Tag Archives: Spending Review

Schools and the Spending Review

Posted on by
Reply

The budget yesterday revealed that the DfE’s budget for education won’t be able to escape the government’s need for savings Budget 2026: everything schools need to know | Tes The current projections are for an average 2% fall from 2028-29 according to the tes article. As I mentioned in yesterday’s blog post, capital spending will also not be immune from cuts. This is despite the dire state of many school buildings.

What follows are my own views on future spending, not those of any political Party, and certainly not those of the Liberal Democrats, of which Party I remain a member. I offer then up for debate, at a time of crisis in the national finances.

Firstly, the school estate. One obvious way to improve the quality of the school estate is to use the reality of falling rolls to remove some of the worst schools from the estate. In the past, when there was a coherent system for forward planning for schooling, based around local authorities responsible for their ‘place’, such system could quickly have identified how to rationalise a system where capacity exceeded need.

This process wasn’t always easy, as the recent article about falling rolls in Haringey that I posted on researchgate showed. (PDF) Policy Process and Pressure Groups: Falling School Rolls in Haringey

‘Save of Schools’, is still a popular slogan for local politicians. I though this issue through in my one attempt at drama based around a primary school facing falling rolls ‘Heading Off’. Not great drama, but allows the issues around falling rolls to be discussed. Post | Feed | LinkedIn

In the present system of maintained schools, academies, foundation schools and the remaining voluntary aided and controlled schools, where is the forward planning taking place? Should the DfE appoint a commission charged with a review of the estate, and how it might be rationalised?

Such a commission might need to look beyond just the condition of the estate to also address the thorny question of the size of post-16 provision and any relationship between size, the range of curriculum on offer and the level of outcomes. It is easy to duck this challenge in a divided system where the ‘buck’ can be past to another group, whether politicians, MAT boards or regional directors at the DfE.  It is a measure of good government that it is prepared to make hard choices. I wrote  a blog about this issue earlier in the year. Are small sixth forms a good idea? | John Howson

Pupil teacher ratios have been under pressure for some time. On a per pupil funding model, retaining the present funding model could save the government considerable amount of cash as school rolls fall. However, at the school level, fewer pupils make it hard to fund salary increases, where funding is calculated on an ‘average’ overall salary bill.

As I have pointed out before, schools with an above average salary bill, and falling rolls face reals funding issues. MATs can ‘vire’ between their schools, usually through increasing the overhead charge on each school and rebating to help schools with deficits: but is this the right approach?

Rationalising the use of funds for schooling will inevitably collide with the principle of parental choice if closing a popular school is the most sensible way forward. So be it. After all, the original concept of ‘parental choice’ in Section 6 of the 1980 Education Act did contain the get out clause of ‘prejudicial to the efficient use of resources’. Parental choice was never an absolute right.

In a recent post, I asked whether breakfast clubs were meeting their stated aims or whether they were providing free childcare to working families? Might a small charge for those pupils not on free school meals raise some income to help defray the cost to the Exchequer? Not a popular move, but perhaps employers might be willing to help with a tax break. Are Breakfast clubs just a new form of extended school day? | John Howson

Will falling rolls also save money  on SEND? My recent post about the London boroughs and the trends in requests for EHCPs does suggest that the number of requests should reduce with falling rolls even without any assessment of current approaches to funding. This might be a considerable saving, especially if some of the burden  from the former High Needs block  placed on schools. EHCP requests and falling rolls | John Howson

However, against all these savings there are areas where expenditure should, in my view, be increased. I have campaigned for 16-18 travel to education to be free across the country, and not just in urban areas. This is now one for mayors and their counterparts in strategic authorities to take on board. Extend education free travel to 16-18 year olds | John Howson

Then there are the grants not uprated for inflation since 2014. The grant for music is the one best known to me at present, bit there are no doubt still other grants that need a review and updating.

I was also disappointed to see no mention of youth services in the budget. Despite falling rolls, this is an area where more spending is needed.

Finally, I would restore the training grant to all trainee teachers. It is both wrong to pay some trainees and not others and to retain the historical fiction behind tuition fees to place trainee teachers in a different category to trainee army officers and trainee civil servants. Why aren’t all trainee teachers paid? | John Howson

I will also end by reminding readers that the millions the DfE has spent on a teacher vacancy service could have been saved with a bit of commonsense. The present service isn’t free to schools with the administrative costs not being large but being unnecessary. I closed down TeachVac when I took on the role of Cabinet member in Oxfordshire in 2023, but a service that costs nothing to the DfE should still be possible.

The Geddes Axe remained long in the memory of public sector workers, but  I hope that better targeted and rational cuts rather than an across-the-board swipe at a sector will be the order of the day over the remainder of this parliament.

Cut in spending on schools seem likely both to save the wider economy, and to support defence spending for the next war. If Russia wanted to send a message to Europe as a whole, attacking an offshore island that has strongly supported Ukraine is sadly no longer an unthinkable thought.

The Spending Review and savings

Posted on by
Reply

Next week will set the direction for government spending over the rest of this parliament. Although education is a ‘protected’ department that may not mean as much now as it did last year at the time of the general election.

Changes in the geopolitical situation, and an economy where the green shoots are barely peeking through the surface, and could be killed off by the equivalent of one night of freezing temperatures doesn’t bode well for the education sector. This is especially the case when set against falling school rolls and the crisis in the higher education sector. The skills sector might be the one bright spot, and it wouldn’t surprise me if that is where most of the investment will be directed.

The present government is lucky in that the weakening job market means recruiting new teachers will be easier, and the pressure for pay rises might also abate if the choice is more pay for some and redundancies for others. Unions would, in my view, be wise to tackle conditions of service rather than majoring on pay rises and the risk of confrontation with a government that has been generous so far, but might not want to see the limits of that generosity tested.

So, might there be saving to be made?

If there are school closures, will this allow the most expensive and inefficient buildings to be removed from the estate. Why spend time taking out asbestos, if you can just close the school? How would such a policy be managed? Frankly, I have no idea, but to let market forces prevail might have an unnecessary cost attached. So parental choice or rational use of buildings?

And then there is the muddle of academies and the maintained sector.

I looked at the accounts for the period up to August last summer for the 30 single academies and Multi Academy Trusts with schools in one local authority area. The total pay bill for their single highest paid employee came to around £4 million pounds. Now, take out of that total the Trusts where the headteacher is the single highest paid employee, and the total might be around £2 million. Cut this to just five trusts: one each for the two main Christian Churches (CofE and RC) and one each for other primary, secondary and special schools and what might be the savings?

Then there is the audit, legal and professional fees. I doubt whether the private sector charges the same rate as local authorities do to maintained schools. Perhaps academies should be required to employ local authority services, if the quote is lower than that from the private sector?

SEND is the other area where spending needs reviewing. For many, the cost of an EHCP started early in the primary sector should be the first point of focus. Are there differences between schools in different locations, and if so, then why? Can an early diagnosis save costs.

What of Education Other than at School packages? How much are they costing the system, and why are they necessary in such a growing number of cases?

With 150 plus local authorities, how much might be saved from present budgets in order to support investment in teaching and learning in the new world created by the latest technological revolution?

Suggestions on Savings ahead of the Spending Review

Posted on by
Reply

How might the Chancellor save money on education? Apart that is from the possible pay freeze? Over the years this blog has explored a number of different possibilities for savings. Two obvious ones are in the teacher preparation market and the cost of advertising vacancies.

The DfE uses the Teacher Supply Model to identify how many places to fund for teacher preparation courses going forward. Each year, it seems to overfund the number of places in subjects such as history and physical education, so that there are always trainees looking for teaching posts at the end of the year. Should the modelling also take into account data about vacancies to match against that of the other inputs, such as pupil numbers and the proxies for vacancies currently used in the model? Possibly several millions could be saved in fees paid to universities.

The other saving championed regularly by this blog, albeit with a degree of self-interest, is the spending on recruitment advertising by schools. The DfE has made an attempt to reduce this expenditure, but it has been half-hearted at best, and lacking in understanding of how the market operates. In the spring I offered the DfE my help in making their site the ‘go to’ place for teachers seeking jobs, but was rebuffed. Fair enough, but it is worth reading my recent post of the £3 a vacancy cost for recruitment.

Supply teaching is another expensive cost to many schools, especially this year with teachers either self-isolating or off sick with covid-19. Could bringing this spending back ‘in house’ save money by removing the profit element from the cost? Worth a look given that perhaps there will be a million supply cover days this term across the country, if the estimate from one authority that I have seen is grossed up.

Procurement in general is a big area for savings, but like these other savings it challenges the assumption that market-based capitalism will regulate prices. That might be true if schools shopped around, but they don’t, and monopolistic suppliers, whether local or national, have few incentives to reduce prices and introduce new technological solutions that can cut costs for schools.

The whole area of leadership costs must be looked at. How many MAT CEOs do we need across the country? How much more does the system cost to manage than 20 years ago, and is any extra value for money as a result? May be the extra high paid jobs are an incentive for more teachers to stay in the system, rather than leave or better paid jobs elsewhere?

School need more funds, and it is worth reflecting what might happen if effective savings are not made quickly? Some small schools will close, some pupils where parents cannot afford to support the school will possibly receive a worse education than they would have do if funding had been better, and teaching will still not be a career of choice, except in a recession. Even then, it needs to be a global recession, as teachers can now find work anywhere around the world.