IMMEDIATE RELEASE 18 September 2003
Costs in a sample of primary and secondaryschools are set to rise at a faster rate than funding from the Governmentbetween 2003-4 and 2005-6 according to a study of 36 schools in six educationauthority areas for the NUT by PricewaterhouseCoopers*.
Over the three years, primary spending islikely to increase by 16 per cent, 21 per cent and 27 per cent respectivelyover 2002-3. In secondary schools the comparable figures are 14 per cent, 19per cent and 24 per cent.
But under the comprehensive spendingreview, the Government intends to increase education funding by 12.9 per cent,18.2 per cent and 23.4 per cent.
|
|
2003/04 |
2004/05 |
2005/06 |
|
CSR funding % increase over 2002/03* |
12.9% |
18.2% |
23.4% |
|
Estimated primary school cost increase |
16% |
21% |
27% |
|
Estimated secondary school cost increase |
14% |
19% |
24% |
*Funding data from Appendix1 of Raising standards and tackling workload: a national agreement.Calculation based on overall CSR resources less capital funding plus additional800m
Schools involved in the study werenominated by education authorities which were selected to ensure a fair balanceof types of authority facing different funding conditions.
In only one of the six authorities,Hammersmith and Fulham, were predicted cost increases higher in secondaryschools than in primary at 34 per cent over the three years. The lowestpredicted secondary increase was in Essex at 17 per cent.
The highest average primary school costincrease was in Wiltshire at 33 per cent. The lowest was in Birmingham at 19per cent.
Increased teaching staff costs, such ashigher salaries, employers national insurance and pensions contributionsaccounted for three-quarters of the rise in costs this year in secondaryschools and four-fifths of the increase in primary schools. The increase washighest in schools where a large proportion of staff are on the upper payspine. The problem was also exacerbated for schools making additional paymentsto ease recruitment and retention problems.
For the coming years,PricewaterhouseCoopers has assumed in each year a 2.5 per cent pay increase forteachers, in line with the Governments evidence to the Teachers Review Body.It has recognized that the Review Body may recommend a higher increase.
Based on headteachers expectations, it hasalso assumed more than one-third of eligible teachers will move up to point 3of the upper pay spine despite Government evidence to the Review Body, that thenumbers moving to point 3 should be cash limited to one third.
Secondary schools said they expected onaverage year on year increases in the cost of support staff of 15.3, 4.7 and 6per cent over the three years. In primary the comparable figures were 10.1, 2.9and 4.4 per cent. On average, support staff costs were 9.45 per hour thoughthe costs were significantly higher in a number of schools. PWC concluded thatschools could face greater costs in future years if demand for skilled supportstaff increased.
Dedicated headship time was an issue forprimary schools which would need to employ additional staff to make such timeavailable and this could represent a sizeable new budgetary requirement forthese schools.
It was seen as less of a problem insecondary schools where teachers commonly have time outside the classroomduring the teaching day for other responsibilities.
Overall, the study found that schoolsexpected implementing the teacher workload agreement to be around 7 per cent oftheir cost pressures over the three years.
The cost of the workload agreement could behigher. Although some schools had made significant progress on the issue andwere able to provide a fair amount of detail, a number of schools had not fullyconsidered the cost implications of the agreement. Indeed, some heads said theyhad made no provision for teacher workload initiatives in their budgets.
Many heads said they had already met therequirement on removing 24 administrative or clerical tasks or had gone as faras they intended.
Achieving a work/life balance for teacherswas mostly seen as a managerial challenge rather than a financial one.Guaranteed leadership and management time had already been set aside. Limits oncover were seen as more of a problem for secondary schools even though manywere already working within the 38-hour limits. For many of the primary schoolssupply cover was already bought in.
Although premises and other costs wereincluded in PWCs calculations, a number of schools reported additional costimplications. For example, pressure could be put on budgets by the newDisability Act, including as one case study shows, a 100,000 lift, as well asadditional ICT and school repair costs.
EN D pr69/03
The six authorities involved in the studywere Durham, Birmingham, Essex, Hammersmith and Fulham, Brighton and Hove, andWiltshire.
PWC say further work is needed to assesswhether the cost pressures they have identified are likely to be replicated inschools across the country.
*A Copt of the 60-page report is available here.
[Word Doc - 690KB]