Office of the Deputy Prime Minister | Local Government Finance Formula Grant Distrbution Consultation - further exemplifications requested by local authorities

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

Local Government Finance Formula Grant Distrbution Consultation
Further exemplifications requested by local authorities


A number of councils and other organisations have requested the Government illustrate the effect of possible components of the new Formula Grant distribution system other than those contained in the formal consultation document. As the document makes clear, the Government welcomes alternative suggestions for the new system. Therefore we will try, as far as possible, to view reasonable requests positively.

However, exemplifications are resource intensive to produce and to support. Therefore, we cannot guarantee to meet requests, or to provide technical support in interpreting the results. Where a number of similar requests are received, we may need to decide on one to exemplify, rather than duplicating work. We would ask that we are given the maximum possible notice of any request: we are unlikely to be able to respond positively to requests made towards the end of the consultation period.

For more detail, please see this paper that ODPM has discussed with local government representatives in the Formula Review Group.

The Government has not considered these additional exemplifications, and has not taken a view on whether they could form acceptable way forward. They should not be regarded as being formally consulted upon by the Government. They have been produced only to aid authorities in responding to the Formula Grant Distribution consultation document.

Please click on the “Exemp nos” to open the Excel spreadsheet showing the results of each exemplification.

PSS

Exemp noRequested byBrief description
CPSS4ASIGOMAChildren's PSS with no Foster Care Adjustment
CPSS5AHEASIGAs option SSC3, but using married females instead of social class
CPSS6ACCNShows the elderly options increasing the sparsity weight to 5%, and including WFTC in option SSO1.
CPSS7AANECShows SSC2 dropping children living in flats as an indicator, and SSE3 with judgemental increases to the weights given to rented accommodation and income support.

Police

Exemp noRequested byBrief description
POL6APolice Allocation Formula Working GroupCombinations of the police options contained in the consultation document
POL7A
POL8A
POL9A
POL10A
POL11A
POL12A

Fire

Exemp noRequested byBrief description
FIR5ACCN As option FIR1, but using the pensions adjustment to the expenditure database as used in FIR4.
FIR6ACCNAs option FIR1, but using the sparsity adjustment as per FIR4.
FIR7ACCN As option FIR1, but using 3% for the fire safety education element as per FIR4.
FIR8ALondon As for FIR1 but sets the percentage allocated to pensions as the amount spent on pensions as a proportion of formula allocation (approx 18%). (FIR1 uses the current percentage - calculated as the amount spent on pensions as a proportion of total spending, rounded - 16%.)
FIR9ALondon As for FIR1 but uses 'enhanced population'. (The definition of enhanced population is the same as that currently used in EPCS and technical implementation is similar.)
FIR10G FRSG As for FIR1 but using an alternative Fire Risk Index as described in paper FRSG(02) 129. Corresponds to option FIR1B in Annex A of this paper.
FIR11G FIR12G FIR13G FIR14G FIR15GFRSG As for FIR2 but using alternative Fire Risk Indexes as described in paper FRSG(02) 129. FIR11G corresponds to option FIR2B, FIR12G to FIR2C, FIR13G to FIR2D, FIR14G to FIR2E, and FIR15G to FIR2F in Annex B of this paper.
FIR16G FIR17G FIR18GFRSG As for FIR4 but using alternative Fire Risk Indexes as described in paper FRSG(02) 129. FIR16G corresponds to option FIR4B, FIR17G to FIR4C, and FIR16G to FIR4D, in Annex C of this paper.
FIR19ALondon As for FIR14G but with a 2% (of main formula) top-slice for density, and using the pensions adjustment to the expenditure database and the 3% fire safety education topslice used in FIR4.
FIR20ALondon As for FIR19A, but using an (apprximately) 18% pensions topslice (as FIR8A) and enhanced population (as FIR9A).

Highways Maintenance

Exemp noRequested byBrief description
HM3ACCNAs option HM1, but using the current formula’s weightings for vehicle types
HM4ACCNAs option HM2, but using the current formula’s weightings for vehicle types
HM5AHalton BCAs option HM1, but reinstating the current formula's threshold levels (Revised)
HM6AAs option HM2, but reinstating the current formula's threshold levels (Revised)
HM7GFRSG As option HM1, but replacing snow lying days with predicted gritting days.
HM8GFRSG As option HM2, but replacing snow lying days with predicted gritting days.
HM9GFRSG As option HM1, but replacing snow lying days with a winter weather variable where predicted gritting days have 9 times the relative weight of snow lying days.
HM10GFRSG As option HM2, but replacing snow lying days with a winter weather variable where predicted gritting days have 9 times the relative weight of snow lying days.

EPCS

Exemp noRequested byBrief description
EPC5AStockport Change to default levy basis for waste and transport
EPC6ANewcastle Cap on commuters and visitors at 10% of resident population
EPC7ACCN Addition of Working Families Tax Credit data
EPC8ANewcastle Includes overnight visitors data

Capital Finance

Exemp noRequested byBrief description
CF5A SIGOMA/ ANEC Option A2 from paper FRSG(02). Variant of option CF3 using information on pattern of capital receipts over last 12 years, and with adjustments to each sub-block based on primary indicator for that sub-block.
CF6ASIGOMA/ ANEC Option B2 from paper FRSG(02). Variant of option A2 of paper FRSG(02). Debt charge control total is increased by £174m to give a scaling factor of 1, and the deduction in respect of interest on reserved receipts is increased by £174m to compensate.

ACA

.
Exemp noRequested byBrief description
ACA6ASociety of London TreasurersACA exemplifications excluding education
ACA7A
ACA8A
ACA9A
ACA10A
ACA11A Lancashire County CouncilAs option ACA1, but with local authority occupation weights
ACA12A ACA13A South East Counties ACA GroupAs options ACA2&3, but with no lower limits
ACA14 South East Counties ACA GroupAs option ACA1, but using Elliott methodology, LFS and private sector data only
ACA15A SIGOMAAs option ACA1, but using Elliott methodology, NES and public sector data only
ACA16A SIGOMAAs option ACA4, but with a "high" lower limit
ACA17A SIGOMAAs option ACA4, but with a "low" lower limit
ACA18A ACA19A ALG/SLTIllustartion of "NHS Smoothing". Please also see the following explanatory paper - Word 97(74kb) and Excel model - Excel(2595kb)
ACA20A ACAShows three year average of existing ACA

Fixed costs, sluggish costs and population change

Exemp noRequested byBrief description
FCPC3AUnitary TreasurersFixed costs with £450k per upper tier authority
FCPC4A FCPC5ASIGOMA/Growth Areas GroupPopulation decline and growth options with minimum thresholds
FCPC6ACCNShows FC1 topslicing £300k per shire district from EPCS lower, £300k per shire county from EPCS upper, and £150k from each tier for other authorities.

Resource Equalisation

Exemp noRequested byBrief description
RE4A SIGOMA/ ANECVariant of option RE2. CFSSA sub-block totals are not adjusted to bring them into lime with NRE. This results in total SSA rising to £53698.2m (from £53051.4m) and CTSS rising to £996.3 (from £959.0).
RE5ASIGOMA/ ANECANEC special grant proposal from paper RGD(02)03, but with the £192.410m cost of the special grant top-sliced from RSG.

[ Contents ]

Updated 8 October 2002
Return to Local Government Finance Index
Return to Local and Regional Government Index
Return to ODPM What's New Page
Return to ODPM Home Page
ODPM Web site terms