Third supplementary memorandum submitted
by the Rt Hon Charles Clarke MP, Secretary of State, Department
for Education and Skills
During the hearing on 7 July I promised to provide
information on a number of issues.
Q 211—The cost of administering the
current school admissions system across the country.
Expenditure on the administration of admissions
and admission appeals is a matter for LEAs. Section 52 budget
statements for 2004-05 show that net planned spend on administration
for admissions and admission appeals for all LEAs was £46
million. This planned expenditure includes estimated expenditure
for statutory consultation and the establishment and maintenance
of, and consultation with, admissions forums. It also includes
funding delegated to governing bodies of schools that are their
own admission authority for expenditure on the administration
of admission and admission appeals.
Section 52 statements do not disaggregate budgets
for administration of admissions and admission appeals, nor do
they distinguish between the primary and the secondary phases.
Q 264—Efficiency Review
The core tables in the Departmental Report,
including Annex F on staff numbers, follow formats and conventions
prescribed by HM Treasury to ensure consistency across government
and with Public Spending Plans. The figures in Annex F are annual
full time equivalents calculated by averaging quarterly figures
across financial years.
The 2003-04 estimated staff numbers on this
basis were 4,590 (including casuals) as shown in the table. In
keeping with Treasury conventions, and as explained in the first
part of note 2 to Annex F, the DfES figures for 2004-05 and 2005-06
were estimated to be consistent with the then current administrative
cost baselines from the previous (2002) Spending Review.
The second part of note 2 records our plans
to achieve staff reductions of 1,460 by April 2008 which has been
agreed as part of the new 2004 Spending Review settlement. The
baseline for this reduction was the October 2003 staff in post
figure, which at 4,660 was slightly above the annual average.
Against this baseline, the reduction is 31%.
Q 295—Providing help for individual
colleges to enable them to improve
All colleges and other providers will benefit
from recent initiatives to help them to improve teaching and learning
approaches and to strengthen leadership and workforce development.
Support, advice and resources will be made available,
by the LSC and the Department's Standards Unit, to individual
colleges and other providers to take responsibility for their
own self-assessment and to address any improvements needed.
In addition to new action to accelerate quality
improvements by targeting those in greatest need of help, two
other new developments will help. A new inspection model, based
on validation of self-assessment and which will be risk proportionate,
together with the introduction of a new quality improvement body,
will help to ensure that the improvements in quality are achieved.
Q 297—The FE and schools funding gap
The issue of the funding gap between schools
and further education colleges was raised twice in the hearing.
Paul Holmes (Q289) referred to differences in funding for 16-18
year olds following similar programmes of learning in school sixth
forms and FE colleges, while David Chaytor (Q296-297) commented
on the increases in real terms revenue funding per student in
schools and funding per learner in further education, which were
tabulated on pages 31 and 32 in the Departmental Report. I thought
it might be helpful if I clarified our approach to addressing
funding differences.
The further education sector caters for learners
of all ages from 16 onwards, offering full-time and part-time
provision for a wide range of learning opportunities. Funding
comparisons between schools and further education are far from
straight forward and there are a number of possible ways of looking
at this issue. The Government recognises that there is a funding
gap between school sixth forms and further education (FE) colleges
in the resources provided for students aged 16 to 18 following
similar programmes. Our policy has been to "bring up"
the level of funding for colleges, as and when we are able to
secure the resources to do so.
This was addressed most recently at the 2002
Spending Review which delivered a record funding increase for
the FE sector. The Learning and Skills Council (LSC) uses similar
funding methodologies to allocate funding to school sixth forms
and further education colleges. In the 2003-04 academic year the
LSC increased its base rate funding per learning aim on a broadly
comparable basis by 3% for school sixth forms and by 4.5% for
FE colleges. The vast majority of colleges (those that reach their
targets agreed with the LSC) will see a 5% increase in their base
rate funding, whereas school sixth forms will receive an increase
of 4%. We therefore expect to see a further narrowing of the funding
gap as the differences in base rates are reduced.
We have yet to determine funding allocations
within the Department following the Spending Review settlement
for the Department for the years 2005-06 to 2007-08. It is too
early to say what impact the overall settlement will have on the
funding gap after 2004-05.
July 2004
| 
