Schools Forum Meeting of Wednesday 6 February 2007 Agenda Item 4 Annex B
Schools Forum Formula Funding Sub Group Meeting of Friday 11 January 2008 Agenda Item 2
Enhanced Provision in Mainstream Schools
1.0Background
1.1Essex Local Authority has a number of resourced provisions attached to mainstream settings to support a pre-determined number of pupils with a defined category of need.
1.2The funding arrangements to support these provisions have remained largely unchanged for a period of 15 years whereas the organisation and service provided has changed significantly to meet a variety of national and local agendas, most noticeably the inclusion agenda.
1.3On the whole pupils attending enhanced provision attached to mainstream schools receive a combination of intensive support in small groups delivered by specialist staff but also enjoy an enhanced mainstream experience delivered throughout the school with their peers, again supported by specialist staff.
1.4The original funding and indeed current funding model is based very much on a unit approach to the delivery of enhanced provision, with resources being provided to support pupils in smaller groups but not really supporting the inclusion agenda. In order to provide specialist staff to support enhanced provisionfor pupils throughout the school and remain within budget, some schools have made the decision to reduce the amount of specialist teaching. Additionally schools have for some time been suggesting that the main school budget has been subsidising the enhanced provision because the budget provided does not allow schools to retain the required number of specialist teachers and give the pupils a full mainstream experience as required by the Local Authority.
1.5The recommendations made in this paper will allow schools to do this and create a sound funding base for enhanced provisions for the up-coming three year funding cycle.
2.0Staffing Model
2.1For each type of provision a staffing model has been drawn up and costed on a standard set of assumptions. Details of and reasons for those assumptions are listed below. Details of all pupil staff ratios are included in appendix A. Details of assumptions about salary levels are included in appendix B.
2.2Each provision will be funded for and will be expected to employ a Teacher in Charge with clear specific responsibilities relating to the enhanced provision, including lead on training and development, inclusion, monitoring and pupil progress and will represent the enhanced provision at management forums.
2.3Each provision will have a specific pupil: teacher ratio, this ratio will be maintained at the current level as it is recognised that high quality specialist teaching is an integral part of effective enhanced provision in mainstream schools.
2.4Each provision will have a specific pupil: learning support assistant ratio. Each enhanced provision will be resourced to employ one of their learning support assistants as a high level teaching assistant recognising the impact of workforce agreement and providing a degree of flexibility and progression/succession opportunities within the non-teaching staff structure. For enhanced provisions with nursery aged pupils the allocation may well be spent on employing a nursery nurse.
2.5To recognise the additional staffing requirements associated with the inclusion agenda the pupil: learning support assistant support ratios have been halved and the revised model ensures that each secondary school has a minimum of one learning support assistant per year group excluding key stage 5. This increase in learning support assistant time should also assist schools in supporting therapy programmes. Over time this allowance will reduce exceptionally funded pupils in enhanced provision, where historically additional resources over and above the enhanced provision place have been provided to support pupils who need additional Learning Support Assistant time in some classes due to additional needs such as medical or behaviour.
2.6Each enhanced provision for hearing impaired pupils has been given an allowance for communication support time.
2.7Recognising that very few enhanced provisions employ specific midday assistants an allowance of one specialist assistant per establishment regardless of size has been made.
2.8Whilst administrative support for pupils with special educational needs is generally expected to be resourced from the key stage funding a small allowance to recognise the additional costs associated with enhanced provision pupils as opposed to mainstream statements has been made.
2.9A specific allowance per pupil for resources has been identified.
2.10A specific amount per full time equivalent member of staff for training over and above what they would normally receive from the schools training budget and School Development Grant has been made to recognise the additional cost of some specialist courses.
2.11Applying the model for each type of provision generates a total budget for each enhanced provision and an average pupil cost for each type of provision. Taking the average of the total average pupil cost for each type of provision generates an indicative per pupil sum for each category of enhanced provision; these sums are detailed in appendix C.
3.0Funding Arrangements
3.1Enhanced provision in mainstream school is currently funded largely on a predetermined number of places and includes a small per capita sum for each pupil on roll as at PLASC; there is also a small lump sum (currently £5,756).The rational for such a sum is unclear and consideration should be given to it’s removal from the formula to simplify the formula even further. The final component to the funding formula is London Weighting, which would remain where appropriate.
3.2The proposal is to simplify the formula by removing the lump sum element and enhancing the per place value to reflect the new structure it is proposed to support.
3.3A component part of the review of enhanced provision has been the rationalisation of place numbers; this exercise has generated resources that will largely fund the proposals. It is anticipated that the additional cost will be saved by reductions in the amount spent on exceptionally funded placements and a stabilisation of expenditure from the Speech and Language Therapy budget. It is expected that these proposals will be self financing during the upcoming three year funding cycle.
- 1 -
Schools Forum Meeting of Wednesday 6 February 2007 Agenda Item 4 Annex B
Schools Forum Formula Funding Sub Group Meeting of Friday 11 January 2008 Agenda Item 2
Appendix A – Proposed staffing ratios
Primary / SecondaryStaff Category / HI / SLCN / LD / SLD / HI / SLCN / SpLD
Teacher / 6 / 10 / 12 / 15 / 6 / 5 / 8
HLTA / 1 per school
Communication Support / 1 Per school / 0 / 0 / 0 / 6 / 0 / 0
Learning Support / 3 / 5 / 6 / 1 / 3 / 3 / 4
Midday Assistants / 1 per school / 1 / 1 per school
Admin Support / 15 minutes per pupil per week
Resources / £500 / £100 / £100 / £400 / £500 / £100 / £100
Training / £200 / £200 / £200 / £200 / £200 / £200 / £200
Appendix B – Salary Assumptions
Staff Category / Scale / Point on Scale / On Costs / Hrs Per Wk / Weeks per YearTeacher in Charge / TEACHERSUPPER2 / TLR2 + 1SN / 20% / 37 / 52
Teacher / TEACHERSUPPER2 / +1 SN / 20% / 37 / 52
Communication Support / UNQUALIFIED6 / 20% / 37 / 52
HLTA / Band 3 / Middle / 20% / 25 / 45
Learning Support / Band 2 / Top / 20% / 25 / 45
Mid Day Assistants / Band 2 / Bottom / 20% / 6.25 / 45
Admin Support / Band 2 / Top / 20% / 0.25 / 45
Appendix C – Proposed Place Values by type 2008-9
Type / Place ValuePrimary / £
HI / 13,230
SLCN / 7,061
LD / 7,000
SLD / 17,206
Secondary / £
HI / 16,059
SLCN / 13,328
SPLD / 8,999
All figures are at 2006/7 prices, appendix C assumes the per pupil sum remains at 2006/7 value updated and the lump sum factor is removed
- 1 -