relationship, as the process would occur once a year and would not encourage identifying more children for financial gain throughout the year.

·       A member asked for clarification on the current system, noting that a £1.8 million budget had been set for the devolved amount, which was then shared out to schools through a formula. They asked if the set amount had changed to £4 million, as it had been last year, or if it was a different figure. The member also requested details on the new formula, as this information was not included in the report. They pointed out that the current formula included prior attainment, FSM, and the number of Camden residents, and asked how these factors would change when using the numbers for the proportional payment. An officer responded, explaining that the new formula would leave the pot at £1.8 million through the old factors and then add 75% of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Report of the Director of Education Commissioning and Inclusion.

At its meeting of 11th September 2024, an update was presented to the Schools Forum on the procurement of the new school meals contract. The current contract with Cater Link is due to expire on 31st March 2025. A further update is now available.

Following a successful tendering process, tenders were received on 10^th September 2024 for a new service that is due to commence on 1st April 2025 for a period of three years, with option for two extensions of one year each, with a total estimated aggregate value of £24m. The new contract will include an option to break after two years (April 2027), which will allow the Council to move to an in-house arrangement, if possible.

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Education Commissioning and Inclusion.

Nick Smith (Head of Education Commissioning and School Organisation) introduced the report which provided an update on the outcome and detail of the school meals tender. The following points were made:

·       Officers confirmed that the existing contract had been awarded to Caterlink. During the consultation phase with schools, Camden addressed management control concerns and incorporated improvements into the specification, with a focus on resolving ongoing cost and quality issues. Officers emphasised that issues varied between sites and highlighted the importance of strong relationships between on-site staff and school leaders, beyond contractual arrangements.

·       Discussions regarding a potential insourced model would continue, with three bespoke engagement sessions planned, including one with schools. Officers noted that key messages about maintaining quality, avoiding additional costs, and ensuring effective food delivery had been acknowledged by all stakeholders, including the Cabinet Member for Best Start for Children and Families. More detailed engagements with individual schools were scheduled over the next two to three months to explore the advantages of an insourced model.

·       A December 2020 session with ten school leaders saw reasonable attendance from schools of various sizes. Feedback highlighted operational concerns with current provisions and emphasised that an insourced model must address these, with further discussions on workforce arrangements planned for future sessions.

RESOLVED –

THAT Schools Forum note the report.

Report of the Director of Education Commissioning and Inclusion.

This report sets out the work plan for the Schools Forum for the remainder of the 2024/25 school year (Appendix 1) and provides an update on actions requested at previous meetings (Appendix 2).

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Education Commissioning and Inclusion.

Nick Smith (Head of Education Commissioning and School Organisation) summarised the report which outlined the work programme for the remainder of the 2024/25 academic year and the action tracker.

As discussed on Item 8, it was agreed that another Early Years funding update would report to a future School Forum meeting, following discussion at the HNSG (to incorporate an analysis of the funding disparity between ENG, EHCP and CLIF and an analysis of the uptake of CLIF across different settings and transitions, including a consultation with EY colleagues on their assessment of the uptake of CLIF).

As discussed on item 9, an update on Robson House funding arrangements would be provided at the next meeting.

RESOLVED –

THAT Schools Forum note the report.

The final meeting of the academic year is at 6pm, Wednesday 4 June 2025.

The Chair stated that the final meeting date of the 2024-25 academic year was on 4 June 2025.

It was noted that the Clerk would circulate the provisional meeting dates for the 2025/26 academic year.

There was no urgent business.