SCHOOL FUNDING FORMULA REVIEW WORKSHOP Task and Finish Group commissioned by Schools Forum to review the 2016/17 School Funding Factors and recommend saving options for November 2016 School Forum meeting. School FUNDING FORMULA Task & Finish Group Review Version: 1.0 Date: 8 November 2016 Author: Shabana Kausar Strategic Finance Lead Schools
47
Embed
School Funding Formula Review Workshop€¦ · formula, 2017/18 provides the Council and Schools Forum the last opportunity to review the current funding rates and were possible align
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
0 | 46
SCHOOL FUNDING FORMULA REVIEW
WORKSHOP
Task and Finish Group commissioned by Schools Forum to review the 2016/17 School Funding Factors and recommend saving options for
November 2016 School Forum meeting.
School FUNDING FORMULA Task & Finish Group Review
Version: 1.0
Date: 8 November 2016
Author: Shabana Kausar
Strategic Finance Lead Schools
1 | 46
Table of Contents Section A: Introduction ............................................................................................ 2
1. Purpose Of Review .......................................................................................... 3
2. School Funding Formula .................................................................................. 9
3. School Block Dsg Allocation .......................................................................... 10
Appendix 4: Impact of Funding Formula Changes at School Level
Appendix 5: Impact of Further Cut to AWPU of £50 at School Level
2 | 46
SECTION A: INTRODUCTION
3 | 46
1. PURPOSE OF REVIEW 1.1 Terms of Reference
The School Funding Formula Review Task and Finish Group was set-up to undertake a review of Hounslow’s 2016/17 School Funding Formula for Mainstream Schools (5-15 year olds) and;
Compare current rates with other local authorities;
Identify funding factors which are outliers;
Task officers to present options for agreed factors at the November’s School Forum.
1.2 Task and Finish Group
Type of School School Contact Job Title
Primary Maintained Hounslow Heath
Katherine Harper-Quinn
Headteacher
Primary Academy Westbrook Melvyn Tatters Headteacher
Secondary Maintained Heathlands Mike Nicholls Chair of Governors
Secondary Academy Lampton Andrew Oram School Business Manager
The Task and Finish Group was chaired by the Strategic Finance Lead for Schools (Shabana Kausar) and attended by another council officer, Donald Fraser (Management Accountant).
1.3 In Scope
As a result of the delay in EFA implementing the new national funding formula, 2017/18 provides the Council and Schools Forum the last opportunity to review the current funding rates and were possible align these as closely to Council’s statistical neighbours. This is in anticipation of reduced allocation being distributed to London, the review is important for Schools reducing any potential impact at a later date. The group were tasked to review the funding factors and identify savings which can be released to fund the current projected shortfall. The key principles agreed with the Task and Finish group included.
any changes should be comparable with closest statistical neighbours in London;
ensure funding rate changes between primary and secondary do not breach the overall funding ratio outlined by EfA in the School Funding operation guidance of 1: 1.26
4 | 46
1.4 Data Source
Information published by the DfE on 2016/17 School Budget approved and submitted by the Council has been used to undertake the analysis across other local authorities.
1.5 Implementation Date
The implementation date for any changes is proposed to take effect from 1 April 2017.
5 | 46
SECTION B: RECOMMENDATIONS
6 | 46
2. RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 2016/17 AWPU Cut
In light of the current funding pressure across DSG circa £3m it is recommended that Schools Forum approve for the 2016/17 £50 AWPU cut to remain.
2.2 Proposed Funding Factor Changes for 2017/18 In light of the review undertaken by the Task and Finish Group the following changes to funding factors are proposed to be considered:
1. Changes to AWPU - School Forum to consider either:
a) Further AWPU cut of £50 to Primary Schools b) AWPU KS3 to be increased to £4,181.79 from £3,938.31 c) AWPU KS4 to be decreased to £4,828.86 from £5,441.04
2. Changes to EAL AWPU - School Forum to consider either:
d) EAL Primary rate to increase to £450.87 from £310.76 e) EAL Secondary rate to reduce to £1,403.22 from £1,767.40
Appendix 4 sets out the impact of the above for Hounslow schools.
3. Impact of the above changes to MFG
In 2016/17 out of 71 schools, 26 received protection funding through the MFG, of these only 3 are secondary schools. The total cost of the protection is £1.2m The net impact on MFG of the above changes will result in 34 schools triggering MFG protection (an increase of 8), which will result in most secondary schools moving to MFG. The total cost of the protection will increase by £0.63m to £1.8m
2.3 Alternative Saving Option
Where School Forum feel that the changes to the funding factors above will have an adverse impact across the board or for one particular sector it is recommended that School Forum approve an additional cut to AWPU of £50 in 2017/18. The net impact on MFG of an additional £50 being cut across all AWPU factors results 44 34 schools triggering MFG protection (an increase of 18), which will result in thirteen additional primary schools moving to MFG. The total cost of the protection will increase by £0.62m to £1.8m.
APPENDIX 1: SCHOOL BLOCK FUNDING FACTORS
7 | 46
Appendix 5 sets out the impact of an additional £50 AWPU cut for Hounslow schools.
2.4 Further Work on Prior Attainment Due to the current rates being at the top-end when compared with other local authorities both nationally and across London, and thus any downward change to funding factor will result in triggering Minimum Funding Guarantee (MFG). For this reason it is recommended for Schools Forum to discuss way forward with tackling the prior attainment funding and task officers to undertake further work.
P a g e 8 | 46
SECTION C: FUNDING FORMULA OVERVIEW
P a g e 9 | 46
1. SCHOOL FUNDING FORMULA a. How the Current Funding Formula Operates
Council are required to distribute funding to mainstream schools through EFA’s nationally prescribed formula, which consists of thirteen funding factors. In consultation with Schools Forum the Council has local discretion to decide the following;
which optional factors should be used;
the funding rates which will be applied to each factor. Appendix 1 details the 2017/18 School Funding Formula Factors for mainstream schools (5 to 15 year olds).
b. Funding Factors in use 2016/17
School Funding Formula Factors Mandatory
Factors
Option Factors
Used by Hounslow
Decision not to use
Not Applicable
Basic Entitlement
Deprivation
Prior Attainment
English as an Additional Language (EAL)
Lump Sum
Rates
Looked After Children
Pupil Mobility
Post-16
Sparcity
Split Sites
Private Finance Initiative (PFI) contacts
London Fringe
Exceptional Premises
c. Changes to 201718 Funding Formula
The DfE issued the 2017/18 DSG operational and technical guidance late July 2016 which set out the rules which the Council and School Forum have to abide by when setting the 2017/18 School Budgets. With the exception of the following the school funding formula remains the same as 2016/17;
APPENDIX 1: SCHOOL BLOCK FUNDING FACTORS
10 | 46
the post 16 funding factor will be removed, but with protection through the minimum funding guarantee (MFG);
a national weighting for secondary low attainment figures;
there are new bandings for the index of deprivation affecting children (IDACI). A detail explanation is outlined under appendix 2.
2. SCHOOL BLOCK DSG ALLOCATION a. 2016/17 School DSG Block Allocation
The School Budget approved by the Schools Forum in January 2016 was £173.3m which includes growth fund allocation of £1.3m.
b. School Funding Formula Allocation
In 2016/17 the total funding approved by Schools Forum in January 2016 across England (152 local authorities) through the School Funding Formula was £31,909m for 7.06m statutory age children between 5 and 15 years of age.
LA Regions No of LA's
NOR Total
Schools Formula Allocation
London 33 1,087,390 £5,709,655,324
East of England 11 795,061 £3,442,826,222
East Midlands 9 607,040 £2,621,316,241
North East 13 402,020 £1,810,097,214
North West 23 960,608 £4,355,021,914
South East 19 1,118,987 £4,699,504,302
South West 16 660,739 £2,798,084,985
West Midlands 14 784,623 £3,567,574,276
Yorkshire and the Humber
14 645,782 £2,904,583,966
Total 152 7,062,251 £31,908,664,442
Hounslow schools budget allocation is 0.54% of the total funding allocated nationally (£31,908m). When compared against London boroughs, Hounslow schools receive 3.04% of the funding received across London.
London Regions No of LA's
NOR Total
Schools Formula Allocation
Central London 7 139,289 £857,911,223
East London 10 384,889 £2,099,683,854
North London 3 131,356 £670,048,821
South London 6 194,850 £912,776,962
West London 7 237,006 £1,169,234,463
Total 33 1,087,390 £5,709,655,324
P a g e 11 | 46
SECTION D: BENCHAMRKING DATA
P a g e 12 | 46
3. STATISTICAL NEIGHBOURS a. Hounslow’s Statistical Neighbours
DfE has identified the following local authorities as statistical neighbours against which Hounslow should benchmark its Children and Education service funding, budgets and costs.
Closest Somewhat Close
Ealing Reading
Hillingdon Merton
Slough Leicester
Redbridge Sutton
Barnet
Harrow
4. TOP LEVEL ANALYSIS a. National
Against the national picture Hounslow has some key notable outliers that require further review. In addition Hounslow has a slightly above average funding split between Primary and Secondary.
National
Factor
Hounslow Ranking out of 152 LA's (1=highest,
77=midpoint, 152=lowest)
2016/17 Hounslow value add back £50
cut to AWPU
Average value
Primary AWPU 21 £3,338.46 £3,024.05
KS3 AWPU 92 £3,938.31 £4,169.47
KS4 AWPU 13 £5,441.04 £4,682.88
Deprivation (Proportion) 104 5.65% 7.83%
Looked after children n/a £0.00 £661.65
EAL Primary 104 £310.76 £481.55
EAL Secondary 20 £1,767.40 £925.52
Mobility Primary n/a £0.00 £346.23
Mobility Secondary n/a £0.00 £532.36
Primary Low Attainment 4 £1,949.25 £811.66
Secondary Low Attainment 5 £2,450.00 £1,058.03
Lump Sum Primary 109 £110,000.00 £128,213.19
Lump Sum Secondary 125 £110,000.00 £139,472.80
Ratio 32 1:1.34 1:1.29
13 | 46
b. London
Against London the national picture Hounslow has some key notable outliers at the top end and require further review. In addition Hounslow has a slightly above average funding split between Primary and Secondary
London Boroughs
Factor Hounslow Ranking out of 33 LA's (1=highest,
17=midpoint, 33=lowest)
2016/17 Hounslow value add back £50
cut to AWPU
Average value
Primary AWPU 20 £3,338.46 £3,578.01
KS3 AWPU 29 £3,938.31 £4,748.38
KS4 AWPU 11 £5,441.04 £5,148.28
Deprivation (Proportion) 25 5.65% 8.46%
Looked after children n/a £0.00 £878.31
EAL Primary 24 £310.76 £503.76
EAL Secondary 6 £1,767.40 £1,240.27
Mobility Primary n/a £0.00 £622.90
Mobility Secondary n/a £0.00 £754.85
Primary Low Attainment 2 £1,949.25 £897.83
Secondary Low Attainment 3 £2,450.00 £1,310.33
Lump Sum Primary 29 £110,000.00 £144,291.42
Lump Sum Secondary 27 £110,000.00 £133,899.74
Ratio 39 1:1.34 1:1.26
c. Statistical Neighbours
Against our statistical neighbours additional outliers can be identified which require further review. Whilst the funding split between Primary and Secondary remains same as the others.
Hounslow have one of the lowest funded KS3 AWPU across the board but especially when compared nationally. Even when adding back the £50 AWPU cut the ranking shifts by one point.
£0.00
£1,000.00
£2,000.00
£3,000.00
£4,000.00
£5,000.00
£6,000.00
£7,000.00
Cit
y o
f Lo
nd
on
Hac
kney
Tow
er H
amle
ts
Ken
sin
gto
n a
nd
…
Sou
thw
ark
Lam
bet
h
Bar
kin
g an
d D
agen
ham
Wan
dsw
ort
h
Lew
ish
am
Islin
gto
n
Har
inge
y
Ne
wh
am
Cam
de
n
Ham
me
rsm
ith
an
d…
Sutt
on
Wal
tham
Fo
rest
Ealin
g
Enfi
eld
Wes
tmin
ster
Bre
nt
Bar
ne
t
Ho
un
slo
w
Har
row
Mer
ton
Gre
enw
ich
Red
bri
dge
Hill
ingd
on
Hav
erin
g
Bex
ley
Kin
gsto
n u
po
n T
ham
es
Bro
mle
y
Cro
ydo
n
Ric
hm
on
d u
po
n…
2016/17 Primary Amount per pupil £ (London Boroughs)
16 | 46
c. KS4 AWPU
Total £ NOR Unit
Value Ranking Out of
National £4,901,354,501 1,064,518 £4,682.55 14 152
London Boroughs £796,111,469 154,897 £5,146.76 12 33
In comparison with KS3, Hounslow’s funding got KS4 is one of the highest when compared across the board. Even when the £50 AWPU cut is added the remains at the top end and actually moves up to be the highest across its statistical neighbours.
£0.00
£1,000.00
£2,000.00
£3,000.00
£4,000.00
£5,000.00
£6,000.00
£7,000.00
£8,000.00
Hac
kney
Tow
er H
amle
ts
Ken
sin
gto
n a
nd
Ch
else
a
Lam
bet
h
Sou
thw
ark
Har
inge
y
Ham
me
rsm
ith
an
d…
Lew
ish
am
Ne
wh
am
Cam
de
n
Bre
nt
Wes
tmin
ster
Bar
ne
t
Wal
tham
Fo
rest
Wan
dsw
ort
h
Islin
gto
n
Bar
kin
g an
d D
agen
ham
Hav
erin
g
Ealin
g
Sutt
on
Bex
ley
Enfi
eld
Kin
gsto
n u
po
n T
ham
es
Gre
enw
ich
Mer
ton
Bro
mle
y
Red
bri
dge
Hill
ingd
on
Ho
un
slo
w
Har
row
Cro
ydo
n
Ric
hm
on
d u
po
n T
ham
es
Cit
y o
f Lo
nd
on
KS3 Amount per pupil £ (London Boroughs)
KS3 Amount per pupil £
17 | 46
6. DEPRIVATION a. Funding through Deprivation
Overall in Hounslow we allocate a low proportion of funding through the deprivation factors FSM and IDACI. Due to changes in the IDACI dataset and proposed implementation of the new national funding formula at this time it is not advised to change the funding rates but instead review these again once details of the new national funding formula are known.
Overall Hounslow has an above average funding allocated through secondary funding rate nationally but when compared across London and its statistical neighbours it is one of the highest and considered as an outlier.
The following factors stood out as outliers when compared across the board and thus become the main focus area when options were being discussed with the task and finish group;
AWPU
EAL
Prior Attainment
Appendix 3 provides detail analysis by local authority against the factors listed above.
10. AWPU OPTIONS
1. General As approved by Schools Forum in Autumn 2015, the AWPU cut of £50 has been reversed for 2017/18 which releases £1.1m back into the schools block but increase the pressure across high needs. Due to funding pressure of circa £3m it is proposed that the £50 cut remains.
2 Primary AWPU
The Task and Finish Group did not identify this as factor as one to be considered but in order to take a full review of all AWPU factors the primary AWPU factor has also been reviewed. As outlined in section 7.1 the Primary AWPU is at the top end when compared across the board and especially against London boroughs. It is therefore proposed that an additional £50 is cut from Primary AWPU which will bring the rate down to £3,238.46 and estimated to release £0.8m (net of any MFG impact) to be used against pressures within the School Funding Formula as a result of changes in data such as FSM, IDACI etc…. Upon funding these pressures and surplus funds should be released to fund pressures across High Needs.
3 KS3 and KS4 AWPU
Hounslow has one of the highest funded Key Stage 4 factors when compared both nationally and across London. Whilst Key Stage 3 is one of the lowest funded factors across London.
In agreement with the group officers looked at varying the Hounslow rate in line with following averages;
24 | 46
KS3 KS4 Funding
Current Rate plus £50 £3,938.31 £5,441.04 £58,927,947
National Average Change £231.16 -£758.16 -£1,327,770.51
Revised Rate £4,169.47 £4,682.88 £57,600,176.32
London Average Change £810.07 -£292.76 £4,819,388.18
Revised Rate £4,748.38 £5,148.28 £63,747,335.01
West London Average
Change £358.87 -£412.34 £628,715.44
Revised Rate £4,297.18 £5,028.70 £59,556,662.27
Statistical Neighbours Average
Change £243.48 -£615.18 -£941,553.43
Revised Rate £4,181.79 £4,825.86 £57,986,393.40
It is recommended to Schools Forum to implement rate changes which reflect the average across our closest statistical neighbours (including Ealing and Hillingdon), as this will provide a fairer rationale than allocating using National or London averages which are distorted by the high cost areas i.e. inner London boroughs. This will release £0.94m of the DSG to be used to fund pressures initially within the school block i.e. business rates and minimum funding guarantee with any remaining surplus being used to fund pressure across High Needs.
4 Additional £50 Cut against all The other option to consider is to cut all AWPU by a further £50 in 2017/18 which will release £1.2m.
5 EAL OPTIONS
Hounslow EAL funding rate has been an outlier for a number of years, with primary rate being the lowest whilst secondary being one of the highest. This is another factor which EFA have identified as an outlier for Hounslow. The reasons for the funding rates have been due to historic reasons and since setting these rates they have not been reviewed.
In agreement with the group, officers looked at following options;
Primary Secondary Funding
Current Rate £310.76 £1,767.40 £4,309,900
National Average Change £231.16 -£752.34 £578,370.77
Revised Rate £541.92 £1,015.06 £4,888,270.88
London Average Change £208.74 -£447.11 £1,290,296.26
Revised Rate £519.50 £1,320.29 £5,600,196.37
West London Average Change £140.11 -£364.18 £1,332,302.80
Revised Rate £450.87 £1,403.22 £5,642,202.91
Change £140.11 -£364.18 £775,463.38
25 | 46
Statistical Neighbours Average
Revised Rate £450.87 £1,403.22 £5,085,363.48
It is recommended to Schools Forum to implement rate changes which reflect the average across our closest statistical neighbours (including Ealing and Hillingdon), as this will provide a fairer rationale than allocating using London average as this includes high cost areas i.e. inner London boroughs. The change in funding factors will result in an additional funding of £0.78m being allocated through EAL that will need to be funded from the savings identified through this review.
6 PRIOR ATTAINMENT OPTIONS
Hounslow has one of the highest funding rates for both primary and secondary schools relating to prior attainment and has been flagged up by DfE as an area for the Council to review with Schools Forum.
It is recognised that this factor currently delivers a significant amount of funding across all schools. This factor mainly drives the SEN non-statemented funding through the current formula and thus any changes proposed will need to be carefully considered with regards to how the funding for SEN non-statemented is managed. Following discussion with the group the funding rate options investigated to look at setting rates at local and national average. Due to these factor being outliers another a funding rate option was considering by using the primary to secondary ratio of 1:1.26.
Primary Secondary Funding
Current Rate £1,949.25 £2,450.00 £13,386,909
National Average Change -£1,086.50 -£1,363.38 -£2,991,601.55
Revised Rate £862.75 £1,086.62 £10,395,307.79
London Average Change -£961.64 -£1,055.14 -£2,897,445.99
Revised Rate £987.61 £1,394.86 £10,489,463.35
West London Average
Change -£684.82 -£703.21 -£2,897,445.99
Revised Rate £1,264.43 £1,746.79 £10,489,463.35
Statistical Neighbours Average
Change -£961.64 -£1,055.14 -£2,897,445.99
Revised Rate £987.61 £1,394.86 £10,489,463.35
Primary to Secondary ratio 1:26
Change -£961.64 -£1,260.53 -£2,947,606.93
Revised Rate £987.61 £1,189.47 £10,439,302.41
Due to the current rates being at the top-end when compared with other local authorities both nationally and across London, this will result on a major reduction of funding thus triggering Minimum Funding Guarantee (MFG); and as such needs to be reviewed carefully. In addition DfE operational guidance allows in exceptional circumstances Councils to set-up a targeted funding allocation for schools disproportionality affected by significant number of statemented pupils (excluding SEN centres).
26 | 46
Thus as a recommendation it is proposed that the DfE guidance is considered if prior attainment funding rates are reduced.
P a g e 27 | 46
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1: 2017/18 SCHOOL BLOCK FUNDING FACTORS (5-15 YEAR OLDS)
P a g e 28 | 46
Factor Further Information
1. Basic entitlement A compulsory factor that assigns funding on the basis of individual pupils, with the number of pupils for each school or academy based on the October pupil census.
Funding allocated according to an age-weighted pupil unit (AWPU). A single rate for primary age pupils, which must be at least £2,000. There may be different rates for key stage 3 and key stage 4, with a minimum of £3,000 for each. Local authorities may choose to increase the pupil number count where schools had previously had higher reception pupil numbers in January 2016 than in the October 2015 census.
2. Deprivation A compulsory factor
Local authorities may choose to use free school meals and/or the income deprivation affecting children index (IDACI). Free meals can be measured either at the previous October census or “ever 6”, which reflects pupils entitled to free meals at any time in the last 6 years, but not both. The IDACI measure uses 6 bands and different values can be attached to each band. Different unit values can be used for primary and secondary. IDACI bands to return them to a similar size to previous years. The draft 2017 to 2018 APT will include data showing pupils matched to the new IDACI bands. These can be found at appendix 2.
3. Prior attainment
An optional factor (although it is used by almost all local authorities). It acts as a proxy indicator for low level, high incidence special educational needs.
May be applied for primary pupils identified as not achieving the expected level of development within the early years foundation stage profile (EYFSP) and for secondary pupils not reaching the expected standard in KS2 at either English or maths. The EYFSP changed in 2013, so a weighting may be used to ensure that funding delivered through the primary prior attainment factor is not disproportionately affected by the year groups (years 1 to 4) assessed under the new framework. For pupils assessed using the old profile (years 5 and 6), local authorities will continue to be able to choose between two EYFSP scores, targeting funding to either all pupils who achieved fewer than 78 points; or all pupils who achieved fewer than 73 points on the EYFSP. For pupils assessed at KS2 up to 2011, eligible pupils are those who did not reach level 4 in either the English or Maths elements.
4. Prior attainment
An optional factor (although it is used by almost all local authorities). It acts as a proxy indicator for low level, high incidence special educational needs.
For pupils assessed from 2011, eligible pupils are those who did not reach level 4 in any of the reading test, teacher assessed writing, or Maths. This reflects the new KS2 English assessment methodology which was introduced in 2012, to include separately a reading test and teacher assessed writing. The 2016 KS2 assessments are the first which assess the new, more challenging national curriculum. At a national level, a higher number of the year 7 cohort in financial year 2017 to 2018 will be identified as having low prior attainment. We intend to use a national weighting to ensure that this cohort does not have disproportionate influence within the overall total. The weighting will be confirmed in advance of finalising 2017 to 2018 allocations and included in the APT in December, having taken into account the latest data about year 7 pupils in the October census. Local authorities will not be able to change the weighting, but would be able to adjust their secondary low prior attainment unit value as usual.
APPENDIX 1: 2017/18 SCHOOL BLOCK FUNDING FACTORS (5-15 YEAR OLDS)
29 | 46
Factor Further Information
This will enable local authorities in most cases to maintain their low prior attainment factor at previous levels without significant turbulence. Low prior attainment funding will be allocated to all pupils identified as not reaching the expected standard at the previous phase, regardless of their year group. It does not only apply to those pupils in their first year of schooling. As with current funding arrangements, pupils who have not undertaken the assessment are given the average LPA score of their year group, so are taken into account when calculating a school’s LPA average.
5. Looked-after
children
An optional factor
A single unit value may be applied for any child who has been looked after for one day or more as recorded on the LA SSDA903 return at 31 March 2016. This data is mapped to schools using the January school census, enabling identification of the number of looked-after children in each school or academy.
6. English as an
additional language
(EAL)
An optional factor
EAL pupils may attract funding for up to 3 years after they enter the statutory school system. Local authorities can choose to use indicators based on one, two or three years and there can be separate unit values for primary and secondary.
7. Pupil mobility
An optional factor
This measure counts pupils who entered a school during the last three academic years, but did not start in August or September (or January for reception pupils). There is a 10% threshold and funding is allocated based on the proportion above the threshold – so if a school has 12% mobility, then 2% of pupils would attract funding.
Proportion allocated through pupil-led factors.
Local authorities must allocate at least 80% of the delegated schools block funding through pupil-led factors (the factors in lines 1-6 above, and London fringe uplift where relevant).
8. Sparsity
An optional factor
Schools that are eligible for sparsity funding must meet two criteria: first, they are located in areas where pupils would have to travel a significant distance to an alternative should the school close, and second, they are small schools. For the pupils for whom the school is their closest compatible school, the factor measures the distance (as the crow flies) from their home to their second nearest compatible school and the mean distance for all pupils is then calculated. Since the pupil population changes each year, it is possible for a school to be eligible for sparsity funding in one year but not in the next. A school may attract sparsity funding if it is:
primary and has on average fewer than 21.4 pupils per year group and the average distance is at least 2 miles;
secondary and has on average fewer than 120 pupils per year group and the average distance is at least 3 miles;
middle and has on average fewer than 69.2 pupils per year group and the average distance is at least 2 miles;
APPENDIX 1: 2017/18 SCHOOL BLOCK FUNDING FACTORS (5-15 YEAR OLDS)
30 | 46
Factor Further Information
all-through and has on average fewer than 62.5 pupils per year group and the average distance is at least 2 miles.
Pupil numbers include Years R to 11 only, for example excluding nursery and 6th Form pupils. Local authorities can reduce the pupil numbers and increase the distance criteria. The maximum value for the sparsity factor is £100,000 (including the London fringe uplift), which can be applied as a taper or as a lump sum. If a taper methodology is used, a school will attract sparsity funding in inverse proportion to its average year group size, for example, a primary school with an average year group size of 21.4 pupils will not attract any sparsity funding. Different values and methodologies can be used for the primary, middle, all-through and secondary phases. Examples are provided below showing whether a school would receive sparsity funding and how much funding it would receive. These examples assume that the year group size and distance thresholds are as set out by EFA, although local authorities can decrease the size and increase the distance thresholds if they wish:
school A is an infant school with 120 pupils and a sparsity distance of 2.5 miles. The school provides for 3 year groups. The average year group size is (120 / 3) 40, which is too high to meet the sparsity size criterion. School A is not eligible for sparsity funding.
school B is a primary school with 120 pupils and a sparsity distance of 2.2 miles. The school provides for 7 year groups. The average year group size is (120 / 7) 17.14, which meets the sparsity size criterion and the distance is greater than the primary distance threshold. School B is eligible for sparsity funding. If the sparsity value is £100,000, applied on a taper methodology, the school will receive £20,000 ((21.4 – 17.14) / 21.4) x 100,000 (allowing for rounding).
Local authorities can make an application to EFA to include an exceptional factor of up to £50,000 for very small sparse secondary schools, which would otherwise be unable to attract sufficient funding to remain viable. Local authorities can only apply for an exceptional factor where schools have;
pupils in years 10 and 11
350 pupils or fewer
a sparsity distance of 5 miles or more The sparsity distance for each school has been calculated as crow flies distances. Local authorities are able to make exceptional applications for schools not meeting the distance criterion where they have significantly higher mileage if road distances had been used instead of as the crow flies.
APPENDIX 1: 2017/18 SCHOOL BLOCK FUNDING FACTORS (5-15 YEAR OLDS)
31 | 46
Factor Further Information
Where approval was given in 2016 to 2017 to use an exceptional factor for very small sparse schools or to vary the road distance for individual schools, that approval can carry forward to 2017 to 2018, provided that the latest pupil data has not changed significantly. Sparsity distances will be produced for all schools in the schools block dataset and these distances will be made available to each authority. If a school opens after the sparsity distances have been calculated then the authority can make an exceptional application for the school. The process is the same for schools that are affected by neighbouring schools closing. We will not recalculate the figures during the year in these situations, as it should be possible for an estimate to be made for individual schools. An existing school, qualifying for sparsity funding, would not lose the funding in year if a new school opened nearby. Exceptional applications should be agreed with the relevant schools forum, and submitted to the EFA for consideration.
9. Lump sum
An optional factor (although it has been used by all local authorities)
Local authorities can set different lump sums for primary and secondary (middle schools receive a weighted average based on the number of year groups in each phase). The maximum lump sum is £175,000, including London fringe uplift and the lump sum may be different for primary and secondary schools. All-through schools will receive the secondary lump sum value and middle schools will receive an average lump sum value based on the number of primary and secondary year groups in the school. A worked example is shown below;
School phase Amount
The primary lump sum is: £100,000
The secondary lump sum is: £120,000
The middle school lump sum is:
3 year groups (Y4-Y6) at primary rate (3/5 x £100,000)
£60,000
2 year groups (Y7-Y8) at secondary rate (2/5 x £120,000)
£48,000
Lump sum for middle school is: £108,000
Where schools have amalgamated
during the financial year 2016 to
2017, or on 1 April 2017, they will retain the equivalent of 85% of two lump sums for the financial year 2017 to 2018 ie assuming a lump sum of £100,000, the additional payment would be £70,000 ((100,000 x 2) x 85% - 100,000). Local authorities can apply to the EFA to reduce this in exceptional circumstances. Where schools amalgamate after 1 April 2017, the new school will receive funding equivalent to the formula funding of the closing schools added together for the appropriate proportion of the year. This means that they receive the combined lump sum for the remainder of the year and 85% in the following year, as outlined above. Local authorities may apply to provide a second year of protection. Applications must specify the level of protection sought, although in
APPENDIX 1: 2017/18 SCHOOL BLOCK FUNDING FACTORS (5-15 YEAR OLDS)
32 | 46
Factor Further Information
general we would not expect the additional protection to exceed 70% of the combined lump sums. Applications will be considered on a case by case basis.
10. Split sites
An optional factor
The purpose of this factor is to support schools which have unavoidable extra costs because the school buildings are on separate sites. Allocations must be based on objective criteria, both for the definition of a split site and for how much is paid.
11. Rates
An optional factor (although it issued by all local authorities)
These must be funded at the authority’s estimate of the actual cost. Adjustments to rates may be made during the financial year but outside of the funding formula. For example, an additional allocation could be made to a school (for example, from balances brought forward). This should be reflected in the Section 251 outturn statement and in each school’s accounts. The effect on the school would be zero since any rates adjustment will be offset by a change in the cost of the rates.
12. Private Finance
Initiative (PFI)
contracts
An optional factor
The purpose of this factor is to support schools which have unavoidable extra premises costs because they are a PFI school and/or to cover situations where the PFI “affordability gap” is delegated and paid back to the local authority.
13. London fringe
An optional factor, but only for the five local authorities to which it applies (Buckinghamshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Kent and West Sussex)
The purpose of this factor is to support schools which have to pay higher teacher salaries because they are in the London fringe area, and where only part of the authority is in this area. It is applied as a multiplier of 1.0156 to the relevant factors.
14. Exceptional premises factors
Local authorities can apply to EFA to use exceptional factors relating to premises. The most frequently approved factors are for rents and for joint-use sports facilities
The exceptional factors must relate to premises costs and applications should only be submitted where the value of the factor is more than 1% of a school’s budget and applies to fewer than 5% of the schools in the authority’s area. Any factors which were used in 2016 to 2017 can automatically be used for pre-existing and newly-qualifying schools in 2017 to 2018, provided that the qualification criteria are still met.
Source: Schools Revenue Funding 2017 to 2018 Operational guide
APPENDIX 2: NEW IDACI BANDS FOR 2017 TO 2018
P a g e 33 | 46
The income deprivation affecting children Index (IDACI) dataset is updated every five years by the Department for Communities and Local Government. The most recent update to the dataset, which took effect in local authorities’ 2016 to 2017 schools block dataset in December 2015, showed a markedly different distribution to the previous 2010 dataset. We recognise that the 2015 data update created unexpected and unhelpful turbulence in budgets, towards the latter stages of the local formula-setting process. We have considered the concerns raised by local authorities and views expressed through the first stage national funding formula consultation, and have decided to update the IDACI banding methodology to return the IDACI bands return to a roughly similar size (in terms of the proportion of pupils in each band) as in 2015 to 2016. The revised bands are named “A” to “G”; with the most deprived neighbourhoods being captured by band “A” (previously bands 6 and 5). For future data updates, we will set out plans for managing the change in data by adjusting the band boundaries more promptly. In the draft APT to be issued to local authorities shortly, schools’ IDACI data will be consistent with the new IDACI band definitions. In the final 2017 to 2018 APT issued in December, local authorities will receive October 2016 census data matched to the new IDACI bands. The following table shows the proportion of pupils in each IDACI band in the 2015 to 2016 schools block dataset (column V) and the 2016 to 2017 schools block dataset (column W). Column Z sets out the 2016 to 2017 dataset mapped onto the new IDACI bands.
Table 8: Proportion of pupils in each IDACI band in the 2015 to 2016 and 2016 to 2017 schools block dataset mapped on to
new bands
The data in this table has been produced by taking the postcodes of each pupil sourced from the schools census in October, and matching them to an IDACI score, and hence IDACI band. The total number of pupils mapped onto each band is then calculated, and proportions calculated. The data sources are as follows:
APPENDIX 2: NEW IDACI BANDS FOR 2017 TO 2018
34 | 46
Table 9 IDACI bandings data sources
Local authorities will wish to review the impact of the new band definitions when they receive their forthcoming draft 2017 to 2018 APT, as some schools may see shifts compared to the data authorities used to set their 2016 to 2017 budgets. We expect there to be much less turbulence when authorities receive their final APTs at the end of the year.
Source: Schools Revenue Funding 2017 to 2018 Operational guide