to be alarmed at school budget cuts

[clayspaniel]

Apparently some schools are going to be badly hit by the new fair funding formula - inner city areas hit hardest. If you put in your postcode it tells you what sort of cuts your school could face, and how this could equate to teachers and TAs jobs. Not encouraging!

(( www.schoolcuts.org.uk/#/ ))

Local area: primary schools range from losing 53k to 195k by 2020, secondary at 53k. We are academically failing (described as a ghetto by the late head of Ofsted) so they.are going to kneecap us even more???

My sons school has already been put in special measures by odstead these cuts mean they are going to have to lose 6 teachers and losing a budget of £200,000 plus this is going to be devastating in particular for my son as he has ASD and rely on ta support he has a plan in place but with funding cuts it means they aren't going to be able to provide the support he needs. This is where it isn't fair. Schools end up with different budgets due to children with sn you tend to find that the schools that have a lot of sn children are the ones with the biggest budgets. When I looked on this it really is the local school with the most an children in that's going to be hit the worst. It's far more complicated than just saying some school get more than others let's make it fair.

It is frightening. And even more frightening is how we will accept it, and fall back on the usual rhetoric of 'well other people had more and that's not fair, so they deserve to suffer. And we don't have enough money for us all'.
It's getting tiring and I'm really not falling for it anymore. We should have enough money for us all, and the way to fight inequality is not to drag everyone down to the lowest level. There must be a better way than this...

That's awful witsender- everyone already knows how IoW is struggling with education. Appalling to cut funding. I assumed they were an area getting less at present (due to not being inner city or having high BME population) and thus would benefit under the changes.
Clearly not.
Schools near me are mostly losing around 15%. Range is about 9% to 19%, including schools that are already struggling.

Yup, the school down the road losing £195k is an academy primarily dealing with those with SEN. It is a.lovely, lovely school in an unusually deprived area, how is this going to help?

Ds' school £85k, school where I work £1.3million. I doubt the pta is going to make up the difference. It's wrong that schools in some areas are underfunded but the answer is to increase the school budget as a whole, not rob Peter to pay Paul.

Don't forget that some of the 'cuts' are due to cash flat budgets - they're not taking the money away, but the cost of providing education will continue to rise as the budget stays the same.

Schools will be creative and adapt. They'll have to. We do it every year.

The money is there. They are choosing to spend it on other things. Triple locked pensions, replacing Trident, and a huge amount of money on the referendum (people always had the option to vote UKIP if they felt that strongly in Europe).
Oh and Tax cuts and deals for business. Or even just letting corporations get away without paying their proper tax burden.

Aren't SN budgets separate? I may be wrong but I thought that funding for 1:1 Ta's etc was applied for separately on a child by child basis based on what the child's EHCP states is required? Will that change based on these new calculations because from what I have read it won't. If a school is misusing the funds provided for a specific child with SN then that is a separate issue.
Nobody was campaigning for the badly funded schools to receive more for the years they have been receiving less funding and I don't understand how if school A has been managing on a budget of £4300 per pupil for the last 10 years why school B thinks they will be plunged into some impossible situation by having their funding reduced from £6300 to £5000 per pupil when the new calculations take effect. people and businesses get used to managing on a certain budget but that doesn't mean that it isn't possible to cope on less, people often have to make cutbacks when their income is reduced.
When I see a school in my previous LEA providing horse riding lessons and free residential trips with pupil premium (for all pupils in relevant year groups who get PP funding) I can't muster much sympathy for them having their funding cut.

Wow i've just looked on that link and my school (2 form intake primary) will only lose £14k but the high school at the other end of the road will lose £370k!

Overall my area will lose 11 million, equivalent to 300 teachers

Sixisthemagic - there is a big range of SN and the majority of children who just have "some" SEN do not get 1:1 support. The school I volunteer in (according to this map will lose the equivalent of 3 teachers) is already cutting its cloth thinly. Any TAs who move on/retire are not being replaced. But class sizes are growing (most junior classes have 32-35 children in them) and without help from a general TA "nice to haves" such as regular reading with individual children, re-re-re-re-explaining maths concepts to those children that still don't get it either can't happen as often as it should, or ends up being done by volunteers. Who may be great or may be not. Who may be reliable or may not. Who may have some relevant skills or may not. Who may simply not exist in some areas. This surely isn't the way to go.

We're losing another £393 per pupil despite already having £250 per pupil less than the rest of the country

Dd1s school will lose the equivalent of 9 teachers :O

Did you campaign for more funding six? Do you think a school can be wasting 1.3million a year on horse riding and free residentials?

Single form entry village primary (not naice middle class village) set to lose £90k

I wrote to my MP and the PM handbag which is probably more than most people did. I didn't get a response from either as clearly they are not bothered about the unequal distribution of education funding. Yes your right, they probably don't spend 1.3m on horse riding and free residentials but neither of those things come cheap and I imagine they take a big chunk out of the individuals pupil premium and I can't see how it helps them to achieve the aim of it improving the individuals educational achievement. I'm not sure how they documented that the money had been used to achieve the outcomes it is provided for. if they don't need that money for academic stuff then I think they can do without the money and it be given to schools where their funding levels are historically pitiful.
Are you aware that Manchester has for many years - decades even provided 25 hours free nursery education to all children over the age of 3 whose parents want a place? Typically these nurseries are attached to local schools. How is it right that Manchester gets funding for this scheme when the majority of the country doesn't? This scheme was in place long long before the 15 hours nursery education came into place. The whole of the education system is unequal and unfair.

I think there is money to be saved in state schools, to be honest.
My oldest child went to private school, and his fees at the time were less than the per-capita spending on state education at the time.
I can't remember the numbers now (it was about 7-8 years ago) but there has got to be something wrong there?

So you're blaming schools and kids for inequality in funding rather than the elected politicians who can actually make a difference and who can't be bothered to engage with someone who questions the process.

If Manchester's children are offered more hours childcare then someone, somewhere authorised and paid for it. Manchester is generally a deprived area so more public help is needed to get children to the same place as children generally will be in more affluent areas without needing that support. Taking off those who need things most to give to those whose need is less is what's wrong with this country atm.

Our nearest Academy, which is in a deprived area and does fantastic work is set to lose £440,000! I presume grants for deprived areas will disappear as well, possibly due to Brexit.

Sn funding seems to depend on the area and LEA my son has a EHCP plan that states he needs 1:1 all the time the as part of his plan the school get 2, 345 towards funding the 1:1 the rest has to be funded out of the school sn budget where as in primary school his EHCP covered the whole of the funding. From what the schools have told me it's due to them having a bigger sn budget and that the LEA says they can afford the rest.

No, I'm not blaming schools and kids at all. I am blaming the system that has created the situation where some schools get £2000 more funding per pupil than others. I am hoping that the new system will address some of the inequality.

cath per pupil state funding is between 4-8k a year, with higher funded pupils at school in central London. I'd be suprised if there are private schools in central London charging less than 8k a year. Possibly private schools in other areas charge less than the most well funded state schools in central London but that's hardly comparing like with like.

Salford has a successful private prep school which charges less than local Salford primary schools get per pupil, Not even including pupil premium. It's an unusual situation but it does happen.

Schools get extra money for deprivation, sen, eal, London weighting etc. They don't get extra money because a civil servant felt kids in Hartlepool are missing out on riding lessons. I'm sure if more dc at the schools in your area did have additional needs under the current funding formula those schools would get more money. All schools should be funded well regardless. Taking money from some schools to give it to others is just going to cause different problems.

Which school in Salford is that?