How much £ does a MS get for funding a child with a full statement?

[Lesley25]

Hi everyone,
I know this isn't my concern, but after several meetings with the school i do feel that the funding- and lack of it so to speak, is being shoved under my nose.

I don't suppose anyone out there knows how much (in £) a school would get for a child with a full statement? Are they really out of pocket??

It depends on the level of the statement and the way the LA delegates money. In our area, schools are still given funding for all children who fall short of needing a statement or for the basic costs of the statement, plus children with statements attract extra money to the school for specific things. LAs are moving away from that to money being fully delegated, though - so if the school is using its SN budget to fund covering of staff PPA, then they probably resent being expected to use it properly.

Funding the statement is their problem, not yours, though.

If you google the section 251 details for your LA, you should find out exactly how much money the school is given for SN!

Thanks ouryve!

So what if they are out of pocket? They should go and threaten the LA and whinge to them, not a parent of a vulnerable child who's life chances rest on the ability of them to meet their needs.

A school, even out of pocket can raise money if it is a priority. One less secretary, HT take a salary cut, delay new computer system for 3 years, forgo new interactive whiteboard, reallocate a TA, get the FT SENCO to cover a class, cancel subsidised school trip.

Their accountancy is not your responsibility. It is the HTs. Schools are not poor, they just have competing priorities.

You see what i am now getting (and i doubt i'm unique here) is that because schools feel "so poor" they are directing their feedback negatively and pushing for special schools when a child would benefit from mainstream. I think that's happening in my case.

I just thought it would be useful to see how much they get per child. I've downloaded the spreadsheet for 251 and can only see (according to my authority) the £ a special school gets per child, but not what a MS gets for a child on a full statement. However, i would hazard a guess its probably the same amount as the £ a special school would get for a child.

Just to say that MS schools do not get the same amount of £ per child as special schools. It costs WAY MORE to have a child in a SS than in a MS.

The way of funding SEN in MS has just changed. It used to be that, say your child had a statement for 27hrs of TA time and 5 hours of a lunchtime supervisor, then the MS would get exactly what it cost to employ those people (at average rates) - so around £11-13k including on-costs for the TA and a couple of grand for the LTS.

In my area, this has now changed so all schools are given a certain amount of money rolled up into their general budget to cover relatively low levels of SEN (something like up to the first 5 children or a % of the number of pupils I think). If they have more than that, they get a bit extra but it's not the full amount of the cost of the extra staff.

However, as others have said, the school's finances are not really your problem. If your child has a full statement, the school needs to be providing the resources required.

at my recent tribunal the LA gave the figure of £18k for a full time statement ie 32.5 hours - for a special school placement I also know that was £18K so yes they are about the same

I posted in another thread, but I honestly and truly do not think that special school places are an easy out for a LA. They cost a lot and they have many more children who would benefit from them than they have places. Genuinely. For example, DD1's school alone is likely to turn away over 20 children next year (or rather, the LA will only be able to admit 13 of the 33 children who would benefit from spaces).

About £500 per hour is a good guide. So 12 hours per week would be £6000 pa. 20 hours would be £10000. That's on top of awpu which is about £4000.

The school would be expected to put in first £6000 on top awpu. The LA would top up rest. So in theory once a child is over 12-15 hours week then it makes no difference to school if the child gets 20 or 35 hours as the LA pays the top up.

So schools with a 20 hour child will be making a case for 35 hours!?

Lougle- I agree, i don't think special schools are an easy out for an LA.
But if the support on a child's statement is 1:1 plus SPLT & OT support, I'm not sure that the cost of a special school ( i mean an LA maintained special school not a non maintained special school) is as much as the figures quoted above.. I do think this varies significantly per borough.

I've looked under the 251 details for my particular authority and have noted that the maintained special school is 10k per annum per child.

In this case, a statement depicting all of the above support would be considerably more money for an LA and school, therefore schools would be more inclined to push a child with additional needs through to a special school rather then their own.

I guess thats why I'm coming back to my original question and wonder how much £ would a school get for a child with a full statement of 1:1 provision plus SALT and OT - and would they indeed be out of pocket?

I'll be honest, i don't still understand how schools get "topped up" - do they actually get £10,000 for a child with additional needs? and then get topped up on top of the 10k regardless of the provision (32.5 hours) on the statement?
Or do they get exactly the cost of the specialist support actually costs the school- so a specialist TA 15k, SPLT 5k, OT 3K per annum (I've made up the figures).

I know this isn't my concern. But the cynic in me has to know that all feedback regarding my child is not biased in way or another. And if it is- I'll be able to see why.

Lesley, as I understand it the school gets SEN money based on a formula that various between LAs.

From this money they are expected to fund around £4k for the child APW and then £6k for their SEN. Anything more and they would get a top up from the LA.

So. If a child at mainstream costs £14k and at SS costs £10k, then in the former case the LA would have to find £4k, but in the latter they would have to find £10k.

Thanks Starlight.

However, if your child LEFT the school, they would then have a lovely £10k freed up to spend on a vegetable garden (unless a new child started there in which case they'd only have £6k for it). This is because SEN money isn't ringfenced and because schools are competing for the MC kids making them desperate to keep the money for glossy brochures instead of a TA for just one child.

Yes zzzzz I sometime think that it would be better if the LA simply gave me half of ds' school placement money I could give much better value for money.

But alas, I am a mere parent and should not be allowed to control the spending of any funds lest I get ripped off my cowboys.

Welcome to educate my child at my own expense and to hell with his adequate education of course.

Our HT and SENCO really care about the children, what is best for them and what is best for the rest of the school. That is a difficult aspect but sometimes (in their professional opinion) it isn't best for children with SEN to stay in our school. In those cases they work with the parents to find an alternative and have often visited the prospective school with the child and his/her parents.

There have been several occasions what it has been decided that it would be a good thing for the child to be educated elsewhere but I have never heard it discussed as a financial decision (and I am the bursar!)

my dd is supposed to have a full time 1:1 statement with salt and ot, according to reports from SA. The lEA have issued a crap proposed statement that names salt and ot in parts 5 +6 and basically states the level of provision is at the schools discretion.
The statement states that the school must fund the first 10k and the LEA will top this up with band 2 funding - which equates to 20hrs provision.
However school are claiming that band 2 funding only equates to 2.5 hrs 1:1 a day and as the LEA havent quantified the TA hours in the statement they can get away with this.
my take on this is that they are using the AWPU plus the LEA band 2 funding, but not using the 6k they should be providing from their own budget

statement is currently being appealed.

Apologies, what does AWPU stand for?

I don't know what SS cost, I imagine that differs according to the needs of the child, as it would at our school.

I'm sure you are right that LAs would prefer MS to have most SEN children on cost grounds. All I was saying was that IMO, the advice the HT gives to our parents on where best suits their child is never due to cost considerations.

Sometimes he will have decided the child needs to leave for the good of the remaining children, which is sad and I'm sure not allowed, but I have never ever heard him complain about the cost of having a child in the school.

LOL at the idea that I get to "allow" anything.

He will obviously have come up with another reason to tell the parents in any case, there won't have just been that one reason. Any of these kind of situations are thought about long and hard with the best interests of all the children in mind IME. Money really has been the last consideration in fact, AFAIK not considered at all (and I'm sure I would know)

AWPU stands for Age Weighted Pupil Unit. It's the amount of funding a pupil brings to a school and it's different depending on the age of the child. It's approx £4000 for a secondary KS3 pupil.

Schools pay for up to 20 hours of a statement from their budget. The SENCO fills in a form each term to claim money from the
LA for the extra 5 hours of a 25 hour statement.