Forest Hill School Deficit Budget

[Tim Lund]

There's a report on the Council web site about Forest Hill School getting into financial problems and having to draw up a recovery budget or else face a 'withdraw[al of] delegation from the school', which I take means some more centralised control of the school.

There's nothing in the report about how this has happened, which is hardly surprising. There's a general point to be made, however, which is that decentralisation of power has its problems. In this case some people - Council officers? - may well be thinking that the school's management is inadequate, while the school's management may feel they've been expected to do the impossible. Alternatively - and just as likely - there are good people on all sides who want to workout what to do now for the best.

For the Council report, see http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres ... er2010.PDF

Thanks to SydSoc for picking this one up.

[Robin Orton]

I see that 'LA' is helpfully explained in the council document - it means 'local authority', apparently - but what is 'the FM contract' (which seems - paragraph 6.1 - to be at the root of the school's problems)?

[Tim Lund]

I was also wondering what FTE meant, but I think it means full time equivalent. No clue on FM though!

[leenewham]

Abbreviations drive me nuts. TINNFT. H. IJAETWIOIF.

[bigbadwolf]

I don't know how relevant this is, but what you won't find in the report is that Lewisham Council doesn't actually own the school buildings. They rent them from the company, Bouygues, that re-developed the school, making them liable for any costs concerning maintainence.

[dickp]

facilities management? i.e. looking after the building itself, not the teaching provision.

[Robin Orton]

Sounds plausible, 'dickp'. But in that case what does

The school had overestimated the income they were likely to receive. It had assumed that level of reimbursements in the first year of the FM contract would be repeated in the following year

mean? What 'reimbursements' and from whom? The implication seems to be that the school management made a mistake. Understandable in the circumstances - or was somebody careless?

[Tim Lund]

I find this very specific part interesting:

The school was also managing the shared playing fields on behalf of the Local Authority and found this arrangement unsustainable. The Council has now resumed responsibility for the management of the playing fields and is examining how these might be most efficiently managed in the future

Doubtless there's a lot more going on here than we know - or maybe can even reasonably be expected to know - but I'm interested to know what options the Council might be considering for managing playing fields. In the current climate they are hardly likely to find the resources to run them in-house.