Agenda item

Report of the Cabinet Member, Learning and Skills

The Select Committee received a presentation on Pupil Premium funding which was specifically aimed to improve outcomes for disadvantaged children. In order to qualify for Pupil Premium funding 2015/16 a child needed to meet one of four possible criteria, these being:

·         Being eligible for Free School Meals (FSM) at any point in the last six years;

·         Left local authority care due to adoption, special guardianship order or child arrangements order;

·         Been in local authority care for one day or more; or

·         The children of service personnel (who attract “Service Pupil Premium”)

Members received details of the amount of funding per pupil and the number eligible. Concerns were shared over difficulties in ensuring all those eligible for pupil premium funding did so, particularly in respect of the FSM entitlement. Primary school pupils were all now entitled to a free meal and therefore the FSM eligibility was not always identified. Work was being done to promote the need for those eligible for FSM to complete the application process to ensure the school was able to access pupil premium funding.

Ofsted would expect to see details of how pupil premium funding was spent and the difference it had made. The County Council commissioned pupil premium training and support activity through Entrust for ten schools in the last two years. The School Improvement team also conducted regular visits to quality assure schools and part of this process was to consider their self evaluation of support for vulnerable groups. A summer conference for governors had also looked at the use of this funding and it was suggested that details from the conference should be included on the governor website to promote good practice more widely.

Pupil Premium Plus was a government grant to support and promote the education of children and young people in care. From 1 April 2014 each looked after child of school age had been allocated £1,900 to support their education, with eligibility from the first day they come into the care.  The Virtual School and the role of the Virtual Headteacher was responsible for making sure there were effective arrangements in place for allocating Pupil Premium Plus funding. How the grant was used had to be clearly evidenced in a young person’s Personal Education Plan (PEP), in consultation with the designated teacher and social worker, alongside contributions from the carer and other appropriate professionals. Each PEP had to be signed off by the Virtual Headteacher.

The policy for allocating this funding was agreed by the Virtual School Governing Body, and was in line with other authorities. Of the £1,900 per pupil allocation, schools received £500 directly per term. The remainder of the funding was held centrally and used to address specific issues, for example to fund a reading scheme or to support an individual’s specific needs. In all cases evidence needed to be shown of how the funding had been used and what this funding had achieved. There was a school governor role to play in screening how this funding was used and what it achieved.

PEPs were currently held as paper copies and work was being undertaken to create electronic recording which would enable clearer analysis of processes and identification of areas of good practice. It would also enable a quicker and more responsive system. Regular audit was undertaken of the PEPs, with results used to inform training programmes.

The Letterbox reading scheme supported by centrally held Pupil Premium Funding helped to take reading into homes. Work was now being developed in partnership with libraries to help promote a love of reading.

RESOLVED – That: a) the progress on use of Pupil Premium Plus funding be noted and a further report analysing the results of this funding be brought to the Select Committee in twelve months time; and

b) the school governor responsibilities relating to looked after pupils and evidencing use of the pupil premium plus funding be noted.