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

Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Are state schools allowed to profit from extracurricular trips/holidays?

88 replies

origamiwarrior · 05/12/2019 20:03

DD (along with rest of year) has been invited on a European skiing trip during the Easter holidays. Places are limited and there will be a ballot if too many apply. The trip is being supplied by a third-party provider who arranges everything - accommodation, coach travel, ski passes, tuition, insurance, etc.

I went to the provider's website last night (to see if they were registered with childcare vouchers, as we have a glut to use up) and came across the schools' brochure and price list. The provider charges the school £540 per pupil, and the school are charging £1020. The £540 includes free staff places, and in fact there are further discounts for volume (not sure if this applies as I dont know how many kids are going). The 'what is included' is identical, copied and pasted from the provider's website (down to the free souvineer t-shirt) so I know it is the same holiday.

Are the school allowed to profit like this? I know they can't for normal school trips, but I don't know if the rules are different for what is clearly an opt-in 'holiday'.

OP posts:
Chattybum · 05/12/2019 22:17

Well think what you like. I think you should feel if not embarrassed, then certainly sheepish for insulting the integrity of the people willing to take your children abroad. I work with teachers from all over the world and they are unanimously baffled by the attitude of a significant minority of both parents and children in the UK. It's embarrassing. No wonder almost all of them go back home again, I can't say I blame them.

Either way I'm glad the veil of mystery has been lifted for you OP, if you are that interested perhaps you could offer to organise a trip next year?

Dodgeitornot · 05/12/2019 22:30

You can charge as much as you want for non compulsory non curriculum trips and those are not under the criteria @etluxperpetua you've just mentioned. That criteria only applies to compulsory curriculum trips and those are often museums or things the school can do for free. So in rural areas they're quite scarce. It should say on the letter that the trip is excluded from this regulation. I highly doubt a 1k Easter holiday trip is a compulsory trip, whatever it's purpose. @origamiwarrior sorry you got a few mean comments there, I think it's a perfectly acceptable question.

etluxperpetua · 05/12/2019 22:31

(Oh, and I do agree with Chattybum a bit too. The level of stress and responsibility on teachers leading school trips is immense, even when nothing really goes wrong - and sometimes of course things do go quite seriously wrong. I wouldn't do it for all the tea in China, and I'm extremely grateful that other people do. And then you see parents collecting their kids at the end of a trip without even a word of thanks. Extraordinary.)

Dodgeitornot · 05/12/2019 22:38

@Chattybum you're just plain mean, she just asked a question. The finance dept would have a breakdown of costs readily available otherwise they wouldn't have been able to plan the trip. It shouldn't take longer than 10mins to provide this. It's hardly insulting teachers integrity, school accounts are available to anyone at their request. As for foreign teachers thinking British parents are weird, I'm sure many British teachers find the parents of immigrant kids weird at times. Its just different cultures and a weird thing to bring up in an innocent question about a school trip.

etluxperpetua · 05/12/2019 22:38

Er, sorry dodgeitornot, but I disagree. You can't charge for school hours non-residential trips regardless of whether they're compulsory - you can only ask for contributions. With term time residentials (regardless of whether they're compulsory) you can only charge for board and lodging, not activities. So far, so straightforward. I didn't know the rules for non-school-hours trips, which is why I checked - but having just looked at the DfE guidance again, I'd say that the paragraph I quoted above is pretty clear that it refers to activities (presumably including trips) that take place out of school hours. And surely anything outside school hours is by definition non-compulsory?

The full guidance is here, if anyone's interested www.gov.uk/government/publications/charging-for-school-activities.

Dodgeitornot · 05/12/2019 22:40

@etluxperpetua OP never said she is not grateful and it wouldn't be the teachers providing this information. It would be the finance department of the school.

Cookiedough123 · 05/12/2019 22:47

On most trips I have been the ration has been 1:7 this was for a sports tour and skiing trip.

Dodgeitornot · 05/12/2019 22:49

@etluxperpetua I typed out a long response but I CBA. Keep reading your guidance I guess, working in a schools finance dept is my day job, what should I know.

etluxperpetua · 05/12/2019 22:49

No, sorry, I quite agree, that wasn't really aimed at the OP. Just a general observation really.

Chattybum · 05/12/2019 22:50

@Dodgeitornot it's not the practicalities of the question being answered, it's the implication that school is somehow scamming parents that has rattled my cage. It's crap like this that puts staff off organising trips at all! And no, I don't think it shows a lovely patchwork of cultures that overseas staff should be horrified at the way school staff are treated in the UK. I think it's quite depressing.

etluxperpetua · 05/12/2019 22:51

Yup, used to be mine too. But I've never organised a school holiday trip, only term time trips, hence needing to look at the guidance.

etluxperpetua · 05/12/2019 22:52

And fwiw there are lots of school finance depts that get this stuff wrong. Obv not saying you do, but lots do.

Dodgeitornot · 05/12/2019 22:53

Well I guess the air has cleared. School is not scamming anyone, trips are really hard to organise and we're all clearly looking forward to the end of term lol.

Chattybum · 05/12/2019 22:55

Agreed!

etluxperpetua · 05/12/2019 23:03

Well, I would be if I still worked in a school - I don't, for the sole reason that I couldn't hack (some of) the parents any longer Grin.

egontoste · 05/12/2019 23:05

In my professional capacity I have audited school funds like this. It wouldn't go through the normal school accounts but through a separate school 'unofficial' fund account and everything has to be accounted for. It may be that the school is actually subsidising some places for students whose families are on a very low income. There may also be students going who need one-to-one supervision. They won't go with the bare minimum of staff.

Having said that, there is a big difference in the price. Why don't you write to the chair of governors?

etluxperpetua · 06/12/2019 06:48

But schools aren't allowed to charge some parents more to subsidise others. Nobody should pay more than the actual cost of the trip. Subsidy for children on FSM should come from the money schools already receive for deprivation. And although lots of schools do run trips through audited voluntary funds, others (including me) moved away from this and ran everything through the main school account. Frankly I didn't want the hassle of arranging a separate audit. The impression I got was that lots of schools were moving the same way, though I have no figures on that.

WombatChocolate · 06/12/2019 18:37

What I find surprising about this thread and Ops post, is how little people know about school trips and their financing and also that there is a suspicion that schools charge more than needed.

Trips abroad are very expensive. Schools use specialist providers who have to make a profit because otherwise the level of risk involved is such that most schools won’t accept trips without specialist providers, plus the level of organisation on top of the full time job would be prohibitive.

The costs are always more than you find on a website. Lots of people have mentioned the additional costs and contingencies which have to be factored in.

With curriculum trips schools might charge a bit more per head to cover those who won’t pay but need to go. Most or all of this usually has to be funded from the schools very tight budgets.

After a trip like this, the school won’t have retained money. If there is some it will be returned and mean contingency spending wasn’t needed, although it had to be budgeted for.

People have very little awareness of school budgets. Many people behave as if individual schools deliberately make requests for money to squeeze as much out of them as possible and for the school or sometimes even personal gain. There is a lack of appreciation at how far that is from the truth - that schools work really hard to keep requests for money down because they know it’s hard for some people. They are faced with asking for money or not offering the curriculum and non curriculum trips. It’s as simple as that really. School budgets have been cut and cut and there is nothing left for even basics, never mind trips and things which enrich. So if you want them, you have to pay up. It will mean some children access more trips than others but school funding cannot cover the gap.

On top of their many hours of work, teachers choose to also spend time working on organising trips and finding ways to keep costs down which takes hours. And then they go on the trips, bearing 24/7 pressure and responsibility. Why, because they believe the children gain from it.

What reaction do they get for this stuff which is beyond their job? A few thank yous at the end, possibly 1 person sending a box of chocs. Also, umpteen complaints, failure to return forms during the planning stage...parents complaining about rooming, wNting different arrangements, contact and complaints during the trip, people being over an hour late to collect their kids after the trip returns and then pulling up and not even winding down the window to shout ‘tgankyou’ plus lots of commenting about the cost at all stages of the trip, with underlying hinting that the school are charging an awful lot for what it is, implying somewhere along the line, a rip off is going on.

Schools aren’t making money. Looking at the website won’t tell you the full costs involved in running the trip. If you want your children to have more than the barest essentials of an education these days you have to pay some money or you can’t have it - and that’s due to government funding of schools not schools themselves. So pay up and appreciate another adult is taking your child, meaning you don’t need to pay for your whole family to go. Pay up if you want your child to go and you can afford it and don’t if you don’t want them to go or can’t afford it. Know the schools are working hard to keep costs down but providing trips with specialist holiday providers and activities on site is just never cheap unless everyone is a volunteer. Remove the suspicion that the price includes some kind of hike that is benefitting the school or allowing teachers to have a ‘free holiday’ and consider if being 24/7 in charge of x number of whatever age is such a bargain and free holiday.

Sorry, rant over. I’m just disappointed that parents think schools look to ‘profit’ and are money grabbing. Remember how many staff are paying out of their own pockets to photocopy and buy resources or even breakfast because schools can’t, they can’t ask parents and they choose to do this rather than see children go short.

PleasantVille · 06/12/2019 18:42

Have you found out why there's such a difference, I thunk it's a perfectly valid question. No supply cover required, teacher ratio isn't 1 to 1 so why twice as much?

rookiemere · 06/12/2019 18:52

I don't think anyone on this thread has said anything disparaging about teachers or shown any lack of respect for the hard job they do taking students away - I certainly don't envy them well maybe my friends DH who got to go to Lake Louise skiing just a little bit.

That does not mean that OP is not allowed to question the make up of the cost. I certainly would not be happy to pay towards another pupils non essential holiday, and I'm amazed that anyone would be prepared to do that or think it's acceptable practice.

FWIW £1k sounds pretty reasonable for AI ski trip.

LolaSmiles · 06/12/2019 19:04

it's not the practicalities of the question being answered, it's the implication that school is somehow scamming parents that has rattled my cage. It's crap like this that puts staff off organising trips at all!
That's how I feel about it.

The undertone that the school would just be looking for ways to scam money makes you wonder why bother trying to do trips as it can be another thankless task.

Then again, trips and school funding are one of those education topics with misinformation. Just look at trip threads where multiple posters insist that FSM means their child has a pot of money for them to cover trip contributions and other school expenses.

etluxperpetua · 06/12/2019 20:13

As I said, schools cannot overcharge paying parents to subsidise free places for disadvantaged kids - it's not allowed.

LolaSmiles · 06/12/2019 20:40

I know that etlux.

My issue is that on trips, like other school funding things is that it's too easy for people to pass their opinion off as fact (as shown by claims on many MN trips threads suggesting that PP money is a pot for their child to pay for trips etc), which is how people end up with misinformation.

etluxperpetua · 06/12/2019 21:45

Sorry Lola, I was responding to rookiemere's comment about not being happy to subsidise another pupil's holiday.

Phineyj · 06/12/2019 21:57

I'm a teacher. I think it's a reasonable question to ask, given the size of the discrepancy, and a reasonable finance department would give an answer.

Goodness knows, the vast majority of teachers don't know how school finances work, either!

Swipe left for the next trending thread