Agenda item

(a) That the Education and Youth portfolio’s cost pressures be noted;

(b) That the Schools’ budget cost pressures be noted;

(c) That the Education and Youth portfolio’s options to reduce budgets be noted;

(d) That the options to reduce the delegated schools’ budget be noted;

(e) That a report on issues around recruitment and retention be included on the Committee’s Forward Work Programme; and

(f) That a report on Demographics and how this would impact future budgets be included on the Committee’s Forward Work Programme.

            The Strategic Finance Manager introduced the report the purpose of which was to review and comment on the budget pressures and cost reductions under the remit of the Committee. 

            The Strategic Finance Manager and Strategic Finance Manager (Education) provided a presentation on the Medium-Term Financial Strategy and Budget Setting 2024/25 which covered the following points for the Education & Youth Portfolio:

·         Purpose and Background

·         The additional budget requirement for the Council

·      Additional Budget Requirement – Ongoing Risks

·         Overall Position after initial solutions

·         Summary and Conclusions

·         Summary Education and Youth Cost Pressures

·         Education & Youth Budget Reductions

·         The 2024/25 Budget Challenge – our approach

·         Education and Youth Budget Reductions (1)

·         Education and Youth Budget Reductions (2)

·         Summary Education and Youth Budget Reductions

·         Education and Youth Budget Reductions (3)

·         School Cost Pressures

·         Summary Schools Cost Pressures

·         School Budget Reductions

·         Education and Youth Portfolio and Schools Ongoing Risk

·         Out of County

·         Next Steps for the Budget Setting Process 2024/25

·         Budget Process – Stage 2

·         Budget Process – Stage 3 (Final) 

            Councillor Dave Mackie in referring to the presentation, recommended that the following items be included on the Committee’s Forward Work Programme, which was seconded by Councillor Jason Shallcross:-

·         Recruitment and Retention – A report on issues around recruitment and retention within the Education & Youth Portfolio; and

·         Demographics – A report on demographics and how this would impact future budgets.

In response to a question on safeguarding by Councillor Mackie, the Senior Manager (School Improvement) commented that since the pandemic the level of complex cases in schools had increased.  It was explained that schools had significant responsibilities when it came to Safeguarding and Child Protection with the portfolio providing additional support to schools with up-to-date advice and guidance.  Safeguarding was complex and continually changing especially with regard to online safety.  It was explained that because Safeguarding was prioritised that this placed increased pressure on the team and their capacity to support schools.

In response to the suggestion made by Councillor Mackie for the additional items around recruitment and retention and demographics, the Strategic Finance Manager (Education) advised that the issues around recruitment and retention was a wider issue affecting all portfolio’s, therefore consideration would need to be given on how this could be taken forward.  She also explained that there was evidence of changes in demographics and that these should be expected in the future.  It was highlighted that the demography in the specialist provision was increasing in numbers and complexity.  There were reductions in the numbers of pupils in primary schools and she explained how this year a larger year 6 group of pupils had been transitioning to secondary schools with smaller nursery and reception classes.  This unfortunately would impact schools as the regulations required that 70% of school funding was based around pupil numbers, with funding following the pupils.  It was difficult to predict forecasts around demography and any reductions in school budgets should also consider the demographic reductions in schools.  

            Responding to Councillor Andrew Parkhurst’s question on staff increases, the Strategic Finance Manager confirmed that this would equate to an increase in staff in the School Improvement Team, which would be a recruitment of an additional part time post.  There would also be an increase in the team of Health & Safety Monitoring Officers.

            In response to Councillor Parkhurst’s question on the changes in staff terms and conditions in Youth Services, the Senior Manager (Flintshire Youth Services) provided an overview of the work which was being undertaken with regard to maximising assets.   Referring to the staffing element he clarified that staff had previous been paid against a JNC pay scale and it was proposed to move all staff across to the NJC pay scale.  This would ensure that the service ran as efficiently as possible together with increasing the provision and presence on the street.  

            Councillor Andrew Parkhurst referred to the increase in demand and complexity of Education Other Than At School (EOTAS) and asked whether the reduction in the need for external placements could reduce the cost estimated for 2025/26.  The Strategic Finance Manager explained that the budget pressure shown for 2025/26 was a gross position of increasing costs of staff and resources needed at Plas Derwen.  She said that she would speak to Senior Manager Inclusion Services following the meeting around what information on estimates could be provided to the Committee.   

            Councillor Parkhurst also referred to recommendation 5 shown in the report and said that he had difficulty in providing areas of possible cost efficiency as Members had not been provided with a breakdown of the Education and Youth portfolio budget line by line.  The Strategic Finance Manager referred to information provided to Members last year which provided a breakdown of portfolio budgets and said this could be circulated to the Committee if it felt it would be useful.  Councillor Parkhurst welcomed the additional information being circulated following the meeting. 

            Councillor Glyn Banks referred to the Out of County figure of £500,000 included in the forecast and asked if this should be shown as a £1m projected overspend.  In response the Strategic Finance Manager said it was showing as an £1m in year overspend currently in the Monitoring Report recently presented to Cabinet.  There was some anticipated demand included in this figure as a contingency which would be monitored throughout the year with placements moving in and out of the service.  This required constant review and it may need to be increased as things progressed throughout the year.

            Councillor Arnold Woolley referred to demography and the reduction in the numbers coming into schools and asked if this was linked to the increased number of children who were now home schooled.  In response, the Strategic Finance Manager did not think that this was related.  The numbers were falling in primary schools but there was not an equivalent increase in the home-schooling figures.  The Senior Manager (School Improvement) commented that this forecast related to a fall in birth rates which had been monitored for a number of years and was difficult to predict.  She explained how the funding for key stage 4 and key stage 3 pupils was allocated.

            The Leader of the Council advised that the Education & Youth Portfolio had been forecasting the expected decline in primary school numbers for a number of years.  He referred to the pressures a few years ago when a large year 7 group was moving through schools.  He did not feel that this was the same and even though there was quite a decline in the primary year groups that this was due to the natural population cycles.  He understood how difficult this was for schools and governing bodies with the difficult decisions that had to be made.  He reminded Members that the Education budget was the largest budget within the Council, with the schools delegated budgets amounting to 80/90% which was delegated to financial decisions made by schools and governing bodies in Flintshire.  He agreed that it was important that there was scrutiny of the remainder of the budget left within the Education Department.  If parts of the Council’s budget were ringfenced at this early stage it had implications on the cost reductions for other department such as Social Services or Streetscene. 

            Councillor Dave Mackie referred to the comments made by the Leader.  He referred to the 3% cut to every school in their budgets last year and had spoken with finance officers about how this had been implemented.  He understood that this would carry on every year as it was in the base budget.  It was possible for a small number of schools to take the money out of their balances, but this did not apply to all schools, and he was aware of some schools which had insufficient balances in order to fund that cut in the budget.  He said that this was a specific cut in the budget for every school whether there was a positive balance in funding or not.  

            The Leader responded to clarify that the way it was administered was through the Schools Delegated Budgets but the intention of it was that it was a hit on school balances.  He appreciated not every school had balances and when the balances report was produced some schools managed their balances well with other schools having pressures that they had to deal with.  The Council had to produce a balanced budget and unless additional resources were forthcoming then Council Tax increase was the only other place to raise funds.  He referred to the Council’s decision to keep Council Tax at 5% last year when inflation was at 10% and costs were increasing.  This was a very concerning situation for everyone and the Council wished to provide the best services for Flintshire.

The recommendations, as outlined within the report, were moved by Councillor Arnold Woolley and seconded by Councillor Gladys Healey.   

RESOLVED:

(a) That the Education and Youth portfolio’s cost pressures be noted;

(b) That the Schools’ budget cost pressures be noted;

(c) That the Education and Youth portfolio’s options to reduce budgets be noted;

(d) That the options to reduce the delegated schools’ budget be noted;

(e) That a report on issues around recruitment and retention be included on the Committee’s Forward Work Programme; and

(f)   That a report on Demographics and how this would impact future budgets be included on the Committee’s Forward Work Programme.