Agenda and minutes

          Apologies for absence were received from Jane O’Connor - PVI Representative, Beth Jones - PVI Representative, Cathy Liku - Community Nursery Schools Representative, Matty Deeny - Secondary Academy Representative and Councillor Tom McInerney.

          Subject to Aaron Stafford being added to the list of attendees, the minutes of the meeting held on 21 January 2026 were agreed as a correct record.

          It was noted that the Department for Education did not accept the Council’s budget as the £92,000 referenced at the previous meeting, had not been specifically allocated. Therefore, officers had to recirculate the money back into school funding formula. This meant that 51 schools would receive £1600 but six schools had minimum funding guarantees. The Department for Education approved Halton’s school budget with this proposal.

          One Forum Member noted that there would be delays with receiving funding with mid-term transfers as funding was not allocated on a termly basis.

          Officers concurred with this and noted that regulations stated that schools must have growth funding. Falling school numbers was a more common problem than increasing numbers.

          Forum members noted that pupils with specialist needs and could not be in the mainstream side of a school received funding and there was no funding for children without specialist needs. This meant that teachers not involved with the specialist pupils were made redundant.

          It was noted that Halton had 21% more children in resource centres compared to the national average.

          RESOLVED: That the Schools Forum supported the officers proposal regarding the surplus £92,000.

          The Forum was presented with the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) 2026/27 for Early Years. The 2026/27 DSG settlement was announced on 17 December 2025, allocating Halton a total of £178.850m. £122.425m was allocated to the Schools Block, £0.768m for the Central Schools Services Block (CSSB), £31.877m for the High Needs Block, and £23.781m for the Early Years Block. The Forum approved the Schools Block allocations and mainstream school funding formula in January 2026. There was a small increase of £0.003m for the CSSB, over the 2025/26 budget, despite the annual 20% reduction in historic commitment funding and the main driver (pupil numbers) being 246 fewer (a reduction of 1.4%). This was because the unit of funding has increased by 2.1%, from £43.05 to £43.97.

          The 2026/27 hourly rates position Halton as 60th in Authority funding rankings nationally with two-year olds, and under two-year-olds, at 97% of national average, and three- and four-year-olds at 96% of the national average. Halton was above the Northwest average funding level at all age ranges (102.75% for three and four-year-olds, 104.0% for two-year-olds and under). Officers based proposals on passing on all the year-on-year funding increases at two and under, and 96% (49p of 51p) of the three and four-year olds funding rate increase, with an overall passporting level of 0.5% above the increased requirement of 97%. This meant that the funding rates agreed for 2025/26, following consultation with settings, and ratification by the Forum, and adding the in-year funding increases to each of the two-year-olds and under, and 49p/hour to the universal and extended three and four-year-old entitlement.

          RESOLVED:

1)    That the report be noted.

2)    That the Schools Forum approve the proposed 2026/27 hourly rates and supplements for the Early Years funding formula.

An update on the new White Paper regarding SEND provision was given to the Forum.

          The Forum was presented with the DSG High Needs and Central Schools Services Blocks 2026/27. The High Needs Block allocation for 2026/27 was confirmed at £31.877m before Academy and Further Education (FE) recoupment and included the deduction for the net export of SEND pupils educated outside the borough. Academy and FE recoupment totals £4.970m for per‑place funding, as set out in the DfE’s published allocations. In January meeting, the Forum voted to transfer the headroom funding from the Schools Block into the CSSB. Halton had £26.907m available for distribution to specialist providers and to help manage ongoing cost pressures within the High Needs Block.

          This represented a headline increase of 8.92%, or a net increase of 5.7% in annual funding, within which both inflationary pressures and rising demand must be managed. However, this comparison was misleading, as the 2026/27 figure included the annualised value (approximately £2.1m) of previous separate grant elements in 2025/26 for pay and pensions uplifts and national insurance contributions.

          There were no proposals to increase the discretionary top up rates for resources places or special schools but there was a continuing expansion of resource-based programme which was consistent with the growth of travel referenced in the White Paper. Significant expansions in numbers at resource bases and increasing numbers and costs of out of borough provision, increases in numbers and value of EHCP (Education & Health Care Plan) assessments are all contributory factors in generating an initial forecast shortfall of £8.71m. £42m was needed to manage all High Needs services.

          A cumulative DSG deficit would be investigated at £27m and this would not incorporate the budget for 2027/28. It was predicted that there would be an overspend of £12m for 2027/28. The Forum agreed to an annually increased contribution for the established schools’ safeguarding post to mitigate the reduction of the ‘historic commitment’ funding into the CSSB.

          It was noted that the public did not understand how much services for high need pupils costed and much the overspend costed the Council. If demand was not met, then services suffered. High Needs services had a statutory override, so it was not included in base position of the DSG.

          Smaller authorities struggled to have their own specialist SEND provision which was why Halton and neighbouring authorities had to rely on out of borough placements. Providers increased their prices annually for these placements. It was rare for a local special to not be able to meet a pupil’s needs; they may be placed put of borough if there was no place locally, if constant provision was needed, or if there was a place at a neighbouring authority that could accommodate them. Pupils would not be placed back in borough if they thrived at their out of borough placements. Work was done regionally to mitigate excess rises in costs for out of borough placements. The Forum suggested that authorities who did send children to out of borough placements were looked at.

          The needs of pupils had increased significantly over a short amount  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.