to think that the pupil premium should be the same in all similar areas.

[american78]

I have just discovered that the amount paid to schools per child in our area is much less than national average.
AIBU to think this is unfair. We are in the South East.

I don't understand what you mean, it's set at £488 per eligible child across the country. If your school is getting less, it's probably because there are fewer eligible children, i.e. on free school meals. The premium is designed to help social mobility and support the most disadvantaged children, so if your area doesn't have so many of those, then it makes sense that you won't get as much.

Actually now you mention it that sounds rather daft.

What does this money pay for?

Things cost more in some areas and less in other areas. The amount the schools get should be enough to allow them to buy the same things, not strictly the same amount of cash.

What eagleeyed said.

Yabu to think it unfair that schools with higher numbers of fsm are getting more money. The money is used to support disadvantaged children. How is that unfair?

Awaits complaints about children receiving fsm getting free music lessons, uniforms, school trips and food. All of which, with the exception of food being a myth nowadays.

No this is not taking FSM into account. I know there is a set additioal amount for those pupils and I am fine witt that.
I live in one of the Shire Counties and there ws an article is local newsletter pointing out the standard amount per pupil was less in this county than the neighbouring counties.

Pupil premium is only paid to students who are on free school meals. If your school doesn't have many, it'll get less money. You apparently live in quite an advantaged area.

Maybe I worded it wrong.

maybe you should link to the article then?

Are you getting mixed up between pupil premium and other types of funding?

As far as I know, pupil premium is only to do with FSM so you can't say "this is not taking FSM into account". The two are linked.

However there are other types of funding inequities NOT to do with FSM/Pupil premium.

For eg we live in a London borough which is just on the border of inner and outer London. The school has to pay the teachers inner London weighting, but pupils are only funded at outer London rate. This means the schools in the area are at a big disadvantage as they are paying more, but receiving less.

No actually I mustn't have meant pupil premium. It must be the standard amount paid per pupil.

If by 'worded it wrong' you mean you relied on q letter in your local rag rather than checking for yourself what the Pupil Premium actually is, yes you did!

I would be interested to see how schools actually spend the money, as extra funding sometimes disappears into the pot. Apparently they will be accountable ...

Yes the standard amour per pupil varies and it is truly laughable here.
Pretty much the lowest in the country.
Heaven knows why.

Some rumour of a review, but six years has been mentioned. Both my DDs will have left school by then

Well if your county is on the borders with London it's quite likely you're getting less compared to London schools. It's more expensive to recruit teachers within London for the reasons I mentioned, and other costs are higher too.

They can't fund all areas exactly equally because the needs are different and a line has to be drawn somewhere. (The argument in my area is that the line should be drawn in the same place each time - ie pupil funding should be done on the same geographical basis as teacher pay - otherwise it's unfair).

Amount

This is not comparing with London schools. This is comparing to other Shire counties.

Pupil premium is same wherever you are (though amount differs according to eligibility eg LAC, FsM, forces)
Pupil funding is different, and varies everywhere according to many factors.