Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Changes to free school meal eligibility…

162 replies

AlwaysCoffee25 · 27/03/2025 09:55

”As of April 1st, 2025, the "transitional protection" for free school meals, which allowed continued eligibility even if income increased, will end. New applicants after this date, earning above £7,400 net per annum, will no longer be eligible”

I don’t see the big deal, if you need to reapply you can.

Whilst I think in an ideal world all children should free school meals the reality is we can’t sustain every concession as a county and stopping continued eligibility if your financial circumstances change seems sensible to me 🧐

Although it seems odd timing with free breakfast being introduced (it hasn’t reached my DC’s school) the cynic in me thinks it’s because they know the take up on breakfast will be significantly lower than lunches.

OP posts:
AlwaysCoffee25 · 28/03/2025 18:45

We’ve had a memo from my children’s school concerning it anyway. So I’m not sure why you’re doubting its validity?

OP posts:
NeverDropYourMooncup · 28/03/2025 18:56

AlwaysCoffee25 · 28/03/2025 18:44

It says it will change March 2025

Yes, it does. But the new guidance hasn't been released yet, so there isn't any indication whether the transitional protection will be extended for another year to provide for those changing educational phase, whether it will revert as planned in the 2024 (and the 2023 x 2) guidance or if they've come up with any form of alternative.

There's still a day of March 2025 left. It's not that unusual for stuff to be dropped on the last day or even later. But it means that until the new one is published, nobody can make any assertions about the Labour government as we don't know what it is they are going to decide.

Kandalama · 28/03/2025 19:03

It makes sense to assess FSM yearly but also to require any changes in circumstances to be reported within the year too.
Assuming there is a cost benefit of course,

PeachPumpkin · 28/03/2025 20:05

Ohthatsabitshit · 28/03/2025 16:29

“Thatcher Thatcher milk snatcher” rather pales in comparison to this doesn’t it.

Starmer Starmer child starver?
Reeves Reeves ??????

Feed the bairns you arseholes.

Starmer, Reeves, school lunch thieves?

PeachPumpkin · 28/03/2025 20:09

Sorry if it’s already been mentioned, but doesn’t this potentially affect school funding too? Currently they get pupil premium funding for each means-tested FSM child they have. I can see that the extra funding continues for 6 years after a child stops having FSM. I wonder how this could affect secondary schools.

NeverDropYourMooncup · 28/03/2025 21:00

Kandalama · 28/03/2025 19:03

It makes sense to assess FSM yearly but also to require any changes in circumstances to be reported within the year too.
Assuming there is a cost benefit of course,

The problem there is that whilst some people can be assessed via the live Universal Credit/National Asylum Support link (the one that local authorities have access to, but not all of them are prepared to have staff working with it), not everybody is. For those, the school staff have to assess an application as though they're employed to handle claims with sight of average earnings, assessment periods and taking a punt on the documents and the person being the person they say they are.

Telling somebody that you can't give their child FSM because they have no money coming in (due to a benefits error or their employer has gone bust, not paid them and UC are telling them they can't have any money until the employer tells them why they haven't paid them) so you can't assess their income isn't much fun. It's also pretty crap to tell somebody who has no money at all that their kid can't be fed either because they're too broke to be entitled to free meals.

The other issue is that when the entitlement to benefit ends for any reason - including errors and sanctions - if it were automatic, the food would stop immediately. And the live links that are compulsory are bad enough for the DfE computer systems failing to pick up the correct data or interpret it correctly (the live attendance data connection is terrible, for a start) - we really don't need something as important as feeding kids trusted to a system that will already swear blind that we have different numbers on roll to what we know is correct with no apparent way of getting the errors/ghosts in the machinery resolved.

I've always felt that if I wanted to spend my time assessing claims for benefit and dealing with the reactions of desperate people, I'd have applied to work for the job centre in the first place. I wasn't a fan of being told in front of others when I was nine that I couldn't have any lunch after today because my mummy needed to pay for my food, either. I also have other rather important things to be doing on 1st September than trying to deal with 800 people whose children aren't going to have anything to eat on Wednesday. I'd also prefer to actually take some of the annual leave I'm actually legally entitled to this summer; it isn't as though I've been able to for the last four years, but it would be nice for a change.

There's a separate scheme for FSM for children whose parents have No Recourse to Public Funds. Even that can be difficult, as you need to get somebody who may not be able to understand the forms to complete them - but at least there's no reliance upon an unwilling local authority or computer access and skills on the part of the parent. And people are scared that if they admit they don't have much money that we'll tell the Home Office and they'll be deported despite the entitlement to FSM (and compulsory education) being a child's right and legally not being included as part of the Public Funds prohibition.

A simpler solution would be for the DfE/Benefits to give access to the database to nominated people in school to deal with the majority of applications. Or, even better, have an automatic opt in so that parents don't need to apply, the fact they've been awarded a qualifying benefit being enough to notify us of eligibility. However, that's not possible, apparently, because the previous government made commercial deals with a small number of companies who charge for a service contract each school would be locked into.

I really hope that on Monday, we find out that it's been kicked along for another year, protected status remains for the secondary transition and the only change to the guidance is that the end date runs to the end of the Summer Term 2026 instead of the April it was extended to last Autumn. Oh, and that we get more than six hours' notice of what's happening in 2026/27.

But that's what happens when the system was deliberately set up to need redoing every single year. It was done specifically so the previous government could take it away without any challenge once they were more secure politically than they were.

Kandalama · 28/03/2025 21:27

NeverDropYourMooncup · 28/03/2025 21:00

The problem there is that whilst some people can be assessed via the live Universal Credit/National Asylum Support link (the one that local authorities have access to, but not all of them are prepared to have staff working with it), not everybody is. For those, the school staff have to assess an application as though they're employed to handle claims with sight of average earnings, assessment periods and taking a punt on the documents and the person being the person they say they are.

Telling somebody that you can't give their child FSM because they have no money coming in (due to a benefits error or their employer has gone bust, not paid them and UC are telling them they can't have any money until the employer tells them why they haven't paid them) so you can't assess their income isn't much fun. It's also pretty crap to tell somebody who has no money at all that their kid can't be fed either because they're too broke to be entitled to free meals.

The other issue is that when the entitlement to benefit ends for any reason - including errors and sanctions - if it were automatic, the food would stop immediately. And the live links that are compulsory are bad enough for the DfE computer systems failing to pick up the correct data or interpret it correctly (the live attendance data connection is terrible, for a start) - we really don't need something as important as feeding kids trusted to a system that will already swear blind that we have different numbers on roll to what we know is correct with no apparent way of getting the errors/ghosts in the machinery resolved.

I've always felt that if I wanted to spend my time assessing claims for benefit and dealing with the reactions of desperate people, I'd have applied to work for the job centre in the first place. I wasn't a fan of being told in front of others when I was nine that I couldn't have any lunch after today because my mummy needed to pay for my food, either. I also have other rather important things to be doing on 1st September than trying to deal with 800 people whose children aren't going to have anything to eat on Wednesday. I'd also prefer to actually take some of the annual leave I'm actually legally entitled to this summer; it isn't as though I've been able to for the last four years, but it would be nice for a change.

There's a separate scheme for FSM for children whose parents have No Recourse to Public Funds. Even that can be difficult, as you need to get somebody who may not be able to understand the forms to complete them - but at least there's no reliance upon an unwilling local authority or computer access and skills on the part of the parent. And people are scared that if they admit they don't have much money that we'll tell the Home Office and they'll be deported despite the entitlement to FSM (and compulsory education) being a child's right and legally not being included as part of the Public Funds prohibition.

A simpler solution would be for the DfE/Benefits to give access to the database to nominated people in school to deal with the majority of applications. Or, even better, have an automatic opt in so that parents don't need to apply, the fact they've been awarded a qualifying benefit being enough to notify us of eligibility. However, that's not possible, apparently, because the previous government made commercial deals with a small number of companies who charge for a service contract each school would be locked into.

I really hope that on Monday, we find out that it's been kicked along for another year, protected status remains for the secondary transition and the only change to the guidance is that the end date runs to the end of the Summer Term 2026 instead of the April it was extended to last Autumn. Oh, and that we get more than six hours' notice of what's happening in 2026/27.

But that's what happens when the system was deliberately set up to need redoing every single year. It was done specifically so the previous government could take it away without any challenge once they were more secure politically than they were.

Re your first paragraph.
Why aren’t some people assessed by the Local Authorities.

NeverDropYourMooncup · 28/03/2025 23:04

Kandalama · 28/03/2025 21:27

Re your first paragraph.
Why aren’t some people assessed by the Local Authorities.

Two things - one, some Local Authorities have decided that they aren't going to have anything to do with it and the schools can deal with them (since covid + academisation), and second, some circumstances do not fulfil the criteria of the online checker that is available to Local Authorities and the private companies that have made a deal with the government - the same LAs are even less likely to want to pay a couple of people to deal with those.

Kandalama · 28/03/2025 23:17

NeverDropYourMooncup · 28/03/2025 23:04

Two things - one, some Local Authorities have decided that they aren't going to have anything to do with it and the schools can deal with them (since covid + academisation), and second, some circumstances do not fulfil the criteria of the online checker that is available to Local Authorities and the private companies that have made a deal with the government - the same LAs are even less likely to want to pay a couple of people to deal with those.

Edited

Seems really messed up.
Clearly it’s needs streamlining. It should all be available to apply online and why isn’t it just part of the usual potential extras available when applying for benefits and UC etc.

No wonder so much money is waisted on red tape and admin.
Hoping you get a bit of a break this Summer

meanwhile…a letter to my MP needs to be written

LongLiveTheLego · 31/03/2025 02:25

NeverDropYourMooncup · 28/03/2025 16:23

I implemented it. I know what it says.

Well you clearly do not

Grumpy19 · 12/05/2025 20:52

My income is below £600 some months and over it other months. I'm stuck on a zero hours contract. With the reassessments, I don't know whether they'll pick a month where my children will qualify or won't and no one will tell me how often or when they plan to carry out reassessment. It's very stressful.

DB2025 · 15/10/2025 14:55

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page