Class size for economically viable school

[QuiteQuietly]

DCs primary school has PAN of 30. Only one class is at capacity (actually over PAN), the rest have class sizes in low to mid 20's. I've noticed the numbers decreasing in the last year (mostly people moving away from the area, so not obviously an escape from unhappiness). How long can a school manage with these numbers? I was under the impression that schools were paid per pupil - and that's why some schools have mixed-year classes. The staff are a cast of thousands (eg reception have 5 TAs - a few of them are 1-2-1's) and while I'm grateful for the small classes and high staff:pupil ratiol, I am concerned for the future.

Eventually the school will have to amalgamate classes and make staff posts redundant if the roll continues to drop.

Are any of the class mixed year groups currently? That sounds like the next logical step.

A small village school near me now has three classes of 30; a Yr/1/2 class, a Y3/4 class and a Y5/6 class. Three teachers (one is the deputy) and a headteacher.

You say there are lots of TAs, how many teachers are there? It may be that they will leave and not be replaced, or be made redundant if the roll continues to fall.

I suppose our school runs regularly at 15 below PAN. They get fairly creative about class composition. It's when schools get less than 5/yr group that I don't know how they manage.

No mixed year groups at the moment, or any plans announced to do so. They are advertising for new staff next year on the website, so doesn't look like they are winding staff numbers down. I would prefer there wasn't a sudden "tank" of staff and numbers of classes, and if there were sudden changes and a resultant further exodus of children, I suppose I would probably prefer to pre-empt that.

So I wondered how long they could continue in the current vein with no apparent plan to address the issue.

the avg primary school class size in England is around 26. So it's only when they get sharply below that that they have to start merging. DC have often had class sizes around 22-23.

There are a few primaries in rural areas round here with a total roll (i.e. Not just one class) of less than 20 and have a maximum size of 40. I think they tend to have two staff, not sure if they are both teachers, plus visiting specialists/learning support. Lot smaller buildings and very large catchments though, a city or town primary would close rather than get that small.

This is in a town with four primaries, plus smaller village schools nearby. One school has recently expanded because of a new housing development. The other town schools are at or near capacity - not sure about the village ones.

If a child has an entitlement to one to one support their support assistant isn't counted in the class ratio so it is a bit misleading to look at numbers without knowing the facts.

Many rural schools operate with low pupil numbers but a steady decline year on year will certainly result in redundancies after a period of time.
Mid twenties doesn't sound a cause for concern.

I know 1-2-1's don't count in class ratio, but the school has to fund the first 15 or so hours themselves now. I gave example of the reception class as I volunteer in there so know it fairly well. There are 5 tas - two are definitely 121, 2 are there every year (eg last year when DD2 was in YrR and there were no 121 children) and the 5th one I am not sure whether she has a particular function or not - she is generally around the classroom and doesn't seem attached to anyone in particular. All the KS1 classes have two tas and KS2 have 1 per class (plus any extra for specific children, plus volunteers), plus there are school-wide TAs who do extra numeracy or literacy and a HLTA who does PPA cover. This seems remarkably well staffed, particularly given the class sizes. Anyway, I'm not complaining - I just wondered whether the school could viably continue in the same vein. I'm not too fussed about losing TAs personally, but wouldn't be so keen on mixed year classes or losing even more children because of reaction to sudden change.

If mid-twenties doesn't sound like a cause for concern, then that is reassuring - thanks.

In my LEA schools have always had to heavily subsidise 1-1 support (more than £15K) ... The funding that came with a statement was nowhere near enough to meet needs.

Very simply (very as it is complex) most LAs support small schools through a schools forum agreement. As more become academies this may well be unviable.

Roughly- and it varies by LA and not all funding is equal. You need 500 for a secondary to be viable- you can do 350 with a small academic curriculum. A primary you need more than 120 to have a non teaching head. Primary schools with less than 100 are financially supported through the formula. Pupil premium makes a vast difference although but small schools are less likely to have as many eligible pupils.

To be stand alone viable as an academy long term you would need to be single form entry (at least 25 per year group).

to correct- to stand alone as a primary academy- you would need to be at least single form entry- 25 plus per year

The answer is that there are so many permutations that affect what is and is not possible to make a school financially viable.
Firstly at a national level each LA has a figure per pupil, which varies dramatically. The lowest funded LAs are £2000 plus per pupil worse off than the highest (Tower Hamlets if you discount City of London). There is a bias to higher funding in the South East and London which is not by any means explained by the higher salaries in London. A new national funding formula is promised some time in the future as everybody recognises that the current funding is inequitable.
When we get to an LA level there a number of different funding streams that are used and the LAs have some limited opportunity to vary these to suit the needs of the schools in the area. Now all schools, including Academies, are funded the same and a major constituent is a per pupil figure. Pupil premium does start to have a significant effect in primary schools if there are higher levels of FSM in the school.
Another factor that is "hidden" is that whilst all schools have by law to set a budget that is not going into deficit, there are a lot of schools that are in deficit and are being kept propped up by the LA. The LAs now are being far more serious about making schools be financially viable.
My LA did an exercise to establish what the real cost of a class of a primary school and came up with a figure of 23 to 24 pupils per class as the "break-even point". This is in an LA that is towards the bottom of the league table in terms of funding per pupil. and is also based on average teacher salaries. If you have an experienced teaching staff then the difference in salary is significant - more than £10000 difference between the top of the basic salary scale and the bottom.

What I think every parent now needs to know is that things are going to get much tougher. Schools have been relatively protected up to now. However LAs have not and lots of things that the LA did for nothing before are now being charged for. Also increased national insurance / pension payments by the school as the employer kicked in on 1st April and there are even bigger increases next year in both pension contributions and in national insurance. So from April 16, many schools will be feeling the pinch and will have to start looking carefully at class sizes and levels of teaching and non-teaching staff.
There is lots of hot air at present from all the political parties about funding for schools but when you add in reduced 6th form funding, major changes to SEN funding and general inflation, those schools that have poor financial management are going to suffer badly over the next few years.