East Durham College Finance and General Purposes Meeting Thursday 19th March 2026

S Robson (Chair)  

S Bullock 

A Jefferson  

G Edmunds 

M Anderson 

I Wright

J Manns (Director of Finance)) 

H McCoy (Assistant Principal Performance) 

A Barnard (Director of Estates) 

S Pritchard (Clerk to the Corporation)  

V Charlton (Committee Secretary) 

Apologies received from J Mitchelson 

The Chair invited committee members to declare any conflicts of interest relevant to the agenda items for the meeting.  None were declared. 

The minutes of the meeting held on 13th November 2025 were approved.  

It was agreed that the November minutes be amended to confirm that MA had submitted apologies for that meeting. 

The Schedule of Business, reports and agendas will be reviewed by the College Leadership Group and then discussed with the Chair and the Clerk. Where possible, clashes with University Board and Committee meetings should be avoided to support governor attendance. 

In relation to assurance on planned maintenance, the Principal advised that the Director of Estates would attend the meeting for the Estates agenda item. A maintenance schedule had been appended to the Principal’s report to provide assurance that matters are being actively managed. The Chair of the Finance and General Purposes Committee emphasised the importance of monitoring major items and providing a holistic overview to avoid unexpected issues. The Committee does not require the schedule to be presented again. 

On prioritisation of works, the Principal confirmed that maintenance planning is aligned with cash‑flow considerations, noting that cash generation remains the College’s key challenge. The Committee Chair confirmed that previous reviews of plans had been helpful in providing visibility of upcoming works and ensuring existing assets are being properly maintained. Insurance considerations were also noted. A Governor requested assurance that statutory maintenance obligations are being met, particularly in relation to health and safety reporting. The Chair reiterated that health and safety and compliance are critical and that governors require clear assurance in these areas. The discussion was welcomed as part of the ongoing development of the Estates Strategy. 

The Director of Estates presented the report and provided an update on key developments. 

The steel frame for the new build has been erected and the lift shaft installed. A CEM meeting was held the previous week, with value engineering undertaken; while further work is required to align funding, the outcome was considered achievable. 

Members were informed that funding support has been secured from the Department for Education for a new communications system. The Principal confirmed that, due to the design of the building and forthcoming legislative requirements from April 2027, the College had made a successful case despite this being an optional upgrade. The DfE response has been positive. 

The appointment of a Security Officer, commencing the following week, was discussed. It was confirmed that this is a pilot until the end of the academic year and is intended to provide additional cover and reduce the impact on management time, rather than address significant behavioural concerns. Sanctions would continue to be applied in line with existing procedures. The Principal confirmed that longer‑term costs would be reviewed following evaluation of the pilot. 

An update was provided on the discovery of asbestos beneath the 3G pitch. As the asbestos is located at depth, the College will proceed with the preferred option to remove the surface mat and replace shock pads, without excavation or alterations to the lighting, removing the need for planning approval. The Principal confirmed that a Board decision was not required, as delegated authority applies and previous approval of £200k remains in place. The current estimate is £205k, but is subject to tender. Work is underway to determine the cashflow implications. 

The Chair of Governors requested a dedicated session on the Estates Strategy at a future meeting to provide a clear timeline and context for progress. This was supported by the Committee Chair as a means of keeping governors sighted on long‑term plans. 

The Director of Estates reported on two recent RIDDOR incidents and confirmed that additional health and safety briefings had been delivered.  

Governors reiterated the need for assurance around compliance and statutory maintenance. It was agreed that governors do not require detailed schedules but do expect regular assurance on major maintenance items, capital planning, and the link between estates, finance and health and safety. The Principal confirmed that capital budgets and longer‑term condition planning, supported by forthcoming DfE‑commissioned condition surveys, would be progressed and brought back to governors as appropriate. 

The Assistant Principal presented the report to the Committee, highlighting the key areas. 

Sickness absence has reduced and is now below the national average. This improvement will be taken into account when setting targets for the next academic year. Following an internal audit recommendation, moving forward there will be a a stronger wellbeing focus for staff.  

Several key appointments have been made, including a Health and Safety Advisor and teaching staff in priority curriculum areas. 

The Gender Pay Gap Report, which is published annually, was noted. While comparative data is not yet available nationally, this will be included in the report to the May Board meeting. National benchmarking data has been referenced, and further comparative analysis will be added for Board consideration. 

In relation to pay awards and staff structures, the Assistant Principal outlined that new academic structures and a revised pay proposal were implemented in November. Work is already underway to assess affordability for the next academic year. It was noted that a two‑year pay deal had previously been discussed; however, additional pressures, including increases to the National Living Wage for business support staff, mean this will need to be revisited. Further discussion will take place at CLG. The Principal confirmed that a joint union meeting is scheduled for May. 

In response to a Governor’s question, the Principal clarified that while the AoC undertakes collective pay bargaining and provides recommendations, decisions on pay awards are made by individual colleges based on affordability. Unlike schools, colleges do not receive direct funding to cover pay awards. It was noted that although the College had previously fallen behind sector pay, significant progress has been made in recent years. A Governor commented that pay had previously been a significant risk but that this has reduced due to the work undertaken. The Assistant Principal emphasised the importance of not falling behind again, highlighting the move to a single pay framework as a fundamental step in aligning with the sector. 

The Chair noted that the positive progress reflected in the paper should be mirrored in the risk register and requested that this be reviewed at the Audit and Risk Committee in June. The Principal confirmed that the risk score in relation to pay has reduced and that the risk description has been updated to reflect current sector pinch points. The Assistant Principal added that recruitment remains challenging in Maths, English and industry‑based roles, where the College is competing directly with school and industry pay rates. 

A Governor acknowledged the significant progress made in reducing turnover and sickness absence, noting the direct impact of the pay strategy. Questions were raised regarding the increase in the median gender pay gap. The Assistant Principal explained that changes in senior leadership composition and pay differentials within certain curriculum areas, such as engineering, have influenced this position. Further discussion took place around the impact of vacancies on the median and the underlying position of the gender pay gap. 

The Committee discussed capacity pressures within key business support areas, including Finance and MIS. It was noted that the Director of MIS has left the organisation, with an interim appointment commencing shortly. Recruitment will take place for an Executive Director role to increase technical capacity. Proposed senior structural changes have been discussed with the Clerk and will be brought to the Board. The Chair confirmed that the Board recognises these pressures and would be supportive of appropriate analysis and potential investment, noting the College’s growth since the current structures were established. 

The Assistant Principal advised that resolving these issues will take time, particularly given the complexity of the roles and the need for new postholders to shape future structures. The Principal supported the development of a clear roadmap, while noting the need to remain mindful of affordability. A Governor requested clearer narrative and context around proposed structural changes. In response to recruitment challenges, the Assistant Principal confirmed that the use of market supplements and potential bonuses is considered. 

Overall, the Committee welcomed the report, noting the clear progress made and the inclusion of absence trend analysis and underlying reasons. 

The Committee noted the report. 

The Assistant Principal, HM, presented the report, providing an update on progress against key priorities. 

Following a request for further detail on cyber security, members were informed that a detailed Cyber Security report is submitted annually to the Audit and Risk Committee, covering firewalls, phishing, direct attacks and compliance. Governors requested that the cyber security report be reinstated as a regular report to Audit and Risk Committee with consideration given to its relevance for safeguarding and risk oversight. 

he Assistant Principal confirmed that arrangements are in place ahead of the current licence expiry in August. The College is part of the Jisc network, providing centrally managed firewall and security services, and has achieved Cyber Essentials accreditation, which is externally audited. Members discussed system resilience, including examinations, and noted that future systems will be cloud‑based, the current MIS system is not cloud based.  It was also noted that a newly appointed governor brings relevant cyber security experience. 

In response to questions on staff training, it was confirmed that phishing simulations and online training are in place. Although no face‑to‑face training has taken place this year, training may be organised if there was an urgent need.  Governors noted that more frequent short training sessions may be beneficial, given the potential impact of cyber incidents, and advised that training should be kept under review. 

Governors requested clarity on the proposed timescales for procurement of finance systems and assurance that integration with HR systems would be considered. The Assistant Principal confirmed that the current HR contract has a further year to run and that early planning, including finance integration, is underway. The Board will be kept informed. 

The committee noted the report.

The Director of Finance (JM) presented the report on behalf of the Vice Principal Finance and Business Planning. It was noted that references in the report should be to Period 6, not Period 5. 

Income is currently below budget and will continue to be closely monitored, with forecasting remaining prudent. The main shortfall relates to Element 3 High Needs funding, and meetings with Durham County Council are planned over the next month to discuss this. The College continues to meet the FE Commissioner benchmarks, although some require ongoing attention. 

Adjusted cash days in hand at Period 6 stood at 68 days (compared to benchmark of 40 days) and continue to be monitored closely. Improvements have been made compared to the previous year through weekly payment runs, tighter credit control, and earlier notification of commitments, all of which have improved cashflow and support future capital investment. The adjusted current ratio is 1.1, meaning current liabilities could just be met if required. The College is meeting bank covenants, which remain a priority, and provides monthly reports to the bank. Further improvements to reporting were noted as forthcoming. The Director of Finance invited questions. 

A Governor welcomed the strong income narrative but requested clearer separation between income and expenditure variances, noting that although there is an underspend to date, it would be helpful to see how this is split. Forecasting was supported as prudent, but concern was raised about excessive caution potentially impacting future budget planning. The Chair emphasised the need for consistency and accuracy in forecasting, potentially expressed as a range, to avoid volatility, while also balancing prudence with investment in current students. The report was noted to be improving. 

A Governor queried whether further income or expenditure reductions were possible in the remaining five to six months. The Principal advised that apprenticeship income continues throughout the year, including potential January starts, and that opportunities for additional income were being explored. 

A Governor highlighted a £165k forecast underspend in materials and equipment, noting this appeared significant given a current £25k overspend. The Director of Finance agreed to review the figure to confirm whether it was an anomaly. 

A Governor raised concerns around the accounts process, regarding the robustness of process and sign‑off arrangements, particularly in the context of a new system and management accountant. The Director of Finance offered to have a discussion with the Governor outside of the meeting, with feedback to be brought back to the committee. 

A Governor also raised question regarding capital asset issues identified in the accounts. The Director of Finance confirmed these stemmed from last year’s audit and are being addressed ahead of the next audit. 

The committee noted the report. 

Budget Assumptions 

The Chair advised that he had held a discussion with a Governor prior to the meeting and had also spoken with the Principal. Upon reflection, it was noted that this item of business is not currently aligned with the College’s position, and that the paper provided lacks the necessary level of detail at this stage. 

The financial model from the Department for Education had only been received on the day of the meeting. Budget information is still being received during the course of this week and, as a result, there has not been sufficient time to develop the level of detail required for presentation to the Board. Income assumptions are currently based on a 16–19 allocation of 2,088 learners; however, these assumptions have not yet been fully modelled through to cash values. In relation to Higher Education, the assumption remains that the operating environment continues to be challenging. Student numbers stand at 105 in the current year and are expected to remain broadly similar in the next academic year. 

With regard to Apprenticeships, a recent announcement confirming that certain standards are to be defunded will have an impact on budget planning. The College will be switching off Level 5 provision and will therefore remove some apprenticeship starts from its planning assumptions. It will also be necessary to calculate the carry-in position. Funding for 14–16 provision is confirmed later in the cycle, and an amount of £1.65m is currently assumed based on best estimates. NECA funding is assumed at £2.8m. When a more detailed version of the financial model is brought forward, consideration will be given as to whether a simpler provision should be made at this stage, with decisions taken alongside the senior team as the College moves towards a more outcomes-based model. It was noted that a prudent approach can be adopted. 

Discussions are continuing with Durham County Council in relation to High Needs Funding. The College currently has 110 commissioned places, which were submitted to the Department for Education in December. DCC has indicated an intention to reduce the number of places to 80, based on the funded places for the current year. It has been explained to DCC that this represents a one-year dip rather than a longer-term trend, and a meeting has been arranged for the following week to discuss this further. If the number of places were to reduce to 80, Element 2 funding would fall to £180k. The College intends to seek to retain funding at the level associated with 110 places. 

In relation to staff costs, modelling is currently being undertaken around potential pay awards, which are driven by student numbers. As these figures are not yet confirmed, no further update can be provided at this stage. 

The Principal recommended that a revised document be brought forward at the end of April or early May, potentially for consideration at the July Board meeting. A Governor commented that it would be helpful for the report to include specific areas of focus, including utilities, noting that the current utilities contract has less than 12 months remaining. 

Governor asked whether there is a metric relating to the relationship between staffing, curriculum delivery and curriculum consumables, in order to understand academic costs in comparison with vocational provision. The Assistant Principal advised that this is addressed through the curriculum planning process, with requirements needing to be justified. It was noted that the College uses contribution and class size benchmarks, and it was agreed that viewing the metric value would be of interest. 

The Principal added that forecasting is undertaken at course level, although for operational purposes this is managed at department level. A Governor indicated that they would welcome a paper providing detailed income information, but not expenditure. A further question was raised regarding whether formal procedures are in place for curriculum planning. The Assistant Principal confirmed that this is scrutinised through the curriculum planning process and advised that Curriculum Planning has also been subject to an internal audit cycle, which received a positive outcome. 

Capitalisation and Depreciation Policy 

The Committee noted the policy and there were no comments.   

The Committee noted that there were no outstanding actions.  All actions were complete or progressing.  No further comments.  

No further discussion required.