2. Delegation Process
Anything to do with delegation, we take to our working group, which consists of a range of
representative heads. So we bounce some ideas around them and when we get some options that
they feel comfortable with, we put them out to all the schools and use their response.
2.10 In one authority, the local association of governors although in favour of delegation, felt
that they had had no voice in the decision with the Fair Funding process, as this had
been limited to consultation between head teachers and LEA officers. Only with the
recent introduction of a Schools Forum did governors consider that they had been
offered an opportunity to participate in the consultation process.
Formulae for delegating the school meals budget
2.11 In interviews in Strand 1 of the study, interest groups had raised concerns that the
formulae for delegating funding had not been clearly understood by all schools and
caterers and that in some LEAs there was a lack of transparency around the process.
With schools and caterers unclear how the sums were derived, there was unease that
funding could be perceived to be not equally available to those who choose to leave or
to remain with a central contract.
2.12 The factors used to devise the school meals budget formulae varied, even within the
small sample of LEAs selected in Strand 2. At the most minimal level, LEAs reported
delegating only a sum to reimburse schools for providing free school meals. However,
other LEAs delegated further elements, which were identified as a subsidy for all paid
meals as well as free meals, and for the repair and maintenance of kitchens and kitchen
equipment.
2.13 The delegated budget for free school meal was calculated in several ways. Some LEAs
used the number of pupils with registered entitlement whilst others used meal take up as
the basis for their calculations. Some calculated using a snapshot view such as
entitlement recorded at PLASC (Pupil Level Annual School Census), others used the
beginning of the school year as their audit point. One LEA used two census points,
September and PLASC and then 7/12 and 5/12 proportions to assess an average
entitlement.
2.14 The use of the census or snapshot formula raised problems, not least because it failed to
accommodate changes in the number of pupils in each school taking the free school
meal over the course of the year. To overcome variations over the year, several LEAs
used actual take up, with schools invoicing the LEA for reimbursement for the free
school meal taken in their school.
2.15 In addition to the free school meal funding, two LEAs reported calculating budgets
using total paid meal take up in each school. Historically, this element had been used for
calculating budgets for grant maintained schools and the formula had been continued
for calculating delegated budgets. However, whilst take up of paid meals had been
recorded on Form 7 in earlier days, these data were no longer collected, so the LEA had
now to collect this independently from each school. The LEA believed this to be a
worthwhile exercise, providing an incentive to schools to maintain and improve the
meals service.
If you just worked it out on the number of pupils then schools which have tried hard to get
more pupils in for meals would feel that they had been done, because ‘We have upped our
number of pupils and we don’t get any recognition for that in the formula’. So if we did that we
13