CYPE(5)-07-19 Ð
Papur 2
SF
31
Ymateb gan: Cymdeithas Genedlaethol y Prifathrawon
Response from: National Association of Headteachers (NAHT)
NAHT welcomes the
opportunity to submit evidence to the Children, Young People and
Education committee.
NAHT represents more
than 29,000 school leaders in early years, primary, secondary and
special schools, making us the largest association for school
leaders in the UK.
We represent, advise
and train school leaders in Wales, England and Northern Ireland. We
use our voice at the highest levels of government to influence
policy for the benefit of leaders and learners
everywhere.
Our new section, NAHT
Edge, supports, develops and represents middle leaders in
schools.
The invitation to submit evidence to the National
Assembly for WalesÕ Children, Young People and Education
Committee for the inquiry concerning School Funding is very
welcome, as is the focus upon:
¯ the sufficiency
of school funding in Wales; and
¯ the way school
budgets are determined and allocated.
The inquiry will focus specifically on:
The sufficiency of
provision for school budgets, in the context of other public
service budgets and available resources.
- NAHT Cymru has previously
called for a national audit / review of school budgets in Wales in
order to clarify the sufficiency of school finances to meet the
growing needs of all pupils.
- In the current long-term and
unprecedented large-scale period of educational reform in Wales,
such a national audit is also necessary in order to adequately
assess the financial capability of schools to successfully
implement Welsh Government educational reforms. This is
particularly pertinent given the history of well-intentioned,
inadequately implemented policy within the Welsh education system
of the past.
- In terms of the scale of
pupil needs, there is little sign that these are reducing, in fact,
in terms of areas such as deprivation, Additional Learning Needs
and Mental Health and Wellbeing, evidence suggests that the demand
is growing and outstripping available resources.
- In reflecting upon the
sufficiency of provision for school budgets in Wales, analysis of
Welsh Government Main Expenditure Groups (MEG), via their own
publicly available supplementary budget figures and draft budget
figures, is relevant.
- During the Welsh Government
Draft Budget 2018-19 outline proposals process, the then Cabinet
Secretary for Finance and Local Government, Mark Drakeford AM,
stated,
ÔI am setting this
draft Budget against one of the longest periods of sustained
austerity in living memory. The UK Government has consistently and
persistently cut funding for public services as it has sought to
reduce the deficit.
This has had a very real
impact on our budget, which by the end of this decade will have
fallen by 7% in real terms, compared to 2010-11. This means that we
will have £1.2bn less to spend on vital public
services.
If spending on public
services had at least kept pace with growth in GDP since 2010-11,
the Welsh Government would have had an extra £4.5bn to spend
in 2019-20.
Instead we are still facing the very real prospect of further
spending cuts to come from the UK Government Ð £3.5bn of
cuts to public spending are planned for 2019-20, which if they all
fall in devolved areas, could mean up to £175m of
further
cuts
to the Welsh budget.ÕHis statement clearly
recognises the pressures upon public spending.
- Figures show that the
Education MEG budget in 2013-14 was approximately
£2,170,491,000 and was subsequently approximately
£2,101,219,000 in 2017-18 Ð circa a 3%
reduction.
- In the years in between
2013-14 and 2017-18, the Education MEG initially fell, then
remained relatively steady in cash terms and then gradually
increased back towards the 2013-14 figure by 2017-18.
- In 2018-19, the Education
MEG was £2,416,879,000 Ð this total included additional
resource for projects such as a boost to the existing
21st Century Schools Building programme, a new schools
as community hubs pilot and the ÔCymraeg 2050 - A million
Welsh speakersÕ commitment made by Welsh
Government
- The figures show that for
Local Government, over that same period, the MEG was at
£4,728,084,000 in 2013-14 and at £4,254,156,000 in
2017-18 Ð approximately 10% less.
- In 2018-19, the Local
Government MEG is £5,405,117,000.
- The figures show that for
the Health and Social Services MEG over the same timeline, the
totals were as follows Ð 2013-14 £6,382,118,000, 2017-18
£7,526,011,000 and 2018-19 £7,795,872,000.
- In fact, every year since
2013-14, the figures for Health and Social Services have increased,
albeit at varying rates, presumably in recognition of increasing
demand upon the system.
- The above is especially
significant as schools are reporting difficulties in accessing
resource to implement the type of growing support for pupils that
could legitimately be expected to come from other sectors,
particularly health. Some schools have had to use their own budgets
to put this support in place for pupils. This is particularly
prevalent in the special school sector, although mainstream are
having to pay more particularly to support mental health and
wellbeing.
- It is also worth noting that
between 2013-14 and 2017-18 overall pupil numbers have slightly
increased by 0.4% and within that pupil total, figures for those
with Additional Learning Needs have also remained fairly steady
with a slight increase of 0.3% from 105,303 in 2013-14 to 105,625
in 2017-18
- The overall level of
reserves held by schools in Wales was £50 million at 31 March
2018. The overall level of reserves increased by 10% compared with
the previous year. Reserves in primary schools accounted for
£49 million or 97% of the total reserves. However, this
followed a 28% drop the previous year.
- The increase in overall
reserves is driven by primary schools where reserves increased in
the latest year. Reserves in secondary schools decreased, as they
have done in recent years, and are now in deficit (by £2.4
million) for the first time since the series began.
- Since the economic downturn
and the introduction of austerity measures there has been an
increasing number of schools with negative or lower level of
reserves and a decline in the number of schools with reserves over
10% of expenditure.
- 146 primary, 79 secondary, 8
special, 1 nursery and 7 middle schools in Wales had negative
reserves totalling £25 million. The remaining 1,328 schools
had positive reserves, 171 of which had reserves in excess of 10%
of their total delegated expenditure.
- One of the challenges facing
primary schools in particular is their relatively small economies
of scale i.e. the ability to absorb potential shortfalls in funding
are significantly reduced.
- In addition, many schools
with reserves have generated income throughout the year, via use of
premises, school leaders taking additional regional strategic roles
(Challenge Adviser, NQT support etc) in order to offset budget
shortfall in core funds. Therefore, it would be inaccurate to
describe such reserves as underspends.
- Finally, with uncertainty in
terms of future school budget levels, prudent financial management
would dictate some degree of caution.
- It is, therefore, NAHT
CymruÕs assertion, that Education funding within Welsh
Government has not been afforded the same protection / ongoing
review as other areas such as health. When one considers that Local
Authority funding has also been cut over the same period, it is
clear school funding has been negatively affected both directly and
indirectly. This is despite the evidence clearly illustrating that
pupil support needs have risen over the same period.
The extent to which
the level of provision for school budgets complements or inhibits
delivery of the Welsh GovernmentÕs policy
objectives.
- Welsh Government have set an
agenda for Òambitious learningÓ in Wales which now
requires a more profession-led use of pedagogy and adaptive
teaching.
- This approach has been
broadly welcomed by the profession because it is widely recognized
that there are benefits in, for example, making provision for
increasingly reflective learners and making use of authentic
learning contexts to build skill capacity. However, whilst this
type of progressive teaching for learning builds capacity for Wales
to compete with international standards, it cannot be seen as a
ÔcheapÕ option Ð it requires investment and
appropriate resourcing at a time when class numbers are rising and
the amount available for capital expenditure is not.
- The ÔNew Deal for the
Education WorkforceÕ announced by the previous Minister for
Education, Huw Lewis AM, sought to offer all practitioners, support
staff, teachers, leaders and FE Lecturers in Wales an entitlement
to access world class professional learning opportunities to
develop their practice through their career. The New Deal was
intended to support practitioners to develop their practice in the
most effective ways to improve outcomes for their learners. The
introduction of this professional learning model was supposed to
include the following characteristics:
o
Coaching and mentoring
o
Reflective practice
o
Effective collaboration
o
Effective use of data and research evidence
o
A
range of high quality online professional learning
material
- In reality, the ability of
schools to meet the commitment required to deliver the above staff
entitlement was inextricably linked to their available resource for
training. The limited available funding left for schools, once they
had committed to their statutory obligations, meant that the New
Deal was unlikely to be successful in this original
form
- Clearly, the knock-on effect
for wider reforms, such as the new curriculum, are significant and
this is why NAHT Cymru welcomed the additional funding recently
announced by the Cabinet Secretary for Education, Kirsty Williams
AM to deliver the ÔNational Approach to Professional
LearningÕ (NAPL) as it was an acknowledgement that current
and previous funding levels had been inadequate in order to deliver
a previously unfunded commitment to professional
learning.
- The fact that the (NAPL)
funding has been ring-fenced specifically for professional learning
purposes suggests that Welsh Government are fearful it might simply
be absorbed into other funding pressures Ð either at Local
Authority level or at individual school level Ð an
acknowledgement that school budgeting is either under pressure or
not transparent or both.
- The new Additional Learning
Needs and Education Tribunal (ALNET) (Wales) Act 2018 has brought
in a number of significant changes and the principles behind the
Act, including child-centred planning and a single Individual
Development Plan, appear to make sense. However, the financial
implications for schools have been seriously misunderstood and
underestimated by policy makers.
- For example, following on
from analysis undertaken by our school leaders, the full process of
producing an Individual Development Plan (IDP) for a child
(including meetings and paperwork) should, on average, take
approximately 3 hours per plan. For a small school of 100 pupils,
with the national average of about 23 children on the ALN register,
the amount of non-teaching time required to simply complete the IDP
paperwork will take at least 14 working days per year (ignoring the
possibility that the IDP could be updated more frequently according
to pupil need). In the many small primary schools, the ALNCo will
have at least a part-time teaching commitment, therefore, the 14
days will need to be covered largely through supply-cover release,
which is an additional significant cost to the school.
The
£20 million announced to support the reform does not include
the time needed for person centred planning and IDP writing. Given
the time we have outlined above and that there are circa 130,000
learners in Wales (Stats Wales figures) with an ALN that requires
school action, school action plus or statementing then we estimate
a cost or circa £10million to fulfil the obligations for the
act at school level (not including any conflict
resolution).
- In itÕs recently
published review of Information and Communication Technology,
ÔDelivering DigitalÕ, Qualifications Wales stated that
most schools faced serious challenges in updating both hardware and
software. ÔSome told us that limited financial resources
were a primary reason for using outdated hardware and
softwareÉ.. this was identified as a significant barrier to
the successful teaching and assessment of ICT
qualifications.Õ Pupils also cited the outdated
resources as a reason why they did not engage so effectively with
the subject and why the subject appeared so detached from the
modern world of ICT beyond the school gates.
- The Welsh
GovernmentÕs ÔCymraeg 2050: A million Welsh speakers -
Action plan 2018Ð19Õ sets ambitious targets for the
education sector. The success of achieving the action plan
objectives rests upon the ability of schools, in both the
Welsh-medium sector and the English-medium sector, to fully engage
with the steps required to meet the overall objectives. School
leaders are committed to trying to deliver the objectives but there
is a tension being created through lack of resource.
It is
unhelpful that LA WESPs are uncosted at present.
- Looking at Objective 3.2
from the above Action Plan, for example Ð ÔDevelop one
continuum of teaching and learning Welsh to be introduced as part
of the new curriculum in all schools in Wales and ensure that
assessment and examination of Welsh skills and knowledge are
inextricably linked to teaching and learningÕ Ð it
is clear that this has implications for all schools in
Wales.
- The challenge facing many
schools, particularly in the English-medium sector, is in securing
the level of Welsh-language expertise and competence within their
staffing to be able to deliver the above objective whilst at the
current time having to prioritise basic staffing provision against
a backdrop of reducing core budget i.e. Ð enough staff to
deliver the whole curriculum to all pupils in classes of acceptable
size.
- Developing and supporting
good mental health and wellbeing is also acknowledged by Welsh
Government as an important policy issue for schools. However, with
the challenges faced by increasing numbers of families as a result
of current public sector pressures this frequently means that
schools are the place where significant issues concerning mental
health first become apparent. Schools know that children and young
people cannot learn as effectively if they have poor levels of
mental health and wellbeing, however, the ability of schools to
meet this growing need can be seriously inhibited by lack of
funding. Without appropriate training and resources, many schools
will find themselves ill-equipped to support their pupils
effectively and the cost in both human terms and ultimately to the
Welsh Government, when addressing issues further down the line, are
significant.
- NAHT Cymru believe it is
clear, therefore, that any policy that reforms education practice
in schools, must be properly resourced. In addition, unless new
policy fully replaces existing policy and it can be proven that a
reconfiguring of existing budgets is all that is required to
deliver it, ÔnewÕ funding is essential and must be
provided at the outset and ongoing.
The relationship,
balance and transparency between various sources of schoolsÕ
funding, including core budgets and hypothecated funding
- NAHT Cymru school leader
members have told us in increasing numbers and with an ever-growing
frustration that the core budgets in their schools are becoming
more inadequate in order to maintain or continue to raise
standards. For many schools the critical role of both the Education
Improvement Grant (EIG) and the PDG in recent years has been to
mitigate against the disproportionate negative effect upon the most
vulnerable pupils that their reducing core school budgets
create.
- The Education Improvement
Grant (EIG), established in April 2015, aimed to provide financial
assistance to schools, local authorities and regional education
consortia to improve educational outcomes for all
learners.
- However, it should be noted
that when the EIG (an amalgamation of 11 previous grants) was first
introduced this represented a 10% cut on the overall level of the
aggregation of the previous 11 grant funding streams. In 2016/2017
there was a further 5% cut followed by a 0.62% cut in 2017/2018. It
is clear that the overall EIG has shrunk over time and the
flexibility in the school-level use of the grants, provided by
Welsh Government at the time, appeared to be a response to an
expected pressure on wider budgets.
- In reality, many schools
have had to utilise their EIG provision in its entirety (often in
addition to greater proportions of their core budgets) simply to
sustain adequate staffing levels. The Foundation Phase principles,
in relation to the initially recommended staffing ratios for
example, have been seriously diluted over recent years due to
falling funding.
- In our evidence to the CYPE
committee during the previous inquiry into ÔTargeted Funding
to Improve Educational OutcomesÕ we cited the published
ÔEvaluation of the Pupil Deprivation Grant - Final report -
December 2017Õ undertaken by Ipsos MORI, WISERD and the
Administrative Data Research Centre Ð Wales on behalf of Welsh
Government. The report indicated that pooling of resource was a
fairly common feature - Ôas a part of the full suite of
funding provided to schools the impact of the PDG is reliant on the
existence of other funding streams with similar or complementary
aimsÉÉevidence shows that schools top up the funding
used to run PDG activities from their own budgets and/or other
funding streams by substantial amountsÕ.
- This suggests that where
schools have to undertake cuts to their core budgets, the impact
can also be felt within the provision provided via the use of
additional grants too Ð often badly affecting our most
vulnerable children and young people.
- In response to the NAHT
Cymru school funding campaign, the Cabinet Secretary for Education
stated that the ÔWelsh Government fully supports fair
funding for schools and we have a long-standing commitment to
schools with successive efforts to prioritise funding and protect
schools from the level of challenge experienced by public services
across the UK.Õ
- However, the response goes
on to state that Local Authorities are responsible for schools
funding in Wales and they have a duty to ensure suitable
educational provision is available for all learners. This begs the
question as to how the Welsh Government can ensure it remains
committed to Ôfair-fundingÕ when responsibility to
allocate actual funding sits with 22 different Local Authorities
with 22 different funding formulae and little evidence of
consistency in terms of criteria used or delegation rates. Clearly,
there is additional funding added to the Local Authority education
pot, which is generated by rates of council tax income, and these
also vary significantly across Wales.
- Therefore, whilst the Welsh
Government provides additional significant levels of grant funding
for schools, the vast majority of the funding provided for schools
is directed to Local Government through the Local Government
Settlement.
- There is also the added
layer of the Regional Consortia in Wales. They oversee the school
improvement role on behalf of Local Authorities, but they also take
the lead in distributing both the EIG and PDG.
- Currently, school leaders
are expressing an increasing lack of belief in the benefits of the
middle tier, in general, questioning whether it can drive genuine
improvements at school-level and, as a result, confidence in the
middle tier is at an all-time low.
- The perception of school
leaders is that the middle tier lacks the same levels of
accountability, particularly in terms of delivery (value for
money), that is expected of schools.
- The question must be asked
whether a country with a population similar to that of Greater
Manchester requires, or can financially sustain, three layers of
governance?
- There appears to be a degree
of uncertainty on behalf of schools as to how the grants are used
in their entirety within each Regional Consortium, particularly in
terms of the EIG.
- The Welsh Government state
that close to 100% of the Pupil Development Grant and more than 80%
of the Education Improvement Grant is delegated to schools.
However, just as schools are required to show evidence that their
grant spending is making a demonstrable impact upon the achievement
of children and young people, demands for evidence should be
stronger for Regional Consortia to justify retaining any of the EIG
or PDG centrally. How this retained grant money is spent by the
Regional Consortia should be transparently published on an annual
basis and measured by outcome impact upon pupils.
- It is generally accepted
that there are budget pressures facing schools in Wales, however,
it is also worth noting that the middle tier is particularly
congested Ð and that each organisation requires funding to
exist.
- In Wales, the educational
middle tier includes the Regional Consortia, Local Authorities,
Estyn, Education Workforce Council, Qualifications Wales, Diocesan
Authorities and others.
- This congestion lends
further weight to NAHT CymruÕs call for a comprehensive
review of education spending in Wales, particularly when the
child-facing settings that are supposed to be supported by the
above organisations Ð the schools themselves Ð are
struggling to provide the provision our children and young people
need and deserve. It would be useful to understand the full extent
and level of funding resource being absorbed by the middle tier in
Wales.
The local government
funding formula and the weighting given to education and school
budgets specifically within the Local Government
Settlement
- Within the Welsh Local
Government Revenue Settlement 2018-2019 Ð ÔGreen
BookÕ it states, that, ÔThe data used to calculate
the distribution of Standard Spending Assessments (SSA) across the
service areas are collected from various sources, mostly on an
annual basis. The exceptions are the settlement and dispersion
data, which are based on the 1991 and 2001 Censuses and selected
indicators derived from the 2001 and 2011
Censuses.Õ
- Thus, it appears that the
Welsh Government formula uses 1991 census data to drive the
distribution of sparsity funding and a special education formula
based on numbers of pupils eligible for free school meals, which
appears to have remained unchanged since 2003.
- Elements used to calculate
the funding distribution to Local Authorities, as outlined in the
ÔGreen BookÕ, therefore, appear to run contrary to the
commitment made by Welsh Government to regularly review the
mechanism. In three yearsÕ time, for example, the sparsity
data will be 30 years out of date. Irrespective of the potentially
small variations in such data year-on-year, it would appear more
transparent, and be increasingly accurate, if such figures were the
latest available for each year.
- It should also be noted that
elements such as sparsity are included in the ÔGreen
BookÕ calculations and are also funded again through grants.
This partly explains the disproportionate differentials between
rural and urban funding levels.
- In addition, it should be
noted that, the total of £4.214 billion of un-hypothecated
funding through the Aggregate External Finance (AEF) for 2018-19
was a 1.3% decrease in real terms from the 2017-18 figure. With
increasing costs impacting upon schools for inflation affected
areas such as energy and water, as well as the increasing costs
deferred to schools via more expensive Service Level Agreements
from Local Authorities, the overall effect upon school budgets is
clearly negative.
- In terms of the weighting
given to education within the Local Government Settlement, it is
relatively unclear, and the fact is that actual spending levels
vary between Local Authorities.
- This lack of clarity is
exacerbated by the hugely differing relationships between
individual Local Authorities and their respective Regional
Consortia, how they were set up and structured and their governance
arrangements appear very inconsistent.
- The school services and
other education elements appear to be the greatest proportion of
each Local Authority spend, but not all reach their Indicator Based
Assessments (IBAs) and as they are not set as targets there appears
little incentive for IBAs to be met by Local
Authorities.
- Other than the per capita
spending on school services in the ÔGreen BookÕ, which
show variations of approximately £100 or more, it is
difficult to gauge exactly the weighting given to education and
school budgets specifically within the overall Local Government
Settlement
- By factoring in that
delegation rates to schools also vary hugely across the Local
Authorities, the picture becomes increasingly difficult to compare.
For example, the funding delegated to schools is budgeted to be
£2,160 million. The amount of funding that local authorities
delegate directly to schools ranges between 75% and 90% of overall
gross school budgeted expenditure.
- NAHT Cymru believe that the
local government funding formula must utilise the most up to date
data every year and the weighting given to education and school
budgets specifically within the Local Government Settlement should
be needs led and not set on the basis of the overall total
available. It is also pointless creating IBAs if Local Authorities
choose not to at least meet them.
Welsh Government
oversight of how Local Authorities set individual schoolsÕ
budgets including, for example, the weighting given to factors such
as age profile of pupils, deprivation, language of provision,
number of pupils with Additional Learning Needs and pre-compulsory
age provision
-
The
gross spending (Council spend) per pupil in Wales is published as
follows:
Council
|
Amount spent per pupil (2018-19)
|
Vale of Glam
|
£5,107
|
Newport
|
£5,232
|
Bridgend
|
£5,306
|
Flintshire
|
£5,401
|
Wrexham
|
£5,499
|
Swansea
|
£5,506
|
Monmouthshire
|
£5,552
|
Carmarthenshire
|
£5,573
|
Caerphilly
|
£5,660
|
Torfaen
|
£5,687
|
Cardiff
|
£5,724
|
RCT
|
£5,731
|
Pembrokeshire
|
£5,768
|
Neath Port Talbot
|
£5,772
|
Anglesey
|
£5,801
|
Merthyr
|
£5,830
|
Conwy
|
£5,956
|
Denbighshire
|
£6,041
|
Gwynedd
|
£6,081
|
Ceredigion
|
£6,249
|
Blaenau Gwent
|
£6,355
|
Powys
|
£6,456
|
However, gross figures are not necessarily useful when
scrutinising school budgets.
- NAHT Cymru gathered a number
of pieces of information via surveys, research and freedom of
information requests, one line of inquiry focused upon more
specific Age-Weighted Pupil Unit (AWPU) figures.
- In focusing upon the AWPU
figures at Local Authority level, NAHT Cymru gathered figures for
the four years 2013-14 up until 2016-17. The figures show that the
variation between the lowest Local Authority AWPU and the highest
in 2016-17 were as follows - for Year 2 pupils there was a
£956 difference (£2812 was the highest, £1856 the
lowest), for Year 6 it was £904 and Year 11 it was
£1181.
- The various AWPU figures
across all age ranges vary year-on-year Ð essentially, it
appears that Local Authorities have to calculate the AWPU simply
based upon how much in total, they have to allocate to school
budgets, once various other criteria have been
included.
- For example, one Local
Authority responded by stating the AWPU value includes the
following in their calculations:
-
Salary
Costs (i.e. Teaching Staff, Supply Cover, Nursery Nurses, Midday
Supervisors etc.);
-
General Allowance & Exam Fees;
-
Premises (i.e. Water, Refuse etc.);
-
Various Service Level Agreements (i.e. Catering, Building
Maintenance etc.);
-
Teacher Recruitment & Advertising;
-
Music
Tuition;
-
Sickness Compensation Scheme;
- Another Local Authority
simply told us that, ÔThe AWPU is calculated by dividing
the funding available by the number of pupilsÕ whilst a
third included the following in their calculations:
-
Pupil
Teacher Ratio (PTR)
-
Supply
Cover
-
Pupil
Number Allocation
-
Furniture, Equipment and Materials Allocation
-
Examination Expenses
- Therefore, it is clear that
there is no consistency across Wales and the current system
produces a picture that is inequitable and not transparent. This
means that the monitoring role of Welsh Government is made
unnecessarily complex.
- It should also be noted
that, in previous evidence to the committee, NAHT Cymru showed that
data used to identify deprivation is far from perfect. School
leaders become frustrated when key pupils from disadvantaged
backgrounds unfairly miss out simply if they do not take up FSM
even if they might be eligible However, when disadvantage is
identified, it is often addressed in multiple ways for the same
pupil due to the way money is delegated to schools (e.g .an element
through delegated core budget, a second element through PDG and a
third element through ALN budgets). Is this the fairest and most
effective way of addressing additional risks for pupils created by
deprivation?
- Local level leadership
should allow allocation of resources where they are most needed,
however, there needs to be consistency in the criteria that is used
for calculating the Local Authority formula for distributing to
schools in order to provide clarity, increased equity and
transparency. This is desirable for schools, for parents (knowing
that their child has a fair share of funding) and the wider public
as well as to enable more robust monitoring by Welsh
Government.
Progress and
developments since previous Assembly CommitteesÕ reviews
(for example those of the Enterprise and Learning Committee in the
Third Assembly)
- The Education Minister, Jane
Hutt AMÕs, response to the Enterprise and Learning Committee
in the Third Assembly contains a number of specific answers to
recommendations. It is worth reflecting upon a number of
them.
- The first recommendation of
the committee was,Õ Éthat the Welsh Government
should review school funding mechanisms to reduce obscurity,
complexity and disparity within the current system, to improve its
responsiveness to current and future need, and to focus on desired
outcomes. We also recommend that new approaches to funding
distribution should be subject to robust scrutiny and a timetable
for implementation published so that progress can be
monitoredÕ
- The response is deeply
unsatisfactory in stating that the then Welsh Assembly Government
was not prepared to undertake a fundamental review of funding
mechanisms as it was deemed unnecessary. Given the growing
complexities in the bureaucratic layers within the Welsh education
system (including the more recent establishment of the Regional
Consortia) and the growing pressures on the public purse, such a
response now would be indefensible.
- The Minister goes on to
state that regulations were clear and consistent and ensured that
all local authorities took account of important drivers like pupil
numbers or deprivation and sparsity, for example. However, we have
found evidence to suggest that the data driving some of the funding
allocations are out of date.
- The report also refers to
commitment from the Welsh Government to reducing the bureaucracy of
administering grants, but school leaders tell us that for many
grants, Regional Consortia often demand excessive paperwork for
delivery in schools.
- Another recommendation
stated, ÔWe recommend that the Welsh Government should
improve the transparency, comparability and consistency of
published information on school funding in Wales, both on the
funding distributed to local authorities and in turn to schools;
also the requirements for reporting on education
expenditureÕ Unfortunately, in allowing Local
Authorities to continue diverging in terms of their individual
funding formulae, together with the role of the Regional Consortia,
particularly in allocating grants such as the EIG and PDG,
transparency appears to have worsened greatly as has consistency
and the ability to adequately compare.
- The fourth recommendation is
very telling as it reflects our current view of the need for a full
review of school funding, ÔWe recommend that the Welsh
Government commission an independent review of schoolsÕ
revenue needs which would form a basis for agreement between the
Welsh Government and local authorities on a recommended minimum
funding requirement in respect of local authoritiesÕ
education spend..Õ The response is wholly unacceptable
Ð in refusing to accept an independent review, the Minister
suggests that such an approach would cut across local democratic
responsibilities. However, by dismissing the need to establish a
minimum level of funding, the assumption is that schools have
adequate levels of funding to deliver Welsh Government improvement
policies Ð our evidence suggests that this is simply not the
case and in order to ensure all schools can implement current
education reform, a minimum level of funding requirement is
absolutely essential Ð hence our call for an independent audit
/ review.
- Finally, the tenth
recommendation - ÔWe recommend that the Welsh Government
should continue to make progress on developing a sustainable and
symbiotic relationship between education policy objectives and the
school funding system that delivers them.Õ Ð was
accepted, however, once again our evidence suggests that Welsh
Government did not learn the lessons of well-intentioned,
inadequately funded and poorly implemented policy of the past. Many
current reforms are welcomed in principle by the profession,
including school leaders, but agreement and consensus does not, in
isolation and without adequate resource, implement successful
reform.
The
availability and use of comparisons between education funding and
school budgets in Wales and other UK nations.
- The 2018 Institute for
Fiscal Studies (IFS) report, ÔComparing schools spending per
pupil in Wales and EnglandÕ, provided a powerful picture.
The report noted:
á
Higher
levels of school resource / spending can improve later life
outcomes;
á
Previous Welsh Government statistics suggest spending per
pupil was about £600 lower in Wales than in England in
2009-10. IFS figures suggest it was probably closer to
£300
á
Academies programme in England caused previous difficulties in
comparing as their figures were missing from Local Authority
outturns but these have now been included from 2013-14
onwards
á
Spending per pupil was only about £100 lower in Wales
than in England in 2017-18
á
However, both Wales and England per pupil spending has fallen
since 2009-10
á
In
England, the decrease has occurred more swiftly over the same time
period Ð 8% cut in England, 5% cut in Wales
á
Faster
fall in funding influenced by direct allocation of spending to
schools in England, reduction in wider Local Authority services and
School Sixth Form cuts also being greater (but still severe in
Wales) Ð 25% and 22% respectively
á
In
simple terms, funding has fallen in both England and Wales but
pupil numbers have grown in England but remained fairly static in
Wales
- The IFS report essentially
paints a picture of gradual erosion of school funding, under a
range of influences, over a significant period of time. Both Wales
and England have experienced overall cuts over time, but England
has caught up with Wales in recent years Ð although both appear
still to be on a downward trajectory.
- In terms of Scotland, when
looking at their own fair funding principles, the Scottish
Government describes a startlingly familiar picture, ÔThe
system for allocating funding to schools is complex, opaque, and
varies widely between local authorities. While the local government
settlement uses a series of defined methodologies for allocating
money to local authorities which take account of a wide number of
needs-based factors, there is little transparency over the method
of allocating funds from local authorities to education, and then
to individual schools. There appears to be
substantial variation in how local authorities spend and allocate
their education budget, and how they record that spending. Those
differences make it difficult for teachers and parents to
understand what level of funding their school receives and why, and
for local authorities to understand the differences between them
and other local authorities. Addressing these issues is
important.Õ
- The principle of value for
money is also cited by Scottish Government, not as a cost cutting
exercise but as a way of maximising the impact of each pound spent
to improve the outcomes for all children. This principle should be
applied not just to schools, as it is already within Estyn
inspections, but also to all middle tier organisations to ensure
that their function, activity and spending ultimately deliver the
best for children and young people.
- The principles upon which
Scotland wish to base future funding plans should also be noted
Ð the approach is centred around children and young people, is
school and teacher-led, focusses on the quality of teaching and
learning; supports leadership; and has a relentless focus on
improvement. It does not focus upon top down mechanisms to enforce
this approach in schools but instead seeks to equip schools
themselves with the resources to bring the principles to fruition
Ð ÔSchool funding needs to reflect and support the
greater devolution of responsibility to
headteachersÕ
- NAHT Cymru believe that the
whole sector needs to establish an honest, open dialogue when
analysing school budgets in Wales.
- We need to establish how the
true funding picture is affecting children and young people within
individual schools in
2018.
We
need:
á
an
independent review into school funding in order to move forward and
establish a sufficiently resourced school system;
á
clear
principles of equity for all (irrespective of location)
á
a
consistent approach to the criteria used in every Local Authority
school funding formulae and
á
to
properly scrutinize the middle tier, the effectiveness of regional
working and the affordability of such a structure for Wales given
the pressures on budgets
á
a
commitment to transparency in order to ensure that the shared goals
outlined in ambitious reforms can be realised in our schools.
Rob Williams Ð
Policy Director NAHT Cymru
December
2018
References:
- ÔDelivering Digital
Ð Sector Review of Qualifications and the Qualifications System
in Information and Communication TechnologyÕ
Qualifications Wales
December 2018
- ÔCymraeg 2050: A
million Welsh speakers - Action plan 2018Ð19Õ Welsh
Government 2017
- Evaluation of the Pupil
Deprivation Grant
Final report -
December 2017
Written for Welsh
Government by Julia Pye, Lucy Lindley (Ipsos MORI)
Chris Taylor, Daniel
Evans (WISERD) Katy Huxley (Administrative Data Research Centre
Ð Wales)
- Welsh Local Government
Revenue Settlement 2018-2019 - Background information
for
Standard Spending
Assessments, Local Government Finance Policy Division, Welsh
Government May 2018 Print ISBN
978-1-78903-434-9
- Third Welsh Assembly -
E&L Committee Follow-up report.
Arrangements for
School Funding - Government response.
- Institute for Fiscal Studies
(IFS) report, ÔComparing schools spending per pupil in Wales
and EnglandÕ Ð 2018
- Fair Funding to Achieve
Excellence and Equity in Education - A consultation
Scottish
GovernmentÕs future approach to school funding - October
2017