Supplementary memorandum submitted by
the Department for Education and Skills
Questions 85-88 (Mr Bacon): How much funding,
on average, is being delegated by Local Education Authorities
(LEAs) to schools?
Over recent years an increasing proportion of
the funding has been delegated from LEAs for schools to spend
themselves. The Government remains committed to achieving the
highest possible level of delegation to schools which is compatible
with the need of LEAs to retain the resources they need to carry
out their own essential functions.
The funding delegated by LEAs to schools over
recent years has been:
2000-01 84%
2001-02 86.3%
2002-03 87.2%
Only about one-tenth of the funding retained
centrally by LEAs relates to "central administration".
Most of the retained funding relates to such items as school transport,
special educational needs (SEN); out-of-school education and behaviour
support; and school improvement.
Questions 150-152 (Chairman): Why do secondary
schools in Kensington and Chelsea receive £1,400 per pupil
more than those in Hammersmith and Fulham?
Under the current formula funding system, the
Government is providing the same funding for all comparable pupils
right across the country. Additional top-up funds are then added
to deal with the additional costs of educating deprived pupils,
and the additional costs of recruiting and retaining staff in
areas where wage costs in general area highest. The needs of sparsely
populated areas are also properly reflected.
Kensington & Chelsea and Hammersmith &
Fulham are both inner London authorities which benefit from the
same factor in the formula to take account of area costs (the
Area Cost Adjustment).
On the measures for deprivation, Kensington
has above the average percentage of children of families in receipt
of Income Support (the most highly weighted deprivation factor)
and Hammersmith well above the average. Both have well below the
average percentage of families receiving the Working Families
Tax Credit. Both authorities have well above the average percentage
of children (in primary schools) with English as a second language
and from low achieving ethnic groups (in secondary schools). The
table below illustrates this.
MEASURES OF ADDITIONAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS
| Income
Support
| WFTC | Primary English
as a second
language
| Secondary Pupils
from low achieving
ethnic groups
|
Kensington and Chelsea | 23.0%
| 7.5% | 46.1% | 45.1%
|
| Hammersmith and Fulham | 36.3%
| 10.9% | 38.3% | 42.5%
|
| England average | 19.8% |
19.0% | 9.8% | 9.1%
|
| |
| | |
The impact of this data, pupil number composition and low
birth weight (in the high cost pupil funding block), act to give
Hammersmith £4,643 per pupil in its Education Formula Spending
Share in 2003-04, and Kensington £4,438 per pupil.
However, for 2003-04, the Department wanted to ensure that
all authorities received an increase in their Education Formula
Spending Share of at least 3.2% per pupil, in addition to compensation
for the bulk of the teachers' pension contribution increase and
the transfer of grant into general funding of nursery grant and
class size grant.
To ensure that all authorities received the 3.2% increase,
extra funding was provided (damping allocation) to protect those
authorities who would otherwise have seen a lower increase in
2003-04 as result of the change to the new funding system.
In the case of Hammersmith and Fulham, its increase would
have been 2.7% per pupil without its damping allocation of £360,000.
That had the effect of increasing its funding per pupil by an
extra £22, from £4,643 to £4,665.
For Kensington and Chelsea, the effect of the damping allocation
was more significant. It would have seen a decrease in its EFSS
of 4.3% without its damping allocation of £3.7 million. That
had the effect of increasing its funding per pupil by an extra
£348, from £4,438 to £4,786.
Therefore, taking account of both authorities 3.2% per pupil
increases and compensation for the pension contribution increase
and grant changes, Hammersmith's EFSS per pupil aged three to
15 in 2003-04 is £4,665 and Kensington's is £4,786.
If the authorities' formula funding and standards fund grants
are taken into account for all pupils aged three to 19 in 2003-04,
Hammersmith's funding per pupil is £5,370 and Kensington's
is £5,590.
In neither case is there a £1,400 difference between
the two LEAs.
However, the amount that individual schools receive depends
on the locally agreed formulae. It is for LEAs, through their
formulae, to ensure that funding for additional needs reaches
those schools that need it. LEAs are best placed to know the local
needs and priorities of their schools.
Therefore, significant differences in funding per pupil can
arise between a particular school with high numbers of needy and
deprived pupils, compared with one with a low number of such pupils.
Local authorities have provided us with Section 52 Budget statements
which show the position of their schools.
According to Hammersmith and Chelsea's 2003-04 figures concerning
secondary schools, the Sacred Heart High School's budget per pupil
is £3,106, whilst the William Morris Academy's is £4,768
per pupil. According to Kensington's Section 52 report, Holland
Park School's budget per pupil is £4,429, whilst the Sion-Manning
RC School for Girls' is £4,097 per pupil.
Thus particular schools in neighbouring authorities can receive
substantially different sums per pupil.
David Normington CB
Permanent Secretary
Department for Education and Skills
January 2004
| 
