Download
king edward vi camp hill school for boys n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
KING EDWARD VI CAMP HILL SCHOOL FOR BOYS PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
KING EDWARD VI CAMP HILL SCHOOL FOR BOYS

KING EDWARD VI CAMP HILL SCHOOL FOR BOYS

204 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

KING EDWARD VI CAMP HILL SCHOOL FOR BOYS

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. KING EDWARD VI CAMP HILL SCHOOL FOR BOYS A UNIQUE POSITION – FACING THE PERFECT STORM OF MULTIPLE AND SIMULTANEOUS CUTS TO FUNDING’

  2. This is not news – it has been predicted ! • Change of Government: - loss of (three) specialism funding (£240 000 per year) - implementation of a new ‘National Funding Formula’ • Impact of the financial crisis on the economy – no increases to education budget. • A time of ‘austerity headships’ – an expectation of maintaining/improving standards with lower resources levels.

  3. Camp Hill Boys – Financial PlanIncome Assumptions Grant • Main <16 Funding. Baseline rate from 2013/14 continue to reduce by 1.5% each year. Lump Sum is maintained. Minimum Funding Guarantee therefore falls by 40% from 2013/14 to 2017/18. • Education Services Grant - £150 per pupil (2013/14) reducing to £130 from 2015/16. • Over 16 Total Programme Funding remains at 2013/14 levels throughout Plan. • Over 16 - Transitional Protection ends in 2014/15 • Over 16 – Formula Protection Funding remains the same for 3 years commencing 2013/14. Assumed halved in 2016/17 and nil in 2017/18. Other Income • Frozen at 2013/14 levels

  4. Camp Hill Boys – Financial PlanCost Assumptions Staffing Costs • Staffing pay increases by 1% pa • Staff progress in accordance with existing pay policy • Teachers Pension 14.1%. Support Staff 18.89% • National Insurance 9%, 12% from 2016/17 Non –staffing Costs • Insurance, Utilities and professional services increase by RPI from 2013/14. • All other costs frozen at 2013/14 levels.

  5. Camp Hill Response (2009-2013) • Slim down the curriculum (A Level PE/ remove Spanish as a third language option Years 8-11) • Take opportunity to reduce ‘overstaffing’ when people leave (e.g. In Art, MFL and Mathematics) • Increase Income – expand the Sixth Form • Convert to Academy Status - LACSEG (now called Education Services Grant – ESG) - £239k down to £108k – still better than nothing, would be in an even worse position now !)

  6. What cuts are taking place ? - 1 • 2 sets of unrelated cuts – impact affects CHB because of its small size (3 Form Entry – 93 in total), comparative size of Sixth Form and the loss of three specialisms. • Sixth Form cuts to funding – we are in the third of five years – potential of a ‘fiscal cliff’ in 2015/16 • Big impact caused by Birmingham’s interpretation of the National Funding Formula (37 to 12 criteria), emphasis on IDACI 4,5 and 6, Ever6 FSM and LPA (Low Prior Attainment). • Has been a transfer to primary from secondary (growth of student population) and their decision to redistribute former specialism money.

  7. What cuts are taking place ? - 2 • Cut of A Level Science Funding from 1.2 weighting to 1 (same as all other subjects) – a significant impact in a school where 74% of all post-16 entries are in Maths and Science. • Inability of Grammar Schools to recruit Pupil Premium income. • CHB 15% cut 11-16 (£360 000) – largest of any secondary school in Birmingham • Issue – MFG 1.5% only guaranteed up to 2015 – election etc. Instability affecting strategic planning and decision making. • Need to plan to lose £580 000 of income from 2015.

  8. Birmingham Rate: £4,278 Birmingham Rate: £4,278

  9. Birmingham Percentage: 69.8%

  10. Possible Solutions: A Cut Costs: • curriculum – overstaffed departments (Biology, Chemistry, English, Mathematics) – could save 2 FTE • Cut Staffing – (cut A level teaching in Art, Music/Computing, French, German, Religious Studies and Design Technology) – boys would leave with further loss of income – could save 2.6 FTE (they are all single group A Level Subjects) • Cut specialism/enrichment activities • Cut extra-curricular additional payments • Cut TLRs – Housemaster, Sport, AHOY etc • Cut ICT and Capitation • Cut double staffing in PE and Design Technology and reduce staffing of games These would still not be enough ! B Joint King Edward VI Camp Hill School C Joint King Edward VI Camp Hill Sixth Form (CHG issues with subjects) D Expand to four form entry – preferred

  11. Eventual rate of funding is approximately £4000 per student.

  12. Expansion: • Aim – preserve the curriculum and ethos of the school • Can’t afford to increase staffing ! • Future issues – staff costs, inflation, fuel, utility costs, costs of maintaining old building and existing ICT systems (Teaching and Learning) • Must also make reductions in costs – joint teaching with CHG • Cut staffing when people leave/lower staff costs

  13. Issues 1: • Need to build - when, where, what, how afford (joint building with CHG ?) • Permission of KE Foundation (use of capital grants) • Consultation with Admissions Authority to change Admissions Policy but not to ‘increase intake over PAN’). • No requirement to seek changes to the ‘Academy Funding Agreement’ – pupil numbers are indicative. • Successful and oversubscribed schools allowed to expand as a result of changes to Admissions Legislation by the Government. • Uncertainty of timing of future cuts – cliff, convex or steady decline • Impact of delays – see table

  14. Issues 2: • Need five more form teachers • Hall – Full School Assemblies • Dining Hall • House Assembly spaces • Toilets, Rooms and lockers • Available space for specialist rooms (Art, DT, Music and Science) – hence need to cut 9 to 8 hours teaching in Sixth Form to free up rooms. • Compulsory Games ? Link to General Studies/Enrichment post 16 funding • House- percentage involvement will fall • Extra-Curricular and /clubs – percentage involvement falls (key part of school’s ethos and Year 7 message) • Impact of cutting Year 10 and 11 to forms of 31 on results in English, Maths and Science

  15. Conclusion: • If we don’t expand we still can’t meet cuts • In not doing so we risk creating school that we can’t market (to pupils, parents and staff !) – impact on curriculum and extra-curricular programme. • If we don’t expand we face a possible significant reduction in demand/quality of intake, loss of teaching and support staff as cuts are enforced to meet demands of reduction in income/increase in expenditure. • As a result of these dual set of cuts, three form entry grammar schools in Birmingham are not viable. • Even if we do expand, the financial viability of the school is not assured if we seek to maintain the quality and breadth of our educational provision. • We don’t control all expenditure e.g. Staff Pay Rises, Non-Teaching Staff Pension Deficits, Employer Pension and National Insurance Contribution Levels etc.