Pupil Premium Plus

[1099]

My DS has an entitlement to PP+ (please don't confuse this with Pupil Premium) which his school gets, I want them to use part of it to help fund some out of school drama and theatre arts classes to help with his self esteem and confidence. The HT has told me the money can only be used for things within school, I know this is incorrect but am trying to find something to show him which will support this. Does anyone know of anything written or a website that definitively outlines what the money can be used for, or maybe some examples of how funds have been used in RL. Thanks.

Hadn't heard of pupil premium plus but a quick google has found <a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=www.pac-uk.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/PAC-UK-Education-Service-Pupil-Premium-Plus-Flyer.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjU8LXlj-PNAhUlCcAKHY3GBKQQFggiMAI&usg=AFQjCNHCIM7RxFZQZJ7Wv--e06R64GmbMQ&sig2=jE4NLZXpxcPKDyfwcFEGlw" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">this document and this
"The money is not ring fenced and does not have to be spent on the individual child."

Implies you will struggle to persuade the school to spend it on your childs out of school activity!

I think you are incorrect, all PP+ and PP money has to be spent IN school and can't be used for out of school activities. That's certainly the case in our area.

My understanding is that PP+ is for improving educational outcomes in school

It is for use in school. Perhaps you could fund the out of hours club

How do you 'know' the head is incorrect but can't find anything that proves that?

If it's not ring fenced then it's not your own personal pot of money to spend on after school clubs. Ask the school how they are using the money?

www.gov.uk/government/news/100-million-to-support-the-education-of-children-in-care

There are budgets attached to EHC Plans (Personal Budgets) which can be used to fund activities/support out of education. However, councils can be sneaky in telling you this and releasing them. I haven't hard of PP+ (I'll read the link later) but by its very name I would think that it has to be spent within/by school.

My DDs get/got PPP.

It has been used / offered for

• ELSA support
• Writing support
• Spelling support
• Maths support
• Drama club run by external provider but held has an after school club. Usually payable but offered free to PP/PPP children. (We actually paid because we can).

In secondary, DD1 received two lots of English intervention using her PPP money.

Has the school flagged up confidence as an issue holding your DS back educationally? If so then I think your request is reasonable unless they are taking action in school. But I'm not surprised they don't want to do something externally. If they can do something internally then other children can piggyback onto it.

DD1 has PP+ and at primary it was mostly used for instrument lessons (private teacher, but came into school to give the lessons). It was also used for small group music theory lessons, and a couple of other children piggy-backed onto this (I think one paid and the others didn't). I think the school has to be able to demonstrate the postive impact of spending the money, so difficult to do out of the school environment. At secondary, we are struggling to get them to use it for her benefit, but it's not my biggest issue at the mo so have not got around to making a fuss yet.

It is up to individual schools to decide how to spend the money.

PPP is intended to "help adopted children emotionally, socially and educationally by providing specific support to raise their attainment and address their wider needs." The school is supposed to use it to improve both education and personal outcomes for the child, identified in their PEP (personal education plan).

As such, there are no solid rules as to what it can and cannot be spent on, but the school is accountable for how it spends it and how the spending has made a clear impact on outcomes for the child as highlighted in the PEP.

There are some case studies here; corambaaf.org.uk/webfm_send/3879

The new ‘pupil premium plus’ will see funding to support children in care at school increase by £1,000 per pupil.

I think some schools are asked by parents how to spend some of the money. However, it must be used to improve educational outcomes and not just because parents cannot afford music or drama lessons. The school is accountable for the difference this money makes. There is a lot of research on what are the most effective methods of improving educational outcomes and music, drama and art make little difference.

There is a problem where the school receives PP funding for bright children who are doing very well. Some forces children certainly fall into this category! They may well not need to normal interventions so can get drama and music as a bit of a bonus. I am not sure I agree with this but my Head agreed to this recently as the child was making excellent progress academically. It is a difficult judgement but in general I do not believe it is up to parents to tell the school now to spend the money and the school are the educational experts and accountable for the money, not the parents. Ofsted have just issued new guidance on what they will be looking for and how schools must report on their web sites about how they spend the funds and educational outcomes. Therefore choosing options which are shown to have no impact is not a good idea.

Bojo your post refers to PP. The OP specifically said she wanted advice on PPP, not PP.

The Sutton Trust has excellent links to research on effective methods to raise attainment for PP children.

Not entirely, titchy! The school receives the pp plus from the Virtual Head but must still account for it being used effectively, as I described. The school would be wise to consult the parents about additional needs and how these can be addressed. Some of these can be addressed by non classroom activities but, it still must make a difference and should not be spent because a parent wants music lessons paid for. A good use is training TAs in the needs of adopted children. Parents do have great knowledge of their children but they are encouraged to work with schools to get the best outcomes and the research is still relevant.

Thanks for the replies;
rollonthesummer - I didn't say I couldn't prove it, I'm actually pretty happy that I can, I just want to support it with some examples.
DS attracts PP+ as a formerly LAC but now adopted from care, thus the funding isn't via VSH, and I think the criteria that he falls into is a bit of a grey area to be honest, I think that patricaholm has it closest; (thanks for the BAAF link) but as far as I know DS doesn't have a PEP, should he? do you think this is something I should ask about?
mrz the guidance I have says PP+ is "additional money for schools to improve the educational and personal outcomes of disadvantaged pupils including those who have been adopted from care”, so I’m coming at it from the personal outcome angle, which also reflects in his educational outcome as it happens.
I also think at school means of school age, not physically at school.
Finally I know the money isn’t ringfenced and I don’t regard it as ours, however the money is allocated to the school because of DS presence at the school, it is reasonable therefore to assume they would primarily use it to support DS surely, and currently it isn’t, all PP, AFC, Ever6 etc is put in a pot and used mainly it seems to pay for TAs.

I also think at school means of school age, not physically at school

The conditions of grant laid down by the government say that the money can be spent:

• for the purposes of the school, i.e. for the educational benefit of pupils registered at that school

• for the benefit of pupils registered at other maintained schools or academies

• on community facilities

Spending the money on individual tutoring would be ok but I suspect Ofsted would look askance on money being spent in the way you propose.