Funding consultation 2011/2012

14, 17 and 19 January 2011

Purpose of meeting

• To outline the proposed changes to the funding formula for 2011/2012 and the reasons for change

• To receive comments and questions about the proposals

• To ensure everybody is aware of how to formally respond to the consultation

Contribution to consultation

• If you wish your comment to be recorded then please state when you speak- your name- your school/PVI/organisation- your role (eg governor/manager/headteacher etc)

• But please also respond to the formal consultation

Background information

Dedicated Schools Grant

• Total funding available is from the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) which is fixed by the DfE according to the number of children counted in January

• This funding is for - all maintained schools including special needs- early years providers (PVIs)- pupil referral units (PRUs)- out borough special needs- academies although this is taken back by DfE to reallocate to individual academies

School funding 2011/2012

• At a national level it is about cash neutral• Pupil premium is funded from this total and so the basic

level of funding will reduce, we assume by around a reduction of 1.5%

• This includes the grants that are assimilated into the DSG but it does not include grants that have stopped eg all the central grants and capital grants

Individual Schools Budget

• The ISB is a “fixed” proportion of the DSG and so the funding available is fixed by the number of children counted at the census.

• Consequently if funding for a part of the formula is increased then there is less for other factors or other sectors

Current funding formula• Schools are funded through a range of funding

factors which are mainly of the form number of units x unit value = funding

• Early years has a separate formula covering all PVIs, nursery classes and nursery schools.

• All settings are funded at a fixed rate of £3.49 per child hour session (max 15 hours per week and 38 weeks per year) with additional factors

Outline of current school funding formula

• 3 main sections- main the largest and the basic AWPU, fixed, floor area etc- AEN to supportthe children with additional needs and based on a range of factors eg FSM, IMD, prior attainment, ScAct+, mobility- highcost includes statement funding the majority based on factors eg AWPU, FSM, IMD, prior attainment

Reasons for change

Some reasons for change

• Some say funding formula is too complicated

• separate funding factors are seldom used by heads in setting the budget

• grants that were separately allocated to individual schools in 2010/2011 have now been assimilated into the dedicated schools grant (DSG)

• Introduction of pupil premium based on free school meals (FSM)

Some reasons for change

• schools who seem to be experiencing the most budgeting difficulties are 1 form entry primary schools, especially if they have disproportionate high numbers of children with higher needs.

• National funding formula proposed for 2012/2013

Some key principles

• Generate as little turbulence as possible in the funding

• Simplify the structure where possible

• Allocate funding as fairly as possible bearing in mind current situations

• Not move funding from one sector to another

The proposals for change affecting early years in schools, classes and PVIs

3 and 4 year old funding formula

• Quality indicator - no proposal

• Flexibility indicator - no proposal

• Nursery school transition factor- The second stage in the reduction of the nursery school transition factor is due in April 2011 and it is proposed that the next 20% reduction is implemented as planned

3 and 4 year old funding formula

• The relative value of the factors• Assuming that there is some flexibility in the available funding

then it is proposed that the relative values for the English as an additional language (EAL) and extended hours factors would remain as now (or reduced if less funding is available) but the index of multiple deprivation and special educational needs factors would be increased or at least maintained at a relatively high level.

• Proposal: In the early years formula the extended hours factor and the EAL factor would be kept at current values or reduced. The IMD and SEN factors would be kept at current values and increased if additional funds are available.

3 and 4 year old funding formula

• The rate per hour for child hours

• It is proposed that this rate be increased or decreased at the same % rate as that used for the age weighted pupil units in the main school formula.

• Proposal: In the early years formula the child hour rate be changed at the same % as the change in AWPU for the school formula.

• The proposals for change affecting maintained schools

The personalised learning factors

• To simplify the formula, these factors should be assimilated into the main formula. This would mean that the per child factor would be added to the age weighted pupil unit (AWPU) factor and the other factors (low prior attainment, high prior attainment, index of multiple deprivation (IMD)) would be added to the additional educational needs (AEN) factors. There would be no change in funding for any school due to this change.

• Proposal: The personalised learning factors would be assimilated into the appropriate additional educational needs factors in order to lead to a simplification but no funding change from what a school would have received.

The highcost funding formula factors• To simplify the formula and to better reflect the fact that

the funding for the first 12 hours of teacher assistant support is related to school action plus, the highcost funding formula should be added to the AEN factors. There would be no change in funding for any school due to this change.

• Note a notional calculation would need to be made in order to estimate the effective funding for the first 12 hours of children that are statemented.

• Proposal: The highcost funding formula factors would be assimilated into the appropriate additional educational needs factors in order to lead to a simplification but no funding change from what a school would have received.

A factor to support primary schools who take in disproportionate numbers of statements.

• Based on the position at the January school census an assessment will be made of the number of statements at or above 12 hours of TA support in each primary age (year R to year 6) school compared to the notional funding for providing the 12 hours. (see 7 above). The percentage of statements taken in by the school (ie not those assigned at the school or a predecessor nursery class or infant school) will then be calculated. A supplementary funding allocation will then be made as follows:

• As at the January census, for primary schools where the number of 12+ hour statements is higher than the notional number being funded through the funding formula then for each extra statement an allocation is made based on the following sliding scale

Percentage of statements that are taken in by the primary school

Proportion of funding as compared to the allocation for 12 hours

Less than 25% 0

Between 25% and 50%

25%

Between 50% and 75%

50%

Over 75% 100%

A factor to support primary schools who take in disproportionate numbers of statements.(3)• Note that this calculation is completed for the start of year funding

and is then not changed during the year due to any subsequent changes in statements or children leaving or joining except where the initial information was incorrect.

• This change would provide extra funding to support some of those schools who have taken in a disproportionate number of statements and would encourage more schools to take in children with statements. This funding would be taken from the main pot of funding. It is estimated that this would initially only affect a handful of schools and not all would receive the maximum funding.

• Proposal: An additional factor be introduced that supports primary schools that take in a high proportion of children with statements. The details as in the main consultation paper.

Floor and site area to be replaced by an age weighted pupil allocation.

• This was considered by the working group but no conclusions were finalised that could be proposed for change. There is thus no proposal. It should be noted that this factor is unlikely to be included in any national formula and so change is likely in the next year or so.

Grant assimilation into DSG

Grant assimilations

• The government has confirmed that some grants that are currently allocated to schools are to be assimilated into the main dedicated schools grant (DSG). They are not separately identified within the new DSG. It is thus up to local decision to decide how the “extra” funding is to be allocated. This could be either through the main funding formula and /or through a series of separate formula to reflect the original or modified methods of allocation. The decision is to be made locally.

• It should be noted that in 2010/2011 the total funding for this grant was partly determined by the number of children in the January 2010 count. The final allocation was then used by the DfE to determine the DSG multiplier for Croydon. The notional amount of funding is thus not fixed and will not necessarily be the same as in 2010/2011.

• Some grants are currently allocated on a simple formula basis and could very easily be assimilated into the mainstream formula without significantly changing the funding an individual school would receive. Others are much more targeted and it is proposed to operate many of these in a similar way to the current year.

Grant Assimilated funding Affected school sectors

Funds allocated for one to one tuition £1,697,271 Primary and secondary

Funds allocated for “every child programmes” such as Every Child a Reader

£46,880 and£58,500

Primary

Extended schools Subsidy and Sustainability £1,242,358 and £1,146,911

Primary, secondary and special

School lunch grant £502,250 Primary, secondary and special

School Standards Grant £7,193,733 Nursery, primary, secondary and special

SSGp £2,586,564 Primary, secondary and special

School Development Grant £9,524,065 Nursery, primary, secondary and special

Specialist schools grant £2,180,484 Secondary schools only

Ethnic Minority Achievement grant £3,186,163 Nursery, primary, secondary and special

The National Strategies’ budgets that were allocated to schools

Primary £640,844Secondary £574,782

Mainly primary and secondary

London Pay Addition Grant £1,075,000 Primary, secondary and special

Diploma formula grant £1,855 secondary

Total £31,657,660

Funds allocated for one to one tuition

• Targeted

• Funding to be kept centrally and targeted.

• Similar to now.

Funds allocated for “every child programmes” such as Every Child a Reader

• targeted

• Funding to be kept centrally and targeted,

• Similar to now.

Extended schools Subsidy and Sustainability

• Part per school and part on the numbers of FSM and looked after children (LAC)

• Assimilate part to a fixed allocation per school, and part to numbers of FSM/LAC in similar proportions to the current year. Allocations to be allocated to individual schools unless all schools in a cluster agree to combine all or part.

• No change

School lunch grant

• Per child

• Assimilate to AWPU

• No change

School Standards Grant

• Per child although some historic differences due to banding in previous years mean that different children have different values.

• Assimilate to AWPU to ensure each child of a particular age is allocated the same funding.

• Some change due to historic banding and smoothing of change over the years

School Standards Grant (personalisation)

• Per pupil, pupils with FSM and low prior attainment. Per school for special schools with a pupil supplement over 100 pupils

• Assimilate into the AWPU, FSM and prior attainment factors in the main formula. For special schools a fixed allocation and pupil supplement for over 100 pupils.

• Some change due to historic banding and smoothing of change over the years

Specialist schools grant

• Targeted but based on numbers of children. Some schools receive extra due to double specialisms.

• Either- Assimilate to AWPU across all secondary schoolsSome changeOr - try to replicate the current allocationsSome change

Ethnic Minority Achievement grant

• Central provision with the schools allocation based partly on the numbers of children with EAL and partly targeted to certain ethnic groups

• To continue as now with a central provision and the majority being assimilated into the funding formula using the same factors as in 2010/2011

• No change

The National Strategies’ budgets that were allocated to schools

• Targeted• This funding has been significantly reduced and it

is proposed that the majority be kept centrally to be allocated to individual schools when required. The methodology for actual allocations to be devised between the Schools Forum and LA officers. Allocations to be monitored by the Schools Forum.

• Some change

London Pay Addition Grant

• Per child

• Assimilate to AWPU

• No change

School Development Grant

• Historic and very variable

• A new formula which is described later in the paper.

• Some change

• Note the proposal suggests the separation of funding for the continuing support for advanced skills teachers (AST).

Further details about the current schools development grant funding and the proposal for allocating the notional funding in the DSG.• This is the one notional grant which is not easily assimilated. It is

also the one notional grant that potentially has the greatest amount to be allocated.

• The current funding formula for the school development grant has been built up over a number of years and targeted at various aspects of schools (eg small schools, schools with pupils with most educational need, school type/size etc). In recent years the formula structure has been frozen and funding allocations only changed as the number of pupils in a school increased or decreased. This means that some of the reasons for allocation have become increasingly less fair as the pupil populations across the schools have changed over the years.

• Advanced skills teachers are funded through this grant and it is proposed that funding is extracted for this purpose.

Option advantages disadvantages

a)use current allocations as a guide

Less funding turbulenceLess likely to trigger MFG

Maintains potentially unfair allocationsGreater change likely when a national formula introduced

a)add to the main funding formula, thus topping up the pot for allocating AWPU, FSM, IMD etc

Easily administeredWould provide additional funding to the Croydon formula

Not able to target funding to where it is most neededSome schools might trigger MFG

a)devise a new formula that targets funding where it is considered to be needed

Could focus on particular factors (eg more on small schools, AWPU or IMD etc) to target need. These could be added to current factors.Could be used to offset the pupil premium funding which is just based on FSM by allocating a greater proportion to IMD, prior attainment etc.Would be more fair than the current allocations and be able to address some of the difficulties in the current formula.

Some schools might trigger MFG

School development grant (3)

• Proposal: The funding for advanced skills teachers to be extracted and then the remaining funding to be allocated using a new formula. This formula to provide a lump sum for small primary schools, a proportion (about 30% of the remainder) on AWPU and the remainder to be allocated using factors supporting need (ie FSM, prior attainment and IMD). The split between these need factors to be balanced, taking into account the pupil premium funding based on FSM.

Minimum funding guarantee (MFG)• This will apply to the normal formula funding but also to the

assimilated grants. If the new allocation methodology is similar to that currently used then the minimum funding guarantee will not trigger. However, for grants that are targeted, there is likely to be a change from one year to the next. The MFG is likely to trigger in these circumstances and thus maintain an element of the previous years targeted funding. This reduces the funding available to allocate to all schools and so the funding level is marginally reduced, with the possible effect of triggering more schools into MFG. At this time the DfE have not confirmed whether it will be possible to exclude some “grants” from the MFG calculation although has been the norm in the past and there is some indication that the DfE are considering how this might be done.

• Proposal: Subject to DfE agreement then grants that involve targeting to be excluded from the MFG calculation. If the above proposals are adopted then this would include at least the following.

• Funds allocated for one to one tuition Funds allocated for “every child programmes” such as Every Child a Reader The National Strategies’ budgets that were allocated to schools

Any other comments/questions?

The consultation process

The Consultation Process

• Paper on Finance Matters with other supporting information

• Consultation responses on Fronter • These meetings in early January (am, pm and

evening) to explain proposals and to seek comments

• Closing date for responses is 28 January 2011• Responses will be made available to the Schools

Forum funding formula working group and then final proposals will go to the Schools Forum at February meeting

Typical question

• Should the ???? factor be changed? Yes or NoIf No please give your reasons:

Getting to the information

• The link to get the information http://webfronter.com/croydon/Finance_Matters/mnu3.html

• Then follow the guidance

Any other comments/questions?

Thank you for attending

• Please complete a consultation response