To think that this is wrong and on par with benefit fraud?

[littleplasticinedinosaur]

School that my child goes to has asked in the newsletter that every parent who is entitled to free school meals applys, even if they don't need it or they continue to bring sandwiches, because the school will receive a large sum of money each year.

I think that this is totally wrong, and the school shouldn't be profitting in this way. The money is supposed to be there to ensure that children living on the poverty line get a meal. And if the parents don't want or need it then the money should go back into the pot for something else.

It's a bit odd to get het up about something that will give the school your kids go to more money for their education.

Don't do it!

Schools get extra money for every child that is entitled to free school meals but because its an over complex system each family has to apply for the county to recognise that they would be entitled. The school diners service only get the money for meals taken at the schools I've been involved with, so no fraud is necessarily going on and disadvantaged children would be being helped.

X post there, hurrah! All is right with the world.

The number of pupils eligible for free school meals is the measure the government use to decide which schools will get the pupil premium. The school are simply asking that all pupils who are eligible register. Take up is not important, it's the eligibility that counts. If pupils don't register for free school meals, then the true deprivation of the school remains hidden and the school don't receive the money they're entitled to. Eligibility for free school meals is a fairly crude measure of deprivation but it's the best available.

Schools get extra funding for disadvantaged pupils - the measure used for that is if the child is in receipt of FSM. Even if the parent is able to send a packed lunch, the pupil is still entitled to the additional funding which will actually help all pupils at the school. YABU.

It's not about the money they get for the meals it's because a school with a high percentage on FSM get extra funding from the government now.

That extra £600 isn't money for the meals, it's money on top of the money for meals because schools with poorer pupils tend to have additional problems, plus if you have a high percentage of families poor enough to get FSM you aren't going to be able to raise as much through school fundraisers.

The parents might not need the FSMs, but their DC might need additional help and this is a way to pay for it.

Unfortunately, rather like childbenefit paying NI contributions to ensure SAHMs can get the top up pension, we have a system where often your entitlement for a benefit is directly linked to claiming a different benefit. While you might not actually need the first, you might need the the second so have to claim the first.

autumn but it's because of the cuts that it was making me mad, because I thought that the school was basically claiming for food not needed. I now realise this is not the case and at worst bad wording so kind of makes my op completely redundant!

Anna I didn't claim as I just didn't need it. I had a job and took some extended unpaid maternity meaning I was entitled to income support, I had savings and was only out of work for 3 months, I was just happy enough to be able to receive income support and be able to have an extra 3 months with baby and get child benefit and possibly tax credits for the next 18 years.

Not against any benefit for those who need it btw.

Yup, my dds nursery school and primary school remind parents to do this at open days/curriculum evenings etc for all the reasons that are highlighted above I don't have a problem with it at all.

Your going to get YABU for about 8 pages now though op!

My daughters school does this. I think it's because they get extra funding. I hope it's not benefit fraud as I claimed for school meals (they kept asking!) and she takes sandwiches.

At least it's educated me on something.

Might ask MN to remove to save taking up space and we definitely don't need another 2356653 page benefit thread.

It's not fraud at all - entitlement to FSM is just used as an indicator of disadvantaged/low-income children for funding purposes.

Extra £600 per child is huge. Claim it.

Pupil premium is a lib dem policy, by the way.

YABU do you object to the school claiming money that means they can provide your child with a better education? School budgets are so tight nowadays that they need to do all they can.

I wish someone would donate their unwanted free school meals to my DD. She's always moaning because she doesn't get to eat with her best friends because I don't want to pay 2.75 a day! When I try to tell her that it's too expensive for her to have school dinners, she says "they don't ask for money mummy, they just give you the food!"

Seriously though the pupil premium is a good thing. You can get free violin lessons at my DD's school if you get free school meals too.

Yes they get more funding for every child that claims FSM. My dds are entitled to FSM even though they take packed lunches anyway. I didn't have a choice whether to apply for FSM as it's on the HB form so they award you them anyway if you get HB. But now it means my dd1 can go on the Year 5 residential trip next year as it's subsidised because she's entitled to the FSM and we only have to pay £20 towards to it.

Yabu.

The school isn't doing anything wrong by encouraging parents who are entitled to FSMs to claim them. What's wrong is that they are entitled to more money than other schools because of the parents income.

It is a sign of how underfunded they are. If you were a head teacher, wouldn't you do everything you could to ensure as many resources for your students as possible.

They can't say: please you POOR, jobless, on benefits people make sure to aplly for FSM. They say FSM only as an indirect way to reach those people.

Children are being very strongly encouraged to sign up for FSM and the school the child attends then gets a lump sum (£430 for the school year 2011/12). I would very much like to see all schools accountable for where they've spent this amount. It's intended to be spent directly on the child in question but I know for absolutely certain that it's sometimes not.

The Pupil Premium was not intended to allow schools to balance their books. It's a disgrace.

Also this pot of money has absolutely nothing at all, zilch, to do with the paying of salaries to teachers (in response to someone upthread).

Yellow, you sound like you know more about this than I do, and I'm interested!

What sort of things do you think schools do spend the pupil premium on?

Rooble is correct. Free school dinner entitlement evidences economic deprivation and disadvantaged circumstances. Schools receive extra sums per child in order to combat povert and in an attempt to level the playing field.

I'm genealising from the particular Freddo but I do think that some schools are using the cache of money to ease the budget, passing none on to the individual pupil claiming FSM to provide support. I'm not pressing the point with the school in question and I doubt it's alone, but it's not what the money was intended for, and it's not right.

generalising (rather than genealising), sorry.