There is more money going into schools than there ever has been before

A figure like 60% suggests systemic issues in funding that leads to shortfalls

NASUWT are saying that the 60% figure quoted in the EPI (Education Policy Institute) report is wrong - by a considerable margin!

"the £50 million that has now been specifically earmarked for grammar expansion? Is that a ‘historical correction’ or politically motivated, do you think?"

It's a double announcement - it's how a proportion of the money within the (extant) secondary school expansion will be spent. They've not raked up new money for it.

I’d also like to know how many of that 60% are stand alone academies that have to buy in HR, data and payroll services.

I think you are over simplifying based on one report Clavinova

I don’t think the NASUWT are lying. I think that their conclusions are a bit wrong. Every head I speak to has serious concerns about funding going forwards and this is NOT a new thing.

Why are schools spending more than their income? Is it wastefulness or is it because they don’t have enough to cover what is needed for staff, building maintences, supplies etc because of the system?

A figure like 60% suggests systemic issues in funding that leads to shortfalls.

Are you saying our education system is well funded. Because I don’t think you’ll find many staff or heads that agree with you. Your argument is based on semantics.

MissSusanSays

Do you think that NASUWT (National Association of Schoolmasters) is lying then?

I think he is stuck between a rock and a hard place.

He's the SoS ffs! He has ultimate responsibility for his departmental budget and strategy. If he can't use the funds fairly, he's not up to the job. If he can't present a good enough case for adequate funding for his department, he's not up to the job.

It's schools that are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Not some ineffective numpty that doesn't have the first idea of how to deliver on his responsibilities.

noble that is part of the problem, isn’t it.

The government isn’t being honest.

And Clavinova. I know about those schools because I know the head teachers or former heads. These schools are not open about their financial difficulties. Most heads try not to raise panick amongst staff and parents.

As for St.Olaves- one swallow does not a summer make. Are we lying when we tell you that we work for schools or know of schools in financial trouble?

I could name four primary schools, right now that are over £100,000 in deficit this year. And that is just my area

And that is exactly what parents at St. Olave's were told (info from MumTryingHerBest's link):

Parents were told that this money was critical in keeping the school functioning following the budget cuts of recent years, and were also recently informed that the school would be running a deficit of £100,000 for the first time this year And yet the school had funds of £1.4m and £1m sitting in the bank.

I don't think running a deficit is necessarily a problem if you read this recent publication from NASUWT (National Association of Schoolmasters) - 'Where has all the money gone?'
www.nasuwt.org.uk/advice/leadership/budgets-funding.html

For those schools which are in deficit, this does not necessarily mean that the school is experiencing funding difficulties. Many schools experience short-term deficits because of increased pupil numbers which have led to greater expenditure to meet pupil needs. Funding for increased pupil numbers (known as ‘growth’ funding) is usually given to schools at least one year after the increase in pupil numbers has occurred

Inaccurate information about school funding, including fictitious school funding allocations, is circulating round the system, which is leading schools to believe that they must cut expenditure on teaching and learning when this is unnecessary

The EPI Report is highly misleading. The percentage of schools with deficit budgets rose by three per cent to ten per cent by March 2017, with a decrease in the average surplus by £11,000 to £131,000 for 90 per cent of schools. However, the EPI Report has drawn the conclusion that over 60 per cent of schools spent more than their income in 2016-17. No wonder the EPI has noted that the figures in their report differ from published statistics on school balances

If parents want a well equipped school then they need to pay directly or tell the government to sort it out.

But you are right that inner city schools in areas of high deprivation will feel the worst, eventually. It is actually the leafy middle class schools with low SEND and PP numbers that are already feeling the burn.

I could name four primary schools, right now that are over £100,000 in deficit this year. And that is just my area.

I could also tell you the two large secondaries that are totally reliant on PTA funds for new equipment- pens, paper, sport, music etc.

We’re not making this up. What has really happened here is that a academisation is costly and schools switched based on promises of more straightforward and better funding, only to realise they had lost all of the free support provided by the LA.

Yes, bog roll. It was like preparing for a camping trip getting the school bags ready each morning; bog roll, handwash (no soap either). Shouldn't really complain though, one in two loos did have a door, the rest were open air! The subsidence caused sewage leaks so we really should have had welly boots too. Wow, I miss it!

MumTrying. Ok, so there may be a very small number awash with cash, but that surely is outweighed by the 99.9% of schools who are struggling. Whether parents can afford to contribute or not is not really the issue. In my opinion, no parent should be asked to contribute for state education, apart from voluntary PTA and "outside charity" fundraising. It is completely unfair that money has been set aside for grammar schools alone. But the government is smart. They need more votes so give the money to the areas of education where more people vote Tory. As Nick Clegg and David Laws both said in their memoirs, Cameron and Osborne were quite vocal about about not wanting to support projects which did not involve Tory voters (in that case, social housing). Education is an easy target for the government. Teachers don't like striking. The government will continue to do what it likes with our education system until we vote no.

St O's is a one-off and can't be compared to other schools on the income from parents.

I don't think St O's is a one-off:

www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/11plus/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=54301&p=667676&hilit=contributions#p667676

www.elevenplusexams.co.uk/forum/11plus/viewtopic.php?f=71&t=47375&p=578956&hilit=contributions#p578956

To be clear, I don't think schools should be begging parents to help pay for the running costs of the school. However, I suspect that some schools have been benefiting from the "voluntary contributions" made by parents for a number of years now. I also suspect that a fair number of parents at those schools have been able to offer financial assistance when asked to do so.

Would you tell the family who contributed £500 that year that their son will not be able to take a subject due to restricted places in the class?

I wonder how many of the 163 Grammar schools will be in that situation once they have benefitted from the £200m funding that has been set aside for them.

MumTrying. St O's is a one-off and can't be compared to other schools on the income from parents. I have to warn you though that when I toured sixth forms a year ago they were all, some in less affluent areas, asking for anything from £50 per year to £50 per month. These schools are desperate. However, by paying we are exacerbating the problem with school funding, we are supporting the government's lousy education funding plan.

By financially contributing to a school it blurs the equality of education at that school. Would you tell the family who contributed £500 that year that their son will not be able to take a subject due to restricted places in the class? I doubt it.

£50 million for grammar schools to expand, ignoring all other schools. What a joke and a disgrace. However, I do hope the extra funds going to my DC's former grammar school will be used for some of the things that were missing and I don't mean the teachers that were got rid of, the classes that were enlarged and the subjects that were cancelled. My family are hoping that the current and future students will get loo doors, toilet paper, the leaky roof repaired, the rats in the canteen eradicated and the major subsidence issue dealt with. Really, it was like the 1800s. Don't miss it at all. Nor the letters asking parents for £50 per month.

MissSusanSays I doubt any school that has a high number of deprived families or located in less affluent areas will be able to ask for a monthly donation of £60.

That’s one school.

I hate this quibbling. Having sat through meeting where our head outlined how many teachers wouldn’t be replaced and how many TA positions would go, I think it is wild that some people seem to think this is a figment of our imagination.

I can tell you now that I haven’t had any CPD in four years because my school can’t afford it. I think won’t be the only teacher who has gone without training because there is no cash.

I can also tell you that in my school we have lost at least one member of staff from each department and at least seven teaching assistants.

What impact do you think that is going to have on the education of children?

olavesunofficialnews.wordpress.com/2018/01/25/voluntary-fund-bombshell-school-has-over-1-4m-in-the-bank-unspent/

The funding issue has been rumbling for a long time, what it boils down to is that the DFES have no idea how much it actually costs to run a school and even the National Audit Office has said that the DFES have no clue about how to help schools make savings. There is plenty of in-party fighting going on, Hampshire County Council’s leader has been very vocal about funding cuts. Due to academies and free school programme LEAs can’t open new schools themselves, it all has to go out to bids and thus costing more money. The whole thing is a shambles and set to continue.

I have never tried to 'defend' Damian Hinds, I think he is stuck between a rock and a hard place. I see him as representing the country's collective delusion that we can have a world class school system on the cheap. I dont see ANY other politician offering anything better. We have to accept we cant currently afford more.

People do want to talk about the grammar 'thing' because a lot of people believe it is a good thing. Its human nature, not all people are equal.

This is the oddest comment yet. I am sure you know exactly how statistics are manipulated, whilst still being 'true'. If you are trying to make a point about school under-funding then there is plenty of evidence for that. Expanding a few grammar schools is not that evidence.

People only get to vote for a best-fit candidate to their views And I guess politicians advocating tax rises didn't fit enough peoples views. Hence there wasn't a majority of tax rising politicians voted in.

Perhaps Comprehensive Future are 'playing the man, not the ball' - quibbling over money allocated to grammar schools when so many extra secondary school places are needed?

This is the DfE all over. What a bloody shambles.

They’ll find a way to blame teachers for it all. Or immigrants. Or the EU.

It’s just a blame game on repeat.