£150m for kitchens

[ipadquietly]

...when teachers and TAs are taking over OT, speech and language and physio services due to lack of professionals
... when schools can't afford an extra TA to deal with a child who is biting, kicking and spitting
... when statemented children are relying on TA support ONLY, with no therapists or psychologists available to guide them through their screwed up childhoods
... when maintenance on schools will suffer due to the building of KITCHENS!
... when no research has been done by the government to find out if parents even want their children to have school meals. (In our sandwich only school, only 30% of parents showed an interest in their children having school meals.)

These people are absolute IDIOTS. They want to feed first-world children and close their eyes to the rotten, screwed up society they are creating.

Prh47 I agree totally, we have a large number of very hard working families who do not qualify for FSM/pupil premium, but who find it very very hard making ends meet.
This is a pretty rural area there is next to no public transport. To get to 90% of local manual, agricultural or shift jobs you need to run a car.

There is very little affordable rented accommodation. Wealthy commuters push the price of housing through the roof.

But as I said before, parts of this very group who needs the help most are the ones who will take one look at the quality and portion sizes and say 'No Thanks'

Those like me who don't need the help will, having lost our child benefit, take the FSM just because we are seriously pissed off with Mr. Cameron.

I'm shocked at the lack of vegetarian and vegan options mentioned earlier. Here there is a meat option, a vegetarian option and sv jacket potato with cheese/beans/coleslaw option on Tuesdays to Thursdays. On Mondays both of the main options are vegetarian. If you have any other special diet you need to book meals in advance and get a doctor's note if relevant but the company will generally be able to provide a meal, although the child will have less choice.

At the moment, the school meal service is subsidised by about £140 million a year, quite separate to the similar sum which pays for FSM. This is because the catering provision tends to need around 40-50% takeup to break even, and the average is about 38-39% (more in primary schools, less in secondaries).

So if they use one year's worth of subsidy to improve many kitchens in places which have been downgraded or neglected for years, and then get all primary uptake up to around say 70% by providing KS1 meals free, the amount they have to subsidise the service should go down thanks to economies of scale (it costs hardly any more to feed 70% of a school compared to 40%, because kitchen staff costs and energy are the main costs), while the amount the caterers have to spend on ingredients should go up.

It's been done in various boroughs and schools already, and reportedly been very successful - admin time is freed up because no-one has to chase dinner money or entitledment to FSM, so there's a saving there, and practically all kids want to do what the majority are doing. I know some schools funded it by going vegetarian, which was accepted after they did taster days for parents. There certainly should be vegetarian provision and provision for medically-required diets - don't know about vegans.

Problems like lack of time to eat, kitchens runnng out of best options before the last classes get there, food that has been deemed nutritious but isn't tasty, have been recognised and resulted in the School Food Plan which was recently published, led by the founders of the LEON chain. It's all about improving the eating experience rather than the actual food.

Hope that puts it into a bit more context. I think it's a great idea - but then so were all the initiatives to improve hospital food over the last 20 years, which didn't get that far.

statsgeek
links and evidence please

prh47 School funding for England includes £5 billion for high needs pupils out of total schools spending of £38 billion.

This is an example of politic-speak.

I KNOW:

• that TAs are expected to do physiotherapists' work
• that we have 2 days of ed psych a term (400 children)
• that teachers and TAs have taken over OT services
• that speech and language consultants are in school for one day per term (i.e. for preliminary assessment of learning difficulties) that that adopted children with severe attachment disorders are ignored* by the system *PRUs (due to LA changes in responsibility) are now charging ridiculous amounts
• that there are several 'levels' of 'neglect'

Can you provide links for how the £5billion is distributed?

On another point - I agree with a metebells3 how arts funding has been reduced. There were a number of fantastic arts partnerships that were culled by the present government. (She didn't mean 'less money for art' within the curriculum.)

Define politic-speak. It is a true statement. Whether or not £5 billion is enough or is being spent in the most effective way is another matter.

For VA, VC and community schools the LA receives a grant from the government for schools funding. The formula for this is complicated but it is based on the number of pupils with an additional amount for the number of high needs pupils. The LA then takes a slice of this funding for the services it provides (the size of this slice varies from LA to LA) with the remainder being passed on to schools. Part of the money held back by the LA is for SEN assessments, ed psych, expensive tailored provision for individual SEN students and some other SEN-related services. Schools are, however, expected to provide the support needed for SEN pupils that don't need expensive tailored provision out of their own budget. The formula used to determine how much an individual school gets varies from LA to LA. The number of pupils in the school is the biggest factor. The number of high needs pupils is often but not invariably taken into account. However the overall budget is determined it will include a notional SEN budget which the school is expected to spend on supporting SEN pupils.

For academies the process is much the same except that the government decides how much the LA will receive and gives the rest direct to the academy.

A PRU (which is not just about SEN) receives funding of £8,000 per place which is then topped up by funding from the LA or school for each pupil admitted. The top up funding should be less than the funding the school or LA receives per pupil.

There are nearly 2 million high needs pupils so the amount allocated represents around £2500 per pupil. Of course, some pupils will need support costing more than this whilst others won't need anywhere near this figure.

prh
I - and many many others - value your detailed knowledge of the admission process
but I have to ask the question : why are you so unquestioningly supportive of the status quo?

especially as the NAO gave the Charities commission a roasting this week
(a 360 roasting would be interesting ...)

you seem to believe that charity status will lead to good governance when the evidence is scant
you believe that company status will lead to good governance with no evidence other than unapplied laws

there is a very real problem, work round it if that suits your mindset, but please do not deny it

You seem determined to ignore anything I say that goes against your predetermined view of what I think. And I don't see the relevance of your comment to this thread. But to repeat what I say whenever you make this accusation, I have never said that charitable status leads to good governance. All forms of organisation are open to abuse. No-one has yet come up with a form of organisation that is not open to abuse. Please get that into your head and stop accusing me of something I have never said.

Of course, since you are presumably talking about academies, the Charities Commission is not the regulator involved. That is the EFA. Not saying the EFA does a better job than the Charities Commission. I don't know. But the NAO saying the Charities Commission is not an effective regulator is irrelevant when talking about academies.

Talkinpeace you could start with WWW.schoolfoodplan.com - the PDF of the whole thing covers what I said above, with links to sources. It's surprisingly readable.

Highlights how much schools and their food vary around the country.

But said doc is written by Dimbleby and co who are posh boys with a catering company.

Think I'll base my views on the tiny amounts of shite my dc are fed in school,the woeful lack of well sourced libraries in schools(to go with those shut down in the community) and the fact that rich families don't need free food.

Oh and school dinner money is all done online,there is no extra cost or time to chase- a computer churns out an invoice.