|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
|Maintained primary, secondary and all special schools, city technology colleges and academies( 1) : Pupils permanently excluded more than once by gender, ethnic group and special educational needs( 2) 2000/01 to 2004/05England|
|Number of pupils|
|(1) Includes middle schools as deemed. Includes non-maintained special schools. Excludes general hospital schools.|
(2) This analysis is based on incomplete pupil level data. Any findings based on these figures should be used with caution. Those pupils who have been permanently excluded from more than one different school since 2000/01 to 2004/05 have been selected.
(3) Less than 5 pupils.
1. Information presented here has been derived from an extract of the National Pupil Database which has selected pupils with multiple cases of permanent exclusion from different schools collected via the 2002 through to 2006 School Census. The characteristic data shown relates to information provided for the pupils' most recent exclusion.
2. A new set of codes to record the ethnicity of pupils was introduced in 2002. Schools were initially permitted to report ethnic data using either the old and new set of codes between which there is no direct mapping. This analysis separately shows data for those pupils whose ethnic group has been classified under the old coding framework.
3. The new SEN code of practice came into force in 2002 and introduced new codes for recording stage of SEN. Both the new and old codes have been used here.
4. Numbers have been rounded to the nearest 10. There may be discrepancies between the sum of constituent items and totals as shown.
National Pupil Database.
Mr. Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills (1) how many pupils ceased attendance at a pupil referral unit because they had been sentenced to a term in a young offender institution in each year for which figures are available; 
(2) what information he has collected on the number of pupils placed in pupil referral units who are later (a) sentenced to a term in a young offender institution and (b) subject to an antisocial behaviour order. 
Mr. Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many and what proportion of pupils in pupil referral units did not obtain (a) five A*-C grades including English and mathematics at GCSE, (b) five A*-G grades at GCSE and (c) any passes at GCSE in each year since 1997, broken down by ethnic group. 
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the total recurrent funding per pupil was in real terms in (a) Suffolk, (b) Bedfordshire, (c) Cambridgeshire, (d) Essex, (e) Hertfordshire and (f) Norfolk in each year from 1998-99 to 2007-08. 
Jim Knight: The revenue funding figures per pupil aged 3 to 19 for Suffolk, Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Essex, Hertfordshire and Norfolk for years 1998-99 to 2005-06 are provided in the following table:
|Local a uthority||1998- 99||1999- 00||2000- 01||2001- 02||2002- 03||2003- 04||2004- 05||2005- 06|
| Notes: 1. Price Base: Real terms at 2005-06 prices, based on GDP deflators as at 27.09.06 2. Figures reflect relevant sub-blocks of Standard Spending Assessment / Education Formula Spending (EFS) settlements and exclude the pensions transfer to EFS and LSC. 3. Total funding also includes all revenue grants in DFES Departmental Expenditure Limits relevant to pupils aged 3 to 19 and exclude Education Maintenance Allowances (EMAs) and grants not allocated at LEA level. 4. The pupil numbers used to convert m figures to per pupil are those underlying the SSA/EFS settlement calculations plus PLASC 3 year old maintained pupils and estimated 3 to 4 year olds funded through state support in maintained and other educational institutions where these are not included in the SSA pupil numbers. 5. Rounding: Figures are rounded to the nearest 10. 6. Status: Some of the grant allocations have not been finalised. If these do change, the effect on the funding figures is expected to be minimal.|
The revenue per pupil figures shown in the table below are taken from the new dedicated schools grant (DSG) and are in cash terms. They are not comparable with those for the years 1997-98 to 2005-06 because the introduction of the DSG in 2006-07 fundamentally changed how local authorities are funded. The DSG is based largely on an authority's previous spending.
The 1997-98 to 2005-06 figures are based on education formula spending (EPS) which formed the education part of the local government finance settlement, plus various grants. This was an assessment of what local authorities needed to fund education rather than what they spent. In addition, the DSG has a different coverage to EFS. EFS comprised a schools block and an LEA block (to cover LEA central functions) whereas DSG only covers the school block. LEA block items are still funded through DCLGs local government finance settlement but education items cannot be separately identified. Consequently, there is a break in the Department's time series as the two sets of data are not comparable. An alternative time series is currently under development.
To provide figures for 2006-07 DSG, the Department has isolated the schools block equivalent funding in 2005-06. There are other grants that support the schools budget, these are not included in the DSG figures provided. The figures are for all funded pupils aged 3-15.
|Local authority||2005-06 Baseline||2006-07||2007-08|
1. The revenue funding per pupil figures only run to 2005-06 because the Department cannot provide a consistent time series beyond that year as the introduction of the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) in 2006-07 fundamentally changed how Local Authorities are funded. The 1998-99 to 2005-06 figures are based on Education Formula Spending (EPS) which formed the education part of the Local Government Finance Settlement, plus various grants. This was an assessment of what local authorities needed to fund education rather than what they spent. In 2006-07 funding for schools changed with the introduction of the DSG which is based largely on an authority's previous spending.
2. In addition, DSG has a different coverage to EFS: EFS comprised a schools block and an LEA block (to cover LEA central functions) whereas DSG only covers the school block. LEA block items are still funded through DCLG's Local Government Finance Settlement but education items cannot be separately identified. This means that there is a break in the Department's time series as the two sets of data are not comparable, an alternative time series is currently under development.
3. To provide a comparison for 2006-07 DSG, the Department has isolated the schools block equivalent funding in 2005-06; as described above this does not represent the totality of 'education' funding in that year. There are other grants that support the schools budget, these are not included in the provided DSG figures.
Mr. Jeremy Browne:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many children originally from EU accession states were enrolled in schools in
(a) Somerset and (b) Taunton constituency in (i) 2002, (ii) 2004 and (iii) 2006. 
Within the School Census (SC), schools are required to record ethnicity data that reflects the main categories used in the 2001 National Population Census. Children from the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia are recorded under the ethnic category Any Other White Background.
Following a consultation exercise in 2002, local authorities (LAs) were given the option of using extended ethnicity categories in their schools if they felt that the main ones did not meet their local management needs. However, the extended ethnicity categories do not include separate codes relating to the eight European Union accession countries. They are all included within the White Eastern European code.
Not all LAs have chosen to use the extended categories. The majority of authorities use a mixture of main and extended codes. As a consequence the Department does not hold complete data for the extended ethnic background categories.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|