Cash-strapped councils have been given government permission to circumvent laws requiring minimum funding levels in schools so they can divert cash to cover gaping SEND deficits. Since 2020 local authorities have had to follow national minimum per-pupil funding levels (MPPFLs). This financial year, the rates are 拢4,160 for primary pupils and 拢5,995 for secondary. Minimum funding levels were a manifesto commitment under the Conservatives. But show Kent, and Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole (BCP), 鈥済ained approval to set a lower value鈥 this year. Kent was granted a similar request last year. ‘A dangerous precedent’ Andrew O鈥橬eill, a member of the Headteachers鈥 Roundtable, said the move 鈥渟ets a highly dangerous precedent鈥. 鈥淚t鈥檚 really indicative of the corner that councils have been backed into. It鈥檚 a massive concern, because all you鈥檙e doing is slushing not enough money around the same system.鈥 Andrew ONeill The requests are linked to decisions to transfer money from core schools funding to the high-needs budget. Kent transferred 1.2 per cent 鈥 or 拢15.2 million 鈥 this year, while BCP moved 0.5 per cent, 拢1.3 million. Such transfers are common. More than 20 councils had requests to transfer 拢67 million rubber-stamped this year. But until recently the transfers had not affected minimum funding levels. The Department for Education said it rubber-stamped the deals for both councils 鈥渋n the context of their safety-valve agreement鈥. Safety-valve deals involve government bailouts in exchange for efforts to bring down SEND spending. Kent has one, but BCP鈥檚 bid for a 15-year agreement was rejected this year. Nevertheless, BCP, which predicts its dedicated schools grant deficit will balloon from 拢63 million this year to 拢108 million next spring, went ahead with a 0.45 per cent cut to minimum per pupil funding levels. DfE and LA ‘complicit in damaging life chances’ The move has particularly affected the area鈥檚 grammar schools, more likely to be funded at minimum levels because they don鈥檛 attract as much disadvantage funding. Dr Dorian Lewis, head of Bournemouth School, said he now gets 拢27 less per pupil than the minimum funding level, or about 鈥溌25,000 less鈥 overall. The decision was also made outside of the council鈥檚 schools forum, where schools would have a say. 鈥淚t appears that ministers in allowing the transfer of funds from schools鈥 budgets are complicit with the local authority in damaging our students鈥 life chances,鈥 he said. In council documents, BCP pointed to a growth in school reserves from 拢13.9 million in 2019, to 拢37.6 million. The council also plans to double the amount it transfers from schools next year too. 鈥淭he thing for me that really irks is that they’re now saying, 鈥榳ell, you can afford it because you’ve got a reserve鈥,鈥 Lewis said. 鈥淎nd actually, we’ve built that reserve up over time to fulfil capital projects, because that’s the only way we get that money available. 鈥淚t鈥檚 almost like, 鈥榳ell, you’ve managed your budget鈥ou put money aside, you鈥檝e been prudent. But now that’s our excuse now for trying to take money away from you鈥.鈥 ‘Deeply concerned’ David Sims, head of Bournemouth School for Girls, said his budget had lost about 拢27,000, 鈥渆quivalent to half an experienced teacher, the refurbishment of a couple of computer rooms or the provision of significant pastoral/learning support鈥. 鈥淲hilst I am of course mindful of the importance of the need for effective provision for the area’s SEND children, I am deeply concerned that our pupils should be funded below the MPPFL.鈥 Keziah Featherstone Keziah Featherstone, co-chair of the Headteachers鈥 Roundtable, said extra SEND funding was 鈥渨ithout a shadow of a doubt鈥 needed, but 鈥渆very single school also needs a minimum amount of funding per pupil鈥. 鈥淭hat is more critical than ever now. It just feels like robbing Peter to pay Paul.鈥 Last year, Kent reduced minimum per-pupil funding rates by 0.5 per cent to move money to its high-needs budget. This year it reduced the rate by 0.9 per cent. The council has a near 拢200 million SEND budget deficit. Seamus Murphy, the chief executive of the Kent-based Turner Schools, warned that schools that were not inclusive could claim they did not have the resources to meet need and 鈥渇urther exacerbate the crisis in provision for children with SEND鈥. A Kent spokesperson said the changes were approved by its schools forum with 83 per cent support, and the move 鈥渄oes not impact on the viability of any schools鈥.
Peter Freeman 11 October 2024 MPFFL forces LA’s to transfer funding from schools with high levels of deprivation and low prior attainment to schools with better-off pupils. It makes a mockery the National Funding Formula and was introduced to protect grammar and other schools which enrol few pupils eligible for pupil premium. It should be phased out under the Labour government.
Stu 13 October 2024 Mppl bypasses pupils needs and massively protects schools with good attainment, low numbers of SEN and low free school meals. These school funding is lower as pupil’s needs are lower. Normally schools mostly grammar, receive more funding than they would under the national funding formula because of mppl protection. When moving money from schools to high needs, mppl means a lot of grammar schools lose or contribute nothing. This article is arguing that these protected selective schools should not contribute to block movements but schools who are arguably under funded should.