Writing a message to the next education secretary which has been publicised on his behalf by The Leaders Council, Andrew Clowes, headteacher of Hey with Zion Primary School in Oldham, Lancashire, questions how far school budgets can be expected to go with rising staff wages and higher energy costs.
It is going to be an interesting year in schools.
Now that the new prime minister is appointed, we shall likely soon after have a new secretary of state for education.
Perhaps we shall have a few. This time last year, Gavin Williamson was in post. After his departure we welcomed Nadhim Zahawi, then Michelle Donelan, next James Cleverly. Five within twelve months is a possibility.
This school year, my own school expects a visit from our friends at Ofsted; there have been rumblings about potential strikes across the public sector; there is little doubt that the “cost-of-living crisis” will affect the families of pretty much all of our children- some more than others; and I shall try to manage a school budget to minimise the impact of the energy price rises and underfunding of staff pay awards. There will be school staff too who are affected by the cost-of-living crisis: teachers, teaching assistants, office staff, site staff, midday supervisors or whoever.
For the children, we shall try as ever to present an environment which is wholesome, optimistic, and brimful of opportunities.
For families, there are specific things we do and shall continue to do to ensure we do not make their financial situation even worse than it will already be for many.
- We provide all the stationery that the children need, free of charge.
- We do not insist on branded school uniform - supermarket versions are fine.
- We have sold pre-loved uniform at our summer fair, and parents wanting to access our lost property store are invited to do so.
- We ask children to come to school in PE Kit on PE days. This gives time during the week for parents to wash uniform and reduces the need to buy multiple versions of it.
- We provide long term loans of laptops/Chromebooks to families who do not have them.
- School trips are usually kept very local, to reduce costs. No charge is made, just donations invited which are voluntary.
- After-school clubs are either free or very cheap (£1 per week or half-price for those for whom we receive Pupil Premium). Where that still represents an obstacle, the charge is waived altogether.
- When there are PTFA fund raisers, children are never excluded from activities on account of ability to pay.
- Period products are available free of charge in places that girls can access discreetly.
- We establish no expectation of children bringing in cakes/books and the suchlike to celebrate their birthdays.
- When we have offered after school or weekend tuition (around 70 or so children availed themselves of this last year) no charge is made.
- Last year, we were able to offer free books to families who wanted them.
- We also worked with some local charities to provide food parcels to families in need.
- Via another local charity we also managed to help Father Christmas provide toys, pyjamas, and warm coats for around 50 of our children.
A Maths problem I must solve is how to manage to sustain this in the light of the legacy of school budget cuts of the last decade, now that energy costs and inflation are about to bite.
My school is a little larger than average primary school, but close enough to the norm to give a “typical” picture. Our numbers on roll are around 300 and this is quite stable. We have a £1.6 million budget.
Since 2010-11, school budgets have certainly been reduced. The Institute for Fiscal Studies [IFS] talks of an eight per cent cut in education spending from then up to the commencement of the pandemic. In that time, we have lost through redundancies a couple of teaching assistant roles. Those job losses helped us meet about half of that cut and other savings and adaptations have managed the rest.
Now we have more money to save. Teachers are to be awarded a pay rise of five per cent, but schools had been advised to budget for three per cent. £1.2 million out of my £1.6 million budget goes on wages. This two per cent underfunding will cost my budget over £20,000.
The school’s energy costs last year were £22,000. This year I am budgeting for £46,000, but who knows where this energy price rise is going to end.
So where do I cut?
I look at the figures…
- Do I cut supply teacher insurance? I’ve not been appointed to gamble like that.
- What about cleaning costs? Not sensible, there has been a virus going around.
- Security? Waste management? Not sensible at all.
- School dinner service? I really don’t think so.
- Building maintenance? To do so would be short termist, bad management which would be financially counterproductive over the long term and could potentially create safeguarding issues in the immediate future.
- Shall I not pay the apprenticeship levy as we pay over £4,000 per annum and we do not benefit at all from it? I’m not allowed. I must pay it.
A £1.6 million budget but there is not really much to look at to cut back.
One of my experienced teachers is leaving teaching all together. I have appointed a less experienced teacher as a replacement, and I often do this sort of thing. Staff generally become more expensive with experience, so it helps if, more often than not, as experienced teachers leave, they are replaced with less experienced counterparts. This is becoming a less attractive strategy, though, as the wage structure of teachers is being flattened. The saving is still worthwhile, but not as large as it was.
To take away the sports and music specialists we have would be damaging to the quality of education. I could not do that on moral grounds. I do my job in order to do the best I can for the children, and I would struggle to justify drawing my salary if it was simply to preside over an unnecessary dismantling of what is good.
Lots of statistics are bandied about by politicians but I would like to leave you with one moral dilemma presented to headteachers, to recall next time you hear boasts of how much money has been pumped into schools.
When I pay staff to work after school or at the weekend to provide extra tuition for the children, I pay them between £20 and £30 per hour. The National Tutoring Programme was introduced and in its first year I only had to pay £10 per hour: great value for money for the school, as it was so heavily subsidised.
Yet it cost the taxpayer £40 per hour…not so great value for money.
Morally, is it right to take advantage of good value for money for my school, when I know it represents poor value for money for the taxpayer? I did so, but I felt uneasy about it.
The percentages in the sliding subsidy scales change each year but a principle remains: headteachers are more efficient with spending the money and sourcing good value for money than is the government.
If the next secretary of state for education wishes to be more popular with headteachers than their recent predecessors have been, a pledge to refrain from stipulating how we should spend the monies allocated to schools might be a good starting point.
